CMU School of Drama


Friday, January 18, 2019

The Spectator Between Productive Participation And Narcissism In Punchdrunk’s Immersive Theatre

The Theatre Times: We all probably agree that the theatre is by nature “immersive” and that–since the days of the dithyrambs sung and danced in honor of Dionysus–the involvement of the spectator is one of its main purposes.

However, in the last decade, and particularly in England, the Immersive Theatre has become an effective theatrical genre. The spectator’s interactivity and participation, the use of technological and digital devices, the preference for unconventional spaces as well as the simultaneity of the scenes and therefore the disinterestedness in the philological interpretation of the dramatic text, are some of the main characteristics of this new theatrical art form.

1 comment:

Davine Byon said...

I have a love/hate relationship with immersive theatre of this kind. On the one hand, I think that immersive theatre has the ability to push boundaries of storytelling and be more intriguing to a wider audience than traditional staged theatre. On the other, I don’t know that I necessarily agree with Punchdrunk’s statement that for “theatre to make an impact, audiences must be at the heart of a narrative and have agency over what they experience.” This can allow audience members to choose things that may be more comfortable, familiar, or personally interesting to them, rather than allowing themselves to be temporarily vulnerable to an experience that may push their boundaries or surprise them. I personally love being presented with something unexpected in a show, whether that’s in terms of plot, tech, or emotional impact. I believe that an audience gains the most from a new or challenging show when they are willing (either consciously or subconsciously) to engage in confrontation and trust with what is being presented to them, and I don’t know that immersive theatre of this nature necessarily allows for that.