Survey
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Warwick University PG Conference May 2014 Forum Theatre: Performance as Research? Julie Hudson Materials used with the permission of Cardboard Citizens.. Photo 6th Mar 2014 Warwick Research Interests • Thesis – The environment on stage; the impact and efficacy of ecotheatre. – Event research – audience reception research. – Identifying theatre productions that successfully shift the environmental perspective of their audiences and communities. (c.f. Kershaw 1992) • Cardboard Citizens Project – Theatre seeking to shift perspectives on homelessness. – Forum theatre - Performance as Research – Opportunity to test out the idea of efficacy in another context. Glasshouse by Kate Tempest • Rhea, Jess, Paul. Sundry small characters played by Kathryn Bond. • In a nutshell: – Jess is 18, living with her mum and step-dad in his house. Rhea wants to follow her dream instead of washing up and working on the checkout. Paul’s struggling at work. Jess is trying to find herself (and a job). – Two fights (Jess/girlfriend, and Jess/Paul/Rhea). – Downward spiral – homelessness, job loss, baby. www.cardboardcitizens.org.uk Forum Theatre as Audience Reception Research? • Watch the play. • Decide whose perspective you want to explore. • Offer solutions. “Where might you have done things differently?” (Joker). • Actors replay a scene, you shout STOP. • Opposite the relevant actor, you, the spectactor, play out how you think it should have gone. Roundhouse London, 15th May 2014 Terminology: Joker - forum theatre facilitator. Spectactor – spectator-turned-actor. Cast Johanna Allitt – Rhea Kathryn Bond – Rachel, Clint, Reg, Pickles, Jackie. Michelle Cobb- Jess Andre Skeete – Paul Adrian Jackson - Joker Terry O’Leary - Joker Kerry Norridge Understudy St. Helens Central Library, 24th April Theatre Event as Dialogue • ‘When spectators observe the actors, they actively participate in an event, the theatrical performance […] as a co-creative participant.’ (Sauter, 2010) • ‘Conventional theatre is governed by an intransitive relationship, in that everything travels from stage to auditorium. […] Lest the magic of the stage be shattered, silence is required. In the theatre of the oppressed, by contrast, dialogue is created. This theatre asks its audience questions and expects answers.’ (Boal, 1998). Feedback Form as Audience Engagement • ‘I understood the play better after the forum. If I hadn’t experienced the forum, I would never have wanted to fill in a four-page feedback form. But, the feedback form took me on another step in my understanding of the play.’ (Spectator, in the bar, Battersea Arts Centre, March 2014). Listening-to-the-Audience-as-Research The Curve. April 2014. Corby, January 2014 Research Questions • Research questions – What impact did the play have? How did the audience react to it? – Is there a relationship between the reaction to the play and the reaction to the forum? – Co-creative participation – Evidence of Impact? • Methodologies – The audience survey – What did the audience think? – Documenting audience reactions on the spot. – Observing spectacular spectactorial performativity! Size Seems to Matter for Audience Surveys Response rate Performances Audience Number The Word Cloud Game • Did the audience take a view on one of the three main characters? – Word selection: prominent words or phrases from the text (e.g. ‘out of control’), or about the behaviour seen in the play (e.g. ‘in denial’). – Instruction on the form: “Choose one character and think about how they came across to you. Draw a circle round any word you agree with. Cross out anything you disagree with.” Methodology note: Semantic differentials rejected as less likely GENTLE than a game to engage the audience. SELFISH CONTROLLING LOVING DOING THE RIGHT THING CARING IMPULSIVE DISHONEST UNLUCKY STUPID JEALOUS OUT-OF-CONTROL DESTRUCTIVE CONFUSED TRAPPED BULLY SELF-INDULGENT IN THE WRONG STRESSED VIOLENT VICTIM SUPPORTIVE RUNNING IN CIRCLES IN DENIAL IN THE RIGHT MISUNDERSTOOD REASONABLE DESERVES BETTER UNCARING AFFECTIONATE Cloud Sparks Creativity A shift in perspective, greater complexity after the forum. Evidence that the play , and then the forum, had an impact on this spectator. Hypothetical Responses Playing Games: What the Audience Did Audience Profiling Characters RHEA PAUL 70% 70% 60% 60% 50% 50% 40% 40% 30% 30% 20% 20% 10% 10% 0% 0% The Forum – Feedback Forms • You can have the conversation you normally have after the play with the audience. • After the forum I understood Paul better. I could empathise with him more. • Before the forum I thought Rhea was powerless. After the forum I realised she had agency. • After the forum I could see how hard it was to change the outcome for Jess. Listening to the Audience • Evidence of audience engagement? – In the play: Laughter (singly, in groups, in ripples). Sighs. Clapping/applause. Cheers. Whoops. Other noises: sssss, ooooo, arrgg, yuk, oh no!, foot-banging – In the forum: Laughter (singly, in groups, in ripples). Sighs. Clapping/applause. Cheers. Whoops. Other noises: sssss, ooooo, arrgg, yuk, oh no!, foot-banging and, the “buzz” (audience in discussion). • All plays are different. – Benchmarking the sound-points in the play. Idea inspired by the Meyerhold notation. Counting Noises: Sounds per Spectator Minute • A. Single noise. 1, 2, 3 etc. • B. Group noise. 1, 2, 3, 0.1, 0.2, 0.3 * the number in the audience. • C. The spectator minute. Duration of the play or (as appropriate) the forum in minutes * the number in the audience = total spectator minutes. • D. Total number of noises = A + B (for play, forum). • Intensity of reaction = D/C for each of the play and the forum. 39 Performances Play Accounts for 31% of Variance in Forum Noise 25 Performances (No Theatres) Play Accounts for 38% of Variance in Forum Noise 21 Performances (No Theatres or HMPs) Play Accounts for 51% of Variance in Forum Noise Re-Writing the Play (1) • "Jess" : Hopping theatrically around holding onto her fist (laughs from the audience). • Paul: You think you're a big woman now? • "Jess": No, but you thought I was last night. (Oooo from the audience). Mum. Sorry. I didn't want to tell you this way. I got home and Paul came back, and found me crying in the dark. He was trying to make me feel better. • Paul: It's true so far. • "Jess": And we kissed. • Paul: This is not true and you f***ing hit me. (Oooo from the audience). • Rhea: Why would you say this, Jess? • Paul: (getting louder and louder) She punched me and now I'm supposed to have kissed her. • Joker: Is this progress? • Audience: No. We had a bit of fun but it didn't get us anywhere. She needs to get her mum on her own. • Source: Notes, Leicester Curve performance. Re-Writing the Play (2) • "Paul": What we 'avin? Curry'll do me. I've got something I need to talk about. Something's happened. I've been made redundant. But don't worry. I'll get some redundancy, about three grand, and I'll start a little business. • Rhea: That's wonderful my darling. • "Paul": And there's something else. You know I smoke a spliff now and again? (Pause. Puts his hands over his face). You know, I don't think I can tell you? • Rhea: Tell me what? What? Is it cancer? • "Paul": I'm not gonna die. That would be much worse. As I tell you this I want you to think about how much worse that would be. • Rhea: WHAT. • "Paul": I'm not gonna die but I kissed Jess by accident. • Rhea: You kissed my daughter. • "Paul": She was upset, crying and everything. It was an accident. • (Rhea whacks him with a tea towel, and moves away from him to hug Jess). • Joker: (raises her eyebrows at the spectactor). • Spectactor/Paul hybrid?: I thought I'd clear the air. What I wanna do is say sorry to Jess. Source: Notes, HMP Wandsworth performance. Evidence of Impact and Efficacy? • At the most basic: feedback form response-rate (based on Stage Manager’s show reports, data not final). • Word-cloud as evidence that the audience is taking a view on the characters, and that view changes with the forum. • Other feedback form questions e.g. about what made spectactors come to the stage. • Sound-point notation and regression as evidence of an active dynamic between the play and the forum. • The content of forum interventions as evidence that people empathised with actors and characters, that the play connected to people’s lives. Primary Materials Venues Visited by the Citz Glass House 2014 Feedback Forms Type of Venue Audience Performances Percent Hostel or Related Specialist Services 116 71 41 37 52 31% 23% 39% 45% 27% 59% 1066 317 13 23% 10 18% -------------- 1287 838 2125 25% Theatre for Hostels 6 11% Youth (16-25) Foyer or YMCA 7 13% Youth Theatres 3 5% 3 5% -------------- TOTAL SPECIALIST 33 London Mainstream Theatres -------------- Regional Mainstream Theatres TOTAL GENERALIST Overall Total --------------------------- Response RtePerformances 378 310 105 83 190 14 Prisons Forms Observer 23 41% -------------- 56 100% ========= ========= Percent 14 29% 4 8% 5 10% 2 4% 3 6% -------------- 30% 28 58% 302 187 23% 22% 10 21% 10 21% -------------- 489 23% -------------- -------------- -------------- -------------- 3191 806 ================== 25% -------------- --------------------------- ========= 20 48 42% -------------- 100% ========= Source: Audience numbers from Stage Manager’s show report therefore still an estimate. Bibliography • Boal, Augusto (2008). The Theatre of the Oppressed (London: Pluto Press). • Boal, Augusto (1998). Legislative Theatre. Using Performance to Make Politics. Translated by Adrian Jackson (1998), Loc 556. • Kershaw, Baz (1992). The Politics of Performance (London and New York: Routledge). • Sauter, Willmar (2010) ‘Thirty Years of Reception Studies: Empirical, Methodological and Theoretical Advances’, in About Performance 10, pp. 241-63. • Tempest, Kate (2013). Glasshouse (Unpublished manuscript). Creative Team Production Team Writer – Kate Tempest Director – Adrian Jackson Designers – Stephanie Johns and Hannah Jerrom Sound Design and Composition – Arun Ghosh Additional Sound Design – Giles Ashong Lighting Design – Peter Higton Fight Direction – Austin Spangler Voice Coach – Tim Charrington. Tour Producers: Sarah Sansom (Time Won’t Wait). Rowan Rutter. Production Manager – Bernd Fauler. Stage Manager – Alix Lencz Marketing and Press Petia Tzanova. Alix Lencz setting up in St. Helens Central Libary.