Feedback from the audience - Goodtimes Studios
We asked our audience at the Goodtimes Studio for feedback on specific questions and this is what people felt and thought.
Question 1. Put one word to your experience of VOICE on the day.
Question 2. In a sentence tell us about your thoughts of VOICE now.
Question 3. Plus any other elements you would like to share.
Jon: Q1. Lush Q2. The work was intelligently primal but still culturally contemporary. Q3. I really like the theatre of the blind fold.anticipation and surrender. It added to your capacity to concentrate on and absorb the work without distraction. If I thought it was a little short, it must be the right length.
Nick: Q1. Considered. Q2. Having sight removed prior to seating better enabled the audience to focus their attention on the sound. Q3. The removal of participants sight and the process of disorientation (through corridors, etc) risked dominating the sound piece itself, though the balance was struck quite well. There was definitely opportunity to use the space more informally/socially following the conclusion of the sound piece. Having established that the piece begins prior to entering the gallery space itself, the mood at conclusion was one of the whole exhibit continuing, participants largely left in a more formal, less social way. I didn't mind either way but the intention needed to be more explicit either way.
Bosco: Q1. Immersive. Q2. Blind-folded, my sense of hearing reached out further that normal, the pinpoint accuracy of the spatial dimension achieved a stunning corporeality that was breathtaking to behold. Q3. One of the best sound pieces i've ever experienced. would hear again.
Betty: Q1. Intense. Q2. Voice was an interesting audio installation that created a mental space to explore lucidly and almost felt like hallucinating at points. Q3.inviting people in to a space without the pre-conceived notion of the space they were in was a big trust exercise but also enhanced the audio senses very successfully.
