I was doing some digging and came across this vlog from "JennHeg", who last September saw a live simulcast of the Washington National Opera's La Boheme at her local movie theater.
Good news: She loved it! Seeing it at the movie theater was cheaper and more convenient for this young and technologically savvy person. Moreover, it did not seem to detract from the experience (I'm sure those close-ups of hearthrob Vittorio Grigolo didn't hurt). However, this raises a few very important questions
1. If you're watching a live simulcast of opera (or theatre, ballet, etc), is it still a live performance?
2. Is it a slippery slope? At what point does it become television?
3. Can theatre companies also use simulcasting technologies to reach audiences in new markets?
4. Is this how we finally access The Long Tail?
5. Is theatre really an art? Or is drama the art and theatre the medium?
Comments (2)
It is a fantastic cultural experience to watch an opera, musical, or piece of art, however when you take the relationship of live-performer and audience out of the picture you lose the human experience which is 1/2 of what the theatre is all about.
Posted by Michael Ian Cedar | April 12, 2008 10:52 PM
Posted on April 12, 2008 22:52
1. If you're watching a live simulcast of opera (or theatre, ballet, etc), is it still a live performance?
When I watch the cubs on TV, is it still a live ball game? When I watch the candiates answer questions in tandem on live TV, is it still a live debate?
I am not trying to be a smart ass here...I think these comparisons are totally valid
Posted by devilvet | April 14, 2008 3:44 PM
Posted on April 14, 2008 15:44