The Politics of Art & Authenticity

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

When I was watching the preview video for House/Divided I was pretty skeptical on whether or not the production would be a success.  From the preview it seemed that they were incorporating the past and present, and using all different types of media, which can definitely be risky.  Basically, the performance would either be fantastic or would be a failure.  Luckily it was the first.

I was very impressed with how well The Builders Association was able to use multi-media to its fullest; using video previously recorded and also live footage.  It all meshed together perfectly and nothing seemed out of place, or random.  As a person experienced in editing film, I know how much time it takes to make sure everything is perfect, and having to do all of that live is very impressive.  I also really enjoyed the way they created the music for the performance, using some sort of synthesizer.  It brought in a whole new-age feel to music for performances.

The combination of events from the past and present was also very successful, and made viewers see how history repeats itself.  The play is based on the famous novel, The Grapes of Wrath, by John Steinbeck.  The director, Marianne Weems, explained that if you changed the word “farm” to “house” it would sound very similar to the banking crisis we experienced a few years ago.  There was a lot of juxtaposition between the two time periods.  It was interesting to see just how similar the two times were.  Both had to struggle fighting the system, both had to see their belongings thrown on the street, and both had to find a way to make it through.  There were some odd aspects of the stage directions, such as how the actors were sitting in the house and talking off into the distance.  It didn’t seem like acting, but more like a bad soap opera. Overall though, the execution of the two time periods worked very well.

I really must commend The Builders Association and Marianne Weems for all the hard work they had done to make this production.  They had to make sure every piece of media was done perfectly and that the set was assembled and dissembled on stage at the right time.  It was also really fascinating that they used remnants from a foreclosed home to build the house they used for the show.  The time and effort put into this production was seen throughout the entire show, and I think it made the audience appreciate the show even more.

When I entered the theater last night to see “House/Divided,” my first impression was negative, just because the building seemed old and decrepit, and I felt like I was about to fall off my chair onto the people on the ground level. And when the presentation finished, my first impression was that it was really interesting – as in, different, cool, strange, weird. Between those two feelings, though, many things went through my head.

The show began and I was immediately captivated. I loved the multimedia aspect of it, but that also made it somewhat confusing. I think the idea behind the production is ingenious, connecting a major historical event to a major recent-day event.

I was drawn into the drama of the foreclosure. The fact that live actors were playing in the show made it very real-life. My heart was beating as I watched a group of men taking apart someone’s house, only because he was late on his mortgage one month! I just wanted to stop them and explain that they couldn’t do it! I couldn’t help but sympathize as I heard phone calls with customer service representatives who were no help. I know the feeling of trying to explain your situation to annoying customer service people who don’t listen to what you have to say, cut you off, and have no feelings. It’s like talking to the wall. The show portrayed this very effectively. Previously, I didn’t feel personally affected by the economic crisis, but now I have a better understanding of what happened and how people’s lives were crushed physically and emotionally.

Although the production was very dynamic, I thought the olden-day part was a little boring and the narrator’s voice really annoying – it was monotone and it just didn’t stress the right words. However, the reference to Steinbeck’s “Grapes of Wrath” was very powerful. One reviewer said, “You can look at the story of ‘The Grapes of Wrath’ and replace the word ‘farm’ with the word ‘mortgage’ or ‘house’ for what is happening now and the story is very much the same.” “House/Divided” effectively compares the two eras and shows how similar the events were. Reading “The Grapes of Wrath” and watching “House/Divided” elicits the same responses and emotions. The characters in both are helpless and paralyzed compared to the powerful people they come up against.

I’m not sure why, but I got the feeling that it wasn’t a completely finished production. Maybe because the video once replayed by mistake, or because a different video was cut off in middle, but I just felt it needed to be rehearsed one more time to make it perfect!

All in all, though, I think “House/Divided” was a great production and the multimedia production was the perfect way to convey its message.

I loved last nights theater production at BAM. After climbing all million steps and then climbing into my impossibly high chair, I was sweating and not so in the mood. But i got excited when I saw the fragmented house on the stage, and got ready for a show that was bound to be interesting.

It was incredible.

When I was in 12th grade, my school put on a production, and I was “tech head”, in charge of all technological aspects of the production. The production was multi-media, with projections and videos and serious props and acting, dancing, singing. I spent countless  hours in the computer lab, working in powerpoint and flash- I felt like I was best friends with Adobe. Even more hours were spent in the back of the theater, on a headset, explaining to the guys behind the scenes when to point which light where, when to open the projector lens, where to stand at what moment. I had to stand in the back during the actual play, pressing play and pause and stop and go. And our Manhattan High School production did not come anywhere near House/Divided.

I guess I can appreciate the technology a lot because I first-handedly understand how much effort needs to be put in (the computer really doesn’t know what to do on its own). It was truly incredible. I cant even put into words how impressed I am.

Aside from the technology, the actual content was incredible also. Comparing the content of The Grapes of Wrath by John Steinbeck, about the economy of yesteryear, with the present day’s economy was such a creative and powerful idea. Then, they were kicked out of their homes and oppressed because the times were changing. They had no power to stop it, they were helpless. Today, there is no difference. The people are kicked out of their homes, and there is nothing they can do about it, even as they watch their possessions being dumped at the curb.

The ending of the production was also great. I love the comparison of the green grass that will come tomorrow with the positive green ticker symbols that will flash on the stock exchange screen. It brought hope to the table, which is always a good way to end a production.

The feelings and emotions that the play’s content produced could not have been conveyed the same way without all of the technology, and it is so important to realize how much the media matters.

It was incredible.

On my way to the BAM I continued to think I’d have a bad experience.  For one, “House/Divided” was an experimental show so it would either be good or bad.  Also, I get lost easily when using the subway.   I was positive I would have a ton of trouble getting to the theatre.

It took three tries asking directions to figure out where I was going.  I didn’t even see Professor Davis bedside me even when Nayoung specifically told me where to look.  Finally when the production started, I hate to say it, I thought it seemed dry.  It was just a projection on a house with someone narrating away.   It was boring.  Then two people came on stage and they sat there for minutes doing, what I thought, was nothing; one man sitting at a desk and someone else cranking some sort of device.

However it immediately picked up when the two men working for Bear Stearns were brought out.  Anything business catches my interest but this caught my interest for other reasons, one of which was that it was very relatable for me.  For one, one trader was obviously shorter than the other and seemingly more aggressive.  The taller trader was a bit more laid back and made fun of the shorter one.  This is just like the two ex-Bear Stearns traders I know, George and Josh.  George is short and curses up a storm when it comes to Josh who is constantly making fun of him, especially over his height.  I also believe they made this very life like.  Traders often get calls from home when they’re not busy, like the short trader did.  They are also known for their broad sense of humor and cursing up a storm.

I also like how they portrayed the CEO of Bear Stearns.  At one point I read a book called Memos from the Chairman. It was a book filled with memos from the CEO to all of his employees and associates.  Much of what this character said was stated in many of the memos, which made it truly life like.  I also took an interest in the scene where Lehman went bankrupt.  I never actually thought about it, but seeing it in this play, with background music, and seeing the actors depressed putting their heads down as if to say “it’s all over” actually got me thinking.  How did those who were involved feel when it happened?  How truly devastating was that event?  Then they showed hope at the end.  While grass beginning to grow again was being talked about, among all the red on the ticker, scattered green began to appear.

The scenes I found least entertaining were the ones of the people traveling out west.  They seemed boring however I also feel they were very much needed for the storyline.  They also got me thinking as well.  How did those people feel knowing that when they arrived at their destination there would be nothing?  Both scenes with the eyes really got me.  The first was where the man was telling the travelers of his horrifying experience.  On the screen his eyes continued to look which indicated he was thinking back.  The other scene was with Alan Greenspan.  His face was on the screen in the background as he spoke.  Toward the end of his talk there seemed to be more emphasis on his eyes as he spoke with a more authorative tone to show that he wasn’t saying but telling the people how it was.  I believe this was well done considering eyes are a window into the soul.

There were some mistakes that I noticed.  The woman attempting to sell the house fumbled her lines almost saying $7,000 instead of $4,000 so stopped, addressed the man in the back again, and corrected herself.  She also almost tripped while going up the stairs.  One of the videos repeated itself for some reason.  I also realized that the narration was actually being cranked for at one point the voice became slow, and when I looked, the man doing the cranking immediately sped up in order to correct the problem.

Throughout the entire narration I waited for seven words to be said.  The moment we were told this production would include the Grapes of Wrath by John Steinbeck I was sure it would be somewhere and it was.  “Live off the fat of the land.”  One line that always stood out in Steinbeck’s works.

All in all I thought this was a well-done play.  The storyline was great and very entertaining.  I enjoyed the humor that was added in like the grandpa being a big doll and the trader’s lives at work.  I have already recommended this play to two people and hope they find it as entertaining as I have.   This has made for one of my better evenings this week.

Source

http://i.tm-cdn.com/photos/42186.jpg

Artist at work
Courtesy of Cassie Lui

Back in September, I went on a cultural event to see 5Pointz. I actually see 5Pointz every day on the 7 line as I take my long commute to school. I always happen to look at it, but I never seem to pay too much attention. The only thing that catches my attention from this building full of graffiti is the insane and beautifully detailed “painting” of the famous Notorious B.I.G. I’m always intrigued by it, but never took the time out to walk around the building and see the entire artwork that is on this building. Going to this place really opened to eyes about the artwork that NYC is surrounded by. NYC is full of graffiti, although it is not looked upon as art, 5Pointz makes people realize that graffiti is a form of art and it should be appreciated. The fact that artists take the time out from all over the world to come to this building to show their artwork, without having the chance of being penalized for destroying public property, is amazing. While my visit there, I saw a man who was actually working on a piece of art at the location. His work was so detailed and you can see the heart that the artist was putting into it. The amount of time, work, and effort that goes into the artwork that is shown on this typical Queens building is absolutely breathtaking and makes me actually appreciate the graffiti that surrounds NYC. The one thing that truly made me amazed was the fact that people want to destroy the building and take away this beautiful artwork away. The fact that this building’s purpose is to showcase graffiti (legally) to the public and for these “street artists” to portray their talent to the world, to the city, and to themselves. To take that away from an artist is truly unfair and truly destroys a form of art that is strongly practiced in NYC even though it is looked down upon. I love 5Pointz and what this building consists of and this building made me appreciate graffiti in a whole new way. Graffiti isn’t just “scrap on the walls”, it’s actually art that has meaning to it just like any other piece of artwork in the world.

When I was reading the voice of Carmen in class, I tried to imagine the emotion she would have beneath her words but it was extremely hard to visualize. The story starts quickly, jumping into the life of Carmen with no warning, no nothing, and suddenly all men were entranced by this woman. I could not help but chuckle at the cheesiness and ridiculousness of it.

http://app1.kuhf.org/articles/1346436764-Opera-Cheat-Sheet-Carmen.html

Hearing the words sang, especially in French, was an entirely different story. It felt richer, deeper, more layered… and it just made more sense. The plot is not as simple and one sided as I first believed. There was more conflict and social commentary involved than just a troubled romance. Though I did not like her character, I liked how complex Carmen turned out to be.

It was my first time in an Opera house and I could not have attended a better production to see first. I enjoyed myself very much. Granted that I almost dozed at a few points (Don Jose’s voice was just so soothing!), I watched and listened in awe at the strong lungs of all the performers on stage. I remember thinking that if I had to compete with any of them, even one of the children, in one of those games where you hold out a word as long as you possibly can, I would not stand a chance.

Carmen was a wonderful and worthwhile performance. I plan on walking up those red steps and seeing more operas in the future. Maybe I would be able to make my way one floor down at a time until I can sit and see the actual faces of the actors and actresses.

I also applaud all the other workers who put time and sweat into this production. I was truly impressed.

The only word to describe Jun Robles Lana’s Bwakaw is sincere. It stars Eddie Garcia, playing the role of Rene, an elderly man who catches on to the reigns of life just as it was about to eclipse him and his dog whose loyalty never fails. In this film, the essence of a man’s truthfulness to himself is brilliantly captured in the simplistic style of the director. The bold characters and slight corniness of a few scenes enhance the plainness and honesty of the central character while also keeping in mind the basic quirkiness of Philippine film. Overall, Bwakaw is sincere. It is sincere in characters, plot, style, and heart.

Bwakaw is Tagalog for someone who’s greedy, eats ferociously, or indulges. He is exactly the opposite of Rene since he is a man who has given up on his dream life, a man who has never indulged. By naming the film after Rene’s dog, he is even more forgotten and behind-the-scenes. Even the title appeals to the sincerity of the film; it is true to the fact that Garcia had chosen the background life. He lives apart from everyone; he doesn’t flaunt his true self. Though it seems as if he’s in denial, he’s not. He chooses to be sincere to his sexuality and to accept the consequences.

The striking characters around him like the two fabulous hair salon owners, the persistent neighbor Minda, the tough tricycle driver, and the always fanning priest succeed to envelop Rene in a warm and rich environment where his character is the odd one out. With this, the film gives off an even more authentic feel. It creates a microcosm of the Philippine population, making it believable.

The plot of the film is also realistic. Because of the less tolerant times in a Catholic-majority country, Rene felt forced to change himself and when he had finally came forth and admitted his sexuality, his prime had already passed. The film is insightful in that way. Society tends to be focused on the present and so the topics not talked about back in the day continue to be ignored. Its purpose is sincere and comes off as sincere. It humbly depicts a perspective not pondered by most, such as an elderly gay man who has never gotten to be himself until he thought it was too late.

The lack of a musical score except for a few scenes in which Rene watches the water and reflects on his life adds to the authenticity of the film. All emotions shown to the audience and elicited from the audience is not prompted by any music but caused purely by the scenes themselves. Nothing was exaggerated; nothing was masked musically. The audience reacted without help. It reminded me of many Philippine films I had watched before in which every thud of an object and crow of a rooster is heard. It adds to the sincerity of the film. It’s not just a film about a man but actually a segment of that man’s life.

Bwakaw’s mixed comedy and drama boils reality down to perfection. Life is never either/or. When it comes down to it, Bwakaw is the actual reality for some. And I found myself proud that something of that nature can come out of my own country.

http://www.google.com/imgres?um=1&hl=en&sa=N&biw=1280&bih=702&tbm=isch&tbnid=VQVY3GjfxmGiZM:&imgrefurl=http://tiff.net/tagsearch%3Ftag%3DAging%26year%3D2012%26path%3Dfilmsandschedules/tiff&docid=RrujeuVcbcZsWM&imgurl=http://media.tiff.net/contents/stills/bwakaw_01.jpg&w=695&h=350&ei=whOAUIChKanC0QGrk4HoCw&zoom=1&iact=hc&vpx=470&vpy=269&dur=2018&hovh=159&hovw=317&tx=150&ty=81&sig=102592201894873628021&page=1&tbnh=141&tbnw=282&start=0&ndsp=22&ved=1t:429,r:18,s:0,i:126

http://robertarood.files.wordpress.com/2010/02/garanca_carmen-760245.jpg

It was my first time seeing an opera. I had these grand expectations of everything in the theatre would fancy. I pictured fancy people with their fancy suits and dresses carrying around their binoculars walking around Lincoln Center trying to get to their seats. I had this stereotype of only the rich seeing the opera. There were these grand set of sets covered in red carpet and had gold railings. I was actually excited to be a part of this.

I am so lucky that in class we got to review what was going on in the play. The subtitles in front of the seat were very distracting. I wanted to be able to see the opera and yet understand it. It was unfortunate that the bar that had the screens of the subtitles was blocking my way of viewing the opera. So I had to strain my neck to see it. #short people problems

I loved the orchestra. The music was so lively and entertaining. It is also amazing how people were able to project their voice and still be heard from all the way in the highest row of this giant theatre. I actually loved the high pitched sounds of the children in the opera. My only critic would be the costumes. I wish leads of the play had more eye popping colors that would make them stick out like a sore thumb.

This was an unforgettable experience and I would love to see another opera.

I loved this movie. From a broad perspective, this documentary falls under the same category as any movie that portrays a horrific, unbelievable atmosphere. It made me think of the movie Slumdog Millionaire, another movie that I love. It made me think of other films I have seen where the characters are faced with abominable situations, but somehow find the strength to go on – a story of hope. In his film, Kinshasa Kids, Marc-Henri Wajnberg, uses music as a critical theme in setting the tone for the movie. The music, whether it is background music or live music, follows the story from beginning to end. Music plays an important part of the movie. Whether it is happy or sad, hopeful or full of despair, the music is always there, adding to the tone, making the viewer empathize with the kids’ struggle for survival. If this documentary is supposed to portray Kinshasa, make you feel like you’re a part of it, living and partaking in adventures with those kids, Wajnberg succeeded. I felt like I was really there.

The basis of the movie is a few poor, starving, ostracized kids in Kinshasa that have a dream to create a band. This dream is their hope, their reason to get up in the morning. The film chronicles the kids’ adventures, struggles, and formation of the band. Background music constantly enhances the movie and, along with the footage, helps the movie come alive. When the kids are sleeping and making sure no one is stealing from them, trying to find food, or having fun and getting the band together, the music emphasizes the extremity of the situation. Wajnberg edits the movie in a specifically stylish way. The movie feels very real, as he doesn’t employ big, fancy cameras with staged actor, but rather the real life Kinshasans on the real streets of Kinshasa. Sometimes he will zoom up close if he is running after someone, with shaky, real-life footsteps, and other times he will zoom out and film in color. He interviews real people, who speak in their own language, with subtitles. We see real Kinshasa houses, streets, people and their families. The film keeps this theme, of interviews, going back and forth between the kids’ adventures and other people living in Kinshasa.

Music does not reverse the kids’ situations. It does not try to fake the viewer into thinking the kids’ situation is really not that bad. That the kids are used it to their lives by now, and they have given up trying to deal with the reality of the situation, and now music is their only escape. Music does not detract from the severity, the reality, the point of the movie. The music shows that kids will always have a goal, no matter what. Their lives, their situations, their atmosphere will not stop that. When the kids want to make a band, they take advantage of the resources they have, and use everyday items to make their make-shift instruments.

Kids will be kids. Even when faced with abject poverty, disease, and a dim future, they will have fun, laugh, cry, play, and dream.

They will always dream.

Kinshasa Kids is a documentary-style film that uses real stories as the basis for its actors’ scripted performances. Director Marc-Henri Wajnberg uses musical interludes to restore some childishness and carefree amusement to the homeless children who are unfortunately immersed in the struggle of day-to-day survival. Though thousands of children are forced onto the streets of Kinshasa, Africa for being “witches,” Wajnberg shows how these children take time away from looking for work or scrounging for food in order to perform the music that they love. Even though these children are forced to grow up at a young age, they are still able to enjoy singing, dancing, and just having fun.
Wajnberg keeps returning to this theme of musical silliness, and provides a break from the fighting-to-survive storyline. He achieves this by switching between shots of abject poverty and upbeat performances. Even one of the most confusing and controversial parts of the film, when the young girl Rachel is raped, is then followed by the large closing musical number. The children decide to name their band “The Devil Does Not Exist” which reminds the viewers that although the children seem happy and carefree, they still are forced to live on the streets because they are “witches.” Even though the children themselves mock the notion of witchcraft, there is nothing they can do to change their reputation.
Kinshasa Kids feels like a real documentary, even though it uses actors with scripted performances. This is the power of Wajnberg as an auteur. He’s able to give his film an authentic feel by only basing it on true stories, and by leaving in some unscripted portions. For example, at one point the van in which Bebson, the children’s musical mentor, is riding, gets into an accident. Wajnberg incorporates this totally unscripted event into the film. Also, Kinshasa Kids is shot using only a handheld camera, which also gives it a real-life feel. After I watched Kinshasa Kids, Wajnberg himself got on stage for an audience question and answer session. When asked why he made light of Rachel being raped, he said that he was merely conveying what it’s really like in Kinshasa. A vagabond child being raped is an everyday occurrence that is not met with shock or horror. In fact, upon showing Kinshasa Kids to the local cast and crew, Wajnberg said he noticed that many of them were laughing during this scene. Kinshasa Kids is as authentic a portrayal of Kinshasa as an unscripted documentary would have been.
Kinshasa Kids is very successful at incorporating both aspects of the children’s existence, as vagabonds, and as aspiring performers, without seeming unbelievable. This is because the children get help from an adult, Bebson, and because their instrumental noises are made primarily using everyday objects like walls, containers, and their hands. It seems like the children are resourcefully trying to make their own fun whilst still being forced to live on the streets. The film follows them alternately trying to get work and trying to come up with ideas of how to use their musical talents. This culminates in them making a concert in order to collect donations from audience members.
I found Kinshasa Kids to be informative, thought provoking, and moving – all things that a great documentary should be. I think that Marc-Henri Wajnberg succeeds in doing this by creating his own storyline but making it as close to a real documentary as possible. This allows him to achieve his goals while garnering audience sympathy. And there’s nothing to capture audience attention like a good musical performance.