Sierra Leonean students rehearsing Julius CaesarFor the better part of a decade, I've been trying to justify why I think that public theatre can be a valuable investment in developing countries. Although my own focus has been on Sierra Leone, (if you're curious, you can read about my exploits here--complete with fun pictures!) I believe that in most contexts, theatre can serve as an important medium for reflecting, processing, and transforming social norms and can be especially instructive in a society that is undergoing changes.
My strong belief in the power of public theatre stems from more than just my personal affinity for Shakespeare. In fact, I think an important link can be drawn between how the theatre was used in early modern England, and how it might be used in developing countries today. Drama in the Renaissance was more than just passive entertainment; it used a familiar mode of theatrical discourse that extended to many areas of daily social interaction. Early modern society was deeply histrionic at all levels: merchants in the Exchange, prostitutes in Bankside, medical doctors, and royal processions, all employed a performative language for a particular end, whether it was to attract customers, convince the sick that they were convalescent, or display the extent of one's political power. In contrast to the subsequent bourgeois era, which used the printed word more and more to shape public understanding, the Renaissance used spectacle. In a world where print culture has yet to become mainstream, spectacle remains the most accessible way of interpreting society. Of course, public theatre doesn't have to look like Shakespeare's Globe; it can be street theatre, radio plays and readings, anything that invites an audience to listen and think critically.
Obviously I am not suggesting that public theatre will solve all problems, particularly in developing nations. I am merely arguing that it can be an important institution for encouraging critical reflection upon one's environment and this ability is absolutely essential for citizens of developing countries like Sierra Leone, if they are to actively shape the direction that their nation takes, particularly after violent conflict.
For detractors who would argue that there is no money for such enterprises, or that these must be secondary concerns for people who lack even basic necessities, I would argue that I have seen the opposite to be true. A rich cultural life must grow alongside practical development such as infrastructure and education; indeed, cultural enrichment is essential because it helps to bolster tangible growth. It is a myth (part of the western hierarchy of needs that has defined and derailed so many aid missions) that intellectual and artistic endeavours cannot flourish in a society whose food is not as bountiful, whose water is not as clean, or whose democracy is not as mature as ours.
My strong belief in the power of public theatre stems from more than just my personal affinity for Shakespeare. In fact, I think an important link can be drawn between how the theatre was used in early modern England, and how it might be used in developing countries today. Drama in the Renaissance was more than just passive entertainment; it used a familiar mode of theatrical discourse that extended to many areas of daily social interaction. Early modern society was deeply histrionic at all levels: merchants in the Exchange, prostitutes in Bankside, medical doctors, and royal processions, all employed a performative language for a particular end, whether it was to attract customers, convince the sick that they were convalescent, or display the extent of one's political power. In contrast to the subsequent bourgeois era, which used the printed word more and more to shape public understanding, the Renaissance used spectacle. In a world where print culture has yet to become mainstream, spectacle remains the most accessible way of interpreting society. Of course, public theatre doesn't have to look like Shakespeare's Globe; it can be street theatre, radio plays and readings, anything that invites an audience to listen and think critically.
Obviously I am not suggesting that public theatre will solve all problems, particularly in developing nations. I am merely arguing that it can be an important institution for encouraging critical reflection upon one's environment and this ability is absolutely essential for citizens of developing countries like Sierra Leone, if they are to actively shape the direction that their nation takes, particularly after violent conflict.
For detractors who would argue that there is no money for such enterprises, or that these must be secondary concerns for people who lack even basic necessities, I would argue that I have seen the opposite to be true. A rich cultural life must grow alongside practical development such as infrastructure and education; indeed, cultural enrichment is essential because it helps to bolster tangible growth. It is a myth (part of the western hierarchy of needs that has defined and derailed so many aid missions) that intellectual and artistic endeavours cannot flourish in a society whose food is not as bountiful, whose water is not as clean, or whose democracy is not as mature as ours.
- JK
1 comment:
very interesting. I think that there is always this push for embracing new media, and using it as a tool to "save the world". (like blogging or whatever). But in all honesty, i don't think twitter, in 140 characters or less is going to do fuck all in terms of allowing people to explore their own culture and society. Having never been to Africa, I can't speak for it. But for a lot of other places I have been to, there is a need to create social change and develop movements stemming from those in need, and I think exploring these through theatre is pretty much ingenious.
Post a Comment