“House/Divided” compared the story of the Joad family from The Grapes of Wrath with the modern day financial and foreclosure crisis through the use of live performance and media. The Joads were a family who was forced to leave their home and land in Ohio and travel to California to find work and a new life. Their task is not very simple because they must also deal with death as well as little pay. The modern day portion of the play consisted of someone being kicked out of their home and the financial workers and others involved in the crisis. It also showed documentary-type interviews with people who lost their homes or were involved in the foreclosure process in some way.
The play involved aspects of live performance and media. There were actors present portraying the Joad family as well as actors depicting a modern day man suffering from foreclosure and the people working in the financial and police departments. There were also some physical props involved. On the other hand, media was involved heavily in this performance. The house was taken into the two different time periods with projections of houses in various conditions. In addition to the videos of interviews shown, a loop of stock market numbers and images of the dustbowl were projected. At other times, projections of the actors’ faces were shown larger on screen.
I tend to take a more Phelan approach to this situation because I do believe the live performance is livelier, more realistic, and overall a different experience than media. Phelan says that a performances life is in the present and that media in any form makes the performance something different. In my experience, I believe that live performances evoke more emotion from the audience. Still, in some circumstances, I think it is possible to use media to support the live performance while not taking away from it. In “House/Divided,” however, media was so much of a component that its creators had taken a more Austlander approach. Austlander believed that media was just as “real” and important as live performance. He used the analogy, Dance + Virtual = Virtual, and he supported this equation.
Ultimately, “House/Divided,” was a unique experience even though it was not the same as a completely live play would have been. I think the use of media in some aspects was very original, for example the initial entrance of the house’s projection was great. Although I do prefer a performance with more live aspects, I do not completely agree with the first woman who spoke in the discussion session. Although the audience was not completely invested in a fleshed out storyline, I left with a feeling of appreciation my family and the house we are fortunate enough to have.
“House/Divided” is a modern remake of “The Grapes of Wrath” by John Steinbeck. It cannot quite be classified as a play, but more as a theatrical experience. This project tells the story of one family’s struggles with the Great Depression through mediatized screens and embedded interviews.
“The Grapes of Wrath” focuses around the Joad family; its members are unable to afford their house in the wake of the Great Depression, so they pack their belongings and move to California in the search for a better future. However, their new home is far from meeting their expectations, since work is hard to find and locals are awfully hostile. As Lisa said, though, the Joads manage to find hope and comfort in their strong family unit and in the love that they feel for one another.
Even though both “House/Divided” and the Steinbeck novel that inspired it are based on the same plot, they leave the audience with completely opposite impressions. While the original places its main emphasis on the value of family, the remake is more of a criticism of the way modern-day banks are run. This is made apparent by the highly-digitized scenes of executives, bankers and clerks addressing people who’ve lost their houses without much sympathy. Clearly, this is a reference to the subprime mortgage crisis of the 2000’s. The crisis was caused by banks giving out more high-risk mortgages than ever, which inevitably resulted in many homeowners not being able to afford their properties and thus defaulting on their payments. Consequently, more than a million homes were foreclosed around the United States.
Walking into the Harvey Theater of the Brooklyn Academy of Music on Friday night, I expected to feel the wrath of both the Joads and of the many people whose homes have been foreclosed over the years. However, my feelings were somewhat blurred by the overbearing technological features of “House/Divided.” The ever-changing screens were definitely impressive and revolutionary, but they seemed to overshadow the raw emotion of the actors on stage. Instead of looking at an actor’s face, I inevitable looked at the broadcast of their performance on the screen behind them. This is why I agree with Lisa that in this performance’s case, Phelan’s views on live performances are accurate.
Phelan argues that the livelihood of a dance or play is valuable, unique and passionate enough on its own, so there is no need to enhance it using technology. This was said in response to the Auslander camp, which claimed that technology is an inevitable part of theater and constitutes the future of performance. I disagree with Auslander, because there is a beauty and presence to pure human presence that does not need to be joined by foreign elements. Such philosophy was apparent during “House/Divided,” whose liveliness was lost among its advanced technology. However, as Lisa said, the performance was definitely not a failure because I did leave the Harvey Theater with an appreciation of my home and family.
The House Divided is a performance created by the Builder’s Association, directed by Marianne Weems. It is a modern interpretation of John Steinbeck’s classic, “The Grapes of Wrath.” Like Lisa summarized, The Grapes of Wrath focuses on the Joad family who were forced to move from their home in Ohio to California due to the effects of the Great Depression. Along the way, the Joad family dealt with the struggles of poverty, starvation, death, and the importance of family.
The House Divided was a performance that incorporated the idea of being forced to move out of their homes. The performance included large projections to depict different conditions of a single house prop used on stage. It also incorporated a prerecorded narration of Steinbeck’s novel.
The House Divided was not solely based on Steinbeck’s “The Grapes of Wrath”. The performance also interweaved the recent housing and financial crisis. The two times had its similarities, as well as its differences. Although it sounded harsh, someone in the post discussion of the performance stated, “ you blew it”, and I can’t help but find my self agreeing to part of this statement (though not to that great of an extent that I can outright say to the director she that “blew it”). This person was hoping to get some emotion out of this piece that incorporated two disastrous and heartbreaking events, but got nothing out of it. I was hoping this performance would make me feel something as well. I was hoping to see how devastating the financial crisis was, as well as feel the emotions Steinbeck depicted in his novel through this performance; however this was not the case for me, which makes me lean towards Phelan’s view of live performance.
Phelan states that a live performance is livelier than a performance that uses media. Live performances engage the audience as well as evoke more emotion from them. There are times where I do agree with Austlander who states that media can enhance a performance, however. There are ways media can be used to enhance a performance, but in the case of The House Divided, I believe that the use of media harmed the overall performance rather than enhanced it. I found myself focusing too much on the projections rather than the actors on stage, which made the performance very emotionless and confusing for me.