Applied theatre in times of terror: Accepting aesthetic diversity and going beyond dilemma

Abstract

Through historical evidence and a research review, the positive assumption behind the Norwegian project is that theatre may provide democratic inclusion where any felt understanding can be accepted as aesthetically valid insights to be uttered on stage. This is how drama is created, and ultimately how diversity is treated and tolerated. However, dilemmas occur when applied theatre aims to be participatory democracy in action. These dilemmas, which are linked to conflicting practices and discourses, as the French philosopher Jacques Rancière (2004) shows, also connect to conflicting aesthetic thinking or regimes. The particular dilemma discussed here deals with the location of aesthetic autonomy as well as the dilemma of free utterance versus transformed mediation. A short analysis of two contemporary performance cases further illuminates the dilemma.

What Role can Physical Theatre Play in Reimagining Democracy in South Africa?

“…The aesthetic is also part of a "distributed" polis society , implying that the arts are controlled, made predictable and de-politicized in Western democracies. This is partly done by stimulating the theatre industry as compensatory, non-binding entertainment and, as a consequence, muting the educative and political potential of theatre by attempting to remove or relocate aesthetic performance and theatricality from the social sphere to an institution of the unreal and fictitious (Rasmussen, 2017). In arts education, similar de-politicized strategies can be found in the position of the arts in the curriculum in many Western countries.…”

“…However, the attempt to realise this ambition reveals dilemmas, and is also met by critique. In particular, we meet notable differences in discourse and practice between applied theatre and the arts institutional theatre industry (Rasmussen, 2017). Without any intention of defending a certain normative view on the "nature" of applied theatre, we still think it is important to explore some of the influential arts-based research traditions from a cultural democratic vantage point.…”

“…Many political scientists have noted the number of people feeling increasingly frustrated and excluded in the post-democracy (for example Crouch, 2004;Mouffe, 2005;Rancière, 2006). Moreover, it is suggested that ways of repressing antagonism by seemingly allowing diversity can lead to intensified outbursts of antagonistic violence (Rasmussen, 2017;Swyngedouw, 2019).…”

Introduction: The Political Potential of Applied Theatre Practice, Education and Research

“…The aesthetic is also part of a "distributed" polis society , implying that the arts are controlled, made predictable and de-politicized in Western democracies. This is partly done by stimulating the theatre industry as compensatory, non-binding entertainment and, as a consequence, muting the educative and political potential of theatre by attempting to remove or relocate aesthetic performance and theatricality from the social sphere to an institution of the unreal and fictitious (Rasmussen, 2017). In arts education, similar de-politicized strategies can be found in the position of the arts in the curriculum in many Western countries.…”

“…However, the attempt to realise this ambition reveals dilemmas, and is also met by critique. In particular, we meet notable differences in discourse and practice between applied theatre and the arts institutional theatre industry (Rasmussen, 2017). Without any intention of defending a certain normative view on the "nature" of applied theatre, we still think it is important to explore some of the influential arts-based research traditions from a cultural democratic vantage point.…”