But during practice Wednesday – two days before the show’s opening – an accident befell the eight performers. According to authorities, five lost their balance and tumbled to the ground.
The stunt involved famed tightrope walker Nik Wallenda, but he wasn’t among the injured, authorities said.
6 comments:
I am torn by the lack of a safety net at rehearsal. On one hand it makes sense because it gives the performers a more realistic setting for their performance as there is no safeties during the actual performance. On the other hand the lack of a safety seems ridiculous because the possible risks should be as small as possible, like only no safety during the live performance. The article says, “Nik Wallenda said he trains like an athlete and calculates his risks for every stunt” which would support the idea that the safety should only be removed when absolutely necessary to lower the risks, a logical calculation. But a performer dependent on the idea of a safety net isn’t any more appealing than a lack of safety precautions. I guess the performers understand the dangers they face but I can’t help but wonder if there isn't a better method to help prevent freak accidents.
Article Rating:
7/10
Notes:
Goes well with milk
Tightrope walking is one of the acts in any area of performance that I hate watching the most, as it gives me a ton of anxiety about the possibility of an accident. Incidents like this are an example of the biggest issue I have with the stunt. Part of the appeal of the tightrope walking is the enormous risk factor, as people generally love to watch things with high stakes. This typically means that installing a safety net or having them wear a harness would take away from the way that the audience perceives the stunt. Personally I think that if people are fully informed about the risks of what they're doing then they should be allowed to make their own decision about whether or not to perform safely. However, it's honestly baffling to me that Nik Wallenda could lose multiple members of his family through tightrope walking and still continue doing it.
This article was absolutely frightening for those who are performing in this business, especially for circus like performances. One of the first things I was taught as a technician was to make sure that the actors were and felt safe. Tightrope walking is an extremely dangerous feat to accomplish, so the fact that the performers were hurt when under regulation is terrifying. The article made it seem like there was a high chance that there was no safety net. When performing stunts like these, there should always be extra, unnecessary precautions made. One time I went to a circus and the actor was wearing a harness, which I thought was very smart when put into his position. I remember questioning why he was wearing the safety equipment, but looking back that was probably the safest thing he could've done.
As the article describes Nik Wallenda, he seems to understand the risks he is taking. He has clearly been doing these kinds of performances for a while, has done even riskier stunts (and knows when it is dangerous enough to wear a harness, even if it doesn’t look as cool), and has lost family members because of tightrope walking accidents, so I doubt he believes he is invincible. My problem, though, is that it’s a group activity. The article convinced me that even if there wasn’t a net, that Wallenda was probably fine with that. The other tightrope walkers, who were actually injured, weren’t really discussed in the article. I wonder what their comfort levels were with whether or not to have a net. And I also sincerely hope that it is the tightrope walkers and not the circus who decides what safety precautions will be taken. The circus should be able to offer or add a net, or harnesses, but not take them away, or suggest the show would be better without it.
These events just go to show how important safety issues are, especially in the world of the performing arts. The article indicated it was ‘unknown’ is a safety net was used during the rehearsal, but even if there was, that fact that this level of injury could occur implies additional safety measures should have been utilized. And the fact that five people lost their balance at once seems rather strange, like perhaps there actually was an issue with the rigging. I have a friend who’s sister is an acrobat and aerial dancer, and for the longest time she performed without safety nets. Until one day she fell, and broke both of her arms. It was a miracle she could continue in her career. Now she never performs without a net. It’s sad that it takes a scary situation like the one presented in the article to get people talking about safety.
It’s always so scary to hear about things like this happening, especially in major performance groups, and of course, the most important thing is that it looks like everyone will be okay. However, it’s interesting to me that the CEO is quoted as saying that there was no problem with rigging, but that the performers just “lost their balance”. It seems that by the circus’ hesitancy to say whether or not there was a safety net suggests that there was none. I wonder whether this is for a heightened sense of risk, or if this is common practice amongst such well trained tightrope walkers. I wonder what kind of stunt they were doing to make so many of them fall at once; I suppose that with most of these group- acts, if one person falls, it’s likely that they will all fall. It seems silly to me to not have a safety net regardless of the skill level of the performers/ the reputation of the circus, because, as is clear from this news story, you never know what could happen.
Post a Comment