Tracking Change Proposal doc
Proposal for Urban Legend Movie and Map
Theme: Tracking Change
Team: Charlotte Goldman and Daniel Sexton
Urban Legend: “an often lurid story or anecdote that is based on hearsay and widely circulated as true.”
Intent:
Our project is to create a 10-15min movie and a walking map that will imbue character into the site by exploring a fabricated past event. We also propose to install markers that represent an unbuilt amusement park, which are also potential haunting locations and are elements of the walking tour. This core proposal could be augmented by utilizing online resources and broader participation, such as “leaking” the movie onto Youtube to create hype, and creating a blog for ghost encounter stories –however, we may run out of time for these secondary elements.
Background:
The South Waterfront is a utopian “eco-chic” development that promises a healthy, luxurious, ecologically conscious lifestyle. However, it is still in a state of “becoming,” which gives the place an odd sense of limbo. Storefronts and condos are largely untenated, construction is still in progress, and the new “perfection” of the site lacks patina or character.
One of the ways to lend character and context to new development is to link it to the history of the site. However, the actual history of the South Waterfront seems to be disconnected to its present treatment. As a superfund brownfield, the site has literally been paved over, covered up, its relics dismissed from memory. Therefore, to add a little character to the site, we thought that we would utilize the site’s perhaps mundane actual history to invent some false history of a more scintillating nature, to create an urban legend about the site. We also thought that the site’s mysterious, disorienting lighting effects caused by the reflective buildings tie in well with the idea of “unexplained phenomena.”
Our idea behind the urban myth is to link the site to the past, as well as give the potential for future growth as people expand on the story and potentially add their own stories of unexplained phenomena. The movie dramatizes the story and lends it weight, otherwise the story might be too “wispy” to take on its own life. The walking map gives a way for people to relate the story to the site. The truth of the history is less important to us than creating interest in the site. Ideally, the hoax will be interesting enough to still have a life of its own even though it is not taken as truth. Basically, we hope that it is fun for people to continue to play with the story. We are not intending that the story be believed, just believable enough to be fun.
While creating a hoax might sound bad, hoaxes have a long history as a precedent for creating interest. There is something about them that remains compelling, even after they are disproved. People still want to know what the hoax was, even though they know it isn’t true. The franchise of Ripley’s Believe It of Not is an example of how people find the question of the hoax more interesting than the answer –in fact, the best stories cannot be proved or disproved. However, we did not want to put the SOWA in jeopardy by creating a hoax that could not be disproved. Our hoax can be disproved. Our warping of actual historical events and places serves to make the believable and link it to the site.
What would our project accomplish? It would comment on the lack of apparent history at the site, it would lend the site a “story” which it currently lacks, and it could impact the future story of the site as the story spreads and evolves. It would capitalize on the presence of the streetcar and trolley –a past to present/future link with romantic appeal, and the potential of the light-reflective surfaces to engender unusual light phenomena.
Design Proposal:
The Story:
There are two aspects of the story to look at:
1) The sequence of events in the story itself.
2) How we tell the story, which might not be the linear sequence of #1.
One of the keys to making this successful is to create an interesting story. We are embellishing actual history to cerate a hopefully more interesting story for the site.
Story Background:
Portland used to have an extensive system of trains, streetcars and trolleys. After a period of decline, the streetcar system has seen a revival. The new Portland Streetcar connects Portland to the South Waterfront. The Willamette Shore Trolley (started 1887) also connects to the South Waterfront. It is a heritage trolley that runs between Lake Oswego and Portland, terminating at the southern end of the South Waterfront near the Old Spaghetti Factory.
We think that the streetcar/trolley has romantic appeal and a traveling aspect that is similar, but more human, than the river. Also the streetcar/trolley has a heritage element (trolley) and a modern element (streetcar) that we feel fits within the “tracking change” theme nicely. The current disconnect between the two lines, which connect to the site at opposite ends, sets up an opportunity for exploring the space in between –which is the South Waterfront.
Why did the trolley just stop there? There are modern political reasons why the two streetcars don’t connect now, but why the earlier disconnect? Why was the South Waterfront area left out of the trolley system. Our story seeks to explain this, with a mixture of truth and fiction.
Story Outline:
At the end of the trolley lines in Portland, amusements parks were built to attract people to use the lines. They were called “heaven” at the end of the line. (True) However, the developers for these amusement parks were in a hot bidding war over who got to build the amusement parks. (perhaps true?) The Oaks Amusement Park was originally going to be built at the terminus of the Willamette Shore Trolley Line (False), rather than its current Sellwood location (real). Why wasn’t it built? In 1902, when construction was set to begin, the trolley held a commencement celebration and trolley ride. However, disaster struck. There was a fire on the trolley, killing the innocent celebrants. The project was stopped, and people became superstitious about using that trolley line (False). It fell into disuse, and The Oaks Amusement Park was built in Sellwood instead. Arson was suspected as the cause for the fire. Of course, the Sellwood developer was suspected, but nothing could be proved. The culprit was never found. Since that time, the area along South Waterfront to Riverplace has been plagued by stories of strange phenomena. Strange lights, unexplained reflections, ghostly presences –much in keeping with downtown Portland’s “most haunted” status. Perhaps those people are still trying to find their way to “the heaven” at the end of the line. We will never know.
The Products:
For the exhibition of the show, we propose to show the movie and a walking tour map of the site that identifies where on the site different events in the story take place. Markers of the planned amusement park would be installed on the site, which would be identified on the map and in the movie.
The Movie:
We propose to create a short movie, 10-15 minutes in length that tracks our investigation of the urban legend. The style of the film would be sort of historical to make it believable, but with spooky elements to make it lurid enough to be interesting - a sort of low-tech, history-channel, mythbusters, Ripley’s Believe It or Not mockumentary. We can go to different places in the site where supposed events had occurred and tell about them. We can film Ross Island at night, perhaps boat out there, on the quest for mysterious lights or strange sounds. We can interview construction workers about the tale –either asking them to participate in the hoax, or getting their honest reactions. Perhaps we interview residents and workers on the site -asking them to make up details as we interview them. This could become a participatory story, if the people are willing. It would be interesting to “leak” the movie on youtube and spread rumors about it in Pioneer Square and in SOWA.
Footage for the movie can include:
Narration of the diary of a survivor, and reenactments/footage from their perspective
Interview residents
Interview workers on the site (construction)
Interview Trolley Conductor
Interview Streetcar Conductor
Interview Cirque du Soleil performers (haunted)
Historical “evidence” –documents (deeds, maps), posters, pictures (some real, some faked)
Trolley footage
Streetcar footage
The street with the reflections and the bioswale (I have a photo to find it)
While the actual storyboard is yet to be determined, it might be fun to start the movie with the survivor who wrote the diary fleeing the scene of the disaster in a reenactment, and then go into the investigation of the story.
Two ways to handle the interviews:
1) fake them outright –scripted. Time-saving, but less fresh and less participatory/interactive.
2) Haunt the site first, then interview people about it –candid. Harder to get expected outcome, but more exciting and could take on a life of its own in the project.
The Map & Site Markers:
We could install markers of where the amusement park elements would have gone. Then we can create a walking map of these markers, including the proposed plan of the amusement park, and the haunting sites. This would relate all three elements together. Of course you’d get there by streetcar or trolley!
This map is a kind of tourist map, pretending the legend is widely known. It gives a way for visitors and residents to walk the movie sites on their own, and spreads the legend w/o having to see the movie. It is a bit like the “map of the stars” or a walking tour.
Important Locations on the Map:
The trolley tracks where the fire took place
The Willamette Trolley stop
The current streetcar location
The Tram stop
The proposed Ferris Wheel –probably on the unmown grass by the river
Other amusement park attractions yet to be determined
Haunting locations yet to be determined, but potentially including Ross Island and the Cirque du Soleil tent location
Methods:
Workplan until Show
(calendar table copied funny -deleted on post)
11/7-11/12
Collection of test footage
Writing of Diary
Writing of script
Perhaps haunting the site
Research resources needed –music, costumes, historic orgs
11/13
Evaluate progress, determine needs & what to install, film at site
11/14-11/19
Gather materials, such as costumes, installation materials, historic “evidence”
Continue writing as needed
11/20
Create installation markers, install
11/21-25
Create map
11/26
Thanksgiving
11/27-11/29
Work together over weekend to edit footage and gather as needed (both in Portland
11/30-12/2
Final preparations
Materials & Cost: Total estimate $1320*
Digital Video equipment –UO fusion lab $0
Computers and editing software –UO fusion lab $0
Costumes –rental –est $300
Historic evidence images –online, historic orgs $10 copy charges
Printing of maps –est $10
Music score -$25 if not original
Installation materials –est $1000 (?)
*we really have no idea what it will cost to make our installations
Charlotte does not have movie editing skills, however Daniel does and Charlotte would like to learn. Both Daniel and Charlotte can divide the work of production, with Charlotte probably taking on more of the pre-filming organizational and public interaction aspects, and Daniel doing camera work and putting it together digitally. Daniel’s location in Portland makes him a better choice for obtaining footage throughout the week, and for any haunting activities. Of course they would both help each other. Thanksgiving weekend Charlotte can stay in Portland to work together with Daniel, if Daniel is available (undetermined). This would be an ideal time to edit the movie together. Time is the biggest limiting factor, so that means that organization is that much more important. Some of the additional elements of our project, such a ghost story blog, may not be able to be accomplished in time.
The editing of the film would be important, and we probably want music to enhance it. One theater resource is Alex Misar’s father, who we could ask to advise, and perhaps even pay to compose some score for us. We need to organize the scripting, the filming, and site locations. We need to actually DO the filming, and have considerable time to edit it. If we decide to haunt the site, that layer also needs to be done. We would use digital cameras checked out from the university. It might be interesting to use higher quality cameras for interviews and things, and use a low-tech camera for our myths. We have access to an array of equipment in the fusion lab. Getting the storyboard and scripting done SOON would help us get input to make the movie more robust and interesting.
Impact Statement:
This project seeks to repair the lack of character of the site by utilizing a hoax to impart real character. This plays on ideas of marketing that are so prevalent at the site. The South Waterfront, a capped-over toxic superfund site, is sold as an ecologically responsible place, which is also a kind of hoax, although perhaps the design is the ecologically best treatment with the means available. The truth of the site’s ecological claims notwithstanding, there is a feeling of “deceptive perfection” which our project attempts to address. It is our hope that our project will communicate that not everything unsavory should be hidden and that character and authenticity often come from the imperfections we wish to hide.
