In chapter three I argued that if we incorporate elements of Paulo Freire’s critical pedagogy, especially his problem-posing theory, into the system of trial by jury, there would be enormous benefits in terms of enhanced communication which could bring with it more clarity in understanding for jurors in the trial. In this chapter I suggest that if we add to Freire’s work some of the practical communication devices developed by Augusto Boal, this would further develop the potential for understanding, by
engaging with elements of space and structure in the criminal trial. The changes that I suggest in this chapter build on the suggestions put forward in chapter three and are based predominantly on devices for communication through participation, which are rooted in Boal’s Theatre of the Oppressed. Theatre of the Oppressed is the
amalgamation of the various ideas and techniques that Boal developed in his lifetime, some of which include: Legislative Theatre; Aesthetics of the Oppressed, Games for Actors and Non-Actors and Forum Theatre. Of all his work, Boal is undoubtedly best known for his development of, and work in Forum Theatre, and it is on Forum Theatre that I concentrate most in this chapter. What underpins much of this work is Boal’s emphasis on communication through participation as a means to empowerment, to a sense of inclusion, or to enhanced understanding of any given situation. In this next step in my exploration of the role of the jury I argue that if we truly understand the difference between presence and participation in the courtroom, we will come to realise - in a practical sense - the untapped potential of both the jury and the spaces within which it currently functions. Additionally, at this stage I draw on my practical experience of working in performance arts and so view the possibilities for the jury from
123 an artistic perspective, thus drawing into the exploration the diversity of ways that the jury can be integrated into the trial as it progresses, as well as demonstrating in my work another research method for use when trying to understand the jury. By using Forum Theatre as the method through which people are empowered to communicate and to participate, I aim to highlight the points in the trial where the jury could
participate meaningfully and I offer practical ways to make that happen. Thus, whilst I do challenge the presumption that the jury, as it currently stands, participate in the trial, I do not make the challenge as a negative but rather I use the current presumption as our starting point as I refocus our image of the role of the jury to broaden further our expectations of its capacity in the criminal trial.
Thus, at the centre of this chapter I draw out the dominant aspects of Forum Theatre,1
which include the Joker and the spect-actor, because it is through these vehicles that I propose change, not only by re-thinking communication through participation but also by re-thinking how we respond to or regard the space in which that communication takes place. I do not propose to alter the structure of the courtroom because I believe that my aims can be achieved through alternative communication styles that are based in participation thus avoiding the need for architectural or interior design alterations. I do however make a brief exploration towards the end of the chapter into the impact of architecture where I place my focus on the subliminal influence of allocated space on those using it. I do that to emphasise the way that people, often unconsciously, defer to allocated space with that deference serving only to hinder their sense that they are able to or even allowed to participate, so subconsciously undermining their inherent abilities. Therefore, in this chapter I introduce methods which encourage active
participation in our communication, and in so doing I am opening the space to enable or encourage as many of the jurors as possible to take their part in the process.
124 Boal did not develop his Theatre of the Oppressed from purely artistic decisions or experiences but rather it “grew out of a determined battle to make socially engaged, life-affirming theatre in a climate of extreme repression” with the participatory theories and techniques being developed over time.2 He did this through collaboration
with other theatre practitioners and educators, creating something which had, as he saw it, real tangible value for the people with whom he worked. His Forum Theatre techniques have at their core participation by both actors and spect-actors3 and it is this aspect of his work I am most interested in exploring. By discovering the power of his method in other spheres I propose to apply it within the criminal trial process.
In chapter three my research was driven by inspiration taken from the work of Paulo Freire but I made it clear from the start that I was not using his critical pedagogy as my basis for ‘teaching’ the jury; rather I used it for opening our perceptions and awareness of the lines for communication and understanding in the trial proper. Along similar lines, therefore, whilst I have chosen to draw on Augusto Boal’s Theatre of the Oppressed, I am not suggesting that the future for trial by jury is to elaborate on its already perceived theatrical dimensions by imposing some Forum Theatre techniques. Indeed, I should say that the links thus far drawn in the literature between the theatre and the criminal trial are rooted, mainly, in their similarities in terms of aesthetics and dramatic performance and should not be confused with my use of Boal’s work. 4
Therefore, I do not rely on the trappings of the theatre and by that I mean the tip-up seats, the scene changes or lighting designs and nor do I rely on theatricality or
spectacle derived from directorial opinions and styles found in the imagery, sound, and stylistic decisions each designed to affect an audience either by drawing them in or forcing them out to draw links to or advance my ideas for using Boal’s form of theatre
2 Babbage, F. (2004), Augusto Boal, London and New York, Routledge p.2.
3 The spect-actor is the term used to refer to the spectator when he interacts at the intervention
points in the Forum piece. I discuss the role of the spect-actor in more detail in section 4.2.2 below.
4 I discuss this in more detail below in chapter five when considering aspects of theatricality and
125 practise in the criminal trial. Indeed, the aesthetic space of the theatre – the platform – in my opinion only serves to create separation and division between the space of the actor and the space of the spectator. My work is focused on drawing the two together, not endorsing the gap between them, and so my primary purpose is neither to describe the current system nor to draw out the similarities between theatrical and legal
performance. Therefore, examples such as Howard Zehr’s comparisons of the administration of criminal justice as, “a kind of theatre in which issues of guilt and innocence predominate. The trial or guilty plea forms the dramatic centre, with the sentence as the denouement”5 I find to be fairly limiting in terms of broadening our
understanding of how information is conveyed. He draws a parallel with a traditional ‘play’ where the story arches around the central character(s) and makes a link between a criminal courtroom and a theatre – not at any point acknowledging the rich diversity in theatre practice, not unsurprisingly because he is viewing the issue ostensibly from a socio-legal background. This link is tenuous because it relies heavily on theatre
performances of ‘straight’ plays as well as assuming that the ‘stories’ told in court are
structured, either into a coherent story form, or at least a recognised dramaturgical form. We know from the discussion in chapter three that the stories told in court are far from coherent for jurors and I would go so far as to argue that reference to theatre performances is, in this instance, a little clichéd. Moreover, in terms of staging, the kind of productions to which Zehr refers are, to the great extent, created to be performed traditionally in conventional theatres to passive and mute audiences sitting in their allotted space observing the acting from the stage afar. 6 It is clear then that drawing distinctions with jurors who are passive and, to the greater extent, separated from the rest of the trial players, is easy to do. In general, little more than lip service is given to the needs of either the actor or the audience in the theatre and this is typical of many of the comparisons between the courtroom and the theatre which rely
5 Zehr, H. (1995), Changing Lenses: New Focus for Crime and Justice, Scottdale, PA, Herald
Press p.77.
6 Indeed, if theatre were only about such performance styles and spaces then perhaps the link
126 on the theatre in the stereotypical sense as though this was the very definition of
theatre and nothing more. Moreover, often these comparisons rely on the “face-to-face encounters in the courtroom” as a kind of drama thus endorsing the trial as some sort of theatrical performance.7 These points are made more acute when we consider that
Boal’s work does not rely on theatre buildings or stages, or indeed any of the trappings commonly associated with theatricality and performance, to have a direct and lasting impact on its audiences.8 Additionally, a cursory glance at theatre performance today demonstrates that seeing the performance does not necessarily require us to attend a theatre. For example, Catalonia’s La Fura dels Baus stage their macro-performances outdoors not least because their sets prohibit performance inside any space let alone a purpose built theatre space9 and Edinburgh’s site responsive theatre company Grid Iron
sees audiences attend such venues as a disused paediatric hospital,10 airports,11
anatomy departments12 or public houses13. Or when we do visit a theatre, what we see
on the stage may be communicated in ways designed to disrupt or distort our ideas of convention. For example in Robert Lepage’s The Seven Streams of the River Ota we can see both the direction and the design activating simultaneity in the performance itself with the effect on the audience of seeing thousands of stampeding actors with the employment of three people and a bank of ingeniously staged mirrors.14 Thus, whilst
this image of the theatre (be that a proscenium arch, a studio, a black box) may well be
7 Mulcahy, L. (2011), Legal Architecture, Justice, due process and the place of law, Oxon and New
York, Routledge, p.176.
8 Boal’s work is not the exception and so for other examples we can look to theatre directors
Robert Lepage or Ben Harrison for inspiration on the use of a variety of theatrical conventions.
9 See for example their first macro-performance Pepsìclope watched by 10,000
http://www.lafura.com/web/eng/obras_ficha.php?o=62 or their 2004 macro-performance of La divina comèdia http://www.lafura.com/web/eng/obras_ficha.php?o=79 [live at 03/07/2013].
10 Ghost Ward, Directed by Ben Harrison for the National Theatre, location disused paediatric ward
in disused hospital (2005).
11 Roam, Grid Iron Theatre Company, location airside Edinburgh Airport (2008).
12 What Remains, David Paul Jones and Ben Harrison for Grid Iron, location Edinburgh University
Anatomy department, 2012.
13 Barflies, David Paul Jones, locations various public bars in the UK.
14 Robert Lepage is considered as one of the most visually inventive theatre directors and The
Seven Streams of the River Ota was the first piece created for his own company Ex Machina http://lacaserne.net/index2.php/creation/ [live at 03/07/2013]
127 the point of the comparison, what life shows us is that that is not the case and so I demonstrate briefly in this chapter and more closely in chapter five, that, certainly in part, these comparisons may well be out-dated.
What would it be like if we began to integrate some of the elements of Theatre of the Oppressed into trial by jury? What would the trial look and sound like if Boal’s theories were central to the criminal trial framework? Would that bring us one step closer to understanding all of the trial participants, as well as making participation possible for all participants? In this chapter, then, I shall attempt to show how the trial might look or sound different if elements of the Theatre of the Oppressed were integrated into its framework. As a by-product of that investigation I shall show how, in my exploration of the trial ‘theatricality’, Forum Theatre could be a way in to broaden our perspectives on what ‘theatricality’ really is and so demonstrate the tremendous power of a
different style of theatre when we consider whether or not it (theatre performance) “is a mirror in which may be seen the true image of nature, of reality.”15
Augusto Boal believed absolutely in the power of drama to change society and transform lives. Through his Theatre of the Oppressed he gave voice to the oppressed and through his life he continued to so do maintaining until his death that “all forms of expression and communication are in the hands of the oppressors” and so to offer tools or avenues for expression which bypassed or surmounted those was his primary aim.16 He argued
that “theatre is the human language par excellence”17 and in that he meant that using theatre as a form of communication, human beings are able to observe their own capacity to witness the “possibility of our being simultaneously Protagonist and
15 Shakespeare, W. (1600) Hamlet, III.2.20-24.
16 Boal, A. (1998), Legislative Theatre, Using performance to make politics, translated by Adrian
Jackson, London and New York, Routledge at p.7 (subsequently referred as Boal (1998) (Legislative)) p.21.
128 principle spectator of our actions…to reinvent the past and to invent the future...[and] therein lies the immense power with which theatre is endowed.”18 I do not agree
completely with Boal when he refers to the language of the theatre as the ultimate mode for clear communication and as a forum through which to alter situations because it is only one mode of communication, and one which may or may not be accessible to many. It should not be elevated to the level of the ultimate because in that
perspective we may lose sight of other opportunities for change. I have, however, chosen to integrate the work of Boal for a variety of reasons, not least because I believe that there is certainly a place for practical experience alongside theoretical enquiries as a way to understand better how to integrate jurors practically. Boal’s work has the power to break and / or transcend barriers to transform situations which have hitherto remained static for centuries. Thus, through integrating his work as part of my
investigation into trial by jury I aim to develop bridges of dialogue between all of those involved in the criminal trial. In this respect, the exploration of Boal’s work builds on the work already undertaken in chapter three, as I depart from focusing only on the spoken word to demonstrate how physical interaction can also play a part in enhancing understanding and participation through overcoming barriers to communication.
The chapter proceeds as follows. First I chart the life of Augusto Boal and I illustrate the significance that his early work at the Arena theatre had on his later Theatre of the Oppressed. Thereafter, I consider the potential of the Theatre of the Oppressed as a device for enhancing participation in the current trial. Subsequently I assess the impact of the courtroom architecture and the staging of the trial on all of the trial participants. In so doing I shall look at the extent to which clear communication currently exists between the legal professionals and the jurors and where Boal’s techniques might offer possibilities to improve or transform that capacity for communication. The chapter concludes with the script of a short trial that I have created for the purposes of
129 demonstrating Boal’s Forum method at work. While the limitations of the PhD thesis in written form prevent me on this occasion from physically showing the work in action, I do the very best that I can to communicate its power within those parameters. Thus, my trial has Forum devices intercut with trial dialogue and where I expect the
interventions to be I have ‘rough-cut’ them to include Joker/Spect-actor or Spect- actor/Actor dialogue. This hopefully allows the reader to assess the effect of the interventions, the use of the Joker and the transformation from passive observer (spectator) to active participant (spect-actor) in a criminal trial.