Drama Education and Dramatherapy

Exploring the space between disciplines

Clive Holmwood

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2014
• Print ISBN: 9781138683280
• eBook ISBN: 9781317970668
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Education
• Subtopic: Education General

Dramatherapy is increasingly being used in schools and educational establishments as a way of supporting young people's emotional needs. This book examines the space between drama education and Dramatherapy exploring the questions: Does a therapist teach? When does the role of the drama teacher border on that of therapist? How do these two professions see and understand each other and the roles they play?

In Drama Education and Dramatherapy, Clive Holmwood draws on his experience as a Dramatherapist and examines the history of drama education and Dramatherapy, exploring the social, political, therapeutic and artistic influences that have impacted these two professions over the last century. He also discusses how these fields are intrinsically linked and examines the liminal qualities betwixt and between them. The book considers two specific case studies, from the therapist's and teacher's perspectives discussing what happens in the drama class and therapy space including how the dramatic form is understood, explored and expressed both educationally and therapeutically. The 'them and us' mentality, which often exists in two different professions that share a common origin is also explored. The book contemplates how teachers and Dramatherapists can work collaboratively in the future, bringing down barriers that exist between them and beginning a working dialogue that will ultimately and holistically support the children and young people they all work with.

This book will be of interest to those involved in using drama in an educational or therapeutic context, including: drama teachers, arts therapists, teachers of arts therapy and researchers within wider arts, applied arts and educational faculties within colleges and universities.

Chapter 1

Drama, Dramatherapy and anthropology

The Senoi Temiars of Malaysia regularly perform rituals for the maintenance of health as well as the curing of physical, social and supernatural manifestations of ill-health. Their preventative and curative séances are stimulated by, and enacted through, dreams, dance, music, drama and trance media, imbued with complementary themes of the erotic and ascetic, and an underlying aesthetic sense of creative performance.

(Jennings 1995: 1)

Sue Jennings, a leading, pioneering Dramatherapist and anthropologist, lived with the Senoi Temiars in the jungles of Malaysia for two years. She, along with Turner (1982) and Schechner (2003), has long been interested in the connection between anthropology and drama. As one of Britain’s leading Dramatherapists, she has specific interest in making anthropological connections with Dramatherapy. Not surprisingly there has always been a relationship between anthropology and Dramatherapy in the UK; anthropology was a core subject area in my Dramatherapy training at the University of Hertfordshire. There is also strong emphasis on the ‘ritual approach’ within Dramatherapy in the Sesame training at the Central School of Speech and Drama in London. I have stated that this book is based on my empirical experiences within drama education and Dramatherapy; this chapter is framed within this context. I will therefore explore the connections, similarities and differences between anthropology, drama and Dramatherapy. I will look at the significance of these connections and how they link and relate to the main focus of this book – the differences and overlaps between drama and Dramatherapy.

If anthropology is ‘the study of mankind, its societies and customs and evolution of man’¹ then ritual, Grassat suggests, is even more complex. It holds a dual purpose, ‘in many rituals, the sacrificial act assumes two opposing aspects, appearing at times as a sacred obligation to be neglected at grave peril, at other times as a sort of criminal activity entailing perils of equal gravity’ (1977: 1). He believes that ritual is a way of managing the violent aspects of human behaviour within society in a controlled and responsible way, and that ritual sacrifices have served to allow communities to protect themselves from violence (1977: 8). Jennings states that ‘rituals assist us to know who we are and when we are, as well as giving boundaries to the journeys of the dramatic imagination’ (1995: 8). Schechner’s view is similar to that of Jennings: that dramatic ritual provides safe boundaries. He feels that ‘at its deepest level this is what theatre is about, the ability to frame and control, to transform the raw into cooked, to deal with the most problematic (violent, dangerous, sexual, taboo) human interactions’ (2003: 191). If ritual is about dealing with the problematic and the difficult in a safe and protective way, it could be argued, perhaps, that it has a similar language and philosophy to drama and in particular Dramatherapy.

Theatre and ritual

The historical connection between ritual and drama is contentious and much debated. Rozik (2002) has attempted to re-think the more traditional, linear, Darwinian view of the direct connections between ancient ritual and drama. He discusses that people generally assume that drama derives from ‘Dionysiac ritual and Christian theatre’ (2002: X) and that it is almost impossible for modern thinkers to completely and fully escape from the perspective that ancient rituals follow a linear path to drama and theatre. He concludes that there is a flaw in the modern understanding of the roots of drama. ‘Traces of the origins of theatre cannot be found in recurrent features of narratives, mythical or otherwise, because worlds (real or fictional) and media, including theatre, are independent of each other’ (2002: 336). This suggests that, because each of these forms is an individual and independent ‘medium’, they have separate identities and cannot have the same roots. I would agree to an extent; however I would argue that, although they have inherent dissimilarities, ritual and theatre have relational connections with each other.

For Victor Turner, having theatrical roots within his family led him to see the world from a theatrical perspective. In From Ritual to Theatre (1982) he suggests that some sort of drama appeared to ‘erupt’ from the everyday fabric of social life. The scientist in him compared these ‘everyday relationships’ with the ‘taxonomic’ relations among actors (their kinship ties, structural positions, social class, political status, and so forth)’ (1982: 9). Jennings, on the other hand, not only had theatrical and scientific perspectives, but also a Dramatherapeutic framework for her time in the Malaysian jungle. She was careful not to allow the stereotype of the therapist to get in the way and was concerned with the interplay ‘between play, drama, theatre and ritual’ (1995: xxviii). Jennings also seems to have a slightly more subtle understanding of how the different ‘media’ fit together, which is more akin to Rosik’s assertion:

To suggest that ritual and theatre are separate forms is to miss the essential nature of the phenomena … I maintain that the terms ritual, drama and theatre are all means of trying to describe the various forms of larger than life representations involving dominant cultural symbols, artistic media changes in role, in a designated space, set apart.

(Jennings 1995: 23)

This is similar to Turner’s view that ‘liminal’ space is somehow set apart from ‘everyday’ space. It is in this ‘set apart space’ that he suggests that the familiar becomes unfamiliar and the participant is able to have fresh perspective. This brings us closer to thinking about what Dramatherapy might be; from a western perspective it is one way of allowing individuals to describe, represent and understand aspects of their life from a fresh perspective.

Arnold Van Gennep’s Rites of Passage (1960) shares similarities with the Dramatherapy process. Turner describes Van Gennep’s work as having three distinct phases within the ritual format: 1) ‘The Separation’, often described as the young boy leaving home on a journey; 2) ‘Transition’, sometimes described as having a challenge, which turns the child into a man; and then 3) ‘(Re) incorporation’, returning to the village to take on the role of a man (Turner 1982: 24).² This is similar to the developmental phases within a Dramatherapy session: the warm-up, the main activity and the de-rolling followed by discussion. The transformative element is similar to one of Jones’ nine core processes in Dramatherapy: ‘transformation’ (1996a: 119). Jones feels that just as there is a transformational element within drama and theatre with actors taking on roles or characters this is also true of Dramatherapy. Turner feels that moving from one social status to another requires, in parallel to this, a movement through physical or geographic space, which are akin to the pre-liminal and post-liminal states as originally expressed by Van Gennep. Terence S. Turner (1977: 54) proposes that Victor Turner’s formulation of Van Gennep’s rites of passage is ‘transformation’ that occurs at ‘the pivotal point’ of a liminal phase. Therefore the transformation is the central mechanism that allows the individual to move through the liminal space from the pre to post liminal phase.

Dramatherapy and ritual

As a major writer on Dramatherapy, Jones has been critical of some perspectives of ritual within a Dramatherapy context. He states: ‘Some have argued that the basic assumptions behind Dramatherapy of a fixed structure with active participation can be paralleled with the psychological and emotional functions of ritual’ (1996a: 250). There has been much debate about the use of ritual within Dramatherapy. For example the Dramatherapy training at Roehampton University offers a ‘ritual theatre model’ approach to Dramatherapy.³ Jones alternatively suggests: ‘Dramatherapy has been too quick to claim other cultural practices as its own; too eager to draw parallels between itself and ritual. Dramatherapy is not ritual. The dramatherapist is not a shaman’ (1996a: 250).

Clare Schrader (2012) presented the first book on ritual approaches to Dramatherapy. She states:

Ritual Theatre enables its participants to inhabit many aspects of themselves, to free their spirit, and to claim their power. It demands that participants and practitioner alike enjoy the richness of archetypes, symbols and ancient wisdom, because these elements will transform you both. Ritual theatre will by degrees lead those that are willing and ready to ‘put themselves in accord with nature’.

(Schrader 2012: 41)

These contrasts show that there is still debate within the Dramatherapy profession around the purpose and use of ritual within its training and theory. As Jones suggests, it may be too easy for the profession to latch onto other theoretical frameworks and use them as their own. Dramatherapist and cleric Roger Grainger states:

Words distort; eloquent words distort absolutely. Ritual does not depend on words but on the transforming action of lived life … thus when dramatherapy deals with the fundamental longings of the human soul, it speaks the language of religion, even though nothing ‘religious’ is actually said.

(Grainger 1990: 27)

Thus Grainger is clearly stating that the practices of ritual, religion and therapy are similar and use similar, often non-verbal, vocabulary, but they are not the same.

Liminality

Although I have already stated that we should be cautious about readily utilising the language of other disciplines, if we consider Dramatherapy from an anthropological perspective it will allow the more developed language of anthropology to shed conceptual light on the processes of Dramatherapy.

Liminality, according to Turner, ‘may involve a complex sequence of episodes in sacred space-time, and may also include subversive and ludic (or playful) events’ (1982: 26). The idea of set time and space is central to Dramatherapy, where time is also set apart from daily life. The client or group meet the therapist usually at the same place and time each week. If the relationship between the therapist and client is central then the meeting in that space could be claimed to create a special or ‘sacred’ space. Turner’s ideas of ‘playful’ or ‘subversive’ events being carried out within this space bear parallels to Dramatherapy, where the notion of play is central. He suggests that the liminal, literally means a threshold, doorway or crossing place (1982: 25) from ‘limen’ – a place that is neither one nor the other, a space separate or apart from the world around. Turner discusses that in a liminal phase there is often disconnection from the main group – as, for example, in Van Gennep’s Rites of Passage. This parallels dramatic distance in Dramatherapy as described by Jones, allowing space for the client to stand back from difficult material by using drama through metaphor or symbol. This draws a parallel between actual (social) space and psychological space – the distance in one symbolically re-enforces the distance in the other.

Within liminal space and time, Schechner describes ‘communitas’ as occurring (2003: 128) at its centre. He states this is ‘ecstatic levelling’ in which everything merges together into one. Turner originally describes this as a ‘flow between or among individuals’ (1982: 58). Schechner uses the term transformative time. Parallels can be further drawn between anthropology and Dramatherapy, where Jones points to a similarity to Schechner’s view that transformation involves ‘the displacement of anti-social/injurious behaviours by ritual gestures and displays’ (Schechner 1995: 119). Jones (1996a: 102) discusses that involvement in dramatic activity within Dramatherapy allows a shift to occur for a client to re-engage with the emotional and creative aspects of themselves. This appears similar to the ‘flow’ Turner originally describes when he discusses ‘communitas’, the central, luminal moment when all boundaries and barriers appear to break down within the ritual process.

Embodying complex social and cultural acts is often used in the simple gift of ‘giving’. Nicholson suggests a similarity between the act of theatre and the act of giving gifts, ‘the experience of making theatre and the experience of the gift are special forms of communication through which personal relationships and feelings are dramatised’ (2005: 164). Nicholson feels the social complexities around giving and receiving gifts connect with the ambiguities, ethics and boundaries of delivering applied drama. Nicholson also states that ‘ethical issues relating to the praxis of applied drama may be found in the conducts laid down by both educational research and dramatherapy’ (2005: 157). In Dramatherapy the ‘gift’ is often used dramatically as an exercise at the end of a session when each group member places their hands into a box and takes out an imaginary gift, which they are encouraged to either give to another group member, or keep for themselves. Nicholson’s idea of the complexity of gift philosophy and its social contextualisation is therefore used practically in Dramatherapy. Distanced and dramatised, it allows a containing space at the end of a Dramatherapy session where gifts are shared both consciously and unconsciously on an intra-psychic level.

Comparison

Grainger (1995) explores the connectedness between drama, religion and healing. He is of the opinion that ‘therapies retain the shape of the rite of passage because it is the inalienable shape of transformation’ (1995: 60). Therefore a comparison of a ritual and of Dramatherapy practice might show the similarities and connectedness but also the distinct differences between the two.

Schechner (2003: 112) describes a year-long festival that took place in Papua New Guinea, which culminated in a two-day event called the ‘Pig Kaiko’ or pig dance. The cycle of individual festivals lasted as long as it took to raise enough pigs for the tribes to eat. It consisted of a series of 15 dances involving 13 local tribes, hosted by the Tsembaga. The purpose of the festival was to ensure there were enough pigs for people to live on; pigs were to be killed and eaten at the end of the festival as a celebration. The festival has a deeper and more profound social meaning. As Grassat suggested, it is also a way of dealing with aggression and danger. The visitors from other tribes arrive dressed to fight and wearing ‘fight packages’. Their arrival is a fight that is turned into an entertainment – a dance. During the festival, bartering occurs between the tribes, gifts are given by the visiting tribes, and pig meat is later shared by the Tsembaga with their visitors. Potential violence is sublimated with dance and barter between neighbouring tribes and allowing tribes to survive by sharing sustenance. Through this structured ritual, Schechner states: ‘what starts as theatre ends as communion’ (2003: 116). The dance and entertainment act as a highly effective ritual to keep the peace between potential warring tribes, which allows for social communion, barter and sustenance. All of this is done cyclically based around the rearing of pigs.

By way of comparison, I offer here the story of a client of mine (Holmwood 2005)⁴. Mary (not her real name) was a woman in her mid-thirties who had severe learning disabilities and challenging behaviour. Mary had no speech but a love of music and song. She would express her distress using a range of self-injurious behaviours, which would include banging her head, attempting to remove her clothes, lashing out, scratching and biting. Mary would particularly become distressed whenever words connected to ‘ending’ were used. I worked with Mary in a unit for adults with severe learning disabilities and challenging behaviours. She was my client for two distinct phases with a gap of a year and a half in between.

At the beginning of our first phase of work, sitting in a room with me and listening to music was as much as she could tolerate. I later used hand puppets to tell simple stories about Mary going for a walk with her mother. Although she no longer lived with her mother they had a good relationship and she looked forward to her weekend visits. The stories dealt with both beginnings and endings. This work developed into a story I often told Mary as we walked up and down the corridor during our sessions (for many clients with severe learning disabilities the space was not the room or building but the proximity to the therapist). The story was of a princess in a faraway land who would rise every morning and visit her subjects in the city, towns and villages – they adored her. She would then return to the castle and attend a banquet to which all had been invited. Mary’s distress and fluctuating ability to communicate with or understand the world was dealt with within our story. This brought to a close the first phase of our work.

A year and a half later Mary began to work with me again. I used fairy tales to explore Mary’s relationship with the world aro...

Table of contents

• Cover Page
• Half Title page
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• Dedication
• Contents
• Figures
• Tables
• Foreword
• Preface
• Acknowledgements
• Introduction
• 1 Drama, Dramatherapy and anthropology
• 2 Theatre, therapy and politics
• 3 Dramatherapy: A historical overview
• 4 Drama education
• 5 Dramatherapy, drama and story
• 6 Research approaches in drama education and Dramatherapy
• 7 Context in drama education and Dramatherapy: Space in context or context in space
• 8 Discourse in drama education and Dramatherapy
• 9 The drama in therapy and education
• 10 The liminal debate
• Conclusion
• References
• Index