TOLD BY AN IDIOT OPEN SPACE
TOLD BY AN IDIOT ARE DEVELOPING THEIR PARTICIPATION PROGRAMME.
IF YOU WERE TOLD BY AN IDIOT, HOW WOULD YOU DO IT?
These are the issues that were raised during the open space, where a report has been typed up, the issue name links to the report.
Staff it with skill
What's wrong with the word education?
Why and what for?
Baby or Bathwater?
Engaging young people who do not want to be engaged in theatre “I aint doing drama – its gash!”
Where would you take it?
Trust your/their imagination
'We don't stop playing because we get old - we get old because we stop playing'/Working with the Elderly
International Exchange
Why would you want to be taught by an idiot?
Get them up and doing stuff
Open Rehearsals?
How to inspire/train/teach others to reach a wide audience?
Who should we participate/partner with?
Is a performer central to engaging with a young audience?
How can we get it wrong?
Make it real
Is process more important than product?
Friday 25 June 2010
Thursday 24 June 2010
Issue 12: Open Rehearsals?
Convener John Wright
Participants: Paul Hunter, Phelim McDermott, Dickie, Fay, John, Merce Ribot and my biggest apologies because didn’t write down the names. (We started as a small group of about 6 and we were between 10-14 people by the end of the session)
Summary of discussion
A. On John Wirght’s Open Rehearsals (OR) experience in France
1. OR Format:
- Tickets sold
- Questions would be asked to the audience
- There was a talk to the audience before hand
- Very popular
- Similar experience to putting on a show every night
2. Ideas/discussion/questions on this particular experience:
- Need of a structure to establish the rules of engagement.
- How can we get people to participate more? And Why?
- David class- work in progress
- Listen to the audience for feedback?
- Can it develop to a director/group of actors defending their ideas?
B. Discussion. Ideas, challenges and rewards of OR and further questions
- The need to find STRUCTURE to establish audience participation (when, how...) in a NON-ISSUE based OR experience. This in contrast to WorldWork issue based interventions.
- OP has the potential to transform relation between (switch roles?)
Performer – Writer – Director
And
Audience member - performer
- STRUCTURE understood as a trigger to create an develop work NOT as overall schedule for a final result (not to create expectation for an end product)
AND
STRUCURE depends and emerges from the inter-action with audience.
- CHALLENGES experienced when working with audience participation/OR:
1. The audience can become a judge
2. Actors can experience- pressure, freeze, nerves...
3. Touching/bring up difficult topics (at this point, a brief discussion was held about the boundaries between therapy and theatre)
- POSITIVE IMPUTS found on OR experiences:
1. OR can help unite/bound a theatre company.
2. “drunk on theatre”: audience participation creates another level of engagement with the performance, “makes you interested and enjoy theatre” in a different way (most important: that’s a comment from a non-theatre consumer)
3. OR, can it create a new form of theatre?
C. Relevant organizations using audience participation:
-WorldWork
Issue based + characters/role changing (interesting: ability to defend difficult ideas + difficult issues topics come up)
-Coney theatre Company
Role play.
Combination of SET UP RULES + individual choices: PERSONAL INPUT. The performance duration varies from group to group.
Participants: Paul Hunter, Phelim McDermott, Dickie, Fay, John, Merce Ribot and my biggest apologies because didn’t write down the names. (We started as a small group of about 6 and we were between 10-14 people by the end of the session)
Summary of discussion
A. On John Wirght’s Open Rehearsals (OR) experience in France
1. OR Format:
- Tickets sold
- Questions would be asked to the audience
- There was a talk to the audience before hand
- Very popular
- Similar experience to putting on a show every night
2. Ideas/discussion/questions on this particular experience:
- Need of a structure to establish the rules of engagement.
- How can we get people to participate more? And Why?
- David class- work in progress
- Listen to the audience for feedback?
- Can it develop to a director/group of actors defending their ideas?
B. Discussion. Ideas, challenges and rewards of OR and further questions
- The need to find STRUCTURE to establish audience participation (when, how...) in a NON-ISSUE based OR experience. This in contrast to WorldWork issue based interventions.
- OP has the potential to transform relation between (switch roles?)
Performer – Writer – Director
And
Audience member - performer
- STRUCTURE understood as a trigger to create an develop work NOT as overall schedule for a final result (not to create expectation for an end product)
AND
STRUCURE depends and emerges from the inter-action with audience.
- CHALLENGES experienced when working with audience participation/OR:
1. The audience can become a judge
2. Actors can experience- pressure, freeze, nerves...
3. Touching/bring up difficult topics (at this point, a brief discussion was held about the boundaries between therapy and theatre)
- POSITIVE IMPUTS found on OR experiences:
1. OR can help unite/bound a theatre company.
2. “drunk on theatre”: audience participation creates another level of engagement with the performance, “makes you interested and enjoy theatre” in a different way (most important: that’s a comment from a non-theatre consumer)
3. OR, can it create a new form of theatre?
C. Relevant organizations using audience participation:
-WorldWork
Issue based + characters/role changing (interesting: ability to defend difficult ideas + difficult issues topics come up)
-Coney theatre Company
Role play.
Combination of SET UP RULES + individual choices: PERSONAL INPUT. The performance duration varies from group to group.
Wednesday 23 June 2010
Issue 11: Get them up and doing stuff
Convener: Steve H
Participants: Hazel, Chris
Summary of discussion
Talked about how difficult it is for some people to do this – to accept that what works for one person does not necessarily work for another. Need for a safety net and a structure that has games that are easy/ that work combined with more challenging stuff both for participant and leader.
To challenge is vital as it is what we do to ourselves as performers and theatre makers – to deny them this would mean not having a understanding of this.
Participants: Hazel, Chris
Summary of discussion
Talked about how difficult it is for some people to do this – to accept that what works for one person does not necessarily work for another. Need for a safety net and a structure that has games that are easy/ that work combined with more challenging stuff both for participant and leader.
To challenge is vital as it is what we do to ourselves as performers and theatre makers – to deny them this would mean not having a understanding of this.
Issue 10: Why would you want to be taught by an idiot?
Convener: Lucia
Participants: Nick White, Paul, Jonathan Peck, Jacqui O’Hanlon
Summary of discussion
- It presents an opportunity for teachers/students to work in a new different way
- Told by an Idiot offers subversion and energy
- Told by an Idiot are not teachers, we are artists/theatremakers and this is our strength. We are not limited by boundaries, the work / connections will grow organically
- Told by an Idiot places great emphasis on the creativity of the performer, the individuals working in that room and this is empowering and liberating. There is no formula or sense of something being lifted from elsewhere
- “How stuff happens” – this is what teachers want to know and are interested in. How do theatre companies work?
- Told by an Idiot reignites the spark for people who may have become slightly tired, stale or out of practice
- The way the company works is relevant to the curriculum, to assessed coursework modules in devising. For younger students there are argument to be made in relation to creativity, literacy, listening and writing
- One of the A Level syllabus may list TBAI, this provides a natural selling point
- An intensive professional development programme for teachers, FE, lecturers would have huge appeal, teachers find it increasingly difficult to have opportunities to be inspired and work with professional practitioners and a staleness can creep into their approach. Working with teachers spreads the reach of the company far and wide
- What are the routes for allowing people into the company and feeling part of it, thinking about how it might best offer participation opportunities? Open rehearsal?
- Told by an Idiot’s way of working would possibly have appeal for deaf groups, people with mental health issues, learning difficulties but does the company want to be that specific?
Participants: Nick White, Paul, Jonathan Peck, Jacqui O’Hanlon
Summary of discussion
- It presents an opportunity for teachers/students to work in a new different way
- Told by an Idiot offers subversion and energy
- Told by an Idiot are not teachers, we are artists/theatremakers and this is our strength. We are not limited by boundaries, the work / connections will grow organically
- Told by an Idiot places great emphasis on the creativity of the performer, the individuals working in that room and this is empowering and liberating. There is no formula or sense of something being lifted from elsewhere
- “How stuff happens” – this is what teachers want to know and are interested in. How do theatre companies work?
- Told by an Idiot reignites the spark for people who may have become slightly tired, stale or out of practice
- The way the company works is relevant to the curriculum, to assessed coursework modules in devising. For younger students there are argument to be made in relation to creativity, literacy, listening and writing
- One of the A Level syllabus may list TBAI, this provides a natural selling point
- An intensive professional development programme for teachers, FE, lecturers would have huge appeal, teachers find it increasingly difficult to have opportunities to be inspired and work with professional practitioners and a staleness can creep into their approach. Working with teachers spreads the reach of the company far and wide
- What are the routes for allowing people into the company and feeling part of it, thinking about how it might best offer participation opportunities? Open rehearsal?
- Told by an Idiot’s way of working would possibly have appeal for deaf groups, people with mental health issues, learning difficulties but does the company want to be that specific?
Issue 9: International Exchange
Convener Patricia Rodriguez
Participants Jackie, Nick, Patricia, Phil, Lucy… (and more)
Summary of discussion
• First question was, does Told by an Idiot as a Company have enough international exposure to give continuity to a potential International Participation Exchange program? The conclusion to this idea was that Yes, they have enough connections achieved through their work to pursue it. In fact, they have already done it.
• What are the benefits of an International exchange?
Importing new ideas
Fresh air
Spreading the ethos of TBAI
• The spirit of the International Exchange relates to the idea that Theatre practitioners are becoming more mobile so theatre experiences can be shared in a much wider perspective, opening up a new world of inspiration.
• We tend to forget that relationship building is actually more important that a final product or creation. This is what exchange is all about.
• This type of program will fit entirely with TBAI spirit as their theatre practice goes beyond language.
• Creative learning should have an international perspective
• A potential theme could be the exchange of a particular cultural element (classical plays, a tradition, a story)
• It will also contribute to the promotion of English language through fun.
• It will promote Participation as a practice that is not usual in other countries.
• A project could be to link two groups/ schools/ theatre companies using TBAI as centre or coordinating point.
• It will be essential to contemplate digital platforms to communicate and promote the experiences (past/ present and future)
• This type of projects is very much linked to the 2012 ambition.
• A potential project was: what could happen if we mix in the same TBAI room a multicultural group?
• It would be interesting finding out which cultures and where there is a crucial need of participation activities.
Funding possibilities and references.
• It is always important to check with the host countries for funding opportunities.
• V.S.O Voluntary Services Overseas.
• European Union Cultural Department
• Arts council
• British Council
• Partnerships ( if it is the case) with American Universities.
• Visiting Arts is a good source of Information for International experiences
• Other:
• ARK (Education Charity Organisation)
• Webplay – Internet based Education Organisation that links education projects all over the world.
Participants Jackie, Nick, Patricia, Phil, Lucy… (and more)
Summary of discussion
• First question was, does Told by an Idiot as a Company have enough international exposure to give continuity to a potential International Participation Exchange program? The conclusion to this idea was that Yes, they have enough connections achieved through their work to pursue it. In fact, they have already done it.
• What are the benefits of an International exchange?
Importing new ideas
Fresh air
Spreading the ethos of TBAI
• The spirit of the International Exchange relates to the idea that Theatre practitioners are becoming more mobile so theatre experiences can be shared in a much wider perspective, opening up a new world of inspiration.
• We tend to forget that relationship building is actually more important that a final product or creation. This is what exchange is all about.
• This type of program will fit entirely with TBAI spirit as their theatre practice goes beyond language.
• Creative learning should have an international perspective
• A potential theme could be the exchange of a particular cultural element (classical plays, a tradition, a story)
• It will also contribute to the promotion of English language through fun.
• It will promote Participation as a practice that is not usual in other countries.
• A project could be to link two groups/ schools/ theatre companies using TBAI as centre or coordinating point.
• It will be essential to contemplate digital platforms to communicate and promote the experiences (past/ present and future)
• This type of projects is very much linked to the 2012 ambition.
• A potential project was: what could happen if we mix in the same TBAI room a multicultural group?
• It would be interesting finding out which cultures and where there is a crucial need of participation activities.
Funding possibilities and references.
• It is always important to check with the host countries for funding opportunities.
• V.S.O Voluntary Services Overseas.
• European Union Cultural Department
• Arts council
• British Council
• Partnerships ( if it is the case) with American Universities.
• Visiting Arts is a good source of Information for International experiences
• Other:
• ARK (Education Charity Organisation)
• Webplay – Internet based Education Organisation that links education projects all over the world.
Issue 8: 'We don't stop playing because we get old- we get old because we stop playing'/Working with the Elderly
Conveners:Paul Hunter & Jenny Byne
Participants: John Wright, Felix, Phelim, Sebastian Warrack, Dickie, Faye
Summary of discussion
➢ Working with older performers – how do we make this possible? How do you engage with them?
➢ Can you apply the same models of work and methodologies to work with the elderly as we do to work with young people?
➢ The elderly tend to be up for doing most things. The key issues tend to be more practical and logistical – it’s about providing the right conditions in terms of access requirements. E.g a warm space; making sure people can hear
➢ What works best is a whole range of experience and ages – inter-generational
➢ We can pigeonhole the elderly in terms of what we perceive they want to do. Actually, they can be much more bold and adventurous (when given the opportunity), then we might first anticipate
➢ An ‘elder’ can be classed as anyone who is 10 years older than you. It’s a relationship – it’s not a one way thing
➢ Phelim’s project - Honouring the Elders – it’s about celebrating people; not for what they did, but for what they are now
➢ Gender is also an issue – it can be much harder for women – female actresses
➢ It’s about generating an atmosphere where people feel they can be foolish
➢ Cross-fertilisation – community works that genuinely helps to inform the company’s work
➢ Bringing a whole mixture of people into one room is the ideal
➢ You can’t play if it’s not safe
➢ Leadership – empowerment through mentoring
➢ In order to work with harder to reach groups, you need to build in time to reach people and establish a relationship. You need to develop work over a long period of time to build trust. In order to do this, TBAI need to widen the pool of Idiots, otherwise there simply isn’t the manpower to support and sustain the work
➢ Doing something that has an impact, and then not following it up is an issue. It feels tokenistic
➢ Working with TBAI and Improbable is about re-connecting performers to why they originally wanted to become performers. Taking them out of the traditional hierarchy and rules of the rehearsal room. It can be re-energising and empowering – but also challenging and frightening
➢ Similarly for participants, it can be invigorating to be placed in a situation outside of society’s normal rules and structures – that can be a very freeing and healthy thing
➢ Playing safely is not necessarily a linear thing. You may need to see someone play before you know it’s safe
➢ It’s about non-judgment. Everyone in the room has something to offer
➢ The logistics and practicalities of a programme/project should appear effortless for the participants
➢ How do you create an environment where people feel safe on their own terms?
➢ Often, a shared obstacle can be good. It can be unifiying and can create a sense of trust
➢ Is everyone present on the same basis? Some may have chosen to be there, others may not have – the rules of engagement may be different
➢ It can both. It can be for people with knowledge and experience, and for people without any experience/prior interest. It can be about enrichment for those who are engaged, and it can be about enlightenment for those who have never been engaged before
➢ The opportunity to subvert our usual expectations - for performers to learn from non-performers
➢ There has to be fluid boundaries – and the performers in the company need to be prepared to work within this kind of fluid framework. E.g. a community group coming in mid-way into rehearsal. It’s about being brave. Performers have to buy into the model.
➢ Long-term, sustained relationships with schools can help to avoid a hit and run situation
➢ WHAT’S THE WORST THING THAT COULD HAPPEN?!?
Recommendations:
o Third Thought, First Framework – Peter Avary
o The Big Chair Dance
o Spare Tire – just received funding. Worth TBAI registering interest
o Magic Me – a company that runs projects with very young people and very old people. Worth TBAI speaking to
Participants: John Wright, Felix, Phelim, Sebastian Warrack, Dickie, Faye
Summary of discussion
➢ Working with older performers – how do we make this possible? How do you engage with them?
➢ Can you apply the same models of work and methodologies to work with the elderly as we do to work with young people?
➢ The elderly tend to be up for doing most things. The key issues tend to be more practical and logistical – it’s about providing the right conditions in terms of access requirements. E.g a warm space; making sure people can hear
➢ What works best is a whole range of experience and ages – inter-generational
➢ We can pigeonhole the elderly in terms of what we perceive they want to do. Actually, they can be much more bold and adventurous (when given the opportunity), then we might first anticipate
➢ An ‘elder’ can be classed as anyone who is 10 years older than you. It’s a relationship – it’s not a one way thing
➢ Phelim’s project - Honouring the Elders – it’s about celebrating people; not for what they did, but for what they are now
➢ Gender is also an issue – it can be much harder for women – female actresses
➢ It’s about generating an atmosphere where people feel they can be foolish
➢ Cross-fertilisation – community works that genuinely helps to inform the company’s work
➢ Bringing a whole mixture of people into one room is the ideal
➢ You can’t play if it’s not safe
➢ Leadership – empowerment through mentoring
➢ In order to work with harder to reach groups, you need to build in time to reach people and establish a relationship. You need to develop work over a long period of time to build trust. In order to do this, TBAI need to widen the pool of Idiots, otherwise there simply isn’t the manpower to support and sustain the work
➢ Doing something that has an impact, and then not following it up is an issue. It feels tokenistic
➢ Working with TBAI and Improbable is about re-connecting performers to why they originally wanted to become performers. Taking them out of the traditional hierarchy and rules of the rehearsal room. It can be re-energising and empowering – but also challenging and frightening
➢ Similarly for participants, it can be invigorating to be placed in a situation outside of society’s normal rules and structures – that can be a very freeing and healthy thing
➢ Playing safely is not necessarily a linear thing. You may need to see someone play before you know it’s safe
➢ It’s about non-judgment. Everyone in the room has something to offer
➢ The logistics and practicalities of a programme/project should appear effortless for the participants
➢ How do you create an environment where people feel safe on their own terms?
➢ Often, a shared obstacle can be good. It can be unifiying and can create a sense of trust
➢ Is everyone present on the same basis? Some may have chosen to be there, others may not have – the rules of engagement may be different
➢ It can both. It can be for people with knowledge and experience, and for people without any experience/prior interest. It can be about enrichment for those who are engaged, and it can be about enlightenment for those who have never been engaged before
➢ The opportunity to subvert our usual expectations - for performers to learn from non-performers
➢ There has to be fluid boundaries – and the performers in the company need to be prepared to work within this kind of fluid framework. E.g. a community group coming in mid-way into rehearsal. It’s about being brave. Performers have to buy into the model.
➢ Long-term, sustained relationships with schools can help to avoid a hit and run situation
➢ WHAT’S THE WORST THING THAT COULD HAPPEN?!?
Recommendations:
o Third Thought, First Framework – Peter Avary
o The Big Chair Dance
o Spare Tire – just received funding. Worth TBAI registering interest
o Magic Me – a company that runs projects with very young people and very old people. Worth TBAI speaking to
Issue 7: Trust your/their imagination
Convener Steve Harper
Participants: Sebastian
Summary of discussion
I wanted to challenge myself by questioning the controlling nature of being in charge. Wanting to make things work rather than trusting participants to come up with stuff.
- asked myself how I could give participants confidence to come up with their own ideas
found TRUST being a word that constantly came up – trusting and being trusted
by trusting – one gives confidence
- also understanding that trusting yourself is vital.
The person who does the wigs at war horse is doing psychology degree so I feel I should credit Di at this point.
She told me about various degrees of competence
Unconcious incompetence – not knowing you are bad at something
Conscious incompetence – knowing you are bad at something
Conscious competence – knowing you are good at something
Unconscious competence – being so good at something that you are not aware that it is a skill
Not sure how this relates to the point exactly but from a personal level – when I have worked with the idiots I feel I am doing stuff that I feel confident in whilst at the same time doing things that I have never done before.
Perhaps this might be a way of working.
Participants: Sebastian
Summary of discussion
I wanted to challenge myself by questioning the controlling nature of being in charge. Wanting to make things work rather than trusting participants to come up with stuff.
- asked myself how I could give participants confidence to come up with their own ideas
found TRUST being a word that constantly came up – trusting and being trusted
by trusting – one gives confidence
- also understanding that trusting yourself is vital.
The person who does the wigs at war horse is doing psychology degree so I feel I should credit Di at this point.
She told me about various degrees of competence
Unconcious incompetence – not knowing you are bad at something
Conscious incompetence – knowing you are bad at something
Conscious competence – knowing you are good at something
Unconscious competence – being so good at something that you are not aware that it is a skill
Not sure how this relates to the point exactly but from a personal level – when I have worked with the idiots I feel I am doing stuff that I feel confident in whilst at the same time doing things that I have never done before.
Perhaps this might be a way of working.
Issue 6: Where would you take it?
Convener: Phil Gunderson
Participants:Lucia, Sebastian, E15, Jonathon
Summary of discussion:
After discussing what the question meant – it could be where you do it or where it leads to , we decided that both were ok.
We are interested in working with performers (but not exclusively)
It is interesting to have mixed groups e.g. young/old
We want to embrace ideas of universality
You need time to build on the experiences – if you only do short sharp workshops you limit the experience.
So how do you go beyond this?
Perhaps the company come in at various points of the process? Pre- Beginning (help the project idea to form) beginning (facilitate ideas/skills) middle (mentor/encourage/shift), end (evaluate/validate/record) post-project (does the project now have a new life, perhaps one driven by the people themselves)
Example of the community theatre course at E15 is a great example of the way students work on projects with a longer life .... they do internships ad try to find companies to work with. Is there a possibility that TBAI could work with these students, perhaps as mentors or facilitators of something a bit larger. It was acknowledged that this would take a lot of setting up!
Another idea was for students (or participants) to come in and work separately on a production and create an integral yet distinct and piece of the show. So that they are working with it for real.
An example of this is Kneehigh/wildworks site specific show ‘A very old man with enormous wings’. In this show (which ran for about 3 hours at a disused harbour)
Featuring an international cast, musicians and a crane, there was an extended interval – ‘carnival interval’ in which you could refresh yourself whilst local community groups created a cabaret style entertainment that linked into the shows themes (the corrupting influences of materialism). Performers from the show wandered through the crowds (so you didn’t feel that it was a separate event. P.s. this show was brilliant
A further example that we discussed was the setting of the science museum where scientific principles are brought to life/demonstrated by interaction. Sometimes with machines and sometimes with live performance, but we thought there may be some underlying theories of interaction and participation here.
Session ended
Participants:Lucia, Sebastian, E15, Jonathon
Summary of discussion:
After discussing what the question meant – it could be where you do it or where it leads to , we decided that both were ok.
We are interested in working with performers (but not exclusively)
It is interesting to have mixed groups e.g. young/old
We want to embrace ideas of universality
You need time to build on the experiences – if you only do short sharp workshops you limit the experience.
So how do you go beyond this?
Perhaps the company come in at various points of the process? Pre- Beginning (help the project idea to form) beginning (facilitate ideas/skills) middle (mentor/encourage/shift), end (evaluate/validate/record) post-project (does the project now have a new life, perhaps one driven by the people themselves)
Example of the community theatre course at E15 is a great example of the way students work on projects with a longer life .... they do internships ad try to find companies to work with. Is there a possibility that TBAI could work with these students, perhaps as mentors or facilitators of something a bit larger. It was acknowledged that this would take a lot of setting up!
Another idea was for students (or participants) to come in and work separately on a production and create an integral yet distinct and piece of the show. So that they are working with it for real.
An example of this is Kneehigh/wildworks site specific show ‘A very old man with enormous wings’. In this show (which ran for about 3 hours at a disused harbour)
Featuring an international cast, musicians and a crane, there was an extended interval – ‘carnival interval’ in which you could refresh yourself whilst local community groups created a cabaret style entertainment that linked into the shows themes (the corrupting influences of materialism). Performers from the show wandered through the crowds (so you didn’t feel that it was a separate event. P.s. this show was brilliant
A further example that we discussed was the setting of the science museum where scientific principles are brought to life/demonstrated by interaction. Sometimes with machines and sometimes with live performance, but we thought there may be some underlying theories of interaction and participation here.
Session ended
Issue 5: Engaging young people who do not want to be engaged in theatre “I aint doing drama – its gash!”
Convener: Chris
Participants: Chris and Felix
Summary of discussion
Using TBAI’s anarchic and fun work ethos and style, young people will be able to see that theatre is something that can be made up of things they enjoy and that they don’t relate to theatre as they perceive it.
We realised quite quickly that TBAI would provide something that is not like other workshops and that this fact would be paramount to it being worthwhile for the company and the participants.
The question of if in one day a worthwhile impact can be made. We established that if perceptions are changed then the day has been worthwhile. Also if this workshop was followed by a show by TBAI to demonstrate that theatre does include these elements that have been enjoyed in the workshop. This may also increase fan base from a wide variety of backgrounds
In terms of how to engage the people, the idea of finding interests and linking them back through theatre showing that theatre can be something that directly applies to the young people and what they are going through in their lives. This could be in the format of improvisation around themes surrounding the young people or using games to find out about the young people and using the information to help devise work.
The ultimate question was what TBAI get out of engaging these young people. The workshops may lead to a long standing relationship between the young people and/or the organisations that represent the young people. However, this may not be the case in which the question regarding the validity of engaging comes into play for both the young people and the company.
Participants: Chris and Felix
Summary of discussion
Using TBAI’s anarchic and fun work ethos and style, young people will be able to see that theatre is something that can be made up of things they enjoy and that they don’t relate to theatre as they perceive it.
We realised quite quickly that TBAI would provide something that is not like other workshops and that this fact would be paramount to it being worthwhile for the company and the participants.
The question of if in one day a worthwhile impact can be made. We established that if perceptions are changed then the day has been worthwhile. Also if this workshop was followed by a show by TBAI to demonstrate that theatre does include these elements that have been enjoyed in the workshop. This may also increase fan base from a wide variety of backgrounds
In terms of how to engage the people, the idea of finding interests and linking them back through theatre showing that theatre can be something that directly applies to the young people and what they are going through in their lives. This could be in the format of improvisation around themes surrounding the young people or using games to find out about the young people and using the information to help devise work.
The ultimate question was what TBAI get out of engaging these young people. The workshops may lead to a long standing relationship between the young people and/or the organisations that represent the young people. However, this may not be the case in which the question regarding the validity of engaging comes into play for both the young people and the company.
Issue 4: Baby or Bathwater?
Convener: Dickie
Participants: Steve, Jonathan, Felix, Paul, Hazel & Bees
Summary of discussion
1. What works and what doesn’t work?
Looking at some of the workshops that some of us have taken in schools – what we felt was achieved by us as practitioners and what,(we felt) had been achieved by the participant.
Conclusions
- Lack of time to fully explore was often frustrating
- Sometimes we felt that the ‘one off’ workshops were imposed.
2. The time thing!
Would it ever be possible to have whole days working with a group of people?
Doing a ‘play’ in a day. Using similar starting point, idea that we have for an ‘Idiot’ Production. All departments too – costume, props, sound etc
A great many of the games that we explore in a workshop could be used to promote the work. People could choose what department they want to work in. People who are not comfortable with performing don’t have to suffer that agony. Use games to produce dialogue or if having problems. In fact, they go through a similar process to produce a ‘piece’ an ‘event’ as we all do when making a show.
COVER ALL BASES
Doesn’t necessarily have to link to current production but if it does can be used in some way as a ‘companion piece.’
Can tick curriculum boxes – ‘creative writing’ technology, problem solving, physical dexterity. It’s good that I don’t really know what is on the current curriculum!
People involved from all departments: Ian Johnstone (music) Naomi (Design) etc
3. Would it even be possible to have a longer working relationship with a group/school/college?
So then the work could evolve in tandem with a rehearsal period perhaps? Or just over a few weeks, months?
Building a relationship! Ongoing.
Possibly a workshop week could become an integral part of the rehearsal process – so it becomes a part of the whole process.
Participants: Steve, Jonathan, Felix, Paul, Hazel & Bees
Summary of discussion
1. What works and what doesn’t work?
Looking at some of the workshops that some of us have taken in schools – what we felt was achieved by us as practitioners and what,(we felt) had been achieved by the participant.
Conclusions
- Lack of time to fully explore was often frustrating
- Sometimes we felt that the ‘one off’ workshops were imposed.
2. The time thing!
Would it ever be possible to have whole days working with a group of people?
Doing a ‘play’ in a day. Using similar starting point, idea that we have for an ‘Idiot’ Production. All departments too – costume, props, sound etc
A great many of the games that we explore in a workshop could be used to promote the work. People could choose what department they want to work in. People who are not comfortable with performing don’t have to suffer that agony. Use games to produce dialogue or if having problems. In fact, they go through a similar process to produce a ‘piece’ an ‘event’ as we all do when making a show.
COVER ALL BASES
Doesn’t necessarily have to link to current production but if it does can be used in some way as a ‘companion piece.’
Can tick curriculum boxes – ‘creative writing’ technology, problem solving, physical dexterity. It’s good that I don’t really know what is on the current curriculum!
People involved from all departments: Ian Johnstone (music) Naomi (Design) etc
3. Would it even be possible to have a longer working relationship with a group/school/college?
So then the work could evolve in tandem with a rehearsal period perhaps? Or just over a few weeks, months?
Building a relationship! Ongoing.
Possibly a workshop week could become an integral part of the rehearsal process – so it becomes a part of the whole process.
Issue 3: Why and what for?
Convener: Sarah-Jane Rawlings
Participants: Michael Vale, Paul Hunter, Jenny Byrne, Phelim McDermott, Fay Munns, Hazel Coomber, Chris, Felix, Phil Gunderson, Lucia
Summary of discussion:
I think an interesting thing happened in this discussion – it started off being a serious why and what for? A real need that everyone expressed that TBAI needed to be clear what they were aiming for. Which left Paul desperately trying to come up with an answer, trying to come up with reasons for doing it – reasons that it felt he was being expected to give and with the rest of the group trying to help him out. But there were silences and nothing resonant was really said and it felt a little frustrating. ‘If this question can’t be answered – what are we doing here?’ kind of feeling was permeating the group – a slight sense of despair. There is already a demand for the TBAI one off workshop – if that’s what this is about – then what are we here for? But then it started to bend and shake and metamorphosised into something different altogether. The awkwardness suddenly gave way to true feeling and people started to talk about what it really should be – separate to trying to meet agendas or teach skills. Or TBAI trying to fit into a box that they think they should. It was probably kickstarted by Michael saying what is a participation programme – what does participation / education mean? We are not educationalists – we are theatre makers. Paul completely agrees with Michael and feels it is important it is not about teaching which is why they chose not to use the word education in the question.
Why?
Paul: ‘we want people to participate in the work of the company’ is one thing Paul said in answer to the probing. But what does this mean? “it’s something that should run through everything we do.” Is this getting to the why?
- Is it about getting younger people to know more about TBAI?
- Is it about building audiences?
- Is it about facilitating change?
- Is it about engaging with a wider audience?
- Is it about extending the way we engage with audiences?
- Is it about liberating / building confidence?
- Is it about provoking a group to celebrate live theatre?
- Is it about sharing a distinctiveness?
- Is it only relevant to theatre studies students?
Are there particular groups who would be interested in this programme? Does it matter? Does it matter suddenly seemed the crux of it all.
Or is it about fluidity – maybe there is no right answer – maybe it changes in each different moment and in every different situation.
Like our work can it work for a very diverse group of participants? In terms of age – a 5 year old, a 37 year old, an 81 year old, in terms of culture, ethnicity, experience etc etc Suddenly people got excited, thinking about working with a group that wasn’t the Btec students, or the year 7s from the Harringay school all who would come with a certain amount of expectation and boxes to be ticked.
Is this possible? Forget the three hour workshop attached to the show. Could it be like a flash mob – something so much more spontaneous – where would you find this random group of people – a festival, a train station etc if you went into a such a location where the participants were already there – you would remove the expectation that this was an introduction to a style of theatre, or had some worthy intention – it would just be an opportunity to work alongside a very diverse group of people.
If it is genuinely about people participating in the work of the company – then how can you bring them in – is it a week in rehearsals where they work with you. Is it a post show discussion that becomes more active?
There are models: it is production specific? Is it something more long term and sustainable? How about legacy? Is it about skills based learning?
It’s not about skill – it’s about playing. It’s about anarchy. Its about live theatre. It’s about an ensemble of performers. It’s about having fun and passing it on. We want audiences to be genuinely part of the fun and not just watching it. We can’t ever promise to teach anything.
This seemed to be the crux of it all – in that what seems to happen is that the two different worlds (which shouldn’t be different), the world of making the work and then working with people about and around the work get separated. How can we make it more porous? Surely the point of all of this, is about making the work more meaningful. It should inform our work. We are bored by post show chats and talking about our work. That doesn’t interest us. We do it because it fits into others structures / agendas. Buildings have their own conscious / unconscious agendas which we have to fit into and we bend and squash ourselves into those shapes. Somehow it must be about leap frogging this and letting the school, building have its agenda and we boldly have ours and then see if we can work together.
Jenny B (Barbican) felt this would work much better. There is an honesty to the approach. The barbican can take this and match it with their own sustainable pathway. Is having fun enough? is enough. Happenings and interventions outside of traditional learning channels are relished – something different and provocative and unexpected is happening. All results are intangible but these no less or more so than a more prescribed approach.
Suddenly the group seemed free of having to fit in to the box and the answer to why was ‘to have fun’ and to be ‘comfortable with chaos and mistakes’, ‘for everyone to be creative’. Surely the benefit of something like this could be huge – the experience can be taken and used in lots of different way. Being not specific is good. Fun unleashes potential and keeps the spirit going and enables you to be in touch with who you are. It creates a sense of possibility.
We are entering difficult times and do we not have to make an argument for pursuing this participatory work that is more than just having fun??
There is a key difference that needs to be boldly stood up to between training performers and providing an opportunity to be creative. And TBAI (as I understand it from this discussion) are not interested in training performers – they don’t feel they have anything to teach - they are much more excited to be facilitating creativity.
What ever it is, it needs to have a name that reflects this, set the tone, lowers the expectation! Does Taught by an Idiot do it? Probably does because the word taught is suitably subverted.
Is there an equivalent on line? An on line idiot share – You Tube. How to access fun on line.
So the discussion went far from where it started and everybody seemed to be excited about managing to struggle out of the barriers and strangleholds that questions like these often create. Whatever this programme turns out to be - it needs to be true to the TBAI spirit. It needs to be about having fun and maybe that is enough.
Participants: Michael Vale, Paul Hunter, Jenny Byrne, Phelim McDermott, Fay Munns, Hazel Coomber, Chris, Felix, Phil Gunderson, Lucia
Summary of discussion:
I think an interesting thing happened in this discussion – it started off being a serious why and what for? A real need that everyone expressed that TBAI needed to be clear what they were aiming for. Which left Paul desperately trying to come up with an answer, trying to come up with reasons for doing it – reasons that it felt he was being expected to give and with the rest of the group trying to help him out. But there were silences and nothing resonant was really said and it felt a little frustrating. ‘If this question can’t be answered – what are we doing here?’ kind of feeling was permeating the group – a slight sense of despair. There is already a demand for the TBAI one off workshop – if that’s what this is about – then what are we here for? But then it started to bend and shake and metamorphosised into something different altogether. The awkwardness suddenly gave way to true feeling and people started to talk about what it really should be – separate to trying to meet agendas or teach skills. Or TBAI trying to fit into a box that they think they should. It was probably kickstarted by Michael saying what is a participation programme – what does participation / education mean? We are not educationalists – we are theatre makers. Paul completely agrees with Michael and feels it is important it is not about teaching which is why they chose not to use the word education in the question.
Why?
Paul: ‘we want people to participate in the work of the company’ is one thing Paul said in answer to the probing. But what does this mean? “it’s something that should run through everything we do.” Is this getting to the why?
- Is it about getting younger people to know more about TBAI?
- Is it about building audiences?
- Is it about facilitating change?
- Is it about engaging with a wider audience?
- Is it about extending the way we engage with audiences?
- Is it about liberating / building confidence?
- Is it about provoking a group to celebrate live theatre?
- Is it about sharing a distinctiveness?
- Is it only relevant to theatre studies students?
Are there particular groups who would be interested in this programme? Does it matter? Does it matter suddenly seemed the crux of it all.
Or is it about fluidity – maybe there is no right answer – maybe it changes in each different moment and in every different situation.
Like our work can it work for a very diverse group of participants? In terms of age – a 5 year old, a 37 year old, an 81 year old, in terms of culture, ethnicity, experience etc etc Suddenly people got excited, thinking about working with a group that wasn’t the Btec students, or the year 7s from the Harringay school all who would come with a certain amount of expectation and boxes to be ticked.
Is this possible? Forget the three hour workshop attached to the show. Could it be like a flash mob – something so much more spontaneous – where would you find this random group of people – a festival, a train station etc if you went into a such a location where the participants were already there – you would remove the expectation that this was an introduction to a style of theatre, or had some worthy intention – it would just be an opportunity to work alongside a very diverse group of people.
If it is genuinely about people participating in the work of the company – then how can you bring them in – is it a week in rehearsals where they work with you. Is it a post show discussion that becomes more active?
There are models: it is production specific? Is it something more long term and sustainable? How about legacy? Is it about skills based learning?
It’s not about skill – it’s about playing. It’s about anarchy. Its about live theatre. It’s about an ensemble of performers. It’s about having fun and passing it on. We want audiences to be genuinely part of the fun and not just watching it. We can’t ever promise to teach anything.
This seemed to be the crux of it all – in that what seems to happen is that the two different worlds (which shouldn’t be different), the world of making the work and then working with people about and around the work get separated. How can we make it more porous? Surely the point of all of this, is about making the work more meaningful. It should inform our work. We are bored by post show chats and talking about our work. That doesn’t interest us. We do it because it fits into others structures / agendas. Buildings have their own conscious / unconscious agendas which we have to fit into and we bend and squash ourselves into those shapes. Somehow it must be about leap frogging this and letting the school, building have its agenda and we boldly have ours and then see if we can work together.
Jenny B (Barbican) felt this would work much better. There is an honesty to the approach. The barbican can take this and match it with their own sustainable pathway. Is having fun enough? is enough. Happenings and interventions outside of traditional learning channels are relished – something different and provocative and unexpected is happening. All results are intangible but these no less or more so than a more prescribed approach.
Suddenly the group seemed free of having to fit in to the box and the answer to why was ‘to have fun’ and to be ‘comfortable with chaos and mistakes’, ‘for everyone to be creative’. Surely the benefit of something like this could be huge – the experience can be taken and used in lots of different way. Being not specific is good. Fun unleashes potential and keeps the spirit going and enables you to be in touch with who you are. It creates a sense of possibility.
We are entering difficult times and do we not have to make an argument for pursuing this participatory work that is more than just having fun??
There is a key difference that needs to be boldly stood up to between training performers and providing an opportunity to be creative. And TBAI (as I understand it from this discussion) are not interested in training performers – they don’t feel they have anything to teach - they are much more excited to be facilitating creativity.
What ever it is, it needs to have a name that reflects this, set the tone, lowers the expectation! Does Taught by an Idiot do it? Probably does because the word taught is suitably subverted.
Is there an equivalent on line? An on line idiot share – You Tube. How to access fun on line.
So the discussion went far from where it started and everybody seemed to be excited about managing to struggle out of the barriers and strangleholds that questions like these often create. Whatever this programme turns out to be - it needs to be true to the TBAI spirit. It needs to be about having fun and maybe that is enough.
Issue 2: What's wrong with the word education?
Convener: Sebastian Warrack
Participants: Helen Burgun, Nick White, John Wright, Chris
Summary of discussion:
• As a term, “Education” is:
o Pejorative
o Formal
o About achieving
o Fitting criteria
o Conforming to a set agenda
o Codified
o Target-driven
• Everything felt freer in late 1970s
• Connotations of didactic “theatre-in-education”
• Privilege – connotations of a transaction – a payment and a return. Only available to those with money
• Not associated with independent thought, self-taught
• “Education” term departmentalizes organizations too much
• Deters greater integration into whole process
• Participants should be “experiencing” the process, not merely observing and studying it
• Work is about entry points
• “Education” work has become more centralized – fewer arts centres exist and fewer organizations are doing more of the work (e.g very few arts centres are doing this work anymore but the Lyric’s creative learning department has grown from 1 in 1996 to 7 in 2010
• Engagement is still very important at Arts Council
• What ages participate in this work – still feels very age-related
• How do groups engage who are not obvious groups (e.g. 30/40 year old professionals)
• Access should be for everyone
• “Education” too strongly associated with specific groups
• Post-show play as opposed to post-show talk?
• “Education” is old-fashioned term but TBAI tend to eschew “fashionable”
• Justifying work for educational reasons is a dead-end argument – what if show isn’t particularly educational, does that then mean it has no value?
• John Wright’s BIG TELLY example illustrating how this work should inform company’s whole programme of work
• Need to create one’s own terminology
• Convention to have no convention
• Own one’s own entry points
• “Education Manager” at Theatre Royal Plymouth because his work is specifically linked to schools
• Participation – it’s broad but also scary
• Frantic Assembly has no term for their “Education” work/department
Participants: Helen Burgun, Nick White, John Wright, Chris
Summary of discussion:
• As a term, “Education” is:
o Pejorative
o Formal
o About achieving
o Fitting criteria
o Conforming to a set agenda
o Codified
o Target-driven
• Everything felt freer in late 1970s
• Connotations of didactic “theatre-in-education”
• Privilege – connotations of a transaction – a payment and a return. Only available to those with money
• Not associated with independent thought, self-taught
• “Education” term departmentalizes organizations too much
• Deters greater integration into whole process
• Participants should be “experiencing” the process, not merely observing and studying it
• Work is about entry points
• “Education” work has become more centralized – fewer arts centres exist and fewer organizations are doing more of the work (e.g very few arts centres are doing this work anymore but the Lyric’s creative learning department has grown from 1 in 1996 to 7 in 2010
• Engagement is still very important at Arts Council
• What ages participate in this work – still feels very age-related
• How do groups engage who are not obvious groups (e.g. 30/40 year old professionals)
• Access should be for everyone
• “Education” too strongly associated with specific groups
• Post-show play as opposed to post-show talk?
• “Education” is old-fashioned term but TBAI tend to eschew “fashionable”
• Justifying work for educational reasons is a dead-end argument – what if show isn’t particularly educational, does that then mean it has no value?
• John Wright’s BIG TELLY example illustrating how this work should inform company’s whole programme of work
• Need to create one’s own terminology
• Convention to have no convention
• Own one’s own entry points
• “Education Manager” at Theatre Royal Plymouth because his work is specifically linked to schools
• Participation – it’s broad but also scary
• Frantic Assembly has no term for their “Education” work/department
Issue 1: Staff it with Skill
Convener: Nick
Participants:Nick, Chris, Phelim
Summary of Discussion:
The company’s producer and artistic directors shouldn’t be expected to manage and deliver a participatory programme.
TBAI need a dedicated member of staff who will be able to work closely and strategically with the producer & directors on developing the programme. It forms a core part of the work, as much and as closely as producing shows does. It isn’t an add on.
This person needs to be:
An expert in participation (depending on the scope of the work)
A project manager to make stuff happen, cook up ideas with the artistic principles of TBAI in mind etc
A facilitator aware and engaged in TBAI’s style
This person has the skill and can ensure other members of the company also understand and experience it too.
The example given was TBAI’s co-prod with Drum Theatre on Fahrenheit Twins. TBAI produced a great education pack for teachers though this was done by one of the producers of the show and a bit of a challenge. Paul & Hayley delivered some good workshops but it was at a really bad time because the show had just opened and they had other pressures too. A dedicated Participation Director (?) could facilitate this, or employ freelance associates to deliver such work. It also helps the co-production element of the work as it means a company and venue can work closely in a dedicated way of this.
Other companies to look at:
- Frantic
- Theatre Centre
- Traveling Light
Participation programmes can engage with people who after time can become associates to deliver work in the style.
Ensuring trust of quality of delivery by someone other than the performers or artistic directors is a big issue, but again a part of the PD’s job. And a potential project in itself, recruiting other Idiots.
Participants:Nick, Chris, Phelim
Summary of Discussion:
The company’s producer and artistic directors shouldn’t be expected to manage and deliver a participatory programme.
TBAI need a dedicated member of staff who will be able to work closely and strategically with the producer & directors on developing the programme. It forms a core part of the work, as much and as closely as producing shows does. It isn’t an add on.
This person needs to be:
An expert in participation (depending on the scope of the work)
A project manager to make stuff happen, cook up ideas with the artistic principles of TBAI in mind etc
A facilitator aware and engaged in TBAI’s style
This person has the skill and can ensure other members of the company also understand and experience it too.
The example given was TBAI’s co-prod with Drum Theatre on Fahrenheit Twins. TBAI produced a great education pack for teachers though this was done by one of the producers of the show and a bit of a challenge. Paul & Hayley delivered some good workshops but it was at a really bad time because the show had just opened and they had other pressures too. A dedicated Participation Director (?) could facilitate this, or employ freelance associates to deliver such work. It also helps the co-production element of the work as it means a company and venue can work closely in a dedicated way of this.
Other companies to look at:
- Frantic
- Theatre Centre
- Traveling Light
Participation programmes can engage with people who after time can become associates to deliver work in the style.
Ensuring trust of quality of delivery by someone other than the performers or artistic directors is a big issue, but again a part of the PD’s job. And a potential project in itself, recruiting other Idiots.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)