I like the Theater of the Oppressed
methodology of the Joker. It sort of reminded me of El Pachuco in “Zoot Suit”,
like this narrator commenting on all the action. I thought the Joker
methodology was a good way to introduce a Theater of the Oppressed tactic into
the piece. A lot of the Theater of the Oppressed options that we read about
last week have an element of questioning within in them, but I think the Joker
was a good one to use with young people. It was nice and cool that she was able
to include the students’ actual questions into the play.
I did think her approach was rather
problematic. She highlighted the problem herself and posed the question, “To
whom and to what is the author beholden when writing a play for a specified
population that has been invited to contribute to the playwriting process?” My
problem was her answer, when she said that the students didn’t understand all
of the references or language in the play. I don’t think it’s wrong to let your
biases show, but I think the responsible thing to do would have been to
continue to educate the students and bring them even more into the play and the
process. Her approach directly contradicts the opening words of the play, “’Cause
when you’re on the street, it’s your street, When you’re in the school, it’s
your school…” It reminds me of a phrase my friend shared recently, “nothing for
us if not with us”, that is to say, you can’t say something is for someone’s
benefit without including them and their perspective.
Comments
Post a Comment