Theater of the Oppressed Brayson Williams

“I believe that all the truly revolutionary theatrical groups should transfer to the people the means of production in the theater so that the people themselves may utilize the. The theater is a weapon, and it is the people who should wield it.”

When one compares this style of theater with Brechtian theater I do not take that comment lightly. This comparison was EXTREMELY helpful for my understanding of this style because I have done my fair share of research into the Brecht style of theater. After reading the article I do see many correlations. Although Brecht never outright stated that his goal was to change the people or even make theater for the people. You can definitely see the influence that his work had. This idea of creating theater whilst the audience gives influence isn’t an entirely lost in today's culture and even vaguely reminds me of how many of our improve troops are set up today. By no means do I mean to sound like I am putting “theater of the oppressed” on the same level as improve. I am merely saying there seems to be a hint of influence/similar idea. The concept that the audience acts with the actors immediately causes for immediate engagement that could spur this behavior to go beyond this experience as well.

It makes me wonder how this style of theater could work today when we have such a culture of “followers” and people that would rather sit and watch.

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00940771.2014.11461899

“The Joker system is used both in conventional plays and participatory methods as a way to disrupt fixed roles. The Joker – named after the card of the same name (and not implying humour) – can substitute for actors for purposes such as explanation and disruption, or to do magical things that other actors cannot.”

https://ceasefiremagazine.co.uk/augusto-boal-games-techniques/

Comments

Geneva Heron Assignments

Assignment: Aesthetic Evangelists - Due 1/30 Three key ideas in the text that resonate with me: The first is the idea of the "new public art," or what we would call "community engaged art." The article discusses the transition from art displayed in public sites to community based projects that have the goal of collaboration and focus more on the process than the end result/outcome. This intrigues me because before this class I was honestly very unaware of this form of art-making and its growing prevalence. Another idea that resonates with me is when the author talked about community based public art of today drawing on the urban reform rhetoric of the past both consciously and subconsciously. This stood out because it's an old adage that history repeats itself and I think it's interesting that the times we live in now call for a callback to this type of work and a more curious examination of what this can do for people and their communities. Th...

Jeremy Griffith - The Roof is on Fire

1. CONTEXT: What were the circumstances that framed the meaning and process of this project? There are many minority teens in low-income, low-opportunity areas who have unheard voices. Their self-esteem isn't cultivated and all of their portrayal in the media is negative. 2. CONTENT: What was the issue, need, idea or opportunity addressed by this project? Teen voices were unheard, opinions of them were based on negative media stereotypes, and many of them had very poor self-esteem. 3: FORM: What is the medium that was used to address or embody the content? Immersive theatre in the form of car-conversations that audience members could eavesdrop on. 4. STAKEHOLDERS: Which are the groups or individuals that were invested in the project? The teenagers were very invested because of their desire to free their voices. The adults who helped were invested because they wanted to help these kids start to change the narrative. And the d...

Arts and Community Engagement 2018

Search This Blog