Tics in the Theatre: The Quiet Audience, the Relaxed Performance, and the Neurodivergent Spectator

Letting Bodies be Bodies: Exploring Relaxed Performance in the Canadian Performance Landscape

“…The question of which bodies are invited into RP spaces might also be taken up in relation to the "participatory politics of the theatre medium" (Simpson, 2018, p. 231). While it is important to recognize the likely impossibility of accommodating multiple accessibility needs simultaneously, participants in our study reflected on how audience communities are built during RPs; as Simpson (2018) reflects, there is opportunity for the creation of communities in spaces where audiences are not expected to remain selfcontained, static and silent. Each RP audience brings into contact people who may not otherwise spend time together; their unique constellation of embodied intricacies impacts each others' experiences as well as their own.…”

“…Different approaches are being piloted across the country as venues and organizations in and beyond the theatre sector attempt to meet (and hopefully exceed) accessibility standards. Approaches to enacting access include, but are not limited to, audio described performances (e.g., Naraine et al, 2018;Whitfield & Fels, 2015), live captioning, and RP (Fletcher-Watson, 2015;Fletcher-Watson & May, 2018;Kempe, 2014Kempe, , 2015Simpson, 2018).…”

“…RPs change the ways that theatre is delivered by permitting more movement and sound amongst audiences, adjustments to sound, lighting, and other effects, introductions to the show and to actors, provision of space outside of the main house for audience members to go to if they wish to have a break ("chill space"), and information about the venue and the show, including accessibility considerations, provided to patrons before their visit (Chandler et al, 2020;Simpson, 2018). RPs began with a focus on providing accessible cinema and live theatre experiences for people with Autism (Fletcher-Watson, 2015;Fletcher-Watson & May, 2018;Simpson, 2018) and Tourette's syndrome (Thom, 2015). 4 The scope of those to whom RPs might cater has since expanded to include a wider group of people for whom the "traditional rules of theatregoing" may be unappealing or inaccessible, including children and families, people with chronic pain, and more (Fletcher-Watson & May, 2018).…”

“…Questions about the possible othering or infantilization of disabled audiences also arise when considering that much of RP literature explores the utility of the approach for those with Autism and/or children. Simpson (2018), reflecting on the limited availability of RPs in the UK, shared comments from theatre consultants who raised questions about what kinds of RPs might be mounted to challenge the dominant perception that only youthoriented programming needs to be "relaxed." Other critical considerations for RP expansion include the extent to which disabled and non-normatively embodied folks are generally integrated into RP as only audiences, or also as actors, directors, producers, and others on the production side.…”

“…Fletcher-Watson (2015) and Fletcher-Watson and May (2018) consider the access needs of audiences including but not limited to Autistic individuals and acknowledging the benefits of RP's flexibility and limitations when it comes to balancing multiple accessibility needs. Recently, Simpson (2018) reflected on the value of RP in moving away from ingrained notions about silent, static audiences and toward a reclaiming of an "unruly" and copresenced, embodied audience that engages with the work and with each other. This literature paints a picture of a field on the precipice of practical enactment and theorization; RP presents an opportunity to explore issues of voice, enactment, involvement, co-presencing, and tailoring in performance spaces.…”