I've just listened to a talk show on Radio 3, called Night Wave, hosted by Anne McElvoy. In this episode (Wednesday June 30th) Anne interviews Mark Ravenhill and John McGrath.
They discuss the growth of interactive, or pervasive, theatre.
It can be heard here, (from 23 minutes in):
John explains how the NTW launch involves many, many different kinds of theatre including interactive, which is being used for "NTW05: The Beach". Anne quickly begins her condescension (and not just with tone-of-voice) by asking Ravenhill whether he believes it's a bit narcissistic to want the audience in the 'heart of the drama'. Ravenhill immediately agrees and tries to relate what NTW is attempting, to a wider cultural anxiety to be more democratic. He then continues to talk over Anne, suggesting interactive theatre is part of that compunction and compares it to politicians feeling more democratic by 'tweeting' online. Listening to this makes me think he's of the opinion that interactive theatre is a desperate attempt to keep with the times.
Ravenhill continues with, "it's a form of control really. I can't just have you [the audience] sat there, I need to know what's going on in your head". Does he really think this is what interactive theatre is about? Surely it's about creating a unique theatrical experience by involving the audience as much as they feel comfortable with. It provides a fun, engaging, provoking theatrical form of story-telling that is unique and memorable.
Let's look at other forms of audience engagement: Stand-up comedy for the grown-ups and children's story-telling parties for the little ones. Both of these forms of theatre involve the audience. People sit on the front row or at the front tables of a comedy club because they are happy to interact with the comic (or haven't been to a comedy gig before). Children's story-telling parties (which I have led on numerous occasions) involve getting the children to think and participate. Oh no, sorry Mark, I do it because I'm not comfortable performing without knowing how each audience member feels at any given moment.
John reminds us that as theatergoers "If it's exciting and takes you to new and imaginative places that you didn't think you could go to then you're going to follow that work and be excited by what that company does". But according to Ravenhill, being a part of the action doesn't leave the spectator time to have any emotional or philosophical space. I'm not sure I agree. I think getting involved in the action often gives audience members a physical reaction, an emotional reaction and (where applicable) a philosophical reaction. And as John highlights, "can be an enlightening experience". Ravenhill's poor retort (whilst talking over Anne again) is "The danger is it's Disneyland for posh people". 1) You've obviously not been to Prestatyn, Mark and 2) Sorry, WHAT?
Do have a listen and let me know how you feel about this interview. Is Anne playing devil's advocate here or is she firmly siding with Ravenhill? Eerurrgh!