Theatre of the Oppressed

Theatre of the Oppressed is both a theoretical framework and a practice.  Of the theory of Theatre of the Oppressed I will focus on three points that lie at the heart of work: praxis, the rejection of catharsis, and need for dialogue. 

Perhaps the most paramount of concepts behind Theatre of the Oppressed is the idea that theatre is the most human of all types of expression.  Boal says simply, “…theatre is the human language par excellence…. Some of us ‘make’ theatre—all of us ‘are’ theatre” (A. Boal, Legislatve Theatre 7).  At the core of Theatre of the Oppressed is the idea that all humans are theatre because they are capable of simultaneous action and reflection—performer and audience in one—and that this makes it possible for humans to analyze what they do as they do it.  This is an extension of praxis, or the simultaneous action and reflection necessary to transform the world.  Boal was greatly influenced by the work of Paulo Freire; the title of Boal’s work is an homage to his longtime friend and mentor.  In his book Pedagogy of the Oppressed Freire introduced and challenged the banking method of education, which Freire poses as an oppressive education model that tasks educators with depositing information into empty minds.  In this model, the student has no knowledge to offer and therefore remains silent while talked at, giving all power to the teacher.  Freire points out that monologue is a key element of an oppressive structure and accentuates the importance of dialogue to establish mutual learning for both student and teacher.  Boal saw this monologic dynamic within the traditional model of theatre—audience members sit in the dark, unmoving and silent while actors, well lit and elevated on a platform, can speak and act to transmit ideas upon the waiting audience.  “Conventional theatre is governed by an intransitive relationship, in that everything travels from stage to auditorium, everything is transported, transferred in that direction—emotion, ideas, morality!—and nothing goes the other way” (A. Boal, Legislatve Theatre 19).  Boal re-envisioned theatre to involve all people, performers and audience alike, in communication and the development of ideas. 

Another key Freirian principle adopted by Boal is the concept of conscientização, or conscientization.  It is the process of becoming more human by developing one’s consciousness, and involves viewing pieces of the world at an objective distance so one can understand and interpret with a keen critical eye.  Freire describes it as “learning to perceive social, political, and economic contradictions, and to take action against the oppressive elements of reality” (Freire 17).  This was incorporated into Boal’s work, as will be outlined in the explanations of the different forms of TO.

Freire also stresses the dangers of prescribing liberation and the importance of praxis, simultaneous action and reflection.  According to Boal, theatre is a step further into Freire’s praxis.  “The theatre is, in its most archaic sense, our capacity to observe ourselves in action.  [This] affords us the further possibility of thinking virtualities, of imagining possibilities, of combining memory and imagination… to reinvent the past and to invent the future” (A. Boal, Legislatve Theatre 7).  Boal’s theatre allows people to not only act and reflect, but to see forward, to imagine the possibility of future action, and to practice this action.  It is through this theatrical praxis that we can envision, rehearse, and enact change for our world.

Within Theatre of the Oppressed Boal addresses a series of concerns with traditional elements of theatre, problems that Boal attempts to solve with the practice of his art.  Boal takes issue with the Aristotelian concept of catharsis in drama.  In such a play, dramatic action is designed to sweep audience members away, lost in the story and following the play as if they themselves were living the story they see.  When plays end favorably, audience members are placated, comforted by the outcome and see no need to take action.  Boal was influenced by the work of Bertolt Brecht’s epic theatre, which functioned to encourage an audience’s critical distance from the action on stage.  Brecht termed this verfremdungseffekt, which “means to watch from a distance, without involving oneself, as one who observes, thinks and draws his or her own conclusions” (A. Boal, Theatre of the Oppressed xix).  Both Brecht and Boal believed that employing theatre as a tool for purging emotion was a method of dominating and placating the people.  As individuals watched heroic characters on stage they are drained of their desire to behave as heroes themselves.  Such theatre accesses audience members’ capacity for empathy, or the ability to feel the same as another.  Boal saw this as problematic.  He felt that audience members shouldn’t feel ‘the same as’ the characters on stage, trapped by their choices and actions.  Instead he wanted audience members to be able to reflect on the action on stage as unique and independent individuals, accessing their own experiences and histories to view the story with a keen, critical eye.  “What I want is for the spect-actor to take an heroic stance, not the character” (A. Boal, Games for Actors and Non-Actors 28).  Boal worked towards creating art in which the viewer maintained a conscious understanding of oneself in relation to the action, and was capable of reflecting upon what they witnessed.  In order to do so, fighting catharsis was key.  This was an important aspect of creating and sustaining social justice movements.


To create change, an audience member cannot be satisfied with what they witness—to do so is to be satisfied with the way things are.  Instead, Boal believed they should be left wishing for something different or something more, but something that they may wish to achieve outside of the theatre space.

Instead of empathy Boal urged sympathy—for audience members to feel similar to, but not the same as, the characters on stage.  Boal believed sympathy would allow for audience members to connect to the urgency or importance of the issue displayed without being trapped by the confines of the characters’ actions.  Through Theatre of the Oppressed he hoped the audience members would find affiliation and connection with the story and the issue without experiencing empathy and catharsis.


Boal’s poetics of Theatre of the Oppressed laid the groundwork for the practice of the many different expressions of the art form.  Each expression of Theatre of the Oppressed was developed organically, created in “response to concrete and particular political situations” (A. Boal, Games for Actors and Non-Actors 28).  When Boal was exiled and fearful of being arrested and returned to Brazil, he developed Invisible Theatre to address societal issues without the public’s awareness that they were involved in a performance.  Forum Theatre was borne out of a spectator’s frustrations with an actor’s inability to perform as she instructed.  The Rainbow of Desire was a response to his growing understanding of internalized oppression, and Legislative Theatre was a way for Boal to include the people in decision making while he was in public office.  Boal simply developed creative solutions to socio-political challenges.  The large arsenal of Theatre of the Oppressed techniques is outlined in his many books and continues to be honed, redeveloped and reimagined by facilitators across the globe.  Although the different expressions of Theatre of the Oppressed—Newspaper Theatre, Image Theatre, Invisible Theatre, Forum Theatre, Rainbow of Desire and Legislative Theatre—are intertwined and connected, each has its own function and practices. 

Read more about the different forms of Theatre of the Oppressed:

• What is Image Theatre?
• What is Forum Theatre?
• What is Legislative Theatre?

Cited