At the Same River multimedia performance of the complexities of Marcellus Shale hydrofracturing were uniquely examined primarily through the point of view of the local people in Lewisburg. It was clear that the collaborative between the Bucknell students and New York based Strike Anywhere Performance Ensemble was well organized and well versed on the hydrofracturing issues that are unique to Lewisburg, like the setbacks that Barbara of the environment committee experienced and damages hydrofracturing has on the environment. Overall, they emphasized the universal problems we all endure from fracturing that range from differing scales, spatial flows of resources, and intractability.
The most prevailing point of the performance was the demonstration of intractability between the need for income and jobs versus the depletion of the river and health concerns. As we have seen in various environmental issues, the problem of consumption is complicated due to intractability. Here like in many other communities across the world, the social and political desires have are held at a higher regard than the environmental factors. The government depends on these large companies for jobs, the locals need the jobs, the consumers need the oil, and the companies need the revenue for their shareholders. Like we have discussed in class, these companies are able to avoid governmental oversight and restrictions, like the Clean Water Act. The paradigm is best expressed through the internal arguments within the community, particularly in the household of the activist Barbara and her husband the community barber. Regardless of personal moral opposition for hydrofracturing in the Marcellus Shale and concern of the future of their clean water and generations to come the barber was motivated by his financial needs to take a job as a truck driver. Thus, working for the same company his wife, Barbara was fighting against, spending hours rallying against, and even getting arrested for her devote opposition to displace people from their homes. Furthermore, exemplifying the cyclic nature and interconnection of differing levels of this relationship
The display of the forever changing river by interpretive dance displayed the spatial flows of resources by reiterating that this small town, which has suffered a decline in jobs, saw this as an opportunity to stimulate the local economy not considering the effects of hydrofracturing. Hydrofracturing has been used to extract the oil deep in the layer of the Marcellus Shale since the easier to access oil has been more else depleted for our generations, similarly “what makes strip mining so-cost effective is precisely what makes it so devastating”(Reece, 62). Here, Reece explains that destruction to the environment is not a unique or coincidental practice, but rather an intentional cost versus benefit analysis. Hydrofracturing is contaminating the water of locals and effecting their health and quality of life.
The performance moreover visually displays the story we have heard too many times from each reading and the value that we must start to place on the river that is being polluted.