1. CONTEXT: What were the circumstances that framed the meaning and process of this project? In this context we are let in to the lives of the youth of inner cities, especially Oakland. Generally we are shown these stories without the context of how the city has been shapen to affect them. There are legal and societal structure in place specifically to make it harder for them to grow out of this way of life.
2. CONTENT: What was the issue, need, idea or opportunity addressed by this project? When working towards the same goal, there is often an invisible double standard to how we treat white and minority students. Our own preconceived notions affect how the outside chooses to motivate both emotionally and with budget (a la crappy public school system.)
3: FORM: What is the medium that was used to address or embody the content? The choice could be to employ a 4th wall and over hear real conversations of inner city youth to further understand the inequity. These conversations allow one to jump into another's shoes by hearing their first person perspective.
4. STAKEHOLDERS: Which are the groups or individuals that invested in the process and outcomes of project? Often times an artist will have to distinguish themselves as an objective third party, much like a reporter, who can interestingly convey messages to a different ear and perspective.
5. AUDIENCE: For whom was this project conceived? this project seems to focus on gaining the attention of middle aged white people, so as to enlighten them with first person perspective on how they affect others. Less exposing and more revealing.
6. ENGAGEMENT STRATEGIES: How were the stakeholders, audiences, and others engaged/connected to the project?
The ability to listen and relate. And to not inherently become defensive towards other people's point of view. The perspective of everyone together is the broadest one of all.
7. GOAL: What are this project's objectives?
It seems as if they are trying to reveal the emotional value of kindness and equity. Shedding a light on ones weak point, so hopefully the organism at whole will heal and protect it rather than profit.
8. VALUES: What were the project's guiding values or core beliefs? How were they expressed in the project?
The mIn value at play is that the voices of the youth and oppressed should not be ignored and left only to media coverage. This should be a conversation throughout the state and eventually country. Dialogue.
9. RESOURCES: What tangible and intangible resources were used to pursue the project's goals?
Space, actors/performers, props, builders, project manager, audience.
-They recieved around $100,000 in donations
10: OUTCOMES: What were the results of this project?
There was an increased awareness of the dialogue that is already happening amongst the youth. And rather than keeping the dialogue to the affected, they were able to allow others to peer in at who they are affecting with their choices.
Comments
Post a Comment