Created by Toronto-based artists Deirdre Logue and Allyson Mitchell, the installation is an homage/parody of those Christian “Hell Houses” that pop up during Halloween. But instead of warning the attendees of the horrors of sex before marriage or the dangers of drugs, the piece is promoted as being a “sex positive, trans inclusive, queer lesbian-feminist-fear-fighting celebration.”
10 comments:
This sounds like a really cool idea, like I said in one of my comments last week, I think the concept of a haunted house is an extremely theatrical one. Haunted houses are basically installation art combined with performance art. And what a great idea to parody the Christian “Hell Houses,” those were so ridiculous, so many kids grew up with them, and yet we almost never talk about them anymore. Although I enjoyed that this article also gave a critique to the structure, design, and execution of this house, it’s annoying to hear that these artists didn’t go all the way. An idea like this that is so based in the notion of “Fuck you and fuck the society we live in” should understand that in order to emulate this idea, you have to give full energy and full commitment. It sounds like they could have had a much more experienced creative team and director, or maybe a stage manager. Someone who could have seen the areas that were unclear and fixed them so the ideas could get across.
It’s a shame that the “hell house” didn’t end up having the impact it was supposed to. A place like this, if it got a lot of attention and also really managed to wow its audiences could have an exciting life span. Imagine, the exhibits could go around the country, maybe to areas that are less inclined to have pro-feminist and pro-gay rights people in the community. From the article it just seemed like such an amateur display and the team just needed to get their, for a lack of a better term, ‘crap’ together. It also sounds like the “hell house” was maybe not the best concept idea to start from even though part of the experience is poking fun at the haunted house theme. I agree with the author of the article if you are going to put up a show like this in an area like LA there are expectations that the show is going to be something exciting and never seen before.
After reading the title of the article and the first paragraph, I was definitely expecting it to be more along the lines about what Sutton was expecting: a haunted house warning viewers of the dangers of heterosexuality. I feel like that would’ve been very funny, and could’ve made some good points, but the reality of the haunted house is also a very interesting concept. It sounds to me like more or less an untold history of LGBTQ+ people in LA, especially lesbian and trans women. I think there is a lot of merit to that, especially because LGBTQ+ history tends to be completely ignored by our culture, and especially by our school system. For example, my US History textbook didn’t even mention Stonewall. I think marketing it as a haunted house might not be the most accurate marketing strategy, but it does get people in the door for something that they might be scared away from if it were marketed differently, which isn’t a bad thing when you’re trying to get a point across. I would definitely go to something like this given the opportunity.
The title of this article intrigued me, so I’m disappointed to hear that the actual exhibit itself isn’t as successful as it seems it could have been. I am all for the integration of social justice with entertainment; in fact, I think it is one of the most effective ways to get important, positive messages out into the world. However, I can’t help but think about the audience this haunted house is geared to. Would someone who didn’t identify as queer or a feminist voluntarily decide to go to this exhibit in the hopes of learning something? While I’d like to believe yes, I think the sad truth is probably not. Before reading this article I had never heard of these “Hell Houses” the haunted house is compared against, so I don’t think that all of the references made complete sense to me. I don’t know what I was exactly expecting when I read “lesbian haunted house”, but I didn’t expect it to be quite so literary and educational; like the authors states, I was picturing something a bit more light- hearted, with maybe some smart social commentary done in a mockingly amusing fashion. Even though it doesn’t seem like this endeavor was as much of a hit as it had the potential to be, it’s exciting to be living in a time where exhibits like this are possible, and there are many people working towards giving art a broader purpose and using art to purport their positive messages.
I thought this was going to be more exciting from the title. While I like the idea of a haunted house exploring a political idea, (and of course I haven't seen this so I may be wrong) it can come off a little kichsy. I feel that way about Hell Houses too, though, so maybe that's what they were going for. Even if it's supposed to be about the LGBTQ+ history in West Hollywood, there should still be an element of actually trying to scare someone, if it's a haunted house.
When I opened this article I was hoping she was going to describe an actual haunted house with reverse gay humor. Instead it seems like its piece is more of an educational look at the history of LGBTQ in LA and southern California. This doesn't make it necessarily a bad thing just maybe a bit inappropriate for the Halloween season? Most people looking for these houses are going to want to be scared or humored to the extremes, form the authors point of view it seem like this house can be equated to going on a slightly under budget museum tour.Understanding that this project is new and will have its kinks, I think that the creator should have looked around at some of the other LGBTQ events that have been springing up around LA and brought a more current perspective to their project. Or at the very least worked to make the whole thing more shocking. If they are going to set themselves up in the center for movie and artistic innovation, they are going to have to up the ante.
This was a really cool idea as a concept, but it could have been executed in a more horror-oriented way. Like Cassidy said, if you're going to market something as a haunted house there should be some element of trying to scare the audience. I think that one of the reasons that this didn't go off as well as it could have was because the audience went in with this expectation. Discussing LGBTQ+ issues in a public setting is something that's very important, but they shouldn't have made it as academic as it was. There are ways to talk about feminism and LGBTQ+ issue in a comedic setting and have it still be progressive. If this company wanted to give almost entirely history based lesson they probably shouldn't have framed as a haunted house. The work that they created was still cool and educational, but they should have advertised it in that way instead.
I think the main reason why the event wasn’t as successful as it supposed to be is because of that reason everyone has pointed out, I think the main purpose is confusing. The way I think from reading the article heading and when I started reading the article is not actually what I first expected it to be. And also, I think it’s Halloween, people wanted to do something else, if you ask me, as much as this event sound interested and I wanted to attend, I would also go do something else rather than going there. I think whenever someone would like to do something, the vision needs to be clear, but also the most important thing is advertisement and marketing which draws the direction of the event and draws people attention and set the frame of whether it’s a good one that worth going or not worth going.
I think this is a really awesome idea. The sad thing about this is that it might seem too obvious in its goals to get any crowds that are otherwise oblivious to these discussions. I am worried that the only people who were going to this were people who were already exposed to the LGBTQ+ conversation. It's hard to imagine someone who is otherwise separate from the community to walk into that for fun during the Halloween season. I think something like this would be more effective in a place like Dallas, TX. Granted, this model should definitely undergo some workshopping in a place like LA that is very accepting (or more than most) of the LGBTQ+ community. I like the idea, I'm worried it will stay confined to areas that already agree with what is being said.
I think that while the main purpose of this project began as something simple, I think that they got a little too exceed in the execution of the project. Are they trying to entertain or educate or both? There are a bunch of successful ways to get their message across, and I think that they attracted a fairly niche group of people that would opt to spend their Halloween learning a little about feminism. Good thing they were set up in West Hollywood, since I'm sure they wouldn't have had the same success in some other less liberal cities in the country. Unfortunately, the majority of people out partaking in Halloween festivities are less inclined to go somewhere to learn something over somewhere where they can just party. Something like this would probably be really successful as a side attraction or a float idea for annual gay pride parades around the country.
Post a Comment