Browse a comprehensive list of all Harvardwood Alumni Profiles below, and find out who our regular Member Profile writers/interviewers are!

Elisabeth Sharp McKetta AB '01 is an award-winning writer, a writing teacher, and a mother of two. With a PhD on the intersections between fairy tales and autobiography, as well as a seven-year streak of writing weekly poems for strangers, she teaches writing for Oxford Department for Continuing Education and for Harvard Extension School, where she won their highest teaching award. She has authored thirteen books across genres, most recently the novels SHE NEVER TOLD ME ABOUT THE OCEAN and ARK, the essay collection AWAKE WITH ASASHORYU, and the personal growth guide EDIT YOUR LIFE, based on her experience living three years in a 275-square foot backyard guest house with her family of four (five, if you count the Labrador). She co-edited the anthology WHAT DOESN'T KILL HER: WOMEN'S STORIES OF RESILIENCE, which Gloria Steinem described as stories that “will help each of us to trust and tell our own.” Elisabeth’s work with myth and memoir, which she began studying at Harvard College (B.A. 2001), has been spotlighted in HARVARD MAGAZINE.

Q: Your newest novel, ARK is an uplifting middle-grade story about relying on family (including pets!) during tough times and the challenges of isolation. This was inspired by your own experience living in a 275-square-foot tiny house with your family during the pandemic. Can you talk about that experience and how it morphed into this wonderful book?

Of course. My husband and I wanted adulthood to feel simpler, so in 2017 we simplified house. We moved as a family—6-year-old daughter, 3-year-old son, two Labradors, and us—into a backyard guest house that we called “The Shed”. Living there meant that we had no living expenses and very little housework, and so had the freedom to spend more time doing the things we like best: interesting work, deliberate parenting, fun adventures, and lots of travel. It was one of the best choices we’ve ever made. COVID-19 threw everything into disarray for everyone. It was fascinating to try to figure this new life out. Though in many ways it was scary and uncertain, it was also interesting and creative. It felt like we were living on a very small planet with only four people! My books always have fairy tales, myths, or very old stories at the core, and in the spring of 2020, I found myself thinking a lot about the ark story and its theme of withdrawal from life as it had been. Starting in lockdown, I gave myself the assignment of writing five short poems each day—they could be really short, or they could be prose poems, or anything at all—inspired by our family’s experience. Quickly the poems morphed into fiction, and us into composite characters, and then ARK the novel was born. It was born from life-writing, but quickly flung itself into fiction. I loved writing it. 

Q: What do you hope that younger audience members take away from reading ARK?

What a wonderful question. Two things above all. First, I hope it engages young readers’ “can do” spirit. In ARK, 11-year-old narrator Arden has the hardest time accepting three major changes in her life. When the story starts, she’s scared about the pandemic, miserable about her family’s move to a tiny house, and desperate for a dog. Only when she realizes that she can use the ARK to give a home to dogs who have been turned out does she begin to see her own problems with a fresh perspective—which is often how it works. When we’re stuck, changing one thing (anything!) with an eye for helping someone else (anyone!) can get the water moving again, and can help more people downstream. I would love for young readers to reflect on how they might engage their own powers of kindness and creativity to effect real change. Second, I’d love for young readers of ARK to reflect on their own relationships with and responsibilities toward animals. Philosopher Martha Nussbaum observes in Justice for Animals: Our Collective Responsibility, “No non-human animal escapes human domination. Much of the time, that domination inflicts wrongful injury…” Therefore we owe animals “a long-overdue ethical debt.” In ARK, I have tried to write about this ethical debt in a way that is joyful, loving, and hopeful. I hope young readers can think about ways to act toward animals and the natural world in that same spirit. 

Q: You’ve authored thirteen books, ranging in genre from poetry to middle-grade fiction to nonfiction memoir. How did you come to have such a diverse body of work as such a versatile writer, when many authors tend to pick one specific genre and stay with it for most of their careers?

I keep thinking I’ll grow up and pick a genre! But that hasn’t happened yet, and I doubt it will. I mostly write what feels exciting or necessary during a given life season, as ARK felt for the pandemic, and SHE NEVER TOLD ME ABOUT THE OCEAN felt in my early days of motherhood, and AWAKE WITH ASASHORYU: ESSAYS felt as I looked back at my twenties from age forty. Often, I write a book as a way to solve in writing a feeling or fear, or to lay something to rest. Other times, a fun and challenging project is offered to me—like my grandfather’s biography Energy, or collaborations with artist Troy Passey, or my Boise picture book, which my local bookstore asked if I’d write. I believe a writer grows a psychic inch or two with each challenging project, and I like to take on projects that will help me grow. Each new genre feels like facing a vertical rock wall and wondering, “where do I put my foot?” But through the climb, the writer gains strength, and in the end gets to see things from a new perspective. 

Q: Your Ph.D. dissertation was about the phenomenon of writers (usually female) using fairytales to map onto a description of their own lives, which you coined the coin “asymptotic autobiography” to describe. Myth and memoir continue to be strong features throughout much of your published work. Can you talk about how your work and research as a doctoral student impacted your storytelling path?

In every single way! Though my genre is all over the place, my use of fairy tale or myth as narrative seed or spine is the common denominator of nearly everything I do. There are shards of these wonderful old stories buried in the language and the plots of all of my work—including the bedtime stories I make up for my children! I recently developed a course for Harvard’s Writing Program called “Mythic Memoir”—it's been a dream to teach. I owe this obsession/intersection to two exceptional teachers who I learned from in college: Maria Tatar for fairy tales, Hope Hale Davis for memoir. They left their mark. I love how both fairy tales and memoirs engage what feels like the only question worth asking: how do we become?

Q: What’s your process like for starting, writing, and finishing a story? What are the challenges, and what comes easiest to you?

I think of the writing process as a trio of concrete but very different verbs: Create. Craft. Connect. Of these 3 writerly Cs, I love the first one most—the freewheeling “write anything” messy generative part. I love waking up into a project. During the “Create” phase, I write sentences and stories the way my kids make cardboard apartments for their stuffed animals. It’s pure play. Pure discovery. No expectations of greatness. Just the fun of an art project. Then the “Craft” stage starts when I’ve got enough written to ask what this project IS and what it needs to be—to start shaping and editing it. This part takes the longest and is the least orderly—but it is the most satisfying stage, because it’s here that the writer learns the most (and discards the most!) In this second “C”, the piece—whatever the genre—identifies its ideal form. At some point, after weeks or months or years of (often haphazard-feeling) craft decisions, a project becomes 92% perfect—or good enough to get feedback on and send out to wise, big-hearted readers. The “Connect” stage—polishing, publishing, marketing—is the one that feels the most vulnerable, because it’s fraught with opportunities to fail and to hear “no.” Once I got over my fear of hearing no, I started enjoying this stage too, especially when I think about the collaboration that comes with publishing, and how cool it is to have readers, and the many ways an author can think of the work in a “yes &” way. This is the stage where the work meets the world.

Q: How did you know you wanted to become an author? What did you do early on that set you down such a successful career path?

I think a lot of writers know early. The evidence is pretty easy to find: all you want to do is read and write! The trick is always creating a “floor” for the writer to safely stand on while starting and finishing projects. Sometimes that’s a financial floor; other times it’s a floor of trust in roommates or family members to support and encourage the writer (often by leaving them alone during certain hours!) A writer’s floor is the ability to trust that there is time and space to complete the project here, now. To take it as far as it can go. In my twenties, I took on every odd job I could find, from selling hats to reading college application essays. But I tried to write as often as I could. I failed. I tried again. Also, I stayed in school for a PhD, because I knew that becoming a better reader would certainly help me become a better writer—and I also knew that I’d love teaching. When I turned thirty, teaching adults became my financial floor, and writing in the mornings became my creative floor. Both still are. Moving to the Shed helped immensely, because it edited our life and bought me writing time. It also taught my family to communicate well and fairly over shared resources—time, space—which is really useful. But there’s no denying that setting up a career as an artist can be a really fumbly thing, because unlike so many careers, there’s no clear road to it—you’ve just got to crash through the woods and find your own path. 

Q: Which project are you most proud of that you’ve worked on, and which one taught you the most?

I am always proudest of the most recent project, because it’s the highest rung on the ladder of my growth as a writer. Always, when I start on a project, my ambition for it outstrips my skill. But in working on it, and learning new ways to approach it, my skill grows and the project changes into something I can do. So I come out of each project feeling like a better writer than I was before. The book that “grew me up” most was definitely my first novel, SHE NEVER TOLD ME ABOUT THE OCEAN. I had written and abandoned five novels before I wrote it. I knew how hard the revision would be. I wanted it to be the biggest thing I could possibly write, a mythology about mothers and daughters, birth and death. It would be four intertwined stories about how we face fear, and the ways women ferry each other through hard times. It took ten years and received over 300 rejections. During those ten years, I wrote other things too, and each one developed different writing muscles. But OCEAN felt the hardest to get right. I wasn’t sure I could even get it right until my publisher finally sent it to print. 

Q: What’s your biggest tip for aspiring authors?

I have three. 1. Just write! Set a weekday writing and reading practice. Give it a daily dose of your best energy, rather than just leftover time. Claim your role as writer through your regular attention to it. 2. Say yes to projects that come your way, for each one will add to the creative fermentation that will be your weird, wonderful, surprising career. 3. Starting immediately, resolve to be a writer who helps writers. Participate in that generous chain, thinking creatively about what skills and kindnesses (great and small) you can offer. You will be glad you did. Each of these three investments—writing and reading, taking brave leaps, nurturing relationships—will pay forward a thousand times.

Q: Finally, which project have you both been most proud of being involved with?

The membrane between writing and life for me feels really permeable. I like to spend most of my hours teaching, writing, and loving on my people, especially my family. These three intersect; I like that they do. While I like having a writing schedule, I determined early on that in order to be portable, I’d be willing to work flexibly (meaning not mind working early mornings, weekends, and vacation days) so that I could take my work anywhere. This has worked well. I like to distill my work into short “pods” of focus, and spend the rest of my days with family, friends, and students. I have two children (age 9 and 12) who still like spending time with me, and I love to take them on adventures out in the world, even just to a cafe or a bookstore. But I also love to walk, read, talk, and cook.

Join us for a talk with Jeff here!

by Laura Frustaci

Jeff Melvoin AB ‘75 has worked on over a dozen primetime series and was showrunner on eight of them. In all, he’s been involved in over 470 hours of produced television, most recently as an executive producer on season three of KILLING EVE. Other executive producer credits include DESIGNATED SURVIVOR, ARMY WIVES, ALIAS, and PICKET FENCES. 

He was supervising producer of the CBS series Northern Exposure, for which he won an Emmy and two Golden Globe Awards. Other writer-producer credits include the NBC series HILL STREET BLUES and REMINGTON STEELE.

Melvoin is also founder and chair of the Writers Guild of America West’s celebrated Showrunner Training Program, now in its eighteenth year. In February, 2015, Melvoin received the Morgan Cox Award, the WGA’s highest recognition for Guild service. He has taught at USC School of Cinematic Arts, UCLA, Harvard, and the Sundance Institute. Jeff has also lent his experience to the European Showrunner Programme, leading sessions at the inaugural edition in 2022 and will be returning in 2023.

Jeff Melvoin has always had a history of helping young showrunners develop the skills that it takes to succeed in the entertainment industry. And now, after years of drafting and planning, he’s published a book detailing every aspect of it. RUNNING THE SHOW: TELEVISION FROM THE INSIDE was released today, and within its pages lies a wealth of information, experiences, and anecdotes about Jeff’s time in the business working on shows ranging from KILLING EVE to DESIGNATED SURVIVOR to ARMY WIVES.

Almost twenty years ago, Jeff was the driving force behind the WGA Showrunner Training Program, which he created in response to his observation that there existed dwindling learning opportunities for future showrunners to learn their craft. Jeff recalls: “Before you were allowed to pitch a series in the old days, you had to have a considerable number of years in the business, because the studio’s assumption was that if they picked up your show, you would have enough experience to run it.” No longer is that the case. “At the turn of the century, the networks realized they needed more original material,” Jeff explains, “and so they started to look at less experienced writers. Suddenly freshness was an important thing. And very often that translated to younger people, newer people, people coming from outside of the traditional television path. As a result, you had more opportunity for writers, more originality, but you also had shows that were getting onto the schedule and then failing—not because the writers didn't have talent, but because they didn't have the experience to run a show.”

So Jeff and then-president of the WGA John Wells created the six-week Showrunner Training Program to train 25 young showrunners each year. But demand far exceeded the program’s capacity, even after raising the number of spots to 30 and sometimes even higher. “TV in the last twenty years has become such a hot field,” Jeff reasons. “There are so many people who would like to be part of it, but the knowledge is hard to come by. All of this was on my mind over the last five or ten years when I began making notes for a possible book. With each show I was working on, I would take time to write notes to myself: ‘Be sure to include this.’ The impulse was to get things down while they were still fresh in my head and provide a book that speaks directly and personally to the reader about the business.”  

As it turns out, writing a book wasn’t quite so different from other entertainment mediums. “I found that editing the book was very much like editing film, when you have to take your writer’s hat off and put your editor’s hat on and ask yourself ‘What is the film telling me? How long does this scene want to be? Why am I losing interest?’ And I found I was able to transfer that discipline to my writing.” After 18 months of drafting—and cutting over 100,000 words, Jeff sold the manuscript one year ago to Applause Books, which specializes in books about the performing arts.

Jeff notes, “Being aware that the business is changing dramatically and might look very different six months after the strike is over, I tried to write a book that was more about principles than specific systems or formulaic ways to do things. We're always going to need stories; what format those stories take, how they're presented, the platforms, the economic models, those are going to change. But what's really important to understand is how to organize a show under virtually any circumstance. Resilience and resourcefulness will be key components of the showrunner’s skillset moving forward.”

The book consists of three parts: the first—and shortest—is a mini-history of the business for the last 40 years. The importance of this section for Jeff was to use the prism of his own experiences to illustrate how TV has changed, where new forms come from, and how these forms have grown and transformed the industry. The second section, “Breaking In,”  informs readers about everything from how to become a writer in television to becoming a showrunner for the first time. The third and final section, “Running the Show,” covers much of what’s discussed in the WGA’s Showrunner Training Program. By increasing access to the information through the book, Jeff hopes to arm the next generation of successful showrunners.

Asked to name one of the skills necessary to be a successful showrunner, Jeff’s answer is “the art of compromise.” “The most professional showrunners are the ones who have a good give-and-take with executives,” Jeff says. “They don't cave in, they know when to make a stand, but they also know when to concede.” As Jeff has learned, experienced writers and showrunners are more likely to be open with their ideas, whereas newer writers harbor the belief that they have to defend each and every idea in their scripts to the death. “You only have so much capital to spend with studios, and you have to be careful about how you spend it,” Jeff recommends. “You've got to choose which hill you want to die on.” Another crucial piece of creating good television? Quality scripts on time. “You have to be writing quality stuff,” Jeff states. “But if it's not on time, then it doesn't matter how good it is; you're going to lose influence and won’t get the show that you want.” Procrastinators, take heed!

This is just a taste of the wisdom scribed within the pages of RUNNING THE SHOW: TELEVISION FROM THE INSIDE. Jeff concludes, “I’ve always like the proverb, ‘Give someone a fish, they can feed themself for a day; teach someone to fish, and they can feed themselves for the rest of their life.’ No matter how the business is changing, I hope that the ideas and approaches and principles in the book will help writers get their vision across.”

Jeff’s book is available for purchase now at Barnes & Noble and Amazon.

Join us for a talk with Jeff here!

Eric d’Arbeloff MBA ‘93 and Howard Cohen AB ‘81 are the Co-Presidents of Roadside Attractions, a specialty film distributor based in L.A. Roadside has released over 150 films in its near 20-year history, with combined box office exceeding $500 million. Their films have garnered numerous Oscar® and other award nominations and wins. Roadside is partially owned by Lionsgate, who distributes Roadside films in aftermarkets such as VOD and television. In 2022, Roadside announced a three-year deal with Hulu for the post-theatrical streaming window on its theatrical releases. Roadside’s recent releases include MOVING ON starring Jane Fonda and Lily Tomlin, SOMEWHERE IN QUEENS starring Ray Romano, and the Independent Spirit Award winning EMILY THE CRIMINAL starring Aubrey Plaza. Upcoming releases include RETRIBUTION starring Liam Neeson. Notable releases in recent years include BENEDICTION from director Terence Davies, THE COURIER starring Benedict Cumberbatch, Matteo Garrone’s double Academy Award® nominated PINOCCHIO, Academy Award® winner JUDY, and the number one independent film of summer 2019: THE PEANUT BUTTER FALCON. Also in recent times were the highest-grossing independent film of 2018, I CAN ONLY IMAGINE, the Spirit Award-nominated BEATRIX AT DINNER, and double Academy Award® winner MANCHESTER BY THE SEA. 

Howard Cohen is the Co-President and Co-Founder of Roadside Attractions, which devises innovative theatrical release strategies for outstanding specialty films. Before running the show with Eric d’Arbeloff at Roadside Attractions, Cohen was also an Executive Producer on Mira Nair’s film VANITY FAIR and was head of the Independent Film Department at United Talent Agency. Cohen’s early career included executive positions at HBO, Paramount, and TNT. Cohen is a voting member of the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences (AMPAS), in the Executive Branch. Cohen has a B.A. from Harvard College.

Eric d’Arbeloff is the Co-President of Roadside Attractions. His other credits include TRICK, which premiered in Sundance, LOVELY & AMAZON, which premiered in Telluride; LIFETIME GUARANTEE: PHRANC'S ADVENTURES IN PLASTIC, which premiered at Outfest and is currently available as part of the Masc curation on the Criterion Channel; and ALL IS LOST, which premiered in Cannes. He has a B.A. in Modern Studies from the University of Virginia and an M.B.A. from Harvard.

Q: You’re both producers on the soon-to-be-released film SHORTCOMINGS, Randall Park’s hilarious feature directorial debut based on the graphic novel by Adrian Tomine. What drew you to this film? What are you most excited for audiences to see when it hits theaters?

SHORTCOMINGS is a wonderfully wry and poignant work of literary fiction from author Adrian Tomine that was way ahead of its time when it was originally published, and named a New York Times Notable Book, in 2007. We admired the book’s unflinching honesty and its astute, often hilarious, observations about identity politics, sexual mores, and the impact of racial representation in pop culture. We felt like the broader culture has caught up to it, and we immediately saw its potential as a feature when our head of development, Ryan Paine, presented it to us. Like many of our favorite independent features, it’s told from a perspective that we hadn’t seen on screen before.

Adrian wrote the script for the film, and he and Randall Park worked closely together to update SHORTCOMINGS’ story and setting to the present day. We’re excited for audiences to get to know Randall as a director and for audiences to experience this story and get to know Adrian’s razor-sharp comedy and writing voice, since this is his first produced screenplay! Likewise, we’re excited for audiences to see our phenomenal, funny cast in action.

Q: We’re in a really exciting era of increased representation in Hollywood, specifically with regard to Asian American representation (with last month’s release of JOY RIDE in particular and LOVE IN TAIPEI coming out this month). What can you say about where this film fits within the current industry landscape?

Asian Americans have historically been underrepresented in Hollywood, on camera as well as behind the camera. This has been true even in the independent film sector, though were both old enough to remember the defining impact of Wayne Wang’s early films. While it’s exciting that the past few years have brought an upsurge in Asian-American representation in Hollywood, it’s also frustrating that it’s taken so long for this to happen. Thanks to decades of work by the Asian-American Hollywood community, there’s now a proven track record for a variety of commercial films with Asian characters. But we’ve seen fewer stories that feature flawed, funny, and complex Asian-American characters like our leads, Ben, Alice, and Miko. Our hope is that filmgoers will agree that our creative team has made a film that both leans into Asian-American identity and transcends it. Romantic confusion and the journey toward self-discovery are universal human experiences. They are themes explored in many of the films we love, and in particular, films we love to see with other filmgoers in a movie theater!

Q: Your company, Roadside Attractions, has released a lot of very unique, engaging, and acclaimed films, including THE PEANUT BUTTER FALCON, JUDY, MANCHESTER BY THE SEA, and WINTER’S BONE. What do you look for in films when you’re considering becoming attached to them? What really makes you feel like a film is going to be successful?

We try to approach every movie on its own terms, i.e. does it succeed in what we judge to be its intentions? And then we ask how it affects us personally: Is it memorable, moving, and/or funny? We also try to gauge how we think critics will respond if we’re seeing it in a setting without reviews. If we’re seeing it at a festival where it gets reviewed, we read all the reviews carefully—and ask ourselves not just are they positive reviews—but are they motivating reviews that would get you off your couch and to a theatre? And then we ask ourselves who the audience is in terms of demographic (e.g. age, ethnic group, etc.) and psychographic (e.g. arthouse, commercial) that might actually go to see it in a theatre. Our financial model for movies is still theatrically driven, though we also consider how it might play in home entertainment. We get input from partners to assess that. We go through this exercise on each film, with the goal of seeing both the rewards and the risks. It’s great to stretch for films we love, but we also want to live to fight another day. So it’s a tricky dance between personal passion and business judgment.

Q: Can you talk about your paths to where you are now in the industry? As partners both in work and life, are there challenges or times when you don’t see eye-to-eye creatively? Or do you find yourselves to be very in sync when it comes to creative decisions?

Howard had history as a creative exec at a few companies—HBO, The Samuel Goldwyn Company, and notably running the early indie film dept at UTA in the late ’90s. Eric started in early reality TV and became an indie producer of such notable films as TRICK and LOVELY & AMAZING. We made a decision in the early aughts to join forces and start a company.  There have been challenges here and there being partners in work and personal life but two separate careers had challenges too! We are in sync creatively far more than not, and we’ve learned to politely disagree when we’re not. It’s actually easy because the one who doesn’t like something always says, ‘well if you really love it, even though I don’t, then we should do it,’ and that raises the bar pretty high! We use comps a lot when we assess risk, and every once in a while we drag out the comps that one of us championed that either didn’t work or did work but we didn’t buy. Luckily, we use those sparingly, usually at about 3AM in Sundance!

Q: Eric, you were quoted in a Vanity Fair article a few years ago: “From the very beginning, we really wanted the company to be the antidote to elitist, New York-based entertainment. We wanted to be more populist, to make movies that have what we call a willingness to entertain.” Do you feel like this still rings true for Roadside and your approach?

To some extent the theatrical marketplace has shifted since Eric said that, no question populism has continued to be a North Star for us. We’re not in a position to release tentpoles, so it’s not populist in that way. But we’re interested in films that play different niches out in the world that are not all driven by what happens for indie films in NY and LA and Sundance. Our biggest box office success to date, I CAN ONLY IMAGINE, which grossed $83 milllion in 2018, is a film few Hollywood executives have even seen. We’re proud of that, though we love our coastal elite films too!

Q: How did your time at Harvard play a role in your career paths, if any? And what’s the biggest lesson you each learned early on in the industry?

It sounds kind of pat, but Harvard played the biggest roles for both of us in shaping who we are as people: having confidence in our taste, and bolstering our characters in how to deal with the industry and the world. We both still have close friendships formed at Harvard which are indeed priceless. But there have been ironies too: Eric has an MBA, but he learned one of his most valuable business skills, how to create and manage a budget, in the shabby production offices of the Roger Corman Studio in Venice. That’s a reason to bounce around a bit early in your career—you may learn something real-world and useful!

Q: Of course, I have to ask, what piece of advice do you have for aspiring directors/producers/creatives?

In moving forward with any of your content ideas for film, TV, or any other media, think about whether the film or show is something you yourself would pay to see (or go out of your way to make an appointment to watch it at home). It’s such a simple threshold and yet we find people don’t consider this. If the answer is YES I WOULD, ABSOLUTELY, with little hesitation that’s so meaningful. If the answer is very qualified, well, if it were playing within 6 blocks from my apartment at my favorite theatre (or it was fed to me on an app during the credits of another show) and it had over 90% on Rotten Tomatoes, and it’s cast with my favorite actors…DUMP THAT IDEA NOW. If you’re not totally excited by it at its core you have to assume it will have trouble exciting others. And you might be surprised how powerful it can be to dump an idea or put the brakes on a project. Reason being, you can learn a lot working on someone else’s idea and on someone else’s dime! One of the challenges of being creative and going to a great school is that the expectations get set so high. There are many aspects of entertainment that can lead to a creative and rewarding career. Film is about great teams as much as it is about grand individual statements.

Q: How do you both spend your free time? Any particular media you’ve been enjoying lately?

We have both played tennis (not with each other though)! We have a son who just graduated high school (and going to Harvard, Class of 2027!) so he has been a huge focus for the last 18 years! Eric is on the Board of Film Independent and Howard has sung baritone in the Gay Men's Chorus of Los Angeles since 2002. We are avid theatregoers with a subscription to the Pantages and we travel to Broadway a few times a year. And we pay to see movies in the theatre almost every week. Even during the pandemic, we drove to Orange County when they reopened theatres before LA in June of 2020—we needed our fix.

Q: Finally, which project have you both been most proud of being involved with?

That’s a bit like asking us which one of our children we love the most (luckily we have just one!). What’s fascinating is that our feelings about our films are inextricably bound to our feelings about the process of releasing them. There could be a great poster, a memorable PR moment, or a unique idea from a member of our team that we tried for the first time. If you’ve ever adopted a pet, you know your love blooms from the journey, not just the pedigree.

Sabrina Wu AB '20 is an actor, writer, and stand-up. They star in the upcoming movie JOY RIDE, directed by Adele Lim and produced by Seth Rogen and Evan Goldberg. Sabrina has written for the Disney+ show DOOGIE KAMEALOHA M.D. and two other unannounced shows for FX and Netflix. Their stand-up has been featured on the Tonight Show. In 2022, they were named a New Face of Comedy by the prestigious Just For Laughs festival in Montreal. Most recently, Variety listed Sabrina as a Top 10 Comics to Watch of 2023.

Q: Congratulations on Joy Ride! It’s a really exciting and groundbreaking film, as we’ve heard from cast + creative team interviews (and the stellar critical reception thus far– 100% on Rotten Tomatoes!). Can you talk a little bit about why the script resonated with you personally?

Some of my favorite movies growing up were ensemble comedies like Bridesmaids and Pitch Perfect. When I read the script, I knew this movie would be special in the way those movies were. Packed with jokes you’ll want to quote to your friends later and populated by characters you genuinely love and root for.

Q: The film has been described as Bridesmaids meets Crazy Rich Asians in this SFGate article. Do you feel like that’s accurate? What are you most excited for audiences to see?

I think Bridesmaids is a great comparison. We are an ensemble R-rated comedy. Crazy Rich Asians is a family-friendly rom-com, so to say they’re similar is a stretch. Crazy Rich Asians would have been an amazing title for our film though. I’m a huge fan of Stephanie Hsu, and I’m really excited for everyone to see Stephanie crush a role so different than the one she had in Everything Everywhere All at Once.

Q: A lot of the movie takes place as the four main characters travel throughout Asia. Were you able to film onsite? What was that experience like?

Yes. It was truly so special getting to film in the beautiful parts of Asia like Vancouver, Canada. My immigrant Chinese parents were always telling me about the Cascade Mountains growing up. 

Q: You’ve also written for TV. What similarities or differences did you find between being in a writers room and being on set as an actor? Do you prefer one over the other, or were they both equally collaborative experiences?

For the most part, they’re entirely different experiences. Staffing in a writer’s room is essentially an office job. Because Joy Ride was so uniquely collaborative, the actors were encouraged to  improvise on set and pitch jokes. In that sense, there were some elements of being on set that reminded me of being in a comedy writer’s room.

Q: Before Joy Ride, your performance experience was mostly improv and stand-up comedy (like on The Tonight Show). You mentioned in previous interviews that you filmed over 100 takes for your audition. How exactly did you find yourself auditioning for Joy Ride? What was the process like transitioning from standup comedy to film acting, and was it challenging to adjust to a different medium (recorded versus live performance)?

I auditioned for Joy Ride almost three years ago. I was represented by WME as only a TV writer/comic then, but I was always interested in acting. I had taken acting courses at Harvard and had been in amateur productions while in school and after graduating. I asked my agents to start letting me submit tapes because I thought there was a chance I could do it, and why not? It’s very typical for a stand-up to try their hand at acting. 

Stand-up and film acting are different enough that I didn’t think of myself as “transitioning” from one to the other. I did have to learn while shooting Joy Ride how to keep my energy up as a performer. Doing stand-up requires short bursts of energy and the laughter from a crowd can really fuel you. Film shoots are often 12 hours long and those watching are trying to keep quiet so as to not ruin the footage.

Q: Was it very different playing a “character” who’s not yourself? Or do you find when doing standup you’re also playing a sort of character? Was your “method” of preparing similar? 

That’s interesting. I guess in both mediums I’m playing a character. When I do stand-up, I’m playing a particular version of myself. A version I try to keep as close to the real me as possible. And if I notice myself changing as a person in real life, I try to make appropriate adjustments to my delivery and writing. 

When I’m playing Deadeye or other characters, I do all sorts of nerdy acting homework. I think about their objectives and tactics within a scene. I recall my own memories and emotions that help me tap into their headspace. I think of the characters as versions of myself. But far away versions.

Q: What’s next for you? Would you do more film (or TV!) acting, or are you looking to return to writing and/or stand-up comedy?

I’ll always be trying to juggle stand-up, acting, and writing. In the immediate future, I’m hoping Joy Ride will allow me to take on more acting roles in the film and TV space. Am also working on an hour of stand-up that I want to take on the road. On the writing side, I sold a pilot script to 20th Century a while back. When the strike is over and every single one of the WGA’s demands are met and more, I’m excited to keep working on that project with them.

Q: Finally, what do you like to do in your free time?

All I do is grind.

Danielle Parsons AB '95 specializes in making small subjects larger than life in documentary and video art using microscopes and macro setups. Danielle is the founder of Wonder Science, a Los Angeles-based production company and worldwide streaming app available on Roku, Apple TV, iOS, Android, and Fire TV players. The channel’s programming combines science and art, inviting viewers to see the invisible, and experience a flow-like state of relaxation and curiosity. As a student at Harvard College, Danielle drew inspiration from scientists E.O. Wilson and Stephen Jay Gould. Her passion for film has taken her to some far flung places, from Kazakhstan to the Galapagos Islands. She has produced and directed content for TV and digital outlets such as The History Channel, Showtime, Disney, WIRED, NPR, BBC, and Slate. Danielle's video art has exhibited at museums and galleries including SLOMA, IFP New Media Center, LAPL, and the SPRING/BREAK art show. She built a science museum in the metaverse. Danielle’s work has screened at festivals including the Imagine Science Film Festival, Goethe Science Film Festival, and the Infinity Festival, among others. Danielle creates concert visuals and music videos for bands such as Metallica. She is repped commercially by MAJORITY.

Q: Wonder Science, your amazing content platform where viewers can enjoy and learn from “a fusion of art and science”, is soon launching an app version! What does this mean for you and the platform’s future? What’s the most exciting thing about having a mobile version?

Thank you for your question and compliment! We launched the Android app in May, so now Wonder Science is available through both the iPhone App store and Google Play Store. The mobile apps represent another extension of the Wonder Science brand, putting relaxing, beautiful science into the hands of more people. They will also serve as an additional revenue stream, which is particularly valuable as I bootstrap the business!

I hope the omnipresence of mobile will cause even one viewer to start a science conversation with the person next to them. And I hope new users on mobile will also find their way to watching Wonder Science on larger TV screens via the streaming platforms, Apple TV, Roku, and Fire TV, since subscribers can watch on any device.

Q: You studied science at Harvard, then worked for several years in Hollywood as a filmmaker at MPCA, MGM and Destination Films, and eventually the History Channel. What made you gravitate towards film and Hollywood with your scientific background? 

It may appear as a pivot, but it was a natural progression. My focus had already expanded beyond science during my studies. While studying genetics and evolutionary biology, I had incredible professors like E.O. Wilson, Stephen Jay Gould, and Richard Lewontin, who opened my eyes to the intricate workings of the natural world. However, I never aspired to be a scientist. Advancing genetics requires intense repetition and specificity, and I was drawn to broader interests and making connections between diverse ideas. In my junior year, I petitioned to change my concentration to Social Studies, one of Harvard's few interdisciplinary paths, which I ultimately graduated with.

As for my interest in film, I had produced several plays during my time at Harvard, which sparked my curiosity. Working in film seemed to be a prevalent option among my peers, alongside investment banking and law school, after graduation. I had the opportunity to intern with a producer in Los Angeles during the summer between my junior and senior years, and that experience clinched the deal. So, after graduating, I headed to Hollywood.   

Q: Where did intersections between art and science first develop in your work? What personal experiences or specific gaps in science education led you to found Wonder Science?

Leading up to launching the Wonder Science channel, I had enjoyed a decade of complete creative freedom during which I produced much of its content. I have a home filming and editing studio and could do everything literally in house. The artistry in my work emerged from patiently observing and appreciating the beauty of the subjects I filmed. With limited resources, I also relied on the creative problem-solving skills of myself and my talented collaborators. We used traditional arts and crafts supplies to visualize elements that were too small to be filmed directly. For instance, we crafted molecules by gluing together balls of fluff and created stop-motion animations of quantum processes using cut-up construction paper.

Through filming hundreds of hours of science solely under my own direction, the style of my content diverged from what I saw in mainstream science media. And I thought there was value in that. As the independent streaming industry began to gain traction, I worked with multiple tech teams until we successfully developed the Wonder Science apps. I was excited to have a platform to reach audiences directly. During one summer, I assembled a team of seven editors, and together we sifted through the hundreds of hours of footage, ultimately producing twenty-five programs that became the foundation of Wonder Science. The videos covered a range of topics, including microorganisms, gems, physics, flowers, biology, and even seven videos dedicated to ants.

Q: What are some of the biggest challenges of creating microscopic content? How do you even film something that’s invisible to the naked eye? 

Filming through microscopes is incredibly satisfying. It’s almost a cheat, the factor of strangeness one can achieve looking at almost anything under a microscope. There are several types of microscopy, some of which manipulate light in ways that accentuate different aspects of a subject – one technique makes a microbe seem to glow from within; another technique is great for capturing surface detail on its body. There is a delightful range of what I call “in-scope effects” that can be achieved with different filters, and even DIY. There is also microscopy that doesn’t use light at all, like electron microscopy.

As for how to film invisible subjects, it takes attaching a camera to a microscope via an adaptor. In cases where there isn’t light to capture, as when imaging the smallest things possible, it involves simply setting up a screen capture. The main trick is the microscopy. Microscopy is hard. Electron microscopes I couldn’t begin to operate alone. I owe a huge debt of gratitude to the people, especially to members of the Microscopy Society of Southern California, who have taught me light microscopy hands on. I try to pass it on by volunteering at STEPCon, acquainting hundreds of young students with the microscope as a window to wonder. 

To do light microscopy requires directing the light through the optics of the microscope such that the subject is illuminated and in focus. To do video microscopy is challenging because one must attend to multiple things at once: operate the camera as well as the microscope, keep the subject in focus, move the stage to keep it in frame, adjust the height of the condenser to focus the light. 

When filming so small an area, any introduction of kinetic energy into this ‘set’ – such as the light touch of a finger on the stage or focus knob, or one’s breath -- can cause shot-ending perturbations in the medium. 

One annoying but all too real challenge of filming microscopy is dealing with dust, which will detract from the impact of the footage. Sometimes the dust is on the slide. So you have to start over with a different sample on a clean slide. But count yourself lucky, because inside a microscope, there are a maddening number of hard to access places in which dust particles can collect, one more delicate than the next. When dust is unavoidable, which seems to always be the case to some degree, it then becomes a painstaking chore to mask it out as best as possible in editing. Glamorous work.

Q: How do you decide what content to create? And how do you work to ensure the content provided by Wonder Science remains up to date and relevant in an ever-changing scientific landscape?

At Wonder Science, the decision-making process for creating content is driven by a genuine sense of curiosity and enthusiasm. Firstly, my personal intellectual curiosity plays a significant role. I’ve been following that thread for years, across several broad topics represented in my work. By collaborating and conversing with experts, I gain insight that informs the content creation process. Additionally, sometimes random topics will leap out from newsletters and science publications. Other times, I figure out what’s interesting to say about something that I want to film because it’s beautiful.  

I strive to stay connected with the scientific community and keep abreast of the latest developments in several fields. I’m involved with the American Association for the Advancement of Science and attend their conferences. I am an active member of scientific groups including the Microscopy Society of Southern California and the Lorquin Entomological Society. 

I trust my intuition to draw me to topics that are years ahead of the curve. For example, I was knee-deep in making a project on light capture during photosynthesis when experimental evidence was published saying that the process involved quantum coherence, which was at that time highly surprising to find in a biological system, and which went on to buttress the emerging field of quantum biology. More than once, I have been asked to wait to release a video until after research was published. 

Wonder Science also creates evergreen content about foundational science that will never go out of date. While some aspects of science remain enduring, there are always new breakthroughs and discoveries to explore. So it’s about striking a balance between established knowledge and emerging frontiers.

Q: What are your future plans and aspirations for Wonder Science?

One of my goals for Wonder Science is to communicate all the fascinating and important science I’ve researched over the years. To achieve this, I plan to create versions of existing and new content that incorporate narration and interviews with scientists while staying true to the channel's spirit. We have already released five narrated episodes. I’m planning to grow the content offerings over the next couple years by continuing to license outside content as well as producing in house. There are virtual reality projects and educational video games I’d be excited to do. There is merch I’m dying to make. I want to create and exhibit more science art. 

I’ve nearly always retained the rights to what I produce, and I plan to continue to grow the value of my library of science content. I am preparing to pursue funding. In order to be eligible for grants, I recently established Wonder Science Education Corp as a 501(c)(3) non-profit branch of the company. All of my big plans for Wonder Science really hinge on attracting an amazing team of people, including a CEO, and a genius who can grow our audience across all the apps.

As I look ahead, my long-term vision for Wonder Science is as a multimedia brand, akin to a young National Geographic, infused with emerging music and culture. The ultimate goal is for this overall project to help people connect with their innate sense of wonder, and to incrementally improve the health of our planet and the well-being of all its inhabitants.

Q: I played around in the Wonder Science “Metaverse” for a little bit– it’s AWESOME! How do you think AI is going to impact anything in the Wonder Science-related or STEM space, along with both the entertainment and educational spaces at large?

I’m psyched that you did that! The main Wonder Science metaverse headquarters that you visited is in Voxels, a player-built metaverse on the Etherium blockchain. I have imagined for years a Wonder Science Museum, but my ambitious designs would require mammoth sums to accomplish IRL. Suddenly I could draft the first science museum in the metaverse where anything is possible and even the rules of gravity can be ignored in pursuit of scientific learning! Now we’re waiting to see how the metaverse landscape shakes out in time. 

And now everyone is weighing in on AI which has seemingly instantly changed everything. It feels like we’re living in that stunned instant after a deep cut, staring at gaping flesh before the blood starts pouring out. I actually don’t feel entirely fatalistic about AI though, despite the  gruesome choice of analogy. I mean, there will be massive job disappearances, and some networked AI may blow us all to smithereens next year. But I believe the potential is there for equally radical upsides. And that is thrilling, because the planet could use some huge upsides.

But as to my opinion about AI in STEM and the entertainment and educational spaces… In education as in news, from here on there is no certain truth unless you see it happening in real life in real time. There is no way to assess a student’s knowledge unless you watch them in person write their exams and essays on paper, in the absence of phones or other devices. It’s funny to me the way in which this technological advancement may semi throw us back to a time before computers. Certainly I think AI will advance our entire concept of knowledge.

I guess the entertainment and education we consume will get super excellent, human artists and copyright holders be damned. Personally so far I have been using AI as a tool to improve the quality of my footage through upsizing and slow motion. I don’t yet have ideas on other ways I would comfortably use AI in Wonder Science educational projects. Check back soon! As a science artist, I’m intrigued to collaborate creatively with AI. 

Q: Finally, what do you like to do in your free time?

I enjoy spending free time with my partner and my dog, and hanging out with friends. I like going to museums, movies, and the occasional Broadway show. I tend to have a novel going. I sometimes like to cook. I require free time in nature, hiking or exploring. I am a friend to insects and will interrupt a doubles tennis match to ferry a bee off the court. 

Anthony Chin-Quee AB '05 is a board certified Otolaryngologist (Ear, Nose, and Throat surgeon) with degrees from Harvard University and Emory University School of Medicine. He has appeared at The Moth competitions, where he’s won their Story Slam, placed as a runner-up in the Detroit Grand Slam, and performed on the NYC Moth Mainstage. He was a medical consultant for ABC’s Grey’s Anatomy and a member of the writing staff of FOX’s The Resident for two seasons, distilling complex medical and social issues into palatable and understandable mainstream storylines. His critically acclaimed memoir, I Can’t Save You—a candid account of the ways in which medical residency training shattered the mind of an empathetic, well-intentioned doctor, and the arduous task of piecing it back together again through painful and overdue self-discovery—was released by Riverhead Books on April 4^th, 2023. He has published opinions in Forbes and been interviewed by NPR on the topic of systemic racism in medical education. Anthony currently resides in England with his wife and daughter.

Q: Your memoir I CAN’T SAVE YOU was released on April 4th, 2023. Can you explain where the idea for writing this memoir came from originally, and what pushed you to follow through with it?

I actually remember the exact moment that the idea came to me. I was in the middle of a devastating episode of major depression during medical training: I couldn’t work, funds were running low, and I was on the losing side of a daily argument with a voice in my head that kept telling me that speed limits were light suggestions and seatbelts were annoying and ineffective. So, to summarize: I was doing great.

Then one night in bed, the anti-depressants finally started to kick in, the fog in my mind burned off, and I realized I needed to find a reason to keep going. Not just to keep living, but to keep doing this work that seemed to be killing me every day. And suddenly I remembered: I was really good at telling stories. Since I was young, I’d always loved building them, and people always seemed to gravitate toward them. It was a skill and a love that I thought had been beaten out of me by my job, but it somehow managed to find me on a night when I’d run out of things to hold on to.

There was no lofty societal inspiration. Just the hope that through the promise of storytelling I’d survive. And the distant wish that someday someone might read it and feel a little less lonely.

As far as what pushed me to follow through? Well we’ve only recently gotten curious enough as a society to learn that ‘hero’ doctors have limits and breaking points–all it took was a worldwide pandemic, a doubling of their already insane work-hours, working under the constant threat of dying from an incurable disease, and skyrocketing suicide statistics. Super low bar for humanizing the medical profession, right? But we can’t let the moment vanish just because the stories are no longer in the news. Our stories of survival and sacrifice have always been this dire. And if we have any hope of changing the profession for the better, the time to strike is now.

Q: What lessons do you hope readers take away from your story? What did you really try to focus on communicating or highlighting for your audience as you were writing?

I’d like for readers to know that it’s okay if you’ve spent minutes of, years of, or your entire life feeling like something inside of you is broken or irredeemable. That feeling need not guide you, and it doesn’t have to last forever. The choice to love yourself, your entire self and all of the paths you’ve walked is one you can make any time. There’s no magic to it. It’s just a choice. And lots of affirmations. And a lifetime of work. But once you commit to that choice, there’s no love like it in the world. 

Q: This memoir addresses some deeply personal struggles and challenges you’ve faced in terms of racism, mental health, and being in the medical field. Were you at all nervous about sharing such personal material, and was there anything you felt you had to hold back?

My main challenge in writing this story wasn’t nerves or anxiety about sharing, but managing to share completely. I realized, as I made my way through my first draft, that many experiences and emotions that I thought I’d navigated completely still required much more work in therapy. Honesty came easy, but the act of gaining enough perspective and self-awareness to tell a story of growth, forgiveness and self-love took a lot of intentionally uncomfortable work.

Q: What was the process like for getting your memoir published? Did you have any challenges finding an agent or publisher? 

I knew absolutely nothing about the publishing world when this journey began. I didn’t have any connections or any personal fame or notoriety, so I was really at the mercy of what Google could teach me about “how to publish a book." All I knew was that I had to go on the hunt for a literary agent. So, I put together a snappy query letter (which I based on templates I found on the internet), and sent out cold emails to dozens of agents. And then I got the rejections. Dozens of them. It wasn’t until about eleven months had gone by, and I’d been rejected by about sixty agents, that one took an enthusiastic chance on me. And luckily, it was a match made in heaven. My agent, Jon Michael Darga, has become both a great friend and a fierce professional advocate. Once I signed with him, he worked tirelessly to get me set up at the right publishing house for my book.

Q: In writing this, did you find that any of your ideas or preconceptions shifted as you explored your past and history in the medical field as a Black man? Or did the feelings and thoughts that you’ve had all along sort of just crystalize more clearly?

When I began writing, I’d already gone through several phases in the evolution of my identity as a Black man—not only in medicine but in America and, really, in the world at large. The fun part was figuring out creative and poignant ways to articulate that journey. I had a feeling that there were many people out there who would relate to having a long and often uncomfortable journey through their understanding of their own racial identities, and I wanted to make sure I honored those experiences with as much clarity and empathy as I could manage.

Q: Ultimately, are you glad that you went into medicine? Is there anything about your career that you regret? And what have you done throughout your career that you’re most proud of? 

Even though, knowing what I know now, I wouldn’t do it again, I wouldn’t know all that I know now if I hadn’t gone through it. So, I don’t regret any part of my medical career. Plus, it was the experience that I gained in the journey through medicine that made my entry into my new career possible. I love utilizing all that I’ve learned about both life and medicine in a way that more closely aligns with the things I’m passionate about.

Medicine-wise, the thing I’m most proud of is the way in which I’ve tried to identify others who were struggling through the profession, and help them to find confidence, community, and the freedom to be themselves. The journey, for many of us, is relentlessly dehumanizing. We lose so much of ourselves along the way, and we’re conditioned by our job to believe that we are alone in these feelings. But we’re not. And we all deserve to know that. 

Q: There unfortunately still remains a stigma surrounding discussion of mental health, especially in communities of color. How does your memoir seek to address this challenge, and does any of your other work (as a TV writer) encompass that discussion? Have you seen any changes in this stigma with the pandemic and increased awareness/conversation surrounding mental health while everyone was in quarantine?

The stigma you mentioned is still very prominent, even with the increased spotlight mental health has received over the course of the pandemic. Unfortunately, the onus has remained on the individual to recognize when they need help themselves, as opposed to restructuring our systems and workplaces to be more hospitable and supportive of our collective mental health and wellness.

So, given the fact that much of society has decided that we are ‘on our own’, it was really important to me to depict my experience of depression honestly and completely. I focused on painting as clear a picture of how the world felt both inside and outside of my head as my brain slowly crumbled. I wanted to show as many sides of the illness as possible—from the catatonic depths to the hilarious highs to the alcohol drenched hazy moments in between—so that readers who suffer (and loved ones of those readers) could recognize just how many faces this deceptive disease can take on. If we can recognize more of our individual triggers and warning signs, we might stand a chance at taking control of our mental wellness before we get to that dangerous point of no return. 

Q: You were a story editor for the hit medical TV drama THE RESIDENT. How do you take your experiences in the medical field and use them in your work as a writer on the show?

I love the medium of television, because it’s an opportunity to educate on a very large scale, especially when it comes to medical dramas. As we crafted each episode, we’d often begin with a theme we wanted to explore. And these themes were often tied into broader medical/healthcare issues that we knew to be important to large groups of people. Then we’d use our stories as opportunities to teach the audience about how to advocate for their own health without getting didactic and preachy. One of my favorite episodes to write was about obesity bias in medicine, and how healthcare providers can miss vital diagnoses when we are preoccupied with a patient’s weight. I think we were able to empower a lot of people with that story, as well as demand that we as providers address our blind spots of bias.

Q: What was the process like for sitting down to write a memoir versus writing for television? Any surprising differences or similarities in the mediums?

The processes are extremely different! Memoir writing was a largely solitary pursuit, demanding that I create deadlines in my head as motivation to keep plugging away. Writing for TV is a total group effort. You have a whole room full of smart, creative writers who are always ready to throw new ideas into the mix. Writer’s block isn’t really a thing when working in television, since much of the process is creation by committee. When I hit a wall with the memoir, the work just stopped indefinitely! No more words until I’d taken a break/eaten a snack/gone on vacation!

Q: In what ways did your time at Harvard influence the path you have taken since graduating?

One of the best things I learned while at Harvard was that I didn’t need to feel that my life path was limited by the paths that had already existed in the world around me. I’ve never been around a group of people (before or since college) who so freely believed that they could create the career, life and world that they wanted, even if it hadn’t existed before. It’s super cocky for sure, and can lead you to be somewhat reckless, but the sliver of that hubris that I managed to adopt freed me to leap from the well-trodden medical path into the unknown. And for that, I’m eternally grateful to the Harvard community.

Q: Finally, what do you like to do in your free time?

I love laughing and being silly with my wife and daughter! And when it comes to down time, I read lots of books (YA sci-fi/fantasy is my fave), play video games, and watch an enormous amount of TV (a bit of an occupational requirement).