The power of the circle : interaction ritual chains during preparations for amateur theatre performances

(1)

The Power of the Circle: Interaction Ritual

Chains during Preparations for Amateur

Theatre Performances

Joris Bastiaan

10367357

MA Thesis Sociology (Main Track)

University of Amsterdam

Supervisor: dr. K. de Keere

Second Reader: dr. A. van Venrooij

10-07-2017

(2)

1

Abstract

Within the discipline of sociology, theatre has mainly been approached as a social field. Yet, little sociological research has been executed on the theatrical practice. With the support of an ethnography consisting of observations and interviews, this thesis claims that preparations for amateur theatre performances rely on regulated group activities, which influence the mental state of the participants. These regulated activities therefore aid the theatre performers in dealing with the intense emotions which come with the awareness of an approaching performance. Randall Collins’ understanding of interaction rituals, described in his book Interaction Ritual Chains (2004), has both major theoretical and methodological influence on this thesis. Interaction ritual chain theory examines how social reality is built up of series of situations instead of fixed social structures. Collins provides a clear structure of ingredients and outcomes that are characteristic for an interaction ritual (IR). IR’s can modify the emotional state of the participants, and develop feelings of cohesion and belonging. Subsequently, IR’s can determine the unfolding of succeeding IR’s. Both the ingredients and outcomes of an IR have been organised in four components by Collins. These eight

elements can be transformed into a observational research framework. In this thesis, such framework has been put to practice in observations on three amateur theatre groups in Amsterdam. Over the course of two months, these groups were followed during their preparations for a performance in front of an audience. This thesis revealed that the observed groups used regulated collective activities to mentally prepare the participants. Group leaders turn out to be major regulators of formal group gatherings. These activities repeatedly took place in circular formations. The design of these formations prove to

excellent for the gathering of IR ingredients. The regulating group activities create high levels of group solidarity and morality, which have effect on other informal group activities. The chain of IR’s during preparations for theatre performances purposefully alter the emotional states of all partaking individuals, which enhances feelings of morality and group solidarity.

(4)

3

1. Foreword

This thesis has been written to complete the Master’s program of General Sociology at the University of Amsterdam. Over the course of five months, I have tried to fuse five years of sociological education together into a representative work. Parallel to the General Sociology program, I followed a program called Comparative and Cultural Analysis, at the Humanities Faculty of the University of Amsterdam.

During the two years of combining the courses of both programs, I developed an interest in the phenomenon of theatre. Both this thesis and the thesis written to finalize the Comparative and Cultural Analysis program are thematised by the theatrical practice. Although the two programs differ in approach and context, it might not be strange that the two thesis have things in common. In addition, both theses were written within the same time period, so there is a good chance the two influenced each other. One could see this as a some sort of contamination, but I rather see this as a friendly conversation; as an enrichment of both.

I could not have completed this thesis without the support of my parents, brother, friends, and family. For that, I am very grateful. I want to thank my friends Tom Bijlholt, Siebert Wielstra and Yoren Lausberg for reviewing this thesis. Their comments were very helpful. I also would like to mention drs. Fenneke Wekker, dr. Ramón Spaaij and dr. Sruti Bala and my fellow thesis group members who helped me out during the preparations of this thesis, and dr. Alex van Venrooij for being second reader. Special thanks go to dr. Kobe de Keere for his splendid thesis supervision.

As a final acknowledgement, I want to state my highest appreciation for the hospitality, helpfulness and friendliness of all members of the theatre groups that I was allowed to observe, especially the six respondents that took time to speak with me for the sake of my research. They not only provided the basis of this thesis, but also expanded my interest in theatre.

(5)

4

2. Introduction

“Have you noticed”, he said, “that up to now you have always been in the centre of the circle? Yet you may sometimes find yourself outside. For example-”. Everything became dark; then a ceiling light, in the next room, was lighted, throwing a spot on the white tablecloth and the dishes. “Now you are beyond the limits of the small circle of your attention. Your role is a passive one; one of observation”.

Constantin Stanislavski, ‘An Actor Prepares’ (1936 [1989]: 85) As one of the first, Erving Goffman explicitly implemented theatrical elements in sociological theory. In his book The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life (1959), Goffman presented the sociological perspective known as ‘dramaturgy’. His metaphorical usage of theatrical terms such as ‘performance’, ‘frontstage’ and ‘roles’, that describe social

relationships, are still used in social sciences. Yet, his usage of theatrical elements remains rather shallow. Theatre itself, as a practice and a discipline of cultural production, has lots of aspects that are fruitful for multiple kinds of sociological research. This thesis has the aim to provide insight in one of these kinds of research possibilities. Instead of focusing on theatre in broader social context, a microsociological perspective has the preference here. By observing situations during preparations of amateur theatre productions, it is revealed how theatre is put to practice. The arguments made here are supported by original ethnographic data retrieved through observations and interviews. The theoretical framework and research model of this thesis are strongly influenced by interaction ritual chain theory, developed by sociologist Randall Collins (2004; 2008; 2015). Collins presents a sociology based on situations, where symbolic interactions have the capability to generate social cohesion. The examined amateur theatre groups structurally used preparation methods that enforced a strong feeling of collectivity. These regulating techniques repeatedly took place in circular formations. It is claimed here that such formations have positive influence on interaction rituals, which increases group solidarity. Subsequently, it is shown that the enhanced group solidarity and morality cause spontaneous, informal rituals and gatherings to be oriented to the group goal too, instead of individual intentions.

Next to Goffman’s usage, theatre has a wider sociological history. Theatre has mainly been approached in the context of taste distinction, or as an institutionalised field of culture production. In light of the former: Pierre Bourdieu (1984; 1992) commonly

understands theatre as a form of high class culture consumption; part of bourgeois cultural taste.1 Yet, he makes little effort to discuss theatre explicitly. Bourdieu’s concepts of field and

1

Theatre historically has been reserved for the high class cultural consumers, but many attempts have been taken by entrepreneurs in the cultural field of theatre to reach for the ‘masses’: see for instance the multiple examples of street theatre (Cohen-Cruz, 1998).

(6)

5

habitus have been applied to particular cases of classic theatre, proving that theatrical settings are fitting for such analysis (Shevtsova, 2002; 2009). Alternatively, theatre has been approached sociologically by means of understanding the relationship between the secluded domain of theatre, and society as such. Within theatre studies, the concept of theatricality is commonly used to imply this relationship. Some theatre academics understand theatre as a mode of representation of the society in which it is embedded (Burns, 1973: 9). Others rather see theatre and society as mutually intertwined: society can be understood theatrically, while theatre can be understood in relation to society (Alexander, 2004; 2014). But there have been fierce discussions about the understanding of theatricality, and what way is the best to put it to practice (Davis & Postlewait, 2003). Recently, a study has been presented in which the approaches of Bourdieusian field analysis and of theatricality are combined. In this sociological work, Edelman, Hansen and Van den Hoogen (2017) study the autonomy of theatre. The authors investigate the paradoxical assertion that theatre is widely perceived and approached as a distinct and isolated cultural field, but in fact is highly dependent on multiple social networks running in and out of it. By discussing the influence of

entrepreneurs, national and global institutions, and the market, the authors show that studies on theatre require “a sociographic description of theatre-makers and audiences and a

sociological analysis of the structural features that make up and surround theatre systems” (ibid: 204). They seem to advocate an analytical form that include both the praxis and broader institutional contexts of theatre.

Yet, theatre has hardly been perceived through a microsociological lens. The approaches discussed above are concerned with the development of theatre as a social field; “an organised area of human endeavour with common understandings, values and practices” (Edelman, Hansen & Van den Hoogen, 2017: 13). But there is little research on the influence of this social field on human behaviour in social situations. The definition of Edelman and colleagues raises questions about how these understandings and values have influence on the actual practice of theatre. Subsequently, how these practices are initiated and how they develop during situations, remains unexplained. Maria Shevtsova (2009), pioneer in the field of the sociology of theatre and performance, carried out about thirty years of inquiry on theatre. Yet, none of her essays focus on small scale interactions within the theatrical atmosphere. Nonetheless, her definition of ‘theatre practice’ is insightful:

“Theatre practice, though involving creativity, fantasy, imagination -in a word, art- is the action of those who do it. Whether professionals or amateurs, their work takes place in nameable societies, which, despite the all-embracing term ‘society’, are neither unified nor homogeneous” (Shevtsova, 2009: 275).

(7)

6

In contrast to Shevtsova’s Bourdieusian approach to theatre practice, this study searches for the elements that connect participants of theatrical practices together. One study that comes close to a microsociological insight into theatrical practices, is that of Robert Stebbins (1979a; 1979b). On basis of observations during rehearsals and

performances of an amateur theatre company, Stebbins described how particular humorous moments during these rehearsals and performances allowed the group to remain

concentrated (Stebbins, 1979b: 101). Stebbins subtly shows a social technique of a theatre company to deal with the intensity of theatre production. This thesis has a similar intention. It investigates the theatrical practice in relation to the latest developments of sociological theory on social dynamics of interaction. These developments will be discussed in the next chapter.

This thesis also investigates the methodological applicability of interaction ritual chain theory on the interactions that are part of the preparation process of theatre performers. The research mainly consists of ethnographic observations of three amateur theatre groups. By using a specific observation framework which embeds the features of interaction rituals, the research data presents the gains that amateur theatre performers attain by participating in the group interactions and gatherings. The research project therefore follows this question:

How do groups of amateur theatre performers acquire and use the personal and communal benefits that result from successful interaction rituals that emerge during preparations for performances?

The ethnographic research is specifically concentrated on preparations for performances. This thesis assumes that theatrical performances follow the rules of liminality: the intense moment of a performance in front of an audience is preceded by a preliminary process of preparation and followed up by a postliminal change of social status (Gennep, 1909 [1960]; Turner, 1982). Preparatory processes therefore consist of dealing with impressive emotions concerning the approaching liminal moment. To dig deeper in these emotional experiences in front of high stake performances, this thesis addresses work on preparatory affairs originating from the sociology and psychology of sports.

The research data is presented in three subchapters. The first one discusses the emergence of gatherings that were initiated by a group leader, or were part of previously planned arrangements. According to Collins (2004), such formal rituals have the capacity to produce particular benefits for the participants. The second subchapter deals with similar rituals, but that differ in regulation. Gatherings that were not prepared beforehand; certain spontaneous gatherings, have a different character and therefore produce the benefits of

(8)

7

interaction rituals in another way. Lastly, different kinds of leadership are investigated. The analysis deals with the ways that leaders are able to alter interaction rituals. The conclusion and discussion will finalise the thesis by discussing the components the research question and by presenting the flaws and other implications of this research project.

(9)

8

3. Theoretical Framework

In this following chapter, several theories relating to the subject will be put forth. The chapter will focus on theories of group dynamics and the development of collective states of being, while placing them in relation to theatre. After some introducing theoretical

implications, the components of interaction rituals presented by Collins (2004) will be

clarified. A reading of Fine’s (1979) concept of idioculture will follow after this. Next, theories on preparation originating from the sociology and psychology of sports are expounded, and the chapter will end with some notes on the elicitation of emotion.

Since this thesis builds on research on theatre collectives, the discussed theory will be enclosed within the context of performance and preparation. Performance -a research concept- has been used in various ways within the social sciences. Performance is often connected to ritual in anthropological theory. Both performance and ritual ideal-typically follow the process that Van Gennep (1909 [1960]) introduced as ‘rites of passage’. The structure of these ‘rites’ consists of three phases of liminality. These are separation

(exclusion from the ‘tribe’), transition (experiencing the rituals) and incorporation (embodying a new social status). The elements that are involved in this process, such as ‘symbolic behaviour’, ritualistic stratification between participants, and the spatial exclusion of outsiders, have been inspirational for the development of interaction sociology (Turner, 1982: 24). Anthropologist Victor Turner has discussed the implications of performance and ritual: these two prevail in multiple levels of society and can emerge in everyday situations (ibid.). In addition: intense, sublime rituals such as religious ones are believed to be keeping society together since they unify the individuals that partake in them (Rappaport, 1999).2 Yet, within religious anthropology, there is little attention for the preliminary acts of social rituals. Either the overall result of a ritual, or the eccentric liminary moment is put in the spotlight (Turner, 1982; 1987). The research model used for this thesis focuses on the processes of preparation for a formal public performance and thus examines what is at stake in front of such a tense and demanding moment as a theatrical performance.

When it comes to discussions on ritualistic group behaviour and collectivity in the sociological discipline, Émile Durkheim is commonly mentioned (Collins, 2004; Marshall, 2002). Particularly, his work The Elementary Forms of Religious Life (1912 [1995]) remains highly influential. In his analysis, Durkheim put forth an approach for understanding religious

2

Rappaport (1999: xvi) is one of the anthropologists who strongly advocate the importance of religion within societies, since a vital component of religion -ritual- is neglected in secular postmodern

civilizations, creating disbalance. In light of Collins’ (2004) view, this rather depends on morality and group solidarity instead of religion as such. All group gatherings have ritualistic tendencies, not just religious ones.

(10)

9

group behaviour. He adequately described the influence of group synchronicity, the sharing of emotion, and the usage of group representations on individuals within homogeneous groups (Durkheim, 1912 [1995]; Collins, 2004: 35-38). Following Durkheim, Goffman focused on social interactions within groups, and the properties of interaction. He proposed to investigate interaction not as a psychological matter, but “rather [as] the syntactical relations among the acts of different persons mutually present to one another” (1967: 3, italics added). His efforts in demonstrating the function of symbolic behaviour in social settings became highly influential. Goffman used ritual as a concept to understand patterns in social interactions, and how these patterns reify norms and beliefs (Collins, 2004: 17). The usage of ritual for understanding social behaviour has had significant influence on the work of Collins (2004).

Within the academic discourse of sociology, Randall Collins distinguished himself with a new theory. Although he developed ideas on the importance of social situations earlier (Collins, 1981; 1998), it is in his work Interaction Ritual Chains (2004) where he clearly stated a theory of microsociological manifestations as the building blocks for societal structures. By elaborating on the theories of Durkheim and Goffman, Collins (2004)

described the process of the establishment of an interaction ritual (IR). In line with Goffman (1959), Collins argues that every social encounter between humans holds a certain tension -a reciproc-al respect- th-at determines the current -and following inter-actions -and moods. Over time, individuals develop what Goffman would call ‘scripts’; certain guidelines that help to overcome the tensions between individuals. Such scripts, latent or manifest, have been developed for myriad forms of interaction: almost all interactions have a certain predestined direction. All interactions therefore can be seen as through a ritualistic frame, in the sense that they are based on previously arranged gestures, phrases, positions and mood states. Yet, such interactions differ in degrees of productivity, success rate and frequency. Since all categories of interactions have the capacity to become ritualistic, individuals shift from IR to IR during everyday life; IR’s are therefore influencing each other. A series of successful IR’s create positive outcomes for its participants, whereas a series of failed or forced IR’s

produce negative outcomes. Theoretically, Collins (1981) propagates a bottom-up approach for understanding overarching social processes. A series of successful IR’s -a chain- can have serious social implications. It is in Collins’ (2004: 47) belief that IR’s provide the social goods that develop the features of group cohesion, and in turn keeps society together. Interaction rituals ideal-typically develop on the basis of four main ‘ingredients’, and produce four outcomes. These eight properties have specific properties which will be elaborated on below.

(11)

10

4.1 Interaction Rituals

Image 1: Interaction Ritual (Collins, 2004: 48)

The ingredients of an IR that Collins divides in four categories are prototypical: in reality, such as the context of the theatrical practice, these elements tend to emerge with different characteristics. The first ingredient, Group assembly, holds that there are multiple individuals in near proximity to each other, and therefore can have reciprocal social

influence. When individuals are near each other, they not only can communicate verbally, but also bodily and even emotionally. Collins refers to the latter form as ‘emotional

contagion’: “[f]ace-to-face social interaction takes place among physiological systems, not merely among individuals as cognitive systems or bodily actors” (2004: 78). When bodies come together repeatedly, their beliefs start to correspond, and over time such assemblies help to develop a sense of belonging (Marshall, 2002: 362). The second ingredient, a barrier to outsiders, is meant to exclude anyone who isn’t supposed to be part of the collective. In theatre, this can be done by practicing in a closed space that can’t be entered by outsiders, but the barrier can also be based on symbols. In Heider and Warner’s study on Sacred Harp choirs (a communal form of group singing developed in the United States), such a barrier was created by particular behavioural manners. The authors note that “[v]isitors will quickly discern that both audible talking during a song and applause following it (unless the leader is a child) are frowned on” (Heider & Warner, 2010: 88-89). The lack of knowledge of such manners excludes outsiders from the inner circle of the choir. The third requirement for a successful interaction ritual is a mutual focus of attention. The attention of the participants must become aligned, and must “become mutually aware of each other’s focus of attention” (Collins, 2004: 48). When participants look, act or behave towards a common direction to an object, such mutual focus emerges. This object, may it be a thing, a person or a location,

(12)

11

becomes the centre of attention and therefore attains a powerful position. The object becomes ‘sacred’ in the sense that the object represents the group and therefore is treated with great respect and authority (Durkheim, 2008: 244). In Cottingham’s case on baseball fans, for example, the mutual attention during games was oriented to the playing field by physical elements. According to her, “the attention of fans was clearly directed at the action on the field, by means of both stadium layout and the display of numerous television screens throughout the stadium and concession area that played live footage of the game”

(Cottingham, 2012: 173-174). The stadium as location, the players of the field and the game itself have potential to become ‘sacred’ in this way. The same can be said about the stage, actors and actresses, and the performance in the case of theatrical practices. The final ingredient is a shared mood. For a successful interaction ritual there must be a common emotion or expression during the practice. By expressing this at the same time, members become a collective that experience their situation similarly. The four ingredients reinforce each other reciprocally, especially the last two ingredients (Collins, 2004: 48).

The outcomes of successful IR’s are also divided in four elements. The production of group solidarity provides a sense of belonging. The participants share an experience and therefore have a commonality. Secondly, the emergence of emotional energy (EE) is briefly defined as “a feeling of confidence, elation, strength, enthusiasm, and initiative in taking action” (Collins, 2004: 49). The concept of emotional energy has become key in other work of Collins (2008), since it provides a tool for understanding violence as a conflict between individuals with high levels of EE which continue to battle for more. The third outcome, the production of representative symbols of social relationship, needs more elaboration here since symbols exist in multiple forms. Collins agrees that symbols do not have to be material but also can be gestures or words and slogans (2004: 49). To exemplify: in the article of Heider and Warner (2010: 91-92), objects relating to the communal practice (a song book) but also a repetitive phrase (“in Jesus’ name”) had become symbolic and ‘sacred’ in their usage during ritualistic behaviour. The last ritual outcome embodies the measure of

standards of morality. This relates to the justness, righteousness and productiveness of the existence and practices of a group. By engaging in an IR, a group member entail “a

commitment with respect to future action” (Bellah, 2003: 38). As a result of their investigation of evangelical megachurches, Wellman and colleagues reveal how churchgoers have

developed such morality. One of their respondents noted that the religious practice “isn’t ‘so much about evangelism but really reaching out to people because you care’ that ‘it’s about going out and finding the homeless people and sharing your lunch with them’“(Wellman et al., 2014: 665). A moral justness is attached to the communal practice here. Not only the

(13)

12

participants gain profit from it, but by putting effort in helping the needy, the bigger community allegedly profits too.

All the outcomes of the prototypical interaction ritual all seem to deal with the group as such, with the exception of the inciting of EE. EE is manifested in the individual instead of in the collective. For this reason, participants of IR’s attain EE differently and in different intensity. Collins (2004) describes EE as a value: one can possess a high amount of EE, expressed with confidence, excitement and happiness. But individuals can also have low amounts of EE. Individuals with a low level of EE do not take initiative, and enter a negative and depressed state of mind (Collins 2004: 108). In situations with multiple individuals

present, personal levels of EE might differ significantly. IR’s can unfold in a stratified manner; skilful individuals position themselves on the high end of the EE distribution and near the symbolic group representations to become the centre of attention. In this position, an individual is able influence other participants and the development of the IR. When dealing with power positions, conflicts may arise. In particular stratified rituals, such conflicts or contests divide participants between losers and winners, and respectively distribute EE between them (ibid: 122). Stratified IR’s commonly deal with power (who is giving the orders) and status (who is closest to the centre of attention) (ibid: 111-112).

For analytical purposes, it is convenient to make a distinction between two forms of interaction rituals. Collins describes a difference between formal and natural ritual

interactions. He states the following about the division:

“We may refer to those interactions as ‘natural rituals’ that build up mutual focus and emotional entrainment without formally stereotyped procedures; and to those that are initiated by a commonly recognised apparatus of ceremonial procedures as ‘formal rituals’” (Collins, 2004: 50).

Formal rituals have predetermined lines of action -certain ‘stereotyped formulas’ that provide a framework for the ritual to follow. One might think of traditions and habits as examples of formal rituals. These can have historical and institutional grounding, and can become taken-for-granted. Bellah (2003: 40-41) discusses an example of an everyday ritual that has strict codes: table manners as part of dinner rituals. The tradition of eating dinner consists of particular rules, objects, symbols and manners that are reused every mealtime. The reasons for this tradition can be of a practical nature: In Bellah’s text, dinner rituals in group dinners are even seen as prevention of violence, since dinner is ‘aggressive by nature’; strict social rules prevent members to become introvert and forget about the mutual respect for others (Visser, in Bellah: 2003: 41). In contrast, natural rituals are spontaneous and therefore have

(14)

13

no predetermined ‘script’. These rituals can be incidental, or initiated by external forces. Natural rituals are mostly performed unconsciously. Micro-interactions that are hard to notice in ordinary situations follow patterns that have influence on a natural ritual. The way that interacting individuals laugh synchronously, for instance, or speak to each other (think of speaking rhythm, turn taking, common phrases) can determine solidarity and EE-attainment between the individuals (Collins, 2004: 65-75).

4.2 Idioculture

The clear-cut division between ingredients and results in the theory of Collins seem to provide a framework that is usable in a wide range of situations. However, some authors argue that the situational framework does not provide enough clarity on the conditions of interactions. Gary Alan Fine’s objection with a systematic and universal approach towards interactive behaviour exemplifies this. It is in his belief that social “structure’s reality is separate from its interpretation but must be mediated through the perception of constraints on action and the experience of external forces” (Fine, 2012: 67). Fine has concentrated on the particular characteristics of the groups of interest in his ethnographic research. He states the following: “[i]n focusing on the interacting unit, I argue that every group has to some extent a culture of its own, which I shall term its idioculture” (Fine, 1979: 734). This idioculture is described by Fine as:

“a system of knowledge, beliefs, behaviours, and customs shared by members of an interacting group to which members can refer and employ as the basis of further interaction. Members recognize that they share experiences, and these experiences can be referred to with the expectation that they will be understood by other

members and can be used to build a shared reality” (2012: 36).

In response to Collins, Fine argues that the situational perspective lacks the involvement of overarching influences on such situations. Certain normative constraints in combination with exteriority (obdurate reality; any form of social pertinacity that needs to be adapted to) have influence on situations, but are not influenced by the unfolding of these situations in return. According to Fine, the situation as sole societal measuring unit therefore is deficient:

“Without a history, that is, a set of common references that structure interaction, situations are empty vessels. These established relations permit a situation to

(15)

14

become a local context: a community that recurs. Although structure can emerge from activity, a guiding set of expectations must be present” (Fine, 2012: 23-24).

To return to the context of amateur theatre, situations during the preparation for a performance would consist of a dynamic that involve the characteristics of an interaction ritual. Yet, these elements might not have been provided if there was not a set of common references that was established previously. According to Fine, the framework of Collins (2004) is not sufficient enough in providing an explanation of society at large (ibid: 52-53).3 Following the strain of thought of Fine, amateur theatre practices therefore should be influenced by previously established knowledge of theatre, but also other forms of culture.

To show the influence of such idioculture on group behaviour, some empirical examples shall be put forth. Fine has observed multiple groups in different societies in his career as ethnographer. As part of an investigation on preadolescent baseball communities, Fine initially defined idioculture as dependent on previously attained ’known culture’:

“Among Sanford Heights teams, a ball which was hit foul over the backstop was known as a "Polish Home Run." Such a cultural item would have been meaningless had it not been for latent cultural items -what a home run is, and the symbolic

opposition of hitting a ball straight over the outfield fence and hitting it backward over the backstop. In other words, hitting the ball over either end of the field was a home run (and this was not said of balls which curved outside a foul line). The existence of the item also required a knowledge of social stereotypes -that "Polish" is an ethnic slur- implying backwardness or incompetence. Without this cultural knowledge such an identification of this type of foul ball would not have become a part of the culture of these preadolescents” (Fine, 1979: 738).

In this example, Fine shows that the group practice of baseball can host specific cultural interactions of the group, but this requires knowledge of the common execution of the game. The game can indeed became the group’s own, like the example of the ‘Polish Home Run’ shows. But the formalities precede these deviations, according to Fine. These symbolic devices with the purpose to represent the group are the result of group interactions, just as

3

Collins, in response to Fine, declared that a set of common references in the form of constraint and exteriority in fact is prevalent in his theory. He states that “IR theory does not rest on individuals but on situations, and these are full of constraints, the pushes and pulls of mutual attention and

entrainment in shared emotions. Constraint is micro as well as macro, and what individuals

experience as confidence and pro-activeness – [also known as] ‘‘will power’’ – is a variable quantity of emotional energy from successful IRs” (Collins, 2012: 370).

(16)

15

Collins (2004) shows. But Fine rather sees these symbols as a derivative from already existing symbols that are known over a wider scale.4 For another example, workplaces, such as offices, have formal behavioural codes. Yet, individuals commonly find ways to develop specific ways of interaction to escape these formalities and bond with co-workers more authentically (Fine, 2006; Martin & Wilson, 2011). Restrictions can thus be the formal ‘known culture’ delineating forms of idioculture. Other research projects that investigate idioculture relate to video game fanatics (Khanolkar & McLean, 2012), Latino music scenes (Kotarba, Fackler & Nowotny, 2009) and evangelical groups known as Promise Keepers (Bartkowski, 2000), and have influenced this thesis in the development of a research model.

4.3 Preparation mechanisms

Since this thesis focuses on groups that work towards a communal goal -a

performance-, the development of interaction rituals and group culture should be understood in a specific manner. The group assemblies of amateur theatre practitioners are not merely for the purpose of leisure. A performance in front of an audience is a major objective for amateurs, too. Just as with professional theatre, amateur groups require commitment, trust and focus (Stebbins, 1979b: 95). Since the gatherings of the theatre groups included in the ethnography of this thesis hold up a preparatory character, the interaction rituals and the idioculture of such group are different. The influence of preparation situations on interaction requires elaboration. Since sociological work on the theatre barely contains work on

preparatory mechanisms, this thesis will derive such knowledge from a similar societal field. Within the body of work on the sociology and psychology of sports, preparation in front of high pressure performances has been discussed repeatedly. Beneath, a brief insight in this work is presented, and compared with theatre practices.

Theatre and sports have affinity. Just as theatre, sports can be placed within a ritualistic framework. In one of her studies, Birrell (1981) shows that sports become ritualised experiences when socially valued elements are reified in a sports performance. According to her, “the athlete is an exemplary figure who embodies the moral values of the community and thus serves as a symbol of those values” (ibid: 373). In her reading, sportsmen and women can become ‘sacred’, which brings high tensions along with it. Such high tensions are mainly caused by the awareness of the presence of an audience during the moment of

4_{In accordance, Collins finds the ‘history’ that Fine claims to be essential for situations to become}

meaningful in the accumulation of symbols that an individual acquires over time: “[t]he stock of symbols an individual can use during an encounter comes to a considerable extent from their prior IR chain” (Collins, 2004: 153).

(17)

16

performance. During performances, “athletes have to work to manage their emotions to

maintain composure and that they are affected in some sports by crowd behaviour” (Peterson, 2015: 383). But not only the future sight of competitive performances provides ritualistic tendencies. Spaces where sports are practiced provide these too, since they have a clearly marked out social design. Sassatelli (1999: 244) shows that bodies in relation to a designated space can become “symbolic device[s] for participants to implicitly agree on the definition of the situation.” In her ethnographic work, she shows that fitness gyms have a certain social atmosphere that guides social interaction. Individuals have the ability to engage in this atmosphere, and negotiate about the ‘definition of the situation’. Participants therefore become symbols themselves: they embody the definition of the situation and continuously adjust and reshape the social environment (ibid.). Individual sports therefore seem isolated but even these rely on social and communal support and arrangements (Wacquant, 1995: 80). Similarly, theatre practitioners can become symbolic entities for the ‘definition of the situation’, either by performing or mutually focusing on the theatrical group goal. Sports and theatre both award symbolic value to the body: by presenting oneself according to the understanding of the practice, situations are framed accordingly. Situations therefore become theatrical if the involved bodies would signify situations as theatrical collectively. Since theatre depends on a performance, a mutual orientation towards such performance can therefore construct theatrical situations.

Theory surrounding preparations for sports is mostly centred around themes as the body, emotions, and peak performance. The theoretical concepts used for sports are

applicable on performance arts, as has been shown (Cotterill, 2015: 158). A concept such as ‘flow’, defined as “an optimal psychological state in which complete absorption in the task at hand leads to a number of positive experiential qualities”, is helpful in the understanding of affective states that individuals can be in before and during performances (Jackson, 2000: 140). In a comparative research on different forms of performance (including acting and sports), Cotterill (2015: 167) shows that these performers used similar preparation methods to get into a flow, “including self-talk, focusing strategies, and relaxation techniques”. Psychological research has shown that dancers, as part of their mental preparatory techniques before and between competitive performances, put effort in relaxation, concentration and energy. (Čačković et al, 2012). Relaxation allows performers to “recuperate or a chance to make a few adjustments”, whereas concentration empowers them in “making the choice of what to think or not to think, as well as choosing what is important among the multitude of available information” (ibid: 99). Energy is described as the following: “by creating the needed energy, the dancer will be ready to dance even before music starts or before physical contact with the partner” (ibid.). Strangely, ‘energy’, an

(18)

17

abstract but meaningful concept, remains rather unprocessed in the theory of Čačković and colleagues. This raises questions on the elicitation of such ‘energy’. Here, energy is

understood as EE following from Collins’ discussed IR theory. Being in an energetic state, full of positive and progressive emotions, is the result of ritualistic group behaviour.

Other authors support the assumption that emotions have major importance in the preparation of a sports performance. Hanin suggests that “emotional experiences related to athletic performance serve a very important regulatory function”:

“Emotions are elicited by appraisals and produce a strong regulatory effect on performance. On the other hand, any unexpected change in performance process affects situational appraisals of ongoing person-environment interactions, which often results in emotion shifts or reversals [...]. Therefore, emotional experiences in athletic performance have not only a regulatory function, but also a signal function reflecting an athlete’s perception of situational match or mismatch between task demands and available resources” (Hanin, 2007: 55).

Emotional states thus empower important performances but are dependent on exterior impulses. Emotions are elicited on the basis of interpretations of these exterior impulses such as social interactions, events, or spatial elements. A similar interpretation of group members of the situation therefore awakens similar emotions among them (Scheve, 2011). This dependency on the ‘contours of the situation’ is also seen back in the microsociology of Collins (2008: 2). As the result of interaction rituals, individuals “come away [from situations] with feelings of strength, confidence, and enthusiasm for whatever the group was doing” (ibid: 19). These feelings are individual rewards, and can be used for different purposes outside of the group environment, since they have a long-term effect (Collins, 2004: 108). But in performance oriented environments, these feelings induced by emotional energy are regulated. Emotional states must be controlled for the purpose of the performance. In light of an interaction ritual, the production of EE therefore is not latent, or understood as

independent from the group, as is the case with religious gatherings (Wellman et al, 2014; Heider & Warner, 2010). Emotional energetic states are evoked on purpose in performance atmospheres. In sports environments, such evocation of emotional states is guided by coaches, assistants, etc. (Wacquant, 1995; Peterson, 2015). In theatre, such regulation of emotion is also expected, and similar guidance by personnel, too.

(19)

18

3.4 Elicitation of emotion

As a final note, some words on the elicitation of emotions should be stated here. Collins (2004) discussed the spread of emotions among group members extensively. Next to discussing theory of emotional entrainment, he has also shown microsociological examples. On the basis of ethnomethodological data, such as the research of Jefferson (1985), Collins argues that shared laughter is an example of the establishment of similar emotional

experience. This ‘deeply synchronized social interaction’ shows how emotions can spread by entrainment (Collins, 2004: 65-66). Another example that Collins presents, discusses turn taking in ordinary conversations. He concludes that a “successful conversational ritual is rhythmic: one speaker comes in at the end of the other’s turn with split-second timing, coming right on the beat as if keeping up a line of music” (ibid: 69). Such unconscious rhythmic entrainment generates solidarity: speakers are aware of the speech habits of the others. By adapting to each other’s rhythm, similar emotions are awoken. In light of recent interest in cognitive approaches in cultural sociology, this entrainment and contagion of emotion can be described more explicitly.

Cultural symbols activate cognitive structures that relate to previous experiences of an individual (Vaisey, 2009: 1686). Intense debates have been held on the establishment of these cognitive structures. Interaction, as being the core impulse of creating these cognitive structures, has been subject of critique. Lizardo (2007) argues that direct transmission of tacit skills and knowledge is in fact possible. To prove this, he refers to neurophysiological research that has located mirror neurons in cognitive systems. He states the following:

“[T]he mirror neuron system [...] can be seen as one possible substrate of not only of the practical capacities productive of action (which are mainly subserved by

traditional motor neurons in the pre-frontal region) but those which are in charge of the practical, representation, coding and comprehension of the practical action of self and others, and which may be involved in the implicit matching of the practical skills of others to that of other actors and vice versa” (Lizardo, 2007: 328).

The copresence of others and their behaviour leads to the imitation, if the behaviour provides serious benefits. By the imitation of the actions of others, not only the action-regulating neurons are stimulated, but also memory-action-regulating ones. Imitated behaviour tends to become symbolic for the attained knowledge. Such cognitive evidence supports Collins’ argument that collective group behaviour leads to shared symbols (2004: 50). If group members imitate each other reciprocally, similar cognitive representations will be

(20)

19

created, this evidence suggests. It has been shown that imitation also improves social interaction and mutual empathy (Kulesza et al, 2014). In a comparable manner, emotions are copied when individuals are expressing them close to each other. Such mimicry happens unconsciously. Expressing the same facial gesture of others that are experiencing emotions eventually leads to the experience of a similar emotion (Campos-Castillo & Hitlin, 2013: 172). In theory, regulated forms of mimicry could initiate shared emotional experiences. Methods of regulated imitations therefore could help with the attainment of a shared mood.

In sum, the interaction ritual chain theory of Collins consists of various fruitful elements that relate to the understanding of social behaviour. In addition, Fine’s theory has been put forth to reveal how interaction rituals need to be influenced by broader cultural contexts before a particular group culture can emerge. For technical purposes, preparation methods discussed in the sociology and psychology of sports have been offered.

Subsequently, culture and cognition theory grants this thesis insight in the transmission of emotional states. In the following chapter, the research method is presented. This method is highly influenced by Collins’ interaction ritual chain theory.

(21)

20

4. Methodology

What is provided in the first chapters of Collins’ Interaction Ritual Chains (2004) is not only a theory of interactive behaviour but also an analytical framework for understanding and categorizing such behaviour when found in particular social situations. Research models on the basis of this framework have been executed previously. This has been done both with quantitative as with qualitative forms of data retrieval. The ingredients and outcomes of IR’s can form the variables for quantitative analysis: this is practical for research on bigger populations. The investigation on emotional experiences in megachurches on basis of surveys of Wellman and colleagues (2014), and the analysis of existing data sets on the attendance rates of congregations in the United States of Wollschleger (2012) exemplify such approaches. For deeper understanding of microsociological aspects of IR’s, such as emotional experiences of participants, qualitative analysis based on in-depth interviews and ethnographic data are more proficient. Cases of religious chant singing collectives (Heider & Warner, 2010), Fair Trade consumer groups (Brown, 2011), fans of Pittsburgh Steelers (Cottingham, 2012), or of participants of the Anti-Racist World Cup (Sterchele & Saint-Blanchat, 2015) are examples of such qualitative research projects.

This thesis therefore prefers observations as the basic form of data retrieval. Interviews have the quality to extract the subjective experience of participants, but in the case of investigating group behaviour and interaction, merely interviews are not sufficient. A research model consisting only of interviews cannot provide enough evidence of actual situational group behaviour since “self-reports of attitudes and behaviours are of limited value in explaining what people actually do because they are overly individualistic and abstracted from lived experience” (Jerolmack & Kahn, 2014: 178). Usage of meanings, values, symbols and beliefs by individuals change when they behave in different social contexts (Swidler, 2001; Ghaziani, 2009; Vaisey, 2009). Capturing these expressions on the spot is therefore most reliable.

For the purpose of understanding group behaviour, the research model did not include complete participation. A maintained distance was kept between the observant and the group of interest.5 Although participation might make the situation more ‘natural’, and allow a subjective understanding, it also makes relevant ethnographic knowledge more ‘transparent and taken-for-granted’ and therefore harder to notice (Fine & Hancock, 2017: 264). To verify the findings of the observations, a short series of interviews have been held (see below).

5

For an extensive discussion on the involvement of the observant during the observations, see the discussion at the end of the thesis.

(22)

21

Ingredients of

IR’s

Group assembly (bodily co-presence)

- How do the group members place their bodies in relation to each other?

Barrier to outsiders - How does the group create a boundary between outsiders and itself?

Mutual focus of attention - How do the members of the group create a mutual focus, and on what do they focus?

Shared mood - What are the emotional states that are experienced collectively by the group members?

Outcomes of

IR’s

Group solidarity - How is group solidarity

expressed by the members of the group (after a successful IR)?

Emotional energy in individual

- How is Emotional Energy expressed by members of the group (after a successful IR)? 6

Symbols of social relationship (sacred objects)

- To what extent do the group members use objects, gestures, phrases, etc. to represent the group?

Standards of morality - How do the members of the group justify their behaviour and that of the group (after a

successful IR)?

Table 1: Elements of an Interaction Ritual (Collins, 2004), and their respective implemented research questions.

6

Although Emotional Energy is discussed extensively by Collins, it is difficult to put the concept to practice in the context of ethnographic research based on observations. Emotional Energy was measured on basis of its descriptive definition, which remains very subjective. For a critical discussion on measuring EE, see the last chapter of this thesis.

(23)

22

5.1 Interaction ritual observation framework

The theory of Collins (2004) that has been discussed in the theoretical framework holds eight main characteristics of an interaction ritual (seen in image 1). As shown, these characteristics are divided between ingredients and outcomes. In relation to this research model for observations, these eight elements can provide focus points. When observing situations, such guidance provides help with the filtering the relevant elements out of the myriad developments that unfold during situations. This is necessary since it is impossible to completely capture the social reality in ethnographic notes (Fine, 1993: 279). For the

observations discussed in this thesis, the eight points of Collins were kept in mind, and were rephrased into questions for proper usage (see table 1). This model is not used particularly to test the theory of Collins, but more to perceive group behaviour as a progressive

movement towards coherence and empowerment. As already stated above, the model is very general and requires additional theory relating to the usage of ritualistic behaviour and its implications regarding theatre and performance.

5.2 Research Design

The data that supports this thesis was retrieved according to two different measures. To understand the unravelling of group behaviour of the selected amateur theatre

collectives, observations have been carried out. To undergird the results of these observations, additional interviews have been held with core members of the observed groups. Below, both forms are explained.

5.2.a Observations

In total, about 25 hours of observation have been executed (see Table 2). Three groups were subject to these observations. Each group had particular characteristics but all had a relevant similarity. All groups worked towards a communal goal: a theatrical performance. The observations differed in length. The third observation is exponentially longer than the others. This observation was the only one that lasted over a whole part of the day; starting in the afternoon and ending the evening. Overall, the observation research period lasted about a month. The first observation took place at the end of March, and the last one at the

beginning of May. All observations took place on several locations in the city of Amsterdam. All of them were held in closed spaces. The groups did not move from location during the observations. To capture the observations, notes were written down by hand. These notes

(24)

23

Observation Group Date Start End Time Type

1 1 29-03-17 20:17 22:08 1:51 Practice session 2 2 10-04-17 20:19 22:15 1:56 Final rehearsal 3 2 11-04-17 13:55 20:14 6:06 First performance 4 1 12-04-17 20:06 22:15 2:09 Practice session 5 2 13-04-17 17:07 20:13 3:05 Third performance 6 3 20-04-17 19:12 23:04 2:52 Practice session 7 1 21-04-17 19:13 22:07 2:54 Before performance 8 3 30-04-17 13:55 17:09 3:14 Final rehearsal 9 3 02-05-17 19:07 20:10 1:03 First performance

Table 2: Overview of all observations.

were transcribed to digital files after each observation, and each moment was reflected upon at the same time. This created dense descriptions of the observation. Furthermore,

schematic floor maps were drawn of all spaces where the observations took place. These drawings also include significant group formations and gatherings.

For the sake of clarity, all groups will be described briefly. Group 1 was a theatre group that stemmed from of a theatre class that the members took in a cultural workshop linked to the University of Amsterdam. The members practiced improvisation theatre, and participated regularly in improvisation competitions. The group consisted of twelve persons, and the members were between the 25 and 35 years old. The first and second observation (no. 1 and 4 in Table 2) were executed during practice sessions in their rented studio in the West of Amsterdam. The room was compact, therefore the whole space was utilized for the practice sessions. Practice sessions usually lasted for two hours. For the practice sessions, the group had hired a theatre teacher to guide them. The sessions had a clear program: a short warm-up consisting of one or two short games; multiple improvisations scenes ranging from scenes with two performers to group performances; and a cooling down which often consisted of the same game which they started with. The third observation (no. 7) was at a small theatre where the group performed shows regularly. The group performed along a format known as ‘theatresports’, in which scenes are played out that are based on

improvisation. This format was developed by playwright Keith Johnstone (1979) and invokes a sense of competition during performances. The performances consist of two teams that

(25)

24

battle each other for the highest grades which are awarded by a jury. The competition element aids the development of the performance, but winning is not the actual goal. The aim rather is to give the audience and all performers a good time. The performance was organised by the collective itself. The group had a clear division of tasks to maintain the group’s needs and requirements.

Group 2 and 3 were both part of a bigger student theatre organisation connected to the universities and colleges of Amsterdam. After having contact with the board of the organisation, access was granted to both groups. Group 2 consisted of thirteen students from different study directions. The group had been working towards a performance for eight months. They were working on an adaptation of the book On the Road written by Jack Karouac. The group had practiced in a room of a creative centre in Amsterdam, but all the observations took place at a café located in the North of Amsterdam. Here the group had constructed a set where the play was going to be performed. Peculiarly, this set did not have a backstage where the performers could be ‘offstage’ during the performance. This was an informed choice of the director, for artistic purposes. The first observation (no. 2) happened during a final repetition, a day before the first performance. The group members were not performing in costume yet, and parts of the set had not been finished. After the first observation with this group, the young director allowed entrance to the first and third

performance (observations 3 and 5). The first performance was preceded by a morning and afternoon gathering, consisting of stage building, costume checks and other preparatory activities. The performers came to the location in the afternoon to do a technical run-through. This run-through included signaling (the testing of the wireless microphones), light checks, and some changes of positioning of the decor. The third observation was less stressful since the group already had performed the play twice. The observation therefore provided material for comparison between a long and tense preparation (seen in observation 3) and a relaxed, routinized preparation.

The observations of group 3 were comparable with those described above. The group consisted of twelve actors and actresses, and a director. Two assistants guided the production and monitored the sound and light of the performance. The play was an adaptation of the Ilias of Homer, followed from the perspective of the Greek Gods. Eight actors and actresses portrayed the Gods. The other four actresses were playing Muses that were representing different art forms. The two parties performed sequentially: there wasn’t any moment in the performance that the two different parties performed at the same time. The first observation (no. 6) took place at a rehearsal room in a creative centre (the same as group 2). The three hours were used in high tempo to rehearse the complete play without interruptions. The second observation (no.8) was a week later, two days before the

(26)

25

performance of the first show. The whole afternoon was used to adapt to the new space. This space was located in a renovated entertainment centre in the west of Amsterdam. During this last rehearsal, the whole play was performed and the last corrections were made. The last observation (9) happened during a short moment before the first performance.

5.2.b Interviews

In total, six interviews have been held with members of each group. Two interviews were held in front of the observations, and the four others took place afterwards. The first two respondents became the contact persons that allowed entrance into the two respective groups. These two interviews are typified as exploratory in that sense. The four other interviews are of a more reflective nature. The table below clarifies the details of the interview and their respective respondent(s).

The exploratory interviews were open ended: no prepared questions were raised during the conversations. The interviews had the purpose to understand the main characteristics of the groups, and to attain some initial knowledge of the practices of the groups. The reflective interviews were semi-structured: the conversations were guided by questions that were prepared beforehand. The reflective interviews dealt with subjects that were seen during these observations. The reflective form provided verification material for the observation data. In contrast to the other ones, interview 5 was held with multiple persons at the same time. This focus group, consisting of five members of Group 1

Interview Date Subject

1 08-03-2017 Contact person for student organisation, member group 2. 2 16-03-2017 Contact person group 1, core member

3 10-05-2017 Member Group 2

4 10-05-2017 Five members of Group 1, including contact person 5 12-05-2017 Member Group 2 and 3

6 15-05-2017 Member Group 3

Table 3: Details of included interviews with group members.

(27)

26

including the respondent of Interview 1, were questioned on their experiences. The interviews were recorded, and transcribed afterwards.7 All interviews were held in Dutch.

5.2.c Analysis

All transcriptions of the observations and the interviews were combined and coded digitally with the tools of qualitative data analysis software (Atlas.ti). The coding process was divided in two rounds. Initially, the documents were open coded: all relevant material was labelled with respective terms. The large amount of codes were sorted out and categorised. On basis of these categories, themes came forward. These themes relate to the discussed theory. The second round of coding was executed on basis of these themes. This form of axial coding presented the most relevant data for the thesis. During both coding processes, memos were written for the purpose of reflection of the researcher. The analysis revealed the most relevant quotes and segments in the data. This data is presented below.

All respondents, theatre groups, interview locations and observation locations have been kept anonymous with respect for the members of the groups included in this research project. The data retrieval has been executed by one researcher. During the data retrieval, great effort was taken to avoid interferences with the behaviour of the group of interest.

7

For the questionnaire of the interviews, see the Appendix. For all transcripts of the observations and interviews, see the digital version of this thesis.

(28)

27

5. Results

In this chapter, the results of the ethnographic research will be presented. The analysis consists of three subchapters. The first subchapter deals with formal gatherings. These are predetermined group activities, commonly lead by a director or a teacher. After that, the second subchapter discusses unprepared, spontaneous group gatherings. Lastly, the third subchapter is introduced. It puts forth leadership as an influential force in the group

assemblies observed in the field.

6.1 Formal gatherings

The three groups that were observed had a similar way of positioning themselves during specific moments in their practice and rehearsal sessions. The observations all captured a circular group formation at some point during the sessions. At such moments, all participants that were supposed to perform, gathered at the centre of the space. All

participants positioned themselves according to an imagined circle without being told to do so. The circular formation was created during particular times during the sessions. Below, these moments are put forth. The formal gatherings during practice sessions differed notably from gatherings during performance preparations. Hence, the subchapter is divided,

discussing the two forms separately.

6.1.a Practice sessions

The circular formation mostly emerged at introductory and finishing moments during practice sessions. A circle was created at the beginning of the sessions of Group 1, for instance (see the preparation circle in Image 1). At that moment, the following was observed:

“There are ten actors and one teacher in the room. I just participated in the first exercise. It was a ball game, everyone stood in a circle. The ball must bounce

between the persons without catching it. [...] I have seated myself in the corner of the room now, and have started to write down what is happening.

(29)

28

[...] While preparing my place and my gear, the members were already standing in a circle and talked casually. I was asked to introduce my research project. [...] The teacher asked me to participate in the first game afterwards”

(Observation 1). 8 Group 1 had a tendency to start with the circular formation, not only to speak about the status quo and the plan for the session, but also to become active. The circle turned out to be the starting position for a ballgame. The ballgame was performed at the beginning, and the end of the practice sessions of group 1, and consequently created the circular formation. This formation also hosted conversations about the state of affairs, or more casual subjects such as a plan for drinks after the session. The circular formation provides an open setting for the start and ending of practice sessions. The formation also allows group members to speak with everyone in sight, and vice versa (see image 2). A group member that takes the opportunity to speak therefore becomes the centre of attention. Yet, such an initiative does not break the group formation. In praxis, the focus shifts rapidly between persons who take initiative in discussions that were held in such formations. The particular formation of a circle has inclusive qualities: everyone in the circle can participate in the activity, but it also has the potential to exclude outsiders. The circle is inverted: all participants are turned towards the inside of the circle. Their backs are shown from the outside, creating a physical and symbolic barrier to anyone who is positioned outside of this circle. In light of interaction ritual theory, The bodies of the group members stand in relation towards each other (group assembly); their inverted positions create a barrier for outsiders, and their focus points fuse together when individuals take the lead in conversation. The fourth ingredient is dependent from the group activity in the circle: by playing a game together, or by discussing the same subject, a shared mood can be developed. Such a shared mood is attained more easily if particular activities in the formation become habitual (Collins, 2004: 48).

Another prevalent function of the circular formation was to provide a comfortable setting for the giving of feedback and critique. The practice sessions of the groups seemed less strict: there still was space for improvement. In the circle, one could openly speak to every member and everyone had the ability to respond. This is found back in the observations. Group 2, for instance, had just finished a complete run-through of the performance they were going to give the next week. The director assembled all performers for a moment of reflection:

8

The quotes from the observation should be read in a particular way. The quotes in italics, and aligned to the left, were written down directly during the observations. The quotes aligned to the right are reflections that were written down during the digitalisation of the field notes.

(30)

29

Image 1: Floor plan from the rehearsal studio where Observation 1 took place.

(31)

30

“End of the performance. Lots of excitement coming from all participants.

Immediately, everyone gathers together, and form a circle again. The director takes the lead in giving compliments. A pie enters the circle: a celebration for the final repetition being successful. Everyone is sitting on a chair in a circle now. The director comments on the asynchronous movement of the clapping segment. "Keep it up, keep it sharp! You have to work it." [...] During this moment of reflection, all eyes are on the director when she speaks. Separate smaller mistakes are discussed now” (Observation 2).

In a short time span, the mood within the circle shifts. Excitement and celebration turn to seriousness and critique. The architecture of the circle allows the director to become the focus point without creating distance between her and the performers. The circular formation reserves the possibility that any other member in the circle may become the focus point. The feedback is given by the director here, but the circular form allows the others to respond comfortably without changing the setting. At certain points in these ‘reflection circles’, members also took the initiative to give feedback to other group members. Giving feedback to each other again shows the prevalence of a shared goal: the performance requires everyone to act the best they can. Since reflection moments often emerged in circular formation, such assemblies became symbolic for them. The rapidity of the shift from celebration to critique signifies this. The symbolic formation triggered a common

understanding of the situation, allowing the attainment of a shared mood of giving critique more easily.

Another formal group activity, playing warming up games, was commonly performed in circular formations. Games have the quality of allowing participants to move themselves along predetermined rules. These rules provided the participants with a clear set of

movement options to choose from. Most games depend on action and reaction, and therefore require all participants to remain vigilant. Two similar games which activated its participants were noticed during the observed practice sessions. Firstly, a game called ‘Samurai’ was encountered during the rehearsals of Group 1 and 2.9_{It is based on an}

interaction between multiple persons, which repeated itself continuously. During the preparations of Group 1, the cast members of the two competing teams assembled in a circle to play the game:

9_{During the performance preparations of Group 1, ‘Samurai’ was used as part of the warming up.}

Groups 1 and 2 have had no contact but performed ‘Samurai’ identically. This could mean that the game has been diffused over multiple theatre practitioners as a commonly known theatre game.

The power of the circle : interaction ritual chains during preparations for amateur theatre performances