Examining the ethics of research-based theatre through Contact!Unload

Through a Glass Brightly: Generative Ethical Tensions in Research-Based Theatre

“…Moving beyond Eisner’s (2008) narrow focus on the synchronic (single iteration) and intrapersonal (the solo practitioner’s praxis) allowed us to engage with the generative potential found in this area of tension. This thematic pattern reinforces findings in previous studies that highlighted the need for accountability to audiences (Goldstein et al, 2014), considering the potential effects of catharsis on fragile audiences (Mienczakowski & Moore, 2008), the level of accessibility to audiences, or the integration of evaluation within the theatre experience (Belliveau et al, 2020).…”

“…This area of tension about what data are included echoes Belliveau et al’s (2020) ethical question about how to include narratives beyond the chosen structural narrative frame and previous studies that highlighted the dangers of stereotyping and cliché (Mienczakowski & Moore, 2008). However, our analysis extends beyond that, considering also the generative quality of this tension, as team members who analyzed data in the original study continuously revisited the data (the diachronic dimension of time) to check whether important facets might have been excluded from the performance.…”

“…Recently, Belliveau et al (2020) offered a framework of project phases to reflect on ethical issues, which they used to explore one RbT production. Key ethical dilemmas that they identified included the extent to which a researcher/artist’s own experiences may be present in the work, the ethics of accessibility for audiences, and the integration of informed consent and evaluation within the theatre experience.…”

“…Transmediation as an area of ethical tension echoes concerns raised by ABR and RbT practitioners previously (beyond Eisner), such as Saldaña's (1998) concerns about producing scripts that might reveal too much about participants, Gallagher's (2006) concern with researchers claiming to perform the stories of "others" through drama, Goldstein et al's (2014) questions about the identities of the artists (e.g., whether they come from communities similar to the research participants), and Belliveau et al's (2020) mention of the ethical dilemma around the extent to which a researcher/artist's own experiences may be present in the work. Our analysis shows the complexity of these tensions as they relate to transmediation processes of RbT.…”

Relational and Aesthetic Accountability: Considerations of a Research-Based Playwright

“…Research-based Theater (RbT) is shaped by both the form of theater, as an embodied, gestural, spatial, imaginative multi-dimensional art form (that is both process/inquiry-oriented and a form of cultural production), and the traditions of research surrounding knowledge production, specifically qualitative research (such as research questions, methodological design, and dissemination plans). Aligned with other interdisciplinary forms of arts-based research, RbT has been taken up by researchers and artists across disciplines to engage broader publics in research processes and findings, for example, from nursing, medical sociology, education, obstetrics, public health, rehabilitation sciences, among others, in addition to theater and performance studies (e.g., please see Belliveau et al, 2020; Belliveau & Lea, 2016; Bird & Donelan, 2020; Eakin & Endicott, 2006; Gallagher & Kushnir, 2020; Goldstein, 2012; Gray et al, 2011; Harris & Sinclair, 2014; Jonas-Simpson et al, 2012; Kazubowski-Houston, 2010; Kontos et al, 2012; Mitchell et al, 2006; Nisker et al, 2006; Schneider, 2017; Schott et al, 2016). However, beyond being interdisciplinary, RbT is also often taken up across paradigms.…”