Comments on: Section 98 – Open Source Entry #1 – Introduction: What a tangled web we weave

By: Michael Wheeler

Michael Wheeler — Wed, 13 Jan 2010 20:54:47 +0000

Aislinn! What a great discussion your post has already generated. Fantastic.

Margaret – Check out this post by National Arts Centre company member and theatre blogger Kris Joseph on how in a best-case scenario this sort of work can lead to a different relationship between audience and theatre artist. Hopefully we can encourage a new relationship that occurs beyond the 2 hours that everyone is in the same place as part of a final performance.
http://www.krisjoseph.ca/2009/10/27/porosity/

Laura – Your work sounds fascinating. Not to be cryptic – but please come check this website for a big announcement on Monday that may interest you….As for bias, I have plenty. As does BellGlobeCTVmedia, as does The National Post, as does your local community newspaper. The only problem I’ve ever seen bias make for art and communication is when people act like they don’t have one.

By: Laura

Laura — Wed, 13 Jan 2010 17:08:01 +0000

As a writer, actor, and supply teacher (hoping to have my own class soon!), I think this process is extraordinarily valuable, with respect to the arts, cultural and political communities, and students of all ages. I would love to integrate this process and blog into my future high school history classes–or drama classes. The cross-curricular potential is limitless.
I agree that it will be a challenge to convey the information and knowledge accumulated, while creating a full, absorbing, theatrical narrative, but I like the Jon Stewart example. My one concern would be the extent to which bias is inherent in an emotional or personal narrative drawn from facts, and/or the larger public sphere.(Although in his case, it’s less of a concern, as I usually agree with his bias. And that said, a bias does not necessarily mean something is not still worthwhile and valuable.)
The other perhaps simpler issue that I would anticipate would be becoming overwhelmed… I co-facilitated a theatre project in Kibera Slums, in Kenya, where we attempted to explore and distill local issues with a team of local artists, on chart paper, much like the photos posted above. Our collective research period was less / non-existent, as were were exploring something immediate, such as a lack of toilets and sewage pipes, and something participants had to deal with on a daily basis. So they knew the issues personally and intimately. But it was still a challenge for everyone to narrow our focus and then knit everything together. How will you eventually choose which details, stories, and issues are left behind? (In our case, albeit a different sort of project, a democratic vote cleared the path forward.)

By: Aislinn

Aislinn — Wed, 13 Jan 2010 04:56:45 +0000

Thanks for the great question Margaret. This “fine line” that you mention is definitely something that we considered throughout our development of Tim Buck 2, the first iteration of this project, and it’s something we continue to think about as we develop Section 98: how to present what we have discovered without alienating our audience, and without becoming overly didactic in our methods.

As an example of this challenge in Tim Buck 2, we needed to find a way of giving the audience the history of Section 98 of the Canadian Criminal Code. In an effort to compact as much information into as little time as possible, we created “Section 98 in 2 Minutes or Less”, where we used a somewhat modernized version of “chalk drawings”, an aesthetic of the period we were exploring, to deliver important information in an entertaining yet informative way.

Let’s throw Jon Stewart’s The Daily Show into the debate: when I watch the show I don’t feel like I have to be completely up to date on American politics and politicians in order to be both educated and entertained. However, we know that there is a team of researchers in the background putting this information together. Your thoughts?

By: Margaret

Margaret — Mon, 11 Jan 2010 14:46:11 +0000

I am struck by the idea of the collective embracing its own ignorance about the topics explored and am sure that the deeper you go, the clearer these historical and contemporary climates will become. However, what will you do to communicate these messages to an audience who today may be as ignoarnt as you were when your process began? Will we need to know as much as you in order to live this play’s story? Could you go so far in development that the performance language created is too narrow? It’s a fine line, n’est ce pas? MT