Skip to main content

The Roof is on Fire - Bri Pattillo

This was a really great project and case study. Here are my “10 lenses”:

1.     Context: The organizers identified that children are hearing more about their values from TV than from any other source (school, church, etc.) and the stereotypes they are presented as in the media are the stereotypes they become.

2.     Content: The project addressed this issue of teenage and race stereotypes in the media and challenged that narrative. The teenagers in the “performance” revealed their true identity and opinions, discussing race, sex, and other triggering and important topics. The entire project was also challenging people to listen to this alternate narrative, because they wondered if people even cared to hear a different story.

3.     Form: This project took the form of a self-guided performance. Audience walked around a parking structuring while listening in on the conversations of teenagers sitting in parked cars scattered around.

4.     Stakeholders: The stakeholders were the teenagers; their parents and teachers, people who would benefit from the change the experience might bring; and the community, those that witnessed the event and those that benefit from any positive changes that occurred from it.

5.     Audience: The community.

6.     Engagement Strategies: Get local teachers and students involved, in both the creation of the project and as actors/participants. Hang posters to advertise for the performance. Their engagement strategy during the performance was to use the form of eavesdropping, which creates an interesting dynamic; it is voyeuristic and has a forbidden feeling of hearing and seeing something that is private. This candidness would promote a sense of genuineness.

7.     Goal: To show authentic student dialogue and provide an opportunity for the teens to communicates across cultural divides. To reach the media. To have the audience perform the act of listening, and therefore model that behavior for society. To show teens doing something positive, not negative like they are portrayed.

8.     Values: The organizers wanted to promote media literacy, with the teens and beyond. They believed that if you expect great things from kids they will do great things, but if you only expect bad things from them then they will do bad things, they then gave teens the opportunity to show this good behavior booth in the performance and in the organizing of it. They believed in and wanted to use and showcase the natural optimism of youth is alive in them. The believed the messages society send to these teens were not useful, so they wanted to show a different narrative.

9.     Resources: Space – the parking structure, teenage “actors, volunteers, advertising, the media.


10.  Outcomes: The audience’s opinions were changed in regards to the teenagers. The teenagers felt heard.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Jeremy Griffith - The Roof is on Fire

1. CONTEXT: What were the circumstances that framed the meaning and process of this project? There are many minority teens in low-income, low-opportunity areas who have unheard voices. Their self-esteem isn't cultivated and all of their portrayal in the media is negative. 2. CONTENT: What was the issue, need, idea or opportunity addressed by this project? Teen voices were unheard, opinions of them were based on negative media stereotypes, and many of them had very poor self-esteem. 3: FORM: What is the medium that was used to address or embody the content? Immersive theatre in the form of car-conversations that audience members could eavesdrop on. 4. STAKEHOLDERS: Which are the groups or individuals that were invested in the project? The teenagers were very invested because of their desire to free their voices. The adults who helped were invested because they wanted to help these kids start to change the narrative. And the d...

Geneva Heron Assignments

Assignment: Aesthetic Evangelists - Due 1/30    Three key ideas in the text that resonate with me: The first is the idea of the "new public art," or what we would call "community engaged art." The article discusses the transition from art displayed in public sites to community based projects that have the goal of collaboration and focus more on the process than the end result/outcome. This intrigues me because before this class I was honestly very unaware of this form of art-making and its growing prevalence. Another idea that resonates with me is when the author talked about community based public art of today drawing on the urban reform rhetoric of the past both consciously and subconsciously. This stood out because it's an old adage that history repeats itself and I think it's interesting that the times we live in now call for a callback to this type of work and a more curious examination of what this can do for people and their communities. Th...

Mind Map - Bri Pattillo