HowlRound Theatre Commons: A woman from the audience suddenly climbs onto the stage and begins to scream. The actors know it is not part of the show.
This incident took place near the end of a February 2026 performance of Rage at Dramaten, the Royal Dramatic Theatre, Sweden’s national stage.
4 comments:
I think this is a really interesting event that really is a wake up call to what theatre is, where does a performance end, and what the impact theatre has on an audience. Theatre is often perceived as just stories, fiction or non-fiction reflecting on the past. But there is so much history of theatre being a way to protest and being a beacon of activism that stands against injustices in the world. Often theatre itself is oppressed and historically that has happened various times to the point of near wipe out. People who don’t often watch theatre see it as extremely fake and just a different kind of story telling. Which it is but it continues to push past that definition and have a larger impact on the real world outside the theatre. I think that this story really exemplifies those core values of theatre.
This situation brought up a really important conversation we should be joining in as members of the theater industry, and the future of the theater industry. I feel like the act of making theater can be performative. I found this especially true in the dramatic irony of the actors getting caught off not only one the audience never rushed the stage but also in the TalkBack by the theater organization. I was also shocked that the actors weren't giving comp tickets for an event about a situation that they were put in. I will give props to the theater company for hosting this TalkBack and inviting the activist who rushed the stage. This does I'm make me a little bit worried that it encourages people to do it more because they get a bigger audience, but who's to say. I think acting and creating theater is activism because it shows people what it is like to live in today's age such that they will be inspired to go and make a change to create the world they would rather be in.
This article presents a bizarre conundrum of where to draw the line on free speech and when activism is "appropriate." It reminds me of an article I read earlier this year for a news comment about a man who strangled a person for singing along to a musical. In that case, the man was obviously in the wrong; he physically harmed someone. In this case, the circumstances were slightly different. The cause of the disruption was an activist protesting for the protection of wetlands, and they did not directly harm anyone. However, the action scared the actors. The actors were at work, in the middle of their show, when the screaming started. They couldn't see the sign and had no idea what was going on. These performers were scared, they feared for their lives, and that should never be a position that performers are put in during a show. Activism can be part of theater. Shows can definitely make statements. However, the safety of the performers and audience members should never be sacrificed to make a statement, no matter how important that statement may be.
I think that this article asks a lot of important questions that people in the theatre community often ask themselves. In some ways, I agree with the author that, yes, there can be a difference between theatre and activism in the way we usually think of it, but I see no reason why theatre can’t be just another form of activism. I had a teacher in high school who spoke a lot about something called “artivism” (which I realize now isn’t a term he coined at all, but up until recently I had only heard about that idea from him), which is a combination of art and activism that isn’t exclusive to theatre, but can definitely be part of it. When doing further research into this idea, I even found a study that suggests artivism might be more effective than conventional activism. Overall, theatre doesn’t have to be separate from activism, and it shouldn’t be.
Post a Comment