the first "jerk" of AFR struck
Oct. 25th, 2005 12:20 pmNote: I generally have not liked a single thing Seth H. Holmes has posted on AFR since he subscribed.
Seth H Holmes wrote:
There are jugglers who toss their clubs/knives/lit-torches around patrons, there are samuri swords chopping cucumbers in half on men's stomachs, there are sword-fights while patrons are on stage, there are whips snapping celery and straws down to the volunteer's fingertip, there's a guy walking a tightrope directly over the patrons in his audience, there are knife-throwers and black-powder guns going off everywhere, men "fall" off unicycles into the arms of the cutest female audience member...
These things are, once the act has practiced on them for years, perfectly safe, PROVIDED the patron volunteer do exactly what they were told to do, hold perfectly still when they're supposed to, and not try to "get involved" or upstage the performer.
It is no more "irresponsible" for an act to involve fire near a patron than it is for any of those other stunts. Stunts are what they are, and have been practiced and performed successfully and safely for centuries.
Is there risk? There is always risk. The behaviour of the audience and the volunteer contributes as much risk as the stunt itself, and when the volunteer doesn't do what is asked of them, the volunteer effectively increases the risk.
Disclaimer: I am not naming or referencing any particular details of the incident at Maryland in this post. This is a general observation from years of working festivals (not that i do those kinds of stunts), not one of specifics.
(security note: this is a public post. please refrain from specifics on the Maryland festival incident in any replies. i will screen and/or delete them.)
Seth H Holmes wrote:
Biased or not. It's absolutely irresponsible to bring a patron into such aThere are a LOT of "dangerous situations" that festival performers can and do put the patrons through, not just those involving fire.
dangerous situation.
There are jugglers who toss their clubs/knives/lit-torches around patrons, there are samuri swords chopping cucumbers in half on men's stomachs, there are sword-fights while patrons are on stage, there are whips snapping celery and straws down to the volunteer's fingertip, there's a guy walking a tightrope directly over the patrons in his audience, there are knife-throwers and black-powder guns going off everywhere, men "fall" off unicycles into the arms of the cutest female audience member...
These things are, once the act has practiced on them for years, perfectly safe, PROVIDED the patron volunteer do exactly what they were told to do, hold perfectly still when they're supposed to, and not try to "get involved" or upstage the performer.
It is no more "irresponsible" for an act to involve fire near a patron than it is for any of those other stunts. Stunts are what they are, and have been practiced and performed successfully and safely for centuries.
Is there risk? There is always risk. The behaviour of the audience and the volunteer contributes as much risk as the stunt itself, and when the volunteer doesn't do what is asked of them, the volunteer effectively increases the risk.
Disclaimer: I am not naming or referencing any particular details of the incident at Maryland in this post. This is a general observation from years of working festivals (not that i do those kinds of stunts), not one of specifics.
(security note: this is a public post. please refrain from specifics on the Maryland festival incident in any replies. i will screen and/or delete them.)