The Politics of Art & Authenticity

http://theater.nytimes.com/2012/10/26/theater/reviews/builders-associations-house-divided-at-bam.html 

I live in Brooklyn, so maybe it had to be a given that I would make it to the only event in Brooklyn on time. Meh…. It didn’t happen. The show was on a Thursday at seven thirty. It was the night before flying out to Denver, and also one of the days that I get out of class at 5:30pm. I had so many things to do. Pack; buy some more stuff, and the promised weekly dinner with my boyfriend. I felt like superwoman and thought that I could manage it. It didn’t work out.

I rushed out of class, flew down the stairs, and out the door. I think I made it to the train in less than seven minutes… pretty impressive, if I may say so. I headed uptown. My boyfriend was waiting with dinner. Yum… Brazilian food once again, but hey, at least the flan was delicious. Dinner was over in less than 20 minutes. Ah 6:15pm.  We paid the check and headed to Aeropostale. There I bought the much-needed jacket for the cold, disgusting, dry cold that is typical of Colorado, and then I asked my boyfriend if he would take the train with me to DeKalb Avenue. He agreed and on the subway we went.

The ride there was pretty uneventful.

7:15pm

There was still time.  We ran out of the station. My phone was dead… I told him to look up were I was going. Late, as always but I made it.

Now, on to the actual show. I may have been that I was tired.  Or maybe it was just that it was boring.  Yes, it was innovative. I think on the edge of being extreme. It certainly looked like they were trying to hard.  The presentation itself was impeccable. As far as technology and the use of it—there are no words to describe how good it was.  Yet the acting in the play was mediocre. It just didn’t seem like stock traders actually worked that way.  It was too staged. I didn’t seem authentic. Albeit, The Grapes of Wrath certainly added a certain level of parallelism, which made it easier to understand the concept of, how history repeats itself when we don’t change.

Credit: http://www.bam.org/media/312114/2012_NWF_Mainstage_HouseDivided_613x463.jpg

I’m sorry for the late posts Professor Davis, power here in Brooklyn has been crazy from the hurricane, hopefully this isn’t too late.

The only sense I wasn’t using during this strange and thought-inducing play was smell (I was constantly holding and rolling the playbill and I was chewing gum). The way the play flowed from the Grapes of Wrath scenes to the Wall Street bigs fighting to the decaying house in Ohio was seamless and perfect. Everything connected and made sense in every way. I especially enjoyed the way the actors used the old film projector style to magnify their faces and emotions on the house screen, it reminded me of the old Grapes of Wrath movie that used to do the same thing when an actor was talking. The use of this house in Ohio was an amazing metaphor for what people who were affected by the mortgage crisis were going through. The pain of losing ones home, of having to leave sometimes your most valuable possessions, and the banks treating you like a number rather than a person. This was the reality for many families during this crisis, and the connection to what many people went through during the Great Depression was spot on.

The actors were great in their portrayals of Wall Street bigs and the family in the Grapes of Wrath. The music of the past and the noises of a busy stock exchange provided a great contrast between the past and the present. The really amazing thing was that when one part of the play was focusing on the Wall Street scenes, you never noticed the actors moving in the background getting ready for the next Grapes of Wrath scene. The transitions were seamless and  unnoticeable. This was my first multimedia play and I enjoyed it greatly. If I ever see another it has a lot to live up to because this play truly captured my attention and interest.

Perhaps, for some people, the different style and mixed media used took away from the authentic play feel of the performance, but in my opinion that is exactly what made it a performance. House/Divided  was an eclectic and vibrant play that succeeded in weaving together multiple view points, pointing out the similarities between past and present, and accurately showing some problems we currently have in society.

The play showed the differing opinions of the financial situation from the rich and the poor by quickly shifting from past to present, from character to character, without so much as a gradual transition. The house kept moving as the times kept moving and the shift from silent to full-blown music added to the rise and fall the audience was meant to experience. At least, that’s what it did for me. I was excited then calm, bored then intensely focused.

https://www.facebook.com/BAMstage

There was one scene where I was completely enraptured and my attention was set. It was during the interrogation of Alan Greenspan by two authority figures. The way the actor portrayed his emotion, confusion, frustration, anger and lies was just so brilliantly done. Of course, the fact that his face was shot close-up and played in a large black and white screen overhead as he was playing the part added to the grand effect, but still, the acting and delivery of the lines was what made it truly great. It felt as if I was watching the real thing- I saw it from a witness’s point of view and also watched it as a film.

House/Divided was such a unique way of presenting a story. I wonder how other types of stories can be shown to an audience using the same multi-media methods. I applaud BAM for taking the risk of presenting such a project.

http://theater.nytimes.com/2012/10/26/theater/reviews/builders-associations-house-divided-at-bam.html

The day I went to watch House/Divided was full of first time experiences: first time eating at Shake Shack, first time figuring out how to get to Brooklyn, first time to BAM, and first time watching an augmented reality theater performance. When the professor first introduced  House/Divided to the class, all I knew was that it is going to be a very experimental piece. As a person who is more used to traditional form of arts I have to confess I was not as excited as I was before watching the opera Carmen. But, since you never know what New York has to offer, I tried to attend with anticipation and interest.

The way to BAM was not an easy experience. From almost getting lost to climbing up all the stairs, I tried to imagine the magnificence of the real life size house to keep myself motivated. When I finally got up, seeing the skeleton of the house, I was very disappointed at first. However, when they projected the house on the transparent screens, I could not close my mouth out of excitement. I should have realized at that moment that it was only the beginning of all the technological wonders the performance was about to bring.

Only having the slightest knowledge of  John Steinbeck’s work, I had to concentrate so much to understand, absorb the knowledge as well as notice the details that draws parallelism between current economic situation and situation back then. After getting a hold of the storyline and the pattern I couldn’t help but draw my attention to all the other elements of the performance.

From the staggering recreation of the stock exchange, projection, houses, props, lights to acting, I could not imagine how much these people worked to make all this possible. What especially caught my attention was the use of real time video shots of their actings on the screen. I tried excessively to find the camera, calculating the possible angles but the effort was futile. Having seen some TED performances using recorded video footages and acting like its being filmed at the moment to trick people (in a positive way) I was so curious whether it would be the same for House/Divided but the acting and the video were without discrepancies I hardly believe it was prerecorded.

The overall experience was surreal and amazing but only criticism I would give is that they tried to implement so much at the same time things seemed to be slightly off hand. Although it was my first view, I realized quite a lot of mistakes including acting and technological difficulties. And as a viewer, I couldn’t help but feel slightly overwhelmed by the massive amount of information, whether visual or audio, they were trying to deliver. But then I realized that their efforts to take control of everything seemed to draw comparison to my life in general as well. Trying out all that there is and what I can do, figuring out what works or does not work, trying to implement everything all at once, I have felt like I’ve fallen apart, triggering adverse effects.

I’m not saying it was a disaster but I think sometimes it needs time to get used to it. And it is the effort that counts toward a new era of performance.

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2012/10/26/arts/26DIVIDED_SPAN/26DIVIDED_SPAN-articleLarge.jpg

BAM was not as fancy as Lincoln Center but it offered the homey feeling when entering the theatre. House/Divided was honestly the first play that did get my full attention. Maybe it was because the seats weren’t very comfortable or because the plot was really interesting. Maybe both.

I thought the digital effects were amazing. It was incredible how the scenes were able to transition so quickly from one era to another. The play compared the Depression-era and what is happening in this decade about the home foreclosures. The audience saw the similarities of these economic downturns.

The opening scene was an eye-grabber. It amazed me that the house was digitally formed. I wondered what kind of material they used for the house because it was also possible to see what was behind the house or inside it. I don’t know whether that film turner, or whatever it’s called, was just a prop or actually was used to project the picture onto the house. I also liked the digital screen on the background of the New York Stock Exchange. The modern setting gave off the franticness of Wall Street and how quickly everything gets done.

I think what also appealed to me in the play was the business jargon used because I recently took a midterm in my business class! I actually knew who Alan Greenspan was and what earnings per share was. Thank you, Professor O’Malley, my business professor. My favorite part was the hearing of Alan Greenspan and how he tried to justify the housing bust.

I did enjoy this play. I also liked the fact that it was only an hour and a half long because usually all the events that I have been to so far they are really long and it gets very tedious trying to pay attention after a long day of school. I have never seen a play like this before but I am glad I did.

I didn’t know what to expect while going to see the House Divided and I got lost by going to the wrong BAM theater which made it even worse. The performance started off dry by beginning with a couple people in the 1930s in their house. I realized this was from The Grapes of Wrath because I remembered some of the plot from when I read the book a few years ago. 

Then I began to take an interest in the play when the stock market and housing crash of 2008 began to be portrayed. This had a strong emotional connection for me because I was a trader during the 2008 market crash. I remembered how bad some bank stocks crashed and remembered the fear and uncertainty during the time. One thing I noticed about the play was that the some of the stock prices during that time were wrong. JP Morgan Chase’s stock was never 62 dollars. Bear Stern’s stock was never six dollars. While most people would never notice these inaccuracies, I did. Also, some stock prices movements were wrong, like Bank of America’s stock being up over 100 percent in a day. This never happened during the financial crisis.

I liked the humor of the two stock traders and how they argued and made fun of each other. It reminded me of some of the experiences I had while trading and reminded me of some of friends that are traders. I also liked how you could visualize their lives.

I thought the tie in into the Grapes of Wrath by John Steinbeck was creative,but I felt that it made the play boring. I liked how the play incorporated some of the fear during the time by having interviews with Lehman Brothers CEO. I felt the close up interviewers were done very well and that the use of a foreclosed house was very creative.

Image Source: http://www.bam.org/media/312114/2012_NWF_Mainstage_HouseDivided_613x463.jpg

I really have to stop dreading these events when I know they’re going to be amazing. Because it happened again – what a shocker…

House / Divided turned out to be one of the more interesting pieces of theatre I’ve seen this year, and it’s certainly left me wondering where the future of theatre may lead us in the future. Yes, I’ll admit that when I read the insert in the program that said that we could use our phones to view some “Augmented Reality” during the show, (it was… interesting,) I had a PTSD-like panic attack of that video of Patti LuPone stopping Gypsy mid-“Rose’s Turn” because someone took a picture of her. That’s something you do not want to happen to you.

High-Tech Tragedy

The show was endless in spectacle, and if I wasn’t wondering if the actor speaking into the camera wasn’t trying to mimic a pre-recorded video or not, then I was trying to keep an eye on either the stocks floating above, or on the actors who managed to change costume in the blink of an eye. The details were marvelous – don’t tell me you didn’t guffaw when the repo workers took the actual kitchen sink out of the house. I loved it all.

I found the story triple-layered, using its pieces together to paint a fuller, more devastating picture of the reality of foreclosure and the faults of the housing market. The Grapes of Wrath “past” was the emotional angle. We saw the devastation of a family torn from the home that their family has lived in for generations. We follow their journey out West, and how the rise of corporate banking haunts them every step of the way. The “present day” storyline of the brokers, real estate agent, and corporate higher-ups reveals the business angle of foreclosing. While we still see emotional impact in the man who pleads to find a way to save his home, this part of the show deals with that other side of the phone call. Who are the people who work with statements like “We don’t own the deed to your house,” and “Minimizing human capital,”? The show highlights the “future” through its extensive multi-media usage. There’s no emotion in numbers and computer screens, and yet at times, that’s what seems to dominate the stage, especially if you did use the AR feature.

It was a fascinating use of multi-everything for a theatre production, and I don’t think it hurt the message at all. Even though the ending did seem to throw in a bit of optimism that’s all too familiar in American theatre, it was a thoroughly good show. Let’s just say I don’t plan on buying a house anytime soon.

Photo Credit

http://static-l3.blogcritics.org/12/10/27/186843/house-divided.png?t=20121027181551

This play production was like no other. To experience this was truly breath-taking in my perspective. The idea of having the actual play being played on the house and to use the house as a prop throughout the show was truly incredible and it was done beautifully. The one thing that really stood out with me was that they didn’t just give facts. It wasn’t all about facts, it was about telling a story, giving a side and showing the people what happened. It was more about showing the people what went on during the market crash rather than telling them what went on. I guess that is what draws my attention the most because it just helps clarify the incident.

Another thing that truly drew my attention was the parallelism that they used. The connected the two time periods, which were the Dust Bowl and the housing bubble  and used it into one production. It just shows that no matter what time period it is, whether it is the past or the present, people don’t learn form their mistakes. During the 1920s, we experienced a great economic disaster, and in the present we are basically following that same path, Americans don’t learn. Just a thought that came through my head.

I guess another thing that surprised me was that I knew exactly what the actors or the script was saying. I knew exactly what was going on and knew exactly what they director was trying to get at through this play. I guess I actually learned something from getting placed into Business 1000H. Thank you Professor O’Malley.

http://www.bam.org/media/312114/2012_NWF_Mainstage_HouseDivided_613x463.jpg

When I first sat down to watch this play/multimedia presentation my first thought was “what is with these seats?” I felt as though I was going to fall off the edge of my chair and onto the stage. However as the play or story or whatever you want to call it progressed I found myself completely lost in the storyline. I loved how they used lighting and music and live performances all in one to create this play. For some reason I could not turn my eyes away from the stage. I was fascinated how they kept changing the size of the house and how they would project videos onto the house to make it seem like you were there.

The storyline was also great and I loved how that one house was able to tell the story of American hardship in two separate eras. It made me realized how important a home is and no matter what decade it is home will still be  the most important aspect of American life. For many of us it is a home that idealizes the American dream,often referred to as the house“with the white picket fence.” This story evokes emotion in anyone who watches it because it is so relatable. It is so easy to picture your own family being evicted from your home and forced to fend for yourselves on the streets. Overall A House Divided was a spectacular multimedia play that gave me a very clear insight into the hardships of the housing crises in two seemingly very different eras in American history.

courtesy of nytimes.com

“House/Divided” is very different from any play I have ever seen. It utilizes multi-media and a versatile set in order to draw parallels between the recent housing bubble and the Dust Bowl during the Great Depression. I should mention again this play is very versatile in all that it does. Actors play multiple roles. The house built on stage can be rearranged and is covered in a screen that can be projected on. This allows the set to be immediately transformed into a modern house from a 1930s farm.

Initially, I was annoyed that I couldn’t see everything clearly. The screen somewhat blocked what was going on inside the house, and I couldn’t always see the actors faces. But the positives outweigh the negatives in this one. When the plot switches to recent times, multiple screens light up showing stock quotes and video. And in other instances video cameras are used to project the actors’ faces on the big screen. The screens are overcrowded with video and information for the housing bubble (tech era) plot lines, while the 1930s part of the plot utilizes a much calmer screen set-up, often in black and white.

Also, the plot is very interesting. It follows a farming family that lost their home during the Great Depression. And it follows predominately two stock traders during the housing bubble. “House/Divided” is a very successful venture into experimental theatre which incorporates multi-media platforms. It has a little bit of everything in that watching the screens makes it a movie, while the singing makes it a musical, and the acting makes it a play.  Very good. Very cool. It is definitely worth seeing.