Coming full circle?
Having attempted to embody the words of Augusto Boal by engaging in the “human property which allows man to observe himself in … the act of seeing, in the act of acting, in the act of feeling, the act of thinking” (Boal, 1985), I can now endeavour to answer the questions I initially asked at the onset of this research.
I began with a simple interest, formed in my youth, to create a Theatre in Education (TIE) production that would challenge me creatively and offer something relevant and meaningful for its teenage audience (for whom, as a teacher, I have particular compassion). This led to an investigation of TIE, its history and development, as well as an examination of Trulife’s
existing projects. My interest in using Action Research (AR) as a method, as well as an examination of Trulife’s style, led me to adopt postmodernism as an overarching context in which my understanding of this work could be situated.
With this framework established, collaborative devising could begin and the script for the TIE programme created. Alongside this practical creative work, methods for reflecting on my role as practitioner and researcher were explored: namely, Practice-as-Research (PaR), self
reflection and AR. It was particularly through the lens of AR that my own observations could be formed and my research questions explored.
The devising process of a TIE programme promoting the prevention of Drug and Alcohol abuse amongst teenagers is one which I would consider a success. The creator-actors from the Trulife team and I, were able successfully to engage Trulife's existing postmodernist performance model as it was described to me. However, my own role in identifying their style as postmodern is perhaps one that requires further exploration. Postmodernism is a complex and contested label to attach to any artwork, and a label which does not originate from within the Trulife participants themselves, but rather from my outside academic perspective.
My second objective was to explore AR as both a devising method and as a method to aid in
which kept the devising focused and gave it a recipe to follow. There were many benefits that such a circular approach brought to devising process, but the key insight I gained was that this sort of problem solving approach was already inherently present in the techniques used by Trulife, and I would extrapolate, in all creative devising. This is a theory I would be interested in testing further, and something I will be looking out for in future creative projects of which I am a part. I believe this research expands on existing research by exploring new possibilities of AR, and creates a vocabulary and model that may assist other people in framing their own educational projects.
The application of AR as a method for reflecting on my own role in the research was also extremely beneficial. While it was not strictly used to identify and solve problems, this method prompted a practice of self reflection that was helpful in identifying questions about my role as both a researcher and deviser, and discovering answers to these questions. This self-reflection placed the focus of the research firmly on the practice being conducted. PaR allowed my experiences to become central in developing my own theories about how devising takes shape. Creating any artwork is a process that is extremely personal and subjective, and one which can be hampered when too strict a set of rules is applied. PaR allowed for the creative flexibility within which to create my own path and, combined with AR, to adapt my practices in real time with the added benefit of in-the-moment learning from what was observed, as is evident in the furious typing that took place during each session to record every part of the process. Ultimately, by acknowledging and embracing my role in the research, I was able to grow as a practitioner and am left at the end of the experience with more confidence and more excitement for TIE as a genre than before. I am eager to explore future possible applications of what I have learnt, and have been invited by the Trulife team to remain involved in future projects – an honour I take as a sign of their appreciation of these methods too.
The limitations to this type of research are linked closely with these benefits: the quality of the data observed rests primarily on my observations, thoughts and opinions and therefore must be understood to reflect the influence of my innate biases and gaps in knowledge.
However, by including interviews and considering the opinions of the rest of the Trulife team, a wider, more reliable picture starts to present itself, pointing to the study’s trustworthiness.
specific one at that. As Trulife had their own requirements in terms of topic and with regards to style, our devising was influenced accordingly. It would be useful and interesting to expand the potential of the study and its applicability by exploring the efficacy of the methods and practices in different contexts and environments, including those less familiar with
conventional devising techniques or theatre practices, for example, community groups or classroom teachers. This would bring this research further into the realm of contemporary applied theatre with an expanded applicability, one with a specific benefit in South Africa with its limited resources as a form of capacity development and working with nothing but people and their ideas.
I end with a final Boal quote, which ties in with the cyclical processes that have appeared throughout this research – both in Action Research and self reflection. Boal’s words capture my own feelings at the end of this project, and point to a future where my practice can continue to develop and aid in educating a young audience in need:
When does a session … end? Never – since the objective is not to close a cycle, to generate a catharsis, or to end a development. On the contrary, its objective is to encourage autonomous activity, to set a process in motion, to stimulate transformative creativity, to change spectators into protagonists.28