Augusto Boal brings the audience into the spotlight and creates a platform for them to engage freely in the discussion and dialogue as well as contribute to the event. It adds the spectator as a player in the game. Seeing the process of creating theater as a language in which one should be literate in is fundamental as an artist. Especially one trying to dissect an issue, the process or development of the piece is seen as the language of telling the story. Thus not being in any way passive but rather through inviting the audience in on the story, we place a responsibility on them to come forward and engage in the work. They are being asked to continue the dialogue or story in the moment as we perceive it. I do wonder if giving so much freedom and responsibility to the audience can sometimes backfire when a discussion turns into an argument or when it deters from the story? How is this dealt with?
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...
Comments
Post a Comment