Theatre, Therapy and Personal Narrative

283 Pages·2017·2.26 MB·English

Theatre, Therapy and Personal Narrative:
Developing a framework for safe, ethical, flexible and
intentional practice in the theatre of personal stories

Submitted by Clark Michael Baim to the University of Exeter
as a thesis for the degree of
Doctor of Philosophy in Drama
March 2018

This thesis is available for library use on the understanding that it is copyright
material and that no quotation from the thesis may be published
without proper acknowledgement.

I certify that all material in this thesis which is not my own work has been
identified and that no material has previously been submitted and approved
for the award of a degree by this or any other University.

1
This page is intentionally blank.

2
Abstract

Contemporary theatre has crossed boldly into therapeutic terrain and is now the
site of radical self-exposure. The recent and expanding use of people’s personal
stories in the theatre has prompted the need for a robust framework for safe,
ethical, flexible and intentional practice by theatre makers. Such a framework is
needed due to the risks inherent in putting people’s private lives on the stage,
particularly when their stories focus on unresolved difficulties and cross into
therapeutic terrain. With this ethical and practical imperative in mind, and in order
to create a broader spectrum of ethical risk-taking where practitioners can
negotiate blurred boundaries in safe and creative ways, this study draws on
relevant therapeutic theory and practice to re-connect therapy and theatre and
promote best practice in the theatre of personal stories.

In order to promote best practice in the theatre of personal stories (a term I will
use to cover the myriad forms of theatre that make use of people’s personal
stories), I describe a new framework that synthesises theory and practice from the
fields of psychodrama, attachment narrative therapy, and theatre and performance
studies. The benefits of this integrative framework for the theatre practitioner are
that it promotes safer, more ethical and purposeful practice with personal stories,
and encourages more confident and creative artistic expression. The framework
provides these benefits because it offers a structured model for decision-making
by theatre practitioners who work with personal stories, and suggests ways that
the practitioner can explore fresh artistic possibilities with clear intentions and
confidence about the boundaries and ethics of the work.

The integrated framework has been developed through the grounded theory
process of reflective inquiry, using in particular the models of action research, the
Kolb experiential learning cycle and applied phronesis. The framework has four
elements, which are explored respectively in chapters one to four: 1) History:
understanding the roots of the theatre of personal stories in traditions of art, oral
history, social activism, theatre and therapy; 2) Ethics: incorporating wide-ranging
ethical issues inherent in staging personal stories; 3) Praxis: structuring
participatory theatre processes to regulate the level of personal disclosure among
participants (a model for structuring practice and regulating personal disclosure is
offered — called the Drama Spiral); and 4) Intentions: working with a clear focus
on specific intentions — especially bio-psycho-social integration — when working
with personal stories. The study concludes, in chapter five, with a critical analysis
of two exemplars of practice, examined through the lens of the Drama Spiral.

Key words: applied theatre and performance, ethics, theatre of personal narrative,
therapy, psychodrama, attachment narrative therapy, bio-psycho-social integration

3
This page is intentionally blank.

4
Table of Contents

Abstract 3

List of figures 7

Acknowledgments 8

Introduction 9

The rapid rise of the theatre of personal stories 9
The impetus for this study 14
The key questions, argument and aims of this study 20
Key methodological approaches used in the research 27
Key theoretical and practical reference points for the research 38

Chapter 1: History: An archeology of the theatre of personal stories

Introduction 41
Burgeoning forms of personal and collective narratives in the theatre 43
Socio-cultural and artistic contexts: An archeology of the theatre
of personal stories 50
Conclusion 77

Chapter 2: Ethics: Principles and guidelines for ethical practice
When using personal stories in the theatre

Introduction 79
Defining and contrasting traditional and modern ethics 80
Working with vulnerability and risk through drama 84
Understanding power dynamics in the drama process 90
Guidelines for ethical practice when using personal narratives
in the theatre 95

Chapter 3: Praxis: The Drama Spiral

Introduction 131
The impetus for creating the Drama Spiral 132
The process of research leading to the creation of the Drama Spiral 134
The rhizomatic design of the Spiral 136
The Spiral as a decision-making model 138
Processes occurring at each ring of the Spiral: The four quadrants 139
Description of the six rings of the Spiral 148
The colours of the rings of the Spiral 164
The icons for each ring of the Spiral 165
Factors influencing which part of the Spiral is used 166
Drama-based strategies for regulating distance 168
Applying the Spiral: Some conclusions 175

5
Chapter 4: Intentions: The integrative imperative in the theatre of
personal stories

Introduction 181
Intentions of using people’s personal stories in the theatre 183
Intentions at the sixth ring of the Spiral: Integrating psychodrama
and attachment narrative therapy in the theatre of personal stories 186
Working therapeutically with personal narrative: Psychodrama 189
Working therapeutically with personal narrative: Attachment
narrative therapy 205
Promoting integration and healing in the theatre of personal stories 217
Five levels of integration 220
A caveat regarding working with people with unresolved trauma 231

Chapter 5: Exemplars: Two case studies examined through the
lens of the Drama Spiral

Introduction 237
Case study of a participatory theatre project using personal stories
and rings one to five of the Drama Spiral 238
Case study two: Re-Live’s Memoria 247

Conclusion 257

References 261

Note about the use of my writing that has been published elsewhere: Chapters one,
two and three of this study contain excerpts adapted from a chapter I have written for
Risk, Participation and Performance Practice, edited by Alice O’Grady (Baim, 2017a). The
entirety of that book chapter was written by me during the course of this study, i.e. since
2011. In addition, chapter four contains some excerpts adapted from writing that is
exclusively mine, written during the time of this study, and published in Baim (2013, 2014,
2015a, 2017b).

6
List of figures

Figure 0.1: David Kolb’s Experiential Learning Cycle 33

Figure 1.1: The Sanctuary of Asclepius, or Asclepieion, showing its
position adjacent to the Theatre of Dionysus Eleuthereus,
in Athens 72

Figure 2.1: Typical roles played out in conflict situations and in
situations of abuse.
91

Figure 2.2: Barnes’ Risk Table 100

Figure 2.3: Conquergood’s grid showing ‘Moral Mapping of
Performative Stances Towards the Other’ 106

Figure 3.1: The continuum of distant to personal scenes 136

Figure 3.2: The Drama Spiral: Regulating distance in participatory
theatre and performance 142-143

7
Acknowledgments
Many people have offered crucial advice, practical support, feedback, ideas and
inspiration while I have worked on this study. First off, I offer my sincerest gratitude to
my advisors Kerrie Schaefer and Sarah Goldingay, who offered such valuable
academic support, mentoring and feedback on the drafts of this study. I am also
grateful to Jane Milling, who was a valued member of the academic team supporting
me at Exeter University, and Rebecca Hillman and Natasha Lushetich, who offered
very helpful feedback and guidance at the mid-way stage.
I also extend my heartfelt thanks to Fiona Macbeth, Simon Ripley, Carina, Isobel
and Zoe Ripley, Megan Alrutz, the Patchwork Stories team, Andy Watson, Louise
Heywood, Emma Smallman, Liz Brown and colleagues at Geese Theatre Company
UK, Alison O’Connor and Karin Diamond at Re-Live Theatre, Elise Davison and Beth
House at Taking Flight Theatre, Emma and Becky at ExStream Theatre, Karen
Bassett at Theatre Wild, Emily Hunka at Theatre Troupe, Maria Zemlinskaya of Tout
Ensemble, the cast and support staff for ‘The Girl Who Lost and Found,’ Craig Lundy,
Robin Durie, Katrina Wyatt, Alice O’Grady, Kelli Zezulka, Valentina D’Efilippo, Lou
Platt, Katie Greenwood, Anna Mason, Donna Tonkinson, Miriam Nash, Erin Walcon,
Alyson Coupe, Eden Baim, Bridget Rothwell, Patricia Crittenden, Andrea Landini,
Becca Carr-Hopkins, Eve Jones, Kate Massey-Chase, Kate Kirk, Chris Kozar, Elle
Gianvanni and Lydia Guthrie. I am also very grateful to Alun Mountford, Sally Brookes,
Simon Ruding, Mary and Clive Leyland, Chris Rozanski at the Birmingham Theatre
School, Tony and Jacquie Morrison, Susie Taylor, John Casson, and friends and
colleagues in the British Psychodrama Association (BPA), The Moreno Psychodrama
Society in Australia, the International Association for Group Psychotherapy and Group
Processes (IAGP), the Federation of European Psychodrama Training Organisations
(FEPTO), the National Organisation for the Treatment of Abusers (NOTA), the Family
Relations Institute (FRI), the International Association for the Study of Attachment
(IASA), and Berry Street and the Berry Street Childhood Institute in Melbourne. I am
deeply indebted to these friends and colleagues, who have offered inspiration,
support, moral encouragement, hospitality and rewarding conversation around the
topics and challenges reflected in this study. I also thank Michael Balfour, whose
invitations to facilitate workshops for theatre students led me to begin the in-depth
explorations resulting in this study. I am also grateful to the staff at Gladstone’s
Library, who offered valuable research support and hospitality during my writing
sojourn there.
Special thanks also to the students, faculty and guest participants who contributed
such valuable insights and feedback in the workshops at the following institutions:
Exeter University, The University of Birmingham, Birmingham City University, Leeds
University, Newcastle College, Sunderland College, Queen Mary University of
London, and the Birmingham Institute for Psychodrama.

8
Introduction

Quid rides? Mutato nomine, de te fabula narratur
Why do you laugh? Change only the name, and this story is about you.

Horace, Satires, I. 1. 69

The rapid rise of the theatre of personal stories
In recent decades, there has been a rapid hybridisation of theatre forms and
approaches that draw directly on the personal stories of participants, performers
and audiences (Martin, 2013; Snow, 2016; Foster, 1996; Leffler, 2012; Salas,
1993; Heddon, 2008). From autobiographical drama to investigatory and tribunal
plays, from theatre of witness to self-revelatory forms, theatre makers are drawing
on lived experience and creating powerful work that is transformative for
participant-performers, for auto-ethnographic performers, and for audiences and
spect-actors (Pendzik et al, 2016; Boal, 1979, 1995; Cohen-Cruz, 2006; Emunah,
2015).
While real events have been a subject of the theatre going back to the plays of
ancient Greece, since the latter part of the twentieth century there has been a
distinct shift within the theatre that amounts to a genuine innovation in the way that
stories are sourced and presented in the theatre. Since the late 1960s, and
accelerating since the 1990s, something genuinely new has been taking place on
the international stage, a step-change that foregrounds individuals and the
particulars of their lives, their personal stories, their subjective experience and
their personal struggles as the subject matter for theatre making (Snow, 2016;
Landy and Montgomery, 2012; Heddon, 2008). The proliferation of forms and
artists presenting such work is vast and increasing, showing every sign of being
here to stay. As Guardian theatre critic Lyn Gardner has written about

9
autobiographical performances on the stage, ‘as audiences, we like the idea that
we are getting something from the horse’s mouth and that what we are being told
is true’ (Gardner, 2016). This work takes place in theatres, in schools, in
community centres, in hospitals, in prisons, in care homes, in corporate settings, at
conferences, in university drama departments and dramatherapy programmes, in
comedy venues and spoken word events, in voluntary sector agencies and on the
street. Johnny Saldaña has identified more than eighty closely related sub-genres
all rooted in personal stories and non-fictional events, including autodrama, self-
performance, performing autobiography, documentary theatre, factual theatre,
living newspaper, memory theatre, performed ethnography, reality theatre, and
many others — plus his own specialist focus on ethnodrama and ethnotheatre
(Saldaña, 2011: 13-14). Many of the sub-genres he identifies focus on the use of
people’s personal stories to create theatre. Pendzik et al (2016) have recently
added the terms self-revelatory theatre and autoethnographic therapeutic
performance. The many genres and artists intermix and develop ever more
hybrids. This is not to mention the accelerating profusion of reality and reality-
based programmes on the internet, television and radio. While the many sub-
genres focused on people’s personal stories could be set within the broader genre
of theatre of the real (Martin, 2012, 2013; Forsyth and Megson, 2009), the
proliferation of forms is so great that the theatre of personal stories could probably
be said to form a genre in itself.
This rapid proliferation of personal stories on the stage, in their myriad sub-
genres and hybrids, has meant that practice has raced ahead of theory. Where
once we could make what seemed like clear distinctions between dramatherapy,
psychodrama, and theatre practice (including applied theatre), this is no longer the
case. To highlight this point, in 1996 Phil Jones could justifiably write that ‘the chief
difference between theatre and Dramatherapy […] is that the Dramatherapy
experience allows for the exploration and resolution of projections whereas the
theatre only invites an expression of projected feelings’ (Jones, 1996: 135). As this
study will demonstrate, this distinction no longer holds; theatre practice has moved
on considerably since the 1990s, and the older distinctions between theatre and

10