Theatre As a Form of Activism
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
THEATRICAL COLLOQUIA DOI number 10.2478/tco-2020-0029 Theatre As A Form Of Activism Carmen HĂISAN Abstract: Arts can provide an alternative to violence and the opportunity to give a voice to the oppressed. Music, arts and theatre can become acts of defiance, a form of resistance, or a simple bridge of reconciliation. Creativity in arts give the community the opportunity to exceed certain boundaries and urges the individuals to see the potential in them and in the whole world. We will analize, therefore, the relations between theatre and war, trying to analize contemporary examples of global conflict zones: theatrical protests against war, performances by refugees and the impact of these in education. Using theatre as a form of awareness of human rights, we are not educating only the audience – we also lead to public awareness, empathy and people-to-people relationships. The vision of a theatre that connects thoughts, feelings and actions represents a powerfull symbol of a democratic society. Theatre, as the most public of art forms, embracing the other arts under it’s hat, can become a form of remodeling a society, using our imagination. Key words: activism, resistance, puppet theatre, society, political theatre Theatre is a weapon. A very efficient weapon. But the theatre can equally be, a weapon for release. For this, it is necessary to create the appropriate theatre forms. (Augusto Boal) We are all aware of certain aspects of life that require our attention, whether they are local or global issues - such as poverty, corruption, environment, racism, homophobia, etc. But we should be aware that we, as individuals, have an undeniable power when we access the knowledge we best control and that we cannot (in any way) have an existence separated from the PhD student, Faculty of Theatre, George Enescu National University of Arts, Iași 178 THEATRICAL COLLOQUIA others – the human race is totally interdependent. However solitary a person may be defined, whether he or she wants to, is part of a cultural, legislative, political, philosophical, educational system; in a word, we belong to a system that provides us with certain resources, through which we can live. Among the worries that have come to me, I often find questions such as: what is our contribution to society - beyond the jobs that we have; we offer enough to society?; how important is for us the concept of activism? When we talk about activism, people tend to associate this word with the notion of protest, and this (totally wrong) approach to the term may lead us to the fact that it is not an action that necessarily defines us (depending on the daily social practices of each individual); we did not participate in protests, we are not activists! Absolutely not true. We are all active, to some extent, in creating and supporting the system we live in: sometimes by directly supporting it, and simply by agreeing with it, otherwise, by active opposition, because we do not agree with it, by building and organizing alternative versions that we consider to be better; but we also note another form - both important and ironic, at the same time - non-activism; we are active even when we totally ignore certain ideas, because at that time we give others the power to decide for us. We are increasingly hearing the idea that "together we can change the world." But how effective is this change taking place, I think it is also about the strengths of every activist. I am a strong supporter of the idea that a contribution is all the more powerful as each individual would use the knowledge he best possesses, the knowledge for which he has been trained, and for a passion and internal anxiety, he would use the knowledge based on the activities he is taking and mastering best and for which they are specialized. Artists are often considered to be dreamers, people who live a relaxed life and feed themselves through beauty; but art has no less impact than the other instruments to fight the changes that we want to bring to society. Diego Riviera considered that: All forms of art are propaganda. The only difference is the kind of propaganda. Since art is essential to people's life, it cannot belong to just some of us. Art is a universal language and belongs to all mankind […] Every 179 THEATRICAL COLLOQUIA powerful artist was a propagandist. I want to be a propagandist and nothing else. I want to use art as a weapon.1 This last sentence intrigued me, in a pleasant way, because I feel a bittersweet tone in this association of art and weapon terms, an association which more leads me to think of a pacifist attitude rather than a hate one. The activism through art embodies a way in which people take a new perspective on how social change should happen. In modern times, the dominant modes of action in a conflictual context are the confrontation, the demonstration, and the protest. The supposition behind these ways of reaction is that conflicts of interest can only be combated by battles and opposing positions. But, through artistic manifests, a new way of reaction is adopted, based on the human capacity to create, play a role, and simply play. The premise is that people - even when their political, economic, and social interests are in conflict - can create new relationships, activities, or new ways of moving forward together. The arts can provide an alternative to violence, represent an opportunity for the oppressed to express. Music, fine arts, and theatre can thus become acts of defiance, forms of resistance, or simply bridges of reconciliation. Creativity in art gives the communities the opportunity to overcome certain limits and encourages the awareness of the potential that we have in us as individuals. Art is meant to provoke reactions of all the way that the artist Banksy wrote on one of the graffiti: „Art should comfort the disturbed and disturb the comfortable”2. Theatre, the most visible form of art, in the context in which it includes all the other arts, is an instrument with huge adaptability, which can always be shaped according to the social and cultural vision in which it is consumed. Using the theatre as a way of addressing problems in society, we not only educate but challenge public awareness, empathy, and the creation of interpersonal connections. The vision of a theatre that brings together thoughts, feelings and actions is a powerful symbol of a democratic society. Theatre can become a form by which we reshape a society, using imagination. In fact, there is a long history when seeing the theatre as a form of activism; the actors have always been formers of opinions. We will mention a few, which we consider to be emblematic of the theatre phenomenon as a form of activism. 1https://retrofire.livejournal.com/1054929.html 2 https://scholarworks.umt.edu/etd/4476/(art should create a comfortable state to people who are upset and disturb those who are in the comfort zone), Trans. n. 180 THEATRICAL COLLOQUIA 1. Augusto Boal – Theatre of oppressed Boal pursued a clear objective, namely, to turn the viewer into an actor. Of course, we should not associate the word “viewer” only with a terminology significance that is related to the art field, but also with a political symbol. Boal believes that when you become an actor in a dramatic convention, you can also become a political actor in everyday life. In his view, "nothing is alien to politics, because nothing is alien to the superior art that governs the relations between people."3 The Theatre of the Oppressed was built on the idea that anyone who has the necessary data to play in the "theatre" of their own lives and that at some point, anyone would be or was both an actor and a viewer, from here resulting the spec-actor concept. Boal relies on the idea that when we are passive spectators, we just project personal initiative in the actions of the characters we identify with. The Catharsis thus becomes a substitute for the action, the desire to have an active intervention being satisfied by the resolution of the conflict on the stage. Boal claims that this catharsis will only promote a fixed vision, left only at the level of general awareness, without really energizing the people. Without challenging the importance of an active participation in a show, however, we reserve the right to question this radical theory, considering that an approach from outside is no less important than a participatory one. Theatre need not necessarily provide quick solutions; and the questions that remain in our consciousness after we leave the show room, the anxiety, the impulse to think further, the empathy, can access future answers. In fact, in Boal's vision we also find contradictory ideas: What the Poetry of the Oppressed proposes is the action itself. The viewer does not transfer powers to the character to act or to think in his place; on the contrary, he takes himself a role as a protagonist, transforms the dramatic action originally proposed, tries various possible solutions, debates transformative projects; in short, the viewer rehearses, preparing for a real action. So, the viewer becomes spec-actor, but the change of perspective is for himself, for the rest of the audience, becoming again mere protagonists. In any case, we consider that in the Theatre of the Oppressed it is not necessarily about the idea that an experience must have an immediate effect, but about the power 3 Boal, Augusto - Teatrul oprimaţilor şi alte poetici politice (Theater of the oppressed and other political poetics); Translation: Georgiana Barbulescu; Foreword: George Banu; Afterword: Julián Boal, Editura Nemira, Bucharest, 2017, page 27 181 THEATRICAL COLLOQUIA you have in a certain situation and that an external opinion can better structure the possibilities of resolving a conflict, the possibilities the people inside don't always see, maybe because of subjectivity in a certain situation or because they are trapped in repetitive scenarios where they need to find quick solutions.