MODERATED BY FIGHT CHOREOGRAPHER,
DIRECTOR & ACTOR GEOFFREY PAUL KENT
FACILITATED + EDITED BY KRISTY CUMMINGS
This past spring, the SDC/LORT negotiations resulted in LORT’s recognition of fight choreographers who are SDC Members—a historic moment, as it is the first expansion of the SDC bargaining unit since the Union’s founding in 1959. As this new coverage takes effect, SDC Member and fight choreographer Geoffrey Paul Kent sat down with fellow SDC Members and fight choreographers Drew Fracher, Steve Rankin, Tom Schall, and Robert Westley to discuss the craft of staging violence, including their creative processes, biggest challenges, and what Union recognition means to them. raising expectations
GEOFFREY | What got you started in this profession? When did you realize that you were a fight director/choreographer?
ROBERT | I started off as an actor and, like most actors, eventually you’re in a production that has some sort of violence. For me, it was playing Malcolm in Macbeth, which had a lot of sword fights. The fight director mentioned that I took to it pretty well and that I should consider exploring it further. I did. Having grown up watching Zorro and all of the Errol Flynn movies, it was a joy to pick up. It fell into my lap at the right time in my life, and I slowly transitioned into it.
STEVE | You know, that is the single most difficult question that I have to answer! I’ve tried to condense it over the years but it always ends up being a long conversation because people don’t really have any idea that this is a profession. I’ve even had to explain it to my mother!
I think that all of us in this profession discovered we had a natural proclivity toward it. I really started this career when I was a kid on a farm, swinging from a rope and jumping off of a hay mound.
I was also an actor. I was an overzealous one who would jump from 10 feet in the air and land on my head. I decided that there needed to be a better way to do this, so I started training through gymnastics, competition sword fighting, medieval Renaissance fairs, and falling off of horses—all of which established my skill set.
I went to graduate school at Florida State University/Asolo Conservatory, where I had two years of training in stage combat with Norm Beauregard. After getting my MFA and my Equity card, I was cast as Valvert in Cyrano de Bergerac with F. Murray Abraham in 1979. The fight director was none other than B. H. Barry. Then I was cast as Comte de Wardes in The Three Musketeers, and the fight director was David Boushey. To have the experience of being staged by these two gentlemen—with the two best fight directors in the U.S. at the time—was the most valuable training that one could hope for.
It carved out a path of no return for me. Their wisdom and approach to staging remains with me on every production. All paths to fight directing lead back to them. We would not be able to be having this conversation with SDC Journal if it were not for the two of them. We would be remiss not to mention their names.
DREW | I discovered sport fencing in my freshman year of college. I was always the scrawny kid in the class, and suddenly fencing seemed like, “Wow, this is something I could do.”
Then, in my sophomore year, Joseph Martinez—who is one of the founders of the Society of American Fight Directors—became my movement teacher. Suddenly, I was acting and sword fighting. I thought I had died and gone to heaven.
Once I got out of school, I was trying desperately to be an actor. I think I was pretty terrible, but I was able to get some jobs because I had these other skills. I was often hired to be the fight captain or the guy that died a glorious death somewhere downstage.
I ended up following Joseph out to graduate school at Western Illinois University and worked with him pretty closely for four or five years. Then I got into the SAFD world on the ground floor. The rest was kind of history.
TOM | Drew and I actually went to undergrad together, so part of my story is very much the same as his: training in school and then, out of school, working as an actor for many years. Early on, I was a company member at the Folger Shakespeare Theatre for two seasons, which meant a lot of classical works and a fair amount of violence. I was cast in the fighting roles, such as Hector in Troilus and Cressida, and was picking up the fight captain position fairly regularly. Around that time, I started training with the Society of American Fight Directors and started choreographing as well.
When I moved to New York to pursue an acting career, I stopped doing fight direction. I was afraid of being slotted as “the fight guy.” But I ended up performing fight roles pretty frequently: Athos in Three Musketeers—choreographed by Drew, in fact—Mercutio a couple of times, Petruchio. Over about a 10-year period, fight direction crept back into my life and by now, 30 years on, it’s a good 90 percent of what I do. But it’s very much the same story.
GEOFFREY | All of us started with one foot in that acting world.
When you get the script of a play you haven’t staged before, how do you first approach it from a fight director’s perspective?
TOM | I try very hard not to approach it as a fight director, at first.
On my very first exposure, I sit down with a yellow pad and try to simply read the play as an audience member would experience it, reading it for story and character. I jot down anything that’s salient. That’s where I begin to think about how the fights fit into the play.
After that, I start digging in. But at first, I try to be as open to experiencing the story as I can be.
STEVE | I’ll just back that up. It’s story, story, story. It’s always about why, who these particular people are, and how they’re able to carry out what they’re about to do.
What’s the story? Is there anything that involves an encounter? What happened in the story at some other time that affects the encounters? What happens before an encounter, and what happens after it—why is it there? Just as Tom said, you’ve got to read the play.
GEOFFREY | Do you ever find that you have to go back and reread the plays that you have done many times?
DREW | Oh, there’s always something to learn.
TOM | I agree. It becomes a whole new discovery to reengage with a play. The work is infinitely evolving because you’re infinitely evolving, and the world evolves too, so the same play means different things at different times. It speaks differently, which has to be reflected in your work.
DREW | I would be willing to bet you that all of us would say, “I’ve never used the same choreography twice.” It just doesn’t apply.
Fight work is a very particular thing that happens at a very particular moment. The point about what happens before and what happens after the action is really interesting, and I would absolutely agree. To me, the aftermath is very important.
TOM | The fights are part of a larger context, and you need to honor the entirety of the piece. Sometimes, as a fight director, it’s awfully tempting to think, “I’m going to go in there and make this really cool thing happen.” But that’s like an actor figuring out his character before the first rehearsal. It is just potentially disastrous in terms of how you serve a play.
GEOFFREY | Several of you also work as movement directors, which includes work on any choreography in a show, including character movement, ensemble imagery, character transitions as well as visual composition in scenes. Robert, you often work as both. Is that a different hat from your fight choreographer hat?
ROBERT | For me, they’re always the same hat. I think we’re all movement choreographers. It’s just specific to a story that the movement is violent. Even in the violent elements, there’s always a movement component.
I think we’re always looking for how to emphasize the strengths of the actors, how they move and tell a story physically. Every actor is different. Every actor has different physical traits, so part of my job as a fight choreographer is to maximize the strengths.
TOM | I concur. It’s all about storytelling, and it’s about safety in physical movement. Whether your character faints and needs to be lifted into a wheelchair or whether you attack somebody with a dagger, the same things apply. You’re telling a nonverbal story, and you want to tell it safely and repeatably.
GEOFFREY | Let’s talk about that first experience—that very first meeting on the phone or at a coffee shop—when you talk to a director you haven’t worked with before. What do you look for in that conversation to help you in the rehearsal process?
TOM | That “getting to know you” phase is a really important one. That first date.
I try, as much as possible, to get the director to talk so I can listen. To just listen is a good way to start to get an understanding of the production, as the director sees it. Of course, I’ll occasionally have my feelings about things too. I’ve found instances where in order to feed that conversation, I throw in a thought or an idea. Even if it’s wrong, it always leads toward something productive.
STEVE | You can learn a lot from a director during that first meeting. Some of them will say immediately, “This is how I feel about the kind of fighter Tybalt is,” or “This is what I think Blanche DuBois’ real center is and why she needs to strike out.”
Then again, you get a lot of directors who ask, “Well, what are your thoughts? How do you see it?”
I think we’d all agree that it is so important to get the conversation started and then, hopefully, we’ve read the play so we are ready to participate. Sometimes, though, the play isn’t even discussed. I met Nicholas Hytner when I was going to do Twelfth Night with him. He didn’t really want to talk about the play; he just wanted to talk to me and get a feeling for who I was. There are some directors who are like that. It really is a first date. That’s exactly what it is.
ROBERT | In that conversation, what I try to do is figure out what the collaboration is going to be like. What kind of collaborator they are and how they want me to be in the process.
DREW | I’m sure you would all agree that sometimes directors are very specific: “It needs to be this long, and we’re going to have this music.” And then some say, “Just don’t let anybody get hurt.”
TOM | In early conversations, I try to get a feel for how the director wants to work in the room. As Drew said, some directors really want to have a hand in it. Others want to leave you alone in the room with the actors, then come back in and have an opinion. So, it’s often a useful thing to ask, “How would you like me to be in the room with you?”
ROBERT | We adapt our skills as best we can to whether the directors are very hands-on or hands-off.
It’s funny. When you’re working in rep, in the morning, I can be with one director who is actively hands-on and we’re really collaborating, and then in the afternoon, the other director might say, “Let me know when you’re done, and I’ll let you know what I think.” You’re shifting gears on your lunch break.
GEOFFREY | Let’s move into the first fight rehearsal with the actors. What goals do you want to achieve?
STEVE | For me, it’s imperative to size up the actors within the first few minutes that I meet them.
The first type of person I look for is someone who is scared. If they’re scared, it’s good, but it’s also bad because they could be dangerous. The second type is the overzealous actor. The “I’ll do anything” type of actor. Again, that’s a good thing because they’re going to be valuable, but it could also be a dangerous thing. The third one, which is the subtlest, is arrogance. “Yes, I’ve played Cyrano six times. So I know how to do this.” I go to that person right away and ask, “How do you want to do this?” Meaning, from my point of view, “Do you want it to be difficult, or do you want it to be easy?” I want to identify those people because then we’re all on the same page, and we can all get to work.
We also have to work within the limitations and capabilities of the actors. That means emotional, mental, and physical capabilities. We’ve got to get inside their heads and figure out how to get the ideas in their minds down into their bodies. So, that’s what I do. I size people up and I ask people to move around. We talk about what we’re going to do, and then we try to do a little staging. But it’s mostly, again, another first date.
DREW | I think we all have some version of that exact same process, Steve. That makes complete sense to me. I talk to people about their training. I talk to people about their physical past. “Do you have injuries? Do you have a knee I need to think about?” Those kinds of questions.
And then I always try to spend a little time talking to them about character. They’ve obviously thought a lot about it by the time the first rehearsal rolls around. Is Tybalt really skilled and arrogant, or is he scared? Is he secretly in love with Romeo? I don’t know—but you tell me and that will help me make some decisions as I start to think about the actual staging.
ROBERT | That’s perfect, Drew. I think a lot of the time the thought is that fight choreographers come in and tell actors exactly what their choices are. The actors forget that they have choices. They have done their work; they know their character.
There has to be a dialogue established with the actors at the beginning so they understand that I am not coming in to tell them what to do. I am there to enhance the choices they are working on. I always want to create a physical vocabulary that everyone can use to collaborate and make the staging unique to that production.
STEVE | I’m getting ready to do a fabulous new play called Kill Local, with four women who are a family of assassins. One of the actresses called me before rehearsals started and asked, “How am I going to need to train before I get there? I’ve got a bad back and I know I’m going to need to do this and this and this…” I needed to calm her down and remind her that the action will be based on her character. How does she relate to the weapons she’s going to have? How can I make her feel comfortable?
GEOFFREY | It’s really a series of first dates, then, right? From the first look at the play, then the meeting with the director, then the first rehearsal with the actors.
At the first rehearsal, I like to have the director in the room while we chat through the story as it stands so that if I have an actor who has a really strong opinion about the character and the director disagrees, we can begin that discussion before we start codifying movement that dictates one of those choices.
Then I like to start a little smaller so I can take the temperature of the actors to see where they’re at. If they’re really taking to it quickly, then we move forward. But if not, I can step back and reevaluate after that first short rehearsal.
I’m currently doing a big production of Treasure Island, and I have nine actors moving around with swords. It was nice to have a first rehearsal where I sketched in movement and let them invent things with invisible swords. Just by watching, I could fi gure out who I needed downstage center, who I needed up center, who needed encouragement, who needed a dictator.
As Steve said, you’re trying to read the room as quickly as you can so you can take the tools you have and make the best action you can.
DREW | I also try hard to make sure the actors understand that nothing is etched in stone with anything I’m about to show them at this point in the game. And if it doesn’t make sense to their character—if it hurts their knee, if there’s an issue—they shouldn’t just suck it up and be a martyr. I make it clear they need to tell me and we’ll do something else.
GEOFFREY | Let’s fast-forward to tech. We’ve rehearsed our action. We’ve got it to where we want and now we have all these new facets— the stage, set, lights, costumes—thrown at us. What’s the main problem you most frequently have to tackle?
DREW | Time.
GEOFFREY | Drew’s one-word answer sums it up, doesn’t it?
DREW | Everybody else gets the time in tech, but they think because you’ve been rehearsing for three weeks, you are all set. The fact of the matter is now it’s all new.
STEVE | Yes to time. Also, the environment. Is everything safe? For example, suddenly, the lighting designer has a bunch of footlights along the front of the stage that you hadn’t planned on when you were creating your movement. It’s going to be right where one of your actors’ heads was supposed to land. So you’ve got to negotiate and arm wrestle with people to make it all safe. Are the sets safe? Are the costumes safe? Is the edge of the stage suddenly too close? Is there scaffolding that somebody’s going to run into? Are the escape stairs safe?
It can be a minefield. But, again, you’re right, Drew; it’s about time. Generally speaking, people are friendly about it, but it’s still a negotiation. I always tell my director that when we get into tech, anytime there is a lull, I’m going to be on stage. If you don’t want me there, just say, “Steve, get off of the stage.” I won’t take offense at that, but I will try to be a master of five minutes because that’s sometimes all you get.
DREW | You’re so right. If you do that and you are really proactive, everybody wins.
ROBERT | It’s also about the dynamic interaction with lights, sound, and costumes because these other elements can either eliminate or elevate the work you created in the rehearsal room.
I’m constantly saying, “Talk to me about this sound cue” and, “Could we add a layer of frenetic energy to this beat?” or, “Talk to me about that light cue. Is there a way we can time that blackout to cover this?” or, “How do you feel about pushing the audience’s focus over here?” and “Can you help me?”
That collaboration with the right group of tech people is crucial. Sometimes it really is the costume or the new prop or the light effect that actually elevates the violence beyond what I could ever have done in the rehearsal room.
STEVE | That collaborative process is so important—which is why it is so important for the producers to recognize the viability of the fight director as part of the creative team. This way, when we get into tech, we’re all working together. Just as the dance choreographer is going to go ask for a light cue, we’re going to as well.
I will also say this about tech: if you, as the fight director, don’t get the time needed, you have to speak up. I always tell my actors that if they feel anything is dangerous, they need to tell me. I will stop the rehearsal and take the heat because I do not want them to get hurt—ever.
DREW | I completely agree, Steve. You do have to be on top of that aspect of the process. The time will get sucked up, and then they’re only going to give you one shot to run your sequence. You have to advocate and say, “No, no, no, no. Everybody else got hours to do their work. Let me do mine now.”
GEOFFREY | Safety takes the front seat for me, and then aesthetic comes back later. The first thing I do is to make sure the actors survive tech, or there won’t be dress rehearsals or previews.
ROBERT | I think all of us would agree that, hopefully, we’ve had enough time that we’ve worked out any potential hitches before we get into tech. Sometimes tech is a negotiation. Sometimes you have to be the good cop, and sometimes you have to be the bad cop. There’s the safety component of it, but everybody also wants a good, strong story. Sometimes there needs to be a reminder that we’re all here with the same goal—for that story to be told—which means I might need a little more time here.
GEOFFREY | All right, so now it’s opening night. We don’t often do this, but if you were going to say something to your actors before the show started, what would you tell them? What’s your best advice?
STEVE | I’ve thought about this a lot, and I want to tell you something that Jack O’Brien told me.
I was doing Henry IV at Lincoln Center with Kevin Kline, and I staged a huge battle with 30 people. It was basically a 15-minute sequence in the play in which there are all different kinds of violence. Everybody got to participate. Some people died right away, some people got killed later.
I kept giving notes during previews. Jack pulled me aside and said, “Steve, Steve: you need to realize that they are never ever going to do it exactly the way you want them to do it. Once you realize this, you can give really good, specific notes based upon how they are going to do it now.” That was such a wise piece of advice that let me suddenly release a little bit because everybody was safe. So, on an opening night, what I tell the actors is, “You’re doing great. Just slow down and enjoy the ride.”
DREW | At that stage of the game, I think all you can do is exactly what you’re saying: just be supportive. That’s it.
ROBERT | I like to tell them, “Trust you’ve prepared and that we’ve created the action so you can let it all go and live and respond in the moment. Don’t focus on the choreography. Focus on the moments.”
GEOFFREY | I tell them, “Celebrate the mistakes. We’ve trained to be able to safely make mistakes, so celebrate those. They’ll become the moments that make it live and breathe as you move forward.” Half of the time, we’ve choreographed those “mistakes” to happen. For instance, the dropping of the dagger or the stumble—that choreography actually keeps the action alive and moving.
Comparing your first fight gigs to now, how has this craft changed since you started working in the field? What has changed technically or artistically for you?
ROBERT | Film and how things are filmed have prepared an audience to be more challenged and have greater expectations. I think cirque and dance have also expanded what our perceived limitations are when it comes to action. These other art forms have allowed for a freedom of physical storytelling that only enhances what is possible with stage violence. That and technology have opened so many doors for keeping actors safe while still creating impact or the illusion of impact.
The challenge for me has been to keep on top of how things have been progressing and make sure that the movement being created on stage is still new and exciting, and encourages an audience to keep coming back.
STEVE | More and more, the audience wants to see movie effects on the stage. To create that kind of impact, you have to have people capable of doing it. You also have to share with the playwrights and directors that people are not going to experience what would be a close-up movie shot in the same way they’re imagining it on the page because people are sitting back 25 rows. So we have to adjust because we’re going to be considering the entire stage when we do it.
I also agree that the technology has changed. The great thing that I celebrate about us as fight directors is that they can’t do this without us. If it’s fi lm, they can use CGI. But when you can only use the raw material and the actors’ physical capabilities to do this in the theatre, you can’t replace this craft. That’s the great thing about doing theatre—they need us to tell these three-dimensional stories.
DREW | I would agree with everything everybody has said. Also, our tools are much better. The technical director didn’t make them in his garage over the weekend.
GEOFFREY | The swords aren’t made out of rebar anymore.
DREW | Exactly. And I think there is a huge new percentage of people who have skills and training. There was a time when you basically started from scratch on every show you did. You had to teach that this is the end of the sword you hold.
But, boy, the vast majority of people that I’ve come in contact with lately have had some sort of training. I think that’s helped a lot in terms of giving us a broader range of options when it comes to telling stories. Directors are also more tuned in to our work and more opinionated about it, which I think is a good thing.
ROBERT | I agree about the directors. I’m definitely finding directors who are excited to communicate about the violence of their show, and they are raising their expectation of it.
DREW | Exactly. They have some expectations now. For a long time, you were given free rein to do whatever you wanted, which isn’t necessarily a good thing.
GEOFFREY | For me, the evolution has been prevalent in thrust theatre and theatre-in-the-round. I’m working in those predominantly right now. The techniques have adapted. We’re evolving past the kind of upstage, downstage, clap knaps—where an actor uses his or her hands to create the sound of impact for a punch or hit that doesn’t actually make contact. We’re moving into action that’s much more sleight of hand.
It’s nice to feel that our form is evolving past where it started. Fight direction is young compared to the other design disciplines. We have so many gaps in our knowledge of how they really executed stage fights at certain times. We’re playing a little catch-up with those other artists, but we’re evolving. And not just in terms of moving toward cinematic action, but also embracing the theatricality of violence and what it can do that film can’t.
I have been in the profession for the past 20 years, and I wouldn’t want to look back at the things I created in the late ’90s. The skills I could bring to that room now would be so much different. And, as Drew said, the actors have evolved as well. Partially, the reason we’re getting more options is we’re more often getting a chance to work with people who can run with those ideas, enhance them, and make them better.
How about you, Tom? Have you found it’s changed much since you’ve started?
TOM | I couldn’t agree more with Drew, Steve, and Robert. I particularly feel that pressure of expectations primed by movies.
As for change, the only other thing I can think to add is that I’ve recently been working with some directors who have developed a very unadorned, dry, prosaic style of storytelling. Sam Gold is a brilliant example of this. Annie Baker, as a playwright, seems to do this too. They strip away so much to expose the essence of the story and relationship, and the results are deeply human.
I’ve been lucky to work with Sam on a few things, recently Othello at New York Theatre Workshop and the Hamlet currently at the Public Theater. I don’t know whether any of you saw his Glass Menagerie this season. It was a very empty stage. The actors wore rehearsal clothes, with a folding table and a few chairs. The acting was very simple and direct. I’ve found that kind of aesthetic affects how I’m being asked to approach the violence. Just like the acting, the action wants to be simpler: unspectacular and very exposed.
From a technical standpoint this is tough, because a lot of the tools we usually use to hide techniques and generate the sort of energy that experiencing violence should convey—such as our knaps and non-contact blows—become less useful. I don’t know that I’ve completely cracked the code yet, but I see this type of challenge showing up more.
GEOFFREY | As we start to wrap up this conversation, I want to talk about the wonderful Agreement that was negotiated between SDC and the League of Resident Theatres. Now, for the first time in history, we have union recognition in a collectively bargained Agreement. We now come to the table with the representation that every other director, choreographer, designer, actor, and stage manager I’ve worked with has had. What does that mean to you—to your work—as professional fight directors and choreographers?
DREW | I’ve been involved with this effort for several years. There was a time before when we tried to get coverage, and it was like herding cats. Nobody could agree. It feels to me that we, as fight directors, have finally been able to find some common ground and sit down and talk to each other. I think that was one of the biggest takeaways from this process. Now there’s a much better exchange between us across the board.
If you just want to talk about the basics, think to yourself, “Wow, I have access to healthcare. That’s a you just said, Geoffrey, everybody else in the room has had that for a long time, and we’ve been the red-headed stepchildren. I think a lot of that was our own fault, but a lot of that was the result of producers not wanting yet another expenditure on their docket. But I’ll tell you, I haven’t found anybody yet from the management side of things or an artistic director who hasn’t said to me, “That’s a long time coming and that’s a darn good thing.” I’m sure the people having to pay the bills are wishing they didn’t have to deal with this, but I think everybody is reacting positively. I’m really, really thrilled.
STEVE | I am too because now we’re going to be considered in the process when they are putting the productions together. We’re not an afterthought anymore.
Before this coverage, the theatres wouldn’t bring us in from the start. Suddenly, an actor would get hurt because somebody wasn’t staging something correctly, and then they would bring us in late in the process in the middle of a tenuous situation. That’s no good. Our consideration in the process needs to be earlier. Now they have to think of us when they are putting together the finances.
ROBERT | We’re a budget line item now.
DREW | Exactly. And it’s already happening. I’ve recently had a theatre contact me about jobs way in the future, radically earlier than ever before.
ROBERT | That is good news. In addition to empowering our collaborative voice, which this coverage enhances, personally, I want to speak to the pride that I now have when I walk into the room: I am represented by a union. It has given me even more of a sense of belonging that wasn’t as fully present as it is now.
TOM | From a completely practical standpoint, in the past you or your agent, if you’re lucky enough to have one, have always had to negotiate from essentially a zero position because there was no union contract. There were no given protections, given standards, like property rights.
GEOFFREY | For me, I act, direct, and fight direct. Every year, I’ve had to make sure I get enough acting jobs to qualify for health insurance because that was the only option I had. So, my career path has been dictated by health insurance!
This movement with SDC and LORT’s recognition actually allows me to pick and choose what project I work on from an artistic standpoint, not based on which job will get me to the doctor or fix my teeth. It sounds small, but it means a great deal because it opens up what I can do artistically.
STEVE | Thank you for asking me to be a part of this discussion. I’ve enjoyed the discourse with all of you so very much. I don’t get enough of it. I look forward to being able to see you all face-to-face and continue this conversation.
GEOFFREY | I completely agree. Let’s do it every Tuesday! I always tend to stay in my market because I’m out here in the middle of America. I rarely get to see other people’s work, and we all grow by seeing other people’s choices. It’s really helpful to talk with this group of colleagues, to hear about the different routes everyone took into this profession, and to be self-affirmed by learning that we all have similar feelings about the room, the director, the script, and the tech process. Now when I get in my head during a rehearsal process, I will remember that we all struggle with the same problems. Any other final thoughts?
DREW | I would just add that the best part of the job for me is facilitating the actor’s job, making it simpler and safer for them to do the action every single night. So I would just say to directors: let me come to rehearsal. Use me. If you’re going to hire me, let me come and have input throughout the course of the production because I would like to think I can make everybody’s job easier. And that’s really satisfying.
And, of course, thanks to all who negotiated the new SDC/LORT Agreement, for making all of that happen.
ROBERT | It means the world to all of us. I’m excited to see where this continues to go, and I’m excited for us to have more conversations like this to keep growing together.
TOM | Amen to that.
GEOFFREY | Thanks for taking the time, everyone. I look forward to talking with you again soon.