Theatre for Social Change or Screaming into the Big, Blue, Abyss?

I didn’t really know where to start with this blog. Upon reading Austin’ post, no theaters or performances immediately jumped to mind. So I started the only place I could think of:

            Google provided me with some great jumping off points. First, I’ll say I was incredibly encouraged by American Theatre Magazine’s “14 Theatrical Plans toChange the World.” Each of the 14 companies/training programs/outreach/theatre artists mentioned has a uniquely different approach to creating theatre for social change. Luis Alfaro and his adaptations of plays like Oedipus and Medea, which “brought the epic qualities of Greek tragedy to a Low Angles barrio and to the quiet life of an undocumented Mexican seamstress in Chicago”, particularly stuck me. Another group – Theatre of the Oppressed NYC – actually takes their performances out of theaters and performs instead in “a house of politics.” Using their “strong relationships with local politicians,” Theatre of the Oppressed NYC allows their voice and message to be heard not just by empathetic, like-minded theatregoers, but also by those who have the actual ability to affect change in government with the idea that “[o]nce legislators are forced to step inside the experiences of their constituents, they may be compelled to listen, empathize and change.” Pretty neat stuff.

            It is also a happy accident that this week I went to see Bridge Theatre’s production of Julius Cesar, broadcast at the Manship Theatre by National Theatre Live.  Julius Cesar, of course, lends itself well to political commentary and the production was chalk full of that. Cesar was introduced to us wearing a red baseball hat (remind you of anyone?) and later was costumed in a retro, 1940s era military that brought to mind images of Hitler and Mussolini. Yet actor David Calder had moments in which Cesar struck me as a tired, aging man who was determined to stick to his beliefs, however misguided, in order to preserve his image as a steadfast leader. Performances aside, the play was also staged in an immersive way that had part of the audience standing in the pit of the theatre, which turned out to be the playing space. As actors came and went and platforms raised and lowered with every scene change, the audience was forced to constantly adapt and transform within the playing space. They were even asked to participate to a certain extent, shaking Cesar’s hand as he passed through them, shouting and booing during Cesar’s funeral, moving a giant flag over their heads. It was as though they were a version of Boal’s spect-actors, not quite moved to engage by their own free will but still forced into some level of engagement based on their surroundings.

            I was also struck by how diverse the audience was, namely by how many young people were present in the audience. As a young person living in New York City, I only ever made it to Broadway productions of this quality if there was a special ticket offer available- be that a rush ticket or some other discount. After checking the shows website, I discovered that tickets to this production, this extremely professional, high level production – chalk full of famous actors from James Bond, Game of Thrones, and the Walking Dead and beautifully and expensively produced– had tickets for sale - and from what I can tell they were actual tickets, not "limited view" or some other "bad" option - starting at $20. Woah. Say what you will but making theatre more universal and ultimately more powerful starts with broadening its availability to people. $100 a ticket is not reasonable or feasible for the average American. $20 a ticket is. The importance of making theatre more widely accessible is best summed up by New York Times writer Charles Isherwood who wrote a piece entitled “The Culture Project and Plays That Make a Difference” in September of 2006. Isherwood writes that what makes political theatre different than the news cycles seen on TV is that “it’s human to human, and when the subject is of immediate political significance it can be harder to dismiss as propaganda or dry journalism.” In a world where the sheer amount of news constantly forced down our throats can be so mind-numbing and, as Austin pointed out, make our problems seem insurmountable leading to a powerful sense of apathy, it is important to remember 

“Art can inculcate empathy, and empathy directed not at a generalized humanity but a specific person or persons keeps healthy and intact our alertness to immediate evils, not general ones. It reminds us that history doesn’t happen in newspapers but to people.”