Friday, May 01, 2020
In the Time of ‘Safer at Home,’ Are Raves an Essential Business?
Variety: Virtual raves have proven to be a popular entertainment option during the coronavirus pandemic. From festivals held online — Earth Night, Room Service, Club House and Desert Hearts are among those that took place just last weekend — to rooftop events headlined by the likes of David Guetta (from the Icon Brickell in Downtown Miami) and Martin Garrix (from the top of the 22-story A’Dam tower in Amsterdam; on May 5 he performs live from a boat) to living room sets by major names likes Diplo and by complete unknowns with little more than a pair of CDJs, a USB stick and an internet connection.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
10 comments:
Movie theatres and live theatre are both closed during this time because the entertainment industry, including concerts and raves, are not essential to daily and societal function. News telecasting is relevant for the people to stay current on updates, but entertainment is not important. They are claiming to be media and information outlets, but I do not see how this is relevant. But also if people really want to go to a rave during the middle of a pandemic, then I can only see it as an opportunity for survival of the fittest to come into play and take them out. I do like how some people have been having virtual raves, but I also know that live music and concerts and raves in person have such a different vibe and feeling than just being with the music. Going to concerts wouldn’t be a thing unless it was actually different than listening to music. I do agree that they need to happen in the future, but I don’t think that right now is the best time for live music festivals or raves.
I have to say that I read this article because the title simply made me laugh out loud. It seems ridiculous that in a time like this people are worried about digital raves, but maybe historians in 500 years will say that watching people get drunk and dance alone in their living rooms in front of their computer camera will be the thing that truly saved us. Nevertheless, the entertainment industry is hurting right now, and if entertainers can find work through this obscure entertainment form, and those stuck at home losing their minds can find a little sanity in the chaos, then why not rave? I was, however, shocked to hear of these specific DJs not working from home, and actually going into the Insomniac space in order to curate these raves. This is not what I have been seeing recently, and expected this article to detail how DJs were managing to work from home.
Grocery stores, network news, doctors, nurses, telecom, power, these are essential services, not a DJ. After reading this article it became clear that the motive here was not to help those staying at home but to promote Insomniac's business model. It doesn't matter how many rules you impose or what safeguards you put into place; you risk the spread of a rapidly changing virus when you deny a DJ's request to stream from the safety of their own home. When you say no in this situation, it no longer becomes about promoting the DJ or giving young people a chance to blow off some steam while stuck at home, but rather about you as a company trying to promote your brand. You also run the risk of spreading the infection among the staff and crew, regardless of any distance rules or sanitizing rules that you put in place. Any one of those people answering the door when the DJ arrived could have been a carrier for the virus and showed no symptoms. It's also very telling in the behavior of the company that DJ's fear not getting work if they don't participate. Insomniac should lose their business license over this and the owners of the company should be barred from owning and operating any business for at least the next 10 years. The company needs to face serious consequences lest we find ourselves in this situation and this or a similar company does the same thing and makes things worse.
I actually saw something interesting on Twitter that this article reminded me of. I was reminded of a video in which people were attending a concert or rave of some kind in person, but from inside their own cars! This meant they could flash their lights and honk their horns to the beat. It was crazy how many cars were present. It was like a drive in dance party. Of course, this is different from a virtual rave, which is what this article is about. Seeing this kind of entertainment riding the line between being socially distant and being unsafe is unfortunate. There are many other kinds of entertainment that have had to close its doors, in fact, nearly every form of entertainment that has a congregated physical audience has had to shut down. This issue seems problematic, especially considering the audience it is influencing. I hope that they will take measures to be safe during this time.
I am not sure that I would call virtual raves essential, however they are a fun way for people sitting at home to pass the time. I think it is great that these DJ’s are finding a way to work when their jobs rely almost solely on large groups of social people. It is interesting that these big name DJ’s are performing from rooftops instead of their homes, but I guess that just adds to the intrigue. I watched the virtual rave “That’s So Ravin 2” put on by CMU Drama students William Lowe, Alex Talbot, Sean Leo, and Lenora Grant last friday! It brought a smile to my face and made me reminisce about the first “That's So Ravin” in February so I really enjoyed watching it! Of course it wasn't the same as dancing with all my friends on campus, but It was nice to know that others were watching, so it was a way of feeling somewhat connected to everyone.
As much as I love Insomniac Events and admire Pasquale Rotella, I’m not sure Insomniac is what we now as a society deem an “essential” business. I too have found entertainment and happiness in these virtual raves and concerts, but I cannot escape the thought of how they are able to put them on without breaking social distancing protocol. It was nice to read this article and finally get some answers on that, and I am glad that Insomniac is maintaining as much of a sterile environment as they can while they are still using their facilities. I find it a bit strange that Pasquale himself was not wearing any protective equipment when he appeared on the stream. That feels like he is ignoring his own rules, which is not cool in the slightest. I get that they are trying to provide an authentic, professional-looking experience, but really like, stay home. Not worth it. The DJs and artists can stream from their bedroom or home studio.
I don’t really feel like virtual raves are necessarily essential during this time. Things that are essential are food and toilet paper, let alone a rave? I guess it depends on the person and how they used to live their lives before quarantine. I feel like a similar question could also be is Netflix essential during this time, in which I would definitely respond yes. I think it’s kind of funny that people are contemplating this as something that is absolutely necessary to survive. Most people when they go to raves, not all but most, are being drunk or high off of something, so I’m wondering if it has more to do with that than the actual music, but I don’t know I’m not really a raver. If it brings certain joy to people that they can’t find anywhere else, then yeah it is essential for your happiness and mental health, but no one is having fun right now.
I'm a little bit torn on this one, but honestly, when I think about it, I'm not sure there's anything inherently wrong with it. It's definitely concerning that there seems to be a culture of silence and fear of retaliation; that doesn't speak well and makes me wonder if there's more risk than it otherwise sounds like, but with the information provided, there isn't really anything that seems very wrong to me. Is it risk free? No, but nothing is. It sound's like they are taking a lot of precautions, to the point that the risk of it's probably safer to be there than to be most other places, which means that the largest incurred risk involved in these activities would be just the act of leaving your house and traveling. That's non-negligable, and if the employees especially are being compelled or pressured in any way, then that's certainly a problem. But if the emplyees are wanting to be back at work, and volunteering to do so, and so are the artists, then this doesn't seem to me to be much more risk than just going for a walk outside, which is largely considered acceptable. Is it essential? No, I don't think so. But is the risk constrained to an acceptable level? At least with the information provided, it sounds like it probably is.
Virtual raves are an entertainment platform that really took off because of the video game, Fortnite. A well-known DJ, Marshmello, made it very clear to his fans and the world that he loved playing Fortnite and so the parent company, Epic Games, figured out how to have Marshmello virtually DJ for players to watch live throughout the game. Ever since the COVID-19 pandemic, these virtual raves have gotten really popular with a number of DJ’s and even a small group of designers at Carnegie Mellon University. When it comes down to the technical specifics of how these raves operate and come together this article does not shed any light. To call live entertainment an essential business is a little bit of a stretch, and that is coming from someone who is going to by trying to make a career in that industry. However, I could see how these events take place with amble social distancing in mind and if those guidelines can be followed, I see no reason why these virtual raves should not happen.
The regulation of ‘essential business’ has been a really important distinction for companies across the country over the past few months, with a lot of groups bending or outright breaking the rules by finding loopholes to call themselves essential. I fully understand the motivation to do so, and to have employees making money again and able to perform their jobs. But to try to classify something like raves as ‘essential’ completely goes against what the term is supposed to refer to. I was drawn in by the title of the article, which made it sound like venues were trying to classify in-person rave gatherings as essential, and I’m glad that they were actually referring to the organization of remote ones. And I think that the remote performances have some entertainment value, although less than what the experience of actually being there would be. But no amount of entertainment value is worth people risking their lives for. That’s the point of the ‘essential business’ restriction, to stop things like this from happening.
Post a Comment