The New York Times: I should start with a confession: Rarely during the pandemic have I been able to watch an entire livestream through.
Work is one thing: If I’m “attending” something for an assignment, I try to bring to it the focus of a before-times performance — phone off, sound system on, ideally in the dark. But nearly all my extracurricular experiences online have been nothing like my old days off.
5 comments:
I feel nothing in this article was a particularly groundbreaking statement; yeah, live arts are more interesting than livestreams. That's why live arts having been totally cannibalized by movies even though movies and TV are more convenient and can be made more 'perfect.' And the ability to finely tune things, make things more realistic, control every detail is why movies and TV have thrived independently of live arts, despite their marked lack of liveness. Live streamed theatre, or opera, or whatever, whether just a camera and a mic on an otherwise staged production or specifically staged for the camera, is the worst of both worlds, and while there's some promising implications for access, for programming, etc., I just do not see a world where streamed theatre or streamed opera or streamed ballet or streamed anything ever really takes the place of live and in person performance in any real way.
This article focuses on a somewhat obvious and agreed-upon statement. Barone begins with a generally relatable anecdote about not being able to sit through an entire live stream during quarantine. It's an experience that most people are familiar with at this point: attempting to stay attentive to an on-screen occurrence while being plagued by boredom and distractions. Here in this article, Barone focuses on live streams specifically of opera performances. From his experiences, he expresses that in terms of theater and live entertainment, the audience’s loss of control over what to view at any given moment during the performance is what can easily minimize their desire to watch the performance. That is after all, one of the most unique and immersive elements of any live performance. Barone’s lengthy commentary on this concept isn’t particularly enlightening, but it does serve as a nicely detailed reminder of what many in this field have and are experiencing.
As much as the industry has tried to make livestreams work, honestly I've never paid to watch one over the course of the pandemic. Why would I? The joy of live performance is to live and breathe in the same space as the art makers, and watching on a screen just makes that connection disappear. Sure I maybe be able to see an actor closer, or hear with my personal sound system a little better, but the joy is gone. That is what the writer is trying to get at, and I think we all know it. Livestreams of performances like this only exist in a time where we've been forced to do something different. We wanted something live and this was the only way to do it. However, it sucked. As much as we try to fool ourselves, livestreamed opera, theatre, and music just aren't enjoyable. We're moving on, and we will remember this lesson and time of experimentation in order to create better in the future.
5. Of course, opera and live performances are more interesting and engaging in person. Unfortunately, even outside of Covid-19 times, live performance is often inaccessible to many. To not acknowledge that virtual content exposes many to arts seems odd to me. The author is not wrong in saying that having to consume virtual content, exclusively during the pandemic reminds us that live theatre is vital. However, we should be recognizing it is a privilege. If anything, Covid has shown us that there has always been a need for virtual content. We should recognize the privilege that is consuming live arts. The reopening of venues should not equal the ending of virtual content. Opera and theatre performances should be open and accessible to all regardless of their physical ability to be in the space. Whether this inability stems from lingering health concerns or financial situations, we should be working to ensure all people can consume high quality performances live or virtual.
While I agree with other commenters that this statement that the experience of live theater is not well captured by streaming is overdone and universally agreed upon, I appreciate how this article describes exactly how this stream fails. When theater artists were forced to pivot to an online format, streaming felt like a great solution. For the theaters with the proper resources and ability to gather actors on a stage, streaming seemed like it would allow for the same quality performance, just from the comfort of one’s home. No different from a pro-shot. Sure, you would be missing the experience of a night out, but I feel that people were generally optimistic about how well streaming might work. This article breaks down how streaming is not as simple as it might seem, and without being designed and blocked from the beginning with streaming in mind, much will be lost in the translation to the screen. I still agree that nothing compares to the live experience, but there are ways to improve the streaming experience that would be worthwhile at least for the purpose of archives.
Post a Comment