Third Symposium – 23rd January
Hello and welcome to Three's Company's third Interactivity Symposium. I will once again be live blogging and tweeting throughout.
Enjoy.
Today's panelists are: Ajakumar (Goldsmiths University), Tom Crawshaw (Writer, Three's Company), Roger Foss (Critic), John Hunter (Non Zero One), Steve Marmion (Director), Stuart Nolan (Interactivity Scholar), Ian Shuttleworth (FT), Esther Smith (Actor), Richard Stamp (Critic), Alex Turner (Non Zero One).
13.35
Yaz greets a great crowd and the panel. Apologies for The absence of Karl, he is unfortunatley ill. Yaz says we should start talking about the responsibilties of the makers to provide a story. Non Zero One, what are you promising and audience.
Non Zero One say you can't promise to much, you can't promise an experience, must leave as much space for people to experince. We've done alot of thinking about how much you can assume about how much the audience will interact. We offer a very individual experince, we don't make too many assumption about the aud experince. It should offer a range of things to a range of people. We have to think about this as a marketing tool. There is alot of focus on the site-specifity. What can interaction with a space offer.
Yaz says, what would you say if someone says you are relinquishing responsibilty to the audience.
Non Zero One, say we have to, audience interact with each other (wearing head phones being given instructions), given moments of choice, there is resposiblity there, it's not us making the piece work, unless you give the audience a good reason to do it the audinence will only do it because it would be a the only way to keep the piece going.
Richard Stamp says is it
Ian Shuttleworth says it is a constant play with the audience and the parts. I';m here because of a story, two edinburgh ago there was a show about the holocaust, the audinec cast as the victims, an actor would come to each audience member screaming at them (demonstation with Ian and Roger). They assumed the compliance of the audience, there had just been a speech from a prisoner actor saying we should do something. I decided I would I didn't follow the instruction move, they didn't know how to cope with that. The maker must understand
DUE TO A COMPUTER FAILIURE A PART OF THE DISCUSSION IS MISSING
Roger Foss talks about his article in the Stage reacting to the BACs Interactive season. There are so many bad interactive works. Whether you do you show in covent garden here or a tank outside somewhere it's the work that is important. I'm confused if this thing is interactive... I go back to seeing stuff at Stratford and get a hsow with loads of feeling, interactive theatre I've had fun, but never been touched by it.
Non Zero One, That's about style over content. We didn't wnat to create a headphone piece, but a piece of theatre about something. How do we reach out and touch our audience? We wanted to give an audience that experinec, we can become close to the audience through the headphones. You must use the interecativity in order to help the picece, not make the peice for the interactive elemnts.
Roger says one of the things that intrigue me, I don't know if I'm watching great acting or a comedien, I don't know what it is.
Steve says if you goal is to move your audienec, there are two barrers in interactive, renegotiation of contract and will you ever get more than a feeling of embarrasment from the audiemnce?
Yaz wants to talk about the responsibilty of the maker to tell the story. Asks roger if at having seen Coney (after having written about it) gave you a story.
Roger says he thought it was a complete shambles. Somebod has come up with a great idea, the reality didn't work, I now we all like to regress but kids do that. I didn't feel I was given a piece of theatre. I ask where the skills are.
(Stuart Nolan has arrived) He gives his apologys.
Richard responds I perhaps have a higher tolerance level because I work most at the fringe. As long as the audince knows what they are getting you can experince it.
Roger says the reason he wrote the article was because they said it was the future.
Tom surley if the theory is good, but the practise is weak, it does have a huge future.
Non Zero One say I don't think there is anything wrong with getting people in a room togethre and ket them play, but they must know what they are getting.
Roger says he does think it's great that it does have massive energy behind it. We are so controlled, do play around and try to make something amazing with interactive theatre.
Steve says you must just be good at it.
Non Zero say as long as you can make the peice rewarding, people don't express anger at their "real" choices taken away. Paying for a ticket means you don't just want to do what you want, I do that everyday. The audience are willing to follow instructions. In the holocoust piece there was no reward for staying in your role.
Ian asks what makes you want to create this piece and no other piece.
Steve says you must create theatre that is vital in this moment.
Yaz, should the audience behave as they behave in real life. Coney said the first week that you are putting the audience in a playground state. What do you think Staurat.
Stuart, says can you get someone to do something they couldn't do in real life, if they think it's a real gun, no, if they think they are in a james bond movie yes. Is that ethical? People will do amazing things if you alow them to enter play. Games are important. Game elements are being entered into theatre. As a magician I'm worried about Games, the audience may want to win. I want to get away from competition/conflict.
Non Zero say you must make your audience confident in the actions. that's a huge amount of responsibility.
Stuart, the idea that people have to know whats going on means you loose them.
Non Zero react by saying that they have to play by the rules.
Stuart, you lay out the rules, but you can't create confrontation.
Ian you have to find the medium to use.
Non Zero you must give your audience the rules through your story.
Stuart, there is a debate the video game world. Academics used the same tools to study games as used in books and theatre. They treat it as a text, but you can't use these because it is a game. There is a danger that people look through the story to see the gaming mechanizum.
Richard, I try to see past the mechanics to the story rather than the other way round.
Roger asks if Interactive Theatre as control lead as everything else?
Non Zero say that the theatre maker must be aware of the possibilities that can happen from what you present. It's controlled in that you must geuss everytyhing.
Roger I saw Adventure Time it was massivley controlled. there seems to be alot to do.
Non Zero as long as it is rewarding that can be a good thing.
Tom sasy to Roger that the pieces he has seen Perhaps there isn't enough control to make a good piece of art.
Esther suggests it alows the audience to trust you if you show you are in control.
The panel discuss choose your own adventure books, Steve says he created a piece in which in the end the player actually did choose there ending rather than the reader always ending up at pg 74.
Stuart asks if a game has to end, Richard says it does else it will just fizzle out. Steve says people do get over taken by game so it can become your life.
Richard says he feels a new elitism coming through, do you have to emerse yourself?
Yaz says we will take a break and come back for a more open discussion see you in ten minutes
15:29
We are back and the discussion is moving into an open space debate. I won't be able to blog this... sorry. We will write a report soon.
