Political Protest Evaluation

My group’s issue we were protesting against was the idea of victim blaming. This issue can obviously be quite personal and so we felt we needed to get real voices and examples to add power and truth to our protest. By researching different aspects for our protest, we were able to develop the authenticity of our argument we were trying to present. We were able to use actual quotes from various rape cases to further our argument as we were using real life examples – this showed the prominence of the issue. By doing the research myself, I was able to develop a deeper drive for my argument as many of the different arguments and examples flared up a form of anger. I was then able to use the emotions conjured by the research, and transition them into our political protest – I felt extremely strongly about the issue I was protesting against. 

My role in the protest, along with Zoe, was a female wearing contrasting clothes to the two girls wearing more revealing clothes. This contrast was meant to represent the idea that the clothes females wear can excuse sexual harassment and rape; that by wearing more revealing clothes, they were asking for it. Additionally, I also had to shout out different quotations from our research – not only did this attract the attention of those walking past but it reaffirmed different examples of victim blaming. I feel the use of quotations along with the outfits, helped add effect and power to our argument as it really underlined the definition of victim blaming, clearing it up for those who may not have a very detailed understanding. At different intervals, we all would come out of character and chant; “Women are not guilty for the violence committed by men on their body, mind and soul.” – I feel this was an extremely effective aspect our protest as it really underlined the point we were trying to get across and by chanting it all together at once we were able to gain as much attention as possible. 

I feel that as a group we worked in quite a sophisticated to create a general professional protest. We had everything organised and sorted out before the deadline and had carried out sufficient research to support our argument. This meant we were able to present and perform to the best of our ability without having to worry about different aspects that we may not have cleared up and prepared beforehand. However, this could have been hindered by the fact we used quite blunt and bold techniques, like chanting and shouting, to get our point across as it could be argued as too ‘in your face’ and aggressive.

I felt our protest achieved to conjure up various reactions from the onlookers as there were a variety of different comments being made. For example, an older female teacher stopped on the stairs to tell us how much she agreed with our argument and protest, this showed that we were able to impact people’s ideas and their thoughts surrounding our issue. Whilst performing, I overheard someone state that they often jump to conclusions and judge girls for what they’re wearing, stating that they are practically ask for trouble. This is a further example of our protest impacting on people’s views as they were able to connect the ideas conjured from our protest and relate them to their own experiences and ideals. Though we didn’t present a direct, ‘this is what you can do’ aspect for your audience, I feel that we managed to make people think and at least question their mindset on our issue as many people made comments in response to our actions.

I found during the protest I was able to detach myself from the fact it was a theatre assessment and really start rallying for the cause I was trying to present. I was able to perform with confidence and without anxiety, devoting myself completely to the subject. I found this quite interesting as sometimes I can find myself holding myself back and not letting go, however, with this protest, I felt like I was able to give myself over to the cause and that I had no self placed personal artistic boundaries.

One of the weaker aspects of our protest was the fact that our music was so quiet and covered up by the noise of the other protests. We had developed our chant to respond to the lyrics of the song, however, as we were unable to hear the song at different points we were unable to chant as effectively as we would have liked. Often the song just got pushed into the background and I don't feel the audience were able to connect with the significance of that particular song being used. However, I feel that one of our main strengths was our use of shouting out the different quotations as it attracted attention and got our messages across in a simply way. Sophie and I developed a improvisation during the protest; I would help her, in her drunken state, walk down the stairs as I quote different victim blaming quotations about and towards her, for example; "Did you see how much she had been drinking that night? She had been dancing with that guy the whole time. What did she expect to happen?. I feel that this developed into one of the strongest aspects of our piece as it helped draw the theatrical elements into our protest that I feel we had been lacking previously. One of the challenges we faced, that could’ve weakened our protest gravely, was the fact we were presenting to a group of spectators containing many of our peers and friends. They could have easily distracted us and led us to lose focus, however, I feel that though I did come in contact with many of my friends – I managed to stay in the correct mindset and focused on promoting our message, rather than get distracted and lose my political drive.

I feel that almost every piece of political theatre is a form of protest in a way as both political theatre and a protest strive to achieve the same goal; to leave people thinking and wanting to make a change. Therefore by combining the two, I feel you can create a really powerful device that could be used to promote change and influence ideas through different mediums. You are able to combine both typical protest aspects with different theatre techniques to create something extremely artistic and thought provoking, that leaves the audience with just as much impact and effect as a rally or organised protest. If I had the chance to redo the task and create a new protest, I would have liked to developed a piece that was perhaps more artistically and theatrically driven, to really push myself and my abilities. 

Overall I am really happy with how our protest turned out and although I feel we could have developed our ideas into a more artistic and perhaps creative response to our chosen subject, I feel we created a piece that successfully communicated our ideas to the audience in a way that left them thinking about their own ideals and approach to our chosen subject. 

Political Protests: Victim Blaming

"Women are not guilty for violence committed by men on their body, mind and spirit"

My group; Sophie, Zoe, Chloe and myself, decided that we were going to base our political protest on the subject of victim blaming. In our world obsessed with rape culture, victim blaming is at an ultimate high and we felt it was an extremely important and prominent issue to address. We focused on the victim blaming towards women as it's an issue that effects females more, though not limit to, than males.

We took different quotes from various rape cases we had researched, for example; "Some girls enjoy being raped" - Israeli Judge Nissim Yeshaya in an appeal court ruling on the gang rape of a 13 year old girl by four Palestinian boys, and then placed each quote on to a single piece of paper. We felt that we didn't need to decorate the posters with different colours or add detail as we felt getting the message across clearly was the most important part and it didn't need any sugar coating. We chose to use a black bold font on a white back ground as it's bold and it stands out as well as being quite plain - this links with the fact that the issue being presented with should be plainly dealt with, yet it's sugar coated with excuses to villianise the victims. We explored and used different victim blaming excuses from various different rape cases to add context and realism to our protest; "Not all rape is rape", "She drank too much", "Just let it happen."

We chose the song "Blurred Lines" by Robin Thicke ft. Pharrell Williams, as since it was released it's caused a lot of controversy throughout the media and across the world. The song has been accused of featuring 'date-rape' lyrics, such as the repeated section of "I know you want it." As well as many rape survivors also compared the lyrics from Thicke's song to those from the mouths of their rapists. We chose to link the lyric of "I know you want it"  with the often used excuse of "She was asking for it" as it poses the idea that the man knew the wanted it, and that she was practically asking for it. This was the exact idea we were trying to protest against and so by using such a popular song, we were able to bring our argument relevance and use an example so relevant to our pop culture. 

In addition to the placards with the quotes, we used the traditional protest aspect of chanting in our piece. We decided that we all as a group would chant "Women are not guilty for violence committed by men on their body, mind and spirit" - a quote taken from a feminism based website, as it really underlined what we were trying to present. We are not guilty for men's against us, no matter how many excuses they try and draw up. 

Response to Exhibit B

I first heard about the issues surrounding Exhibit B on the radio, a few days after it was supposed to open, with someone involved in the event was re-telling their experience with the protesters. I'm not 100% sure on where I stand with the entire debate over Exhibit B, however, I feel that as soon as we start censoring art - we begin to tread in a extremely dangerous territory. This article from the Guardian is a debate between one of the artists, Stella Odunlami, and a protester Dr Kehinde Andrews  - I found this really interesting to read as it gave me a chance to hear the different arguments from the two sides of this issue. However, I feel the protester's point was hindered by the fact that they hadn't actually experienced the exhibit themselves and was going off reviews and accounts of the exhibition to create their argument. Though I agree with Andrews' point "If we can’t campaign against things we haven’t experienced there would be no social movements." as I am extremely passionate about different worldwide social issues, I feel that with this specific situation, as it's protesting against an event rather than an idea, experiencing it yourself before making a judgement is imperative. I feel like they are protesting the idea of using real life people rather than the actual exhibition itself - this then poses the questoin, what if it was developed into a theatre piece? would it still be classed as racist?. Whereas Odunlami feels that the exhibition not only exposes racism of the past, but as the present as well. As an actor and artist, I feel I may be biased towards Odunlami as I have a strong belief that art shouldn't be censored and that we should tackle the hard and controversial issues in creative ways. 

This debate also touches on the idea of censor-shipping art, and although Andrews claims that "This is not a discussion about censorship, but about racism, what it is and who has the power to define it.", I feel that by cancelling an exhibit due to it's content, without experiencing it, is a definite indirect form of censorship. Andrews' quotes that it's "about racism, what it is and who has the power to define it", which then poses the question; are the protesters really allowed to accuse it of being racist, and do they have the power and the means to define it as such? I will never agree with silencing protesting voices or the censorship of art, and with this particular issue I feel that with what ever conclusion you come to - someone will always be offended and disagree. 

Group work on Mother Courage and Her Children

Splitting off into individual groups and working on the scene from "Mother Courage..." really helped me to develop a better understanding on the different Brechtian techniques and how to apply them to a set piece of text.

We explored using the Verfremdungseffekt to distance the audience by having the title "Scene 12, Saxony, 1636" being read out loud - this reminded the audience that they were watching a play with scenes, rather than real life events. Though we used the V-Effect correctly to distance the audience from the piece, I feel we could have developed it and created a more effective and powerful use of distancing. I feel it was quite simple. However, this did mean that I was able to fully understand applying the technique to a set piece of text and then developing it to work with the whole piece.

To explore the technique gestus, we had Mother Courage simply throw the tarpaulin over her daughter's body with very little care. This was to indicate through one simple movement that the mother honestly didn't care about her relationship with her daughter or her daughter as an individual. Though I feel this was communicated, I think the action could have been performed bolder and with more purpose as it was done quite half halfheartedly, which could have hindered the message we were trying to put across.  

To include the Not...But technique, we then had Mother Courage come out of character and ask the audience why she was paying strangers to take care of her daughters funeral, suggesting that there may be some remorse within her - however, she goes back and decides that she doesn't care enough and hands the money over to the peasants. This showed her true feelings behind her daughters death, she may have some sadness within her - however, it doesn't hold a candle to her eagerness to follow the soldiers. 

I feel Rhianne's group's version of this scene really managed to capture the three techniques in different creative ways. Similarly to ours, they had the title being said out loud and written on a sign - this instantly distanced the audience in a way that meant we were reminded we were watching a performance, rather than real life. After Rihanne said the title, she got into her character of the dead daughter in front of us - this again distanced the audience from getting emotionally attached to the characters as we are reminded they are actors playing roles. They had the mother hesitate before putting the tarpaulin over her daughter's face, this was interesting as they explored a different approach to the mother's relationship with her daughter than we did as well as creating a clear use of gestus. This gesture revealed the truth of her love for her daughter, she's hesitant to say goodbye and doesn't want to accept the finality of her death. This was extremely effective at exploring the two characters' relationship and stating it clearly to the audience. 

I feel all three of these techniques can be extremely powerful when used creatively and in a sophisticated manner. all possessing the ability to send a deeper message than what is being performed on stage or the first impression that the audience might have gained. Exploring these different techniques myself and seeing another groups' interpretations really helped me further my understanding of their use and effect they can have on the piece and audience.

Not...But

The 'Not...But' technique allows the audience to understand that a character has a multitude of choices throughout the play, though the texts states a character does one thing - there are many other options they could follow. It allows the audience to have an insight into the choices that the character may make, showing them that life is a lot more complicated and layered than what art may make it out to be. I find this technique a really interesting part of Brecht's approach to theatre as it really allows the audience to question why and how things end up to be the way they result to be. It leaves the audience questioning why the character chose to make a specific decision rather than going down a different path and what that decision reveals about the character.

Doing the group exercise of reenacting a scene from "The Caucasian Chalk Circle" really helped me further develop my understanding of how the Not...But technique can be used during performance. TJ's choice of breaking the fourth wall and considering the consequences allowed the audience to really understand the character's decision making, as well as distancing them from the situation - it also may reveal any inner thoughts and feelings of the characters that may have been unclear.. The choice TJ made as the Governess to divert from the original situation and protect her child suggested to the audience that she really does care about her son and his well being, however, as the story line falls back into it's original path - her true colours are shown. This is a really powerful technique as it reveals the true intention behind the characters and their characterisation to the audience, they're able to understand why the decision is being made.

I think during the group exercise their use of Not...But was extremely effective as it allowed us to see the layers of the Governess' character and you see she's a lot more complex than she seems on the surface. This was also aided by the character's use of gestus which involved pushing her son's head away as she passed - this really outlined the character's relationship with her son on a whole and what the entire scene was trying to represent; though she may feel some maternal care towards her son, she cares and fears for her jewels and furs more. 

"The Most Horrific - Vivienne Franzmann

"Knowledge is power. Knowledge is change."

Franzmann's theatre uncut play features many different political aspects throughout. The characters are unnamed, simply called A, B, C and D. This was really interesting as usually characters are named and it suggests that these character's are anonymous, anyone could fill these roles - these characters and the situations they're in could apply to anyone. It also suggests that the character's aren't the ones who are important and ensures that there's no emotional involvement with the characters; the political issues and ideas Franzmann's is trying to present are the ones with the spotlight. 

Franzmann's uses ironic devices throughout the play to explore how awful today's world is, for example, whilst D is trying to explain to C about the case regarding the Ugandan lesbian, C ignores them and pours a bucket of ice and water over their head. This references to the '2014 Ice Bucket Challenge' of the summer, though it started as a way to raise money for charity - it was then pulled out of context and people took part without donating. This suggests that we, as society, focus on the less important aspects of things. This again suggested by the use of C taking a selfie, whilst A and B are talking about a subject they deemed; "the most horrific..."

D references many different situations that have been in the media over the last year and a half - however, C is more interested in the commercial and overdone stories, news that entertain rather than inform "Cheryl Cole, Bankers are Cunts, Terrorists, Fundamentalists, Sex" - again, referencing to the ignorance of the media and press, as well as our society's approach to things. 

Though the play is littered with serious issues, it plays with different comedic elements to get different ideas across, for example, D's last joke about The Welfare State being nonexistent is a comical way to present Franzmann's ideas towards the audience, without specifically stating them plainly. 

I really liked the play and I feel Franzmann's use of mixing the serious issues brought by D and the different comedic and elements from our culture (such as the selfie) brought by C, gives it a really relatable approach. Many of the different aspects and issues brought up were familiar to me and it really left me thinking about how I approach and perceive different news stories and issues in the media - this is extremely important as it achieved the main goal of a political theatre piece; it left the audience thinking about themselves and the issues presented, long after the play was done. 

Gestus

By combining the use of a physical gesture and adding an attitude to that gesture, Brecht developed a technique that was able to tell the audience something about the story or character in a simple and quick way. I found watching the exercise that Ivory and Josh carried out between a person with higher status and a person with lower, really help me understand gestus in an extremely simple way. With a single gesture from both of their characters, their character's social standings were completely revealed to the audience, thus giving me a more detailed understanding of the characters and the relationship between them. 

I personally think gestus is a really powerful device as it can reveal so much to the audience in such a simple way. The gestures do not have to be over complicated and bold, they can be simple and subtle, yet carry so much depth to them. The gestures also mean you are able to communicate to the audience, not through vocals but through your actions and movements. This gives you another platform to present different political statements and ideas to the audience, such as the difference in status. You can connect to the audience in a different way, as you have to get them thinking about what the gesture may mean and then they can make their own interpretations - rather than just stating the meaning straight out. 

This technique is extremely useful for Brecht's preference to distancing the audience from emotion as it allows the characters to present idea's to the audience, without the actors having to feel the emotions of the character or present anything that may cause the audience to become emotionally entangled. 

Verfremdungseffekt

Also known as the 'V effect' and 'distancing', verfremdungseffekt is the Brechtian convention that aims to distance the audience from getting emotionally involved with the characters and the production but without losing their focus. It aims to leave the audience pondering questions and thinking about what is being presented to them.

Seeing the three stages of the same woman - the mad person, the killer and the mother - as a montage, really helped me understand the position the audience were in whilst watching Brecht's original pieces. It left me asking questions and pondering over how the same woman went through all three of those stages; why and how this happened. By seeing this all at once, it allowed my to make my own judgment over her character without being influenced or attached from seeing the journey she went through. This was Brecht's main goal by using the verfremdungseffekt as he wanted the audience to question why the things being presented to them were in the situation they were in and how the situation came to be that way.

I find idea of the 'V effect' intriguing and interesting because as a person who can get quite attached to characters, it seems quite a challenging and almost uncomfortable idea to put myself in and understand. However, I think idea of leaving the audience questioning and pondering about what they're watching and what they've seen, an extremely powerful device that can be used to promote messages and changes in ways the audience may have never experienced before - It's something I would definitely like to explore in greater detail in the future.


I've attached a short video that explains quickly the verfremdungseffekt and Brecht's intention when using this device. Though it doesn't go into great detail, it explains the basic ideas and it's done in a simplistic way that makes it easier to understand for those who may not be completely clear (however ignore the last minute or so).

Creating physical objects and giving them attitudes.

Giving objects that we physically created attitudes helped me develop a better understanding on presenting different ideas and emotions to the audience and how they may interpret the ideas presented. A 'sad chair' could suggest multiple different things to the audience, for example; someone in the scene may be particularity sad, the chair could physically be made up of sad people or events in or surrounding the scene could be upsetting - it leaves the audience to develop their own thoughts and ideas about the scene or freeze frame presented. A 'happy motorbike' could also suggest different interpretations from the audience, for example; the person riding the motorbike could be particularly joyful, the scene it's involved in may be positive and happy or the motorbike could be personified and be happy itself.

By doing this exercise I was able to develop skills that help me portray feelings through my physicality - especially through the physicality of a physical object. It also helped me develop a better understanding of how the audience perceives different ideas presented to them and what they may take from them. It was interesting to see how many different conclusions could be drawn from just one freeze frame of a physical object inhabiting an emotion as it showed how different people may interpret and perceive things in various ways - and how as an actor, I should use that idea whilst developing different scenes and during rehearsals.

Bertolt Brecht

Brecht was born on February 10th 1898 in Bavaria. He was 16 when WW1 broke out, though he was initially enthusiastic, he felt his classmates were being "swallowed by the army."  He enrolled in a medical course at Munich University in 1917, which then lead onto him becoming a medical orderly in a military clinic. Appalled by the effects of war, he first went Munich. then Berlin, to pursuit an acting career.

Unsatisfied with society after WW1, his work fits well with the development of Marxism at the time. By WW2 he was an established figure. He was a pacifist who didn't believe in war and so fled Nazi Germany the day after Hitler became chancellor.

The experiences and events that Brecht lived through helped develop his political voice. He had an original approach to acting and brought a dynamic theatrical style to present his views.Though his most acclaimed work, "Mother Courage and her Children." , is a period piece set in the 1600's, it's a highly regarded anti-war play and is extremely relevant to our contemporary society.

His work had a huge impact on theatre's development and his ideas were so revolutionary that some changed the way people approached theatre forever. He used his work as a force against the popularity of naturalism at the time, and wanted to make the audience think. He wanted the audience to remain apparent that they're watching a play and avoid getting emotionally involved as he felt they would lose their ability to think and judge. He would use various different techniques to remind the audience that what they were watching was not real, this was named Epic Theatre. He called his use of distancing the audience from emotional involvement the verfremdungseffekt.