[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[Xmca-l] Re: Boal and Brecht



Hi David,

Thanks for your response. On the question of scripted vs. unscripted - my
sense is that the distinction is less about the people (actors vs.
spectators) and more about the action. Hence Boal's term "spect-actors." I
read this as suggesting that actors on stage may observe and improvise and
audience members may similarly observe and intervene. the larger goal, as I
see it, is to practice being a "spect-actor" in the theater in order to
become a "spect-actor" with expanded capacities to observe and intervene in
the scenes of everyday life.

on the question of language - again I could be wrong here - I see Boal as
interested in the generative potentials of certain rules and structures at
certain moments. Like rules within play (in a Vygotskian sense),
momentarily suspending the use of verbal language in image theater allows
the participants to develop other kinds of expression and thinking/feeling.
similarly in forum theater, we used to rehearse scenes by asking students
to run the play once through without any verbal language - thus
exaggerating and expanding their gestures and movements as a means of
communication. We would then run the scene suspending movement and using
only verbal language - which pushed us to speak louder and with more
emotion. In the actual performance, the two came back together newly
strengthened.

I'm not sure I understand how image theater can be seen as "anti-symbolic" ?

I wonder if there is a similar dynamic going on in Boal's statement
regarding the authority inherent in any social code. Like the dialectic of
rules & play, I'm not sure if authority and freedom are in opposition or in
a potentially generative relationship within his statement. Perhaps in a
foucaldian sense, we must submit ourselves to the authority of particular
social rules in order to participate in a society, or a classroom, or a
forum theater scene. this dynamic can be used to analyze authoritarian
structures and contexts, hegemony, etc. but it can also be used to
understand how rules/structure give life to new forms of participation,
community, development, etc. in a range of social-political configurations,
including what could be seen as more democratic or humane ones ?

looking forward to hearing your thoughts.
shirin


On Tue, Jan 28, 2014 at 9:57 PM, Haydi Zulfei <haydizulfei@rocketmail.com>wrote:

> Hi David and Shirin
> As this mail from David is yet blank , and I don't know what the cause
> might be , I have to ask Shirin to kindly tell me if she has got David'd
> reply . Thanks !
> Best
> Haydi
> p.s. It's not so bad , however :-) This makes up for the problem of
> receiving SOME mails in doublets or treblets due to the action of some dear
> folk copying all three adresses of the Forum as explained by the dear
> colleague in charge . BTW , all three machines here pronounce the same
> problem .
>
>
> ________________________________
>  From: kellogg <kellogg59@hanmail.net>
> To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" <xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu>
> Sent: Wednesday, 29 January 2014, 3:24:17
> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Boal and Brecht
>