29Oct/090
First Manifesto (11th November 2008)
I’d forgotten about this - this was actually our first attempt to qualify the type of interactivity we’re interested in, in November last year. We’ve developed this on since then, but thoughts/challenges/queries are very welcome.
A second attempt can be found here. You can see how it’s changed after a year of practice and debate, and penned by a different one of us.
We’re trying to create interactive theatre that is:
- ‘Wholly interactive’ (eg. all characters and narratives can be interacted with)
- ‘Fully interactive’ (eg. unlimited interactions potentially possible)
- ‘Truly interactive’ (eg. interactions can actually influence the story and characters)
- ‘Freely interactive’ (eg. all audience can choose to act, or not)
And that also features:
- Consistent and fully formed characters, that are maintained throughout
- A compelling narrative, with satisfying story arc etc.
- Audience interacting as themselves (not in character)
Other (optional but likely) features:
- Illusion and reality bending – through stooges, tricks, ARGs, etc
- Innovative use of technology
- Play and exploration
- Tasks and targets
- Reference to collective / crowd / swarm theories
Not:
- ‘Failed interactivity’ – (i.e. audience don’t participate)
- ‘Messy interactivity’ – (i.e. makers lose control of show)
- ‘Safe interactivity’ – (i.e. incidental interactions that have no affect on show)
- ‘Fake interactivity’ – (i.e. seemingly interactive but in fact largely run by stooges)
This is loose definition of the ideal model we are aiming for. This will be called INTER-REACTIVE THEATRE.
Our steps on the way are not expected to encompass all features – if that even is possible.
