In this key pre election moment this is an invitation to come together at Toynbee Studios, London E1 6AB on the 6th of April at 7:30pm to discuss and engage with the important issues raised by this question.
Dear All,
Through a series of annual and monthly events called ‘Devoted and Disgruntled’ (or D&D), hosted by Improbable, a large network of people from the performing arts have been building a diverse and ever-expanding community. From the annual gathering this January, attended by several hundred people, has come a new groundswell of energy and discussion around the issues that will be important in a general election debate and beyond.
As a direct result of this, and of the activities of associated organisations such as Jericho House, in the past few weeks there have been discussions online and in various newspapers about the commitment of each party to the arts. These have led, for example, to Ed Vaizey, Tory spokesman for the arts, committing to the maintenance of funding to the arts; to the Lib Dems making a matching commitment; and to The Culture Show on the 4th of March, in which each party was quizzed on their arts policies by Alan Yentob.
From the last D&D meeting at the start of this month emerged the desire to widen this debate to include politicians, audiences and other stakeholders, to engage with these questions in a way that involves genuine and constructive debate.
This then is an invitation from this community to join in these discussions in a style where everybody will be able both to listen and to have their voice heard. The evening will run using Open Space technology which gives anyone the chance to propose a starting point for discussion, then take part in one of these conversations or flit between them all.
If any of these questions concern you, come along:
Do artists care about politics?
Do politicians care about the arts?
What do performing artists and politicians have in common?
As a politician, would you like the opportunity to listen and be listened to? To meet the community who cares about these issues?
As an artist, what would make a difference and win your vote?
As an audience member, what would win your vote? What are your concerns?
What will it be like to be involved in the performing arts after this election?
How can the cultural Olympiad actually leave the culture enriched?
What matters to you most about the future of the performing arts in this country?
It would in particular be terrific if policymakers and prospective ministers were to attend and to participate in a genuinely grassroots exchange of perspectives in an environment not dominated by the usual ‘us and them’ structure of staged panel debates.
We would, in short, love YOU to come and discuss and engage with these vital issues!
Hope to see you there,
Phelim McDermott and Improbable
Jonathan Holmes and Jericho House
DETAILS:
If you cannot attend but would like to be kept in touch email office at improbable.co.uk
The evening runs using Open Space technology which gives anyone the chance to propose a starting point for discussion, then take part in one of these conversations, flit between them all, or head to the bar.
This event is free! No need to book, just turn up on the night, but an RSVP is nice.
Artsadmin at Toynbee Studios: 28 Commercial Street | London | E1 6AB.
Map at: http://www.artsadmin.co.uk/contacts/ For further information or to discuss access requirements get in touch with Lucy at lucy at improbable.co.uk or at the office on 0207 240 4556. Hope to see you there.
Showing posts with label public. Show all posts
Showing posts with label public. Show all posts
Friday, 19 March 2010
Tuesday, 9 February 2010
112 Speaking Doubt to power: How could theatre play a greater role in policymaking?
Convenor:Joe Hallgarten, who carrying out some research you can read about on his blog - http://armslengthstate.blogspot.com/2010/01/speaking-doubt-to-power.html
Participants: A small and perfectly formed group of 10-15 A-list D and D-ers, most of whom stayed for most of the session.
Summary of discussion:
Apologies for this random collection of points – I was too busy listening and talking to make good notes!
• Title of session reminded one participant of the solo piece Nagging Doubt
• Artists as civic leaders – if you want public money, should you be expected to engage in the public realm
• Need for a broker between artists and policymakers
• Reminded of the book ‘the gift’
• Would need to ‘timetable’ arts experiences into the policymaking process
• Examples include Blackwatch being seen by the Scottish parliament, civil servants (mainly from DCMS) often coming ‘informally’ to see Barbican shows
• Performing Arts Lab (PAL) may offer a possible model – Susan Benn
• EU parliament has used theatre in this way
• Example of a minister (in an unnamed country) who, having seen Death of a Salesman, ‘went home and changed his country’s pension policy’.
• Matarasso – rural and community spaces
• Theatre needs to be ‘as simple as possible, no simpler’
• What about film? Why is The Wire having so much influence? Or is it?
• Theatre as collective experience
• Forum Theatre
• Kinnock etc influenced by Absence of War
• Maybe we should influence policy MAs etc – how do these emerging policy wonks engage in the arts?
• www.haringwoods.com
• Creating doubt needs space
• Policymaking used to scenario planning/modelling. Arts and theatre could play a role in this – even around dystopias, since scenarios don’t have to be realistic to be useful
• BAC – Coney Show and Home Sweet Home
• Concept of Timenos – From Senate
Participants: A small and perfectly formed group of 10-15 A-list D and D-ers, most of whom stayed for most of the session.
Summary of discussion:
Apologies for this random collection of points – I was too busy listening and talking to make good notes!
• Title of session reminded one participant of the solo piece Nagging Doubt
• Artists as civic leaders – if you want public money, should you be expected to engage in the public realm
• Need for a broker between artists and policymakers
• Reminded of the book ‘the gift’
• Would need to ‘timetable’ arts experiences into the policymaking process
• Examples include Blackwatch being seen by the Scottish parliament, civil servants (mainly from DCMS) often coming ‘informally’ to see Barbican shows
• Performing Arts Lab (PAL) may offer a possible model – Susan Benn
• EU parliament has used theatre in this way
• Example of a minister (in an unnamed country) who, having seen Death of a Salesman, ‘went home and changed his country’s pension policy’.
• Matarasso – rural and community spaces
• Theatre needs to be ‘as simple as possible, no simpler’
• What about film? Why is The Wire having so much influence? Or is it?
• Theatre as collective experience
• Forum Theatre
• Kinnock etc influenced by Absence of War
• Maybe we should influence policy MAs etc – how do these emerging policy wonks engage in the arts?
• www.haringwoods.com
• Creating doubt needs space
• Policymaking used to scenario planning/modelling. Arts and theatre could play a role in this – even around dystopias, since scenarios don’t have to be realistic to be useful
• BAC – Coney Show and Home Sweet Home
• Concept of Timenos – From Senate
Friday, 5 February 2010
105 Theatre how can we get as many supporters as football?
Convener: Leila Crerar
Participants: Nigel Richards, Josh Neicho, Hugh Hayes, Chris Wootton, Sam Sampson, Jen Pearcy- Edwards, Jo Turner, (didn’t get all names, if you attended could you add them)
Summary of discussion, conclusions and/or recommendations:
Q. How can we get the same support for theatre in this country as we do for football?
Q. Do we need to change the mold of theatre how can it be more competitive with Film/Sport/Television.
Q. How do we get bums on seats, without sacrificing our artist integrity?
Q. How to make shows without stars that pay for themselves?
The discussion:
We began by discussing football v theatre:
What is the thrill we get when watching our football team play? The unpredictability of not knowing whether they will Win or Loose. The live event.
It was suggested Football is shorter 90 min; there was a discussion about the length of theatre perhaps being too long. Most other forms of entertainment that Theatre competes with Film/TV/sport are shorter than the conventional theatre piece.
We talk about the culture of football in our society. Being bred into football from a young age. Meaning that you have an unbreakable loyalty towards a team. Wouldn’t it be great if theatre could achieve this?
Football has a permanence that theatre doesn’t have, live event sense of belonging, supporters for life. You know when you go to a match you might be the one to see that special goal, that you can talk about, a moment that can’t be repeated.
The group discussed that theatre could make more of the live element
Rehearsed in mistakes, the audience love to witness something going wrong, assurance that’s a live unique event.
It’s more human; it makes us feel like life.
Playful/improvisation, element of risk and danger. Theatre could imbrace this risk.
People should feel they could walk out of the theatre if they want to.
It’s a good thing if they do walk out, at least they are not passive, and they feel moved enough to walk out.
We use to have that sense of consistency in Rep where people would go and see the same actors in different parts. This creates a feeling of supporting the actors like you would a football team. You have a loyalty towards the cast and you invest more in the actor’s performance.
You have to build this over years; the National theatre’s main objective is selling seats. Complicity, Improbable, Frantic Assembly have built up an audience, because of the consistent quality of their work.
Quality matters
This led us onto a discussion on how to get new audiences, selling shows and marketing:
Marketing needs a new fashionable/modern slant, using the Internet more and maximizing the using of social networking.
Taking the irreverence out of theatre, it needs to be more inclusive.
Theatre needs to be more of an event, rather than a performance, not just sitting in silence in the dark. We talked about the rise of interactive/physical theatre, Punch Drunk with record ticket sales.
They also have a massive queue outside, great marketing tool, like a trendy nightclub. The overall experience of punch Drunk is very different to your average theatre experience/environment audience seem to be very responsive to this. As shown by the general increase of site-specific physical theatre.
Another area that could improve the theatre experience is making the theatre bar more accessible, turn it into somewhere you would want to hang out even if you weren’t going to the theatre. Like the Royal Court. This goes back to the point about theatre being inclusive. It’s important that the theatre building is not just the play. It has to be inclusive/welcoming for a younger audience.
The group then discussed Films v Theatre
With films you get a package. The audience knows what they’re going to get. Risk keeps people away from theatre; generally they don’t like the unknown. This is why we have seen a rise in Hollywood stars in the West end.
It’s about branding, you either need a star, a well-known play, or a reputation as a company, which has been built up over years.
Making films back into theatre,
Shawshank Redemption, On the Waterfront. For the theatre producers they already know that these films have a proven audience that they will be able to sell tickets to. This is the exact opposite of new writing. The group did discuss that the UK needed more new writing theatre's.
Ticket prices are too expensive, especially for a younger audience. The fact that ticket prices are so high means that a lot of theatre will always remain for the middle classes. This again went back to how exclusive theatre is at the moment.
To sum up, we need to offer a unique high quality experience that neither film, TV, Internet, nor football can satisfy.
Where’s society heading and what is it interested in?
We live in a time of Roman theatre rather than Greek, the sensory rather than the idea.
Physical theatre needs a good story line, merging story telling with spectacular, the middle ground between pure text and pure visual.
Having a good story is something people will always come back to.
Yes I can watch spectacular physical/incilation piece and be moved in the moment, but not take anything away with me.
Yes like a big Mac, emidiate fill, but now I would like to go to a proper restraunt please.
Circus de Soliel without language speaks to everyone, sensory experience, unique, they cry because the beautiful possibility transcends things. To be reminded of angels. And its and experience you cannot get anywhere else.
Saturated community, compatition for attention, how do you generate a buzz?
Theatre needs to be true to itself, not become an extention of tv, a language that is complete, what can language provide that nothing else can. To find a theatrical language that is in its owe right, we find a vocabulary that is not competing with television/film.
Participants: Nigel Richards, Josh Neicho, Hugh Hayes, Chris Wootton, Sam Sampson, Jen Pearcy- Edwards, Jo Turner, (didn’t get all names, if you attended could you add them)
Summary of discussion, conclusions and/or recommendations:
Q. How can we get the same support for theatre in this country as we do for football?
Q. Do we need to change the mold of theatre how can it be more competitive with Film/Sport/Television.
Q. How do we get bums on seats, without sacrificing our artist integrity?
Q. How to make shows without stars that pay for themselves?
The discussion:
We began by discussing football v theatre:
What is the thrill we get when watching our football team play? The unpredictability of not knowing whether they will Win or Loose. The live event.
It was suggested Football is shorter 90 min; there was a discussion about the length of theatre perhaps being too long. Most other forms of entertainment that Theatre competes with Film/TV/sport are shorter than the conventional theatre piece.
We talk about the culture of football in our society. Being bred into football from a young age. Meaning that you have an unbreakable loyalty towards a team. Wouldn’t it be great if theatre could achieve this?
Football has a permanence that theatre doesn’t have, live event sense of belonging, supporters for life. You know when you go to a match you might be the one to see that special goal, that you can talk about, a moment that can’t be repeated.
The group discussed that theatre could make more of the live element
Rehearsed in mistakes, the audience love to witness something going wrong, assurance that’s a live unique event.
It’s more human; it makes us feel like life.
Playful/improvisation, element of risk and danger. Theatre could imbrace this risk.
People should feel they could walk out of the theatre if they want to.
It’s a good thing if they do walk out, at least they are not passive, and they feel moved enough to walk out.
We use to have that sense of consistency in Rep where people would go and see the same actors in different parts. This creates a feeling of supporting the actors like you would a football team. You have a loyalty towards the cast and you invest more in the actor’s performance.
You have to build this over years; the National theatre’s main objective is selling seats. Complicity, Improbable, Frantic Assembly have built up an audience, because of the consistent quality of their work.
Quality matters
This led us onto a discussion on how to get new audiences, selling shows and marketing:
Marketing needs a new fashionable/modern slant, using the Internet more and maximizing the using of social networking.
Taking the irreverence out of theatre, it needs to be more inclusive.
Theatre needs to be more of an event, rather than a performance, not just sitting in silence in the dark. We talked about the rise of interactive/physical theatre, Punch Drunk with record ticket sales.
They also have a massive queue outside, great marketing tool, like a trendy nightclub. The overall experience of punch Drunk is very different to your average theatre experience/environment audience seem to be very responsive to this. As shown by the general increase of site-specific physical theatre.
Another area that could improve the theatre experience is making the theatre bar more accessible, turn it into somewhere you would want to hang out even if you weren’t going to the theatre. Like the Royal Court. This goes back to the point about theatre being inclusive. It’s important that the theatre building is not just the play. It has to be inclusive/welcoming for a younger audience.
The group then discussed Films v Theatre
With films you get a package. The audience knows what they’re going to get. Risk keeps people away from theatre; generally they don’t like the unknown. This is why we have seen a rise in Hollywood stars in the West end.
It’s about branding, you either need a star, a well-known play, or a reputation as a company, which has been built up over years.
Making films back into theatre,
Shawshank Redemption, On the Waterfront. For the theatre producers they already know that these films have a proven audience that they will be able to sell tickets to. This is the exact opposite of new writing. The group did discuss that the UK needed more new writing theatre's.
Ticket prices are too expensive, especially for a younger audience. The fact that ticket prices are so high means that a lot of theatre will always remain for the middle classes. This again went back to how exclusive theatre is at the moment.
To sum up, we need to offer a unique high quality experience that neither film, TV, Internet, nor football can satisfy.
Where’s society heading and what is it interested in?
We live in a time of Roman theatre rather than Greek, the sensory rather than the idea.
Physical theatre needs a good story line, merging story telling with spectacular, the middle ground between pure text and pure visual.
Having a good story is something people will always come back to.
Yes I can watch spectacular physical/incilation piece and be moved in the moment, but not take anything away with me.
Yes like a big Mac, emidiate fill, but now I would like to go to a proper restraunt please.
Circus de Soliel without language speaks to everyone, sensory experience, unique, they cry because the beautiful possibility transcends things. To be reminded of angels. And its and experience you cannot get anywhere else.
Saturated community, compatition for attention, how do you generate a buzz?
Theatre needs to be true to itself, not become an extention of tv, a language that is complete, what can language provide that nothing else can. To find a theatrical language that is in its owe right, we find a vocabulary that is not competing with television/film.
085 Process Vs Outcome when working with disadvantaged groups
Convener: ilana Winterstein
Participants: Simon Day, Sharon Matthews, Deepa Shastri, Aaron Minnigin, Marie Kenny, Jennifer Pearcy-Edwards, Katherine Maxwell-Cook, Jennifer Lunn, with other people dropping in and out
Summary of discussion, conclusions and/or recommendations:
What do we mean by disadvantaged? To encompass refugee/asylum seeker groups, disabled, youth out of education, etc.
Practitioners self-impose the pressure of having an ‘outcome’. Assumption by funders/ leaders/ participants that there will be some sort of formal outcome.
Does the process sometimes block the ability to create? Example referenced of sign language captioning in theatre creating a barrier for mainstream audiences. Does the process help or hinder the outcome?
Book suggested: Chris Johnson ‘House of Games’. Deals with process, outcomes, expectations, etc.
American company ‘ City At Peace’ run by Paul Griffin. Improve your process y aiming at the highest quality outcome. Process vs outcome = not mutually exclusive. It doesn’t need to be a fight between these.
Cultural nuances – involve a mediator.
Ensure that there are support networks in place. Be honest with yourself and the group about your skills/limitations – eg. Not a drama therapist but a drama practitioner. Be honest about the things you don’t know. Ask the group eg. Cultural norms/taboos.
Arts industry/art viewed as a commodity in the UK. Who is qualified to judge? If art is a form of expression then it becomes problematic to put a value on it. The notion of ‘good and bad’ for an outcome is problematic in itself. Should you force a process to ensure a ‘good’ end product?
Establish your own value systems at the start of a project. Allow participants to decide what is valuable, eg. Turning up regularly to rehearsals may be an achievement. Be specific to the group and group dynamics.
Identify your objectives from the start. For example the theatre project working with asylum seekers aims to give participants a sense of empowerment.
Companies who work with refugees: Ice and Fire. Creative Roots.
Create a safe space. Key to establishing confidence within a group.
Always important to have something to work towards. The process becomes more valuable if there is an end goal, eg. Performance, but be aware that performance can take many different forms eg. Video of rehearsal process.
Use Open Space. If there are language barriers could use objects to initiate open space.
Assume nothing. Make the implicit explicit. Start from the basics when beginning.
As a facilitator really listen to what the group wants, their specifics.
Be in the process and allow it to lead the way
Participants: Simon Day, Sharon Matthews, Deepa Shastri, Aaron Minnigin, Marie Kenny, Jennifer Pearcy-Edwards, Katherine Maxwell-Cook, Jennifer Lunn, with other people dropping in and out
Summary of discussion, conclusions and/or recommendations:
What do we mean by disadvantaged? To encompass refugee/asylum seeker groups, disabled, youth out of education, etc.
Practitioners self-impose the pressure of having an ‘outcome’. Assumption by funders/ leaders/ participants that there will be some sort of formal outcome.
Does the process sometimes block the ability to create? Example referenced of sign language captioning in theatre creating a barrier for mainstream audiences. Does the process help or hinder the outcome?
Book suggested: Chris Johnson ‘House of Games’. Deals with process, outcomes, expectations, etc.
American company ‘ City At Peace’ run by Paul Griffin. Improve your process y aiming at the highest quality outcome. Process vs outcome = not mutually exclusive. It doesn’t need to be a fight between these.
Cultural nuances – involve a mediator.
Ensure that there are support networks in place. Be honest with yourself and the group about your skills/limitations – eg. Not a drama therapist but a drama practitioner. Be honest about the things you don’t know. Ask the group eg. Cultural norms/taboos.
Arts industry/art viewed as a commodity in the UK. Who is qualified to judge? If art is a form of expression then it becomes problematic to put a value on it. The notion of ‘good and bad’ for an outcome is problematic in itself. Should you force a process to ensure a ‘good’ end product?
Establish your own value systems at the start of a project. Allow participants to decide what is valuable, eg. Turning up regularly to rehearsals may be an achievement. Be specific to the group and group dynamics.
Identify your objectives from the start. For example the theatre project working with asylum seekers aims to give participants a sense of empowerment.
Companies who work with refugees: Ice and Fire. Creative Roots.
Create a safe space. Key to establishing confidence within a group.
Always important to have something to work towards. The process becomes more valuable if there is an end goal, eg. Performance, but be aware that performance can take many different forms eg. Video of rehearsal process.
Use Open Space. If there are language barriers could use objects to initiate open space.
Assume nothing. Make the implicit explicit. Start from the basics when beginning.
As a facilitator really listen to what the group wants, their specifics.
Be in the process and allow it to lead the way
Wednesday, 3 February 2010
010 Politics and content in outdoor theatre
Convener: Bev Adams
Participants: Matt Burman, Paschale Stratton, Naomi O Kelly, Sophie Larsman, Laura Hayes, Adeel Akbar, Sharon Matthews, Dominze Campbell, Susanna Roland, Mark Morreau, Tom Brockelhurst, Agathe Pitarch, Tom Jackson, Joe Hallgarth, Robert Cook, Neil Heating, Natalie Querc, Roxanne Peak-Payne, Roisin Simpson
Summary of discussion, conclusions and/or recommendations:
Street Arts has its roots in the lampooning of power (Commedia), satire (Punch and Judy), and the protest happenings of 1960’s. In 21st century Britain, buskers have to be licensed and paid street performers have local authorities as their paymasters, either directly or indirectly through a festival producer. What opportunities are there for street artists to create contentious, inciteful and through provoking work?
Local Authorities are by nature political organisations striving to meet a host of political agendas– NI111 –participation in the arts targets, community cohesion agendas, street artists are used as pacifiers for disenfranchised communities and with their work used to provide the pretty picture in the promotion of UK towns as destinations. Street Arts delivers well against these agendas. Is it time for us to upset the status quo? Should we try and change the agenda from that of street artists meeting the targets to street artists creating work because of what we want to say or change.
Matt Burman from the Without Walls (a consortium of producers and promoters of outdoor arts) said that, whilst Without Walls was particularly attuned to the need to provide spectacle shows reaching audiences of 5,000 in the run up to the Olympics, not many street artists/companies were proposing work of “intellectual riguer” and there is a desire to see more work of this nature. How does spectacle engage the audience emotionally and intellectually? Group F (French Pyrotechnics company) mentioned that sometimes they strive to engage through colour – getting 10,000 people to look at the colour blue for 2 minutes. Sometimes it is about making the audience look at their surroundings afresh with imprints left by ephemeral street arts works in the audiences minds’ eye often permanently changes their perceptions of that place.
Paschale talked about her up and coming project based on Punch and Judy with an outcome of facilitating the audience/general public to write letters which are posted to the government. When asked if the company censored/vetted these letters she replied that the public where often polite as they were mindful of who they were writing to.
Another member of the group talked about theatre work on sustainability with small communities in India - street theatre as a form of local activism. How do the measure the ripple effect of something quite small and localized?
The work of the street theatre company, Desperate Men, on the River Severn was cited as being a particularly good example of small local meaningful projects extended to specific communities on the river. This project became about the saving of the sturgeon, a once native fish to those waters, and culminated in a large scale finale as a stand off between Caviar Magnates wanting to create a factory (jobs) and the River “Wardens” wanting the Sturgeon to repopulate the river. This type of political project is an extension of the local activism project. It is based in reality, takes into consideration the locale and the interests of the local people but is removed from the realms of agit prop by being presented as metaphor. The plight of 1 sturgeon and its battle to survive.
Public space is increasingly privatized, controlled and licensed and working in the public realms brings with it a number of restrictions and limitations. In order to make impact and draw focus away from the general hubbub of the public space, practitioners tend to work in broad brush strokes, using archetypes. Complex narrative and dialogue is not always effective. Narrative does not necessarily need to be the driver of the message. The emotive visual image can speak a thousand works and have great impact.
Who is out there and do they really want to hear your views?
With theatre (indoors or out) we should be creating a space where change is possible and where people are able to listen, but more importantly, they are able to engage.
What is the language of engagement? Tapping into to universals helps – food, shelter, the human element.
What do we have to protest about? There is currently no political focus but a need for new social, economic and political structures. Where is the vision. Should we start a political party of street performers?
Is it the role of the performer to present of an argument or a political standpoint? Being political does not mean being polemical. Telling people what you want to say (especially if they don’t want to hear it) is the politics of oppression. Politics as content in performance is problematic. Often such shows preach to the converted. Those shows that are successful in helping us to change the way we perceive the world are not successful because they present an argument. Often shows succeed in changing our perceptions through their expression of human interaction. The development of empathy for the plight of an individual is a deeply political act and opening an honest and generous line of communcaiton with the audience on a particular subject creates the possibility for dialogue and development of ideas beyond the life span of the performance - allowing the dialogue with the audience the opportunity to bear the fruit.
Participants: Matt Burman, Paschale Stratton, Naomi O Kelly, Sophie Larsman, Laura Hayes, Adeel Akbar, Sharon Matthews, Dominze Campbell, Susanna Roland, Mark Morreau, Tom Brockelhurst, Agathe Pitarch, Tom Jackson, Joe Hallgarth, Robert Cook, Neil Heating, Natalie Querc, Roxanne Peak-Payne, Roisin Simpson
Summary of discussion, conclusions and/or recommendations:
Street Arts has its roots in the lampooning of power (Commedia), satire (Punch and Judy), and the protest happenings of 1960’s. In 21st century Britain, buskers have to be licensed and paid street performers have local authorities as their paymasters, either directly or indirectly through a festival producer. What opportunities are there for street artists to create contentious, inciteful and through provoking work?
Local Authorities are by nature political organisations striving to meet a host of political agendas– NI111 –participation in the arts targets, community cohesion agendas, street artists are used as pacifiers for disenfranchised communities and with their work used to provide the pretty picture in the promotion of UK towns as destinations. Street Arts delivers well against these agendas. Is it time for us to upset the status quo? Should we try and change the agenda from that of street artists meeting the targets to street artists creating work because of what we want to say or change.
Matt Burman from the Without Walls (a consortium of producers and promoters of outdoor arts) said that, whilst Without Walls was particularly attuned to the need to provide spectacle shows reaching audiences of 5,000 in the run up to the Olympics, not many street artists/companies were proposing work of “intellectual riguer” and there is a desire to see more work of this nature. How does spectacle engage the audience emotionally and intellectually? Group F (French Pyrotechnics company) mentioned that sometimes they strive to engage through colour – getting 10,000 people to look at the colour blue for 2 minutes. Sometimes it is about making the audience look at their surroundings afresh with imprints left by ephemeral street arts works in the audiences minds’ eye often permanently changes their perceptions of that place.
Paschale talked about her up and coming project based on Punch and Judy with an outcome of facilitating the audience/general public to write letters which are posted to the government. When asked if the company censored/vetted these letters she replied that the public where often polite as they were mindful of who they were writing to.
Another member of the group talked about theatre work on sustainability with small communities in India - street theatre as a form of local activism. How do the measure the ripple effect of something quite small and localized?
The work of the street theatre company, Desperate Men, on the River Severn was cited as being a particularly good example of small local meaningful projects extended to specific communities on the river. This project became about the saving of the sturgeon, a once native fish to those waters, and culminated in a large scale finale as a stand off between Caviar Magnates wanting to create a factory (jobs) and the River “Wardens” wanting the Sturgeon to repopulate the river. This type of political project is an extension of the local activism project. It is based in reality, takes into consideration the locale and the interests of the local people but is removed from the realms of agit prop by being presented as metaphor. The plight of 1 sturgeon and its battle to survive.
Public space is increasingly privatized, controlled and licensed and working in the public realms brings with it a number of restrictions and limitations. In order to make impact and draw focus away from the general hubbub of the public space, practitioners tend to work in broad brush strokes, using archetypes. Complex narrative and dialogue is not always effective. Narrative does not necessarily need to be the driver of the message. The emotive visual image can speak a thousand works and have great impact.
Who is out there and do they really want to hear your views?
With theatre (indoors or out) we should be creating a space where change is possible and where people are able to listen, but more importantly, they are able to engage.
What is the language of engagement? Tapping into to universals helps – food, shelter, the human element.
What do we have to protest about? There is currently no political focus but a need for new social, economic and political structures. Where is the vision. Should we start a political party of street performers?
Is it the role of the performer to present of an argument or a political standpoint? Being political does not mean being polemical. Telling people what you want to say (especially if they don’t want to hear it) is the politics of oppression. Politics as content in performance is problematic. Often such shows preach to the converted. Those shows that are successful in helping us to change the way we perceive the world are not successful because they present an argument. Often shows succeed in changing our perceptions through their expression of human interaction. The development of empathy for the plight of an individual is a deeply political act and opening an honest and generous line of communcaiton with the audience on a particular subject creates the possibility for dialogue and development of ideas beyond the life span of the performance - allowing the dialogue with the audience the opportunity to bear the fruit.
Tuesday, 2 February 2010
001 Theatre Collaboration with Members of the Public
Convener: Michelle Read
Participants: Jessica Manley, Beccy Owen, Martin McLeon, Sara, Mark Trezone + 12 or so
Summary of discussion, conclusions and/or recommendations:
Starting Points: ‘Real People’, Stories, Themes, ‘Left-turns’, Degrees of Collaboration, Artist and Participant (as artist).
Many problems with verbatim theatre – Truth claims, issue of authenticity, didactic, manipulate audience into one particular POV.
ref Talking to Terrorists (Robin Soans),
The Laramie Project (Moises Kaufman), Tribunal plays.
What about people involved more in the process of making work; involved in workshops not just as source of stories / research? Even as possible performers ref: Rimini Protokoll in Berlin and Quarantine in Manchester.
Qu: Who is the audience? Who is the piece for?
For general audience.
Ethics: people’s ownership of their stories.
Clarity needed from outset.
Audience as participants: examples Jonathan Kay fooling work involves audience, Nic Greene Trilogy show. Coney Theatre – participatory and interactive work.
Comment that Trilogy uses its three hour length to engage the audience to participate. It was pointed out that the piece started out as a 40 min scratch piece and people still participated. “I joined in because I agreed with the show”. Idea of agreement.
Coney use game formats but also draw on dramaturgical ideas, objectives etc.
With audience participants it’s about helping them to ‘opt in’, getting them to ‘buy in’.
All process involves planning on how to collaborate – about making participants comfortable. What is the invitation that is being extended? Trust. Clarifying expectation? Safe environment rather than vacuum, ‘in the moment permission-giving’. Roles and titles can be barriers.
Comment on outreach work as an example of talking to members of public. ‘you’re supposed to know what you’re aiming for before you go in, but does this mean that you try to fit people to your schema, or if you don’t have an aim are you just collecting stories looking for ideas ‘and then I’m off’?
Participation can be a transformative experience for people.
How do you evaluate?
Not just looking for ‘stories’, may be philosophy of life, experience, area of expertise.
Participant has growing responsibility as their involvement deepens.
Do participants need emotional back-up?
Authorship? Down to degree of collaboration. Flexibility of collaboration.
Apologies to all involved, this was a more varied debate than represented here. I called the meeting and then tried to take notes, which didn’t work so well.
Michelle
Participants: Jessica Manley, Beccy Owen, Martin McLeon, Sara, Mark Trezone + 12 or so
Summary of discussion, conclusions and/or recommendations:
Starting Points: ‘Real People’, Stories, Themes, ‘Left-turns’, Degrees of Collaboration, Artist and Participant (as artist).
Many problems with verbatim theatre – Truth claims, issue of authenticity, didactic, manipulate audience into one particular POV.
ref Talking to Terrorists (Robin Soans),
The Laramie Project (Moises Kaufman), Tribunal plays.
What about people involved more in the process of making work; involved in workshops not just as source of stories / research? Even as possible performers ref: Rimini Protokoll in Berlin and Quarantine in Manchester.
Qu: Who is the audience? Who is the piece for?
For general audience.
Ethics: people’s ownership of their stories.
Clarity needed from outset.
Audience as participants: examples Jonathan Kay fooling work involves audience, Nic Greene Trilogy show. Coney Theatre – participatory and interactive work.
Comment that Trilogy uses its three hour length to engage the audience to participate. It was pointed out that the piece started out as a 40 min scratch piece and people still participated. “I joined in because I agreed with the show”. Idea of agreement.
Coney use game formats but also draw on dramaturgical ideas, objectives etc.
With audience participants it’s about helping them to ‘opt in’, getting them to ‘buy in’.
All process involves planning on how to collaborate – about making participants comfortable. What is the invitation that is being extended? Trust. Clarifying expectation? Safe environment rather than vacuum, ‘in the moment permission-giving’. Roles and titles can be barriers.
Comment on outreach work as an example of talking to members of public. ‘you’re supposed to know what you’re aiming for before you go in, but does this mean that you try to fit people to your schema, or if you don’t have an aim are you just collecting stories looking for ideas ‘and then I’m off’?
Participation can be a transformative experience for people.
How do you evaluate?
Not just looking for ‘stories’, may be philosophy of life, experience, area of expertise.
Participant has growing responsibility as their involvement deepens.
Do participants need emotional back-up?
Authorship? Down to degree of collaboration. Flexibility of collaboration.
Apologies to all involved, this was a more varied debate than represented here. I called the meeting and then tried to take notes, which didn’t work so well.
Michelle
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)