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.
Second Manifesto (9th October 2009)
This represents Three’s Company’s first second attempt to write out a complete definition of this particular style of interactivity. We’re currently calling it either ‘inter-reactivity’ or ‘narrative interactivity’.
This definition is most likely change. Feedback and thoughts are welcome.
A style of theatre where:
- A clear narrative1 2 runs through the work
- The audience can interact with and alter the narrative, and
- This interaction occurs predominantly through interaction with the characters3
- Character and audience remain within the world of the theatre work at all times
- The number of potential narratives which can result approaches infinity4
In addition, in Three’s Company’s style of narrative interactivity:
- All interaction is optional, with a satisfying theatrical experience resulting no matter how much you wish to engage
- Work is likely to make use of comedy and have a strong sense of humour running throughout it
Notes:
1 This narrative is actively provided, with the theatre-makers taking responsibility for the audience experiencing it: the audience do not have to find or imagine their own story (although there may be extra stories which can be experience this way).
2 This narrative, whatever it is, is as carefully wrought and crafted as any story-based play written for the theatre; it includes peaks and troughs, action and conflict, a beginning and middle and end.
3 The characters are strong and three-dimensional (though possibly comedic) and can also be altered/affected by the audience (indeed, in their ability to affect any given character or audience member, the audience and characters are identical).
4 In an ideal world, this would be infinite, in the same way that in an ideal world each piece of didactic theatre would change the opinions of every spectator. In development, it would be sufficient for the possibilities for narrative or character variation to be expanded at as many points as possible.
UPDATE 29/10/09: I’ve found an earlier version, so you can see how this has developed from our first attempt -Yaz.
