Event name: Slowdanger: SuperCell Performance
Event Time and Place: Thursday, September 21, 2023 8 p.m. at The Clarice Smith Performing Arts Center
1. Performance art multimedia performances like this one are a radically different approach to conveying the issues and concerns of global climate change compared to more traditional science or news media venues. What do you think about this performance? In what way was its messaging helpful compared to traditional approaches? In what ways might it be less helpful?
I thought this performance was very interesting, intriguing, and informative. It was a very non-traditional method of a performance that I had never seen and experienced before. Its messaging was helpful towards traditional approaches as the confusion and improvisation built tension and importance. This intriguing performance was very shocking which caused the message to stick with the audience. However, this performance might have been less helpful because the message and the plot could be seen as confusing. It was also sometimes hard to understand actions and movements during the performance. This performance was very informative, its messaging grabbed the audience's, but the plot could be interpreted as confusing.
2. How did you feel about this piece? Did it affect you in any way? Did it seem to affect others in the audience? What were your observations?
I felt very interested and surprised with this piece and it affected me strongly, giving me a different understanding of performances in the arts. I was used to seeing traditional performances and plays, and because this was so untraditional, it altered my understanding and allowed me to look at playwriting from a new lens. It definitely seemed to affect others in the audience as the performance created confusion in the audience. Although the audience was unsure what was happening at all times, they were very focused and intrigued with the performance. I made many observations from this performance, from the audience surrounding me, but more from the uniqueness of the play, and how that pushes forward the message. This performance was very surprising, it altered my understanding of plays, and it seemed to affect the audience in a very unique and intrigued manner.
3. Was there anything in this performance which you felt was factually incorrect or that might otherwise impair or otherwise hinder the understanding of or response to global climate change? If so, what was it?
I didn't think there was anything in the performance that was factually incorrect but some of the improvisation could hinder the audience's understanding of the response to global climate change. For example, some of the improvisation could cause mix messaging and a difference of interpretations. This could alter people’s opinions about the performance message in relation to climate change as people could think they are trying to imply a message, but they are in fact, doing the opposite. A main instance of this during the performance is the beginning when one of the actors was screaming into the microphone in the audience. As an audience member, it was nearly impossible to understand his purpose in his placement and his choice of volume. This performance was not factually incorrect but seemed to not include many facts itself, mostly improvisation, and this could affect people's understanding of global climate change.
4. How broad an audience do you think this work would appeal to, and why?
This performance applies to a more specific audience because of how non-traditional this performance was. I believe the audience that this work would appeal to would be people who love to watch plays, dance performances, and improvisation. I also think this would appeal to climate activists and others who enjoy futuristic story lines and intriguing plots. This performance applies to a smaller audience because of how specific and unusual this performance was and the impact it had on the audience. This audience would be able to understand the actions in the play and the message being portrayed.
5. During the Q&A, did you hear anything from the creators or the audience that made you rethink the performance? If so, what was it?
During the Q&A, I heard answers that made me rethink the performance. I heard about the importance of improvising and that 50% of the performance was improvised. I saw the purpose of this method which was to grab the audience’s attention in order to prove a significant message. I learned about their previous performances at Maryland Day where they used improvisation and an AI generator to write their stories of climate catastrophic storms. The section of the Q&A made me view the performance from a new lens and it allowed me to understand more of what just occurred in the play. The Q&A part was very informative and without this part, my understanding of this play would have been very different in regard to its messaging and its response to global climate change.