This post arts dialogue reflection is broken up into two parts. I reflect, first, after having given the presentation, and then secondly, after having a discussion about it with artists who attended the presentation. The reflection occurs in this manner because those components themselves had to be broken up; the discussion happened a week after the presentation was delivered because the agenda ran over in the first call.
After having conducted the arts dialogue, I realized in retrospect that a misstep perhaps was not taking Watson’s advice and including the theoretical frameworks and other literature and sources that have been guiding the project. I only felt this after having discussed the project that I may have missed an opportunity to root the project in something larger, perhaps even something more germane to our current socio-political circumstance.
In reviewing the requirements for the Arts Dialogue as outlined in the doctoral handbook, I also began to wonder if I misunderstood or misinterpreted the assignment, and took more of an approach of conducting an event rather than presenting on the project. If I had been able to conduct the full event as outlined in my original plan, I wonder if I would have felt this way. I would have been able to engage the audience in a deeper way, really rooting them in the work through a visceral and embodied experience, and I would have been able to talk about the project and how I’ve come to develop the experiences that we would have shared in together. The virtual presentation was one/sixth of the time of the original plan, and thus much less content delivery.
Despite this, I think the presentation was received well. Some answered the question about what they remembered being in the Declaration of Independence, calling out its hypocrisy, exclusivity and thus irony. Everyone participated in the silent prompt to respond to what they think, or would draw, when they think of justice or freedom: love; a heart filled in with pen ink; fighting on behalf of other people; voting; a drawing of the scales of justice; agency; childlike joy. This is what this particular group of artists envisions of justice and freedom. And to the final participatory invitation, what is one action you can take to make someone else feel like they belong, one filmmaker shared her vow to use this current moment to become fluid in sign language to be better in solidarity with the deaf community.
This amount of thoughtful engagement in a digital presentation demonstrates the relevance of the project as well as the potential potency of the participatory elements that will be crucial to both the development and action of the play.
Before coming back together and having a discussion around my presentation, I shared with the group two prompts for feedback based on choreographer Liz Lerman’s Critical Response process: What resonated with you about the project and What questions/curiosities do you have? What was unclear? Additionally, I asked for further suggestions of related work, literature, and research they thought I should be connected to.
I certainly left that discussion with a list of resources that may be relevant to the project, some of which are already on my radar, but some that were not, including “The Declaration of Sentiments” from the First Women’s Congress in 1848 and a more contemporary collection of essays, songs, and other responses entitled “Why Freedom Matters.”
People didn’t initially respond with questions, but once they emerged some were about the nature of participation in the play. This made me think that perhaps most people don’t really have a reference for participatory theater, and now I feel I will try to do a better job at explaining what it is or how it works in future such presentations to folks who may not be familiar.
Another question that came up in the discussion was about who the intended audience is for the play, and this is something I’m still grappling with. Is it for the marginalized folks who are at this piece’s center, or is it for folks who still have not prioritized their freedom or recognized fully their personhood? Is it for people to be allies? And if it is for those black, queer, trans folks, how might it avoid preaching only to them at the risk of alienating people in positions of power, white, cis, straight men? If I’m honest, I’m not sure that I care about alienating them, but this points out a strategy that the project has yet to refine. I think it is for the people that it’s about first, but secondly, I do hope that it reaches people who are outside of that. One activism/organizing exercise I'm reminded of now is to analyze the stakeholders, to identify those with the highest interest and the highest power to do something about the issue. As a piece of activism, is the play an action against something, or can it be activism for and within something? This question I’ve been asking since the beginning comes back to mind.
Appreciations included the project’s nod towards afro-futurism (something I want to incorporate more intentionally), its invitation to rewrite the past to inform the future, and that it seemed to provide a beacon of hope. Other reflections were about how the project reminded one artist of the slow but eventual process of justice, and another of what wars and battles the initial declaration led to, and what its omissions instigated. I’m intrigued to keep investigating this notion, or question of how to deal with the things that get left out, and I think it’s central to some of the major questions of the project itself. How can we practice and dare to declare freedom without infringing upon other’s? How can a mere document include protections for all? What happens when we omit, whether consciously or unconsciously, and how might we navigate that in community? These are questions I hope participants continue to engage with as the project advances.
Allen, D. (2015). Our declaration: A reading of the Declaration of Independence in defense of
equality. New York: Liveright.
Boal, A. (1985) Theatre of the Oppressed. New York: Theatre Communications Group.
brown, a.m. (2017). Emergent strategy: Shaping change, changing worlds. Chico: AK Press.
Carruthers, C. (2018) Unapologetic: A black, queer, and feminist mandate for radical
movements. Boston: Beacon Press.
Cohen-Cruz, J. (2005). Local acts: Community-based performance in the United States. New
Brunswick: Rutgers University Press.
Delgado, R. & Stefancic, J. (2017). Critical race theory: An introduction. New York: NYU Press.
Freire, P. (2014). Pedagogy of the oppressed : 30th anniversary edition. Retrieved from
https://ebookcentral-proquest-com.proxy.library.nyu.edu
Hartman, S. (2008). Venus in two acts. Small Axe, 26 (6), 1-14.
Johnston, C. & Paz Brownrigg, C. (2019). Ensemble-made Chicago: A guide to devised theater.
Evanston: Northwestern University Press.
Landy, R. & Montgomery, M. (2012). Theatre for change: Education, social action, and
therapy. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Lerman, L., & Borstel, J. (2003). Liz Lerman's critical response process: A method for getting useful
feedback on anything you make, from dance to dessert. Dance Exchange.
Martin, B. (2004). The theater is in the street: Politics and performance in sixties America.
Amherst: University of Massachusetts Press.
Mertens, D.M. (2007) Transformative paradigm: Mixed methods and social justice. Journal of
Mixed Methods Research, 1, (3), 212-225. https://doi.org/10.1177/1558689807302811
Rohd, M. P. (1998). Theatre for Community, Conflict and Dialogue: Hope Is Vital Training Manual.
Heinemann Press.
Sendzimir, L. & Yarrow, R. (2012). InExActArt The Autopoietic theatre of Augusto Boal: A
handbook of Theatre of the Oppressed practice. Stuttgart: ibidem-Verlag.
Simpson, J. (2013). The Trayvon factor: Playwrights and theatres are revisiting issues of race
onstage in the wake of the Martin-Zimmerman verdict. American Theater Magazine,
December 2013. https://www.americantheatre.org/2013/12/04/george-zimmercan-case-sparks-revival-oftheatre-dealing-with-race-issues/
The U.S. Declaration of Independence; John Hancock, et al.; 1776
Way, B. (1981). Audience participation: Theatre for young people. Boston: Walter H. Baker Co.