IPTN JOURNAL JUNE 2024

Once again, we are delighted to bring you the latest edition of the IPTN Journal – our third as co-editors. We are very pleased (and a little humbled) to include no less than 14 items, from a total of 24 writers, sometimes working individually, sometimes collaborating as co-authors, and who between them represent 12 different countries.  In fact, we have assembled such a range of content that we have been able to create three new sections. Read on for a brief overview of what to expect.

The first of our Articles is from Norbert Ross. Against the backdrop of describing his work in Central America and Mexico, he offers a thought provoking critique of the meaning of applause in playback performances. This is followed by Jimmy Wang’s exploration of the dramatic concept of distance and how it might be understood in the different stages of the playback performance ritual. Jimmy’s help with translating his original article from Mandarin to English is much appreciated. The third article draws on the structure of the Monomyth to give a comprehensive account of Beaver’s Boomerang, a Playback Theatre company for teenagers in Latvia. It is written in two parts, by Marija Bambulyaka, who leads the company, and by Ruslan Novikovs, one of the young participants.

The fourth article, by Kimberly Dailey, Hannah Fox and Pam Grace, gives a detailed overview of the development and potential of the Playback Theatre Town Hall Experience, a method for applying playback as a strategy to create meaningful change in organisations and corporations. In the final article in this section, Ferran Luengo utilises his expertise in both fields to compare playback and improv – and he shares several exercises that we’re sure you’ll want to harvest for your own work.

Next comes the first of the new sections we created for this edition – our Video Article. Here, Andrew Utenkov and Marat Mairovich talk together about Vistonki, the project they undertook across five cities in Ukraine in the summer of 2023, offering workshops and performances for playbackers experiencing war. Andrew and Marat have kindly given us exclusive use of their touching film for a short period.

Thought Pieces is our second new section. We think that the shorter articles in this section all act as prompts or provocations on different aspects of playback. In the first, Jonathan Fox shares his thoughts on several issues that he spoke about in his talk to Leadership Graduates in Connecticut in 2023. Next, we have a brief introduction to Playback Theatre and Restorative Justice – an area of innovation that Deborah Zavos is keen to develop further with colleagues. Then Deniza Glezina analyses the stories and enactments from a performance in Hanover for the local Ukrainian refugee community and considers how playback can have a role in reducing social conflict. Finally, Christine Powers looks at empathy in playback, and advocates the importance and value of recognising when this might be incongruent.

Our third (and final) new section is Research. Elsa Maurício Childs and Anna Smetanova have written a meticulous exploration of the experiences of oppression that were honestly (and generously) shared by participants in the Better Together online project. Better Together was not initially designed to focus on oppression – but we think this research complements the original project and adds usefully to the growing body of literature about playback and social justice.

Our Events section this year begins with an item about the VI Iberian Meeting in Barcelona in November 2023, written by Ana Fernández. This is then followed by accounts of the IPTN World Conference, Roots and Routes of Playback Theatre, which took place in Muldersdrift, South Africa in December 2023. The first takes the form of a conversation between the four main organisers of the event, Tarryn Lee, Cheraé Halley, Kathy Barolsky and Mammatli Thakhuli-Nzuza, in which they reflect on their attempts to create an equitable space and to address the dominant narratives usually found at global PT gatherings. This is followed by reports from three Conference participants – Sheila Donio, Siphumeze Khundayi, and Sarah Pritchard.

Finally, Signpost represents our ongoing attempt to record references to Playback Theatre we have become aware of over the past year, in academic journals, newspaper reports, books and other published material.

The IPTN Journal only exists because there are playbackers who devote time and energy to describe their work and share their ideas, and we are deeply grateful to all our contributors.  Through their efforts and explorations, we are hopeful that the Journal can play a part – however small – in helping us all to think and learn about what the challenges, changes and chaos in our world might mean for playback, and what playback might mean for the world.

We are always keen to receive feedback about the Journal. Please let us know what you think – or simply say hello!

Radhika Jain and Steve Nash

IPTN Journal co-editors

editors@playbacktheatrenetwork.org

Abstract

In this article the author looks at what happens during the beginning and closing of a playback show, and he asks two key questions: What marks the beginnings of our shows and where do we locate their final acts and why? and What subjectivities are performed during our openings and closings – including the final applause? In attempting to answer these questions, there is discussion of the author’s own practical experience, reference to the history of political theater, and exploration of the concept of the fourth wall both with respect to its aesthetic and ethical purposes, as well as in relation to the activist aspect and the role of the citizen actors (Fox, 2021).

Introduction

As we took our bow on stage, the audience applauded, and we responded with applauding back at them. Returning the applause was meant not only to say, “thank you for your presence,” but also to acknowledge their role in our show. After all they were the reason for the event and some of them became the main contributors to our play, the playwrights, so to speak.

As usual we had followed the dramatic arc for the show, including the framing of the event by music, the ensemble’s dramatic entering, and the introduction of what Playback Theater (PT) is and how it works. “We” are the Salvadoran playback company Teatro ACTUEMOS! with whom I perform in El Salvador, Honduras, as well as in refugee shelters in Tijuana, Mexico. Following the introduction, we did some sociometric work to get to know and to warm up the audience, followed by a series of short forms. Music filled a short break, during which the audience members were asked to share stories amongst themselves. This prepared them for the next part of the show, audience members coming on stage to tell their stories on stage for the long forms. Finally, we closed the event with a slideshow, briefly turning the spotlight onto each of the stories we had heard during the event. The closing, marked again by the music, finished with our bowing in front of the audience – naturally eliciting applause, marking the metaphorical closing of the curtain. The now concluded performance transitioned into a social mixer, where ensemble members mingled and chatted with the audience. As PT practitioners we cherish these conversations as an essential part of our work, their duration becoming somewhat of a measure of our success.

Everything went well, yet somehow, I am increasingly displeased with certain aspects of the show. To be clear, I am still happy with our overall work in the performances. We were able to create and hold a safe space for audience members to share deep stories. We received and played them back in ways that had the audience asking for more. Everyone enjoyed their participation. On one occasion, a young girl even joined the stage to support the teller during a specifically harrowing part of his story (Ross, 2021; Ross, n.d.b/c). So why the uneasiness?

Reflecting on our rituals

As I teach PT, I contemplate the ritual of playback more frequently and from different perspectives, exploring the rationales for our choices, and how they affect the overall endeavors. Over its almost 50 years of existence, both PT as well as the context (space and time) within which it is carried out have seen many changes. Hence, it is necessary to occasionally take stock and reflect on what we do, how, and why. This includes the meaning of specific PT events, as well as the emerging subjectivities.

Such reflections should not be simply exercises in creativity, as we are not looking for change for the sake of it. It is about carefully reflecting upon the meanings our work might engender and whether adjustments and improvements are necessary or helpful. Such reflections are always personal and mirror our own positionalities and interests, and the ideas presented here are informed by my personal experiences as a PT practitioner, social activist, and anthropologist working with marginalized youth in El Salvador and the USA.

I use PT in various contexts. First, I founded the PT ensemble Teatro ACTUEMOS! in El Salvador, working in marginalized rural areas of the country as well as in refugee camps in Mexico (Ross, 2021; Ross, n.d. a/b/c). I am also currently involved in collaboratively setting up a PT group in Nashville, (USA). Second, I teach PT both as part of a college course on theater and social change, as well as outside academia. Finally, I use PT in a workshop format with marginalized youth. These workshops very much take the form of teaching PT within the process of ensemble building. However, we do not strive for public performances nor is the goal to build a theater ensemble. While both might happen, the immediate objective is to build a trusting support community via sharing, empathic listening to, and enacting everyone’s stories. It is from the confluence of these three experiences that the below considerations emerge.

Specifically, I focus on the beginnings and the final acts of closing a show. Two main questions guide my explorations. What marks the beginnings of our shows and where do we locate their final acts and why? and What subjectivities are performed during our openings and closings – including the final applause? The more I reflect on these two questions the more uneasy I feel with my own practices. There are probably as many ways of closing the ritual as there are PT companies. The basis for my discussion is my own experience, what I have seen, done, taught, and learned, including some strays into the history of political theater. It is from this perspective that I offer some thoughts and suggestions for contemplation.

When thinking about the subjectivities that emerge from our openings and closings, I specifically explore the role of the fourth wall both with respect to its aesthetic and ethical purposes as well as in relation to the activist aspect and the role of the citizen actors (Fox, 2021). Hence, I start with a broader discussion of the fourth wall as part of the wider framework of political theater.

The Fourth Wall

PT emerged within context of experimental theater, at a time when many people in the USA and around the globe experimented with being different (Fox & Salas, 2021). Inspired by the likes of German theater critic and playwright Bertolt Brecht, theater artist Antonin Artaud, and Brazilian educator / philosopher Paolo Freire (1970), traditional theater came under scrutiny, interrogating ongoing power relations both within the theater, but also with respect to the role of the audience and theater ensemble (including writers, directors, and actors)¹. It is important to note that what was at stake was not so much aesthetics, but ethics, or rather a realization that they both are intertwined. At issue were the purpose and concept of theater, “the plays,” but also the roles of the theater ensemble, and the audience. Consequently, theater practitioners experimented with different formats, and different types of stages.

One way to think about some of these discussions is from the perspective of the famous fourth wall of theater, “this invisible wall that stretches along the front of the stage, separating the actors from the audience” (Cullen, 2020). Already in 1758, French playwright Denis Diderot somewhat foreshadowed Stanislavski’s concept of the actors’ “public solitude,” when he asked them to “imagine a huge wall across the front of the stage, separating you from the audience, and behave exactly as if the curtain had never risen” (Bethune, 2002). Both Stanislavski and Diderot focused on the actors’ perspective, asking them to insulate themselves from the audience, to enhance the realism of their acting. Others, such as German playwright Gerhart Hauptmann, used the fourth wall as a theatrical device in their plays, separating the reality of the stage from the reality of the audience (Mauer, 1982). The fourth wall clearly constitutes an isolating device, a separation of two worlds: on one side the actors and their play on the other side the audience, now relegated and reduced to (mostly quietly) observing and consuming the play (Davis, 2015)².

The fourth wall became specifically prevalent during the 19^th century’s naturalist theater, (of the likes of Hauptmann) and the realism it eventually gave into. The clear separation of the stage from the audience allowed writers and actors to represent the audience with a sense of real life as they knew it, allowing the audience to peer in from the outside. In a way the stage was used to create an alternate reality, independent of the audience and its perspective. This perspective of the audience as invisible observer became the norm in most film and TV productions (Cullen, 2020)³. Film or television screenings are usually not affected by the audiences’ actions. Some notable exceptions aside, film screenings are usually also not regarded as performances. These exceptions (such as public screenings of Rocky Horror Picture Show; see Cotroneo, 2022) extend the performance site from the screen into the audience, removing the fourth wall. The film becomes part of the larger spectacle.

Said differently, in its extreme form, the concept of the fourth wall reduces the audience to mere observers and consumers. It provides a break from reality, by offering a fictitious alternative reality to be watched in a voyeuristic fashion. It is against this (false) sense of realism that German theater critic and playwright Bertolt Brecht wrote, likening it to a way of pacifying the audience, and a weakened state of awareness (Cash, 2022)⁴.  

Rather than being a theatrically ignorant concept (Bethune 2002), Brecht understood the fourth wall as a device to either isolate the actors from the audience or to separate the audience from the play. Hence, exploring the role of the fourth wall inherently addresses issues such as the role and purpose of theater and its’ inherent power structures⁵.

For Brecht the fourth wall was first and foremost a hindrance for the creation of an audience made up of critical spectators, who actively observe and analyze rather than simply watch (Bradley 2016). In fact, Brecht called for the development of a Zuschauerkunst, the art of observing and seeing. In his vision, the audience would reject any proposition of fate as driving human life, asking instead for a representation of life as human made and changeable (ibid.). As Laura Bradley explains, Brecht built many examples into his plays where an “on-stage audience” (performed by actors) either fails or succeeds to actively observe and deduct behavior from it. She suggests thinking of these parts of Brecht’s plays as presenting important moments of spectator training (ibid.).

The different forms of improvisational theater in the 1960s and 70s took these ideas, criticisms, and experimentations further. Jacob Moreno’s spontaneous theater, for example (Moreno 2010), took the fourth wall down entirely, using audience members as actors, inspiring not only psychodrama, but as a result also several forms of Latin American teatro espontáneo (Boal, 1985; 1995; Garavelli, 2003; Aguiar, 2009). Teatro espontáneo does away with the fourth wall by integrating the audience into the scenes, abandoning the idea of a given story line, replacing the playwright with on the scene improvisation by actors and/or the audience. Gone are the distinctions of actors vs. audience or play vs. reality. The spect-actors (Boal, 1985) do not simply cross the 4^th wall, but effectively do away with it entirely. In fact, Boal described his Theatre of the Oppressed (TO) as “rehearsal for the revolution” (1985)⁶, with the stage constituting a part of reality, a training ground for change.

We moved from the voyeurism of a passive audience within the naturalist and realist theater, to the actively observing audience of Brecht, to Boal’s spect-actors, who actively discuss reality on stage, rehearsing the revolution.

Playback Theatre and the Fourth Wall

Around the same time when TO emerged PT took to the stage, developing a different approach to the fourth wall. Inviting audience members to tell their stories on stage, PT effectively replaced the playwrights of traditional theater with audience members.

However, during the storytelling and the enactments of the stories we employ the fourth wall to protect the tellers and their stories. We usually steer our acting towards, yet at a safe distance from, the tellers or the audience. This becomes inscribed in our stage practices. For example, when shifting from short to long forms, we usually change the orientation of the stage during acting (now a diagonal) to face both the audience and the tellers. It is for the tellers and the audience that we perform, our acting is our gift to them and specifically the tellers (Salas, 1993). Similarly, as actors we usually train to not engage with the tellers or the audience, avoiding eye contact with either. Compared to teatro espontáneo we also do not invite audience members or tellers to join the acting on stage. Said differently, the fourth wall is impenetrable during certain parts of PT.

Of course, PT’s corollary of the traditional theater play is not the individual story, but the entire PT event. During such an event PT crosses the fourth wall at several crucial moments:

• during short forms when the conductor asks audience members to share emotions or short stories;
• during the transition from short to long forms, when audience members are asked to share stories among themselves;
• and finally, during the long forms, when audience members come on stage to share stories to be enacted by the ensemble.

Clearly, audience members constitute an essential piece of a PT play. However, once the conductor hands the story over to the actors, the acting remains behind the fourth wall. “Let’s watch” clearly indicates the role of the teller and the audience during that part of the event. At this moment the position and the positioning of the tellers becomes somewhat ambiguous. Are they on stage? Off stage? They are clearly separated from the rest of the audience (who can observe their reactions), yet they do not share the stage with the actors.

The fourth wall is, of course, part of our efforts to protect tellers and their stories. It is hard enough to hold a story safely on an improv stage, it would be impossible to guarantee such safety inviting the audience to participate in our enactments.

Still, if the atmosphere is right, audience members can break down parts of the fourth wall, lending themselves to specifically dramatic moments. During our PT work in refugee camps in Tijuana (Ross, 2021; Ross, n.d.a;b;c) a young girl stepped onto the stage while a particularly difficult story was told. She placed herself next to the teller, supporting him with a hug. After the enactment of the story, the girl stayed on stage continuing her support for the following tellers too⁷. Such interventions are rare and unexpected, making them particularly powerful, because they represent honest and truthful acting, creative expressions of group spontaneity. Rather than involving audience members as actors, Playback Theatre insists on what Jonathan Fox has coined as the citizen actor (2021), wherein the actor must live up to the credo of social justice. By default, such an actor must be considered an activist (ibid.). This kind of activism incorporates but extends beyond the social artistry that takes place in the enactments (Barolsky, 2022)⁸. In fact, PT activism must already start at the inception of a PT event, when we consider the community and the rationale for our performances. Considering this perspective, the citizen actor expands beyond the stage into the community, questioning the fourth wall from the get-go, or at least making it more porous. I just expanded the PT event into its wider context, embedded within the communities we perform for and with. It is here that we must consider the overall ritual, its beginning and ending, including the role of applause.

Playback Theatre and applause

To be clear, I do not mind audience members applauding the ensemble after the successful enactment of a story. After all, as PT practitioners we offer our vulnerability, seeking artistic renditions of the stories we listen to, enacted as a gift for the tellers and the community. This is very different in TO, or when I use PT within a workshop format. In the latter cases, actors, audience, and tellers are all the same individuals, sharing and gifting one another. Applause automatically comes from and goes to everyone in the group.

It is this perspective that leads me to consider the final applause of a PT event. If we see PT events as communal endeavors, where community members not simply come to listen and observe but actively participate in the events, then our closing acts ending in a bow and applause seems to be misplaced for several reasons.

First, using the final bow as a metaphorical curtain fall closes the PT show with the fourth wall right in place. The bow on one side and the applause on the other delineate the audience as spectators, grateful for a performance they just watched. Their participations are rather dismissed at that point, exalted is the position of the ensemble.

Second, the performance of the fourth wall at the end somehow closes a circle, where the arc of the performance starts with a fourth wall (group entrance) and ends with a fourth wall, somehow erasing or lowering the incredible collaboration and co-production that happened in between. An arc performed that way makes the separation between the ensemble and the audience even stronger. Within this context the idea of our acting as a gift to the community becomes highly problematic⁹.

Third, performing the curtain closing as closure of the event, excludes the now post-event social gathering from the actual PT event. This is interesting on several accounts. Mostly every PT artist acknowledges the importance of this social gathering as part of the community building. It is arguably also the most horizontal aspect (in terms of ensemble / audience relations) during a PT evening. Yet, by closing the actual event, prior to this gathering, the socializing becomes an after-thought, a post event affair, an annex that somehow doesn’t entirely belong.

This is where my uneasiness comes from: our traditional closings not only separated us from the audience, but by doing so maintained or established a certain hierarchy. I would argue that these hierarchical dynamics are contrary to much of the PT spirit (such as the citizen actor). Receiving applause and setting the socializing in a post-event space, we tacitly invisibilized the contributions of the audience and somewhat undermined what we set out to do: creating a community collaborating in artistic expressions of who we are, resulting in lasting allyships (of whatever form). It is this kind of co-learning and co-production of knowledge that Freire (1970) had in mind. In his ideal, differences in perspectives and skills are welcomed, yet any hierarchy of learner / teacher was to be refused. If we as PT ensembles take our roles as facilitators seriously and truthfully understand ourselves as lending our acting bodies to a wider project of co-learning and transformation, then we should not allow the fourth wall to be framing the overall PT events.

Experimenting with different endings

To be clear, I do not seek to change the overall arc of group presentation, short forms, storytelling, acting, and somewhat of a summary / conclusion. I also do not seek to alter PT acting, nor do I refuse the applause (of audience, tellers, and conductors¹⁰) at the end of a story’s enactment. However, I want to suggest minor adjustments to our PT events, that will considerably impact our overall positionings as ensemble vis-à-vis the audience.

For this to happen, a simple twist in our opening and closing rituals might suffice. For example, at the end of the performance at the 2023 leadership course of the Centre for Playback Theater our ad hoc created Rainbow Playback ensemble invited audience members to join us on stage, co-creating short forms with the actors to reflect on the stories we just had heard and watched. This small change ended the PT show without the fourth wall. The final applause was no longer directed toward the ensemble alone but celebrated the community. I see this as a first step and other forms are surely possible.

Some groups in teatro espontáneo start their performances with the community by jointly lighting a set of candles, putting them out together at the end of the performance as well (Garavelli, 2003). Doing so they frame their events as collaborations without the division of a fourth wall. Experiments are welcome. Music, rhythm, and dance come immediately to mind, but the possibilities are many. Tone and rhythm could easily be adjusted to the overall PT event, resounding the emotions that were shared. Either way, we might want to keep our closings open for audience members to participate in their design and productions.

Such a move would not only change the closing part of the ritual, but might extend the ritual itself, incorporating the social gathering as part of the overall event. In fact, closing our events with the horizontal conversations of all participants would point to an important aspect of PT: the celebration of a newly established community of empathic listeners.

This doesn’t have to come at the expense of an emotional ending. It also doesn’t ignore the importance of the tellers and their stories that emerged during the event. The ensemble too, remains important, yet the dialogue becomes broader and more horizontal in this account, indicated by the different directions the resulting applause would take (including who applauds) and the different relational subjectivities that would emerge from it. Possibilities are endless – “let’s watch.”

Conclusion

Playback Theater employs and rejects the fourth wall of theater in different contexts and at different moments during a show. Already, the planning of the event should make the fourth wall porous, exemplifying the citizen actor Jonathan Fox has described. If we take an entire PT show as “the play” we find several crucial moments where the fourth wall is broken down. These moments are key during any playback event, when audience members share their stories to be enacted on stage.

While the fourth wall during storytelling and PT acting is an important safety device for tellers and their stories, I urge us to rethink the role of the fourth wall in our overall PT events. Keeping the fourth wall up during specific enactments doesn’t mean we should apply it as a frame for the overall event. I propose that our opening and closing acts frequently do exactly that, setting up a boundary between ensemble and audience / community. Applause immediately following a performance recognizing the story tellers and actors is appropriate (and simply follows the fourth wall during the enactment). However, the applause, following the actors’ bow at the end of a show, creates the fourth wall as a frame for the entire event. It relegates the audience back to their seats, positioning them as mere spectators. Again, this doesn’t mean there can’t be any applause. Yes, let’s applaud, but let’s make sure we all join in at the end, celebrating a successful horizontal artistic production.

References

Aguiar, M. (2009). Teatro de la Anarquía. Un rescate del psicodrama. Santiago de Chile.

Barnett, D. (2017). Brecht in Practice. Online. //web.archive.org/web/20200220151746///brechtinpractice.org/theory/realism/

Barolsky, K. (2022). Acknowledging the importance of the citizen actor and social artistry in Playback Theater. Playback Reflects: An independent blog for writing on Playback Theater, Oct. 28.

Bethune, R. (2002). Before the fourth wall. Art Times, Dec. Online. //www.arttimesjournal.com/theater/decembertheater.htm

Boal, A. (1985). Theatre of the Oppressed. New York: Theatre Communications Group.

Boal, A. (1995). The Rainbow of Desire: the Boal method of theatre and therapy. New York.

Bradley, L. (2016). Training the Audience: Brecht and the Art of Spectatorship. The Modern Language Review, 111(4):1029-1048.

Cash, J. (2022). Bertolt Brecht’s Fascinating Epic Theater Theory. The Drama Teacher. Online. //thedramateacher.com/bertolt-brechts-epic-theory/

Cotroneo, V. (2022). Here’s what made the rocky Horror Picture Show so iconic. Movieweb. Online. //movieweb.com/the-point-of-the-rocky-horror-picture-show-so-iconic/

Cullen, P. (2020). What is the fourth wall and how to sue it? Jan. 15^th //www.stagemilk.com/what-is-the-fourth-wall-and-how-to-use-it/

Davis, N. (2015). “Not a soul insight!”: Beckett’s Fourth Wall. Journal of Modern Literature, 38(2): 86-102.

D’Costa, K. (2014). The Obligation of Gifts, Scientific America. Dec. 26, online. //blogs.scientificamerican.com/anthropology-in-practice/the-obligation-of-gifts/

Fox, J. (2021). Citizen Actor: The artist as citizen and the ethical role of a Playback performer (essay written in 2020). In J. Fox & J. Salas (Eds.), Personal Stories in Public Spaces: Essays on Playback Theatre by Its Founders. (pp.184-185). Tusitala Publishing.

Freire, P. (1970/2018). Pedagogy of the Oppressed. New York: Seabury Press.

Garavelli, ME (2003). Odisea en la Escena: Teatro Espontáneo. Cordoba.

Gorelick, N. (2011). “Life in Excess: Insurrection and Expenditure in Antonin Artaud’s Theatre of Cruelty”. Discourse. 33 (2): 263.

Jamieson, L. (2007). Antonin Artaud: From Theory to Practice. London.

Mauer, W. (1982). Understanding Gerhart Hauptmann. Columbia.

Mauss, M. (1925/2016). The Gift. Chicago.

Moreno, J.L. (1947/2010) The Theatre of Spontaneity. The North-West Psychodrama Association, Lulu.com

Ng, L. (2023). Being a fully ethical conductor when it is not safe to share. Playback Reflects: An independent blog for writing on Playback Theater, June 12^th.

Ross, N. (2021)“The Spirit of the Order: Playback Theatre Against the Normalization of Evil.”

Playback Reflects: An independent blog for writing on playback theater, Jan. 2

Ross, N. (n.d.a) The Migrant as Playwright: Playing back stories on the Border wall. (book manuscript).

Ross, N. (n.d.b) “Enacted Ethnography: Spontaneous theater as ethnographic method and theory.” (submitted) American Anthropologist.

Ross, N. (n.d.c)“The Power of Stories or What Would it Mean to Have That Thought: Theater, Affect, and Enacted Ethnography.” (submitted) Human Organization.

Salas, J. (1993). Improvising Real Life: Personal Story in Playback Theatre. Tusitala. New Paltz.

Stanislavski, K. (2008). An Actor’s Work. New York.

Acknowledgement

Research for this paper was sponsored by a Fellowship from the Fulbright Commission as well as NSF grant 1829148.

Notes

1. Decolonization processes all around the world, the Vietnam war, as well as US policies in Latin America, not only rendered racist colonial structures more visible, but tied them to a specific mode of living and being, itself tangled up in WWII and the previously unimaginable horrors of atomic bombs. The emerging crisis not only addressed issues of knowledge production and representation but included the wider question of what it meant to be human.

2. I somewhat disagree with Davis (2015) analysis of Samuel Becket’s use of the fourth wall, or rather how to understand the fourth wall in Becket’s work. In Becket’s work the actors clearly become trapped in their fictitious world of an imagined reality, the stage. While I agree that this represents a more complex understanding of reality than the one Brecht depicts in his work, both authors use the fourth wall to expose what is happening on stage as fictitious. 

3. Over the last decades several TV shows and movies started playing with the fourth wall by addressing the audience directly. TV shows at times work with live audiences and built in (at times scripted) participation.

4. Brecht’s suspicion against performance as emotionally moving the spectator must be understood in the context of him experiencing the rise of Hitler’s rise to power. Brecht’s likening of theater realism as a drug pacifying the audience (Cash 2022) is of course paralleling Karl Marx’s famous expression of religion as the opium of the people. For Brecht realist theater provided the audience with an escape from reality, rather than being a comment upon life. In contrast, and not unlike Marx, Brecht’s realism was a philosophical realism, exploring how people function and interact, accounting for human behaviors and opinions (Barnett 2017).

5. Brecht’s epic theater was not the only theater that questioned or addressed the fourth wall. Antonin Artaud’s “theater of cruelty” was another attempt to define theater as a tool to awaken the audience. In this context cruelty must be understood as the agitation of life that has become unnecessary and lazy (Gorelick 2011), of hurling the audience into the center of the action, forcing them to engage (Jamieson 2007).

6. To understand the origins of TO one must consider the context of brutal military dictatorships in Latin America, including Boal’s home country Brazil within the wider context provided in FN2.

7. Days later we learned from the camp organizers, that after the performance the young girl started to greet everyone in the mornings with a hug (ibid.; Ross n.d.a). The “play” continued, expanded, and multiplied.

8. See Barolsky (2022) for a discussion of social artistry and the citizen actor in PT.

9. Already in 1925 Marcel Mauss described the gift as establishing relationships and hierarchies between the gift giver and the receiver (Mauss 1925/2016; see also D’Costa 2014). Said differently, gift giving must be problematized and examined as highly political acts.

10. In this context it might be interesting to think a bit more about the role of the conductor at the end of an enactment.

About the author

Norbert is professor of Anthropology and Theater at Vanderbilt University. He is an accredited PT trainer at the Centre for Playback Theater and regularly teaches PT and teatro espontáneo at the University and in El Salvador, where he is part of a PT ensemble. With his Salvadoran ensemble he has conducted approx. 100 shows in El Salvador, Honduras, as well as in refugee camps along the US southern border. His work explores issues of violence, trauma, as well as different forms of social marginalization. He is currently also planning PT based research in Chile along these lines of inquiry. Norbert uses PT in conjunction with ethnographic tools to enhance the aesthetics of PT, bringing to the forefront the political / ethical aspects of any artistic work. This combination also allows him to contemplate and employ the body as a site of knowledge within his research. He currently offers PT training in Nashville TN and El Salvador, hoping to co-found a bilingual PT ensemble in Tennessee.

”概念的视角出发，
重新理解一人一故事剧场中故事的“叙述”与“表演”
 作者：王俊

Abstract

This article begins with an overview of the concept of aesthetic distance in drama, taking Aristotle’s Poetics and Brecht’s Epic Theatre as two contrasting starting points. It then goes on to discuss how theories of distance might be applied to Playback Theatre, focusing on two key areas – the stages of storytelling that are inherent in the arc of a performance, and the theory of Narrative Reticulation. The author’s interest in this subject was inspired by a training exercise where participants pair up and one of them tells a story. After listening, the other person first narrates the story by speaking in the third person. Then they use two or three one-person fluid sculptures to act out the essence of the story. The teller then writes down all three versions of their story – their own telling, and the two played back versions. Typically, this process of shifting perspective and distance enables participants to observe hidden and otherwise neglected details in their stories, gain more objective insight, and trigger new understandings of its meaning and value. The author argues that by studying different theoretical concepts of distance, we can gain a deeper understanding of their relevance to Playback Theatre, and of the interaction between the audience and the actors.

Introduction to the concept of distance

Physical distance

In everyday life, distance is often used to describe the objective physical distance between two objects. This might involve some standard or scientific measurement system. It can be the distance between different geographical locations or the distance between objects.

Psychological distance

The concept of distance is also used to describe the psychological or spiritual subjective feelings of our inner world, such as closeness, strangeness, and familiarity. In interpersonal relationships, we use closer to describe intimacy, while farther away means relative unfamiliarity. The experience of this internal distance is often externalized on the stage through spatial relationship and physical position and is felt and experienced by the audience during the performance and viewing process. 

Distance in theatre

In drama, distance can reflect the relationship between different characters and is an important spatial medium that can be used on stage.

Much theatre theory is devoted to explorations of distance – including the distance between the actor and the character, the distance between the performance on the stage and the audience, and the distance between the actions of the characters and the inner feelings of the audience. It also includes the audience’s distance between the stage performance content and their own personal life experience.

Theories of aesthetic distance in philosophy and art

 Aesthetic distance refers to the gap between the viewer’s conscious reality and the fictional reality presented by the artwork. When the reader is engrossed (or immersed) in a book’s unreal narrative world, the author achieves a kind of close aesthetic distance. An author is said to violate aesthetic distance if he pulls the reader out of the reality of the story, essentially reminding the reader that they are reading a book (Brooklyn College, Miriam Webster).

Kant’s Critique of Judgment

Immanuel Kant’s Critique of Judgment established the concept of disinterested pleasure, which does not depend on the subject’s perception of the desire of the object itself:

“In a pure judgment of taste, the pleasure of beautiful art involves no immediate interest … It is not the object itself that arouses our immediate interest, but the inner beauty. Property qualifies us to have this relationship with it—thus, this property belongs to the essence of beauty.” (Kant, 1793)

The Proposal and Development of the Concept of “Aesthetic Distance”

The term aesthetic distance was specifically proposed in an article published by Edward Bullough in 1912.

In that essay, he begins with the image of a passenger on a boat observing the fog at sea. If the passengers see the fog as a danger to the ship, then the experience is not aesthetic, but to view the beautiful scenery with transcendent wonder is to adopt a legitimate aesthetic attitude. One must feel, but not too much. Bullough writes: “Distance is obtained by detaching the object and its attractions from the ego, by disconnecting it from actual needs and purposes. In this way, the observation of the object becomes the only possibility.”(Bullough, 1912)

The concept continued to develop in films, novels, dramas, and poems, as different creative forms, and different creators all evoked different levels of aesthetic distance in the creative process. For example, American screenwriter William Faulkner evoked a close aesthetic distance through first-person narration and stream of consciousness, while Ernest Hemingway evoked a close aesthetic distance through third-person narration, creating a greater aesthetic distance from the reader.

Destroying aesthetic distance

In 1758, Diderot introduced the concept of the fourth wall, the imaginary wall at the front of the stage in a traditional three-walled box set in a proscenium theatre, through which the audience sees the action in the world of the play. (Ableman, 1998, Bell 1998, Wallis 2008)

Anything that pulls viewers, listeners, and readers out of the illusion of reality created by works of fiction, film, and theatre is considered a violation of aesthetic distance. An easy example of this in theatre or film is breaking the fourth wall, where a character pauses the story’s progression to speak directly to the audience.

When aesthetic distance is deliberately violated in theatre, it is known as the alienation effect (Verfremdungseffekt), a theatre theory concept coined by playwright Brecht.

Drama theory related to distance

From ancient Greece to naturalism, the relationship between hallucinations and immersion

Aristotle emphasized the importance of imitation behind artistic creation. He believed that dramatic poetry is the imitation of action. He mentioned in Poetics that “tragedy is a serious, complete, and definite length. The imitation of action, whose medium is decorated language, is used in different forms in different parts of the play, in a way that makes use of the actions of the characters, rather than narrative, to make these emotions get catharsis.”  (Gu Xi La, 1996)

The theatrical performance presents the characters and their behaviors in the dramatic poems in front of the audience so that the audience can temporarily suspend reality and imagine themselves completely immersed in the illusion of fiction and fantasy. A good theatrical performance makes the audience feel as if the story shown is actually happening in front of them. Aristotle’s Poetics emphasizes the importance of how the audience constructs a fictional illusion in the process of watching the action, strong resonance with the plot, and deep empathy with the protagonist. This deep empathy has a purifying effect on the soul.

Subsequently drama theorists and critics summed up the golden rule of ancient Greek traditional tragedies as the Three Unities, which require the story to have one principal action, to occur in one place, and in one time – originally within a twenty-four hour period. These laws of unity are the classic characteristic of ancient Greek drama and have almost become the cornerstone of correct and orthodox dramatic theory.

The concept of classic traditional drama structure represented by Aristotle’s Poetics deeply influenced the development of drama from the classical period of ancient Greece to ancient Rome, and the Renaissance. It also influenced classical French playwrights, as well as informing more recent mainstream dramatic styles such as realism and naturalism. 

Epic theatre, Alienation, and Defamiliarization

There are other dramatic theories and creative practices that are very different from the model of illusion, empathy, and spiritual purification proposed in Aristotle’s Poetics. Among them is Brecht, who put forward the concept of Epic Drama, as well as the theories of the defamiliarization effect and alienation technique.

“We need a drama that not only expresses the feelings, insights, and impulses permitted by the concrete historical conditions of human relations in which actions take place but also employs and produces Thoughts and feelings that act.”

“The performance method attempted to produce such an image at the Dockyard Theatre in Berlin between the First and Second World Wars was based on the Defamiliarization Effect (V-Effekt). The reflection of defamiliarization It is a reflection in which the object is known and at the same time presents it as strange.”

“Of course, the imagination of the fourth wall, which separates the stage from the audience, must, of course, be abolished. This creates the illusion that the events of the stage take place in reality without the audience. In the case of the fourth wall, in principle, the actors are allowed to face the audience directly. ” (Brecht, 1992)

The approach advocated by Brecht is designed to gradually distance the audience from the stage performance so that they realize that they are not completely immersed in a fictional illusion. They should maintain a viewing distance from the performance and realize that they are both an audience and a calm critic simultaneously, watching the performance with a rational, objective, and scientific attitude. The audience’s viewing behavior and the actors’ performance behavior are not completely hidden and covered, and they should be exposed more directly and nakedly.

Actors and creators need to constantly switch between role-playing and self-identity to achieve the effect of alienation and defamiliarization and to create distance between the audience and the theatre stage performance, so that everyone involved can form a more rational, objective, and scientific communication.  

Illusion and Anti-Illusion, Sensibility and Reason, Catharsis and Intellectual Action

On the one hand, the theoretical standpoint that adheres to the classical drama tradition inherited from the ancient Greek period believes that through imitation, hallucination, and resonance, there should be a strong emotional connection between the audience and the stage performance – encouraging emotional changes, such as pity and fear and enabling the cathartic effect of spiritual purification.

On the other hand, the theatre theory represented by Brecht emphasizes anti-illusion, requiring the distance between the audience and the stage performance to be shortened so that the audience can maintain rational, objective, and critical thinking. This stance advocates for the audience to remain sober and rational. It opposes the illusion of excessive empathy and full involvement to create a richer distance and space between the audience and the performance.

The differences between these two positions are significant in the formal handling of creative techniques in the stage performance. It also extends beyond the stage to other fields – for example applied theatre workers and practitioners who use drama in different social scenarios, informing the way they work around and with the concept of distance. I shall now explore how distance is understood in some of these related areas.

Regulation of Distance Proximity: Application of Relevant Practical Concepts in the Field of Theatre

Educational drama experts, such as Heathcote, have proposed and developed the concept of process drama. This includes the theoretical idea frame distancing. (Heathcote, 2009)

Under the structure of frame distancing, teachers of process drama regulate the distance between the virtual events occurring in the classroom and the roles played by the students. This provides a richer observation, experience, understanding, and reflection on the value and meaning of the events happening for the students’ theatrical learning.

In Dramatherapy, Dr. David R. Johnson, an American dramatherapist, developed the concept of distance using the theoretical system of Developmental Transformations Therapy (DvT). In his therapeutic work with trauma and stress disorder, he discovered that “using play as a tool to maintain a distance from the real world allows for self-revelation, the positive, humorous, creative and spontaneous content held within each patient, assuring them that they are not worthless or dead.”  (Forrester A, 1995)

In Psychodrama, as founded and developed by Jacob Levy Moreno, the group’s psychological improvisation space, developed and created on the spot, allows participants to recreate and truly experience stories and events related to psychological milestones. These milestone stories and events re-occur as if they were happening on the spot, allowing the group members to re-experience and relive them. This experience is reminiscent of the illusion created by the pity, fear, and intense resonance and catharsis that Aristotle emphasized.

Moreno described psychodrama as “an opportunity for action rather than mere talk, enabling us to play the roles of essential figures in our lives, better understand them, and face them imaginatively in the safe theatre of therapy; most importantly, it molds us into more creative and observant individuals.”  (Moreno, 2014)

The Theatre of the Oppressed, developed by Augusto Boal, encourages and advocates for theatre audiences to actively break the fourth wall, transitioning from being spectators to active participants, or spect-actors, taking center stage to rehearse acts of rebellion against oppressive phenomena. Boal believed that Aristotle’s Poetics facilitated the oppression of the people, workers, and audiences to support the ongoing rule of a privileged minority.

“Traditional tragicomedies in the style of ancient Greece are a traditional, standardized theatrical style, today analogous to soap operas, serving to perpetuate state continuance – an example of this being the oppressive government of Brazil utilizing theatre to propagate their oppressive regime.”  (Boal, 1997).

The Theatre of the Oppressed’s critique of Aristotle’s Poetics, its classical dramatic structure, and the revolutionary, proactive, anti-capitalist, and anti-oppressive ambitions it hopes to instill in the theatre aligns with Brecht’s emphasis on alienation techniques and the estrangement effect in Epic Theatre, a theatrical aesthetic theory that advocates for the audience to maintain a certain distance from the drama, preserving a space for rational critique. 

The theoretical and conceptual relevance of distance for the practice of Playback Theatre

The theoretical perspectives of distance in drama theory, as summarized above, provide us with a variety of ways of observing and understanding the ritual processes, community relations, and artistic expressions in Playback Theatre performances. Possibilities for further research include looking at the different components that are key to the playback form, for example, how might our understanding of the concept of distance be applied to exploring the relationship between:

• The teller and their story?
• The audience and the story as told and enacted?
• Members of the audience?
• Stories that make up a performance?
• Different playback forms used?
• Actors and themes?
• Audience and actors?

In the remaining section of this article, I will focus on exploring how the concept of distance relates to two key areas of Playback Theatre:

1. The process of telling a story, and
2. The theory of Narrative Reticulation.

Distance in the ritual stages of telling a story in Playback Theatre  

The storytelling experience in Playback Theatre can be divided into eight successive stages. Within each stage we can observe rich changes in the distance between the storyteller and their story.

Stage One: The storyteller begins as an ordinary audience member, watching a playback performance. At this time, they might not realize what kind of story they want to share. There may be some distance between their awareness and the story they want to tell. It may be buried in their subconscious, and they may not even remember that the story has taken place.

Stage Two: During the performance, they suddenly think of a story to share, and they raise their hand. It could be influenced by an actor’s self-introduction, stories shared by other attendees, or a summary by the conductor – in short, various stimuli and awakenings during drama performance have brought a deeply buried story in the storyteller’s heart closer, with the details gradually emerging and becoming clearer. Gradually they begin to connect with conscious-level memories. During this process, the distance between our storyteller and their inner story is gradually reduced.

Stage Three: This occurs when they are chosen by the conductor and invited to sit in the teller’s chair, to tell their story. This process transforms their personal experience, through their own narration, into a shared experience within a public community that everyone creates on the spot. In this stage, they are externalizing their internal life experience into a narrative that can be described together with the conductor, actors, and live audience. The interview allows the storyteller to turn their interior memories into an externalized version that can be listened to, understood, perceived, and empathized with by all at the venue. The distance starts to widen. The narrative version at this moment is the second version of the story.

Stage Four: The storyteller watches their just-shared story being performed by actors and musicians. The forms used in playback can utilize differing levels of aesthetic distance in line with the dramatic theories of Aristotle and Brecht outlined earlier in this article. Since the teller’s story is being spontaneously performed in a public space with an audience, the relationship between watching, and awareness of being watched, can itself also create psychological distance.

This constitutes the third version of the story, differing from both the teller’s internal experiences, and from the narration co-created with the conductor. The third version is diverse and rich in medium and often allows the teller to gain a new understanding of their story and their relationship to (distance from) it.

Stage Five: When the enactment ends, the actors gaze at the storyteller, reminding them that the story has ended. This ritual invites the storyteller back to their usual status and situation as both a teller and viewer of the story and helps to create some distance between their personal experience and the just-concluded performance. The teller can observe their own experiences from a cooler, more objective, and rational perspective.

The conductor’s follow up or concluding remarks can help to further review and clarify before the teller returns to being an ordinary audience member again.  At this point the value and meaning of the story is often summarised in highly abstract and generalized language. During this process the teller can continue to distance themselves from the story, not only confining it to past experience, but also making it relevant to this present moment. This can influence how they understand the story’s value and meaning in the future. This all requires the teller to view and feel the story from a very distant perspective.

Stage Six-Seven: As the teller rises from the storytelling chair and returns to the audience to continue watching the other stories, they may subtly start to notice potential connections that exist between the other stories and their own. While watching these narratives, they, as a regular audience member, will gradually become immersed in these other stories. In this process, they are distancing themselves from their own story.

Stage Eight: This is the final part of a Playback Theatre performance which can bring integration of all the stories and a closing ritual of the overall performance. The specific form will differ depending on the team, the theme, and the occasion. This completion ritual allows the teller to look back and integrate their own story with all the other stories that were shared. After this, the performance event comes to an end. In this evocative completion ritual, the distance between the teller and their own story might reduce again. But the relationship between the different stories assists the teller in fostering a more distant perspective, allowing them to take in the bigger picture of all that was shared in the event. The teller’s story becomes one of many shared that night, reminding them of their story while also allowing them to create a greater distance from it.

How can we reinterpret Narrative Reticulation theory from the perspective of the distance concept between people and stories?

The four key elements in Narrative Reticulation theory – atmosphere, guidance, spontaneity, and story – can all be explored from the perspective of distance.

Atmosphere and distance: Atmosphere emphasizes how the distance between audience members can be bridged to establish connections among them and to create a shared experience for all participants. In playback, the differences between individuals are inherently present, such as between the actor, conductor, audience members, and musicians, and there may also be differences within the audience between storytellers and regular spectators. To manage these differences and foster a stronger sense of community and co-presence, intervention in and modulation of the sense of distance between people can help to provide connection and a sense of safety.

Guidance and distance: From the perspective of guidance, the above analysis of the teller’s process shows that there is a rich transformation of the distance between people and their stories. The change in distance is in some respects very noticeable and clear, whilst in others the change may show different characteristics depending on the chosen performance form. In a Playback Theatre performance, the distance between people and stories in some segments is very flexible and variable, while in others, the change in distance needs to remain relatively stable and constant.

As performers, we consciously and proactively adjust the distance in every playback event. Through this adjustment, we can clearly guide the storyteller, the audience, and the actors to keep an appropriate distance from the story in different stages, as well as maintain corresponding relationships with the other participants.   The conductor often bears the greatest responsibility for this control of distance.

Story and distance: In the process of a story being told and performed, the teller will experience four versions of story collation and presentation. Firstly, their personal experiences.  These memories are only experienced personally, and others cannot understand them, as they are internal experiences. The second version begins when the teller and the conductor start to narrate the story, transforming the teller’s internal experiences into the version narrated and shared on the spot, listened to collectively by everyone present. The third version is recreated by actors using theatrical forms, transforming the story into a performative version for viewing by the audience. The final fourth version is integrated into the closing ritual, where all the shared stories are acknowledged. During this ritual, the teller hears and understands fragments of their retold story along with other stories. This helps tellers understand all the stories and their interconnections, both from their own perspective and every other story.

These four versions of a story each require different handling, and this reflects the diverse and changing relationship of distance that storytellers construct with their stories in the playback process.

Spontaneity and distance:  The spontaneity factor in Narrative Reticulation theory is a very important one. It relates to the atmosphere, guidance, and story being effectively glued, integrated, and linked together, enabling the shifts in distance between people and their story to harmoniously occur in a current, natural, and authentic manner. This enables the whole event and ritual of the Playback Theatre to organically flow and interconnect.

Conclusion: from observation to discovery, from understanding to utilization

When we observe the ritual and process of Playback Theatre from the perspective of distance, each aspect of the ritual can be seen to be accompanied by a corresponding distance change. Once we begin to observe and discover these changes, we can consciously and actively adjust and deal with the distance related factors contained within our rituals and processes. Here are some examples of how these ideas might inspire practical application.

Inspirations for the actors’ introduction

In order to gradually guide and stimulate the audience to recall their own hidden personal experiences, the performance group might pay more attention to considering how to ensure that the actors self-introduction stories have rich and diverse characteristics, allowing the audience to connect their own life experiences with the actors’ stories, and igniting story memories in the subconscious mind of the audience.

If the purpose of the self-introduction segment is to focus on subtly connecting the audience with the theme, and creating resonance, making those stories that are distant and deeply buried gradually feel closer through a progressive process, then there may be opportunities to design rehearsal time around this segment.

Inspirations for Conducting

Observation and adjustment of the concept of distance are particularly important for conducting. When the teller takes the stage, can they on the spot, through the first few sentences of conversation, sense the innate distance the teller has to his or her story? Are they closely connected to the story and fully immersed in the internal experiences, memories, and emotions of it, or are they maintaining a more rational and objective attitude, to calmly share their story?

By being aware of the initial distance status between the teller and their story, the conductor can actively adjust and transform the interview process. If the distance between the teller and their story is very close, and he or she is overwhelmed by internal experiences, memories, and emotions, then the conductor can consciously help to distance them from this internal experience, obtaining a more balanced and observational experience, with greater distance from the intensity of the story.

On the other hand, if a teller takes the stage with a very detached attitude, the conductor can choose through questioning and guidance, whether to draw closer the distance between the teller and the internal experience of the story, by supporting the teller to express more emotional resonance, and share more details about the experience and their subjective feelings.

With such adjustment, the conductor not only enables the teller to gain a richer distance experience beyond the personal level, but also allows the audience and performers to understand the story and experience from a richer perspective, providing more material and stimulation, adding more possibility and information for the forthcoming enactment and the for the audience’s understanding of the story.

Inspirations for enactment

How can the performance team consciously utilise different playback forms and levels of expression to communicate the right level of distance between story-performance and storytelling? How do they fine tune the distance perceived by the audience and the teller when they are watching the performance?

In Playback Theatre, if we could consciously think about and practice these two dynamics, our performances could be usefully informed by both the empathy and deep mental purification experience mentioned by Aristotle, and the distancing, rational thinking, criticism, and alienation effect emphasized by Brecht. This could provide the audience with a richer and more diversified viewing experience and allow all participants to experience layers of meaning that are potentially different from their familiar independent thinking or personal understanding.

Inspirations on ethical protection for the storyteller in serious and painful stories

Distance can also play a crucial role in the ritual process after the performance, especially when heavier or traumatic stories have been performed. The conductor’s final remarks, and support for the storyteller as they return to their seat in the audience, are of great importance.

Is the conductor able to accurately perceive the distance status between the storyteller and the story performance after a heavy or traumatic story has ended? In this revisiting stage after the enactment, a brief and accurate exchange can help the teller to clearly dissociate internally from the story performance, pull away from the story, and observe and deal with it from a more reflective and objective perspective.

If the storyteller still cannot distance themselves from the story and emotionally complete the disengagement from the experience, and the just-finished enactment, how does the conductor and the performers handle this? What strategies might be adopted to assist and support the storyteller in completing this disengagement process? How do we ensure that the teller can clearly break away from the just-shared and performed story, and safely return to their seat in the audience, ready to continue listening and watching the performance of the next story as an ordinary viewer?

The conscious, selective, and informed application of theories of distance, and how they relate to people seeing their stories on stage, can offer us useful strategies for a more inspired and enlightened approach to Playback Theatre. 

References

Abelman, Robert. (1998). Reaching a critical mass: a critical analysis of television entertainment. Mahwah, NJ: L. Erlbaum Associates.

Bell, Elizabeth S. (2008). Theories of Performance. Los Angeles: Sage.

Brecht, B. (1992). ‘Brecht on Theatre’ China Drama Publishing House. Brooklyn College, New York. Literary Terms. //academic.brooklyn.cuny.edu/english/melani/lit_term.html

Bullough, Edward. (1912/1989). “Psychical Distance” as a Factor in Art and as an Aesthetic Principle.’in Dickie, G., Sclafani, R., Roblin, R. Aesthetics: A Critical Anthology. 2nd ed. New York: St. Martin.

Forrester, A., & Johnson, D.R. (1995). The role of drama therapy in an extremely short-term inpatient psychiatric unit. In A. Gersie, Dramatic approaches to brief therapy (125-138). London: Jessica Kingsley.

Gu Xi La Ya Li Shi Duo De Chen Zhong Hai Zhu (1996). Aristotle ‘The Poetics’ The Commercial Press. Beijing.

Heathcote, D. (2009). Mantle of the Expert: My current understanding. Weaving Our Stories: International Mantle of the Expert Conference, University of Waikato, Hamilton, New Zealand.
Kant, Immanuel. (1793/1991). ‘Critique of Pure Judgement’ trans. Meredith, James Creed. Blacksburg: Virginia Tech.

Miriam Webster Online Dictionary. //www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/aesthetic+distance

Moreno, Jonathan D. (2014). Impromptu Man (1st ed.). NYU School of Medicine, NY: Bellevue Literary Press.

Wallis, Mick; Shepherd, Simon. (1998). Studying plays. London: Arnold Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aesthetic_distance

About the author

Jimmy Wang is the founder of the Floating Theatre Company, which is one of the most active applied theatre companies in South China. He had 12 years of experience in theatre training, performance, and production, mainly working in the field of Playback Theatre, drama and theatre classes teaching, and experimental theatre creation.

Since June 2017, Jimmy founded Floating Experiment Theatre (the predecessor of Floating Theatre), and its original theatre creations and theatre training courses have been staged and held in Shenzhen, Guangzhou, Shanghai, Wuhan, and Xiamen. In 2019, he was invited to lead a thematic training workshop at the IPTN Conference 2019 to share the unique creative experience of Floating Theatre. In August of 2023, he graduated from the 2023 Leadership Program of the Center for Playback Theatre (CPT) in New York.

Abstract

This article emerged from the experience of organizing Playback Theater for teenagers in Liepaja, Latvia, over a five year period and it is written in two separate parts. The first part is written by the group’s trainer and facilitator, Marija Bambulyaka, and the second part is written by Ruslan Novikovs, one of the group’s young participants.  Both authors use the concept of the Monomyth (or Hero’s Journey) to describe their experiences and to reflect on the connection between the individual and the group, looking at how obstacles on the path of group and personal development can be overcome, and how the overall processes might be understood. In a world where everything is interconnected, separating layers of events, dissecting the multidimensionality of objective and subjective reality, and analysing individual and social processes can be complex. In order to capture this complexity and to share her thoughts about doing playback with teenagers, Marija considers three levels: the social context of Latvia, the playback participants themselves, and her own self as a leader. In the final section of Part 1 Marija sets out of some of the practical and pastoral issues involved in providing playback for teenagers.

“Everything is interconnected, a sea of threads,

But if you pull one thread, a ball of yarn will follow.

This world is a spinning wheel, with zero coincidences.

Should to be the thread, or a string, or a bowstring for battle?”

 (Oxxxymiron, 2015)

Part 1 (Marija Bambulyaka)

Introduction

I will attempt to use the concept of the Monomyth, or Hero’s Journey, to examine my five-year experience of working with the teenage Playback Theater team Beaver’s Boomerang. Like any model, the Monomyth  (Campbell,1949) serves as a mere foundation for describing the development of a unique path, and Beaver’s Boomerang’s journey differs from the standard monomyth algorithm. My main reflections are based on Carl Jung, (1997, 2017, 2022), Baudrillard’s works (Baudrillard 2000, Samara, 2006), and other individuals I have learned from through books or real interactions.

In order to convey a comprehensive picture, I examine several levels of ongoing events. The first level is society. Society is the environment in which the movement of Playback Theater (PT) emerged, as a response to the call that arose within the system’s depth, and provides the first level. The second level is the performative group. By using the formation of teenage PT as an example, it is possible to consider the main stages of each participant’s journey, attempting to identify common components of individual processes. And the third level is one particular individual – myself, as the leader of the teenage team, being aware of myself within the ongoing processes.

Status Quo: simplification and annulment of complex reality

Latvia, where the events I describe take place, is a two community state with ethnic Latvians and Russian-speaking descendants of people who came to the country during the time of the USSR. Latvian is the primary state language, while Russian is used by around 30% of the population. This has been a contentious issue in the country for the past thirty years, dividing the informational and social fields of interaction into two conditional opposing camps. Latvian culture suffered from forced interventions by the Soviet authorities for a long time. Since Latvia regained independence in 1990, the pendulum has swung in the opposite direction and now Russian-speaking residents of Latvia face violence and disrespect from Latvian authorities.

Attempts to simplify this complex political situation have included closing educational programs in Russian language, enacting laws regarding the state language, and implementing surveillance to monitor violators of the language law. However the expected integration of Russian-speaking Latvians into a unified political nation did not happen. This conflict has become even more acute since the Russian military aggression towards Ukraine, and the tensions between Latvians and Russian speakers in Latvia have intensified.

The situations we experience are never one-dimensional. But politicians create simplistic laws without considering how these laws limit the complexity of the situation – in this example ignoring Russian language native speakers and manifestations of Russian culture, and viewing everything Russian as a hostile expression. This in turn undermines the foundations of security and respect in society in general.

It is interesting to consider why the complexities of human psyche and soul are so often reduced to such simple denominators. Meeting oneself also means accepting our shadow – those aspects of our personality that we would rather not see in ourselves (Jung, 2019). Perhaps society’s unpreparedness to see its shadow lies at the core of such simplification. We do not want to see pain, we do not want to hear about deep and difficult emotions, we do not want to face our powerlessness in front of Life and its incomprehensible multidimensionality. However, the shadow strives to break through artificial barriers and be recognized. Social conflicts, endless wars, social tensions between different groups can be understood as the breakthrough, the voice of the shadow longing to be acknowledged.

Latvia has enough problems beyond forming a unified political nation. And all I can hope for is that my personal beliefs and goals of co-existence align with the general goals of Playback Theater as a form of social movement aimed at developing the ability of different people to listen to each other, accept and value their differences, and be heard.

The Call: a split between the desired and the actual

The Call to Adventure sounds both from within and from the outside. The world calls each of us to be involved in the social processes around us, to change them for the better (Campbell, 1949).  Our energy for creative transformation of reality calls us to change, to be closer to people, closer to what we call humanity. We don’t know how, but we understand that something needs to change – to release our desire to change the unjust balance of power, to influence the world, and to feel like a valuable part of humanity as a whole, not an isolated, insignificant unit.

Everyone hears their individual call. I belong to those who hear it as a need for changes leading to co-existence, but in Latvia, there are also enough people who feel the call to protect their ethnicity and culture from both the Latvian and Russian-speaking sides. Revisiting the call in the context of Latvia’s social events, we can imagine that many people see and understand that the situation of tension is unhealthy in its nature and arose as a result of non-constructive, perhaps erroneous, integration strategies. Both Latvians and Russian-speaking people do not feel social pressure at the household level, but it hovers in the media space. The conflict between the inner feeling of unity, closeness to people in ordinary life situations, and the external image painted at the legislative and informational level creates tension that needs to be released. And this occurs not during the process of social expansion, but rather within groups with centripetal orientation, delving into their own group culture and values.

Mentors, another world, and challenges: Support from the international community

PT in Latvia emerged thanks to the efforts of one woman who managed to organize two training programs within the framework of the Moscow School of Playback Theater. As a result, three playback teams were formed in Latvia, two of which operate in Russian and one in Latvian. The very existence of the PT movement, the community of playbackers, and the theoretical and practical foundations of the movement seem to form the symbolic figure of the mentor, or the guide, providing support for the hero’s journey, accompanying the hero on their path.

The Beaver’s Boomerang Youth Playback Theater was formed in February 2018 (see Figures 1 & 2 above). At that time, I had just received my practitioner certificate and felt the need to apply the knowledge I had gained. However, Latvia is a poor country, and few residents can afford playback training, especially outside of Riga. I live in the small town of Liepaja, and I faced the challenge of assembling a stable and long-term team.

Campbell (1949) writes about supernatural patronage. I was invited to conduct extracurricular education in one of the schools in our city, funded by the municipality. I managed to negotiate and form a group of teenagers aged 13-16, who participated for free. This allowed me to conduct weekly training sessions for five years and organize performances on topics relevant to contemporary teenagers. A similar situation occurred with the Latvian-speaking Playback Theater Re-stasts in Riga. They have two teams – one for adults and one for teenagers. The work with teenagers is also funded by municipal funds.

Immersing oneself in the study and practice of playback represents a journey into an unfamiliar world. It is a departure from the familiar, where everything is clear and stable, and a venture into the zone of the unknown. People come together with the intention of studying something new and unleashing their creative potential. There is no clear algorithm for how the work of the collective will unfold or what it will be based on. There is only a readiness to change and take all the necessary actions to move forward.

During the journey stage of the teenage playback collective in Latvia, there were internal challenges such as organizing the process of training, motivating and disciplining participants, and collaborating with parents and the school. Secondly, but even more significant, were the challenges of the external environment. This included attitudes towards Russian-speaking teenage groups in Latvia, and attitudes towards PT. The pandemic and quarantine times during the first two years of existence of Beaver’s Boomerang were also a serious challenge, pushing the very existence of the collective to a crisis point.

The first treasure: faith in humanity

The first treasure of Beaver’s Boomerang was the atmosphere of closeness, openness, emotional support, and unconditional acceptance, which we created during the first two years of the theater’s existence, and the willingness of the young participants to work in performances (see Figures 3, 4, 5, 6, & 7 below). This golden social energy and the acquired technical skills played a significant role in overcoming the crisis and returning to the regular world, where the theater found a solid foundation and history. This did not emerge easily or immediately. Gathering together weekly in the group, engaging in exercises and sharing personal stories helped the young participants to open their minds and souls gradually. Each individual has their own pace and distance in forming trusting relationships.

I call this the first treasure because of the huge potential for personal growth, self-development and humanity. It instills confidence in acquiring something valuable that is associated with the playback movement as a whole and the theater group in particular.

The Monster: spectacular and meaningless masses

Following Jean Baudrillard (2000), I would call the monster (and the shadow) of modern society the problem of the social, or social expansion. The development of this social part has always had a dark side. The shadow of society is not just the hidden suffering of individuals, sometimes even hidden from themselves, but also the phenomenon of the masses. Masses are inert, numerous, faceless, and structureless, and this is their main strength. Baudrillard refers to the masses as black holes. The resistance to information in a structured group is carried out through the method of interpreting the meaning of information according to the culture of that group. However, the masses resist differently – devoid of meanings and culture, they turn everything into a performance, consuming and rendering everything meaningless – events, phenomena, information. Much of what we encounter in contemporary society is often a parody – a parody of submission, a parody of consumption, a parody of meaning. Thus, modern society, tightly woven around any member of society, evokes a response, but not a personal one; it is a mass response devoid of any individuality.

Where did this monster come from, and can we fight it at all, and how? By turning to primitive, traditional cultures and societies, we can understand how they consciously managed internal destruction and had a centripetal force in contrast to the external expansion of contemporary society. Perhaps, for representatives of these cultures, the social was something different from what we have now.

Following Baudrillard, analyzing primitive ritual communities with their reliance on the magical and the symbolic and comparing them with the contemporary situation, we see a paradox. The media, while producing the social, destroys it, and the masses that emerged as a result of the social consumption also engulf it. The question arises: what if the social is a trap and never existed on its own but has always been an illusion? If we understand the social as a space of collective development of people, where everything that enters it gains its meaning and significance, it becomes evident that humanity has never had such a space. Speculating about it is a modeling of a desirable simulation.

By honing our ability to withstand the tension between the social and the personal, we rely on the symbolic space formed in the ritual and cultural field of Playback Theater. I often come across phrases about how playbackers, when coming together, identify themselves as a tribe, or as a pack. Perhaps this designation reflects a tendency to return to earlier, primitive forms of social existence, where the dominant culture of the community was not about global goals but about forming a unified culture, moving inward, not outward.

Pain: the personal monster of suffering

If we contemplate the monster that one must fight on an individual level while engaging in PT, I would say it is pain. Over the five years of working with teenagers, I haven’t come across a single one who hasn’t faced this monster. They might appear optimistic, joyful, and happy, but as they get closer to others, as they open up and come into contact with the stories of others, it’s as if the waves of social rituals give way to the rituals of playback, and then these stones within the ocean of a developing human soul are laid bare.

This pain can manifest as uncertainty, a lack of information about who I am, what I can and cannot do in this society. It can be a feeling of being lost when I don’t understand who I am at all? It can be loneliness, the type that scares teenagers the most – feeling utterly alone in this world, with nobody capable of understanding them. It can be desperation – when I try and seek something with all my might, but constantly hear that it’s not enough, that I’m doing something wrong. It can be a numbing of feelings. It can be hypersensitivity and overreacting to events in the inner and outer worlds. Especially tough when it can be trauma – the death of a loved one, life in an orphanage, drug or alcohol addiction, or even unrequited love.

Often, a coach’s personal and professional focus creates a kind of magnet for those who come to learn from them. I notice that some of the children who come to me have quite serious mental issues, related to self-harm, suicidal thoughts, dependencies, diffuse identity, and depression. I associate this not only with society’s problems as a whole but also with my profession as a psychotherapist. Though I try not to mix theater and psychology, I seem to be able to attract all these deep and painful themes against a background where low self-esteem, lack of self-confidence, and problems in relationships with parents are perfectly normal conditions for starting playback sessions.

During Beaver’s Boomerang Playback Theater’s existence, many teenagers have come to us – so different, so dissimilar to each other that I myself am always amazed at how we all manage to find ways of coexistence. Some continue to be involved, some graduate from school and move to other cities, and some just change priorities and delve into their personal creativity or social processes. Some don’t stay from the very beginning because they don’t fit the format, culture, or atmosphere that has formed during Boomerang Bobra’s existence. Confrontation with open human emotions, entering a creative atmosphere, can be painful. I have seen how teenagers, coming into an unfamiliar collective, witnessing our sessions, experience a range of negative emotions – from “what kind of nonsense are you engaged in?” to devaluing themselves as “a stranger here, not belonging.”

I don’t think pain can be avoided. I think that one must accept and endure the battle with pain in order to let go of it later and accept it as a given. Just like a seashell forms a pearl from a grain of sand deep underwater, through the pain that forces it to layer iridescence upon grain after grain. The pearl must be extracted from the shell, sinking to the bottom of the sea. And how important it is then to wear it in the sunlight, filling the skin with warmth, so that it can adorn the world of people with its inner brilliance. Likewise, the skills that teenagers acquire in playback come as a result of deep internal work, which from the outside is not something complex or impossible. People wish for pain not to exist. But pain has been, is, and will always be present, from birth to death. The battle with this monster presupposes the death of that part which would like to shield itself from the sufferings associated with what we call being human. But it also means the victory of that part that lives and perceives the world as it is.

Battle: letting go of illusions

This stage is not just a battle with a monster; it is also a process of dying. The monsters I described above are not the kind of events you can overcome by closing your eyes and passing through without looking. When faced with the real problem of universal socialization and impersonalization, encountering personal pain as a form of reacting to contact with inner or external reality, it is impossible to remain the same without changing. This symbolic death manifests itself in the loss of meanings.

During the pandemic, there was a moment when we were forbidden to work with teenagers, and we said that it might be our last season. I remember my feelings at that moment. Deep inside, I acknowledged the meaninglessness of continuing the work, released the project to the mercy of fate, and decided that I wouldn’t invest my time and energy into something that’s so difficult to keep afloat. Playback is not a choir, art class, or sports section. It attracts those children who have an interest not only in themselves but also in people and their stories. Those who are ready for strange exercises, unusual, spontaneous experiences of living events. And I can’t say there are many such children. Rather, the opposite. I hope playback never becomes a mass phenomenon. And understanding all this, I let Beaver’s Boomerang symbolically die.

Speaking of the individual battle with pain, I see this process as recognition and acceptance of one’s own wounds. The actor walks, tells stories from everyday life, listens to others. And at some point, the desire to share the pain overcomes the inner tension. It seems to me that at that moment, the one who coped on their own, who didn’t need witnesses, didn’t share or involve others in their pain, dies. Perhaps the pain loses its subjective value and becomes part of the group’s narrative. It retains its meaning in the storyteller’s experience but ceases to be their personal tormentor. The person who suffered from it – dies, releasing their fears, troubles, problems, and pain outward. They give them into the hands of fellow actors and let go. They stop being the one who kept everything inside and become someone else. At this point on the path, it is entirely unclear what comes next. Symbolic death is a dis-identification with the former identity, a point of fragmentation of self-conceptions.

Choice: acknowledging needs and embracing change

The choice essentially means recognizing the fact of symbolic death. When a person, after sharing their painful story, acknowledges its authenticity, integrates this experience into their life, and chooses to move forward, considering this new experience – the pain no longer marks their identity; it remains a companion but no longer leads the person, especially a young person. The choice looks like granting permission to the suffering person to die and accepting oneself as someone else, someone who feels life, its pain, but chooses to live, feel, allow themselves to be, speak and act. This happens spontaneously but almost imperceptibly to others. Sometimes, after some time has passed, the participants tell how difficult it was for them to decide to share their stories, how challenging it was to participate in exercises during rehearsals. But these stories are shared when the choice has been made – the person has given themselves the right to be who they are and to speak about what is really happening to them.

I stopped orienting myself towards what we want to change in society. I reduced my social expectations and chose the symbolic over the social. This means that I stopped putting so much emphasis on how PT is needed by society and how it contributes to the social sphere. I stopped striving for expansion, social outreach, and focused on what happens within the group, the training process, the performances, and the audience. I continued working with the teenagers that summer, and we created another performance, after which many new actors joined us. It was unexpected and strange that just when everything seemed ready to conclude, this influx of fresh energy, new people, and different dynamics happened. We chose to continue evolving, working together, and trying to integrate new participants with the old ones. It has been and continues to be challenging, but also interesting and regular work.

However, teenagers are teenagers, and the issue of discipline is always a crucial moment that requires attention. One week they come and are happy to be together, another week – they are not in the mood, tired, or have a headache. On one hand, playback is a labor of love, but on the other hand – it is work. I analyzed possible pitfalls in the dynamics of group participants and identified two central motives for absences – one is related to the degree of freedom the actors allow themselves. The less a teenager allows themselves to express, or conversely, the more they revealed during the previous session, the higher the probability that they will not feel well during the next rehearsal. Other factors are the usual busyness, school fatigue, tutoring, rainy weather, etc.

To cope with these challenges, we came up with an agreement for the participants, highlighting collective responsibility. We discussed all the conditions, made adjustments as needed, and now, when each new group member signs this agreement, there are fewer problems with absences. The exception is during school vacations – everything is always very uncertain at that time. We sometimes modify the agreement if we notice that certain parts of it aren’t working as expected. And this, too, involves making choices, accepting responsibility.

Training: slow but regular progress

The ascent, the return to the ordinary world, is achieved through the training process. We meet weekly and practice for two hours. Taking into account the time limitations of our training process, I made a decision that it’s better for us to play a few forms but develop them deeply rather than attempting to cover a broader repertoire. Mostly, we play four or five short and five or six long forms. Some forms are constantly being developed – these are forms related to physical expression of emotions and music. We have a few actor-musicians in the team, and synchronizing music with the actors’ performances is a separate task, as is physical freedom and expression of emotions silently. We work a lot with props, primarily fabrics, gloves, beads, ropes, and hats. Symbolization and animating props are also interesting tasks for our training sessions.

In general, our training process includes a 15-20 minute warm-up, according to the planned goal for the training. Then, for 40-45 minutes, we do various exercises to develop specific skills. The remaining hour is spent playing the actors’ stories and discussing how they were performed, what was the heart of the story, what meanings were captured, and what could be done differently. At the end of the session, we discuss what we would like to focus on next time, gather feedback from the actors, and consider their suggestions.

We have a group chat on WhatsApp. This plays a role in uniting the team as it creates a sense of continuous connection. In the chat, they mainly discuss philosophical topics, such as the existence of God or whether the world can love a person. We don’t have time for such discussions during training sessions. Of course, the dynamics of the group are not simple, as playback raises questions not only related to theater but also to broader aspects of life. The chat helps relieve tension, ask questions, and seek answers together.

It can be challenging for me to know when it’s time to play the mother and talk about what is acceptable and what is not during rehearsals. For example, most teenagers use swear words. While sharing stories with each other, they can get caught up in strong emotions and express them using inappropriate language. We have an agreement where we replace profane words with the word lentil. But sometimes, this agreement doesn’t help, and I expect the actors to correct themselves. When they don’t, I intervene and remind them about the lentil rule.

My role is quite complex. I am not only a trainer but also a facilitator. I try to develop not only the actors’ creative potential but also the goal of eventually making Beaver’s Boomerang an independent acting troupe. This task is progressing slowly but steadily. Many actors express a desire to become conductors and have been leading their own performances independently for the past few months. In the training process, I try to be very cautious. I want to activate the actors’ potential for self-expression and encourage them to express their opinions, and I suppose I act as a role model to some extent. I try to use my parental authority as little as possible. Decentralizing power in a teenage group is an interesting task, and it seems to be working for us.

The actors themselves have created Instagram, Facebook and TikTok pages. I am a bit involved but this part of the work is not a priority for me. My focus is more on working within the group. I really don’t want, and even prevent, playback from becoming a mass phenomenon. I don’t want it to be part of senseless spectacles. There’s a delicate balance between the phenomenon itself and involving people for whom it is too complex or profound.

Some people try to simplify the task of listening, they do not want to delve deeper into the world of the Other to understand more. Performances turn into amusing and entertaining spectacles for the masses. But for me, this is not entirely Playback Theatre. I think more about serving people, and for now, I do my best to serve those who share the vision and understanding of what playback is all about.

Performances: returning to the world and sharing personal stories

Performances initially serve as a form of initiation. From this perspective, a performance could be seen as a point of choice or even crisis. However, we strive to hold performances regularly, and over time, they become as integral to the training process as our weekly rehearsals.

During performances, all the skills and abilities that the actors possess are mobilized to live the storyteller’s story authentically. I employ Nikolay Demidov’s  (2004) etude technique to explore each actor’s individuality and their unique inner impulse. We use the metaphor of the actor’s persona as an empty jacket on a hanger, and the storyteller’s story as the body that fills that jacket. This approach allows for both a sense of emptiness and liberation within the actor’s inner space, while their personality remains the foundation upon which the story unfolds.

Through playing the stories of the storytellers, we demonstrate how creatively and freely a person can express themselves, the diverse facets of existence we can witness in their shared experiences, and how attentive and respectful we are to the life stories they share. Towards the end, and sometimes even during the performance, the actors engage in dialogue with the audience, sharing their own stories or discussing their experiences as playback actors. This process brings them back to the ordinary world, a world that remains the same but with transformed actors who are now seen and heard differently.

In recent months, some of the actors proposed conducting the performances themselves, and from my perspective, they managed it quite well, suggesting that Beaver’s Boomerang is ready to independently lead its own performances. Mistakes are unavoidable, but they offer valuable learning opportunities. During our last performance, for example, one of the young conductors repeatedly asked the storytellers with a smile, “So, how did you like it? Did we exceed your expectations?” Analyzing the performance, the actors themselves asked her what this question implied, and they realized that playback actors are not entertainers or pleasers. They are not here to fulfill the storyteller’s expectations or amaze them. Our mission is to truly listen, deeply experience their stories, and if possible, add a drop of our essence and alternative perspectives. Understanding and verbalizing this concept became possible when the young conductor exposed her focus—her desire to please and surprise the storytellers. Although it was not easy for her to receive such feedback from the actors, that is what conductors are here for—to establish clearer and more genuine connections with the audience and actors in the future. After all, our ultimate goal is for the storyteller to feel genuinely heard and satisfied.

We have performed on average four or five times a year, totaling about 20-25 performances. Most were in school classes, focusing on topics such as vacations, holidays, and occasionally conflicts when teachers invited us to address a specific issue. We have performed on bullying in schools, for groups of socially vulnerable children, addicted adolescents, and on the theme of choosing one’s future. We also conducted several performances centered around parent-child relationships, with an audience consisting of both children and parents.

We were invited to perform in Riga for a group of young women, exploring the theme of experiencing social isolation. We titled it Me with Myself and Me with Others, and the performance delved into deep and emotionally challenging stories. The girls in the group had been gathering for a while, building trusting relationships, so the stories shared were very personal, and most were about trauma. Our performances in other cities and the open performances in our own city are also a part of the Playback Theatre’s narrative about itself – about its existence, constant development, and renewal.

Conclusion (me: simply to be)

I feel like the protagonist of my own narrative. Playback has profoundly transformed my life, infusing it with strength, energy, and, as Rollo May (2020) put it, “the courage to create”. The first circle was my own personal growth. If I hadn’t experienced these transformations firsthand, I wouldn’t have been able to move on to a new circle, create a teenage group, then an adult one, and continue working with them, contemplating how to form a group for 10 to 12 ear-old children, as it has its own unique dynamics (see Figure 8 below). I also sense that I am moving in parallel with the phenomenon of PT I now realize that I don’t feel like an integral part of it, not fully immersed in this movement. It’s as if playback is the ocean, and I’m swimming in it, but I am not the ocean itself. I have many questions and reflections on the complex relationship between art, psychotherapy, and spiritual practices within playback.

I pay great attention to ensuring that my psychological background doesn’t overly influence the training processes. Perhaps what I love the most is that with each heroic cycle, I gain a better understanding of myself, the people around me, all those unnamed processes and, most importantly, more about people. And of course, I’ve found my own meaning in Playback Theatre. It is simply to be

References (part 1)

Baudrillard, J. (2000) In the shadow of the silent majority, or the end of the social (A l’ombre des majorités silencieuses, ou la fin du social) in Suslova, N.V., Ekaterinburg: Ural University Publishing House.

Campbell, J. (1949) The Hero with a Thousand Faces (1st ed.). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. 

Demidov, N.V. (2004) Creative heritage in 4 volumes. St. Petersburg: Hyperion, 2004

Jung, C. G. (1971) Aion: Researches into the Phenomenology of the Self. Walter Verlag AG, Olten.

Jung, C. G. (1997) Consciousness and the unconscious: Collection, The Portable Jung. St. Petersburg: University Book

Jung, C. G. (2019) Aion: Research on the Symbolism of the Self, AST Publishers.

Jung, C. G. (2022) Archetype and Symbol. Canon.

Kociunas, R. (2008) comp. Psychotherapy with life: The intensive therapeutic life of Alexander Alexeichik. (2020) Institute of Humanistic and Existential Psychology

May, R. (2020) The Courage to Create. Peter.

Oxxxymiron (2015) Russian singer, quote from song Perepleteno, album Gorgorod.

Samara, E. (2006) Jean Baudrillard and his universe of signs // The Consumer Society. Myths and Structures / Jean Baudrillard

Playback Theater: The Hero’s Journey from the actor’s perspective

Part 2 (Ruslan Novikovs)

“I know it’s better to keep silent,

But I can’t not to take the risk.

I think about one thing night after night,

Just slightly changing a couple of destinies,

Just like a god, and gods are not judged.”

            Vodokachka, Long time fool (song)

Introduction

“The meaning is to be” – to be honest, I disagree with this statement. Being/existing is, of course, good, but it is not enough compared to the true power of thought. Being without thinking about anything is possible, but this path creates a strong mass of people, whom later the strong mind of a person leads. In my purely opinion as the Hero, it is not the meaning that creates a person, but a person creates meaning, gives it a form and value that spreads among the masses and minds. Everyone should be heard, but not everyone knows how to use their voice and mind.

Status Quo: the ugly duckling and flocks of birds

The world of fantasies and dreams was the foundation of my entire childhood, wherever I went, whatever I did, my imagination accompanied me from the age of five, and from that moment, I started to feel like myself. Lots of stories about ordinary things that my brain turned into tectonic and epic adventures. In addition to this, emotional intensity and a loud voice expressed both in opinion and physically. Easily trainable, but also lazy, and “a good boy” as everyone around used to say. The kind of boy who got into the school theater section by pure chance, where I could express all my empathy and transform into the heroes I once were in my fantasies. However, despite all the creativity, finding peers and friends with similar thinking was challenging, so the most interesting people for me were creative adults who taught me and whose knowledge I absorbed like a sponge, giving back my restraint and patience during the learning process. Emotional doesn’t always mean a restless child. That’s how I grew up – waiting, absorbing knowledge, inventing worlds, and looking for friends with similar thinking.

The Call: loneliness

I didn’t find the people I was looking for; I didn’t find them. Instead, there were others, into whose frames I could fit to avoid being the strange classmate. Fitting into someone else’s expectations can be difficult; it’s harder to create your own frames. I met Marija for the first time when she came to help our class, which was not always at peace with itself. As a result, I couldn’t fit in with the assigned frames of others; I wasn’t heard, I wasn’t needed, I was lonely. So lonely that I cried, had tantrums, left the classroom with a loud slam, and didn’t want to go back. I didn’t use my voice then; I used the cry of despair.

Mentors, another world, trials: playback or first feathers

Alone, sitting and crying. Suddenly, everyone wants to help, but a minute ago, they didn’t care. The only person who genuinely wanted to listen to me and calm me down was my future mentor. She stayed alone with me and waited for my voice; in response, of course, there were tears and indistinct speech. But I was listened to, and that’s the most important thing. When I was able to speak clearly, they invited me to watch and participate in an interesting theater, and as a person who played the role of a black cat in the school’s New Year’s performance, I couldn’t and didn’t want to refuse.

First Treasure: ugly ducklings

I came, I saw, I was scared, I told my story, I played, and I liked it. The most crucial thing was that I enjoyed it, the freedom. Tell what you want, play as you see fit, use the storyteller’s history and your knowledge, and with my fantasies, it’s a continuous sandbox of characters and events. The second important part was the actors: open-minded, creative, dreamers, and philosophers. THESE ARE MY PEOPLE! These are the ones I was looking for; of course, they were older, but it didn’t prevent us from playing together. And the fact that I was the only boy didn’t matter either, art has no gender. I was where I belonged (see Figure 9, above).

The Monster: flocks of birds

There was one problem; my place worked for 2.5 hours and only one day. I didn’t want to return from the beautiful world of art to the world of everyday life. My week revolved around rehearsals, and everything else felt less comfortable. There, I could express myself as a person, playing other personalities, while the rest of the time, I concealed my identity behind roles and labels.

Pain: being ugly

Discussions often arise about people who are different from others. And somehow, it is not taken into account that we are all not the same. We are similar in that we differ as individuals. Masses of society exist, but within it, various personalities are always hidden. And this is my pain: the masses do not use their voice; they use the collective voice. And I am considered ugly just because everyone else finds their generality beautiful, where I don’t fit in.

Battle: becoming a swan

The most challenging trial is to accept oneself with all the flaws, shortcomings, defeats, victories, and positive qualities. It is difficult to maintain balance, to forgive oneself without falling into apathy and without developing an inflated ego. I had to work on balance, not holding back tears, without falling into apathy and not boasting that I impressed the audience today. To learn to be oneself in this world of other people’s frames, to listen to the voices of others, and to learn to use my own voice, developing the garden that grows inside me (see Figure 10 above).

Choice: fly away or seek a place

There was a moment when the older actors, having grown up, left the playback due to their development paths, moves, etc. It also changed my perception of the playback since the people I was looking for had left, and it was a certain loss. I could have stayed in these feelings and not seen new participants, new possibilities, and interactions. Did I consider leaving? Of course. Why did I stay? I was able to see the potential in others that would help to develop myself. Only in fair competition can we grow. In a monopoly without new participants, stagnation occurs. But it can also be challenging with them.

Training: a new nest above the old tree

On the one hand, an influx of new actors is good; on the other hand, it slows down the overall progress of the group. And the difference in experience between old and new actors is quite noticeable. But thanks to the contract we signed, the turnover of personnel stopped, and we were able to develop dynamically. In training, we use the essence of an actor: gestures, body language, voice, and sounds (See Figure 11 below). And, most importantly, meaning. As I said before, we give meaning its form ourselves. We stretch it, develop it, think it through, sometimes embellish it, and release it through our actions. We also use external objects and the surrounding territory. The challenge lies in maintaining discipline and not letting it negatively affect the magic of theater, but we also try to be creative with that. Since I am the most experienced member of the group, it is challenging to listen to the basics of playback and rituals being explained again to the very new participants. Fortunately, the world of fantasies still saves us. We have a well-trained adaptation to new situations and new forms. So if we were to be stranded on a deserted island, I have a favorable forecast for our survival. Adaptation is what helps us stay afloat. We are ready for something new.

Performances: fairy tale

Everything that happens during performances is like a fairy tale. Of course, from the inside, it seems to us that we do many things not as we intended. But in the end, for the most part, it is a success; we are more collected and responsible during performances than anywhere else, and that’s where the actors’ best sides show. Yes, I praise us. Because we always succeed with failure. If you make a mistake, then do it beautifully.

Me: the dreamer

Dreaming is magnificent, finding oneself is even better, being heard is fantastic, but listening to others is essential. The swan is a beautiful animal, but still dangerous, concealing its wild nature behind beauty, which is inherent in all people. We have been given mind, but not all of us want to think. We have been given a voice, but not everyone knows how to speak. I think, therefore, I exist. I exist without meaning, so to live, I give meaning form using my thoughts.

About the authors

Maria Bambulaka resides in a small Latvian city, where her focus lies on tackling local societal issues, particularly addressing the challenges faced by adolescents in the modern world. Holding a Ph.D. in Psychology, she is a dedicated psychodrama therapist and Playback Theatre Leader. Also, she is co-founder of the Baltic Playback and Psychodrama School, directs the Playback Theatre Studio Dashai, serves as a trainer for the teenage Playback Theatre company Beaver’s Boomerang and is co-artist in the adult ensemble Baydarka. Beyond her theatrical roles, she has private practice as psychologist and supervisor in counseling psychology and contributes part-time as a lecturer at Stradina University and the Baltic International Academy. At the heart of Maria’s endeavors is a commitment to infusing more humanity and sincerity into the world, fostering the sharing of life stories among people.

Ruslan Novikovs was born and bred in Latvia, where he nurtures a creative spark alongside a keen mind. His passion for the stage began in middle school, where he immersed himself in both acting and the technical wizardry of lighting. Soon after, he joined Beaver’s Boomerang Playback Theatre, who transform personal stories into compelling performances. Now, as he closes out his final year of high school focused on politics and jurisprudence, his sights are set on the University of Latvia, to study Social Anthropology. He is a curious Latvian with a creative heart and a mind hungry to understand the human experience.

Abstract

This article introduces and describes a unique way of utilizing Playback Theatre for sustained organizational change.  Four years ago, Kimberly Dailey developed the Playback Theatre Town Hall Experience (PTTE), based on her experience of working in the corporate sector in the US. This integration of Playback Theatre and Town Hall Meetings has led to increased appeal and added value for applying playback to organizational settings.

With the PTTE, Playback Theater is applied and quantified to provide the organization with data. Audience members are encouraged to consider what type of personal and organizational actions they feel inspired to take based on the show. Through analysis of their responses, the organization can identify issues and develop strategies and solutions to shift the culture of the organization and create a dynamic platform for catalyzing change. Through this innovative approach, Playback Theatre becomes a conduit for meaningful dialogue, fostering a culture of engagement, empathy, and sustainable change within organizations.

Introduction

Documented occurrences of Town Halls date back to the 17th century. The Professional Leadership Institute describes the goal of Town Halls as follows: “to bridge the communication gap between management and employees, get every member of the organization informed about organizational plans and updates, and inspire teamwork and collaboration amongst employees.”  (Professional Leadership Institute, 2024) 

The Playback Theatre Town Hall Experience combines these two experiences to create an innovative approach to working with organizations, particularly in areas of diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility (DEIA). The interactivity and focus on personal stories elevate the uniqueness and impact of this approach compared to traditional DEIA training.

This integration of Playback Theatre and Town Hall Meetings into the Playback Theatre Town Hall Experience has led to increased appeal and value-add for organizations and paves the way for the entry of Playback Theatre Practitioners skilled in areas not always represented in the Playback Theatre community.

Playback Theatre is the catalyst that inspires these necessary conversations. Not only are the tellers telling their stories, but the members of the organization are having confidential conversations with each other and talking on the organizational level. The organization can experience, digest, and quantify the performance, and move forward into strategy. And when implemented, those strategies can create sustainable change.

The Birth of PTTE

Numerous experiences and individuals, over the years, contributed to the inception of the Playback Theatre Town Hall Experience (PTTE), created by Kimberly Dailey of Dailey Innovations.

• Purposeful Creativity Methods

One pivotal moment occurred two decades ago at a community college following a Playback Theatre performance. Participants expressed delight and a desire for more, recognizing the potential of Playback Theatre for fostering organizational culture change and enhancing individual emotional intelligence. A staff member’s enthusiastic suggestion for post-performance small group discussions and action steps planted the seed for audience members to take action following the show, although operationalization did not occur at that time. The audience had not just attended an engaging performance and not just connected with each other. No, they had experienced something that activated their curiosity and blew the trumpet for a call to action.

In subsequent years, Kimberly began to incorporate various action methods into corporate diversity, equity and inclusion training, in an effort to recreate her experience at the community college. She took advantage of every opportunity to utilize action methods in organizations, even when the event did not involve Playback Theatre.

It was evident, action methods helped attendees warm up, be present, relax, be spontaneous, fully engage in the learning and problem solving process, and most significantly, commit to action. Kimberly’s exploration of these varied impacts, led to her creation of Purposeful Creativity Methods (PCMs), and the book Purposeful Creativity Methods: A Guidebook for Building Insight and Connection in Organizations and Communities (Dailey, 2022). PCMs are evidenced based methods to facilitate connection, spark creativity, and enhance team morale. The PCM name represents the following:

METHOD because they are based on theoretical foundations and evidence-based strategies

PURPOSEFUL because they are intended to strengthen human relationships

CREATIVE because they spark original and new ways of relating to self and others

• A Personal Call to Action

Another significant influence arose during Kimberly Dailey’s tenure at a diversity, equity, and inclusion consulting firm. As a Playback Theatre practitioner and psychodramatist with a background in employing action methods in organizations, she excelled at facilitating challenging conversations with senior leadership teams and aiding leaders in overcoming emotional barriers to change. However, she initially resisted engaging in data analysis, an essential component for developing effective diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility (DEIA) strategic plans. Yet, witnessing leaders’ responsiveness to quantitative data results softened the resistance.  Concerns about high turnover rates among diverse new hires prompted a renewed commitment to DEIA efforts.

• A Global Call to Action

The most critical seed for the development of PTTE, however, was sown in response to the series of tragic national and global events in 2020. Events such as the COVID-19 pandemic and the murder of George Floyd by Minnesota police sparked heightened emotions and ignited a demand for the safe expression of feelings and sustainable workplace culture shifts. To address these challenges, PTTE emerged as an impactful, action-oriented approach to transforming organizational culture and addressing DEIA issues.

As emotions ran high and stress levels soared across all levels of organizations, safety and hope became scarce commodities. Daniel Goleman’s concept of emotional contagion underscored the profound influence of leaders’ emotions on organizational culture, highlighting the urgent need to combat the pervasive negative emotions infecting workplaces. Recognizing the importance of buy-in from leadership, transformational experiences, personal sharing, and a commitment to action, PTTE was designed to create a safe space for open expression of feelings and foster community and purpose amid social distancing measures.

With technology providing a virtual platform for PTTE during the pandemic, opportunities for emotional expression and community-building expanded exponentially, offering a path toward sustainable organizational change in the face of unprecedented challenges.

Like Turning a Ship Around

On an organizational level, the process to create sustainable culture change is labor intensive; like turning around a ship. Leaders often underestimate both the effort required and their organization’s capacity. (Carucci, 2021)

Organizations have many ways of approaching culture change; some are effective, some are not. However, ordering employees to change their mindset and commitment to the organization has never been an effective way to impact the heart except by instilling fear and resentment.  The research indicates the futility of mandated organizational change (Walker & Soule, 2017). It cannot be intellectually imposed, it must begin with an internal shift… an emotion.  When a community is unwilling to address a swelling dissatisfaction, but a voice presents a positive vision and a realistic path forward, it ignites a movement.  It starts small, but as the movement creates impact, others join.  As the movement grows, the impact grows and takes over existing networks and influencers. Ultimately, the leaders use their growing influence to institutionalize the new initiatives and norms.

The founders of Playback Theatre, Jonathan Fox and Jo Salas, state that it “affirms the importance and dignity of personal experience, enables people to view their lives in new ways, and draws people closer as they see their common humanity.” The PTTE uses Playback Theatre to introduce experiences, around a particular theme, related to a problem that the organization is trying to address. The stories may or may not have occurred in the workplace, but they still connect to the same theme.

Ideally, during Act 1 of the PTTE, there is an internal shift as people see their colleagues, not just as employees, but as human beings. In this way, when people listen to each other, culture can change. The PTTE is a vehicle for creating more equitable spaces in organizations. In a short amount of time, the PTTE links personal stories to the issues within the organization.  From this, data is generated, and that data can be used to inform strategy toward shifting the organizational culture.

A few years ago, Dailey Innovations partnered with a large publishing organization to guide them through the PTTE.  In helping to concretize the concept of change, we found it helpful to refer to what we began calling “the 3-H’s of DEIA,” the head, heart, and hand.  As we moved through the process, they were able to connect our efforts and activities with their primary motivation.  An added benefit of the 3-H’s, is they reinforce the need to make meaning of our emotion-evoking experiences and develop a thoughtful way to respond rather than reacting.  So if we’re trying to become better change agents, we can’t just go from the intellectual and into the behavior if you don’t have the fullness of the heart connection, and the heart is what the PTTE brings to this organizational change process. This concept is a primary component of PTTE; making meaning of our experiences; to be able to move from experiencing something into understanding what you experienced and why the experience is having the impact it does.

The last 10 years have seen the impact of several ongoing polarizing events including political events and elections, Supreme Court decisions, the politicization of media, and the flood of violent images that dominate social media, to name a few. These polarizing events increase the  “US vs. THEM” experience in the larger society, and specifically in workplace culture, which severs the ability for people to feel a sense of belonging, value, and connection, which is counter to productivity, commitment, and safety.

In a Playback Theatre Town Hall Experience, people learn how to effectively collaborate by deeply understanding each other’s point of view through telling and listening to each other’s real-life stories, discussing them to acknowledge connections or biases.  This process is highly effective in eliminating the “us-them” mentality that separates people along lines of race, class, ethnicity, and background and is, therefore, a critical component in building insight, collaboration, and innovation.

The Playback Theatre Town Hall Experience

The Playback Theatre Town Hall Experience (PTTE) is made up of five acts (diagram below) that incorporate David Orr’s 3-H framework (Burgess, J., 2022) for achieving transformative change by appealing to the three key motivational drivers of all humans: the heart (emotional), the head (analytical), and the hand (action).  The research demonstrates (Creasey, 2024) that these three motivational drivers are required for effective change management that supports, equips, and enables employees to move from their current state to the new state. This shift in the internal state of the employees is what creates sustainable culture change.

The thing that makes the PTTE so unique is the combining of Act 1 and Act 2.  The goal isn’t simply the outcomes of connections and empathy generated by the performance, it is to harness those benefits and build on them, more and more, with each act.  Many organizations are seeking the Playback Theatre emotional impact (Heart), the empathy-building component, which is critical, however, they don’t always follow it up with the Head and Hand.  But when they do, Playback Theatre becomes a unique and novel entry point to courageously step into a strategic process.  From a few personal stories (Heart), we span the individual’s understanding and capture the bigger picture for the organization (Head).  The stories witnessed in Act 1, evoke additional convergent or divergent memories among participants as they share, and from those memories, they create meaning.  And that meaning translates into data. And that data, when analyzed, can inform strategies for organizational cultural change.

ACT 1

The Act 1 moderator serves many roles in the PTTE: the midwife between the tech team, the organizational contacts- and the playback performers.  The moderator sets the organizational context for the experience, educates the audience on the functionality of Zoom, as well as briefly introduces the audience to the basic concept of Playback Theatre. The moderator then turns things over to the Playback Theatre conductor, with a humorous exchange of ‘fruit’ across the virtual divide. 

During the performance, the conductor invites participants to share personal stories about diversity and inclusion. This is the diversity immersion experience that encourages people to be curious about someone else’s experience, to gain awareness of their internal dialogue about it, and to reflect on their own experiences that may connect with or diverge from the experiences of the tellers.

At the end of the 75-minute performance, that includes the warm-up and closing, the moderator re-emerges. The conductor returns the “fruit” to the moderator and exits.  The moderator then sends the audience members on a 10-minute break. 

ACT 2

• Small Group Debrief

Act 2 opens with a 45-60 minute debrief.  In the large group, participants are introduced to a set of norms that emphasize the importance of transparency and generous listening to each other. 

Participants are prepped to identify a facilitator, timekeeper, and scribe, once they are in small groups.  The scribe captures the major points of their discussion, without identifying any of the individuals present or discussed, and submits them on an electronic survey form.  The collected data is anonymous with no identifying information and no connection to the individuals presenting the data.

Audience members are then placed in small breakout groups of 4-5 people, where they discuss the performance through questions tailored to help them explore the organizational culture, aspects of DEI, and their self-agency to make positive change. Possible questions include:

• What did you experience as you watched the story?
• What did it encourage you to do differently?
• Based on this experience, what hope and vision do you have for your organization?

These focus questions serve to deepen the community-building element they just experienced in the performance, but this time on a more intimate level. Those who weren’t comfortable sharing in the large group now have another opportunity to connect with only 4-5 of their colleagues. 

• Word Cloud

After the breakout rooms are closed, they are once again invited back into the full group for a time of collective sharing.  The PTTE uses Poll Everywhere virtual Word Clouds to create a visual representation of the group’s perspective. Participants can access Poll Everywhere through a computer or phone (image below).

A Word Cloud is an image composed of words, submitted by participants, in response to questions (image below). The size of each word indicates its frequency and importance; if 40 people submit the word INSPIRED, and three people submit the word OPEN, the word INSPIRED would take up most of the page, and the word OPEN would be much smaller.  Participants watch the Word Cloud emerge in real-time, as the shape changes and various words take up more space on the screen, often uttering spontaneous responses and reactions as the words are added.

Much like the impact of a physical body moving across the screen, a Word Cloud amplifies the voices of the audience members. The process is visually stimulating, and it provides a way for audience members to share their opinions, voices, and stories, anonymously.

As each Word Cloud emerges, the moderator acknowledges the image and invites audience members to comment.  A new Word Cloud is created for each question. The World Cloud serves as a powerful tool for inclusion, connection, and communication.

• Back to the Head: Psychoeducation

Act 2 concludes with a psychoeducational component to re-ground participants in the present.  This transitions them from the heart, back into the head perspective, for a discussion of wellness and self-care. Often audience members who hadn’t previously shared, begin to comfortably disclose their personal experiences with self-care. 

• Parting Words

The PTTE concludes with an organizational representative who shares contact information for people participants can speak with to ask questions or provide feedback about their experience, shares the next steps, and provides encouraging words inspired by the PTTE and emerging themes.

ACT 3

Dailey Innovations then analyzes the data and prepares a report to aid the organization in strategic planning.  The data is incorporated into one of three types of comprehensive reports, which is an invaluable tool for developing a strategy for organizational change. (see diagram)

• PTTE Report Options

Once the report is completed, Dailey Innovations meets with the organization’s leadership team for Act 3. Together, they review the report and explore the next steps.  In this way, the report becomes the compass that directs them in their diversity efforts.   Playback Theatre has become the organizational methodology for problem-solving within the organization.  And what’s wonderful about this data, is that it represents every voice present in the PTTE.

• Next Steps…

As you can see, the PTTE has lots of moving parts guided by multiple skill sets and roles.  It is a powerful process, and it requires a significant commitment from all involved; to be effective, that commitment must start with the leader.

The organizational leader is the first voice heard in the PTTE.  They speak vulnerably, sharing the PTTE purpose, process, and desired product (or outcome) of the PTTE.  They must be willing to model sharing a personal experience and be available for Act 2 and beyond. The response of leadership and their commitment heavily impact their direct reports and others.

The benefits of Playback Theatre have been well-researched.  The outcomes of the three acts are cumulative, with each new Act building on the previous Act.  If an organization begins the PTTE with a plan to only complete Acts 1, 2, and 3, they will experience community-building, make meaning of the stories on an individual and organizational level, and review the data; which are beneficial to the organization.  However, because the information has not moved beyond the Head and Heart, into the Hand (the strategy and action component) the impact may be time-limited and not generate sustainable cultural change. Still, some organizations choose to stop at Act 3 for several reasons:

• Some have internal resources and processes that facilitate the strategic planning and implementation phase and monitor progress. 
• Some decide they are not ready to move beyond Act 3; perhaps they realize they do not have the resources, capacity, or infrastructure to accomplish the desired goal.
• And, some organizations experience a leadership transition that deprioritizes the focus on sustainable cultural change.

The reality is that change is hard on any level.  However, a change in a system, as complex as organizational culture, requires a tremendous commitment.

ACT 4

For those who continue to Act 4, members of the leadership team are guided through a Community Strategy Lab to examine the data and develop strategies to address the identified needs and achieve the desired outcomes. This may include establishing committees, conducting further research, developing a plan for additional discussions, addressing resource needs, or an infinite number of other strategies. 

Some organizations initiated the PTTE with the plan to move from Act 3, skipping Act 4, right into Act 5, perhaps having already collected data to inform this decision.  In these cases, early in the process, they have identified workshops that they want to implement, therefore the data is used to inform the workshops rather than determine the strategy.  This process is not typical, but it has been effective for some organizations.

ACT 5

Once the strategic plan is developed, the organization moves into Act 5, the implementation of the strategic plan.  For organizations that continue Act 5 with Dailey Innovations, an unlimited number of action steps are possible. Implementation may include workshops, immersive learning experiences that utilize Purposeful Creativity Methods, and/or the use of Playback Theatre with smaller groups for continued empathy development and community building. 

• Leadership Playback Workshops (LPW)

Some organizations continue to utilize Playback Theatre with the leadership team where leaders learn the skills to step into each other’s stories. The LPW maintains the momentum of the PTTE by facilitating relationship-building among the organization’s leaders. It helps them navigate their personal and professional life, and teaches them the skills of being spontaneous and adaptable; they learn active listening and how to be authentic in all situations. When they can be vulnerable with each other, have difficult conversations, and work collaboratively toward the common goal, this cultural shift positively impacts each of the leader’s teams, and the organization as a whole.

Results

• When it works…

An established historically black college has successfully institutionalized Playback Theatre and is strategizing beyond Act 5 and developing a program to teach students how to use Playback Theatre for social justice and culture change.  Some of their desired outcomes for students and the community include:

• Increase cohesion and trust across communities and organizations
• Enhance awareness and understanding of how individuals’ lives are impacted at different levels of intensity
• Practice having bold inclusive conversations about sensitive topics
• Increased capacity for clear thinking and focused action for the road ahead
• An intrinsic motivation to use the skills and techniques for good

This means that the university is not only using Playback Theatre but they are invested in training students to use it within the organization and outside! 

• …And when it doesn’t

Change is hard, cultural change is hard, and in environments where self-disclosure conversations are not the norm, it can be harder to implement PTTE.  There is a level of normalizing self-disclosure that needs to happen in this process.  Dailey Innovations worked with a few organizations with low morale, difficult transitions in leadership, or unsupportive leadership.  Employees were not used to having vulnerable conversations and sometimes didn’t feel safe. 

We’ve found it ineffective and problematic for organizations to make Acts 1 and 2 mandatory.  These phases of the PTTE require an emotional presence and self-disclosure.  When people are required to participate, it creates an atmosphere even more unsafe for personal sharing as internal tensions inhibit open discourse, particularly when authority figures are present. In addition, small groups are vital to facilitate a safe environment conducive to vulnerable sharing.  High-tension environments also benefited from advanced guidance to help them thoughtfully consider a story they might tell, and a longer warm-up with sociometry to facilitate connection and belonging.

The Conductor’s Perspective

In many ways, the Playback Theatre conductor carries the emotional component, or the Heart, of the experience in a way that may exceed what’s required in a typical Playback Theatre performance.  Accredited Playback Theatre trainer and Playback performer, Hannah Fox, has been an integral part of the PTTE, serving as the Dailey Innovations Playback Theatre Director, Coordinator and main Conductor for the performances.  She shares her perspective and experience.

• Facilitating Emotional Risk-taking in the Workplace

Playback emphasizes the uncensored expression of one’s life experience spoken from the heart. However, not all organizations foster an environment where employees feel free to speak openly. Employees may understandably be concerned about expressing their honest views on company diversity issues if the CEO or members of the leadership team are present. 

In Act 1 of the PTTE, audience members are encouraged to be vulnerable and tell stories about belonging and exclusion. To ensure safety, the members of the Playback team interacting with participants need to listen to the teller with awareness and care and be educated around issues of social justice, bias and systemic oppression; this includes the facilitator, conductor, actors, and anyone providing direct tech support to participants. We also have to spend enough time with a warm up, including sociometry and actor introductions, to build a “container” and a sense that we are all sitting together in the same room, even in a virtual space.

This work requires a calm but heightened level of alertness to monitor for bias and potentially offensive or concerning content or language that may upset audience members within the PTTE.

• Remaining Neutral

The Playback Theatre conductor, as well as the actors, must maintain a certain level of neutrality despite their own personal experiences and biases. It’s impossible for any of us to be free of bias. Our biases are the result of our upbringing and experiences. We cannot be free of bias, but we can become aware of our own privileges and “blindspots”, and get in touch with our own experiences of exclusion, rejection, microaggressions, being “othered”, as well as the times and spaces where we feel a true sense of acceptance and belonging. 

The question arises: How can we remain neutral as a Conductor while respecting the teller and their story and any biases that may emerge during playback? Ideally, we can do both: remain neutral and check our own biases and also address prejudice as it comes up–either in the conducting of the story or in the enactment.

Additionally, it is helpful for the Artistic Director to gather comprehensive information about the client and share as much information as possible with the performers. This involves researching visiting the client’s website and understanding both their company values, mission, and also their objectives for the session.

• Diversity on the Stage

Hannah has found it crucial to create diverse Playback Theatre companies in her almost 30 year career leading playback companies in order to create representation on stage and challenge societal power structures, which often center the white, male, straight perspective.

In creating her playback companies, including Pangea Playback Theatre, her current company, great effort is made to find not only professional playback performers, but also to create a multi-cultural team that represents different races, ethnicities, languages, genders, ages, and nationalities. Diversity in the Conducting role is also important. In PTTE they often rotate conductors.

In addition to diversity, other core principles have been important to her; for instance, it is paramount to compensate actors fairly and value their time and creative contribution. Another commitment has always been to bring the full body to the acting and embody stories with movement and metaphor as opposed to talking-head more literal and naturalistic theatre.

• Creating the Virtual Theater and Stage

In order to create the virtual theater and stage, participants are instructed to mute themselves and turn off their cameras, and click “HideNon-Video Participants,” so they only see the video boxes with the conductor, actors, and musician.

Though necessary, this one-way communication stream introduces significant tension for the actors and conductor who perform without hearing or seeing any reactions from the audience, until after the enactment is complete.  To increase engagement, audience members are encouraged to remain present and attentive even when their cameras are off. Audience members are asked to turn their cameras back on and rejoin the group once the actors have come to a final stage picture.  This serves to foster a sense of presence and connection among all participants.

• A Promising Future

Despite the challenges, the virtual environment, with its rapidly advancing technology, offers advantages such as anonymity protection during group discussions, the inclusion of participants  from diverse geographic locations, and the facilitation of vulnerable conversations even in the virtual space.

The Future of PTTE

• Assessment

Thus far, the PTTE has not included an objective assessment of cultural change.  The organization does generate subjective feedback through updates from organizational leaders and departments, implementation of the strategic plan, and objective feedback including productivity outcomes, profits, customer satisfaction, and employee assessments.  However, the implementation of evidence-based pre-, post, and periodic assessments of the organizational culture, would better monitor the change, the effectiveness of the strategic plan, and areas for further attention and problem-solving.

• Broadening the Skill-set of Playback Theatre Professionals

The facilitation of the PTTE draws heavily on left-brain methodologies that include analysis, comprehension, writing, and speaking; though still creative, these skills are less spontaneous and more analytical. Embracing these methodologies complemented the right-brain processes inherent in music, dance, and theater, contributing to a holistic skill set development. Mastery of less traditional skill sets, such as evaluation and technical proficiency, proved essential in effectively engaging with organizations and stakeholders.

Recognizing the value of diverse skill sets beyond acting underscored the collaborative nature of PTTE which incorporates project management, data collection and analysis, writing, technical support, and moderating to ensure its success.

Conclusion

The birth of PTTE began with a young Playback Theater student’s commitment to create a way to make Playback Theatre profitable for company members and valuable to corporate organizations.  The experiences of the last four years demonstrate the transformative potential for PTTE.  Organizations participating in PTTE have successfully steered organizational culture change and promoted sustainable strategies for diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives. 

We invite others to join the effort to bring Playback Theatre into corporate America as a tool for organizational impact and strategy development.  PTTE promises to be a welcoming doorway for new skill sets and areas of expertise seeking a place in the Playback Theatre community.

Perhaps you are curious about the Playback Theatre Town Hall Experience.  We hope, in years to come, that both seasoned and brand-new members of the Playback Theatre Community and beyond will examine, explore, implement, and improve on the effectiveness of PTTE.  And hopefully, some will even endeavor to incorporate useful new technologies, skills, and interests in courageous ways.

 

References

Professional Leadership Institute. (2024, March 2)  What is a Town Hall Meeting and How to Conduct One!  //professionalleadershipinstitute.com/resources/what-is-a-town-hall-meeting/

Dailey, K. (2022) Purposeful Creativity Methods: A Guidebook for Building Insight and Connection in Organizations and Communities

Walker, B. and Soule,S. (2017, June 20). Changing Company Culture Requires a Movement, Not a Mandate.  Harvard Business Review.  //hbr.org/2017/06/changing-company-culture-requires-a-movement-not-a-mandate

Carucci, R. (2021, April 30) How Leaders Get in the Way of Organizational Change.  Harvard Business Review. //hbr.org/2021/04/how-leaders-get-in-the-way-of-organizational-change

Creasey, T. (2024, March 2) Change vs. Change Management. Prosci.com. //www.prosci.com/blog/change-vs-change-management

Burgess, J. (2022, January 19) Using the “Head, Heart, Hands” Model to Embrace Customer Success.  Sogolytics.   //www.sogolytics.com/blog/customer-success-head-heart-hands-model

About the authors

Kimberly Dailey, MSW, Certified Psychodramatist, Organizational Specialist Dailey Innovations, co-CEO

An organizational development specialist with over 30 years of experience.   She combines her expertise in business, leadership development, diversity, theater, and systems analysis to help organizations bring clarity, focus, and alignment to their diverse teams. Kimberly has designed over 1,000 diversity training curricula for clients including the Smithsonian Institution, Carnegie Hall, American University, Humana, and Tata Communications. Having conducted trainings in over 25 countries, she is passionate about using creative methods to transform organizations and communities. 

Kimberly’s experiential training methodology was the basis of a five-year research project that validated the power of using a whole brain teaching methodology to ensure learner engagement and retention. She received a noted fellowship for her research on identity development formation and its importance to individual self-efficacy.  Kimberly holds a B.A. from Georgetown University, an M.S.W. from Howard University, and is certified in the areas of Life Management Facilitation and Organizational Development from Georgetown University. She is also a certified psychodramatist.

Author of Purposeful Creativity Methods: A Guidebook for Building Insight and Connection in Organizations and Communities. 

Hannah Fox, M.A., APPT, RYT 500

Senior international Playback Theatre trainer, co-director of the New York School of Playback Theatre and founder of both Pangea Playback Theatre, an international multi-cultural professional Playback Theatre company and Big Apple Playback Theatre. Hannah is honored to be a performer and facilitator with Dailey Innovations and has a special interest in using theatre and performance as a tool for promoting social justice. Hannah is the author of Zoomy Zoomy: Improv Games and Exercises for Groups (2010), and as well as numerous other scholarly publications about Playback Theatre. She is the daughter of the founders of Playback Theatre.

Pam Grace, MSW, LCSW-S, LCSW-C, ACBT, CTP Level 1

My Write Mind, CEO. Psychotherapist, Playwright, Stage Director, and Texan. Author of the stage play, Breakfast, an award-winning intergenerational historical drama about the first day of school integration in the rural small town of Corsicana, Texas.

Abstract

This article delves into the fusion of Playback Theatre (PT) and Improv, drawing from my personal experience. It explores the shared principles of spontaneity and collaboration, delving into PT’s story from and the challenges it poses, while documenting cases where PT has been applied in Improv workshops and vice versa. The lessons learned and approaches to combining both techniques are discussed, providing insights for artists and facilitators seeking to unlock the creative potential at the intersection of PT and Improv.

Introduction

If I were in a Playback Theatre (PT) performance, sitting in the teller’s chair, the conductor would ask me, “Where does this story begin?”. I would take a breath and say. . .

“College is a perfect time for self-discovery. For me, I discovered theatre. It wasn’t by chance, though. I’ve always enjoyed goofing around and playing pretend with friends, and some of them encouraged me to join the university theatre group. I did it.”

It was around that time when I discovered improv. Sergi Claramunt, an excellent hospital clown and one of the last students who got to learn from Jacques Lecoq before he passed, invited his fellow classmate, Véronic Joly, to offer a workshop at the Pallasospital headquarters. Veronic was then the president of the Ligue d’Improvisation de Paris. During the workshop, her focus was on Canadian-style improv matches. We spent a week learning, and she left us with an urge to continue practicing improv. To pursue this, we used to meet in the evenings wherever possible and practice by ourselves. It was trial and error for us. After some time of enjoying it, the focus on personal matters and scripted theatre kept me away from improv for a while.

In the 2010s, a friend and fellow theatre mate, who studied psychology, told me about a postgraduate program on theatre in education she was doing at the University of Valencia. Tomás Motos, the postgraduate director, an expert in the field of theater in education. He spoke to us about the full range of Augusto Boal’s Theatre of the Oppressed and, of course, introduced us to the concept of PT. He was very interested in creating a PT company so, when he learnt about my experience in improv, he invited me to join. Teatro Playback Inestable was about to be born. I got hooked to PT, I started to expand my knowledge in any way possible. I met Ana Fernández and other teatro espontàneo practitioners in gatherings. Ana was the first to form a PT company, in Salamanca, detaching from espontáneo. I visited the city many times after our gatherings and witnessing the creation of a rich community formed by Spanish and Portuguese playbackers.

When it comes to my improv-self, Camp Improv Utopia Ireland in 2018 opened my eyes and my improv journey got a strong boost when, thanks to that, I started to attend international gatherings and festivals. A new world of learning that even led me to Chicago, the “Improv Mecca”. Since then, I haven’t stopped learning and performing on an international level. Over the last decade, improv and PT have become two essential tools that propelled me to become a full-fledged applied theatre facilitator and performer. In this essay, I will discuss both of these tools and how their use merged within my practice on certain occasions. Specifically, I will offer insight into the enactment of the PT form known as story and the long form improvisation.

Before we begin, I want to offer a few disclaimers. This essay is about my personal experience using PT and/or improv while facilitating the other. Regarding the story form, I have my particular subjective take on it. I do not intend for my view on this particular form to be seen as an example of how it should be, but rather as how I like to interpret it. In art, there is no absolute truth.

Underlying context

While maintaining an underlying sense of established ritual to structure its performance, PT is fundamentally a spontaneous art form, inherently based on improvisation. In its initial inception, PT took shape through three distinct forms: fluid, pairs, and story. The first two are regarded as short forms, whereas the story form is representative of long form. Short forms are normally used for conveying immediate emotions, whereas the story form demands a more intricate enactment (Fox, 1999).

In the contemporary landscape, influenced by a multitude of cultures and nations, PT has undergone evolution and assumed new and diverse variations. This evolution has resulted in a many original forms, each offering a unique perspective on story enactment. Whether it veers away from the original concept of PT or not, that’s a discussion for another time.

Improvisation is something that has existed since humans achieved the ability to communicate and play. All you have to do is take a look at any group of children and observe their behavior. They are living machines of creating stories and taking them to the extreme with the maximum conviction and with a spontaneity that is progressively buried under the social conventions settled inside by the adult individual.

American author Sam Wasson, in his book Improv Nation, makes a bold claim: “Many have surmised that improv’s origins date back centuries, to commedia dell’arte. I don’t agree. Nor do I believe it was always there. Like anything else, improvisation had to be invented – and it was invented, in America, by young, mostly middle-class amateurs, performers, and producers who, in the true spirit of the form, were making it up as they went along.” (Wasson., 2017).

I’ll allow myself to take of my objectivity hat to express my disagreement with him. I can imagine Mr. Wasson making that colonising statement while riding a grizzly bear and waving the Star-Spangled Banner. They might be the land of fast food, but to say that the USA invented improvisational theatre is too much.  In the second half of the twentieth century, the United States developed improv comedy as it is known today. I’ll give him that. However, Mr. Wasson overlooks a few facts, such as the first documented use of improvisational theatre in Western history, which was found in the Atelian farce of Rome around 300 BC. In   this play, actors devised live sketches on stage.

Still in Italy, from the 16th to the 18th century, it was a common practice among Commedia Dell’arte actors to improvise. In the 1890s, many theater theorists and directors such as the Russian, Konstantin Stanislavski and the French, Jacques Copeau, founders of two great currents of interpretation theory, they used improvisation in training and rehearsal.

It is now when we tackle Sam Wasson’s references in the creation of improv. The inception of modern theatrical improvisation can be traced back to its origins as children’s theatre exercises. These exercises, which became integral to theatre education, owe much to the progressive education movement initiated by John Dewey in 1916. During the mid-20th century, precisely in the 1940s, 50s, and 60s, Viola Spolin emerged as a prominent figure in this realm. Her notable contributions include the development and documentation of various improvisational exercises, all of which were encapsulated in her book Improvisation for the Theatre. This pioneering work marked a significant milestone by offering techniques for both learning and teaching improvisational theater. Spolin’s influence reverberated deeply, shaping the inaugural batch on the modern era of American improvisers like Paul Sills, Bernie Sahlis and Howard Alk; co-founders of The Second City in Chicago in 1959. Later, Charna Halpern and Del close became another referents in the improv creating, also in Chicago, the improvOlympics (later rebranded as iO).

Augusto Boal used improvisation to arrive at the construction of a forum theatre piece, encompassing inside the Theatre of the Oppressed (Boal, 1974).

Regardless of their countries, improvisers must accept the proposals of their peers and add, that is, build on them. Therefore, in this discipline, listening and acceptance are as important as teamwork. That’s why the universal motto of improv is “Yes, and”.

Working with long form

In improv comedy, there are different formats. You could find short form sets, these are essentially sequences of improv games where the fun comes from watching the performers adapt to the rules of each game based on audience suggestions. And then there’s the opposite, long form.

We can view long form improvisation as the improvisers’ playground. Within this category, you’ll find numerous derived improv forms, such as the Harold, the Armando, La Ronde, montage, improvised plays, genre improv, to name just a few. What unites them is the spirit of exploration, moving beyond the confines of improv games, and the extended duration. A long-form improv set can range from twenty-five minutes up to an hour (Napier, 2015).

Essentially, long-form improv serves as the sandbox where we unleash our inner child and help us reconnect with the joy of spontaneity. However, there’s a catch. Improv comes with its own set of rules. I understand it might be against its principle, but there’s an established etiquette that enriches the experience of creating an improvised piece.

• The rules of improv

The first rule you will find in improv emphasizes the capacity to embrace a proposal and enhance it through the contribution of your own ideas. This is encapsulated in the mantra “Yes, and…” This principle serves as the cornerstone of improv, the very first lesson to grasp for those looking to engage in this practice. Denials not only disrupt the flow with your scene partner but also destroy any opportunity for the storyline to progress.

Another important premise of improvisation is listening. Body language, emotional tone or arrangement in space can affect the development of a scene. We must avoid generating any contrast that causes a disruption of the scene and, therefore, alarms the public’s attention. If a scene partner comes speaking in a sad tone, it would be bizarre to respond in a celebratory tone. If a partner enters the scene and through mime establishes that there is a table in the middle of the stage, you cannot cross that space as if there were nothing. In short, listening is very important to prevent the public from perceiving anomalies.

In PT, we have to add another layer in the listening category. We are literally listening to a story, and we have to do it properly. The goal is always to honour that story and this cannot be done if we get incorrect details. During the enactment, we cannot invent new characters or create anything on the scene that wasn’t in the story.

Lastly, performers must hold deep respect and commitment to their performance. In scenes, partners should strive for equality and wholeheartedly embrace their companion’s suggestions, even if it means letting go of personal ideas that only serve individual brilliance. When actors consistently demonstrate consideration for each other, the scene shines naturally.

Again, this is particularly crucial in PT. Respect should be always present as well as commitment and dedication to the truth of the story being reenacted and the suggestions of fellow performers.

Some introduce many more, but these can be considered the basic rules of improvisation. Not everything is allowed under the “Yes, and” umbrella and that might be contradictory. But once these premises are internalized, they can be practiced through various exercises to improve our scene work either in improv or PT. Most of these exercises aim to sharpen mental agility, while others are a combination of activities designed to enhance acting skills.

• The story form in PT

Story, or scenes, is the original long form originated in PT. Stories appear in the middle of a performance to allow longer sharing from the audience in order to be represented. But, is it really improvised if we already know the story?

The fact that the story is provided doesn’t necessarily simplify the actor’s task. It’s not an easy job to extrapolate the received information without possibly adding any details that may elicit negative reaction from the narrator. It’s advisable to exercise caution in using clichés or popular songs that haven’t been mentioned in the story, as using these resources without knowing their connotations for the person can be delicate. Doing so runs the risk of bringing up something associated with a negative memory. These actions may even be artistically sound and have the potential to work. However, they are not without risk. PT performers must be willing to yield for the sake of the story, regardless of their strong aesthetic or dramaturgical judgment. In opposite to improv performers, they have to juggle a lot of factors.

In addition, Jo Salas stablished five echoes of the story: the face of the story, here and now, personal, socio-political and myth and archetype (Salas, 1993). While the first two come from the immediacy of the teller sharing their story, as performers we might want to give special awareness to the rest of them so we can identify and introduce the dramaturgical conflicts attached to them. I’ve learnt from the Valencian playwright Paco Zarzoso that, when delving into a dramaturgical text, we encounter three distinct types of conflicts: vertical, horizontal, and transversal. The task of PT performers is to recognize the echoes that emerge in each story, moving from the individual to the collective and societal. However, mere recognition is not enough; as performers, they must also be able to bring out the relevant dramaturgical conflicts when representing certain aspects of the stories. When it comes to personal echoes, this refers to the individual’s relationship, the performer taking on the role of the teller, with the story. These types of conflicts are known as vertical and concentric conflicts. Vertical conflicts pertain to the metaphysical conflicts that the individual has with the story. These can include conflicts of values, moral convictions, religious codes, etc. All of them are centered around individual transcendence. Mental disorders like paranoia and other psychopathologies also fall into this category. We say conflicts are concentric when, although they are also individual dilemmas, they revolve around more commonplace issues like decision-making. Concentric conflicts can trigger vertical conflicts, for example, in decisions with consequences that impact an individual’s moral convictions (e.g., returning a found £100 bill). However, if decisions relate to something more trivial, they remain as simple concentric conflicts (e.g., what to wear, what to eat, etc.).

In improv long form vertical or concentric conflict is rare. It’s more likely that a type of ‘eye-level’ conflict will come into play, known as horizontal conflict. It’s easier for everyone to identify with it because it’s the one we’re always in by default due to our social nature as humans. Interactions with friends, family, and anyone else bring about this type of conflict. Of course, this kind of interaction will appear in PT stories, specifically in the moments where the literality is stronger.

By becoming aware of the social frame of the story, we begin to identify transversal conflicts, which connect the individual with their socio-political environment. It is the performer’s task to demonstrate this relationship and how it affects them individually (vertically) or in their interactions with peers (horizontally). This echo is particularly crucial when working with groups such as refugees, victims of natural disasters, those affected by a specific illness, and so on. Again, this is something that we will rarely find in improv unless they’re doing an improvised piece inspired by Brecht’s or Ibsen’s plays where there’s always a socio-political event lingering in the background.

The archetypal or metaphorical echo seeks to represent the story in an analogous manner, drawing on typical archetypes from tales, legends, mythology, etc. In this way, it provides a more symbolic version and fosters greater empathy from the audience by expanding from a specific case to a more abstract and general one. The identification of conflicts is more elusive in this echo though. Typically, the conductor may offer a narration and the actors could take on static forms, presenting the story in a tableau format. It can also be represented freely while attempting to maintain a coherent archetypal imagery in each actor’s intervention.

In order to be aware of the echoes, PT performers need to let the core impact the surface of the story and develop from the inside out as much as possible, guided by the identification of the types of conflicts described earlier. Naturally, not all stories may provide enough information from the teller to carry out the desired expansion exercise. It’s the responsibility of the conductor, during the interview, to bring forth the conflicts of the narrator with their story if they don’t naturally arise.

The relationship between PT and improv

Having delved into both improv and PT individually, I’d like to talk about the synergy that exists between these two art forms. As a proficient practitioner in both, I find it natural to infuse elements from one into the other, creating a symbiotic relationship that enriches my practice in both realms.

• When PT and improv overlaps

Numerous improv forms draw inspiration from real-life stories. One notable example is “The Life Game,” a form devised by Keith Johnstone himself, who even filed a copyright for it. In this format, an individual is interviewed, and a team of actors spontaneously creates scenes based on the stories and details shared by the teller.

In 1995, Armando Diaz, a prominent improviser from Chicago, introduced a new format. In this format, there’s someone who opens delivering a monologue about themself. After that, an ensemble of improvisers creates scenes inspired by it. However, these scenes aren’t required to directly re-enact the stories shared in the monologue. This form is now known as the Armando, in honour of its creator.

In Chicago, the iO Theatre was the place of birth of another format rooted in real-life experiences known as “The Living Room.” In this format, the ensemble seeks a suggestion of a word from the audience, sparking a conversation about genuine stories associated with that word. Once the cast feels there has been sufficient sharing, they start a series of scenes inspired by these experiences and conversations.

Numerous variations of these forms exist, all with the common premise of drawing inspiration from real stories shared on the stage. For instance, the London-based company Dreamweaver Quartet interviews an audience member who tells a recent, vivid dream, and they transform it into a musical. In Germany, a company utilizes the pretext of a birthday party to share stories inspired by the unexpected gifts found in their boxes, then they create scenes based on them. These examples are just a couple of derivative formats among many, so using the same source of inspiration as PT is not a new concept in improv.

But what happens when an improviser tries PT? And what about a playbacker doing improv?

• Bringing improv to playbackers

At the start of 2022, I had the privilege of receiving an invitation from Portuguese playback artist and scholar, Antonio Gonzalez. The purpose was to assist the Dispar theatre group members in enhancing their story form within their PT practice. As I sat with the group, composed of relatively young members, I started to get to know them and their concerns and challenges tackling the story form. What became apparent was a shared sentiment of both fear and respect towards the long form. They also shared that their main aim was to being able to feel comfortable in this particular type of re-enactments. When I asked them how was their experience with the story form, they replied that they had many tendencies like making it too literal or trying to bring a solution to the teller sharing. Some added they felt a heavy responsibility whenever they were chosen to be the teller’s actor. Once their concerns were identified, I was able to address them with the adequate exercises.

1. I’m not comfortable with long form

On the initial morning of our workshop, following an enjoyable warm-up session, we worked on playfulness and heightened awareness among the participants through a series of improv games and brief three-line scenes. It was only after this light hearted warm-up that I introduced them to a more challenging exercise: engaging in long-form scenes. This practice, used at The Annoyance Theatre in Chicago, can be seen as a form of “shock therapy”. Essentially, it involves selecting two actors and placing them on stage for an unprompted ten-minute scene. While this approach might seem intense to some, like tossing someone into the deep end to learn to swim, there’s indeed considerable value in acclimatising oneself to the stage and its demands. I always like to use a “floating device” though. I told them there was an envelope on the table, a letter, and it was up to them if they want to open it and read it, or just ignore it.

I saw them pull through, effortlessly, very compelling scenes. After all, there’s a difference working with playbackers instead of improvisers. No one was trying to be funny. The participants were really enjoying the scenes, making them eager to join the next one. All they had to do was. . . being in it. They appeared to be primarily content with the accomplishment of “surviving” and managing to hold the spotlight for an extended duration.

2. I’m being too literal

Tackling this concern from an improv perspective is quite naive since improv is the epitome of literality. In PT, it’s indisputable that we have foreknowledge of the story we’re about to bring to life. However, the execution is still entirely in the hands of the actors. This is where the dynamic interplay between creativity, technique, and the imperative to remain faithful to the narrative unfolds. Actors and actresses grapple with finding the balance. Their innate creativity is set in motion, utilising not only their body and voice, but also drawing upon available resources like fabrics or any other relevant elements for support.

In order to achieve a compelling re-enactment, there are several exercises for trying to expand the way of thought and work on creativity. One of the simplest exercises that I brought to them is trying to rephrase something several times. Line up five participants and give them a simple statement like, for example, “the sun is shining”. The first one has to say the same but without using those words, “the yellow ball in the sky is bright”, they might say. The second one has to rephrase it again without also using the previous version’s words, “the closest star blinds me”, that might add. The exercise iterates five times with the same statement before moving on to the next with the participants in round-robin. This exercise pushes ourselves to find metaphors and even delving into a poetic language.

Another approach to steer clear of literality is, once identified, is reshaping the arc of the story. We might consider commencing with the climax moment and then navigating both backward and forward in time from that central point. And, of course, as playbacker we have a whole range of tools to play with: movement, poetry, song, point of view, analogy, fabric, chairs and, of course, music. So, the next time you wonder what could you do to be less literal, just take a look in your toolbox.

3. I feel burdened by the teller’s actor role

There’s a misconception about being the teller’s actor, assuming we must bear the burden of the story if we are endowed with it. This is far from accurate. One of the best things of improv is the “I’ve got your back” statement. It is within improv nature the obligation to make our scene partners look good. That also extends to PT.

In the improv scene, there exists a plethora of short-form games where an actor steps out of the room, there are one or many suggestions asked to the audience, and the player re-enters the stage. There, they are tasked with identifying the information that has been withheld from them while playing seamlessly. Of course, this is for fun but a skilled actor might act convincingly and relay the guessed information with grace and pathos.

When I was in Japan, back in 2017, I attended an intensive workshop with the Taiwanese playbacker Josephine Linn, after the Asia-Pacific PT Conference. Josephine brought into my attention the possibility of the teller’s actor leaving the room during the conductor’s interview to the teller, keeping them oblivious to the story. Once back in the room, it’s up the rest of the cast to support the teller’s actor in order to build a faithful re-enactment that honours the story. Surprisingly, it works very well. Since then, I’ve used this exercise with many companies and workshops and I’ve never seen a re-enactment that left the teller unsatisfied. Of course, mind that this is an exercise and it never should be considered in a PT performance.

This exercise brings out in full blaze the improv motto of having each other’s back. If we are endowed with the teller’s role, it’s not up to us to carry over the re-enactment. The rest of the cast will offer enough support to achieve a successful piece. The teller’s actor just has to react to the offers, and that’s something you definitely can train with improv exercises. Train your improv skills, trust your team mates and let them share the burden of responsibility with you.

Upon completing the training intensive, the final segment of the workshop in Portugal involved story playback. I could clearly witness the tangible outcomes of our efforts. They skillfully implemented numerous concepts we had discussed. Observing their satisfaction with the results and feeling their gratitude was truly fulfilling.

• Bringing playback to improvisers

I had the privilege of being invited to be a facilitator at the Belfast Improv Festival, back in 2019. During the event, I had the opportunity to introduce PT through a six hours long session for two different groups. I couldn’t help but feel a bit concerned about how it would be received by a comedy driven community.

The initial group I worked with was rather curious; it consisted of just six attendees, all of whom happened to be female. These participants were improvisers who were eager to explore a more delicate and nuanced approach to the art form. Throughout the day, our focus was primarily on fluid sculptures and stories, encouraging them to use the elements for symbolism typically found in the PT toolbox. During the last hour, we had the festival resident pianist to underscore the stories in order to warm them up for the showcase.

I was aware that this was a bit out of the ordinary for an improv comedy festival. In this type of festivals, you often have teams coming together on the spot to perform. We had about six hours to work, but I have to admit, from a PT good practice point of view, I was being a little irresponsible. We were going to wrap up a night full of improv comedy acts with a 45-minute showcase.

Obviously, I took the role of conductor and I got up in front of the crowd to let them in on what was about to happen. I asked them to toss out a deep topic or dilemma to get us started. Of course, it being a comedy festival, someone yelled out “haircuts” Yep, I should’ve seen that coming with this crowd. But then, someone else shouted “relationships with parents” and that was just perfect. I got real with the audience, sharing a bit about my own experiences with my parents, and it set the mood just right. Then, one by one, the cast introduced themselves, sharing a little about their own dynamics with their parents, followed by fluid sculptures from the rest of the members. The audience was impressed. After those introductions, I asked the audience to share their thoughts and experiences on the topic, and some of them did. This gave our cast a chance to turn those audience stories into fluid sculptures.

Then, we got into the stories, and I was surprised, they were fairly deep. We heard experiences about self-acceptance, body image, and even someone shared what was like living with a hereditary congenital heart condition that led to the early demise of her father. The cast was flawless and treated all the stories with the deserved respect. They used analogy, points of view from objects within the story, poetry, and even the cast member with dancing background found herself performing a routine. They were also able to find the lightness in those stories. The performance was quite successful. The audience loved it, and the cast was thrilled. They were very grateful to find out that you can dive into deep topics and still have a blast improvising in all sorts of creative ways.

A few days later, I had to run the workshop again with a fresh group. This time, possibly because of the positive results from the previous showcase, the group size doubled, and we had a more diverse mix of genders. The main difference with this group was that there wasn’t the added pressure of a showcase looming over us. We went through the same processes and exercises, but when it came to sharing personal stories, some participants struggled to resist the urge to be funny. It’s understandable; humour often serves as a shield, a way to protect ourselves. PT, on the other hand, demands vulnerability, and not all improvisers feel comfortable with that. I wouldn’t say it was a bad workshop; they picked up valuable exercises and techniques, and they successfully played back each other’s stories, some of which were quite deep. However, I would have been concerned if we had been preparing for a showcase with this group.

In general, I had a great time at this festival. Looking back, I realize that it might have been a bit bold of me to try to introduce PT in a crash-course style, especially with the added pressure of a public showcase, for a group of improvisers. Fortunately, things worked out well with the showcase group, but after that, I made a decision to stick to a more traditional approach when facilitating PT, without rushing it in such a short time frame. I learned a lot from this experience, and I haven’t stopped incorporating playback elements since then, but I tend to tailor them into improv and not the other way around.

Since then, every time I start facilitating an improv workshop, the key messages I emphasize are:

1. You don’t have to be funny

I’m not saying this in line with the typical improvisation standards of not needing to intentionally seek humor to find comedy. Of course, there’s a certain beauty in discovering humour in sincere situations, and this also happens quite often in PT. However, in PT, there’s no requirement to be funny whatsoever. This is a concept I aim to convey to improvisers, acknowledging that dramatic improvisation is also a valid and valuable form. It’s crucial for participants not to feel compelled to be clever, witty or original.

People who feel the need to be funny might feel that way for different reasons. Doing it successfully it’s compelling and addictive, it helps us establish connections while boosting our self-esteem. Every time I facilitate for improvisers, there’s someone who struggles with this. They just cannot avoid trying to be funny. That’s one of the reasons I don’t try to “sell” what I’m doing as PT. As for those kinds of improvisers, I encourage them to reflect about this urge but there might be a lot of underneath personal work that they have to do by themselves.

2. Don’t be scared of emotions

Emotions in improv often remain on a surface level, played for comedic purposes. However, there’s a trend that’s evolving, it’s becoming increasingly common to witness emotionally grounded scenes in improv shows. These scenes offer audiences something beyond just laughter, appealing to those who value deeper and more meaningful scenes. Suddenly, improvisers are not fishing for laughs only, but for those “aaaw” moments. Consequently, there has been a rise in the popularity of workshops on acting for improvisers and emotional connection.

However, even in a supportive and safe space where the release of emotional energy is encouraged, some individuals may still find it challenging. This reluctance can be attributed to the societal constraints that we developed as adults, being taught to not to be too loud, to avoid making scenes and to keep ourselves together. Again, it’s up to the improviser to break free from these social constraints in order to get the release of emotion needed for the practice of PT or any other demanding acting role, something that can be achieved with any exercises that pushes them to work with feelings.

3. Expand your ways of communication

Improvisers rarely stay quiet. They rely on words to establish their relationships on stage and make things happen. They also focus on the horizontal conflicts and other interactions between peers on an eye level.

PT allows us to ditch conversations in favour of symbolic offers using any of the many options inside our toolbox. Of course, we have the advantage of knowing a story beforehand so, no matter how symbolic we get, the audience is going to interpolate what happens on stage and attach it to the story in a subjective way.

I’ve mentioned earlier the intensive workshop I attended in Japan, led by Josephine Lin. In this workshop, we delved deep into the core elements, or “treasures” of PT. I also mentioned these treasures: body, fabrics, chairs, character point of view, poetry, song, analogy or metaphor, and music. The challenge presented by Josephine was to re-enact stories using just one of these elements as our creative vehicle. This deconstruction of PT allowed me to have more insight in order to apply it to my performance both as an improviser and a playbacker and it gives me the idea of opening the door of magical realism to improv.

As improvisers, we need to view the stage as a canvas for artistic expression an empty space, like Peter Brook said (Brook, 1968). Even if we want to remain in the comedy realm, we possess the ability to infuse depth into any scene. Embrace the freedom to transform into inanimate objects, providing a unique perspective. Don’t shy away from spontaneously breaking into song, even in non-musical improv shows. Feel free to incorporate poetry, dance, or break the fourth wall. In essence, let your performance flow from your heart. It may look that I’m trying to encourage a kind of “new age” style of improv but wouldn’t it be nice to have such a playground?

Conclusion

In Playback Theatre, I’ve learned to really listen and try to honor people’s stories. Taking someone’s experience and bringing it to life on the spot helps us grow empathy. This listening has been very helpful to me when it comes to improv. It helped me to better engage in scenes and build trust among my peers.

Improv’s emphasis on quick thinking and embracing the unknown has boosted my confidence as a PT actor. It helped me respond better to the unexpected things that can happen during a performance. The free-spirited nature of Improv has brought more lightness, even humor and fun, into my PT practice.

My everlasting journey through PT and improv has not only given me insights into human relationships but also shown me how they can enrich each other. Both PT and Improv, share a common goal of celebrating humanity. No matter if the stories come from the audience or are created on the spot. It’s all about making deeper connections with others.

In summary, I’m a better PT practitioner thanks to improv. I’m a better improviser thanks to PT. I’m a better human thanks to both.

References

Boal, A. (1974) “Teatro del oprimido”, Alba Editorial (Ed. 2009)

Brook, P. (1968) “The Empty Space”. McGibbon and Kee

Fox, J. (1999) “Gathering Voices”. Tusitala Publishing

Napier, M. (2015) “Behind the Scenes. Improvising Long Form”. Meriwether Publishing

Salas, J. (1993) “Improvising Real Life”. Tusitala Publishing

Wasson, S. (2017) “Improv Nation”. Houghton Mifflin Harcourt

About the author

Ferran Luengo is a Spanish actor and applied theatre facilitator based in London. Leadership graduate from the Center of Playback Theatre, he has been immersed in the practice of Playback Theatre for more than a decade, drawing from over twenty years of stage craft in theatre and improv. He actively performs and facilitates with London Playback and True Heart Theatre, while also improvising with the acapella musical troupe Acaprov, Not GCSE Drama, and Shuffle. As an applied theatre facilitator, he is committed to theatre in education, facilitating and performing in dozens of schools in London and beyond.

Video synopsis

This article is in the form of a video in which Andrew Utenkov and Marat Mairovich have a reflective conversation about their experience and process of designing and undertaking the Vistonki project, which took place in five Ukrainian cities in the summer of 2023. In the past, vistonki were small letters that people sent to each other by pigeon mail during the war. In this case, they were the personal stories and words of support that people wrote in one city and sent with Andrew and Marat to the next one. The Vistonki project builds on the earlier work they started with One and a Half Rooms, which took place on Zoom during the pandemic. On February 24, 2022, a full-scale invasion of Russian Federation troops into the territory of Ukraine began. On the same day, Andrew and Marat initiated One and a Half Rooms at War, supporting the Ukrainian playback community for two years with weekly Zoom meetings that included online playback, music, and speakers from all over the world. This video was filmed, edited in December 2023, when there was time to reflect on the Vistonki project and their journey together.

About Vistonki

In ten days in summer 2023, Andrew Utenkov and Marat Mairovich travelled through five cities of Ukraine, providing five performances and one workshop. The Vistonki journey covered Kyiv, Kharkiv, Odesa, Dnipro and Lviv. It started in Tel Aviv and ended in Jerusalem at the Western Wall.
 
In every city, together with the local playback community, vistonki from the previous city were performatively read aloud, and a Playback Theatre performance for the townspeople was organised. At the end of each performance the audience were invited to write vіstonki to people in the next city. Audience members were also given the opportunity to write Tales to God, which were taken by Marat to the Western Wall in Jerusalem.

For Andrew and Marat this journey was about the connection between people, about closeness even when there is distance:

“When we share our experiences and stories with other people, it changes our world because people feel seen and important. We believe that pain is relieved when it is shared with others. We understand that performance art and Playback Theater are not able to stop the wars. But it can support people along the way, discover new meaning and remind everyone that even in the midst of horror, beauty can be found.

And most importantly this journey reminds us that –
we all need contact – together,
we need to let the tears out – together,
we need laughter – together,
we need to be seen and we need to see others,
we need to be – together.”

Link to video article

Acknowledgements

Thanks to:

• Playback Theater Na Varti (On Guard) and the Kyiv community of playbackers;
• Kharkiv assembled playback team and The Kharkiv playback community
• Young Odesa Playback Theater and The Odesa playback community
• Playback Theater Susidy (Neighbors) and the Dnipro playback community
• Lviv assembled playback team and the Lviv playback community
• Hanna Pysana – the creator (and translator) of the Vistonki video  //www.facebook.com/hanna.pysana
• The Community of Ukrainian Playbackers and The Ukrainian School of Playback Theater  //www.facebook.com/playbackschool
• Forum ZFD, this journey took place thanks to their financial support //www.forumzfd.de/en/who-we-are //www.facebook.com/GIZ.CPS.Ukraine/

About the authors

Marat Mairovich is a playback musician and conductor from Jaffa, Israel. He has twenty-five years of experience in Playback Theater. Marat leads three Playback Theater groups in Israel: a group for the visually impaired, a group for immigrants, and Mabat, a performing group for sighted and visually impaired. He performs and trains throughout Israel and abroad (South Korea, Germany, Latvia, Ukraine, Russia, Belarus, Moldova, Turkey etc.). At the moment when the full-scale invasion of Russian troops into Ukraine began, together with Andrew Utenkov from Odesa, Ukraine, Marat started the One and a Half Rooms at War project, holding weekly support meetings in Zoom for the Ukrainian Playback community. This project lasted for two years and ended in January 2024. Marat also visited Ukraine twice and performed and conducted master classes there. Marat plays violin, piano, synthesizers, guitar, and percussion professionally.

Andrew Utenkov is from Odesa, Ukraine and is an actor, conductor, trainer, and co-founder of the Ukrainian School of Playback Theater. He has ten years’ experience in Playback Theater. Andrew is the leader of Playback Theater group in Odesa and one of the leaders of Odesa playback community. Andrew leads social, dance and theater projects to support the physical and psychological state of Ukrainians during the war. At the moment when the full-scale invasion of Russian troops into Ukraine began, together with Marat Mairovich from Jaffa, Israel, Andrew started the One and a Half Rooms at War project, holding weekly support meetings in Zoom for the Ukrainian Playback community. This project lasted for two years and ended in January 2024.

Abstract

The following brief article represents a lightly edited version of a talk given to the 2023 PT Leadership class of the Centre for Playback Theatre. The talk took place at Wisdom House in Connecticut on August 11, in a room with lots of light and a semicircle of about 15 Leadership students and their teachers. It touches on two subjects. One is the full potential of playback work, and the second is playback on the world stage. Unfortunately, the rich and lively discussion that followed Jonathan’s talk was not recorded clearly enough to be included as part of this article.

Introduction (and a disclaimer)

Before starting, I want to make a disclaimer. While I travel to many places, I don’t often get to see performances. So, I find myself in a strange position. I’m a co-founder, and as such people constantly ask me questions: “How to do playback well? What’s the right way? How is the state of playback in the world today? What do I think about playback’s future?” The unfortunate fact is, I don’t actually get to see too much. How can I comment about playback in your country if I haven’t seen you perform? It puts me in a strange position.

So, when I’m sharing with you some of my impressions, understand that rather than commenting about the state of playback anywhere, my comments simply reflect the way I think about playback. Please evaluate what I say for yourself.

The full potential of playback work

Long form story

I’m going to start by talking about the Long Form story. I am referring to the form where the actors are sitting on stage and the teller picks at least one actor; where after the interview, the conductor says, “Let’s watch”, and then there’s some sort of setting up and you do the story. What are you calling this form here at PT Leadership? Just Story? Okay, let’s simply call it Story. It’s all we had in the very beginning.

I still find this story form very important. Let me explain why. To succeed with it, the performers need to be in good contact with each other. This has deep implications. So many of you belong to groups that are long-standing groups. But if you’re not in a group like that, how do you build the necessary connections? How do you build the ensemble so that you can work with each other in a deep way on stage?

In the applications of playback that some of you also are involved in, there isn’t really that sense. For instance, what if you are working with teenagers. They come and they go. It’s their life stage. You may see them once a week; you may see them once a month. So yes, teaching playback can be very, very valuable for them. But how can they reach a deep level of ensemble onstage? Often, they can’t.

But it doesn’t mean that that ensemble is not always important, for it is that intimately connected improvisation that allows deep emotion to come forth.

Another aspect of the long form is that the ritual part of it is very important. There’s the ritual part and then the theater part. And they’re both so different in terms of performer skills. Both are difficult to do well. But they create such a powerful impact.

I’m talking about this because I wonder if that long story form may be slowly losing its interest for people. Today we have so many other forms. Take Corridors. It’s much easier to do really. You can quickly bring out every part of the story. As an audience we can all see enough of the story. Furthermore, you don’t really have to think about the ritual too much. You can just jump into action. It’s a way to do playback adequately. But I don’t think you can get the same depth.

I’m not saying don’t use narrative forms like Corridors. But I feel that that story form remains some kind of bedrock. And that even if in our use of playback we can’t rely on it for one reason or another, as teachers, we need to know it. We need to honor it.

Playback and Art

A few years ago, somebody on one of my travels proudly told me that their group knows 40 forms. They were so happy to tell me this. But I was kind of shocked. Forty forms! Well, that tells me something: if you’re going to take the time to learn 40 forms, and if you’re going to actually use them, you will be drawing a lot of attention to yourself. It makes me think that you’re very proud to be a Playback Theatre artist.

However, for me the key playback skills are quite different. I might even call them passive -such as listening, trying to understand, trying to empathize. For me, most important in the playback process are the tellers and the audience or the community, not the performers. I wonder … if I need to show my 40 forms, do I really think that the community is most important? I think of our role a little bit like a midwife. Most of the time a midwife’s role is relatively humble. She helps here, gives instruction there. She encourages. But it’s the mother – and then the baby – that do the most, who are most important.

Playback and Therapy

On another topic, several people have been telling me recently about their therapeutic work with playback. Of course, the therapeutic is one way to use playback. And it can be effective. People are now writing scientific papers to show that playback can be very sound therapeutically.

But it also makes me nervous in the same way that this artist idea makes me nervous. For if I think of myself as the therapist/conductor, I’m in a certain position of control, perhaps trying to fix something or heal something.

But we’re not trying to change anything. We’re just trying to listen. I start to worry that some of us are giving in to that natural urge towards ego gratification—that it is ego pushing us to think of ourselves as theatre artists and therapists and to turn away from the modest role of simply being the vehicle for bringing out the story.

Social Justice

If I am saying that we want to be humble, that we don’t want to do anything, that we just want to let the story come forth, you might well ask, where does social change come in?

My answer is that the way playback achieves change is especially in the emergence of the group story. It is in this process of hearing one story after another, of bearing witness to this sequence of stories that enables the community to see themselves, often in a new way. At the same time, it gives them a deep experience of meaning and connection. For me, this is the crux of how playback achieves social change. Playback is a vehicle for the people’s voice.

True, we know that individual tellers often have a profound experience telling their story. However, I feel it’s a mistake, as many people did in the early years, to focus only on the individual teller.

Going back to the story form … For us to do the long story we need to try to hear the intention of the teller and emphasize that. And at the same time cut away other things. We need to take an artistic risk. As Christian Penny, a playbacker from New Zealand says; we need to take a risk that is equal to the risk of the teller telling their story. In making this attempt, we can make a big mistake. In contrast, when you do some of the other narrative forms, you can kind of skip over the mistakes; you are not exposing yourself so much. But in the story form, it really does take artistic choices and artistic execution.

And of course, we need always to maintain an ethical position in performing playback, and in that sense, it’s always going to be therapeutic, since we want the theatre to be positive for everybody involved. Being ethically responsible requires a lot of sensitivity and a lot of knowledge.

A space between art and therapy

To sum up, I’m saying “not artists and not therapists.” But yes, of course, “artistic and therapeutic.” And because Playback Theater is based on the idea of respect and human rights, social change is built into the idea.

It’s an unusual and challenging synthesis of roles. Ah Reum (a 2023 PT Leadership student) wrote her Leadership essay on Buddhism and PT. In fact before playback I was influenced by Eastern ideas – especially Japanese theatre and the Zen arts. Just from reading, you know. There is this idea of a practice, a lifelong practice, like tai chi or flower arranging or calligraphy. It’s never finished: your learning is never finished. Playback seems that way to me. We do not take the easy way. We pursue what is supremely difficult. And we never arrive at perfection.

Finally, in talking about the long form story, the importance of ensemble, and playback as a practice, I would like to return to those of you who do playback under conditions that can’t really aspire to this level of commitment. Let’s imagine that you may be using applied playback with 10-year-olds or in therapy or in business. How do you keep your own center? How do you keep in touch with the heart of the work? That’s my question, and I don’t really have an answer. One way, of course, is to do what you have all done—make the big step to take the PT Leadership course. I congratulate you on that. It may also be important for you to find some way to connect to these core ideas and principles on an ongoing regular basis, especially those of you who are not in a long-standing company that has regular rehearsals. Maybe with our post-pandemic online knowledge, we can create something new. It is something to think about.

Playback Theater on the world stage

I would like to now say a few words about PT on the world stage. As playbackers, you come to this leadership class from your own country, your own city, your own town, your own community. Day in and day out, many of you are very focused on your own group and its work. It takes all your attention.

But here you are together in the PT Leadership class with people from all over the world. As playback leaders and trainers, you are likely increasingly to become part of this world community. I must say, it is quite exciting to see some of you again here at Wisdom House in this international setting after I saw you last in your home country.

There’s something a little strange for a playbacker to turn a face to the world. Playback is an intimate face-to-face form. What does it mean to do playback on a worldwide basis? Is it feasible? Is it sensible?

At this point I just want to give you a little history. After 15 years of development, with the approach spreading fast, Jo Salas and I felt that it was crazy for us, with playback already in many countries, to be the main communications hub.

So in 1990 we invited a group of people to be the board of directors for a network, the International Playback Theater Network (or IPTN). In doing this, I wanted to avoid the common example of founders who tried to control the growth of their method. There are examples everywhere. Take Stanislavski, the great Russian theater director. When he passed away, there were these fights in Europe and America about who had the permission and authority to be the number one Stanislavski teacher. People became so angry they took legal action against each other. In the psychology field in family therapy, gestalt therapy, and neurolinguistic programming, leaders sued each other. I didn’t want any of that.

The creation of the IPTN was an attempt to give PT away. After 1990, playback was controlled by an international institution, and we were just part of it. When the original company retired it gave its legal structure to IPTN. At that point the network became a legal organization in the USA. (In US English, we call it a non-profit.)

In 1993, about five years after the original company ceased operations, I started the School of Playback Theater, which later became the Center for Playback Theater. CPT also became a non-profit with its own board of directors, now run by some of the people here in this room. Heidi Vogel is the treasurer, for example. It’s a volunteer job with a lot of responsibility. There are IPTN board members taking part in the Leadership class as well.

So there are now two worldwide institutions for Playback Theater – the Center for Playback Theater, and the other is IPTN, the International Playback Theater Network.

CPT promotes playback advanced training – it organized this Leadership course. IPTN is responsible for the worldwide conferences and the playback journal. As some of you know, with these kinds of widely dispersed volunteer organizations, with people meeting from different parts of the world in the midst of their very busy lives, it’s very hard to get things done.

Challenges of world gatherings

Another problem has been with the world gatherings, which take place in different countries every four or five years. In my experience organizing one of these conferences, which now can include over 300 people, can overwhelm the host group because they don’t have the resources and they don’t really have the skill. After all, your average playback team is small and most of the time they are focusing on their playback skills. They are set up to have the manpower and experience in organizing a worldwide conference. There have been some unfortunate consequences. Long-standing groups have collapsed after organizing one of these things. It’s also hard to pass on the knowledge from one group or country to another four or five years later.

It’s not that we haven’t learned as we went along. We have. But it has been hard. And I have sometimes wondered, even though it’s so great to be together, whether it has been worth it. I have thought, let’s rather focus on regional meetings, like Asia, or North America, or Europe. Or meetings at the national level—just one country.

Another problem has been that even though we all are playbackers and all share certain fundamental values, national politics can overpower our playback values. You might think well, that shouldn’t happen, we certainly should be able to listen to each other no matter who we are. But, in fact, what’s happening in the world can overwhelm us and does overwhelm us. Many of our world gatherings have been very, very conflictual. And people have gotten hurt.

So, these are questions for you to think about as you grow into your role on the playback world stage. We look to you to help us find answers as we move forward, so that we can bring the core values of Playback Theater to more and more people—not only in our own communities, but as widely as possible.

Addendum

My above talk was given in August 2023, several months before the IPTN World Conference in South Africa, which took place in early December 2023. This was the first ever international playback event held on African soil and one that Jo Salas and I were delighted to attend. In some ways the obvious successes of this important event contradict my point above about the demands of holding such major world events, and the organizers very ably demonstrated what can be achieved with a solid and effective team (see reports and reflections elsewhere in this Journal). In general however, my other points still stand, in that visa issues, challenges created by political and military conflicts on the world stage, and environmental concerns, all had an impact on this Conference and upon our community. These issues were, and are still, actively being discussed by those who attended – and by those who did not.

About the author

Jonathan Fox is the co-founder of Playback Theatre and was artistic director of the original Playback Theatre Company from its inception in 1975. From 1993 until 2010 he was director of the Centre for Playback Theatre in New York. He is the author of Acts of Service: Spontaneity, Commitment, Tradition in the Nonscripted Theatre and Beyond Theatre: a playback theatre memoir; co-author with Jo Salas of Personal Stories in Public Spaces: Essays in Playback Theatre by the Founders; editor of The Essential Moreno: Writings on Spontaneity, Psychodrama and Group Method; and co-editor of Gathering Voices: Essays on Playback Theatre. He is a former Fullbright Scholar with an MA in Political Science from Victoria University (NZ), a BA in English from Harvard University; and a D. Phil. h.c. from Kassel University (Germany) for his artistic and scholarly contribution to theatre.

Abstract

This article is a narrative of integrating Playback Theatre and Restorative Justice practices. It describes the journey from utilizing Restorative Justice in education to exploring the intersections of both methodologies. The article emphasizes the shared goal of healing social harm and fostering community connection, underlining themes of emotional safety, storytelling pace, and consent.

Introduction

I am a playback practitioner and have been for over 30 years. It is my passion. I see playback as a tool for changing the world. Sadly, however, 30 years ago playback was not a feasible option to bring to my career as a social worker in special education. Restorative Justice (RJ) takes only one person, in contrast to a whole company, to facilitate deep change. RJ became my vehicle to impact the racially biased disciplinary actions of the school system where I worked. The overlap between these two liberatory experiential processes is informative.

Restorative Justice

Restorative Justice is a form of community practice used in communities, schools and criminal legal systems all over the world. It is often referred to as restorative justice (RJ) when racial equity is at the forefront. As playback practitioners, many of us are committed to healing the ‘social body’ and transforming social harm. These same ideals are the foundation of RJ. Many First Nations communities have indigenous practices of RJ such as the circle process, which was first translated and applied to non-indigenous culture in Canada and New Zealand. In South Africa, efforts are being made to use it for situations of mass violence, following the experience of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission. There is a spectrum of restorative practices, on one end there are informal encounters and on the other end, formal conferences, called healing circle or restorative justice circles. In the middle of the continuum, there are community building circles that, in a school system, are critical to creating a restorative environment. Gathering in a circle is the most common form of a restorative practice and when you gather in a circle there are fundamental agreements. They are as follows:

• Speak from the heart
• Use ‘I’ statements
• Permission to pass
• Respect the talking piece (an item that is passed in the circle and whoever has it, is the speaker)
• Listen without judgment

Community building circles are teaching students to have a sense of belonging, active listening, less hierarchy of power, and getting to know their peers. When a healing circle is offered as part of the disciplinary protocol, students now have an understanding of a circle process and an experience of being with their peers outside of a ‘typical’ classroom. A restorative justice circle uses the following questions as part of the facilitation process.

1. What happened?
2. What were you thinking at the time?
3. What are you thinking now?
4. Who has been impacted?
5. What can I or we do to make things right?

One day, I was facilitating a healing circle with a student, his parents, a bus driver and her supervisor. I started to timeline the event that brought us into the circle, on a whiteboard. Timelining is writing down the step-by-step experience, adding thoughts and feelings as needed. This is not part of the typical process when reviewing a harm situation. As the student was sharing his thoughts that led him to attack the bus driver, a light bulb went off for me. It was brought on by a deep knowing that this was a significant moment. There was a backstory to his actions that even the very upset bus driver understood. She was so moved by this understanding that she welcomed him back on the bus. This led me to timeline with each person in a healing circle, both the person who has been harmed and the person who did the harm. There is an important issue that enters into this exploration. Consent. It is imperative to get the consent of the person who experienced the harm to this broadening of the process, going beyond the traditional questions.  

Playback Theatre and Restorative Justice

So, here I was exploring the back story during a healing circle. A spark happened, a thought light bulb. I eventually contacted a playback friend and director of River Crossing Playback Company, Chris Fitz, who is also Director of Strategic Initiatives and Training for Advoz: Mediation and Restorative Practices, in Lancaster, PA. Together, we planned an in-person workshop, exploring the intersection of playback and restorative justice. This first gathering was scheduled for the middle of March, 2020. It was delayed for three years due to Covid. We eventually met at River Crossing’s monthly open rehearsal. Most people were very familiar with playback and many were also experienced in restorative justice. When planning the workshop, Chris and I were hoping to explore using payback in a healing circle. However, we realized that it would be too difficult and too staged to explore an experience of harm. As if by divine intervention, I had made a participant feel very uncomfortable by not hearing her suggestion. We used that as a moment of harm, with her permission and proceeded to structure a healing circle with some of the participants. The other participants were outside of the circle, witnessing and being available to do playback. I was the facilitator of the circle and, with her consent, used the traditional restorative questions. When the person who experienced the harm started sharing, I asked her for any early childhood memory or similar emotional experience. We then opened the circle and the other participants became actors for the long form of her story. Here is some of the learning from participants and facilitators.

• There is great immediacy in playback, whereas circles take a long time.
• In a circle, everyone gets to witness everything. It seemed like in playback, the players may not be able to see or enter into what their colleagues are doing.
• The purpose of our circle at that point was not entirely clear to me. It was not defined as either “restorative” or “community-building”, which are experienced differently (?). 
• It doesn’t seem realistic to employ playback for a circle of empathy (such as we had) because it would take so long to play out each participant’s separate story. 
• I wonder about playback demonstrating at different stages just the emotional through-line of a restorative circle process as the circles’ emotions build, change, ebb.

After the success of that workshop, Chris and I went on to facilitate a one time virtual workshop. In this meeting, we spent most of our time teaching participants about restorative justice and exploring the expertise in the zoom room. One participant, Lenore Bajare-Dukes, shared her thoughts about the intersection of the two structures:

“Also, both practices – restorative and playback – share this aspect of offering a ritual container to hold very powerful, charged stories that come out in the moment—and so emotional and social safety are really important. and fluid and not at all guaranteed. My powerful question lingering afterward was how much set-up and pre-work and judging the situation would be needed to have participants be ready for combining forms like this – and how much fidelity to each form is needed for that ritual safety.”

Lenore brought up very important questions that are still being incorporated into the continued exploration. Chris and I then offered a four part series through Playback North America. We planned to take a deeper dive into both playback as an adjunct to restorative justice and then restorative justice incorporated into playback. Even though many participants were familiar with both playback and restorative justice, we gravitated to the exploration of restorative justice into playback. At one point, I was conducting a story about the challenges of doing repair work connected with violence that happened in a group that had been meeting for twelve years.   I used the questions of a healing circle and also pursued the backstory and the earlier experience of harm, that related to the present experience.  The focused questioning brought the teller to a surprised revelation about the deep connection between her early story of harm and the present day situation. It became a very vulnerable moment for the teller.  This investigation brought issues to light that included when to use the focused restorative questions, what sort of playback performance is appropriate and how to ensure consent, from the teller, of the focused questions and pursuit of the backstory.

Chris Fitz identified the similarities between playback and restorative justice as shown below.

• Centers ritual in process, relational, communal
• Centers honor (vs. shame)
• Balancing universal and particular of community 
• Depends on participation to move process forward
• Allows for various levels of participation (witness, teller, actor/artist, facilitator)
• Importance of decolonizing ourselves from racial capitalism and white supremacy as facilitator, conductor, actor 

Next steps

Chris and I look forward to co-creating the next step; the second in person workshop focused on playback using restorative justice questions, timelining and the backstory. Please join us.  If you would like to be connected in this journey of discovery, our FB page is Playback Theatre and Restorative Justice. Honoring each of us pursuing social activism, committed to creating the world we want to live in, one story, one circle at a time!

About the author

Deborah Zavos, LCSW-C, is a third-generation Jewish immigrant from eastern Europe. She is from a marginalized community that also has white skin privilege. She is a deep practitioner of anti-oppressive systemic structures. She began practicing playback in the late 1980’s, training with Jonathan and Jo, in New Paltz.  Playback Theatre is her passion and being a social worker is her occupation.  She was a co-founder of DC Playback Theatre, the first multiracial company. That company brought the conversation of race to the international playback conference in Olympia, Washington in 1995.  Deborah has been centering the issue of racism ever since that time.  Her deep commitment to liberation, from her Jewish anti-Zionist roots, propelled her to pursue both playback in the community and restorative justice in schools. 

Abstract

The full-scale invasion of Ukraine by Russia has triggered significant shifts in cultural affiliation and worldview within Ukrainian society, leading to internal divisions. This study seeks to address the inquiry of how social conflicts manifest amid these circumstances and explores the potential of Playback Theater as a conduit for dialogue between conflicting groups. Through an analysis of a performance by the Playback Group Kochivnyky held in Hanover, Germany for a local refugee community, as part of Ukraine’s Independence Day celebrations on August 24, 2023, this research endeavours to illuminate the mechanisms, such as Narrative Reticulation, by which theatrical interventions can facilitate constructive engagement and reconciliation amidst societal discord.

Russia’s great war against Ukraine has radically changed the discourse in our country. Everything Russian has become sharply negative, contemptible, and disgusting. However, any change in the discourse does not automatically entail a change in public perception. On the contrary, it may lead to the radicalization of those who, for various reasons, may consider themselves excluded from the updated picture of the world. In other words, those who have the opposite point of view, or, let’s say, not that radical, act as an opposition to those who deny any positive manifestations of Russianness – even on an interpersonal level. Using the example of the Playback Theater performance, I would like to demonstrate how this imperceptible social conflict manifests itself and in what way the Playback Theater becomes a safe space: a platform for establishing a dialogue between different groups of people.

The performance that I will focus on took place in Hanover (Germany) as part of the festival for the Independence Day of Ukraine on August 24, 2023. I took part in it as a performer. The theme of the performance was Harvest. The audience (which we will call the participants of the performance) was asked to share what they would like to take with them (harvest, yield, gather) from the summer to the fall (that is, to the future). I would point out that the vast majority, answering this question, spoke about their achievements, and not about losses.

This specific example of starting performance is one of the stages of creating an open and trustworthy space or safe space. Such questions help the participants of the performance switch from everyday life and reflect, enabling them to see how the implementation of what they have said will be enacted by the performers. I would like to emphasize the word enact— put ideas into action. This means that performers do not make personal judgments or comments on what they heard from the audience but instead enact it on stage. Therefore, the audience becomes accustomed to the rituals of conducting the performance — the order of raising a hand, the conductor’s selection of a narrator, a short interview, and then a summary of the story for the performing team, determining the Playback Theatre form. “Ritual is security. It is an expected, repetitive action that creates a sense of safety. And safety, in turn, contributes to the birth of stories.” In addition to the important state of security and the creation of a safe environment, the Playback Theatre’s declaration of certain rituals is also important for programming the aesthetic framework of the performance. “Ritual is the separation of performative space, which helps to change the perception of reality, creates a sense of the importance of what is happening, and at the same time, the viewer in this process is not a passive observer, but an active participant”. (Wikipedia, accessed Feb, 2024)

As per the described Playback Theatre process, the conductor invited the audience to share their stories — personal true experiences articulated here and now. The first woman who sat down in the narrator’s chair made a statement about the need to divide the worldview into black and white, separating those around into like us and not like us (for example, fitting Russians in the category of absolute evil regardless of their political views, and Ukrainians in the category of good, respectively). The first storyteller spoke in Russian, her speech was clear, with a didactic tone, calm and confident. The main emotional message was the uncompromisingness of the solution, which simplifies life.

The story of the first teller was embodied by the performers with an emphasis on messages of unity and commitment to move in one direction, of becoming stronger by following the same rules in the form called Chorus. On stage, the actors stood in a tight group and followed each other’s suggestions, repeating each movement or word together several times. After breathing together, the group synchronously looked around and asked: “Who’s like us?”, until one actor stood out from the group. He took on the role of the antagonist. He circled the group and moved his hands as if checking its boundaries. The group commented on his actions with the phrases “he is not like us” or “not ours”, and “stranger”, and waved him off. The confrontation ended with the group’s victory. The next joint action was a comparison of “Ukrainian” and “Russian” as the right choice. The actors pointed to the space above, held and swayed the imaginary “Ukrainian” in their hands while showing the “Russian” they pointed down and pushed this imaginary object with their feet. Embodying the importance of choosing Ukrainian identity, the performers held each other tightly by the arms and shoulders and repeated: “like us” or “ours”, which turned into the phrase “gather ours” with the corresponding movement of collecting and pressing imaginary pieces of identity to yourself. This resonated closely with the theme of the performance, Harvest.

After the first full-length story on the stage, the conductor turned their attention to the audience in search of the next story. The second storyteller quickly raised her hand. The previous story evoked something within her, so she took the stage intending to share and talk through her experience. As an antithesis to what was stated, the second storyteller suggested looking at this division as inhumane, as one that excludes the voices of a part of society from the consensus. That is, she identified herself with those people who, for various reasons, hesitate or are not ready for radical changes. She was speaking Ukrainian. According to her, the story of the previous storyteller intensified the feelings of objection and activated the trauma of rejection.

The story of the second teller was embodied by the performers as four metaphor associations that highlighted different aspects of her story to emphasise the importance of each of them. For example, isolation from others or a vivid emotional reaction to an external stimulus. In portraying her story as a performer, I chose the aspect of the narrator’s rejection of a uniform society and embodied it in the fairytale-like metaphor of a prince who liked to read stories about various imaginary worlds. Once he came across a book about a world where all people thought, spoke, and acted the same, so there was no difference between the characters, the book outraged the boy and he assumed that it was just a poorly written book, but his father replied that it was a history guide. The prince was frightened by this, he did not want to accept that his world was once like this, so when the prince grew up and became a king, he prohibited to prohibit anything.

The stories of both tellers were performed on stage one after the other, the Playback Theater actors embodied them without bringing their subjective opinions. Subsequent storytellers did not return to the theme of self-identification, although the tonal direction of the performance noticeably changed: the audience, which was initially set to tell everyday stories, switched to more intimate and vulnerable topics of war and emigration.

To analyze the essence of why this happened, I want to turn to the theory of Playback Theater, namely the model of narrative reticulation (NR) proposed by Jonathan Fox. To put it briefly: “The theory of narrative reticulation describes a dynamic balance of four attributes – story, atmosphere, spontaneity, and guidance—allowing a flow of interconnected stories” (Fox, 2021). In other words, if all of the attributes are fulfilled in the right ratio, then the desired effect occurs and we can, according to Fox, say that “The sequence of stories, considered as a whole, will reveal important aspects of the identity of a community. A strong NR leads to augmentation of meaning—a deepening of the stories as the event proceeds—and a vigorous exchange of various perspectives. In this way, NR promotes dialogue. It is a very dynamic process. For the most part, the community responds unconsciously, and the performers focus on the challenges of enactment story by story”.

It seems to me that the Playback Theater, thanks to the described methods of work, best meets the main tasks of working with society, which were pointed out by the Belgian sociologist and culturologist Pascal Gielen. In particular, he notes: “Since various social groups and interests occur in the common space, conflicts often occur there as well. The common space is open to disagreements. (…) communities are anything but harmonious. That is why communities are formed by disagreement, not consensus. Democracy emerges from constant criticism and confrontation between the government and the opposition, and the community and its culture demonstrate unity precisely through internal tension, conflicts, and discussions. Consensus leads to homogenization, and therefore relative stagnation in culture” (Gielen, P & Lijster, T.,2018).

The same Gielen calls the artistic space the safe space where conflict situations should be embodied and discussed. Art methods, in particular Playback Theater, contribute to the reduction of social tension through the presentation of different points of view and different positions, introducing them for interaction. This is what is embedded at the value level in Playback Theater – the overlaying notion that every story should be heard. As Volodymyr Savinov writes in his theses about the concept of narrative reticulation: “In the Playback Theater, conditions are created for the consistent and more or less comprehensive creation of a narrative. That is, there is no opportunity to interrupt, answer, interpret, or even react to what is being said. There is an effect of temporary unity around one person and their life” (Savinov, V., 2017).

Traditionally, the performance in the Playback Theater ends with the so-called final form, which is the overview of the entire performance. The actors rethink what happened during this time in the space, and embody some moments or aspects that were not or only partially manifested on the stage. The final form for this specific performance was defined by the conductor as Episodes: the performers acted out short sketches in an incidental manner without consulting each other. This way metaphors from different stories can overlap and form a certain structure.

At the performance that I am describing, I, as a performer, came up with a metaphor about searching for “my” people, like searching for treasures. I listed companionships, friendships, connections and rearranged the chairs, each of which symbolised a certain person. Thus, I added previously not mentioned specifics and personalised the story of the first narrator. After my return to zero (that is, a neutral space, so-called backstage), another actor came out and moved all the chairs to one side of the stage, thereby referring to another story point of the first storyteller about the necessary separation of human values. The third performer went to the empty half of the stage and said that everything that is not a human value is fear and she was scared there. She spoke about the feelings of the second narrator. I walked up to her and said, “I’m not afraid to look into your eyes if you’re not afraid to look into mine,” thus paraphrasing the words of the first storyteller and suggesting an interaction of the character representing the second narrator. Eye contact was made, and we went to different ends of the stage without breaking it. In the next scene, at the initiative of the other actors, the narrative metaphor from the second story was continued. Previously it was a lion in a fabric-draped cage, a metaphor for alienation, now it became a whole city of lions travelling in cages. The performing team depicted it by imitating the sound of cars and rapidly moving with chairs on the stage where an actor’s chair bumps into another’s chair and a silent scene of positive connection takes place.

Summarising, nowadays Ukrainian society is subjected to continuous trauma and danger, and therefore needs tools to overcome these destructive conditions. To me, it seems that Playback Theater can be one of such tools. Due to its ritual structure, Playback Theater creates a safe space for articulating oneself and one’s position through narrativization; allows the expression of emotions, and engagement in conflict without confrontation and violence. Careful embodiment of stories by actors validates conflicting positions, and combines them into one narrative, thereby strengthening the network of associative connections, and appointing a non-verbal dialogue between the participants of the performance. Reducing social tension is one of the possible results of the Playback Theater in Ukraine.

Translation by: Olena Kompletova

References

Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia.Playback theatre. Theory — Playback Theatre (miraheze.org) (accessed February 15, 2024)

Fox, J. (2021). ‘The Theory of Narrative Reticulation: a Brief Description’ Personal Stories in Public Spaces: Essays on Playback Theater by Its Founders, Jonathan Fox and Joe Salas. New Paltz, NY: Tusitala Publishing

Gielen, P & Lijster, T. (2018). Culture: The Base of Civil Society. IST Publishing

Savinov, V. (2017). “The Concept of ‘Narrative Reticulation’ as a Socio-Psychological Effect of Playback Theater. The space of art therapy: possibilities of integration: materials. XIV Intern. interdisciplinary scientific-practical conference (Kyiv, February 23-25, 2017) edited by A.Chuprykov, L.Naydenova, O.Voznesenska, O.Sknar]. Zoloti Vorota

About the author

Deniza graduated from Kharkiv National I. P. Kotlyarevsky University of Arts with a bachelor’s degree in drama theatre directing, and continues to pursue her MA degree in Theater Studies at the same university. She has a Basic Playback Theater course certificate and specialisation in Online-Playback Theater “New Paths of Love” and “Playback Work in War: Peculiarities of working with traumatic stories” from Ukrainian School of Playback Theater. Since the beginning of Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine, she established traveling Playback Group Kochivnyky which consists of Ukrainian refugees. Deniza Glezina is a part of the Playback Theater Nema in Kharkiv and aims to restore theatre life in her hometown.

Abstract

The accessibility and simplicity of the Playback Theatre form allows it to be adapted to many different contexts and performed by those with many different levels of ability. One of the most powerful attributes of Playback Theatre is its power to create empathy (Halley & Fox, 2007).  This article explores our understanding of empathy from different perspectives, and challenges some of the assumptions that are commonly made about its presence and function within Playback Theatre. The author introduces the concept of incongruent empathy and describes how this can have relevance to issues of social justice in our practice.

What is empathy?

According to Wondra & Ellsworth in their paper entitled An Appraisal of Theory of Empathy and Other Vicarious Emotional Experiences, empathy is defined as “the ability to understand another person’s thoughts and feelings in a situation from their point of view, rather than your own” (2015, p. 411). Empathy, or the ability to understand the emotions of another person, is critically important in many settings.  It is just now being understood that empathy plays a role in everything from business relationships to healthcare.  In fact, according to Wondra & Ellsworth, a study from Massachusetts General Hospital found empathy to be the distinguishing factor in medical care satisfaction. “Empathy enables clinicians to connect on a deeper level with patients, and hence act in their patient’s best interests” (Wondra & Ellsworth, 2015, 412).  Other research is even more striking, claiming that “studies have shown that empathy can also affect healthcare outcomes – it can reduce the length of hospital stays and even make the common cold go away faster” (Howick et. al., 2018, p. 242). Understanding how to create empathy has far reaching impacts in many disciplines and has the potential to improve lives.

There is no consensus amongst various disciplines exploring the phenomenon, how empathy is created or functions. Indeed, there is difficulty in even defining it. Empathy theorists conceptualize several different types and forms of empathy. For the purposes of this paper, I will explore playback in relation to the concepts of cognitive and emotional empathy.  According to Wondra & Ellsworth, cognitive empathy is, “simply knowing how the other person feels and what they might be thinking. Sometimes called perspective-taking” (2015, p. 412). Emotional empathy, on the other hand, is “when you feel physically along with the other person, as though their emotions were contagious” (2015, p. 412). Both these forms of empathy involve stepping out of one’s own perspective (either through emotional or intellectual channels) to inhabit another’s point of view.  These acts of empathy can be achieved through Playback Theatre because of several inherent qualities of playback itself.  Playback Theatre is affective, meaning it operates in the realm of feelings.  Contrary to much of western performance aesthetic that eschews actors playing emotions, playback embraces the enactment of emotion.  In fact, many of the short forms of playback require actors to distill the story down to the emotional essence.  (See Figures 1 & 2 below)

This embrace of emotion as a central component of a story separates playback from other forms and situates it in the realm of empathy.  According to others Wondra & Ellsworth “emotional expressions cause us to feel emotions, which we experience as empathy” (2015, p. 413).

This focus on the affective qualities of the story allows emotions, full force, to reach the audience.  Because of the affective nature of playback, the artistic helps bypass the logical, rational and analytical brain to reach participants’ emotional center. Secondly, Playback Theatre’s place as an artistic form makes it ripe for creation of empathy.  In our day to day lives, our culture encourages us to operate on an intellectual (and less affective) level.  By taking true stories and elevating them to an artistic level using music, metaphor, poetry and dance, playback accesses the power of artistic creativity to reach community members’ emotions.  Art has the power to inspire emotions in community members.  In fact, “one central feature of aesthetic experiences is their ability to arouse emotions in perceivers” (Gerger & Kremer, 2014, p. 176).  In elevating participants’ stories to the aesthetic realm, Playback Theatre is leveraging the power of artistic expression to impact the emotions of the audience.

Playback’s connection to empathy

Playback Theatre puts experiences and emotions on display in an artistic form.  This inspires audience members to feel similarly to what they see portrayed.   Looking to Wondra & Ellsworth again, we find that “these experiences, when we feel an emotion because something happens to someone else and it is the same emotion that they feel, we call empathy” (Wondra & Ellsworth, 2015, p. 411).  But the authors go a step further, claiming that the concept of empathy extends beyond the traditional understanding.  In this same article, the authors also define as empathy:

“the transmittal of emotion that is a distinct or different feeling than the one shared”

In this way, context becomes important.  For instance, an actor may portray a story where they feel sad, and the audience has an empathetic experience of anger. Wondra and Ellworth argue that this is still empathy, “the context is what changes the emotion – just because it doesn’t match, doesn’t mean it’s not empathy” (Wondra & Ellsworth, 2015, p. 412).  This notion is novel in the context of Playback Theatre.  For this type of empathy, I am coining the term incongruent empathy to point to the dissonance between the emotions transmitted and received through the course of the empathic act. 

Incongruent empathy points to the importance of contextual understanding.  Imagine a scenario where a playback troupe is performing the story of a Black American’s experience being stopped by the police.  The actor portraying the victim is feeling and expressing the emotion of fear.  The audience has an empathic response to the portrayal, however, the emotion they empathically understood from the actor was anger.  In this case the incongruent empathy has created a miscommunication that has critical social justice implications. In this example, the misunderstanding of the empathic emotion has the potential for many problems in the playback space.  The audience could assume that they understand the story/emotions/experience of the teller (vis a vis the performers) even though their understanding is completely inaccurate.  This inaccuracy is a reflection of misunderstanding, assumption and bias that is mirrored in society, writ large.

We, as playback performers (and audience members) must take care to interrogate our emotional resonances to Playback Theatre.  We white folx, in particular, must do the work to examine our assumptions and biases as well as the lens we apply specifically to the emotions of the other.  Perhaps this points also to the importance of holding a talk back or debrief after performances to encourage reflection and processing of audience experiences of empathy.  Whatever the intervention, we can clearly see the possibility for incongruent empathy to create complications for the emotional bonds we hope to create between audience members, performers, and tellers in the playback space.

The theatrical connection

Though, at first glance, incongruent empathy signals a potentially dangerous condition in Playback Theatre, this construct within empathic communication may have a distinct and intentional resonance within the realm of theatre. For this perspective we can look to performance theory.  I was reminded, in thinking through this concept, of Brecht’s theory of alienation effect and how it might change how we look at this phenomenon (Brecht, 2015).  Brecht was creating theatre at a time when realism in acting and stage production was the norm. Konstantin Stanislavski, often regarded as the father of modern theatre, touted creating a seamless theatrical world into which the audience could submerge themselves.  According to Stanislavski (2003), the audience should not be able to tell the difference between theatre and reality.  In this way, he can be seen as wanting to create an environment where the audience feels precisely, through empathy, the emotion the actor is portraying. Brecht, on the other hand, sought to create a theatre of context, whereby the audience is reminded, by acting style, directorial choices and other devices that they are watching theatre, not real life.  By allowing the audience to contemplate their context, they can see the performance, the message of the play from a further distance, and thus extract social and political meaning from it.  This alienation effect, as he called it, allowed the audience to feel something different than what the actor is portraying.  Brecht famously said of this incongruence that his Epic Theatre chooses to create distance with, “I am made to laugh about those who cry, and cry about those who laugh” (Brecht, 2015).  This distance, Brecht describes is not unlike the dissonant empathy that can happen in Playback Theatre. Brecht uses the mismatch of emotions between audience and actor to illuminate social and political issues, to understand the social components of the story and to orient us to action toward change.  Knowing this technique, perhaps we can leverage our empathic missteps for the same purpose.

Cognitive empathy comes in to play

Cognitive empathy, or the intellectual understanding of how an other is feeling has an importance as well.  Cognitive empathy contains within it an intellectual distance which prevents spectators from overly identifying with the empathic emotion.  This concept of understanding but not necessarily feeling the emotions of the other maintains a critical distance between the self and other.  This space, I argue, is not unlike the space of Brecht’s alienation effect.

Is it possible that the incongruence of emotional empathy, while creating a misunderstanding (if you are oriented toward traditional emotional empathy) might also carve out a space for cognitive empathy?  Perhaps it will make space for a cognitive empathy that allows community members and spectators to view the larger context/social conditions of a shared story?  Might playback’s use of these various types of empathy create a complexity whereby audiences are both thinking and feeling empathetically toward the performers (and the tellers vis a vis the performers)?  Might this incongruent empathy in playback be particularly powerful because it is both emotional (emotional but incongruent) and cognitive in nature? What does this concept of emotional empathy/incongruent empathy/cognitive empathy illuminate about the capacity and possibility of playback as a form for Social Justice?

Practical applications

In performances where audiences and performers contain members from differing social assignments differing in power– for instance, one where dialogue is seeking to be created amongst disparate groups, it is imperative that we interrogate the emotionally empathetic experiences of community members.  In this way, we can leverage the affective experience, which seeks to open doors of empathy as well as cognitive empathy which creates the possibility of accuracy and understanding on a larger scale.  One way to do this would be using a talk back.  The use of a talk back or a space (usually immediately following a performance), where performers sit with audience members to discuss all aspects of the performance as well as answer questions.  In the case of a performance that seeks to create dialogue between disparate groups, the talk back is an essential part of analysis and synthesis of the playback experience. The talk back allows full transparency to the “radically dialogic” elements of Playback Theatre (Park-Fuller, 2005).

The talk back can become a place of cognitive empathy, whereby those who experienced emotional (and potentially incongruent) empathy can explore their experiences.  The conductor/playback facilitators can be instrumental in guiding the conversation to the potential areas of incongruent empathy whereby the possibility is created for those in dominant social positions to examine their potential mis/matches of empathetic response.

In a social justice context, this tool would be essential for correcting incongruent empathy which could potentially reaffirm oppressive social dynamics.  It allows participants to contextualize their affective responses.  Both the playback performance’s artistic form, which has the potential to open channels of understanding and the talk back’s cognitive/dialogic structure can help provide larger understanding within the social constructs. (See Figure 3 above and Figure 4 below)

Conclusion

Playback Theatre, as a form that plays in the affective and emotional space of empathy seeks to create connection between the many participants it touches.  Empathy operates in playback through many different channels.  In some cases, pure emotional empathy is experienced, where audience members feel emotions in direct and powerful ways that mimic the emotions of both the teller and the performers.  In some cases, however, a dissonance is created between the respective emotional players. 

This incongruence is both something to be aware of and careful of.  This experience of incongruent empathy, if not identified, processed, and understood, can create misunderstandings which could even perpetuate challenges between disparate groups. If unchecked, it could have the effect of driving wedges between disparate groups within the playback sphere instead of creating unity. 

Looking to the work of Bertolt Brecht can perhaps give us a perspective where we can leverage this incongruence.  It is possible that this emotional mismatch can create an appropriate distance; one where cognitive empathy and intellectual understanding on a larger scale can be achieved.  By allowing and encouraging an emotional experience while at the same time allowing a broader contextual view, audiences can gain an understanding of the larger social issues at play.  By embracing this alienation effect, we can elicit cognitive empathetic understanding.  This larger, societal context has the potential to bring the audience to a place where social understanding can lead to engagement with social justice issues.

Acknowledgements

All images credited to Jaynicole Productions.

References

Brecht, B. (1961). On Chinese Acting (E. Bentley, Trans.). The Tulane Drama Review, 6(1), (Original work published 1935): 130-136. doi:10.2307/1125011

Brecht, B. (2015). Theatre for Pleasure or Theatre for Instruction. In Brecht on Theatre: The Development of an Aesthetic, edited by John Willett and Ralph Manheim, Bloomsbury Methuen Drama, pp. 69-77

Gerger, G., Leder, H., & Kremer, A. (2014). Context effects on emotional and aesthetic evaluations of artworks and IAPS pictures. Acta Psychologica, 151(0), 174-183 //www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0001691814001541?via%3Dihub

Halley, S., Fox, J. (2007). Using Playback Theatre to Create Empathy. In The Change Handbook – (2^nd edition). ISBN 978-1-60509-080-1    

Howick J, Moscrop A, Mebius A, Fanshawe TR, Lewith G, Bishop FL, Mistiaen P, Roberts NW, Dieninytė E, Hu XY, Aveyard P, Onakpoya IJ. (2018). Effects of empathic and positive communication in healthcare consultations: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J R Soc Med. 111(7):240-252. doi: 10.1177/0141076818769477

Park-Fuller, L. M. (2005). Beyond role play: Playback Theatre and conflict transformation. Playback Centre. //www.playbacktheatre.org/playbacktheatre/wp-content/uploads/2010/04/LindaPark-Fuller-Beyond-Role-Play-Playback-Theatre-and-Confl.pdf (accessed Jan 15, 2024)

Stanislavski, K., & Hapgood, E. R. (2003). An Actor Prepares. Routledge

Wondra, J., D., Ellsworth, P. (2015). An appraisal theory of empathy and other vicarious emotional experiences. American Psychological Association, 122(3), 411–428 0033-295X/15/$12.00 //dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0039252

About the author

Christine Witmer Powers(she/her/hers) holds a BFA from the Tisch School of the Arts at NYU. She has trained at the Stella Adler Conservatory in New York, the Royal Academy of Dramatic Arts in London and the Academy of Theatre Practices, Gardzienice in Poland. She received her MA. in Performance Studies from NYU in 2004 and a certificate in International Trauma Studies in 2011. Christine is passionate about using physical theater methods to explore empathy and community.  She is currently pursuing her MS. Ed. in Clinical Mental Health Counseling at Western Connecticut State University as well as her drama therapy credential through the North American Drama Therapy Association. Christine is thrilled to have been a member of Big Apple Playback since 2009.

Abstract

Better Together (BT) was a Playback in the Port online Playback Theatre (PT) project (September 2021 – October 2022) whose goal was exploring multi-cultural encounters via PT. In bi-weekly sessions, eleven practitioners (including authors) from eleven different countries presented their countries and stories were shared and played-back by the presenter and other participants. Despite not being a primary goal of the project, the interactions during the project provided a possibility to reflect on how oppression may occur in international online PT. Being aware that our perception as authors may be influenced by our identity as European, educated, white female PT practitioners, we investigated participants’ perceptions in semi-structured interviews. Results indicated that all participants were aware of oppression in their country and felt oppressed and/or were an agent of oppression at least once in their life. In addition, nineteen situations of oppression were recognized as occurring during BT. In this article we describe each of these situations and explore how they were handled within the context of the online group. Based on our findings we suggest good practice recommendations for Playback Theatre in international contexts.

I look at the world

From awakening eyes in a black face—

And this is what I see:

This fenced-off narrow space  

Assigned to me.

I look then at the silly walls

Through dark eyes in a dark face—

And this is what I know:

That all these walls oppression builds

Will have to go!

I look at my own body  

With eyes no longer blind—

And I see that my own hands can make

The world that’s in my mind.

Then let us hurry, comrades,

The road to find.

(I look at the world, Langston Hughes)

Better Together

On the 16th of July of 2021, Playback in the Port launched¹ an ambitious experiment. Under the guidance of Will C., Marat Mairovich and Nina Garbuzova, it was introduced to the world as the Better Together project, asking for applications from people from diverse communities all over the world. The project was described as a deep dive “into a process that not only explores the countries and cultures of every person in the group, but also inspects how we collectively relate to the narratives shared,” as “a way to understand what it means to be a global community.”

The project designers aimed at exploring multicultural encounters and the group processes that frame them, with the final goal of producing a written testimony of the experiment (now published in three parts in Playback Theatre Reflects²). The purpose of the final article was to have “the larger Playback community (…) access and actualize the content as a means of enhancing our community’s ability to promote healthy ways of bringing international Playback Theatre members into spaces of collaboration.” (Chalmus et al., 2022) The selection process called for people “passionate about exploring other cultures in a respectful and creative way.” Selection was based on the answers to a detailed form containing questions such as “describe any group process experience you have that feels relevant,” “describe your experience working in internationally diverse spaces,” “why do you want to be part of this group? What do you hope to gain? What do you hope to offer?” or “these sessions will happen in English, but what other languages can you speak?” (ibid.) Afterwards, applicants were interviewed in small group sessions, which included an improvised, surprise personification of each of the applicant’s respective countries. Together eleven participants were selected, including the authors of this article. 

The project organisation was described in detail by Will C (Chalmus W, 2023), so only brief details are provided here. Each month two sessions took place. The first session was dedicated to one of the participants. They presented their country and culture, and shared personal stories, which were played back by rest of the participants. In the second session, two weeks later, we shared stories of how we, as individuals in the group, were relating to the presenter’s stories. A final discussion was included. Shared facilitation and conducting was rotated among the participants, and sessions on group dynamics were included throughout the project (conducted by organizers, or participants who volunteered to do so). The roles that each person in the group was expected to take were Presenter, Conductor (chosen by the Presenter for the first session, voluntary for the second session), Facilitator (chosen by the Presenter for both sessions), Performer (Actor and/or Musician), Teller, Audience. After each session, all participants evaluated the session, reflecting on how they had related to the session in terms of feelings, discoveries, vulnerabilities, difficulties, teachings, confirmations, reformulations, reimaginings. A buddy system pairing participants was created for mutual support throughout the project and group dynamic sessions, specifically designed to address group process, were also included. The agreed upon values (included in the guide that each participant received after their application was accepted) that directed our practice were: “(i) be present in every moment; (ii) remain curious; (iii) leave your prejudice, stereotypes, biases, labels, and clichés at the door; (iv) go deeper than the surface level response of what is happening and what you are hearing; (v) don’t simply be a tourist in these cultural experiences. Be a local as much as you can. Learn about cultures and let the learning change you; (vi) achieve enlightenment!”

Oppression

Despite not being designed for tackling oppression specifically, as the process unfolded, it became evident that the question of oppression would become omnipresent. The presentations of individual countries were characteristically focused first on the history and geography of those countries. Though not with the same intensity in all cases, they naturally ended up signalling situations related to colonisation, slavery, economic and social injustice, the patriarchy, misogyny, racism, gender-based violence, discrimination, inequality, and lack of equity in general. This signalling also happened from different perspectives. Some presenters were speaking from the target rank³ point of view (Nieto & Boyer, 2006/07). Others presented from the point of view of someone who belongs to an agent rank group, which brought into the discussion the awareness of privilege and the lack of this fundamental awareness, sometimes within the same individual, depending on context and personal history. As this common thread started being woven, so did our interest as authors in analysing how a group with these specific characteristics in terms of thematic focus and general goals could/would (or not) replicate patterns of oppression within its own workings and structure. We were interested in raising our awareness about our own potential for oppressive behaviour, and to help others become aware of that potential too. We aimed to contribute to a deeper understanding of the risks, and the learning and self-growth possibilities inherent to multicultural encounters – a need that has become particularly acute during the post-pandemic Zoom age. 

To define the basic concept of oppression, we propose starting with a quote from bell hooks, who wrote in 1984 that “being oppressed means the absence of choices” (hooks, 2000). And this absence of choices is imposed by systems constructed by historically dominant or agent rank groups that benefit these privileged groups in detriment of target groups. These systems of oppression – of which racism, sexism, heterosexism, cissexism, ableism, classism, ageism, religious discrimination, colonialism (and within this, all sorts of forms it has historically taken and still takes today), patriarchy, and xenophobia are the most known and glaring examples – are built in such a structurally profound and ingrained way that they enable agent rank groups to exert control over target groups. And this control is exerted by limiting target groups’ rights and freedom in general and, more specifically, their access to basic, fundamental resources such as healthcare, education, employment, and housing, to name the most evident ones. These are all manifestations of institutional/structural oppression, related to biased rules, policies, practices, and procedures on an organisational and/or governmental level that perpetuate oppression, and which are historically determined. But oppression operates on three other levels that are just as discriminatory and that dictate each individual’s response to difference in more direct ways. The first of these is the personal/individual level, which refers to values, feelings, beliefs, identities that each person holds, and individual phenomena such as explicit or implicit bias, the use of stereotypes (not to mention certain clichés themselves), and, even, internalised oppression. The interpersonal level of oppression includes our behaviour, our actions, our use of language, our interactions toward and with other people, and dictates situations like microaggressions, racist, discriminatory interactions, and transferred oppression. On the cultural level, oppression dictates what society’s concepts of truth, right and beauty should be. Marilyn Frye defines it in relation to its etymological root:

“The root of the word ‘oppression’ is the element ‘press’. The press of the crowd; pressed into military service; to press a pair of pants; printing press; press the button. Presses are used to mold things or flatten them or reduce them in bulk, sometimes to reduce them by squeezing out the gases or liquids in them. Something pressed is something caught between or among forces and barriers which are so related to each other that jointly they restrain, restrict or prevent the thing’s motion or mobility. Mold. Immobilise. Reduce. (…) The experience of oppressed people is that the living of one’s life is confined and shaped by forces and barriers which are not accidental or occasional and hence avoidable but are systematically related to each other in such a way as to catch one between and among them and restrict or penalize motion in any direction. It is the experience of being caged in: all avenues, in every direction, are blocked or booby trapped.” (Frye, 1983)

Our goal in this study is to raise our awareness of ways in which we may all be contributing, in our daily professional lives, when interacting with others, to this moulding, this reducing, this immobilising, this caging. First, oppression and injustice are human creations, human phenomena, and, as such, can be undone. For this undoing, a thorough and rigorous examination of our own bias is essential. Without this process of awareness, behaviour tends naturally to be reproductive, which means that without our deliberate intervention, any current, enduring oppressive practices, cultural (and other) norms, guidelines, and institutional settings will perpetuate already existing outcomes and keep giving rise to inequitable ones. Addressing oppression and bias in group processes, be they conscious and/or unconscious, is fundamental, even if it elicits intense reactions and deep emotions when we are confronted with our own contribution. It is also why we must all be ready and trained to address these feelings. It is, lastly, why we decided to address this question in our essay.

Group

The Better Together group consisted of eleven individuals residing in eleven different countries. Two members resided in countries different from where they were born. One of these presented their country of birth, the other their country of current residence. The countries represented were (in alphabetical order): Brazil, Hungary, India, Israel, Malaysia, Portugal, Russia, Singapore, Slovakia, South Africa, USA. To describe themselves, each participant in this study filled out a form with questions based on the works of Marcella Runnel Hall (Social Identity Wheel, see Figure 1 below), Leticia Nieto and Boyer (2006/07), Pamela Hays (2001), Adams et al (2016).

Related to the Social Identity Wheel by Marcela Runnel, the Better Together group consisted of individuals of different races, ethnicities, genders, sexual orientations, sexes, religious/spiritual affiliations, and legal statuses (see Figure 2 below). As far as socio-economic status and physical, emotional developmental (dis)abilities, there seemed to exist less diversity, and participants could be considered mostly able, middle-class, people with above basic education (1-9th grades). The participants were 35-49 years old, and the average age was 42 years.

Figure 2 notes:

DNWTS – do not want to answer, NA – not answered;

Category “partly” is indicated if the group they identify with is not majority, yet relatively privileged in comparison with others;

NNSOC – non-native speakers with English being official language in their country, 

2+EDU – English is their 2nd+ language and they use it every day,

2+OC – English is their 2nd+ language and they use it occasionally

The language of the group was English and the different rapports with the English language determined different ranks in the group and the level of easiness when communicating in the group. Some of the group members shared a common native language (incl. English, Russian, Chinese, Portuguese). Some of the group shared English being the official language in their country, while others learned English as a second or third language and used it to different extent in their everyday life. Based on these categories, the characterization of the group allows us to perceive group members’ potential and/or effective identification with Agent and Target ranks according to Nieto and Boyer.

Methods

A questionnaire, written in English, was developed (see Figure 3 below). It included free-response questions, closed and multiple-choice questions. Questions supporting respondents’ intuitive understanding and spontaneous definition of oppression were preferred over questions that might require pre-existing scientific awareness of oppression.

Prior to the interview, respondents were informed about the anonymity, and purpose of the interview, and about how data would be handled. The interviews were conducted by the authors and Sheila Donio⁴ and were recorded. The data was evaluated using grounded theory – an inductive technique for interpreting recorded data about a social phenomenon (Glaser & Strauss, 1967). We applied the coding approach described by Strauss and Corbin (Strauss & Corbin, 1990, 1998) which involves classifying and categorising text data segments into a set of (i) codes, (ii) categories, and (iii) relationships. Firstly, an open coding procedure identified key ideas and perceptions hidden within the text data. A code representing the basic concept of a portion of a text was assigned to it. Each individual code originated from the text and represented the original meaning and its nuances.

This process was continuous, and the number of codes increased with the portion of analysed text. Secondly, similar codes were categorised to represent specific and meaningful concepts. Open coding, categorization, and axial coding were performed simultaneously. Axial coding targeted the analysis of relationships between concepts and constructs. Identified codes, categories and relationships were further analysed by a mixed quantitative and qualitative approach.

1	Which types of oppression had you perceived in your own country before the Better Together project?
2	What have you learnt about contexts of oppression in other countries during Better Together? How did that learning change the view on oppression you had before the project?
3	Do you perceive yourself as a person subjected to oppression? Has that perception changed during the Better Together group process? Do you perceive yourself as someone who has been the agent of oppression? Has that perception changed during the Better Together group process?
4	Have you perceived oppression in other international Playback contexts? Please specify the type of oppression and context?
5	Does your awareness of oppression differ if you are in an international context in comparison to when you are in your own national context?
6	Have you been aware of any situations of oppression within the Better Together group process? Describe the situation(s).
7	How did you react in that (these) specific situation(s) and why?
8	How would you describe the process chosen by the group to handle the situation(s), if any? Was this choice satisfactory for you or would you have chosen a different way to handle this (these) situation(s) within the Better Together group?
9	What has the learning about oppression during the Better Together project brought to you personally and/or to your Playback practice?
10	What would you recommend to international Playback groups in relation to types of oppression in group processes after this one-year journey?

Results

Individual learning about oppression through knowledge and story sharing

Project participants had already perceived almost all types of oppression in their countries. Most frequently mentioned were sexism, elitism, racism, xenophobia, and heterosexism (see Figure 4). Least mentioned was linguistic oppression. Some participants admitted that they might not be aware of some types of oppression when it does not concern themselves, and, at the same time, it is not discussed publicly.

More than half of the participants considered themselves as subjected to oppression. One participant pinpointed that the oppression they were subjected to is smaller when they compare their own situation to other people from the same oppression target group. This implies they were assessing oppression in relation to something. Other participants recognized that they might be treated insensitively or even oppressed in some contexts (e.g., use of language, country of origin), while in other cases they are privileged. Those participants also noted that being oppressed or not depends on how others perceive them. Presumptions related to the oppression narratives others assigned to them were more powerful than their own behaviour in the oppressive situation they experienced. Furthermore, they expressed the importance of one’s own attitude towards taking the role of the oppressed in an oppressive situation. However, they noted that the ability to not take an oppressed rolecould be rooted in their otherwise privileged lives and related behaviours.

A similar number of participants admitted they might have been agents of oppression in their lives. The reasons for this self-perception ranged from: (i) economic and environmental exploitation caused by their lifestyle and its impact on current and future generation elsewhere in the world; (ii) making small everyday political decisions that support oppressive systems; (iii) using only the majority language in playback groups and performances; (iv) executing jobs where they are expected to maintain the standards of the society; (v) taking leadership roles and connecting people and project/task management; (vi) unwillingly oppressing somebody; or (vii) supporting oppression by not fighting against it. Some participants stated that, in their cases, awareness of privilege leads to preventing their potential oppressive behaviours. Their perception of themselves as agents of oppression during the project changed based on: (i) learning what their dead angles were; (ii) how much their own privilege meant; (iii) increased awareness of how oppression occurs; (iv) how unwillingly anybody can oppress others; (v) how unwillingly and/or unconsciously anybody could be part of oppressive systems; (vi) which conflicts related to oppression could occur; and (vi) reflecting on oneself as an oppressor.

From presentations and sharing of personal stories, five participants learnt about the distribution of different types of oppression and the prevalent types and oppressive patterns. The extent and depth of oppression became more perceptible to two of them, and the context of oppression to four participants. Participants realised that narratives of oppression differ in different countries, and that nuances/details about the context of oppression differ too. Some participants got the opportunity to discuss certain types of oppression for the first time, as talking about those oppressed target groups was taboo in their home country. Two participants changed how their perceived oppression in their own country thanks to the project. They became: (i) sensibilized to other types of oppression in their own country; (ii) able to recognize how the oppression against minorities is slowly growing; (iii) could find similarities and relate to patterns of oppression in different countries and people’s stories. Four participants learnt nothing to a little about contexts of oppression. They became aware: (i) of some details of how oppression patterns work; (ii) confirmed their understanding about how oppression works; and (iii) that sometimes people in countries where systemic oppression is strong were not aware of oppression.

Patterns of oppression in international Playback Theatre contexts All participants admitted that their awareness of oppression differed in international and national playback contexts. Some felt more privileged and more able to use their own talents in international than in national contexts, others felt even more oppressed. The geopolitical or economic status of their home country was given as the main reason in both cases. Others referred to no difference in their perception of being privileged but reported changes in their awareness about oppression and changes in behaviour. Participants admitted they learnt about oppression in one country through international experience. Some perceived that the topic of oppression is more frequently present in international than in their home contexts. It was also mentioned that knowing the nuances of their home country context felt more secure but might lead to being less sensitive to oppression there. Contrarily, feeling more insecure in international contexts was caused by doubts about: (i) what can be taken as oppressive and what cannot (in terms of stories, behaviours, acting, conducting, communication, etc.); (ii) ability to depict the social and cultural context appropriately and respectfully; (iii) being perceived as trustworthy and able to play teller roles while coming from other backgrounds. Most participants have recognized occurrences of oppression in the international playback context (see Figure 5 below).

Category	Situation 1	Situation 2	Situation 3
Culturally disrespectful	Offensive gestures Offensive language choices	Disrespectful behaviour towards others (e.g. not giving them time to prepare)	Unwillingness to handle those situation by some privileged groups/ ignorance
Racism	Privileged groups pursue a certain image about oppressed groups and deny acknowledging diversities in oppressed groups	White places for white faces
Non-inclusive environment	Some Playback schools not included in round tables	Unwillingness to adjust schedules across time zones	For newcomers and less experienced people on large meetings
Playback practice I	Choices of forms	Teaching playback	Diversity in practice should not harm audience
Playback practice II	Zoom projects inaccessible on mobile phones	Standards of a good actor vs. ableism
Geopolitical issues in playback community	Missing sensitivity and approaches to handle it	Willingness to create dialogues on both sides
Playback community	Privileged groups take space in sharing	Non-privileged group representatives not invited to speak	Supporting access to international gathering
North-driven leadership	Sexism	Elitism	Ageism
Western perspectives	Project-setup

Handling of situations of oppression in group process

Nineteen situations of oppression were perceived as having occurred during the bi-weekly meetings of the group during this one-year project (see Figure 6). The identified situations, their perceptions, and reaction to them differed among participants. Most of them were perceived by individuals or small group of participants, and not verbalized in-front of the whole group. Some were noticed by all participants, yet not received with the same attitude. Three situations were experienced by whole group. Some participants referred to those situations in Playback Theatre Reflects in their published articles. Others did not comment publicly on what they shared with us in the interviews. When setting up the interviews, we informed participants that the results would be summarized and generalized, and no direct quotes or personal data would be published. This procedure is similar to protecting the teller by keeping their stories private in PT. Furthermore, we decided to describe the situation of oppression in general terms to focus on the underlying patterns of oppression rather than on the actual personal story. We describe the conflict sides and the core of the conflict from the viewpoint of the people who listed the situation. We also added the category mentioned by to demonstrate the number of participants which referred to each situation.

No	Type	Conflict sides	Core of conflict
1	Racism	Participant – other participants	Inappropriate word choice in a single person statement
2	Racism	White people – people of colour	Group overfocused on white people issues Did not considered the needs of people of colour
3	Racism /White supremacy	White people – people of colour	Asking if a person of colour could tackle a group situation related to racism caused by white agent, instead of following normal session structure for which they had responsibility at time
4	Racism	White participant – participant	Questioning about someone’s race in an inappropriate way
5	Racism / Self-victimisation of white oppressor	Agent of oppression – others in the group	Person who oppressed others switch to a victim position
6	Occupying the space of speech / Racism, Sexism	Privileged – others	White voices frequently taking space to share and talk Perceived as silencing leading to withdrawal by others
7	Sexism	Facilitator – participant	Inappropriate word choice in group discussion
8	Ableism	Participants –  other participants	Silence and withdrawal of less experienced Misunderstood as personality or culture
9	Ableism supported by structure	Participant – organisational structure	Participant perceived that those who are less experienced do not have support from the organisation structure to have equal chances to others
10	Cultural insensitivity/ ignorance/ Eurocentrism/western	Participants of certain cultural background – others	Unintentionally culturally insensitive use of names by the group Dynamic between two participants of same cultural background
11	Ageism	Participants below average age (A) – others	Participants A were frequently chosen to step in to multiple roles
12	Linguistic / Language related xenophobia	Participant – another participant	Inappropriate word choice in story telling /sharing Towards a linguistic group represented among participants
13	Power dynamic	Participant – organisational structure	Unclarity about roles, responsibilities, tasks, schedules for certain tasks
14	Power dynamic	Participant in role (A) – other participant (B)	Inappropriate word choice Participant in the role brings a contrary statement to the participant’s statement. They (A) supported their statement with wording around the lines of “the majority wants it,” which was found oppressive by the target.
15	Power dynamic	Leadership – participant	Leadership decided which playback forms to use without consent of the group
16	Exclusion / Inclusion	Participant – subgroup of other participants	Disagreement about when is the proper timing for inclusion of a participant to a process
17	Exclusion / Inclusion	Participant – group	Expectation on group reaction was not fulfilled
18	Exclusion / Inclusion	Participant – another participant	One participant asks other (silent) participant to speak / take part
19	Disrespect to one’s engagement and service to the group	All participants – to one participant	Ignoring the session of the person serving the group the most

Situation 1 (racism) and Situation 7 (sexism) led to open discussion in the group and were the most noticeable. In Situation 7, the session (volunteering) facilitator inappropriately chose words to address a participant in a group situation as follows. Firstly, they closed the possibility to share for the participant. Shortly afterwards, they invited them to speak saying “I will let you speak now”. The conflict parties were a man and a woman. It was perceived as sexism by the group, more specifically as silencing of the targeted person by the agent, followed by an equally sexist giving of allowance for them to speak. It happened in front of the whole group. Most of the people mentioned their inability to react in the moment oppression occurred. One group member of a target gender expressed their frustration openly in a less cordial manner, using expletives, which caused the agent to feel attacked. This group member apologised within the session. A few other members reached out to each other and required the virtual room to stay open after the meeting so they could discuss the situation. The agent and target of oppression exchanged bilaterally in between two sessions. The agent apologised in front of the whole group in the following session. Participants perceived the situation to be unintentional and handled satisfactorily. Some pinpointed a moment of self-victimisation of the agent. They said the situation was tackled on a personal level, but action supporting healing of the group was missing.

Situation 1 (tagged racism) happened during a session where not all participants were present. A white (non-native speaker) presenter, during their presentation of a country, used inappropriate wording, choosing the expression “skin colour” to refer to peach colour. No person playing a primary role (facilitator, conductor, group leader), nor any group member reacted verbally in the moment. There was an immediate exchange between group members in the private chat, recognizing the oppression. After the presentation, the presenter’s stories were played back. In the follow up discussion session, one group member verbally expressed noticing the situation as oppressive during the group discussion at the end of the session.

After the session, there was an initiative by part of the group to prepare a questionnaire to understand what the immediate reaction of the group was. They wanted to understand why the individuals and group had or had not reacted, and how the group could create a mechanism to handle such situations in the future. However, the differing perspective between the agent and this subgroup of participants led to a series of other situations, which the agent considered to be exclusive and oppressive (Situation 16 and Situation 17). Then, the agent suggested discussing the situation in the second session of the month in front of the whole group. The subgroup agreed and gave up on their initiative.

The second session of each month was dedicated to sharing participants’ stories related to the first session and the topics they presented. It was facilitated and conducted by volunteers from the group. The person who facilitated the second session in this specific month perceived themselves as subjected to oppression in daily life. The request was perceived as oppressive (Situation 3). They decided to follow the agreed structure of the session. During that session, many stories related to being or trying not to be an agent of oppression were shared and played back. This in turn led to a series of identified oppressive situations related to racism, especially white supremacy, self-victimisation, and occupying spaces of speech (Situation 2, Situation 5, Situation 6).

Related to a personal reaction to the original Situation 1 in previous session, the (white) person in facilitator role had reported they perceived the oppressive wording as it occurred. They were unable to react due to multiple contrary factors, including a sense of responsibility to respect the structure, and the perceived unintentionality of the wording. Privately, they exchanged and supported the person, who later brought the issue up in the group. Nevertheless, they did not reach out to anybody from the group which was targeted by oppressive wording. A participant, who spoke up at the end of the first session, reported progress in recognizing oppressive situations and increasing courage to speak openly about it in the group.

Participants who reflected on Situation 1 in our questionnaire were dissatisfied with the solutions the group chose. They noted that an immediate intervention by the person leading the group would have been the best choice. They suggested that an in-depth, sincere sharing about which behaviours one could perceive as oppressive would have been beneficial and would have brought immense learning. They felt a process supporting the group after the conflict was missing. They affirmed that the existence of a structure to handle oppressive situations could have been built into the organisational structure and led by a skilled facilitator. Others thought that the reaction of the group was inappropriate, making the situation more serious than it actually was, because the incident happened unintentionally. Furthermore, over-focusing on this matter did not reflect the needs of all participants in the group.

Situation 8 describes withdrawal of some participants from activities at the beginning of the group process. Other participants noticed their silence and lack of engagement in group activities, mentioning it in the feedback form. Afterwards, a participant who had a role in the organisational structure talked one-to-one with the persons subjected to oppression. They mentioned that the reason for their lack of participation was feeling unsafe and unsure about being accepted with their current level of skills in a group with many experienced professionals. Participants perceived that the session structure which enabled people to both volunteer for a role and be selected for a role, in fact did not allow all to take a role (Situation 9). This was caused by the fact that the structure was rooted in the presumption that all participants would be confident enough to take group roles. Furthermore, the structure expected participants to demonstrate their skills in a way appealing to others, which was demotivating.

A situation related to Eurocentric/westernized cultural insensitivity occurred at the beginning of the process (Situation 10). The group started to use a naming system typical for European/western cultural spaces automatically, without consideration. A participant coming from a different naming system was therefore called with a surname instead of a first name. Another participant, who noticed this error, reported it in questionnaire. They said they were unsure if it was a personal choice of the targeted person to be named by surname or not. This uncertainty prevented them from bringing the issue to the group. Once they discussed the issue with the target, they (the third person) talked to the group. The group reacted immediately, and additionally asked everybody for a correct spelling and pronunciation of their names. It was mentioned that if this issue had been addressed at the very beginning of the group process, the situation could have been avoided.

Language related, xenophobic word choices (Situation 12) also occurred. Questioning someone’s race in a way that some participants of the group found inappropriate (Situation 4) occurred too. Interestingly, Situation 4 was not listed as oppressive by the person targeted by the question, but by other group members. A case of perceived ageism occurred (Situation 11) when one participant with below-average age was frequently chosen to take different roles. This same fact was seen as a possible example of racism by another participant. Others thought it was because of the person’s competence, experience, and skills.

Cases of participants asking others about their opinion in-front of the whole groupand inviting them to speak were also found oppressive (Situation 18). It was deemed as disrespectful that the person who most served the group was the one with the least attended session (Situation 19). Three of the situations listed were related to power dynamics (Situation 13 – 15). Participants referred to some need for elucidation of some parts of the organisational structure, and inappropriate wording. The third situation was about the choice of forms and ways to play them, which was decided by the leadership instead of the group.

Lessons learned and recommendations

• Awareness of oppression

Firstly, individual awareness of oppression in participants´ own life contexts was increased. Participants gained more insights into other people’s contexts, on how privilege and oppression happen in their social and cultural contexts. They understood that on a personal level the same thing can be perceived as oppression or not by different people. Secondly, they recognize how easily oppression can occur in interpersonal relationships, how easy it is for agent rank people to be ignorant of target rank people’s contexts and historic oppression and of the systems they themselves live under and benefit from. People admitted how hard it was to be always fully aware about all possibilities of oppression. Thirdly, the participants learned how they react as individuals to group situations related to oppression. They linked their inability to react in oppressive situations in a group to socio-cultural conditioning, which helped them to start overcoming it. They realised they are not the only ones who cannot handle oppressive situations. Others reported a personal journey that has deepened their courage to speak up about oppression in a group.

• Group dynamics

Regarding group dynamics, several learnings were mentioned. Participants saw what victimisation of the agent means for the group process in a diverse group. They mentioned that the group may not have been fully honest with each other regarding oppressive situations. When some of the participants were fully honest about their own prejudices and oppressive behaviour, the group seemed to be unable to match that honesty. Participants also mentioned that situations of oppression should be brought into the group only if each person in the group is ready to do inter- and intra-personal work and that facilitation can help in challenging situations. When taking on the facilitator role, one should be aware that facilitating styles and/or a person’s socio-cultural background can be taken as oppressive too. The commitment to do both intra- and inter-personal and group work should be stated by all participants from the very beginning. This happened in the Better Together project in terms of the values that framed the whole process and that participants were asked to adhere to from the start.

Structures and practices enabling intra, inter, and group work around oppression, type of leadership, and leadership responsibilities should be well defined for everybody from the start of any group process too. Furthermore, these should not be mixed during the regular group process or called out ad hoc without consent and should, instead, be left to group dynamic sessions, which were also an integral part of the Better Together project. Time planning should be flexible enough to account for this type of group process situations and needs whenever these occur. Otherwise, time frames and deadlines might feel oppressive, and resentment can be turned towards the leadership.

• Playback Theatre practice

It became evident for a majority of participants that playback tends to connect us through similarities, not across differences (Donio & Halley, 2023). We were ready to find the pleasant connection and synergies, but more reluctant to share and embrace differences honestly, authentically, and fully. The personal gain and need to reconfirm the self-perception of being a nice person, both related to oppressive mentality, prevails in white dominated spaces. For some of the group, learnings related to oppression motivated them to work with oppressed groups. They directly apply the knowledge gained on diversity of tellers’ backgrounds and expressed the need to consider it carefully. They were inspired by the creativity of the other playbackers, and directly or indirectly improved their skills as conductors. They became aware that from a leadership perspective there is a fragile line between keeping the structure and responding to the here and now, which should be revisited.

Participants listed the following recommendations for Playback Theatre groups across cultures, societal backgrounds, and countries. These recommendations represent the individuals in the Better Together project and not necessarily the group or project as a whole, nor the organizers:

• Embrace own personal and identity-related baggage of behavioural oppressive patterns and be ready to question them internally, interpersonally, and in group dynamics
• Be open and ready to challenge self-perception through the interactions with others in the group
• Make space and structure in a group to integrate confrontation
• Learn, share, explain the details of contexts which make a story and its enactment authentic and respectful for the tellers and international audiences (of mixed backgrounds)
• Study, know, learn about your audiences, countries, countries’ relationships, communities, the world
• Study white privilege awareness and white fragility
• Strive to be aware of oppression and privilege, as this is fundamental work in any individual and group process
• Turn your practice as a playbacker, as much as possible, to social justice and anti-oppression work⁵
• Work in small groups in which everybody should be fully and openly dedicated to sharing and holding space together
• Include modules on oppression (stories on these topics, related to oppression and differences in ethnic origin, political views, gender, languages, etc., and how to tackle them), on how comfortable one is in playing this topic and in understanding/showing different perspectives from their own and from the privileged ones, and on how to tackle those stories, in level 1 and level 2 Playback Theatre training. Home groups or workshops should offer, beyond forms and techniques, training on social justice and geo-political perspectives
• Practice forms of nonviolent communication, of minimising miscommunication, providing constant reminders of how to be kind to others
• Balance awareness and humanity, equity and compassion
• Be ready to handle oppression situations if you are in a leadership role
• Build the process of anti-oppression work with the group from the start
• Be responsible for what is going on, always aim and act for transparency and be ready to change organisational structures whenever necessary
• Do not rush due to previously set structures, sacrifice the plan if necessary
• Go for as much elucidation on all these matters as possible

Conclusion

Even though the Better Together project did not primarily focus on the question of oppression, its aim to address multi-cultural encounters in playback in an international setting, and its centring around the sharing on countries and identities brought about many learnings on these topics and on anti-oppression work relevant to the international PT community. Most of these learnings were collected in the three articles published in Playback Theatre Reflects, edited by Will C. and Jo Salas, with language revision by Emily Conolan.

The present study is based on questionnaires and interviews answered by all Better Together participants and aimed at giving a summary of the participants’ viewpoints in relation to the topic of oppressive behaviours and oppression in international playback settings raised by and within the context of the BT project. The reflection proved that having a diverse, inclusive group is not sufficient to avoid replicating systems of oppression or patterns of oppressive behaviour. Exemplary situations from the project helped understand how the same situation might be viewed from different perspectives, and how individual, sub-group or collective oppressive action or non-action in face of oppression (both aware and unaware and both perceived or not perceived) can perpetuate the perception of oppression on the part of the target individual/group and the actual oppressive behaviour itself.

Interestingly, almost all reported oppressive situations were related to group dynamic, not actual enactments. Yet, that does not imply there were no situations which then turned into mistaken imaginings during enactments (Smetanova, 2023). However, in most cases, direct feedback of the teller helped to spotlight the issue. The teller’s feedback is a way of reflecting on our own work/enactment native and inherent to Playback, while the group dynamics in place during PT practice is not defined, a priori, by similar in-built procedures to be routinely used. If and how feedback is given is fully dependent on the social contract of the group, which may or may not be based on a reflection and integration of the PT Code of Ethics and/or on a deliberate discussion and creation of a group specific code of ethics/conduct focusing on questions of oppression (Mauricio Childs, 2022)⁶. In general, playback practice seems to presume that sharing and discussing stories which resonate among the majority of the people that make up the group is enough.

Maurício Childs, in their BT narrative reticulation analysis, calculated that the total of 117 stories shared in the BT project, were grouped along the topics (i) family history, (ii) national and individual identities, (iii) work and activism, (iv) oppression (Mauricio Childs, 2023). They noted that the journey we set on together “deepened and became progressively more complex and vulnerable.” Even if this was undoubtedly occurring, our interviews indicated that some participants withdrew in different stages of the project due to unfolding oppression. Participants described withdrawal as results of rejection and separation (Mairovitch 2023, Orban, 2023), or disconnecting when the group was leaning towards comfort with the process rather than towards handling certain uncomfortable issues which could bring about real change.Sheila Donio and Cherae Halley besides reflecting on the fundamental question of creating safe spaces where individual differences can thrive, also discussed how introductory group dynamics and individual and group sociometry can contribute to that process. Similar reflections on the need to build both safe and diverse spaces were found in our interviews (Donio & Halley 2023).

The main lessons learnt from our analysis of the Better Together process are:

• Having a diverse, inclusive group is not enough to avoid replicating systems of oppression or patterns of oppressive behaviours via group dynamics. Sharing stories which resonate in the group is not a sufficient way to tackle such dynamics if and when such oppression patterns unfold
• Sociometry and exploration of initial group dynamics which increase self-awareness and awareness of others, intra- and inter- awareness, in terms of individual and (sub)group identity, history, and privilege or lack thereof are a fundamentally, intrinsically needed process. By seeing, recognizing, and stating differences, and how they relate to oppression or oppressive behaviours, more equitable spaces of interaction and co-creation may be conceived
• Structures to tackle situation of oppression should be put in place with and within the group. Concrete ways to respond to critical situations, give and receive feedback, and (re)build trust between individuals, between individuals and the group, between sub-groups and within the whole group need to be established
• Full authenticity and willingness to do intrapersonal, interpersonal and group work should be agreed upon in advance. It is fundamental to recognize and embrace one’s own individual and group identity-related oppressive biases and behaviours
• Playbackers working internationally need to study and learn about their colleagues and audiences, their contexts, their countries’ histories, and the geo-political issues that may affect all of these

This study contributed to a deeper understanding how oppression can be unintentionally replicated in international PT groups, in addition to other self-growth possibilities which international online PT spaces undoubtedly encompass⁷. We are profoundly grateful to all the Better Together participants, who so generously and authentically responded to our questionnaire, as the learnings these answers brought about allowed us to contribute to a reconsideration of how we can create spaces for sincere sharing about oppression in our national and international co-operation and the practice of Playback Theatre.

The work towards undoing systemic, structural, cultural, interpersonal, intrapersonal and group oppression in playback is also deeply dependent on forging self-aware and diverse, multi-ethnic, multicultural, multi-lingual, multi-gendered, multi-aged alliances and on the creation and modelling of profoundly democratic and deliberately anti-oppressive processes and practices, in the hope that these might serve as living examples that amplify the voices speaking up for new organisational systems for humanity.

Acknowledgements

This study was designed, and its results interpreted, using scientifically established methods. We put in our best efforts to remain impartial throughout the study. We recognize that our level of understanding of our own rank might have influenced our interpretations. We recommend readers consult other articles about the Better Together project as cited above. Hereby, we thank Sheila Donio for her support in discussing the initial study idea and with the interviewing process. We leave our gratitude to all Better Together participants who answered our questionnaire, enabling this study to emerge and our learnings to be shared with the international Playback Theatre community.  Will C. (Chalmus), Michael Cheng, Sheila Donio, Nina Garbuzova, Cheraé Halley, Marat Mairovich, Elsa Maurício Childs, Ági Orbán, Mansee Shah Thard, Anna Smetanová, Poh Kiang Tanare acknowledged for their open and sincere sharing, and the consent to publish this study in the International Playback Theatre Network Journal. Participants were listed according to surname alphabetical order, and references to their articles related to the project can be found below. Radhika Jain and Steve Nash are acknowledged for helpful reviewers´ comments, and Jeffrey Childs for language revision, as English is not our native language. 

References

Adams M., Bell LA., Griffin P. (2016). Teaching for Diversity and Social Justice. London: Routledge.

Chalmus, W. (2023). What have we done?! Yet another Playback project! Playback Theatre Reflects. February 24, 2023.

Chalmus, W., Garbuzova, N., Mairovich, M. (2022). Application for PITP: Better Together Series. Google Form, //forms.gle/K6rPBwJxKC6HHDpX9, last accessed: November 11, 2023.

Cheng, M. (2023). Simple Questions and Complicated Answers. Playback Theatre Reflects

Donio, S. (2023). Is That Still Playback? Playback Theatre Reflects

Donio, S., Halley C. (2023). “Who here does NOT relate to that story?”. Playback Theatre Reflects, February 24.

Frye, M. (1983). Oppression. The politics of reality: essays in feminist theory. 1-16. Trumansburg, New York: Crossing Press.

Garbuzova, N. (2023). Better Together – The Way of Connection. Playback Theatre Reflects.

Hays, PA. (2001). Addressing Cultural Complexities in Practice: A Framework for Clinicians and Counselors. Washington, D. C.: American Psychological Association.

Glaser BG., and Strauss A. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. Chicago: Aldine.

Halley, C. (2023). What the rest of the world needs to know about us: A personal reflection on five concepts that (potentially) made our group “better together”. Playback Theatre Reflects, January.

Halley, C. (2023). “If this was my dream” over the course of one year. Playback Theatre Reflects, February.

Hooks, b. (2000). Black Women: Shaping Feminist Theory. Let Nobody Turn Us Around: Voices of Resistance, Reform, and Renewal; An African American Anthology, ed. by Manning Marable and Leith Mullings, 544-550. New York: Bowman & Littlefield.

Mairovich, M. (2023). My Journey with Better Together. Playback Theatre Reflects.

Maurício-Childs, E. (2022). Is The Code of Ethics Ethical? IPTN Journal.

Maurício-Childs, E. (2023). The space between: Interweaving the “I” and the “We” (Narrative Reticulation in a multinational Playback Theatre project exploring multicultural encounters). Playback Theatre Reflects.

Nieto, L., and Boyer M. (March 2006 – March 2007). Understanding Oppression: Strategies in Addressing Power and Privilege.  ColorsNW Magazine.

Orbán, A. 2023. “Evolution” of a white playbacker – how I created separation. Playback Theatre Reflects, February 10, 2023.

Ruiz Esparza, Mireya P. (2023) Anti-oppressive Playback Theatre, IPTN Journal, //playbacktheatrenetwork.org/latest-edition/

Runell Hall, M. Social Justice Education (UMass-A), on the project “Voice of Discovery” (Intergroup Relations Center, Arizona State University).

Shah Thard, M. (2023). How Do I Share My Country’s Story in Twenty Minutes? Playback Theatre Reflects. January 27.

Salas, J. (2024). The Tension Between Inclusiveness and Social Justice in Playback Theatre Playback Theatre Reflects, January.

Smetanová, A. (2023). Where you are in me … A journey of identity between difference and connectedness. Playback Theatre Reflects.

Strauss A., and Corbin J. (1990). Grounded theory research: Procedures, canons, and evaluative criteria. Qualitative Sociology 13: 3–21. DOI: 10.1007/BF00988593616.

Strauss A., and Corbin J. 1998. Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage.

Tan, P.K. (2023). My connection to PT outside Malaysia. Playback Theatre Reflects,January

Tan, P.K., Shah Thard, M. (2023). Newbies in Playback: Two South Asian Working Mothers Comment on Their Experience in the Better Together Project. Playback Theatre Reflects, February.

Notes

1. Facebook post in the group Playback Theatre around the world, last accessed: December 01, 2022

2. See //playbacktheatrereflects.net/posts/

3. Simplified, target is the individual or group exposed to oppression caused by the agent individual or group.

4. Sheila Donio contributed to the idea of this study at the beginning and contributed to the interviewing process. She decided to not participate as author or to the evaluation part of the study for personal reasons.

5. In this respect, the authors highly recommend reading Mireya P. Ruiz Esparza (2023), where the author concludes: “this article represents one step in the systematization of ideas that can give us a theoretical background to our social justice work in Playback Theatre. Researching and writing it has made me feel that I belong to a community of playbackers who have their minds, hearts and bodies set on transforming the world – on giving the stage and microphone to the stories that reveal Marginalization and Privileges generated by the system of oppression in which we live. To this community, thank you for existing. I see you. I hear you. Let us keep giving life to an Anti-oppressive Playback.”

6. Maurício Childs’ concludes that, “as it stands, the Code of Ethics does not sufficiently emphasise the absolute centrality of the other in the ethical choices we make when we do Playback. Instead of expanding on the centrality of diversity by including further considerations on this topic it all too quickly jumps to secondary questions on training and competence”, thus underlining “the necessity for us to acknowledge one’s own privilege in terms of gender, race, culture, language, age, sexual orientation”, “the need to help create brave spaces for risk taking while being mindful that risks may be more consequential for some than for others”, and “the need for constant self-education, beyond Playback, on questions of multicultural communication, political and economic history, social structures, identity politics and power relations”.

7. The authors want to underline that the scope of the present study did not encompass the discussions that have been taken place online about (and since) the Festival for Palestine and the IPTN conference hosted in South Africa in 2023, for which the organization committee defined a very assertive and productive anti-oppression framework, but they believe that the conclusions that have been reached here about the Better Together project may help address and tackle situations like the aforementioned ones in national and international PT co-operations. The authors would also like to highlight the relevance of the last article published by Jo Salas in her blog, The Tension Between Inclusiveness and Social Justice in Playback Theatre (Playback Theatre Reflects, January 5, 2024), for any reflection on these issues.

About the authors

Elsa Maurício Childs has been practising playback since the beginning of 2017. She is a Centre for Playback Theatre Accredited Playback Theatre Trainer, a graduate of the Centre’s Leadership program and a member of the faculty of the Iberian School of Playback Theatre. In 2018, Elsa founded the Lisbon-based professional playback company InVerso. She is also a founding member of the Portuguese playback group Projecto Eco and the international online group Perspektives. Elsa views playback as a tool for social justice and anti-oppression work. She brings poetry, dance and a deep aesthetic and ethical awareness to her practice. Outside of playback Elsa is an actor, producer and writer in non-Playback Theatre. She is a founding member of A Corda, a non-profit cultural association that creates multi-disciplinary works that integrate theatre, music and literature, and a founder of the intersectional feminist group Eufémias, which creates the biennial Eufémia Festival: Gender Perspectives and Identities on Stage.

Anna Smetanová is a Playback Theatre practitioner, process facilitator, capacity building specialist, taoist arts teacher, and former professional environmental scientist. She is interested in the transformative power of playback in connecting outer and inner environments and soliciting community-based knowledge creation in climate adaptation context. Cross-cultural, international, transdisciplinary encounters were part of Anna´s professional and personal life, long before she has started playback in 2017. Story Lane International Playback Theatre Berlin was her entry point to the playback community, and her first encounter with performative arts. Thanks to sensitive leadership and openness of the group, she dived into playback experience of diversities, differences, and the relational webs created or disturbed by identities. The Better Together project was an extension to global scale and online playback realities, we are living now. She wrote this scientific testimony with a hope, that we can jointly free the new realities of the old habits.

The VI Iberian Playback Theater Meeting was held in Barcelona (Spain), on a few sunny days, in a very beautiful place located at the top of a hill, a municipal hostel, from which we could see the sea, which brought us beautiful light and distant smells. And it reminded us that this is a city of travelers who arrive with a curiosity to welcome, to explore, to know, to experience multiculturalism, to find themselves in surprising and artistic corners, with a lot of personality and much to discover.

The VI Meeting, in the context of the unjust world in which we live, was a challenge on several levels, on a personal, collective, and organizational level. From year to year, we are growing and reaching more people, which is very stimulating. But it is also important to be aware of the great responsibility of organizing and the need for better preparation, being increasingly sensitive, reflective and careful. Being able to step out of our comfort zone and face our fears, our uncertainties, the many social injustices, and look back on our journey in PT, which took place in this event.

Co-constructing the meeting space together

Before the event, participants were sent the following document:

We want to welcome you to this VI Playback Theater Meeting, in Barcelona, ​​inviting you to share a place of meeting, respect, and welcome, where there is room for everyone.

In these difficult global moments, when the balance is at serious risk, and polarization is very present in our eyes, we take a paragraph contributed by Leticia Nieto, which can serve us as a framework for our group actions:

“We will create a valuable space.

Because there are no “safe spaces”.

We exist in the real world.

We took scars and caused wounds.

This space wants to lower the volume of the outside world,

And amplify the voices that fight for being heard elsewhere,

This space will not be perfect.

It won’t always be what we want it to be.

But it will be our created and creative space,

and we will work wherever we go.”

Beth Strano

For us, as the Organizing Committee, with opinions, experiences, realities and feelings of different people, we have in common the philosophy of Playback Theater, with the activity open to receive all people, from their own and private side of each one and promoting it there Listen to the power to make your shared humanity visible.

• Take a break, be silent
• Listen
• Empathize
• Grieve and cry if necessary
• Put our humanity in focus
• Co-build containment spaces together
• Take care of each other

 So we wait for you, and we need you so that this meeting can be a moment of calm. An embrace and our welcome from common humanity, even though it could be imperfect.

There was a very large presence of people from Portugal, some of whom were participating in this event (which has already made a place for itself in the history of Playback Theater in the Iberian Peninsula) for the first time. This interest was mainly promoted by the people participating in the Dar palco à diferenÇa project, which has allowed the creation of several new Playback Theater companies in Lisbon in 2023, promoted and managed by the University Institute of Psychological, Social and Life Sciences, dISPar Teatro, Escuela Ibérica de Teatro Playback and Skandinavisk Playbackteater Studio.

The group of Spanish and Portuguese people was also important, and even in this VI meeting people from other countries such as France, Switzerland, Israel, Germany, Ukraine, Russia, Mexico, and England also participated.

Various workshops were presented, and we held a round table in which we pulled up the rug to open up about what was happening to us in the group, in a very delicate and tense international moment, making visible the “elephant in the room” that accompanied us, being able to talk in person, about everything we thought or felt, with all the people who attended. We remembered the need to review the ethical code of the international PT community; we also presented to our growing community the newly formed Asociación Ibérica de Teatro Playback España, in the first hybrid synchronous meeting, in which we announced the composition of the first Board of Directors. And we held a magnificent masterclass, in a hybrid synchronous format, co-directed by Leticia Nieto (online), and with Andrea Sandoval (in person), on the delicate topic of intersectionality, based on the work of Teatro Playback anti-oppression (and in the book by Leticia and Margot F. Boyer: Beyond inclusion, beyond empowerment – a developmental strategy to liberate everyone).

Testimonials from participants

At the end of the event, we asked several questions on the evaluation form, to make changes that would improve the experience and time of the participants at future Iberian Playback Theater meetings (Spain and Portugal).  We present below the questions and their answers, as their authors responded. We consider that these answers can also be useful in the organization of other future meetings in other countries (of which we have news that could begin soon).

What were the most positive aspects of the meeting? [PT] What are the most positive aspects you found?

• Find each other and weave a network. Attempt to listen to each other and put diversities on the table.
• The generosity and love of two facilitators, and the level of maturity at a very sensitive moment when there was a presentation on the topic of the Israel-Palestine conflict
• There is a space that became, for some days, a “home” for all practitioners and interested parties in Playback Theater.
• The request for spontaneity, freshness. I really liked the Israeli teacher (sorry I don’t have the name right now) also the one who lives in England (sorry) dance expression, it’s my thing.
• Meeting with people, sharing at a thematic level.
• The workshops. But they should be more intensive, that is, 2 hours is not enough … at least 4 hours to be well nourished. The interaction was also very positive. The organization was great, they helped whenever needed and in a super friendly way.
• Participate in many workshops, meet many people, be able to talk about current social issues without evading.

What is your assessment of the workshops carried out? You can write some ideas about it.

• I always learn something from the workshops, it seems to me an act of generosity from people who share their ways of doing things, experiences. I lack a feedback space to be able to debate why things are done and from what place.
• Creative and authentic, concerned with genuine delivery and development, ready to allow alterations as they arise, without an agenda/objectives that are not fixed or measured as we usually see.
• The workshops are very stimulating and very varied, in their realization you appreciate the passion and the effort that we organize, which you want to show your way of working and thinking about some issues.
• The request for spontaneity. I really liked the Israeli teacher (sorry I don’t have the name right now) also the one who lives in England (sorry) dance expression, it’s my thing. Maybe due to lack of time … but having brought more chicha to the subject. On the day of the public performance, it would have been great to have interventions by groups, people, types: involved in the show, in this way more spontaneity, creativity.
• Various. You always learn something. Grateful to each person who shares ideas and experiences.
• I liked the possibility of being able to choose … Although it can be frustrating because I wanted to do more workshops! I really liked the diversity of the proposals.

What learning do you take with you?

• That we must go deeper into trying not to reproduce classism, patriarchy and racism in spaces. The leaderships, the roles. How not to reproduce them in our ways of relating.
• How joyful and vulnerable we can be on our guard.
• Leaves with me many creative suggestions in terms of new forms and ways to accompany musically, moments of conviviality and diversity, reflections on the political role of the Playback Theater.
• I want to continue investigating theater, like voice, dance, everything together and of course I am not interested or politics is not essential… I find it as it is lived … limiting.
• The importance of containment and community, the reflection of the hidden in our presence. Pay attention to the invisible (Miguel’s workshop) the importance of talking about elephants and how to build a listening space
• The importance of the body in the box, the energy of the group, Catalan culture, multicultural coexistence
• Many… the practice, the themes, the experiences of the people, and the common passion for PB

[EN] What was missing in the meeting or what could have been better?

• Dear people were missing. I feel that the theme or title of the meeting was very ambitious and that it was not sustained either in the space that was opened to put on the table, or in the open function. I would love to be able to rework what happened in the show.
• If you have to make suggestions for the next meeting, these would be to respect the rhythm of the activities and preserve a safe space. I think that the workshops have often been too fast, without space for learning to settle. However, at times, I feel that there is a lack of attention to safeguarding a collective feeling of security on an emotional level.
• More inclusion in the public spectacle. The representation was uncreative, the moderation was stagnant. With all due respect to active people, it was boring, I was disappointed. It’s such a fragile thread … The horrible food …
• Assess whether the public function is appropriate.
• Take advantage of the situations of war to weaponize victims and create a poor environment on this, lack of artistic content, 90% turned to psychology and associated branches, draw on the artistic importance of theater, focus on ideologies that I don’t have to see anything like Playback Theater, a false inclusivity, respect and “peace and love” because I don’t feel that we defend or that we want to project. Much talk and little action.
• I missed a moment to talk specifically or ask questions about how each group uses PT in each context. As a table for exchanging concrete experiences.

Would you like to leave any more considerations or opinions? Do you want to make any suggestions for the next Iberian Playback Theater Meeting?

• Open functions are a good intention to do with people from diverse groups but at the same time it is difficult to connect, perhaps a small group is formed that warms up from the first day and is the one that takes over in the open function.
• Do it in Brazil sil sil!!!
• Internationality is the basis. With this, more richness, variety, other experiences to translate into theater. Shocks of ignorance! Freshness, out of egos … if possible
• I find the framing of the public function difficult. I understand well the desire to share outwards and the tradition that this has in meetings. On the other hand is respect and containment for people’s stories. Thank the entire organization.
• I would like to see a meeting of Playback Theater and not a meeting of psychologists who want to use PT as a work tool. I would like to participate in the heart of the PT and what it really represents, both for actors and for their audience. More action and dynamism and do not use “playback theater” to force me to follow an idea that I am not part of and have no interest in following.
• I thank you very much, it was my first meeting, and we are going to do one in France next year. I’m going to contact you about this!

Write your testimony, reflections and feelings about what you experienced in the VI EITP. With all the contributions we will build a document: “Testimonies of the VI EITP”, which we will send for publication in the IPTN Journal. We will collect these testimonies until December 15.

• It is difficult for me to organize my feelings that I pass through during the meeting. The fresh air that drove me was the reunion with friends that we have worked and sweated together, connection with people who were sharing for the first time, contributing as a spontaneous theater group La Foguera, and EmocionArTE, a little bit in making the meeting in Barcelona a reality, share our way of doing things and the debates we have in the company. A sensation of internal coldness that I went through was the feeling in the group, perhaps from the unconscious. expressions of systems of oppression, for example difficulty listening to others, making categories among the group, reproducing leadership and hindering the circulation of roles. I started to think during the meeting that there were other people in the shelter that we could have invited to participate, if they wanted, in the workshops, or propose doing a theater session with them. Throughout the meeting I was very connected with those who were absent, with those comrades who could not be there due to problems of political repression in their countries, due to lack of understanding of the conflicts and aggressions that they are experiencing. I am grateful that I was able to name them and present them and this relieves me. I feel that, in these moments of the global context, it is very necessary to support meeting spaces like the one developed by the TP and the TE, that is why we want to continue contributing to this journey both at the individual level and at the level of the companies in Barcelona and Nicaragua.
• The meaning was more than what was evident on stage. Playback is more than representing. Experience fun, dances, movements, parties, refreshments, rides, and shampoos, etc. The box is a tool, not a film. Life happens outside the box.
• Very entertaining for my observation, I am still interested and sensitive to this meeting. Thank you.
• Very entertaining for my observation, I am still interested and sensitive to this meeting. Thank you
• I can say that the experience of Playback Theater was positive, with no sense of getting to know many people, cultures, seeing and knowing through other people like him or PT for them, I went to many of the two workshops that I carried out, but I confess that I did with more work, it took me too long to feel satisfied. I felt that this meeting was 90% dedicated to psychologists and associates … apart from the artistic work, acting work, improvisation, techniques, it was very poor and was reflected in the final show … or that for me it was a enormous shame. But we can always improve from year to year and bet on new directions without losing its true essence; or theater.
• It was a delicious experience that filled me a lot, I took away so many things! It was very impressive, all the energy at the service of the PB, it moved me very much.

Organizing Committee

We only have to add that, in the intention of the Organizing Committee, the desire to create a safe place was present and to take care of it in the best way we could, in those difficult global moments.

Now that this event has passed, when recounting this summary of what we experienced, we can say that we hope to be able to continue this individual and collective work at the VII EITP, which in 2024 will be held in Portugal. We also wish to promote this collective construction, of a more inclusive consciousness, and respect for human rights, at the announced European Playback Theater Gathering, which will be held in Spain in 2025.

We will continue to strive forever to defend human rights and promote peace in the world and justice among people, from the recreation of a safe place, where all of you can fit.

Organizing team

Antònio Vicente, Nuno Amarante, Beatriz Amaral, Ferran Luengo, Diana Calvo, Nadia Zúñiga and Ana Fernández (collector of testimonies)

About the author

Ana is Co-director of the Iberian School of Playback Theater with Antònio Vicente, coordinates the local group Entrespejos, and is a retired Mental Health Nurse Specialist, and professional trainer in Health. As a Psychodramatist and Psychotherapist she is Co-director of the School of Psychodrama, Sociodrama and Applied Theater IMPROMPTU; collaborator of the Master of Applied Theater of the University of Valencia; President of of the AEP (Spanish Association of Psychodrama) and a member of the SEPTG (Spanish Society of Psychotherapy and Group Techniques). Ana is passionate about connection with humanity, and activities that promote the “ethics of love”. She has published and/or coordinated several articles and books, among them: Theaters for Transformation, (Ñaque, 2015); and Playback Theater: Stories that connect us (Octaedro, 2018).

Opening Statement:

This article is about one of the most testing feats and accomplishments that a Playback Theatre (PT) community can undertake – the hosting of an International Playback Theatre Network (IPTN) Conference.

From 4-8 December 2023, the IPTN Roots and Routes of Playback Theatre Conference took place in Muldersdrift, South Africa. In the Zwartkops Mountains, on the banks of the Blaauwbank and Crocodile Rivers, at Glenburn Lodge. The location is situated within the World Heritage Site, the Cradle of Humankind, an area thirty minutes away from Johannesburg recognised as the origin of humankind, the birthplace of where stories began.

The 2023 IPTN conference was planned and carried out by the South African Playback Theatre Association (SAPTA) and brought a total of 178 local and international PT practitioners to South Africa to explore the theme. The intention was to excavate through layers of history and time during the conference to collectively find a sense of purpose in PT – as a global community. Roots and Routes became a provocation to reflect on our roots/routes as holders of stories and storytellers. The theme speaks to storytelling and Playback Theatre’s responsibility and potential to inspire hope and justice – even in the most difficult of circumstances.

At previous IPTN conferences the global North has dominated presence and programme participation.  For some, the IPTN conferences have come to represent a place that can only be accessed by those with power and privilege.

The Steering Committee sought to dismantle this trend by building up an equitable conference that would create greater access for those who have not been able to present at global PT events. As the organisers, we made this a priority from the outset. The conversation that takes place in this article is a reflection on how we did this with the help of many incredible people in the PT community. We highlight the different steps we took to consciously enact and embody the themes and aims of the conference and to ensure that marginalised voices in the global PT community would be acknowledged, represented and celebrated for their PT knowledge that all too often is not seen or heard.

Applying to host the conference

“Being part of the organising committee for the IPTN Conference in South Africa in 2023 has been a profound experience, especially when considering the historical perspective of storytelling. In our early days, we discussed why we wanted the conference to come to Africa. And at the forefront was the imperative of reconnecting the idea of story to the land and Africa, most importantly to establish an African chapter of the IPTN. For me the central imperative was to reconnect ideas of storytelling with its roots.  In reflecting on the conference’s theme: Roots and Routes, the rich history of storytelling in Africa emerges as a central narrative. This history is deeply rooted in our oral traditions, where stories are passed down from generation to generation, preserving culture, values, and knowledge. SA is a country made up of diverse races and historical interactions of race are difficult. The remaining organisers aimed to bring the human face back to the conference. A multiracial committee was always going to be a struggle. This meant prioritising inclusivity, diversity, and authenticity in all aspects of the event. Allowing for a plurality of voices to exist was important.  Significance of narratives from the global South, highlighting their power to challenge dominant narratives, bridge cultural divides, and foster understanding and empathy. By centering these narratives in our conference, we aimed to create a space for meaningful dialogue, exchange, and collaboration.”

Dr Refiloe Lepere (a member of the bidding process and early Steering Committee, co-director Mankokosane Playback Theatre)

Kathy: I was finishing my PhD, which was focusing on PT and its relationship to social justice based on Drama for Life Playback Theatre. There were so many realisations that came out of that process around the work that needs to be done in PT globally, as well as how much we, as South Africans, have to share with the world as playbackers. There are the roots of PT’s origins, which itself has its own roots, hidden histories, and stories lying there in plain sight. For example, the connection of PT and its relationship to staging stories connected to creating a more just world. The potential of hosting a world PT conference was an opportunity to dig up those roots and see how new routes have emerged in the process.

Cheraé: For me – applying to host was a very conscious decision of making space. For South Africa, an underrepresented group in our global picture. After being appointed on the IPTN board, I realised that Africa is named as one region, with Tarryn Lee as the regional representative for an entire continent with 54 countries. Our application to host was our attempt at saying “South Africa is underrepresented, at these global gatherings and at online gatherings, let us host the conference, take up space, and represent.”

Tarryn: I was intrigued by the two theme words: roots and routes. When PT emerged, it was a sociopolitical project, it was an active citizen response to war by Jo and Jonathan and the first playback company. I was (also) intrigued by what routes meant. This personal reflection began as I experienced PT Leadership in Brazil: there are many PT communities, and the PT world is not a homogeneous project. Brazil was the first international PT exchange I had a chance to be part of. I remember a group exercise of being invited to stand near someone you knew. I stood alone. The community I had developed my roots within and through was far away; far away from such opportunities. For many of our colleagues in the Global South it is difficult to be visible in the global arena when you are so far removed from such valuable opportunities to meet, offer, learn, exchange.  I am acutely aware that some of my international PT colleagues from the Global North felt excluded and devoiced. Silencing communities was not an end game of this conference. If safety was perceived as a leading element of previous gatherings, it suggests that the event itself was tight and focused and homogenous, amplifying dominant groups and voices above those that oftentimes have been in the shadows.

Mammatli:  I was really captured by the idea of having South Africans access an international conference. I remember feeling that IPTN was a world of its own and I am a tiny little practitioner in South Africa, somewhere in Africa, and not knowing where and how I fit into the bigger picture but knowing that I am a playbacker. And so, for me, I really liked the idea of bringing PT home. Allowing or creating a space for South African playbackers to see and to experience the bigger picture of where we sit and what PT is. There was an intention that we could build a sense of confidence for the local PT community and ask questions that we may be sitting with and wondering about PT.

Cheraé: It was also a conscious decision for us to not have this be a conference run by one PT company.

Kathy:  From the outset it was like this conference can’t be owned by one PT company because that’s not what PT is about. When you’re one entity, one PT group for example hosting a global PT conference and trying to own and represent all voices on behalf of others – it shuts down possibilities. It was obvious to open up applying for the bid beyond myself, Tarryn and Cherae who are all connected to Drama for Life Playback Theatre. It was important that Refiloe was there in the beginning and that you (Mammatli) stayed on the journey. It was an opportunity for us to strengthen our PT community as South Africans and to really do that work, as we’ve never been able to have a moment to do it.

Tarryn: What has connected us all? It is Drama for Life and their work committed to arts for social change. I consider all five of us, Refiloe included. There is a link in all our backgrounds through Drama for Life, and our context of creating art and theatre in South Africa focused on decolonising and reframing Africa.

Cheraé: It is important to name our approach in developing our Steering Committee. We put the call out for anyone to volunteer, and we sent it to existing PT companies in South Africa, about six of them. We asked the leaders of these companies to share with their teams and asked if anyone was interested in joining the Steering Committee for this conference.  This was going to be a South Africa playback hosted conference.

Mammatli: We were representatives from two different companies and one independent practitioner. We were consciously saying that this conference needs to sit with the South African PT community.

Programme Selection

“Growing up as a child not conforming to gender roles, I had a lot of challenges with socialization. At that time, there was hardly anyone I could call a friend …PT is one of the few spaces where I can be open about my transgender identity and yet not be defined just by that identity. It is a truly diverse and inclusive community. I was not able to physically join the 2023 Conference. However, it was my privilege to be part of the program review team of Roots and Routes of Playback Theatre … It was great to coordinate with team members from South Africa and other countries by email and online calls. There were many great proposals and although it was a challenging task entrusted to me, I believe I have done my best to select the most appropriate proposals considering the objectives of the conference.”

Delfina Kanchana Sundar (Programme Reviewer, from India)

Cheraé: From the beginning we had the intention to make the programme selection experience a more equitable process.  It started with who we invited to be on our review team. We wanted to select reviewers from all parts of the globe, if we were going to pick a program that represented the globe.

Tarryn: Criteria were drawn up for the reviewers to consciously use as a way toward eradicating, or at least minimizing, bias as much as possible. Reviewers were carefully selected within a framework of identity, social context, and unique perspectives on playback practice.  A dynamic, diverse, and inclusive team of reviewers were the result. Members were put into pairs.

Kathy: What was really interesting was putting together people from different backgrounds, experiences, and perspectives in the PT world. Two people would receive the same programme proposal and review it according to the criteria. The idea behind that process was that it’s not just one voice, one holder of power, making decisions. Often, people with very different backgrounds who were paired together would be unanimous about choices. The selection of the program committee was not just about choosing people who represent different identity markers. Every single one of those people has been deeply engaging with the themes of the conference as part of their PT work. The justice themes of the conference are not unique to South Africa. They spoke to issues around equity, access and justice which are global issues.

Mammatli: As somebody who was also a programme reviewer, as well as previously working on the margins and not necessarily aware of the global community in terms of who is deemed important or not, just based on the selection criteria we received some didn’t make the cut. There was something powerful about choosing review panelists who didn’t necessarily know who is who in the International PT arena, and individuals who come from different parts of the world, who are not aware of existing hierarchy, popularity and status. This strengthened our original intentions of access, and equity.

Cheraé: Doing this kind of work is hard. Status did not matter – the quality of the proposal and connection to the theme is what mattered. And it was hard for us to make certain decisions. This really was when we realized we were in the work, working against regular practices that value status within our community, and that this work is not easy but that we were committed to doing this kind of work.

Kathy: It was also about the wording of how we sent out the programme call, which was the first step. As a committee, we justified the conference’s themes as being inspired by our context. To quote a passage, for example from the programme call: 

“South Africa is laid with a history of wisdom, our earliest ancestors, it is also a land ravaged by the history of slavery, colonialism and apartheid. Each country in the Playback Theatre community has its own unspoken and challenging histories to make visible …this event aims to open up explorations of these stories and Playback Theatre’s ability to stage them.”

The themes and values of the conference were in our written discourse as a starting point, but they needed to be translated into action.

Tarryn: I think it is culturally embedded in who we are; that we are direct and transparent in and through the type of PT we practice.

Social Justice vision and commitment

“Over the course of my personal life and professional career, I have learned that not all stories are welcome. Some stories are at their core uncomfortable and others offer an alternative to an existing dominant narrative. The ‘unwelcoming’ is experienced by many in the form of ‘unsafe’ spaces, deliberately intending to silence a teller’s voice. This has been my experience and the experience of many individuals from the Arab world who attempt to participate in various international conferences. The December 2023 IPTN Conference in South Africa changed that for many of us. What the South African Conference organizers delivered was a genuine commitment to firmly place issues of social injustice at the forefront of the conference in a meaningful manner. And in so doing, asserting that ‘all stories are important’ … What we collectively witnessed in those 5 days of the IPTN Conference was genuine engagement, at times uncomfortable, at times raw, but always meaningful. Many dominant and privileged voices chose to respectfully step back and give voice to the stories not necessarily heard. As one attendee said ‘Playback is finally coming back to assume rightful space’.”

Reem AbuKishk (Homegroup Leader, first time attendance, Palestinian)

Cheraé: We all know what happens next. We decided that those who are selecting our programme needed to know that we did not want bias and prejudice to interfere with the way they are reviewing the work people submit. The proposals people submitted. And we created this document …

Mammatli: …Yes, the Social Justice Vision and Commitment.

Cheraé: Let’s be clear here, we wanted these people, who were reviewing, to understand that for us, these isms have the potential to interfere with how you judge the work of others. These isms interfere with how we make room for others, and we needed them to understand how important it was to us, for these isms to be dismantled.

Kathy: It was also about offering a social justice definition so that we could all be on the same page, as a foundation. What was important was that the review committee was committed to the values that the Social Justice Vision and Commitment document was trying to promote. Secretly all of us do have some biases, you can never be bias-free, we are all a work in progress.

Tarryn: Yes, we all have bias in us. I think explicitly this is what it means to be South African and do this kind of work, because I can’t separate being a South African and doing PT.

Kathy: Also, the document was presented to The Review Committee for their comments and input.

Cheraé: Jo and Jonathan also gave us input. There were also things we added because of the feedback received such as White Supremacy and Anti-Semitism. Our efforts were to be inclusive, writing that document resulted in a whole community of playbackers in Israel feeling attacked and excluded¹. We tried to rectify that misunderstanding. Very quickly².  Many people are not aware that two programme proposals from Israel were accepted with this Social Justice Vision and Commitment in place. Their proposal, one for a workshop and another for a homegroup, were relevant to the conference themes. At the time, it did not matter if they identified as Zionist or not. What was more important was that you were willing to have that conversation around a particular topic. This document did not say that because you are Zionist, you will be excluded from participating on and in this programme. You did not have to declare your views. No one had to.

Kathy: That’s true. And there were questions raised about it, do people who are part of a country that is an apartheid state have a role? Should they be participating?

Cheraé: And the outcome was that your participation still matters, you might learn a thing or two yourself. It is a pity that these two accepted individuals declined the offer because of how they interpreted the document. The narrative that began spreading was that this document meant you are not allowed to attend this conference if you are Zionist.

Mammatli: What we are saying is that you could have been Zionist and still attended. You could still put in a strong proposal that has room for inclusive participation or methods of practice which would assist us in the conversation of moving towards social justice. And the Vision and Commitment document was not saying if you subscribe to any of these, you are not welcome.

Application to attend the conference

“It was an exciting moment for being selected to participate in the conference as an African representative from Tanzania …I would suggest introducing certificates of participation for all conference attendees, which is a great idea since it adds value to the participation and serves as a tangible acknowledgment of their involvement.”

Dastan Chakupewa (Delegate from Tanzania)

“The opportunity to exchange ideas with fellow professionals and enthusiasts from the international playback community was both enriching and rewarding. The connections made and insights gained have undoubtedly left a meaningful impact on my professional journey.”

                                                 Zanele Blose (Delegate from South Africa)

Tarryn: A quota system split the world into regions. Each region was given a set number to be filled and when that cap was reached, we were then tasked to distribute attendance to other regions so that an equitable global range was produced. Delegates who had never attended an international PT conference before, were prioritised. And what we saw during the event was a substantial representation of playbackers, both locally and internationally, who were attending a global event of this kind for the first time.

Cheraé: We looked at those applications and it was clear that some regions would be heavily oversubscribed. But the numbers – they speak for themselves. There were 62 applications from people in Europe, 63 applications from people in Africa, 99 people from countries across South, East and Central Asia, 40 people from North America and 22 people from Central and South America, with 6 people from Oceania. The steering committee only had 250 spaces to offer due to venue limitations.

Tarryn: It was exciting to see a significant representation of students: young playbackers at the early stages of their journey, offering a robust energy and vibrancy and vitality that was then injected into the event.  South African students and students from the United States. I was inspired.

Scholarship Distribution and Accommodation support

“It is through the IPTN Conference where I got to experience and explore different Routes and/or Roots of Playback Theatre whereby knowledge was shared through witnessing, doing and speaking. It felt really good to be amongst a community of playback…Jonathan Fox said, ‘we are citizen actors’ and that (when I look back) was visible throughout the conference itself, a sense of community, responsibility was embodied by everyone which became more visible at the closing of the conference where we all gathered at the lawn (picnic vibes), a community was held profoundly.”

Lucky Moeketsi (scholarship recipient, student delegate)

“Accessing the Conference through translation was a way to incorporate our country in the context of playback practice in a concrete way because we have limitations and a very important opportunity for my training as a playback practitioner. It constituted an approach to other ways of performing; it gave me the opportunity to exchange with people from other countries and the possibility of socialising the knowledge learned in Cuba. I had the joy of having the support in translation on a day-to-day basis not only from Melissa, but also from Devrim, Mimi, Andrea, Mario and Thiago who graciously became beings of light, I always felt accompanied since I was accepted.”

     Odalys Téllez Veranes (Cuban delegate, Spanish speaking required translation access)

Mammatli: Together with the scholarship review committee, we created selection criteria which prioritized location, affordability, and whether an applicant was a previous conference attendee. Our desire was to be more inclusive, and to provide access through the scholarships. In the end, most scholarships were allocated to delegates in Africa. And it actually worked out for us that more Africans got an opportunity to attend the conference on their continent, as it might never happen again.

Cheraé: In fact, there was the deliberate decision that those who were receiving a scholarship were also asked to serve in some kind of way.

Mammatli: Yeah, the ecosystem works. The same thing happened with Tarryn’s idea for the accommodation support, which assisted international groups who had to spend so much money on travel and then think about accommodation. The drive enabled those who had to support those who did not have. It’s another way of contributing to a healthy ecosystem.

Cheraé: Those who live in the Global South were particularly affected. They feel the weight of the economy. It’s not enough to say there is room for you here. You also now need the means for you to attend. So that became a focus.

Tarryn: We did find creative ways of fundraising and providing sustainable frameworks to leverage support for those that cannot afford to be present. The accommodation scholarship in addition to the attendance scholarships.

Cheraé: We did not just want you represented. We were not just making the seats available at the table. But we were also intentional about creating an enabling environment. For you to flourish at that table.

Mammatli: I believe that, with the little that we did, we were contributing to sustainable models of conference organising and inclusion. An additional practice by the Steering Committee included live webinars: to address the programme proposal process; applying to attend; questions related to registration, accommodation and travel. The Steering Committee made themselves available at every step of the process. What I realised is, creating inclusive spaces is cumbersome. It’s not just about the call for proposals and putting together a programme. There is a cost to doing inclusive work.

Cheraé: It was a miracle actually. Howard University made it possible for us to pay for both the Wits and Rhodes University students attending. It’s because of the global community’s donations that we could fund accommodation and afford scholarships. It’s because of The South African National Conventions Bureau that we could pay for most of the South Africans’ registration fees. This helped us to not lose money, we found a sustainable way of covering attendance costs but not at the cost of the experience that has been budgeted for.

Days leading to the conference

“We fear for our lives daily, and the lives of our loved ones, yet we know that our stories will be echoed across the world as they are being held high by the heightened event you put together. It is no coincidence that South Africa took Israel to the ICJ a few months after this conference, you ladies took the playback community to stand in trial and defend their ethical compass and they succeeded. Thank you for being brave and bold, thank you for your courage, it is not easy to stand against the flood, the mainstream, and the propaganda.”

Laban (From Lebanon – Company Performance – Joint Statement)

Cheraé: So, here we were laboring. Ready to celebrate. Then the social media storm hit us days leading up to the conference.

Tarryn: It actually started around mid-October where there were posts and comments on Facebook’s Playback Around the World from playbackers who expressed agitation, frustration, sadness, in response to the conference and what it stood for.

Cheraé: The time is significant because it was just after the 7th of October.

Tarryn: People who didn’t align with the conference used social media to attack our efforts and consciousness in creating an event where we wanted to maximize inclusion and voice. And the Zionist Israeli community felt excluded and devoiced. A SAPTA post promoting the committee and conference was shared with negative commentary attached to it. The steering committee were called “woke liberal fascists” who “hijacked” PT and those joining this conference were “participating in a hate crime”.

Cheraé: All of this despite our attempt at explaining ourselves. But two things were taking place parallel to this. The first is October 7th. And the second thing is that we had started going public with our social presence, boosting the event and celebrating ourselves on the SAPTA Facebook page. Counting down. Building momentum.

Tarryn: What was being revealed publicly and through Facebook is that there are many communities existing simultaneously. Some, historically speaking, have been more dominant than others. And this concept that we all understand the same PT, is a fallacy: the we all see each other; we make space for all stories, all stories are welcome stance, was being disrupted. Because it wasn’t about all stories being invited anymore. It was about making space for stories that have been silenced or stories that are not present on these Facebook groups or stories that don’t feel safe in these global spaces.

Kathy: And asking people who hold privilege to understand that they hold their privilege and to quieten their presence, to listen. That has been incredibly challenging and confronting for many in PT, especially when you don’t see yourself as being complicit in Whiteness and antiblack racism or understand what it is. Inclusivity in itself wasn’t enough because, in this setting, it also silences. We combined inclusive ideas with what it is to decolonise PT. Regarding Zionist Israelis, I can understand, to a degree. And yet Palestinians have been enduring ongoing trauma, massacres, displacement and sexual violence at the hands of Israeli Zionists for over 76 years.

Cheraé: Sitting in your victim’s status, watching this positive movement towards a global gathering – we can understand how it must have hurt. Those comments, however, chose to disrupt and dismantle something we were working so hard at for two years. We had been building beyond just inclusion. And in that victim status you actually disrupted what we are building. Those actions then spread a narrative of exclusion. It was so loud that we knew at the opening we needed to set the record straight.

Conference Experience

“Conducting as a young playbacker? I had never conducted for an international audience with people that I admire and respect. I had never conducted for an audience of people who have personal stories to share about the ongoing genocide affecting Palestinians.”

Nine (Student attendee from South Africa and Performance Conductor of Koko!)

“Our homegroup and workshop celebrated diversities in a way that cared for both the individual and the group at the same time, nurturing a relaxing learning environment in a conference that is otherwise full of stimulations and excitement. We look forward to an international community of playback with growing awareness and appreciation of the participation of playbackers who are neurodivergent, providing a space that is nurturing for all.”

Chosen Power (From Hong Kong – Workshop Facilitators/Homegroup Leaders/Delegates – Joint Statement)

Cheraé: We didn’t get it right all the time. We have been reminded of some of the levels in which we excluded our own community. Like with participants in South Africa, who had to travel daily to attend the conference and so many who were not able to attend, practitioners in Cape Town and practitioners in Botswana, Kenya and Nigeria. We tried with pre-conference activities to catch our larger community and we provided transport for those traveling in and out but we didn’t always get it perfect for our own people.

Tarryn: It was a gathering that exposed the white racial majority that sadly often dominates gatherings. Part of the “exclusion” commentary on Facebook was a response to these dominant voices feeling threatened or challenged; fragile white narratives that are confused when they are not prioritised, or why their seat at the table is not a given. This gathering reflected racial diversity and diverse voices beyond tokenism.  

Mammatli: By the time the conference started, and we were to speak at the opening, the tone had not shifted. The fact that we stuck to our principles and the intentions set out in our application to host, up until that opening moment, reinforced our vision. Many people were uncomfortable and did not know what to do with themselves, because the space allowed for a freedom to be yourself. People who don’t often get to experience such liberation and freedom, could be expressive and others felt challenged by that. For the first time, people who usually have a seat at the table, had to watch what they say and how they behave. And perhaps felt like the minority, that they actually are.

Cheraé: To have Chosen Power, the PT group of neurodiverse people from Hong Kong, present in the space and taking up space – what a thing for our larger community to be present for. To be conscious of. There were other ways we attempted to give room to silent voices at the conference.

Tarryn: There were two installations created and both concepts were collaborative projects. The Community Wall offered a space to invite and make visible responses and comments- statements or questions or keywords or pictures- that mapped the conference experience. It became a shared platform beyond the intimacy of homegroup and workshop spaces, or performances. The Remembrance Wall made visible those whom we had lost in recent years and who had contributed to the fabric of PT. It was an outdoor installation by the Tranquillity deck of Glenburn Lodge. And was quite moving. Playbackers wrote messages in their home languages to these individuals. These were two installations of visibility-making.

Kathy: Montreal had some kind of memorial moment marked, and I remember thinking, what a beautiful, important gesture for us to learn from.

Mammatli: The wall allowed room for conversations that did not have room in the workshop spaces in the conference. I also remember a moment where somebody asked me about the images hanging on the deck, I explained that this is a Remembrance Wall and their response was “Jeez, you guys have everyone here”.  And that stayed with me. We have everyone here, in one way or another.

Cheraé: I personally could not connect with the Remembrance Wall at the conference and then a few weeks later, we lost a talented playback musician Ricky, here in South Africa on 31 December 2023. Now, having experienced a loss in our local community – I see how heavy it is. I can only imagine what it meant for someone who has lost someone and who sat on that Tranquillity Deck remembering them at our conference.

Mammatli: It was a beautiful ritual. I remember someone mentioned, I am not sure where, how it was a pity that the whole conference organizing community was made up of women³. And yet that is what made all the difference. The labour of care, of love, of making sure people are present, the community, world, the remembrance wall, the accommodation drive, the scholarship, the holding. It could only have happened because we were women.

This meant and challenged so many things. I’ve never had the opportunity to say to you guys – well done and thank you so much. Because the three of you sit in other spaces and have other relationships, you were aware of a lot more challenges we were up against that were invisible. Because of your awareness of the Global North’s perspective of Africa, you knew that we had to work harder to make the conference as professional as possible.

Cheraé: That image of the four (originally five) women was under threat from the start.

I will never forget that a well-known Arts and Culture Ambassador congratulated Drama for Life for the success on Facebook. And yes, this was a win for Drama for Life as well, but we were rendered invisible in that moment when someone did not name us. Our people quickly stepped in however, to shift that public narrative and named us – Refiloe Lepere, Cheraé Halley, Tarryn Lee, Kathy Barolsky and Mammatli Thakhuli-Nzuza. And also to say, that the female driven support was with us throughout – Thandeka Nheke at the Market Theatre Laboratory who offered us technical equipment, Josefine Krumm and Playback Gehdicht’s generous donation, Kimberley Dailey and her efforts with Howard University funding, Sheila Donio and her leadership on translation, Jo Salas, I mean the amount of times Jo was present for us – the women in the community were present. The women in this community can do big things. We know how to build and sustain communities. We know how to take care of, and how to nurture communities.

Tarryn: Each of us were active and conscious about what we wanted to create after COVID. After the world shut down. Even at the risk of this event becoming a hybrid conference – which could take some consideration in the future – but I don’t think it would have been a manageable model, with our team already stretched for resources and hands-on support. I’m also reminded of all those that couldn’t make it to the conference due to not being granted a visa timeously, or at all; the power structures and gatekeepers that reinforce boundaries and barriers toward inclusivity. 

Kathy: It’s not just because we are women. It is because of the women that we happen to be. I know there are many other women in the world who don’t have that sensitivity, care, and awareness that you all carry. It would have been a very different experience to collaborate with others and achieve what we did.

Mammatli: The sentiment that the three of you carry about South Africa and playback in the world is brave. You had to challenge the norm with direct action against Eurocentric views and behavior. It shook the community.  Because of this work, I look forward to going out there in the name of South African PT and going, yes, it was our conference that did that! It has given South Africa a seat at the table.

Amandla!

Awetu.

Closing Statement

It is not easy to sit on the other side of the conference as the organising committee and to acknowledge having done something named by some as “spectacular” whilst knowing that there were moments of conflict, disagreement and intense debate on what we wanted to achieve. The team had spent two years of their lives to bring a dream about, and at times we doubted our own potential – could we succeed with very little budget? Why did certain members of the global community trust us so much, whilst others did not? Are we burning bridges by some of the decisions we are making?

We battled with the response of those who experienced our inclusive approach as exclusion, as erasure, and as rendering them invisible. It is not easy to say “no” when those who we are saying no to are so used to receiving a “yes”.

After the opening event, a lot of the positive feedback we received referred to the formula of the conference opening, we reflected on this formula which seemed so innate to our own context of South Africa. Why was this so special? It is clear to us that it is only special because so many people across our community do not get to experience such freedom. Freedom of practice. Freedom of thought. Freedom of expression. Freedom to take up space. Not only in their PT practice but also in the international gatherings at large because they are not given the platforms, accessibility and recognition they deserve or simply because they are practicing in isolation. These are the invisible ones of our community. To build a space that makes the invisible now visible, comes at a cost however, and we had to sit with difficult feelings as a collective; we had to make some difficult choices with our local community; and we had to have difficult conversations with the IPTN board. But we always moved with the intention at hand, which was to find a sense of purpose that roots itself in a deeper understanding of justice for all humanity and the earth. Our only hope now, is that the spirit of what was created can find home at every PT gathering going forward.

To celebrate ourselves and our PT community, the steering committee further wishes to make the following key achievements from the conference visible to the larger community:

• This conference hosted academics, practitioners and creatives from 37 different countries⁴.
• The conference programme included over 30 embodied workshops, nine paper presentations and ten performance companies from around the world. Three South African companies performed, others from Singapore, Australia, Lebanon and including internationally mixed groups.
• The conference opened with a keynote address by Dr Gcina Mhlophe – South African storyteller, writer, playwright and actress. Mhlophe’s opening was followed by PT founders Jonathan Fox and Jo Salas as our guests of honour.
• The conference Steering Committee officially launched the South African Playback Theatre Association, which was established to create and hold the vision of the IPTN Conference 2023. Furthermore, to build community and resource sharing amongst South African PT groups and independent practitioners in South Africa.

Notes

1. Despite the document being created only for the reviewers and ourselves as hosts, it was shared among the Israeli PT community by people who misinterpreted the nature and intention of the document – it was shared out of the context in which the document was created and was shared among the Playback community whom the document was not intended for.

2. The steering committee issued a public statement on the Playback Around the World Facebook page declaring the intention of the document, providing clarity on their understanding of the word Zionism and why they included the word in their Social Justice Vision and Commitment document, making the correct and final version of the document public, as an earlier draft version was being circulated. Furthermore, the steering committee met with representatives from the Israeli Playback community who wished to dialogue with them on the document and its effects on their community. These conversations were mediated by Jo Salas, there were equal contributions made by all present in the room. From our point of view, these conversations were sincere, vulnerable, and made room for listening to the other. Unfortunately, the two groups did not come to any shared understanding of a way forward.

3. Amidst the feedback received from external reviewers appointed by the IPTN to review the applications to host, one particular comment was critical that this committee was made up solely of women.

4. Countries in attendance were India, Lebanon, Hong Kong, Mainland China, Singapore, Belgium, Colombia, Malaysia, Jordan, United Kingdom, South Africa, Tanzania, Egypt, Brazil, Chile, USA, Mexico, Cuba, Estonia, Switzerland, Russia, Norway, Ireland, Greece, Portugal, Lithuania, France, Spain, Finland, Germany, Italy, Netherlands, Ukraine, Australia, Zimbabwe, Lesotho and Botswana.

About the authors

Refiloe Lepere: Dr Refiloe is a university lecturer and a theatre-maker who has worked on a number of creative festivals as both curator and organiser. She is co-founder of Mankokosane Playback and BuaPuoPha. Her expertise as curator and organiser has been both in university spaces and in community and theatre spaces.

Mammatli Thakhuli-Nzuza: Mammatli has made extensive contributions to organising teams and think tanks with regard to curating participatory interventions for various creative events. She is co-founder of Mankokosane Playback and BuaPuoPha. She has extensive knowledge in raising money for youth development projects and has successfully received funding from major arts and culture funding sources in South Africa such as the Department of Arts and Culture, and the National Arts Council.

Tarryn Lee: Tarryn is a theatre maker, facilitator and trainer. She is a founding member of Drama for Life Playback Theatre (est. 2008), leads the Playback for Youth project, company co-director in recent years. She received a National Arts Council Presidential Employment Stimulus Grant for a project: Playback Theatre for Social Change which offered scholarships and mentorship training. Tarryn is currently the regional representative of Africa for the IPTN.

Kathy Barolsky: Kathy is an Associate Professor in Drama and Theatre Education at NTNU, in Trondheim, Norway. Kathy founded Drama for Life Playback Theatre where she was the artistic director and later co-artistic director with Cherae Halley until 2016. She served as the first regional representative for Africa and undertook PT Leadership in 2013.

Cheraé Halley: Cherae is currently a member of the IPTN board and the co-director of Drama for Life Playback Theatre. Her experience in curating and organising conferences and festivals date back to her curation of the Drama for Life Human Rights and Social Justice Festival in 2013. Cherae’s experience in international festival gatherings is through her curation of the focus days planned across Cape Town communities during the ASSITEJ World Congress in 2017. 

Photographer

Bongani Ngondo

Dedication

For Pamela Freeman, who traveled to South Africa in 2010 and was the first trainer – the first root – representing the Centre for Playback Theatre and taught Core training to our Drama for Life community. Pamela invoked a sense of citizen responsibility, demonstrated strong black female leadership, and affirmed our intention to use Playback Theatre as a tool for social justice and human rights. Despite her best efforts, Pamela was unable to travel to the conference in 2023, so here and now – we wish to honour her and thank her for her footprints left in Africa.

Sheila Donio, Brazil – My Rainbow Reflections

“Do you want some glitter on you?” he asked.

“No, thanks,” I replied.

“You know, that is wonderful. It’s wonderful that you can say ‘no’. That is what this is about. This workshop is for people to feel free to be themselves. Welcome!”

And that was how my experience began at the Queer Playback workshop at the 2007 IPTN Conference in São Paulo, Brazil, down the road from my house. At that time, I did not identify as a queer person, but I had so many friends that were going to join that workshop that I chose to be there just to be with them.

Fast forward to India in 2019, my 4th IPTN Conference. After seeing the Queer Playback workshop on the program of all other conferences I had attended, I was surprised not to see it on that one. And the theme that year was Celebrating Diversity. (To be fair, I was told that the playbacker who would facilitate it could not attend at the last minute.) But that would not be just another Queer Playback workshop I was hoping to attend, it was going to be my first one after having married my wife, after identifying as a queer person myself – still not a big fan of glitter, though. Stubborn or persistent, before the end of the opening ceremony I had already guaranteed a spot on the program and two amazing facilitators for our Queer Playback workshop to happen! So it did. And it was so successful! Over 30 people attended. Some of them disclosing their identity for the first time. Some very young people. Some older people. Some family, some friends, some local, some coming from very far away. Some afraid, some safe, most of us: proud.

Years passed. The pandemic happened. Dark times. And the most shining light of my life arrived: In July 2022, my wife and I welcomed baby Júlia into this world, in the comfort of our home, just like we had dreamed of. So, for the 2023 IPTN Conference in Johannesburg, I was not as available as I had been to the previous ones. And again, stubborn or persistent, I took Júlia to South Africa. It was our second international trip, but the first one by myself with her. She was one year and four months old. We spent 12 days there. And we were so lucky! We met old friends right at the airport and had help right away. We were hosted with love and family coziness in the city. We were guided by and had company from the best friends in the world (literally). We stayed in a very comfortable room at the conference venue. People offered to help me and played with Júlia at various times. There were still several challenges and I felt very alone many, many times. But it was a blessing!

Nevertheless, I had a few recurring thoughts as I navigated South Africa, in and outside of the conference atmosphere, while I was meeting new people, having wonderful conversations, and Júlia was having a great time: Would we be treated the same way if those people knew Júlia has two moms? What would our trip look like if my wife had been there with me? I confess I didn’t study much about the life and safety of the LGBTQIAPN+ in Johannesburg before I went. Would we be safe if we were there as a couple with our daughter? Would we be able to hold hands while taking our baby to the zoo for the first time?

This conference program included a Queer Playback workshop. Unfortunately, that was scheduled to take place at the same time as the panel I was presenting. But panels ended earlier than workshops. So, as I was strolling Júlia around during her nap, I saw the place where the Rainbow Community was still gathering. I chose to stop by. I stayed a bit far away, not to wake the baby up. I was sad I could not be fully present. (I actually could not be fully present in anything I did during the conference, besides going to the kiddy pool.) But I was there. I let myself be seen. I saw others. I was proud. I could see lots of us were proud. I listened to one story and watched that enactment. Then I sent my love to everyone and walked away. That was all I could do. It was not much, and yet it was a lot.

In one of the evenings, there was a Rainbow Table set up at dinner for rainbow people to connect. I was also busy at that time, and extremely overwhelmed trying to eat, feed Júlia, and get to a rehearsal on time. I wish I could have been there. I wish all conferences had a permanent rainbow table for all meals. One that we could come and go to as we needed a place to feel welcome. Choosing where to sit for a meal at big events like that can be very stressful at times.

People who don’t identify as part of the LGBTQIAPN+ might never understand our need to feel seen, heard, valued, respected, cared for, honestly welcomed. It might be weird to hear and read over and over that WE EXIST. But as we continue to have our rights denied in so many shapes and forms, while we carry our fear in our backpacks anywhere we go, we must continue to say: WE EXIST! AND WE RESIST!

About the author

Sheila Donio is based in São Paulo and has been a playbacker for 20 years, performing and teaching in Brazil and abroad. Júlia is the daughter of two playbackers and has been performing on Playback Theatre stages since she was 39-days old.

Siphumeze, South Africa – Playback beyond gender: An exploration of masculine and feminine energies for the playback actor

As a queer gender fluid humxn I am often aware of how queer folx show up in the world. How they sit in their bodies. Whether they make themselves smaller or bigger. When they speak and when they choose silence for safety. As an artist I get to experience the importance of story. Seeing yourself represented in story and sharing your story. So naturally I’m obsessed with queer folx and our stories.

What I witness time and time again is the silence of queer narratives in playback performances. You will have a room filled with diverse people and a theme that is diverse but more often than not the queer people remain silent. Because speaking, and sharing your story isn’t always safe. Because sharing your story means outing yourself.  What does this inclusivity look like for queer folx when they are sitting in a room with their homophobic colleagues but want to share a story? How can playback create a safer space for queer folx to share their stories?

An audience member lifts his hand to tell a story. He is invited up to the teller’s chair. “Before you continue could you pick someone to play you in your story?”. The teller is presented with choices, two womxn and one mxn. He chuckles as he is presented with the womxn choices. He responds with “obvious,” pointing shyly to the mxn in the cast. The conductor replies “Womxn can play mxn too, so pick any actor you feel drawn to”. The teller pauses and changes his mind and picks a womxn to play him.

As simple as that exchange seemed, it expanded someone’s thinking of gender. He shifted his idea of what a womxn can and cannot hold. Any actor can play any character. What a mindblowing concept when you think about how it can shift our thinking around the boxes we put mxn and womxn in. Witnessing people pick different genders from their own time and time again in so many performances had me thinking there is something to this experience of gender being limitlessness that this ritual offers. I think about Needa when they said “Social change and transformation begins here, as we make space for the stories of the community – through individual voices – and are affected by them” (Needa, 2015) and every time people react and every time a teller picks someone of a different gender to play themselves, we are shifting mindsets. 

The lack of focus on gender also creates a safer environment for the queer teller not to have to put their queerness in the spotlight especially when that is not the focus of the story and essentially have to come out to the entire room. So there is incredible potential for the gender neutral to extend to the entire performance and space we set up. Remove the gendering of things that don’t need to be gendered. You’ll often find that we gender things out of habit, not necessity. Training conductors and actors to see beyond gender because the Playback Theatre form is fluid enough to accommodate. I would even be as bold as to say it asks for it.  As beautiful and colourful as gender expression inherently is, and there should be room to shout all genders and pronouns, our audience walks in with a lot of bias and so does the team. 

So my workshop was me planting a seed. Exploring the potential of PT and Finding a Gender Orange. The actor to listen beyond their own gender bias. The conductor to be fluid in their reception of stories. And mostly for all of us to understand that masculinity and femininity are energies that exist within all of us. It doesn’t matter what gender you are. It doesn’t matter what sexuality you are. You have both masculine and feminine energies at your disposal as tools for both performance and life. 

About the author

Siphumeze Khundayi is a healer, art – maker and facilitator interested in creative ways of bringing together dialogue and artistic healing practice in relation to African Queer identity. She is creative director of HOLAAfrica! a pan-Africanist womanist online collective. Through which she has facilitated and held workshops and discussions around sex pleasure, and healing, in which she uses arts techniques to allow participants to be in their bodies. Her playback journey started when she joined Bonfire Theatre, now Ground Spring Theatre, a playback company based in Cape Town in 2011 and switched to Drama For Life Playback in 2016 when she moved to Johannesburg. She also worked with Zakheni Arts Therapy which worked with both kids and adults and used art as a vehicle of healing trauma.

Sarah Pritchard, United Kingdom – Following My Rainbow to Rainbow Nation

Packing for Playback conferences

Checklist: summer clothes, travel kettle 

Rainbow flag.

At each conference I invite a gathering

of rainbow people, family, friends

hear colourful stories from

around the playback worlds:

Shades of persecution, exclusion resistance, persistence. 

Packing for South Africa IPTN

Short sleeved shirts, travel kettle, rainbow tie

My new flag ordered didn’t arrive on time.

The flag I take, often stays in place for others to use

And the flag has grown with us.

Now many more rainbow versions to celebrate emerging shades of lgbtqi

We have to keep up with our selves. 

Reuniting with rainbow family who’ve met in Bulgaria, Belarus, Turkey and other somewheres

Meeting new family after the

gender workshop & Lgbtqi workshop  

(I tell, I celebrate over 40 years activism) 

I’m invited to do my conference invite

for dinner, be seen, be loved.

A looooong table of smiling, laughing faces of all ages and shades

A rainbowed flag proudly held up

a huge dining room applauding 

I pack my return home

to winter clothes

Travel kettle 

A rainbow tie gifted

to a young friend from Brazil

travelling Rainbow hopes 

***

About the author

Sarah Pritchard is a psychotherapist, poet, and founder member of Playback Theatre Manchester, established in 1992. She has been out and an LGBTQI activist since 1981.

In this section of the IPTN Journal, we share information about new books, and links to online resources such as articles, news reports, and websites about playback that we have become aware of over the past year. We realise that there is much more published material out there, so if you know about any relevant print publications or web based material – in any language – please let us know!

All the links below were active at the time of publication, but hyperlinks can sometimes become out of date. Also bear in mind that access to some Journal articles, and newspaper reports, can be limited by the publisher, although it’s usually the case that at minimum you can see the abstract and citation of the article, or the headlines of the newspaper story.

Books (and chapters in books) about Playback Theatre:

A Colorful Language – Playback Theater as a Way of Listening with Youth in Palestine, ByKhitam Edelbi, Yamila Hussein-Shannan Chapter 1 in Art as a Way of Listening, Routledge (2023)

Young People as Agents of Sustainable Society, Reclaiming the Future, Edited By Päivi Honkatukia, Tiina Rättilä

OPEN ACCESS Routledge (2023)

Chapter 8: Participatory research among youth – too little, too much, too romanticised? Reflections on co-research with young refugees. Nina Tokola, Tiina Rättilä, Päivi Honkatukia, Fath E Mubeen, and Olli Sillanpää

Chapter 9: Co-constructing knowledge of young refugees’ lives in Finland Epistemological notes. Tiina Rättilä, Minna Hokkanen, and Olli Sillanpää

Playback Theatre articles in other journals:

Playback Theatre applications: A Systematic Review of Literature. António-José Gonzalez, Margarida Pedroso de Lima b, Luís Preto, Nuno Amarante, Rita Barros The Arts in Psychotherapy (April 2024)

Beyond Words: the Potential of Playback Theatre in Promoting Reconciliation in Post-Armed Conflict Societies. Oliver-Rodés Parés-Neira, Cristina Final Degree Project, Digital Archive of the Ramon Llull University (2023)

Lifting the ‘knee on the neck’ through virtual collaboration within creative and therapeutic art methodologies. Selloane Mokuku, Butana Molefe, Noluvuyo Magagula Drama Therapy Review, Volume 9, Issue Breathing Beyond Borders: Racial Justice and Decolonial Healing Practices, p. 23 – 44 (April 2023)

Overcoming the student’s speaking anxiety disorders through playback theatre therapy. Dr V. Dorothy Catherine1, V. A. Devi, Dr.V. Anitha Devi Human Research in Rehabilitation, 13(1): 110-119 (April 2023)

A participatory arts application of Playback Theatre to transitional justice in Sri Lanka. Cymbeline Buhler Kinga, Rev J. Sivagnanamb and S. De Silva The Journal of Applied Theatre and Performance, Vol. 28, Issue 1 (May 2023)

Playback Theatre and Narratives: A Micro-Level Study on the Development of the Oracy Through “Collaborative” Applied Art Process. V. Dorothy Catherine, C. Suganthan Theory and Practice in Language Studies, Vol. 13 No. 4 (2023)

Playback Theatre and the significance of intra-actions in staging social artistry. Kathy Barolsky Applied Theatre Research, Volume 10, Issue 1, p. 55 – 70 (July 2022)

Playback theatre in adult day centers: A creative group intervention for community-dwelling older adults. Shoshi Keisari, Anat Gesser-Edelsburg, Dani Yaniv, Yuval Palgi Plos One (October 2020)

A Pilot Study on Playback Theatre as a Therapeutic Aid after Natural Disasters: Brain Connectivity Mechanisms of Effects on Anxiety. Sarat Munjuluri, Peter K. Bolin and Ramiro Salas Chronic Stress, Sage Journals (November 2020)

News reports and blogs about Playback Theatre:

When theatre tackles the effects of climate extremes: the “science-art” approach to disaster risk reduction Diego Giuliani, Youris.com, European Research Media Centre, (Italy & Ireland) 23 February 2024

When stories answer each other: Playback Theater in Freiburg Heidi Ossenberg, BZ e-newspaper (Germany) January 2 2024

In Dnipro, a theater group recreates what their audience goes through during the war Till Mayer, BZ e-newspaper (Germany) September 5 2023

How Playback Theatre Unlocked a Surprising Shift in Perspective Helen Williams, Mindfulness Coach (New Zealand) March 2024

Johnnie’s reflections Australian playbacker Johnnie Jablonka talks about his travels and playback adventures in early 2024 following the IPTN Conference in South Africa (December 2023)

Other sources of writing (and talking) about Playback Theatre:

Playback Theatre Reflects (Jo Salas) A regularly updated independent website for writing about playback.

Playback Theatre Talks (Noa Leibu) A podcast for playbackers, playback fans, art therapists and performers.

Videos about Playback Theatre:

Embodied Narrating: Playback Theatre for Social Change (Melissa Nussbaum) Collection – A series of five half hour videos on the Trauma Research Foundation website

Working with a group of migrant mothers and a group of mothers with Non-Recourse to Public Funds (Playback Theatre South, UK) Seven short videos on The Open University Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences website