Last week, at Liverpool Hope University, I attended a class on Documentary Theater that deals, among others, with the ways theater can memorialize historical events (including current ones). In the first hour, the teacher, Dr. Gary Anderson, lectured on the link between the student protests of 1968 and the soon to occur (November 30) national protest march in Britain about budget cuts in education and welfare services. Students are concerned because the budget cuts mean that their tuition fees will increase by 300 percent, from 3000 to 9000 pounds per year. Now in the second hour of class, a workshop session, Dr. Anderson said that since a major theme of student protest movements is the lack of participation in a democracy, it would be good if the students themselves discussed what possible action they can take to voice their concern about these budget cuts. On their own, the students discussed the budget cuts and other social issues, and agreed to focus their protest on tuition increases. They then talked about what concrete action they can take in the here and now to register their protest. Several suggestions were thrown, and eventually, the students decided to occupy one of the theater spaces on campus (see picture) that was reserved exclusively for music students. Students argued: we'll pay more but got no space here. Right then and there, the students stood up, walked out of the classroom and teh building, and occupied the nearby Capstone Theater. Dr. Anderson did not censor the students' action. Instead he (and I) followed the students to the music theater.
When we got to Capstone, the students (about 35 of them, could be more) were sitting on the stage. “We pay more but no space here!” was their mantra, chanted repeatedly, as they circled the stage like Indians getting ready for a warpath. The war dance over, a girl then opened the grand piano and accompanied three other students who sang a cabaret piece and delighted everyone (me too). Three others went to the tech booth to turn on the spotlights and the microphone. A technician walked in, saw that he couldn't drive the students away, stayed to check that the equipment was plugged properly, and walked out. The "show" continued. Dr. Anderson and I were asked to go onstage while the students chanted, then improvised a scene about government greed, and made protest speeches through the house microphone. Half an hour later, Dr. Anderson asked the students to stay if they wanted to but announced that from a pedagogical point of view, he was going back to the classroom to have a discussion about what happened. The students slowly returned to the classroom and after several exchanges agreed that while they should be aware of institutional constraints, they should retain the spirit of dissent (and the energy it generated) when faced with issues affecting their lives.
Whew! How's that for a regular class?
The technician will most likely report the incident. Dr. Anderson might get a reprimand or something. The Drama Department might be cast in an unfavorable light. Theater students might be branded as troublemakers. And I may be cited as an accomplice, who knows. But are those risks worth taking to have students learn active participation in a democracy? Think what the Deans will say, what OAS will do, what action ADSA will take, and what force the new Security Guards, hell bent on promoting peace and order the Loyola Way, will muster.
But talk about classroom energy and edgy performances -- this was it!
No comments:
Post a Comment