Tag: Los Angeles

Posted on by

A Conversation with Keiko Agena

Keiko Agena

 

In the first decade of the millennium, there were only a handful of (East) Asian Americans in mainstream media who regularly represented Asian women. Sure, there were the random side characters portraying the usual stereotypes; Pick your two-dimensional poison: masseuse, sex worker, nail salon tech or even that one time we had a kung fu kickass like Lucy Liu in movie blockbuster Charlie’s Angels. In this desert of representation was Japanese American actor Keiko Agena who played Lane Kim, the young Korean American best friend of Rory Gilmore on the WB/CW television show Gilmore Girls. Over the course of seven seasons, we learned about Lane’s quirky hobbies and the stresses of being the “good daughter” in a strict Christian, Korean immigrant family. She wasn’t just a caricature but a rare “well-rounded” character who had time to breathe and evolve during the long run of this popular network television show.
 

It has been nearly a decade since the final cup of coffee was poured in Stars Hollow and Keiko Agena has continued her steady and successful career as a Hollywood actress. Recently, the Thanksgiving release of the Gilmore Girls mini-series Gilmore Girls: A Year In The Life on Netflix has also revived interest in Keiko’s character and how far we’ve come as Asian Americans in media.
 

In December, I sat down with my dear friend and collaborator Keiko Agena, to debrief this latest Gilmore Girls mini-series madness and what it’s like to be an Asian American actor and comedian in today’s media landscape. Feel free to imagine this conversation punctuated with lots of giggles and cackles of love and delight.

 

 

Jenny Yang: Keiko, first thank you so much for sitting down with me. This is fun for me because I feel like we get to chat more formally about the stuff that we would typically talk about anyway because we are in a community together–
 

Keiko Agena: Yes, and we are supportive of each other as artists, I feel.
 

JY: We are.
 

KA: We totally are.
 

JY: You’re a big supporter of mine.
 

KA: I would say with many exclamation points and stars that we do that for each other.
 

JY: Aw, thank you. So I think what interests me and Stage & Candor readers about you… Okay, we just have to talk about Gilmore Girls first.
 

KA: Okay, yes!
 

JY: Can I just say, day after Thanksgiving, when Gilmore Girls: A Year in the Life dropped, my ass was at home watching the whole damn thing, all day.
 

KA: Did you really?! All six hours?
 

JY: I saw all six hours, and it felt good. I don’t know if you remember this, but I feel like people who grew up on 80’s and 90’s sitcoms, whenever they do a reunion show, they always would give you what you liked, right? They give you what you wanted. Do you remember those reunion shows?
 

KA: Yes, yes, yes!
 

JY: Whoever would write it made sure of that.
 

KA: Someone became a princess, someone became the editor of Time magazine…
 

JY: They gave you what you liked, and I think that – definitely spoiler alerts ahead–
 

KA: Stop reading here if you don’t want any spoilers.
 

[Editor’s note: The Gilmore Girls section of this conversation will be in grey.]
 

JY: Skip ahead to where we don’t talk about Gilmore Girls anymore. But I feel that as a 60-70% Gilmore Girls fan, that even I got the itch scratched for all that I needed.
 

KA: Yeah.
 

JY: Number one, not enough Keiko.
 

KA: Not enough Keiko! More Keiko!
 

JY: Not enough Lane Kim.
 

KA: #MoreLaneKim.
 

JY: Yes!
 

KA: #MoreLaneKim is very lame. Don’t do that.
 

JY: We don’t say ‘lame’ anymore, Keiko.
 

KA: Oh, sorry.
 

JY: It’s okay. I just reprimand. But yeah, it’s not cool. But I think #MoreLaneKim is good.
 

KA: Let’s Donald Trump this hashtag. What is the most direct and simple–
 

JY: As Donald Trump would tweet, “Gilmore Girls. It was good. But not enough Lane Kim. Sad. #MoreLaneKim”
 

KA: Exactly. To the point.
 

[Everybody laughs]
 

JY: But anyway. It did scratch that itch of it opened with a meta joke about talking really fast and a lot, and crazy commentary, and pop culture references. Then we got into seeing what their lives are all like – all the cameos, all the different men in their life, and where they’re at.
 

KA: They got a lot into those six hours. You pretty much saw or heard about every character that you knew about in the original seven seasons – which is an accomplishment – and introduced you to a few new main characters as well. I don’t know that there’s a stone left unturned.
 

JY: Yes. I feel the only thing that I was a little surprised by but definitely loved, was the fact that Rory Gilmore didn’t have her shit together.
 

KA: No. And it got worse as the episodes went on. She really hit a low. You saw her fall apart. All of the things that she was counting on slipped away, and you’re really going with her on this journey downward. It’s heart-achy.
 

JY: Thirty-two and not super together with her career goals–
 

KA: And her relationship goals–
 

JY: –and her relationship goals. Not that I know what that’s like.
 

[Everybody laughs]
 

KA: Are we veering off?! Are we tangent-ing? How personal are we going to get?!
 

JY: No, no, not personal.
 

KA: Follow Jenny and I on our new show as we talk about personal things. We are going to create it right after this interview.
 

[Everybody laughs]
 

JY: Anyway. That kind of intrigued me because of course it made it more interesting. There was a sense, watching the show before, that Oh okay, miss ‘I got into Yale, I’m so smart’, maybe she’d have her shit together. But knowing a bunch of these overachieving people – maybe myself as one – I know for a fact that after you go through college, and you’re an overachiever, real life happens, and it’s not perfect. You no longer have this structured world. I feel it’s almost like it’s a stereotypical overachiever Asian American story. Maybe at 32 you’re not going to have everything you’re supposed to have.
 

KA: Yes, not all the boxes are checked off. Especially if you go for the primary thing that you want, which she did – she wanted to be a journalist and a writer – and she’s going for it, and this is that time in her life where… It’s not that she’s been unsuccessful, because she has had success, but that’s not the end of the story. It’s not that you can just check that box and say, Okay, career success, let me sail into my 70s. That’s not the creative life and I think maybe people who read Stage & Candor know that. I have yet to meet a creative person where that is their journey. No artist I know found exactly what they wanted to do at 23, and rode that train safely–
 

JY: Uphill.
 

KA: Yes, uphill to greater and greater success.
 

JY: It’s not a linear process.
 

KA: It’s not.
 

JY: Totally, which is why we’re supportive of each other!
 

KA: It takes a village.
 

JY: It does. So how do you feel about being back in the Gilmore Girls revival? What was it like for you?
 

KA: You know what’s funny is, besides feeling like slipping into comfortable shoes, or something that’s fun, is that seeing it as an audience member really made me appreciate what we were just talking about. The people that were kids when we first met them – Paris, Lane, Rory – they’re all of a certain age, and their lives aren’t perfect, and they still have a lot of stuff to work out. I think when I was originally filming it, I was so focused on where Lane was that I thought, Oh it’s only Lane that doesn’t have her perfect dream life. Now, watching the series, in the greatest way possible, I think we feel the angst and the struggle and the ambition of all of those 30-something gang of people, where we have some successes but there’s still a lot to discover and a far way yet to go.
 

JY: Yeah, as if turning 30 is this magic number where everything is figured out.
 

KA: It’s not now, and I don’t know that it ever was in the past, or if that’s just the fairytale that previous stories have taught us.
 

JY: Right. So it was very gratifying, with lots of jokes and references and dialogue packed in there.
 

KA: Did you enjoy that? I know that I loved all that fun stuff that only happens in Gilmore World.
 

JY: Yes! I loved reading on my Facebook feed, where a comedy writer friend of mine who was confessing on a status update, Already got through my first viewing of Gilmore Girls revival. Getting started on episode one again. Same day.
 

KA: Wow.
 

JY: I know. Day after Thanksgiving. She was so happy.
 

KA: There’s a lot packed in there.
 

JY: There is. I feel like it’s like fine art. You see something new probably with every viewing. But #MoreLaneKim.
 

KA: #MoreLaneKim!
 

[Everybody laughs]
 

KA: I like that they won’t get to hear our laughing. Wow, Keiko is really uppity! That’s all she talks about! #MoreLaneKim!
 

JY: Chuckle chuckle chuckle. When did the final season end?
 

KA: 2007.
 

JY: [gasp] That’s like nine years ago. Almost ten years ago.
 

KA: Yeah. So a lot has happened.
 

JY: So for you, what have you seen in terms of changes as an Asian American actor in that time in terms of the industry?
 

KA: I feel that last year, especially, was such a high tide year. We were talking about it when we were doing the fundraiser for Angry Asian Man where we were talking about Wow, if we were to choose what our favorite scene was that an Asian person was in on television for the last year in America, we’d have so much to choose from.
 

JY: Much more.
 

KA: Way more than you would five years ago. Five years ago, you’d have to really search your brain for any scene that you could remember that an Asian person was in that was your favorite. I feel like now, there are so many shows that are out now, and there’s a lot to celebrate. Again, there’s a far, far way to go, but I think the content and the quality that is coming out is something to be supported and celebrated.
 

JY: Yes. Seven years ago, if we asked the question, What are your favorite characters and scenes up until that point? It would be maybe a Lane Kim reference, maybe Margaret Cho, maybe Lucy Liu, and maybe Brenda Song.
 

KA: As you know very well, 2016 has been a crazy year with whitewashing feeling like it’s making a resurgence of some kind, which is challenging to come up against.
 

JY: I feel like it happened in 2016 because it’s been an increasing drumbeat of Hollywood wanting to be like, Oh, we’ve got to make Asian stuff so that China will want it, so let’s maybe start making more Asian stuff. But it’s also the drumbeat of, We have these other ‘diverse’ properties like the Marvel and DC world, let’s just also bring that up. So they’re deciding they just can’t bear to take a risk on non-white talent, not even have us play Asian characters. They do these crazy mental jiujitsu public gymnastics around justifying why the whitest actors are playing the Asian characters.
 

KA: Right.
 

JY: It’s almost a joke to me that the palest, porcelain, transparent actors are chosen, right? Emma Stone is translucent. Benedict Cumberbatch?! It’s like the whitest… It’s not even like Italians, you know?
 

KA: Maybe it’s the love of the geisha.
 

JY: The paleness? The pale Asian?
 

KA: Yes.
 

JY: In the right light, Scarlett Johansson’s European roots will look kind of pale and Asian.
 

KA: It’s tough, man.
 

JY: Scarlett Johansson, Tilda Swinton, Benedict Cumberbatch, Emma Stone: they all have the most pale ethnic heritage.
 

KA: Yes, I think it’s true.
 

JY: And then there’s Matt Damon, but he played a white person that’s saving China.
 

KA: Yes, and that’ll probably do well, too.
 

JY: So I feel that’s kind of upsetting that China is also down for it. I feel like they got brainwashed. The world got brainwashed to want white people as heroes.
 

KA: I feel like I’m part of that generation too of being brainwashed a little. You think it’s natural and then one day, you go, Is it? What would it be like to have a different option? I look at that trailer for “Ghost in the Shell”, and – first of all, I love Scarlett Johansson, I think she’s incredibly talented and she does play that type of character very well.
 

JY: You mean slightly robotic and a little flat?
 

[Everybody laughs]
 

KA: I know you said it as a joke, but yeah, kind of! It’s funny because that’s actually a very tough thing to play – to still be human, and still create empathy, but be dead inside. Anyway, as I’m watching, I cringe and clench a little because it’s so Asian-stylized, and there are just a few people that pop up in Asian dress that it’s uncomfortable to watch. But the second or third time I watched it, I thought, What would it have been like to see a fresh Asian face in that role? It would’ve been incredible. It absolutely would have been star making material, because it’s so incredible. I guess that’s the whole point though, that they don’t feel like it’s bankable – but I don’t think this is bankable the way it has been done.
 

JY: The trailer shows oriental things as only costume and backdrop.
 

KA: Someone already wrote this, but all the bad guys get to be Asian, and that’s been true in other movies too.
 

JY: Since the 80’s films.
 

KA: Yes. You can have the people that actually know kung-fu and different martial arts, the bad guys, be actual Asian people, and that’s acceptable.
 

JY: So you came up during a time where you were probably a part of seeing the default as this is how it works. It’s white people who are the ones that are chosen to lead. How has that shifted for you, or not?
 

KA: I guess it has shifted, little bits over time. I do know when I was a kid, I didn’t think about Asian people because there were none. But I was a huge consumer of media, and I related to all of the white characters, and I emotionally invested in them. So I didn’t feel at that time that I was cheated, but maybe that’s because I didn’t know what I was missing. When you actually do see someone that’s Asian, there’s a different level of excitement that comes with that, that I didn’t even know was an option, I suppose.
 

JY: Right.
 

KA: It’s like living on skim milk ice-cream and being satisfied. When you have a taste of full fat ice-cream, you’re like, Dammit, I want more! Give me more Constance Wu! Give me more! Then for some reason, you’re not satisfied anymore.
 

JY: I think that’s a good analogy. If you think there’s only skim milk ice-cream…

KA: Damn, this is alright!
 

JY: Oh it’s sweet, and kind of creamy. It’s ice-cream!
 

KA: This is what ice-cream is!
 

JY: Oh, I like that. Do you ever feel like now, especially with the rise of social media, and the ability for us to basically protest something that’s not good, how different that feels? You’re basically a Generation X-er, and now Millennials are like, Oh what the fuck, this isn’t good.
 

KA: I think without social media, there are pockets of people that would have this opinion, but there wasn’t a way for you to know that a thousand miles away, there’s another pocket of people that have the same opinion. Asian Americans are concentrated in some big cities, but we’re also spread out all across the United States. So having this platform where people can come and show themselves – we have a voice in this way that has been very productive. In a lot of ways, niche groups have used social media to be very dangerous also, but I think in this way, for the Asian-American community, it’s been extremely helpful.
 

JY: And therefore, #MoreLaneKim, #NotDangerous.
 

[Everybody laughs]
 

KA: Now, let me ask you, how do you feel as someone who has switched – because I think this is very interesting viewpoint – from a completely different career where you were seriously involved, into now having become an artist and producer full-time? What are the changes that have happened for you in the past five or six years? How do you think it’s coincided with how the country has been changing?
 

JY: Oh god, that’s a big question. So I used to work in politics, where creativity was very limited. I didn’t start pursuing entertainment in my early 20s like a lot of folks I meet in LA, so I feel like I had the benefit of work experience and some maturity, but I personally could not have the kind of career I have just five years in, now, if I had started in my early 20s, because of social media.
 

KA: The timing was right for you.
 

JY: The timing was right for me – oh, I’m reliving my early 20s, girl.
 

KA: You’re not in your early 20s?!
 

[Everybody laughs]
 

JY: It’s a completely new terrain. I’m able to have my career because I decided to do a very old school craft of stand-up comedy, where it’s just you and an audience. That’s the core of what I do, but I’ve been able to grow an audience and get work because of new media. Honestly, if I wasn’t on the ground floor of when Buzzfeed Video started… I mean, that’s when they started, three or four years ago. It doesn’t sound like that long ago–
 

KA: But so much has changed in that time.
 

JY: Yes, so much has changed in three or four years. If I wasn’t there, knowing one of the original director/producers who comprised of this new BuzzFeed Video unit, I don’t know if I could’ve had the career I’ve had already in just the last two or three years, simply because I was a part of that process of figuring out what made a viral video. I feel like I’m a part of that history.
 

KA: That’s also half of where I see the success of your career, too, because you’re a very proactive go-getter/producer person.
 

JY: Right – touring, events, and shows.
 

KA: I think it’s an interesting point to say that from an outsider’s point of view – knowing you for a long time – I can see all of the experience that you have gained through the work that you’d done previously of knowing how to organize people, knowing how to set up an event, learning all of that on the job, training, and being very proficient at that… All of that translates now into a new goal and a new dream. That life experience isn’t lost, it just gets funneled into your new creative endeavor. Sometime what maybe would’ve taken 10 years previously, now the time is even quicker because you have an engine of knowledge that’s pushing you forward.
 

JY: Damn. That’s a good summary of my professional life.
 

KA: It’s true though.
 

JY: Yes, all the skills I learned while working, I have been using to build my career now. It makes me hit the ground running a lot more. I have all these business skills because I know about resumes, I know about business communication, I know how to negotiate contracts, because that’s what I used to do. I know how to run meetings, I know how to run large scale events for people, and produce things.
 

KA: Exactly.
 

JY: One of my first jobs was in communications. I was being trained to write a press release, or know how to pitch to a reporter. All of these skills I learned in politics like organizing campaigns and being a part of that all applies to leadership skills, and business skills for being an entrepreneur, essentially.
 

KA: Right. One of the last big things that we worked on together was the Comedy Comedy Festival. How many people were a part of that team and that were volunteering? You had a leadership circle that was how many people?
 

JY: We had about 15 people on the leadership team that took big chunks of what the work needed to be.
 

KA: Right. Then with volunteers–
 

JY: That was another 20.
 

KA: And that’s not even counting performers.
 

JY: 150 performers.
 

KA: So there was a lot happening.
 

JY: Right, and I was able to do that because that was stuff that I did in my previous career. I feel very fortunate that not every stand-up comedian is able to do something like that. I feel very grateful that people feel grateful that such a thing exists. It has helped my career – me personally – but I think what’s tough is balancing external energy like producing things versus, Oh yeah, I need to be writing and creating new material. I think that’s a struggle.
 

KA: Right.
 

JY: But going back to you.
 

KA: We will get back to me, but one thing I do want to say is that that is also a great thing that has happened in the last couple years, where there is the Comedy Comedy Festival that you put on, which is a place for Asian Americans to come and perform, and it’s important for us to have a place with that much support and that many people involved to make it great. Even Will Choi, who is starting to do this stuff over at UCB, is starting to put together shows that have an Asia focus. I feel like this is also a new thing that’s starting to happen right now, where maybe five years down the line we’ll look at this year and be like, Wow, can you believe that this last couple of years, the seed of us all coming together and doing these shows have built into something else? Who knows where that goes.
 

JY: I hope so. When people ask me what I do, I say, “I’m a stand-up comedian, writer, actor, host, producer,” but I really do still think of myself as an organizer, cause that’s what I did for politics. I just apply that same perspective to organizing my career and organizing like-minded people. I see myself as organizing Asian-American audiences and creatives. We have to, or else we’re missing out on opportunities to collaborate and strengthen each other if we don’t get to know each other and build these relationships. I’m super proud about that.
 

KA: You should be super proud.
 

JY: I’m super proud of Comedy Comedy Fest. Will Choi gets complete credit for creating these really successful shows at Upright Citizens Brigade, and really expanding the Asian-American presence at UCB. I personally also feel that it’s part of this greater movement of all of us through Comedy Comedy Fest, or even Tuesday Night Cafe, if we want to go back to that institution in LA of Asian American Artists – that’s where you and I met.
 

KA: Right.
 

JY: I feel like it’s up to us to keep really solid institutions like Tuesday Night going, but also to build on that, and to adapt to current needs. Let’s get all Asian-American people doing comedy together, and include YouTubers, live performers, up-and-comers, as well as veterans.
 

KA: Totally.
 

JY: I feel good about that, that we’re a part of that, you know?
 

KA: Uh huh, I think so.
 

JY: High-five. [They do.]
 

KA: Final thoughts?
 

JY: I feel like a lot of the drum beat and the message that everyone has been saying is, We have to tell our own stories.
 

KA: Yes, absolutely. We have to create our own stories, right?
 

JY: And we’re not the first ones to say that.
 

KA: Yes.
 

JY: How has that call to create or tell our own stories evolved for you, in terms of your work?
 

KA: Hm.
 

JY: For example, I know that you had taken a stab at improv, and it wasn’t a super positive experience necessarily, and then you came back to it, and now you’re an improv beast. You’re an addict! You’re in it, and you love it.
 

KA: Absolutely, for sure.
 

JY: I know that you write, you draw, all this stuff. So that idea of creating your own material and telling your own stories, how has that call operated in your career?
 

KA: I have a podcast called “Drunk Monk,” where the shell of it is where we get drunk and we watch Monk and we talk about it, which is a fun starting point, but really, we go into a lot of tangents. What’s fun about that podcast is that we didn’t intend it, but we’re two Asian people – me and Will Choi, who we mentioned earlier – so we have our point of view, which is an Asian-American point of view by the mere fact that we’re Asian Americans. It’s something that comes up every once in awhile, but I think even if you weren’t coming to it for that perspective, it’s just part of what it is, which is something that I like about it. We also get very personal and we share a lot of personal stories over the course of it. I find that really fulfilling, because that structure is something that we create on our own, and it could be whatever we wanted, and so it is exactly what we wanted. In that way, it’s completely fulfilling because you’re not answering to anybody.
 

JY: Right.
 

KA: The other thing about creating through improv is that part of the reason why I think improv is a draw – especially for people of color – is because you can play family members to anyone that’s on stage. It might sound silly, but it’s not really silly if you think about the fact that I can’t go in and audition for a family member for 90% of the roles out there. I’m not going to match that person as a family member. The freedom of being able to play any type of role that I can think of and not have to be constrained by the fact that I am a 43-year-old Asian woman is freeing in a way that almost feels at this point necessary to my creativity as an artistic person. It’s not something that necessarily gets fulfilled in other areas of my career at this point.
 

JY: Because you’re at the mercy of the character descriptions that you get sent for auditions.
 

KA: Yup, uh huh.
 

JY: Asian. Thirties. Blah blah blah, you know?
 

KA: Yes. I really do appreciate that a lot of them, especially recently, are written as open ethnicity. I appreciate that. That’s most of what I go out for, or a mix of that. The good and the bad of that is, almost everything is written now as open ethnicity, which is great, but, the other side of that is that the two leads have already been cast, and they’re white. That’s the ‘norm.’
 

JY: Yeah…
 

KA: So they’re open to all ethnicities, except for the leads.
 

JY: We’re working on that, Keiko.
 

KA: We’re working on that.
 
 

 

 

Keiko Agena is best known for the TV show, GILMORE GIRLS, where she played LANE KIM for seven seasons. As a guest star she has appeared on such shows as SHAMELESS, SCANDAL, TWISTED, HOUSE, ER and WITHOUT A TRACE, and got to work with Frances McDormand on the film TRANSFORMERS DARK OF THE MOON. Besides iO she has also trained with Dave Razowsky, at the Groundlings and UCB and her band FLYING PLATFORMS has a monthly residency (first Fridays) at the Grandstar Jazz Club in downtown LA. Plus (believe it or not) Keiko was once featured in PEOPLE MAGAZINE’S 100 MOST BEAUTIFUL PEOPLE ISSUE, in the “they play meek and geeky, but off screen they shine” section, with America Ferrera, Jenna Fischer and Mary Lynn Rajskub!

Posted on by

A Conversation with Jorge Molina

Jorge Molina

 

Since November 9th, the art world has been entrenched in discussion and debate on what the purpose of Art is now – what is its impact? What does it look like? What do we want it to look like? And how does it affect us? Now, more than ever, the fight for inclusion is a battle that must be won, and we look to up and coming artists like Jorge Molina and countless others to lead the charge for the next generation of cultural influencers.
 

As a recent graduate, artist, immigrant, and a member of the LGBTQ+ community, Jorge speaks to the importance of intersectional representation on screen, “breaking in” in Hollywood, and his experience on the up and coming TV Land pilot anthology adaptation of the seminal 1988 classic, Heathers.

 

 

Alicia Carroll: So, why don’t you start by telling us a little about yourself!
 

Jorge Molina: Sure! I was born in Mexico City and raised in a suburb right outside of it. I always knew I wanted to work in the film industry in some way and knew that I had to come to the U.S. to do that. I’ve also always loved writing, so screenwriting seemed like an obvious career choice. I applied to several schools my senior year and got into USC with a scholarship. So I moved here, graduated last May, and now am in the process of getting my artist’s visa to stay.
 

AC: What is that process like? I know so many people who have stayed on education or work visa, but how does it differ for artists? Has your experience been smooth?
 

JM: It has been smooth, luckily, but it’s a long and complicated process. The way I describe it best is you’re preparing for a job interview you won’t be present in. It’s a talent-based process, so immigration is basically deciding if you’re talented enough to stay in the country. You compile literally everything you’ve ever done in a binder (your work history, education, awards, letters of reference, etc…) and present it to immigration and they base their decision off of that. There’s other things to it, like lots of paperwork and bureaucracy, but that’s the gist of it.
 

AC: Wow that seems highly subjective. Maybe that’s just me.
 

JM: Hah, I feel you. That’s exactly how I feel.
 

Kelly Wallace: When you decided to come to the U.S., what kinds of concerns did you have?
 

JM: To be honest, I was much more excited and looking forward to come here than concerned. It was always a conscious and active decision to come here and actually move countries, so when it happened it was all very quick and surreal, and didn’t really give me much time to be afraid. I had some worries that I would be home sick, and wouldn’t fit in, but I felt so well versed in American culture – film and TV culture especially, which is what I came here to do – and I wanted it so much that those worries quickly dissipated.
 

AC: That’s wonderful. What made you gravitate towards film and television at a young age?
 

JM: I still ask myself that a lot of the times. I think for me, film and TV have always represented a place where anything that can be conjured up in your head can come to exist. If you can imagine it, it can become a movie or TV show. And that’s enormously appealing. I know it’s a bit of a cliché to be the young, closeted boy that didn’t fit in and yearns of bigger places with more creative freedom, but clichés are grounded on truth.
 

KW: It’s a common feeling, I think. I felt the same way when I was younger. How helpful was TV and film for you when you were discovering your sexuality and when you were coming out?
 

JM: Ah, I can go on about that for ages. More than film and TV directly informing of my sexuality – they were not great at that, since the content we got back home wasn’t always the most inclusive – they served as an escape and kind of a gateway for me to start creating my own worlds. Now looking back, I can see that I was always attracted to stories about underdogs and people not fitting in, and to films with so much queer sensibility, but at the time I didn’t see that. That’s actually a big propeller of what I write. I try to create stories that I would like to have seen when I was growing up.
 

AC: So what kind of worlds do you create for yourself now, in your writing?
 

JM: I am very attracted to coming-of-age stories, people realizing who they are and their identities, and people fitting in. I feel that’s a topic I’m very familiar with, and I’m a believer in the “write what you know best.” I try not to be bounded by genres, but by themes.
 

AC: I am very similar in that I gravitate towards themes. From what I hear, you also write for the stage?
 

JM: I have dabbled in that. I’ve written a couple of one-act plays and would definitely like to explore that more one day, but right now I am more focused on features and TV especially.
 

AC: What draws you to the film and television mediums? It’s always interesting to hear since writers have so many storytelling avenues available to them; why the screen?
 

JM: I think ultimately for me it comes down to the number of people it can reach. I grew up with American content all around me, and it’s the same for so many places around the world. Hollywood is a world forefront in film and TV, and the stories they tell can really make an impact. So that’s what I’m after. I’m sure of the power of art in all its forms, but few have the widespread reach that film and TV have.
 

AC: Agreed. I also went to film school and I’m drawn to it for the same reasons. There is also a certain unlimited freedom to the medium, which I love. In terms of impact, what characters or stories had a significant impact on you? Do you see representation of aspects of your identity improving as you grow?
 

JM: As far as specific characters or stories, I always talk about Ugly Betty and how big that was for me. It had this character of her nephew Justin and it was the first time I saw someone that was a young, Latino gay boy like me and that was huge because his family and coming out circumstances looked a lot like me. I’d seen some gay and Latino characters before, but never one so specific to me. Glee was also huge because it was the first show for me to really both normalize and shed a direct light on gay characters.
 

As for if I see representation, yes. It is definitely growing and changing and that’s what’s so amazing about today’s current entertainment landscape: everyone is getting a voice. Where I think it sometimes lags is getting into nuanced representation that go beyond a single identity. Intersectionality is tricky.
 

AC: It is very tricky. I love seeing intersectional representation because it makes the stories more rich – more human.
 

JM: Exactly. No one is just one thing. I’m gay, and Mexican, and an immigrant, and a writer, and so many more things
 

AC: You mentioned that you use pieces of your real experience and what you know in your writing. How do you think the different parts of your identity have helped you develop your perspective as an artist?
 

JM: Well, it took me a while to realize and embrace that no one else has my experience. I think that in Hollywood, you are often forced into a box and to fit someone else’s vision, but if you look, it’s the people with unique perspectives that stand out. Those are the people I admire, so now I search for stories that only I can tell, in whatever way that may be. Maybe I identify with a character’s story, or am familiar with a world, or know a certain central feeling well.
 

AC: Inclusion in writing is definitely improving but still generally white-cis-straight-male dominated in the industry at large. Because of that, so many people write outside their experience or write stories that…maybe they shouldn’t be telling…or maybe are stories you should be telling, or they should include you in. What do you say to those people? Or is there a way we can combat that aspect of the system other than diversity pipelines?
 

JM: That’s a tricky question. What many people forget a lot of the time is that filmmaking and television are collaborative mediums by nature. I am generally not against people writing outside their own experience, as long as they do their homework. Reach out to people that do have that experience and let it inform the project. Have them read over the script and give an honest opinion. If it’s a TV show – since it’s a writer’s room – a diverse group of people is essential in my opinion. But for more solitary projects like filmmaking, it doesn’t have to be a one-person duty, even if the writing itself is. I don’t know if that makes any sense.
 

AC: That makes perfect sense. I think that is what all of us hope for. The ideal is that anyone can write anything as long as they include research and points of view that make it authentic. It doesn’t always work out that way, but that’s what we strive for.
 

JM: Exactly, I mean no one can write everything. But if you’re going outside what you know, learn it before. These movies and shows do have a very big social and cultural impact.
 

AC: What kind of impact do you hope to have with your work?
 

JM: I do believe entertainment should be the first goal of any of these, so of course to get people entertained. But beyond that, I want people to 1) feel something, and 2) either feel identified [or represented] or feel they knew someone/something they didn’t. I guess I want people to find meaning in what I do, whatever that is for them.
 

AC: Definitely. So we want to transition a little bit to talk about TV Land’s Heathers. For background, what was your journey to Heathers and TV Land? You graduated recently, correct?
 

JM: Yes, I graduated in May. And that’s actually a funny story. When I found out they were developing Heathers – my all time favorite movie – into a TV series, I made it a goal to be a part of the project. So when my school contacts gave me no leads to anyone involved, I tracked down the showrunner on Instagram, DMed him and told him I was willing to do any type of work but I wanted to be on the show. After some months of bothering him, he agreed to interview me, and I ended up as his assistant.
 

AC: That is a bold move. A true Hollywood story.
 

JM: It was crazy. While I was on set just watching the show being made, I couldn’t believe I actually got there.
 

AC: I can imagine. From what has been released thus far about the new Anthology series, the show is diverse in terms of race, sexual orientation, and gender identity. Has it been exciting for you to work on a show that values that?
 

JM: Oh of course! I mean, besides the original being my all-time favorite movie and kind of my model for how I want to write, this new version does such an amazing job of bringing it to the 21st century in those very important terms. I couldn’t be more excited to have been part of a project that sees that, and values that, and kind of plays around with that.
 

AC: That’s truly amazing. You seem like a very dedicated Winona Ryder fan.
 

JM: [Laughs] Oh I am. Favorite actress, I’m sure you can tell.
 

AC: Heathers has such a specific tone. Do you gravitate towards dark comedy? Or the macabre? I feel that is Winona’s wheelhouse.
 

JM: Hm, yes, I gravitate towards dark comedy, but even more towards satire. That’s my favorite genre. Shows like The Comeback or Crazy Ex-Girlfriend, or this new show Search Party, they all take a subject and examine it under a lens and pick it apart and make fun of it. I like pointing things out about society and making it fun.
 

AC: All great shows, we have similar taste Comedy can be such a great avenue for subversion and commentary too.
 

JM: Oh of course! I can’t really do pure comedy; I’m not really good at that, but I like the dark funny – when anytime it can jump to a drama.
 

AC: It’s weird to say that comedic drama or dramatic comedy is “in” right now, but it is. [Laughs] #SadCom
 

JM: Absolutely, it is. And that’s good for me, because that’s my wheelhouse.
 

AC: I agree that the new series does an excellent job of bringing the story into the 21st century. What do you think the benefit of re-inventing stories for a new era or generation is?
 

JM: Well, I don’t think every story should be reinvented. I think if a story still has relevance today, or the creators can find a way to make it relevant for today’s audience, there is big value to it. And Heathers definitely does that. But what’s the point of telling a story that lost its value or that feels dated?
 

AC: Agreed. So what is the relatable/relevant element of this story, Heathers? Or other reboots that are on television now – there are a lot.
 

JM: Well, it should say something about the audience that watches it, or the characters inside them. Heathers does a wonderful job of portraying teen culture like it is now, and not in 1989. I don’t know if I can say much else, but it feels 2016. I think that reboots, whether they do it directly like this, or more nuanced – like say, Westworld, is doing – should really say something about today.
 

AC: So, what do you feel the role of art is, today?
 

JM: Wow, that is a broad question. I think the role of art today – and always, really – is to provide some sort of meaning to whoever is enjoying it. That can be everything from inspiration, to information, to emotion. What’s great about art is that it can be anything you want it to be. Both from the artist’s and the audience’s perspective.
 
 

 

 

Jorge is a professional screenwriter and filmmaker from Mexico City. Jorge is a two time recipient of The Juan Rulfo National Short Story Award, and his works have been published in several anthology collections from the Universidad Iberoamericana and his original script “Fool Me Once” won him the Best Screenplay Award at the 2014 Ed Wood Film Festival. Jorge is a contributor to Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation (GLAAD) website, as well as The Film Experience and AwesomenessTV. Currently, Jorge works on the television reboot of the 1989 cult film classic Heathers, spearheaded by TVLand, written by Jason Micallef (Butter) and directed by Leslye Headland (Sleeping with Other People, Bachelorette).

Posted on by

A Conversation with Sigrid Gilmer

 

Even from 3000 miles away, Sigrid Gilmer’s exuberance, artistic insight, and hilarious writing brightened our days. In this conversation, we discuss why she reimagined Harriet Tubman as an action star in Harry and the Thief, the myth of niche writing, a pesky little thing called the fourth wall, and everything in between.

 

 

Esther Cohen: Give me the quick biography of Sigrid Gilmer.
 

Sigrid Gilmer: I was in born in San Francisco and raised out in the ‘burbs in Pittsburg, California–
 

EC: It’s called ‘Pittsburg’?
 

SG: Yeah [laughs]. It doesn’t have an ‘H’ on the end! The town had a steel plant early in its history so they changed the name to ‘Pittsburg.’ So yes, it’s not very original. But that’s where I grew up. 
I went to college at Cal State LA and studied theater, but not playwriting – I did acting and directing and was just a total theater nerd overall. And towards the end of my college career, right before I was about to graduate, I fell out of love with acting. I realized I didn’t have any control, it was high stress, and I wasn’t having fun anymore. You don’t have any agency when it comes to being able to do your art. You’re always dependent on somebody else.
 

EC: How did you make the transition from actor to playwright?
 

SG: I had a playwriting class and an English class to take right before I graduated. And the playwriting class just made sense to me. I found this new way to put myself in another person’s shoes. I could still pretend to be somebody else, something I loved about acting, but in a way that seemed to fit better.
 

EC: So tell me, what is the difference between New York and LA for playwriting? It seems unusual to be a playwright based in LA.
 

SG: So, the caveat here is that I don’t really leave my house that much [laughs]. So the scene that I’m in is a very small community. Most of the theater in LA is very small and company- and actor-driven. Personally, I feel much freer out here than I did in New York. It’s not exactly that nobody is paying attention, but the stakes aren’t as high.
 

EC: Tell me about the spark for this play. It’s a pretty traditional story presented in a really uniquely funny and fast-paced way. How did the base idea and the unusual structure of the play come together?
 

SG: A couple different threads merged to make this play. I joined two writing groups in LA, Center Theatre Group and Skylight Theatre, that involved writing a play over the span of one year. And I was talking to a friend of mine, a playwright who writes a lot of TYA (Theatre for Young Audiences) plays, and he was talking about how a bunch of TYA plays that deal with African Americans experiences – he made this big joke – that all of them were about Harriet Tubman. And I remember saying, “Well, I’m gonna write a Harriet Tubman play!”
 

EC: And it’s gonna be different!
 

SG: Exactly! I’m gonna write my own version of ‘The Harriet Tubman Play’! I had The Thief and The Mad Scientist characters from a previous short play. I started thinking, oh, I have these characters that I really love over here, and I have Harriet Tubman over here. And I just started playing around thinking, how can I mesh these characters together?
 
I went into the writing process knowing the basics of Harriet Tubman, but I was poking around on the internet and read that she apparently carried a gun with her. When the people traveling North would get freaked out, she would pull out her gun and she would tell them, “You’re gonna be free or you’re gonna be dead.” I read that and instantly thought it was the coolest, most action-movie badassery I had ever heard in my life. Like, why hasn’t Michael Bay done a big flashy Harriet Tubman action movie? [laughs] And as I was writing, a writer at Skylight said, “You should have a trailer for the play.” He was just being snarky, but I thought, “y’know, I should have a trailer. That feels appropriate for this play.” So the action movie concept kept informing the play’s style.
 

EC: Even outside of the guiding theme of “action movie,” the play has a structure I’ve never seen before. Did you dictate in the script the dance breaks and chase scenes and repeated montages? How much of that did you imagine when you first wrote the play, and how much was developed with the director and actors?
 

SG: The short answer is yes, all of the action sequences and songs are written into the play. Of course the specifics get developed in the room with me and the actors and the director. So the tone is everywhere in the script, but how it looks has been different in each production.
 

EC: What do you hope to achieve by very specifically dictating action in a script? Some playwrights love stage directions; others hate them. What’s your stance?
 

SG:: Theater is a visual medium. As much as it is auditory and linguistic, in the end, it must be visual. Movement informs action – it carries the story. I think you can get a lot of storytelling and emotional punch with gesture and movement as much as you can, and sometimes even more so, than with just language. So I do see the action in my head because it is part of the story I’m telling. What the actors are physically doing, how their bodies carry the story, is important to me. That, to me, is an essential aspect of writing a play.
 

Stage & Candor_Sigrid-Gilmer_Harry and the Thief

EC: The play also breaks the fourth wall a ton. Tell me about that.
 

SG: I enjoy the idea that my plays are really just me and the audience, in my backyard, playing. “Let’s pretend this is a spaceship; let’s pretend this is a horse; let’s pretend the floor is lava!” I like that proverbial play found in all theater. And I like the idea of the form acknowledging that and making the audience complicit in it. Saying, no, we’re not actually going back to the 1800s, no we’re not in somebody’s living room – none of this is real. Because you can see people breathe and spit.
 

EC: And that’s the point!
 

SG: Yes, exactly. That’s the point, and that’s the joy and the fun of it: that we’re all gonna sit here together and say, “Let’s play!” To me, that is one of the great things about theater that other storytelling mediums don’t get to do.
 

EC: And breaking the fourth wall is really just another form of audience engagement.
 

SG: Yeah, it’s “Hey, welcome!” I love that engagement and deciding that on this night, in this space, we’re all together and we’re gonna make some shit happen. For me, that always feels right and juicy and delicious.
Especially with this play, because I’m playing around with subject matter that gets told in a certain way all the time, I felt like I needed to reach out to the audience and acknowledge, no, this isn’t the way we normally tell this.
 

EC: You had to acknowledge the unusual circumstances.
 

SG: And also question “Why do we always tell it the other way?” Why are all stories about people of color always tragic, tragic stories? There’s a set frame around suffering. The play actively butts up against that and says, “We can still tell this story and these people can be happy and have agency and joy.” And at the same time, it still acknowledges – not even the challenges –
 

EC: The bullshit.
 

SG: Right! The insurmountable, horrible, messed-up shit that happens. But that stuff isn’t framed in a way that makes the people tragic. Being born into a situation that is fucked up and tragic is different from being fucked up and tragic because of a situation.
 

EC: This play, along with many of your other works, is chock full of both obvious and not-so-obvious historical and popular culture references. How do those references find their way into your writing? What do you hope to achieve with them?
 

SG: When I write, I’m writing for and from what’s in my head. This sounds so narcissistic and selfish, but my first audience is always myself. Like, naming the band of slaves after the Jolie-Pitt kids literally happened because I was obsessed with Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie when I was writing it. And all the cultural references from civil war and antebellum-style movies were just what came to mind when I thought about the content of the play.
 
Music also helps me a lot in my writing process, so the soundtracks I make when I write will make it into the play. When I was looking for songs and trying to figure out characters through those songs, Rebel Yell started playing in iTunes. And it just dawned on me: oh, Rebel Yell has roots in the Civil War, and it sends a kind of fucked-up message. So in my mind, that song fit Harry perfectly. Because this show messes with time, it felt super normal to insert, like, a Dawson’s Creek reference. Because why not? Nothing else in this play plays by the rules. Also, I was watching Dawson’s Creek while writing it [laughs]. My writing is just me working through my own feelings and assumptions about the play and the content. I was working through what I’d read about Harriet Tubman and the Civil War in order to write the play. That ends up getting filtered through my own idiosyncratic interests and whatever I connect with.
 

EC: Tell me about the rehearsal process for this play.
 

SG: In this rehearsal process, and in other the rehearsal rooms of other productions, what I’ve found is that the table work, the first week of being with the play, is important for unpacking the themes, the hard stuff, the messed up stuff. So especially in this production, that first week was really remarkable because we just sat and talked about race, and slavery, and what it’s like to be a woman of color, and how we frame history, and how images about people of color and women get disseminated and framed, and how we negotiate those frames. The first week was laying all that stuff out.
 
The rest of the rehearsal process felt really playful. Katie Lindsay, the director, ran such a warm, open, creative, collaborative room. And this cast – I’m shaking my head now because I can’t even find the words. They are talented and facile and just badass. Everyday in that room was a fucking joy. And for me – outside of making an amazing, great, successful show – the process needs to be wonderful and joyful and encouraging so that I’ll actually want to make another play.
 

EC: And as a member of the creative team, your time is really the process.
 

SG: I think the process matters for everybody. Because how miserable and horrible would it be to be in a room and a process where people aren’t giving and generous and kind to one another? That energy filters down into the final product of the play and the audience feels it. I think, and hope, that our joy comes across onstage and informs the play.
 

EC: This play reclaims a story that is usually told in distorted or sanitized ways about people like you. Have you always had an attraction to writing about people of color, about women, about your personal experience, and rewriting those narratives?
 

SG: I mean, it might be super egocentric, but yes, a lot of the time, I’m writing about me.
 

EC: I’ll also go back on my own question and say that it’s not really egocentric. When women or people of color write about themselves, they get told they’re writing for a niche. But when white men write stories about white men they’re never told that.
 

SG: Exactly. There’s an idea that white maleness is somehow universal and everyone else is super specific. It’s just not true. Everyone’s writing is super specific. Tennessee William’s writing was super specific, but because he fit into the dominant power structure, he gets to be universal.
 

EC: Plays about rich white people are not universal.
 

SG: They’re specifically about rich white people. Which is fine! I love a good Noel Coward play, but let’s be real and say that that is a specific cultural viewpoint. And that’s great, and there really is enough room for everyone’s story. There are a ton of people in the world, so why do all the stories we see have to be about one specific, narrow group?
 

EC: And why do stories that are not about that group have to be ‘niche’?
 

SG: Exactly. Because it’s all niche. It’s all one person sitting down and saying, “I’m gonna think about and explore x, y, and z from my point of view, and my point of view is predicated on my race, my gender, my sexuality, where I grew up, how old I am, and all of that goes into it.”
 
So really, to answer your question, I honestly don’t even think about it. I get interested in a topic and it filters through me and what creatively inspires me and what I’m working through in my own life. I just think “I want to see people that look like me.” Because if I can’t be an actor, at least I can make characters that look like me and live through them.
 

EC: As you said at the very beginning of our conversation, acting is not the only part of theater that involves pretending to be someone else, and I think people forget that. Every single part of theater is about projecting yourself onstage.
 

SG: Hopefully we’re bringing ourselves as artists to the work. And if not, why do it? All of who you are informs your writing. So I don’t think of my writing as niche any more than any other writer’s writing is niche. It’s me specifically. Another black woman would write a totally different play. And you’d think I’m stating the obvious there, but unfortunately, that’s not obvious to a lot of people.
 

EC: Have people approached you and said, “you’re a black female writer, write me a play like a black female writer?” Do you feel lumped in with a demographic?
 

SG: I don’t actually. I’ve been very fortunate to not have an experience in which someone says “write blacker,” or you know, “write more ladylike” [laughs].
 

EC: That’s nice.
 

SG: It is nice. And if that does happen, I will cross, and then burn down, that horrible bridge when I come to it.
 

 

 

 

Sigrid Gilmer makes black comedies that are historically bent, totally perverse, joyfully irreverent and are concerned with issues of identity, pop culture and contemporary American society. Her work has been performed at the Skylight Theatre, Pavement Group, Know Theatre of Cincinnati, Cornerstone Theater Company and Highways Performance Space. She is a winner of the Map Fund Creative Exploration Grant, the James Irving Foundation Fellowship and is an United States Artist Ford Fellow in Theatre.