translating freire: laying the foundations for dialogue in the applied drama workshop

23
Written by Erin Maxon. January 2010. Do not copy without express permission. All Rights Reserved. Translating Freire: Laying the Foundations for Dialogue in the Applied Drama Workshop In schools, offices, and homes, monologues are staged daily. Two-way communication often suffers in fast-paced, efficiency-minded industrial societies; the growing field of applied drama can potentially provide a space for pausing those pressures. Although it is difficult to generalize across the field, the typical participants of an applied drama workshop are not fighting to be heard, but encouraged to contribute. The use of dialogue sets us apart as a practice. In this paper I will not focus on the use of dialogue, but instead endeavour to discover what foundational concepts applied drama must practice in order for dialogue to exist. I will do so by examining Paulo Freire’s recommendations for the building blocks of dialogue in light of real, practical application in applied drama. Divining the Definition of Dialogue The theorist, activist, and educator Paulo Freire created a pedagogy that depends on dialogue as a cornerstone of its efficacy. He developed a system for radical change through dialogical literacy-learning in Brazil. Freire outlined his method in Pedagogy of the Oppressed, a work considered seminal in applied drama and which set the stage for a multitude of interpretations and applications, 1

Upload: erinmaxon

Post on 21-Nov-2014

109 views

Category:

Documents


1 download

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Translating Freire: Laying the Foundations for Dialogue in the Applied Drama Workshop

Written by Erin Maxon. January 2010. Do not copy without express permission. All Rights Reserved.

Translating Freire: Laying the Foundations for Dialogue in the Applied Drama Workshop

In schools, offices, and homes, monologues are staged daily. Two-way communication often

suffers in fast-paced, efficiency-minded industrial societies; the growing field of applied drama can

potentially provide a space for pausing those pressures. Although it is difficult to generalize across the

field, the typical participants of an applied drama workshop are not fighting to be heard, but

encouraged to contribute. The use of dialogue sets us apart as a practice. In this paper I will not focus

on the use of dialogue, but instead endeavour to discover what foundational concepts applied drama

must practice in order for dialogue to exist. I will do so by examining Paulo Freire’s

recommendations for the building blocks of dialogue in light of real, practical application in applied

drama.

Divining the Definition of Dialogue

The theorist, activist, and educator Paulo Freire created a pedagogy that depends on dialogue

as a cornerstone of its efficacy. He developed a system for radical change through dialogical literacy-

learning in Brazil. Freire outlined his method in Pedagogy of the Oppressed, a work considered

seminal in applied drama and which set the stage for a multitude of interpretations and applications,

such as Augusto Boal’s famed Theatre of the Oppressed. His pedagogy, and the dialogical methods it

champions, opposes the “banking method” of conventional schooling wherein education “becomes an

act of depositing, in which the students are depositories and the teacher is the depositor” (Freire 53).

Dialogue is defined by Freire as “the encounter between men, mediated by the world, in order

to name the world” (69). For him, dialogue is not the “non-committal ‘chewing the fat’” of a

conversation nor is it debate (qtd. in Darder 105). Instead, it is an “existential necessity,” that happens

collaboratively, and Freire believes, “[i]f it is in speaking their word that people, by naming the world,

transform it, dialogue imposes itself as the way by which they achieve significance as human beings”

(69). For Freire, dialogue is a key part of the continuing process of humans to become more “fully

human.”

1

Page 2: Translating Freire: Laying the Foundations for Dialogue in the Applied Drama Workshop

Written by Erin Maxon. January 2010. Do not copy without express permission. All Rights Reserved.

What does this mean to the applied drama practitioner? The style of Freire’s writing and

philosophizing can make points he presents difficult to incorporate into real contexts. His language is

often sermon-like in its sweeping generalities. I find it difficult to envision his methodology embodied

in practice. It is significant that Paulo Freire places dialogue at the crux of what it means to be

human, and I know dialogue is a vital part of the work I hope to do through applied drama. But even

Freire’s definition of “dialogue” becomes something unusable and inaccessible to me. For Freire,

dialogue is part of the “vocation to become fully human” and is a tool to combat oppression. To make

this concept more inclusive, I find that dialogue can be more usefully described as “processing

outloud, together” (Lagerquist 14 Dec. 2009). It’s about contribution, participation, voices and bodies

moving together, communicating together towards a common purpose. Art in general is an especially

useful medium for dialogue. I am inspired by director and theorist Peter Sellars’ decree that “Art has

to be about communicating across lines of communication that are closed” (136).

Instead of focussing on the importance and functions of dialogue, which I (and countless

practitioners) do believe to be pivotal to the uniqueness and successes of applied drama practice, I will

look into the ways that present-day applied drama companies, StageWrite and Project Phakama, set

the stage for dialogue in their practice. Information on Phakama comes from a report written by a

founding member, their website, archived primary source material, as well as from a lecture by Fabio

Santos, the group’s director. Information about StageWrite comes out of my own personal experience

working for one year as their administrative intern. I will be referencing their training manual,

shadowed classes, handouts, website, and an interview with the group’s Executive Director, Elana

Lagerquist. Both StageWrite and Phakama feature dialogue as a key component of their work.

Freire names six prerequisites for dialogue to exist – “love”, “humility,” “faith in

humankind,” “trust,” “hope,” and “critical thinking” (71 – 73). I will use Freire’s broadly defined

foundations for dialogue as a starting point, and cite current practical examples and theoretical

concepts to investigate each of the six pre-requisites to dialogue. This paper will endeavour to give

insight into how authentic dialogue is realised in applied drama practice today, redefining Freirian

terms with useable practice to create a more accessible interpretation of his enormously valuable

contribution.

2

Page 3: Translating Freire: Laying the Foundations for Dialogue in the Applied Drama Workshop

Written by Erin Maxon. January 2010. Do not copy without express permission. All Rights Reserved.

Love

Love is at the same time the foundation of dialogue and dialogue itself. […]Because love is an act of courage, not of fear, love is commitment to others. No matter where the oppressed are found, the act of love is commitment to their cause – the cause of liberation. And this commitment, because it is loving, is dialogical. As an act of bravery, love cannot be sentimental; as an act of freedom it must not serve as a pretext for manipulation. […] If I do not love the world—if I do not love life – if I do not love people – I cannot enter into dialogue. (Freire 70)

Love is an ethereal concept. It denotes caring, connection, and devotion, alongside the romantic and

familial connotations it carries. If love is a prerequisite for eliciting dialogue, or even “dialogue

itself,” then how can it be made real in an applied drama context?

Freire’s description of love as a non-sentimental “commitment to others” and to “their cause,”

resonates with ideas of intentionality in applied drama practice. Intentionality, as Judith Ackroyd

explains, implies “a belief in the power of the theatre form to address something beyond the form

itself” (1). Helen Nicholson reinterprets Ackroyd’s concept to be “an aspiration to use drama to

improve the lives of individuals and create better societies” (2005 3). Intentions can differ

significantly from one applied theatre project to the next, but I believe passion and purpose – love – is

behind them all.

I see intentionality, or Freirian “love,” explicitly outlined in the “mission statement” of

applied drama companies and projects, like those of Phakama and StageWrite. Phakama is an arts

organization formed initially from London International Festival of Theatre members that now works

all over the world. The overarching intention of Phakama’s work is outlined in their mission

statement: “Project Phakama is committed to the practice of cultural exchange and the celebration of a

shared experience by promoting a participant centered and non-hierarchical educational philosophy

through the medium of the arts” (qtd. in Richardson 2). Here, a foundation of “love” is laid. The

organization has outlined a purpose for their work, a “commitment to others” and “their cause” (Freire

70).

By translating Freire’s “love,” into intentionality--passion, cause, purpose -- we can then

translate his assertion that dialogue requires “love” into dialogue requires intention. I agree with his

statement, “If I do not love the world—if I do not love life – if I do not love people – I cannot enter

3

Page 4: Translating Freire: Laying the Foundations for Dialogue in the Applied Drama Workshop

Written by Erin Maxon. January 2010. Do not copy without express permission. All Rights Reserved.

into dialogue” (70), but I find that intentionality, a reinterpretation of “love,” is what is needed in an

applied drama context – the first building block for establishing dialogue.

Humility

Dialogue, as the encounter of those addressed to the common task of learning and acting, is broken if the parties (or one of them) lack humility. How can I dialogue if I always project ignorance onto others and never perceive my own? How can I dialogue if I regard myself as a case apart from others – mere ‘its’ in whom I cannot recognize other ‘I’s? How can I dialogue if I consider myself a member of the in-group of ‘pure’ men, the owners of truth and knowledge, for whom all non-members are ‘these people’ or ‘the great unwashed’? […] How can I dialogue if I am closed to—and even offended by—the contribution of others? (Freire 71)

“Humility” is the second prerequisite to dialogue, according to Freire. Arrogance is inconsistent with

the function of dialogue, a constructive interaction between people “learning and acting” together

(71). Although Freire describes “‘pure’ men” versus “’the great unwashed,’” which are extreme

examples very pertinent to his political situation in military dictatorship era Brazil, we can also find a

potential for hierarchy and inequality in applied drama settings.

The applied drama facilitator-participant relationship can echo or counter the conventional

“banking method” teacher-student relationship. As facilitator of a workshop, we do have the potential

to lead and direct without input from our participants. Elana Lagerquist, co-founder and Executive

Director of theatre-in-education organization StageWrite: Building Literacy through Theatre,

described, “[usually] people go in with their own agenda instead of letting those people speak for

themselves” (14 Dec. 2009). Instead, Lagerquist stresses the importance of humility in her company’s

workshops, stating, “You have to be open in every moment to letting them show you what their needs

are.” Coming into the applied drama workshop with set expectations can be stifling; being present and

open to the people, setting, and circumstances in front of you indicates true humility. I find it

essential, as Augusto Boal’s student Ali Campbell advises, to “See what you see, hear what you hear.”

Flexible workshop facilitation is the quintessence of being open and present. In the words of

Lagerquist, “You need a strong plan that can shift. If you want to go from A to Z, you could go a

circuitous route, or maybe you don’t get to Z because H was a more desirable result.” An open and

present facilitator will be able to encourage dialogue, because she does not assume to know what will

happen next, what will be contributed and by whom.

4

Page 5: Translating Freire: Laying the Foundations for Dialogue in the Applied Drama Workshop

Written by Erin Maxon. January 2010. Do not copy without express permission. All Rights Reserved.

The opening of oneself to participants’ needs and contributions, with an awareness of one’s

own “ignorance” and without “projecting ignorance” onto others (Freire 71), is a way that applied

drama can set the stage for dialogue. Project Phakama’s “give and gain” policy offers a tangible

example of this kind of humility. While many of the facilitators of Phakama are world-class artists

and theatre makers, they are not the most valued contributors to Phakama works. Instead, at the

beginning of work-making, Phakama uses a system by which each participant (including the

facilitators) creates a “skills wheel” where, according to Lucy Richardson,

We all identify at least one thing we can give and one which we hope to gain from the project. This makes explicit the two way learning process but also encourages individuals to celebrate their skills, value their contributions and feel responsible for the creative work. (3)

Through the give and gain skills wheel, each person has equal opportunity to contribute and to learn

diverse skills. In this way, people involved know that each person has diverse talents to offer and no

one is allowed arrogance in their own abilities or dismissal of others’ abilities. The process of many

Phakama projects, whereby participants and facilitators share a communal living situation, also attacks

arrogance. Living, working, and sometimes dancing in the kitchen together, diverse people from

diverse places in society all share a common base of day-to-day function (Santos). With hierarchy

levelled and arrogance flung out the proverbial window, yet another layer of the foundation for

dialogue is set.

Faith in Humankind

[… F]aith in their power to make and remake, to create and re-create, faith in their vocation to be more fully human (which is not the privilege of the elite, but the birthright of all) […] the “dialogical man” believes in others even before he meets them face to face. His faith, however, is not naïve. The “dialogical man” is critical and knows that although it is within the power of humans to create and transform, in a concrete situation of alienation individuals may be impaired in the use of that power. (Freire 71 - 72)

“Faith in humankind” can be translated into many facets of applied drama. Without faith in humans,

more specifically project participants, applied drama projects would appear pandering or didactic,

operating on the student/participant as “empty vessel” assumption Freire criticises (60). Many of the

groups serviced by applied drama practice are marginalized in society – older populations, people in

prisons, youth, groups with special needs, homeless people. They are groups that are not often

5

Page 6: Translating Freire: Laying the Foundations for Dialogue in the Applied Drama Workshop

Written by Erin Maxon. January 2010. Do not copy without express permission. All Rights Reserved.

believed to be capable, creative, and powerful -- not afforded faith from their community and

institutions. Faith in humanity in applied drama practice can mean faith in workshop participants,

even before knowing them – confidence that they are capable and powerful.

Faith plays into StageWrite’s Advanced Writing program at Starr King Elementary School in

San Francisco, when StageWrite’s Director, school teachers and hired teaching artists chose a small

group of nine to eleven year olds to engage in intensive work on writing plays. The individuals in the

Advanced Playwriting group are not chosen because they have obvious playwriting skill. They are,

in fact, chosen because they have less skill, more interest, and could benefit from one-on-one attention

and faith in their abilities. From that place, students consistently make huge strides in writing and

communication abilities.1

Yet, Freire’s assertion that faith must not be “naïve” is important. Freire’s “dialogical man

[…] knows that although it is within the power of humans to create and transform, in a concrete

situation of alienation individuals may be impaired in the use of that power” (Freire 72). Faith in

participants of the applied drama workshop must be supported.

In applied drama, “structure” supports faith. Lagerquist describes the perfect facilitator-

participant relationship as “structured playfulness,” whereby “boundaries and guidelines” are set, and

“objectives” and “what will need to happen for those goals to be met” are made explicit. Phakama

also has way of setting their participants at ease through support and faith in their creative freedom:

“Phakama works on the basis that you don’t design a show but rather a capacity, a structure from

which a show can emerge” (Richardson 3). The participants are not lost at sea but in within a structure

that enables them to then create democratically.

Trust

Whereas faith in humankind is an a priori requirement for dialogue, trust is established by dialogue. Should it founder, it will be seen that the preconditions were lacking. {…} Trust is contingent on the evidence which one party provides the others of his true, concrete intentions; it cannot exist if that party’s words do not coincide with their actions. To say one thing and do another --- to take one’s own word lightly --- cannot inspire trust. (Freire 72)

I disagree with Freire’s assertion that “trust is established by dialogue,” and is not an a priori

1 Evidenced in “pre” and “post” achievement evaluations completed by students’ teachers.

6

Page 7: Translating Freire: Laying the Foundations for Dialogue in the Applied Drama Workshop

Written by Erin Maxon. January 2010. Do not copy without express permission. All Rights Reserved.

requirement for dialogue. In an applied drama setting, I believe trust can be fostered through

mechanisms other than dialogue. In fact, in applied drama settings I believe that often trust can be

built best by an absence of dialogue to start with. As a participant of many applied drama workshops

myself, I have found it most assuring when the facilitator (Ali Campbell, Mojisola Adebayo, Sue

Mayo, and others) starts the workshop off with an explanation of who they are, what they are doing,

and what our workshop will be like. I feel more comfortable, more trusting when I know who the

facilitator is, why they are there, and what the facilitator hopes to get out of the day. This trust helps

me to later enter into authentic dialogue.

Phakama “inspires trust” by, as Freire recommends, “not taking [their] own word lightly”

(72). In an example given by the company’s director, Fabio Santos, he describes a participant who

arrives at a workshop after the agreed start time. Fabio, the facilitator of the workshop, dismissed the

participant for the day and did not allow him into class. I am not sure if this event enabled or disabled

dialogue, but it did help the participant to take responsibility for his own actions. The other

participants also then trusted Fabio to keep his own word, and he could ask the same of them. While

Phakama workshops are a place of open contribution and learning, there still have to be guidelines for

behaviour that make everyone more comfortable, able to trust one another, and thereby able to

dialogue.

Along with trust of the facilitator, dialogue needs trust in the space, in other words safety, not

only physical but mental. The applied drama workshop is a special space. Participants are invited to

experiment with their bodies and voices, and engage in performance. The workshop participant

entering into this space can be potentially to be stifled by fear. Fear can stifle not only performance or

creativity, but trust and the ability to dialogue. The following quote is from the book How Children

Fail, and while it is targeted at the needs of children in school, I think it applies to the applied drama

workshop,

We adults destroy most of the intellectual and creative capacity of children by the things we do to them or make them do. We destroy this capacity above all by making them afraid, afraid of not doing what other people want, of not pleasing, of making mistakes, of failing, of being wrong. (Holt 274)

7

Page 8: Translating Freire: Laying the Foundations for Dialogue in the Applied Drama Workshop

Written by Erin Maxon. January 2010. Do not copy without express permission. All Rights Reserved.

This fear of failure is not found only in children but extends to much, if not all, of humanity. Fear is

the enemy of trust, the enemy of dialogue. In practical contexts, applied drama practitioners

endeavour to limit fear through creating a safe space for experimentation and expression in the

workshop, exemplified by facilitator Ali Campbell’s mantra, “There is no wrong!” (20 Oct. 2009)

Trust happens when there is support of a plurality of ideas and contributions, a community feeling,

and resulting freedom to perform. I believe that trust (in tandem with love, humility, and other crucial

pre-requisites yet to be discussed) can then make dialogue happen.

Hope

Hope is rooted in men’s incompletion, from which they move out in constant search – a search which can be carried out only in communion with others. Hopelessness is a form of silence, of denying the world and fleeing from it. […]Hope, however, does not consist in crossing one’s arms and waiting. As long as I fight, I am moved by hope; and if I fight with hope, then I can wait. As the encounter of women and men seeking to be more fully human, dialogue cannot be carried on in a climate of hopelessness. If the dialoguers expect nothing to come of their efforts, their encounter will be empty and sterile, bureaucratic and tedious. (Freire 73)

For dialogue to occur, the people must not be operating in hopelessness. Hope is not only hope in a

discovery of fuller human experience, free from oppression, but hope can also be a more practical act

of “expectation” or “desire.” For me, hope can be translated into the both the hope of the facilitator

for application of moments in her workshop to the outside world of her participants, and also the

expectations and desires aroused when a culminating performance or end product is developed as a

goal for a workshop.

In many workshop settings, “hope” is embodied in a desire for efficacy of a program.

As Helen Nicholson explains, applied drama is a new field that “belongs to a much longer

tradition of cultural efficacy” (19 2005). Efficacy, though it “may vary,” (Edwards 132 qtd.

in Nicholson 2005 50) relates to the ability to generate an effect. Many applied drama

practitioners hope that the work done inside the workshop room will be extended to work

done outside the room. Hope, in the form of the desire for an effect, for efficacy, can be found

in the way that facilitators structure their workshops. As Helen Nicholson suggests, theatre

can be a “powerful symbol of social democracy” (19 2005). The creators of StageWrite hope

that its programs will create more engaged citizens, harkening to Chantal Mouffes’ idea of

8

Page 9: Translating Freire: Laying the Foundations for Dialogue in the Applied Drama Workshop

Written by Erin Maxon. January 2010. Do not copy without express permission. All Rights Reserved.

“embodied citizenship” (qtd. in Nicholson 23 2005), in the last line of their mission statement,

“Through the communal art of theatre young people build skills in creative expression,

collaboration and critical thinking: all necessary components of becoming literate and

engaged members of an equitable society” (Lagerquist and Paff 5). Through their theatre-in-

education program, StageWrite hopes to affect the greater world of their students. In this

way, hope is a driving force for the work they do, and part of the reason that they make work

that can be dialogical.

There is an ongoing debate between stressing process or product in applied drama.

Process-emphasis in workshops often means eliminating performance in the workshop, and

focusing on free-flowing games and activities. However, this may not be an ideal way to set

the stage for dialogue. Both StageWrite and Phakama projects work towards culminating

performances. StageWrite’s Advanced Playwrights program culminates in a staged reading of

the students’ plays by professional actors in a public venue. The emphasis on product is

enormous, with corresponding support of process. As part of their process, the participants

are asked about their hopes are for the future; in 2009 around half replied with “I want to be a

playwright” or “I want to be a writer.” These children identified a hope not just for their play

to be finished and for the performance to go well, but also for a future of writing. As Helen

Nicholson asserts, “because theatre that seeks to engage young people looks to the future, it

often articulates a vision of social change and educational aspirations" (13 2009). This hope

led them to take their assignment seriously, to fight for it, which then started them towards

“visions of social change and educational aspirations.” If they had believed, as Freire says,

that “nothing [will] come of their efforts,” they would not have been able to operate fully

within the course, and would not have embarked on the dialogical processes key to making

their play ideas a reality.

Phakama also focuses on the “drive to create good art” (Richardson 5). The hope to be seen,

to be praised, and to make something “good,” furnishes participants with a reason to communicate.

Phakama then makes that communication dialogical by obliging the participants to work horizontally

and democratically. Everyone is involved, as Richardson describes, “On any Phakama project, the

9

Page 10: Translating Freire: Laying the Foundations for Dialogue in the Applied Drama Workshop

Written by Erin Maxon. January 2010. Do not copy without express permission. All Rights Reserved.

group as a whole decide what is to be kept and what lost, even if the group is over 100 people” (4). It

is vital that the end product is agreed upon and sufficiently compelling to create ‘hope.’ When

participants are convinced of the importance of an end goal and bent on achieving it, dialogue

becomes an effortless tool for accomplishing their task.

Critical Thinking

“Finally, true dialogue cannot exist unless the dialoguers engage in critical thinking—thinking which discerns an indivisible solidarity between the world and the people and admits of no dichotomy between them---thinking which perceives reality as process, as transformation, rather than as a static entity---thinking which does not separate itself from action, but constantly immerses itself in temporality without fear of the risks involved. […] Only dialogue, which requires critical thinking, is also capable of generating critical thinking. (Freire 73)

Here, Freire is asserts many things, two of which being that critical thinking is necessary for dialogue

to happen, and that critical thinking must be for the purpose of understanding what it is to be fully

human. In applied drama, critical thinking happens when participants are given a problem to solve, an

assignment to complete, asked an open-ended question—what Freire calls “program content.”2 For

Freire, program content is described in relation to educational practices, but “program content” is a

major concern of applied drama practitioners. When participants are given a stimulus to focus their

energy on, -- such as, but not limited to, a photo, story, memory, scene, writing piece – they can more

easily engage in critical thinking, and thereby dialogue or “process out loud together” (Lagerquist 14

Dec. 2009).

In the StageWrite Advanced Playwrights program, students engage in what is called “Visual

Thinking Strategy.” Visual Thinking Strategy (VTS) is “a research-based teaching method that

improves critical thinking and language skills through discussions of visual images” (http://www.

vtshome.org/). This entails that the participants make a visit to the de Young Museum in San

Francisco, California, paired with one adult Playwriting Mentor per student. After receiving an

introduction to pluralities of meaning in art by the museum staff, the playwrights visit four rooms of

2 “[…T]he dialogical character of education as the practice of freedom does not begin when the teacher-student meets with the students-teachers in a pedagogical situation, but rather when the former first asks herself or himself what she or he will dialogue with the latter about. And preoccupation with the content of dialogue is really preoccupation with the program content of education” (Freire 74)

10

Page 11: Translating Freire: Laying the Foundations for Dialogue in the Applied Drama Workshop

Written by Erin Maxon. January 2010. Do not copy without express permission. All Rights Reserved.

the museum for only ten minutes per room. They jot down one piece that “speaks to them” in each

room, and at the end of the tour they choose one piece from the four picked, that could serve as a

stimulus for playwriting. They sit down with their adult Playwriting Mentor and engage in a dialogue

about the art piece. Informed by Freire’s ideas of “student-centred” pedagogy, StageWrite trains the

mentors prior to the session to, “never lead the students, [but] let the students lead.”3 The conversation

that ensues is around the work of art, and several activities, including drawing, speaking, and playing

games from that work of art, help to get students speaking about their play ideas. They are thinking in

a way that “does not separate itself from action” (Freire 73), as they converse, build, and create, and

they do so uninhibitedly. This example shows a kind of “critical thinking” that doesn’t involve

tackling huge issues of humanness, but still provides a stimulus for true dialogue to emerge.

Conclusion

Freire’s ideas, as practitioner Sue Mayo has said, are “a gift” to applied drama facilitators and

theorists (9 Dec. 2009). He champions dialogue, and chastises silence and oppression in ways undone

before him. His beliefs have been extended to a variety of fields beyond his own, and yet his broad

language may be what has made him so widely applicable. This essay has converted his broad

recommendations for the foundations of dialogue—“love,” “humility,” “trust,” “faith in mankind,”

“hope,” and “critical thinking” (71 – 73)—into useable terms for the applied drama practitioner. It

has supported those translations by referencing practice in dialogue-centred companies, StageWrite

and Phakama. The list of dialogue building blocks have been reinterpreted into useable applied drama

concepts. I assert dialogue requires intentionality in place of “love;” and being present/flexible and

non-hierarchical in place of “humility.” It needs faith in participants and their abilities, and supporting

structure, instead of blind “faith in mankind.” Dialogue also requires facilitators establish “trust” by

being consistent, dependable, and encouraging pluralities of viewpoints. I reinterpret “hope” as

efficacy of programs and goal setting in the form of culminating performance; and exemplify “critical

thinking” in stimuli-focused program content. I trust that with all these elements in place, dialogue

cannot help but emerge.

3 See Appendix.

11

Page 12: Translating Freire: Laying the Foundations for Dialogue in the Applied Drama Workshop

Written by Erin Maxon. January 2010. Do not copy without express permission. All Rights Reserved.

References

Ackroyd, Judith. “Applied Theatre: Problems and Possibilities.” Applied Theatre Researcher. No.1 (2002): 1 – 14.

Boal, Augusto. Theatre of the Opressed. London: Pluto Press, 1979.

Campbell, Ali. “The Applied Theatre Toolbox.” Workshop. 20 Oct. 2009.

Edwards, R. and R. Usher. Globalisation and Pedagogy: Space, Place and Identity. London: Routledge, 2000.

Freire, Paulo. Pedagogy of the Oppressed. London: Penguin Books, 1970.

Holt, John. How Children Fail. Cambridge: Da Capo Press, 1964.

Lagerquist, Elana. Personal Interview. 14 Dec. 2009.

Lagerquist, Elana and Carrie Paff. StageWrite: Building Literacy Through Theatre Training Manual. San Francisco: Privately Published, 2008.

Mayo, Sue. Personal Meeting. 9 Dec. 2009.

Nicholson, Helen. Applied Drama: the gift of theatre. Hampshire and New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2005.

--------. Theatre & Education. Hampshire and New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2009.

Santos, Fabio. Course Lecture. Goldsmiths College, London. 2 Dec. 2009.

Sellars, Peter. “The Question of Culture.” Theatre in Crisis? Performance Manifestos for a New Century. Manchester: University of Manchester Press, 2002.

StageWrite: Building Literacy Through Theatre. 2009. 15 Jan. 2010. <www.stagewrite.org>.

Richardson, Lucy. “Phakama: Place of Refuge.” (2004). 14 pp. 20 Dec. 2009 <http://www.project phakama.org/Asp/uploadedFiles/File/A%20Place%20of%20Refuge%20Article.pdf>.

Project Phakama Website. <http://www.projectphakama.org/phakama_uk>.

“Visual Thinking Strategies.” Visual Understanding in Education. 2010. 15 Jan. 2010. <http://www.vtshome.org/>.

12

Page 13: Translating Freire: Laying the Foundations for Dialogue in the Applied Drama Workshop

Written by Erin Maxon. January 2010. Do not copy without express permission. All Rights Reserved.

Appendix

13