Advertisement

Introduction

  • Ben WalmsleyEmail author
Chapter
  • 211 Downloads
Part of the New Directions in Cultural Policy Research book series (NDCPR)

Abstract

This chapter constitutes a plea for audiences. It argues that performing arts audiences have been consistently sidelined, homogenised, and disempowered over the past 150 years and that this has had a negative impact on the field of audience studies. The chapter advocates for an engagement-based approach to audience research, which places audiences at the heart of empirical enquiries into the complex multi-sensory experiences that they have before, during and after their performing arts encounters. It also explores the terminology surrounding audience research and illustrates how some of the key terms used to describe audiences are both unhelpful and reductive. The chapter explores the key challenges facing audience research and outlines the aims and scope of the book, highlighting its underlying philosophy of audience centricity.

References

  1. Ashley, S. L. T. 2014. ‘Engage the world’: Examining conflicts of engagement in public museums. International Journal of Cultural Policy, 20(3), pp. 261–280.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Barker, M. 2006. I have seen the future and it is not here yet …; or, on being ambitious for audience research. The Communication Review, 9(2), pp. 123–141.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Baxter, L., O’Reilly, D. and Carnegie, E. 2013. Innovative methods of inquiry into arts engagement. In: Radbourne, J., Glow, H. and Johanson, K. (eds.) The audience experience: A critical analysis of audiences in the performing arts. Bristol, Intellect, pp. 113–128.Google Scholar
  4. Belfiore, E. and Bennett, O. 2007. Determinants of impact: Towards a better understanding of encounters with the arts. Cultural Trends, 16(3), pp. 225–275.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Ben Chaim, D. 1984. Distance in the theatre: The aesthetics of audience response. London, Ann Arbor.Google Scholar
  6. Bennett, S. 1997. Theatre audiences: A theory of production and reception. 2nd ed. London, Routledge.Google Scholar
  7. Bennett, S. 2006. Theatre audiences, redux. Theatre Survey, 47(2), pp. 225–230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bitgood, S. 2010. An attention-value model of museum visitors. Available from: https://airandspace.si.edu/rfp/exhibitions/files/j1-exhibition-guidelines/3/An%20Attention-Value%20Model%20of%20Museum%20Visitors.pdf [Accessed 5 April 2019].
  9. Blau, H. 1990. The audience. Baltimore, The John Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
  10. Brodie, R. J., Hollebeek, L. D., Juric, B. and Ilic, A. 2011. Customer engagement: Conceptual domain, fundamental propositions, and implications for research. Journal of Service Research, 14(3), pp. 252–271.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Brown, A. S. and Ratzkin, R. 2011. Making sense of audience engagement: A critical assessment of efforts by nonprofit arts organizations to engage audiences and visitors in deeper and more impactful arts experiences. San Francisco, The San Francisco Foundation.Google Scholar
  12. Conner, L. 2013. Audience engagement and the role of arts talk in the digital era. New York, Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Conway, T. and Leighton, D. 2012. “Staging the past, enacting the present”: Experiential marketing in the performing arts and heritage sectors. Arts Marketing: An International Journal, 2(1), pp. 35–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Crawford, M. 2015. The world beyond your head: How to flourish in an age of distraction. London, Penguin.Google Scholar
  15. Fiske, J. 1992. Audiencing: A cultural studies approach to watching television. Poetics, 21, pp. 345–359.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Freshwater, H. 2009. Theatre & audience. London, Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Gray, C. 2015. Ambiguity and cultural policy. Nordic Journal of Cultural Policy, 1(18), pp. 66–80.Google Scholar
  18. Heim, C. L. 2010. Theatre audience contribution: Facilitating a new text through the post-performance discussion. Saarbrücken, Lambert.Google Scholar
  19. Heim, C. 2016. Audience as performer: The changing role of theatre audiences in the Twenty-First Century. London and New York, Routledge.Google Scholar
  20. Johanson, K. 2013. Listening to the audience: Methods for a new era of audience research. In: Radbourne, J., Glow, H. and Johanson, K. (eds.) The audience experience: A critical analysis of audiences in the performing arts. Bristol, Intellect, pp. 159–171.Google Scholar
  21. Kattwinkel, S. 2003. Introduction. In: Kattwinkel, S. (ed.) Audience participation: Essays on inclusion in performance. Westport, CT, Praeger, pp. ix–xviii.Google Scholar
  22. Livingstone, S. and Das, R. 2015. The end of audiences? Theoretical echoes of reception amid the uncertainties of use. In: Hartley, J., Burgess, J. and Bruns, A. (eds.) A companion to new media dynamics. Chichester, Wiley, pp. 104–121.Google Scholar
  23. Machon, J. 2013. Immersive theatres: Intimacy and immediacy in contemporary performance. London, Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. McConachie, B. 2008. Engaging audiences: A cognitive approach to spectating in the theatre. New York, Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Pine, B. J. and Gilmore, J. H. 1999. The experience economy: Work is theatre and every business a stage. Boston, Harvard Business School.Google Scholar
  26. Radbourne, J. 2013. Converging with audiences. In: Radbourne, J., Glow, H. and Johanson, K. (eds.) The audience experience: A critical analysis of audiences in the performing arts. Bristol, Intellect, pp. 143–158.Google Scholar
  27. Radbourne, J., Glow, H. and Johanson, K. (eds.). 2013. The audience experience: A critical analysis of audiences in the performing arts. Bristol, Intellect.Google Scholar
  28. Reason, M. 2013. The longer experience: Theatre for young audiences and enhancing engagement. In: Radbourne, J., Glow, H. and Johanson, K. (eds.) The audience experience: A critical analysis of audiences in the performing arts. Bristol, Intellect, pp. 95–111.Google Scholar
  29. Reason, M. and Londelof, A. M. (eds.). 2016. Experiencing liveness in contemporary performance: Interdisciplinary perspectives. London, Routledge.Google Scholar
  30. Reinelt, J. G. 2014. What UK spectators know: Understanding how we come to value theatre. Theatre Journal, 66(3), pp. 337–361.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Rosen, J. 2012. The people formerly known as the audience. In: Mandiberg, M. (ed.) The social media reader. New York, New York University Press, pp. 13–16.Google Scholar
  32. Sartre, J.-P. 1976. A plea for intellectuals. In: Sartre, J.-P. (ed.) Between existentialism and Marxism. New York, William Morrow, pp. 228–285.Google Scholar
  33. Sashi, C. M. 2012. Customer engagement, buyer-seller relationships, and social media. Management Decision, 50(2), pp. 253–272.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Sauter, W. 2000. The theatrical event: Dynamics of performance and perception. Iowa City, University of Iowa Press.Google Scholar
  35. Sedgman, K. 2016. Locating the audience: How people found value in National Theatre Wales. Bristol, Intellect.Google Scholar
  36. Sharpe, B. 2010. Economies of life: Patterns of health and wealth. Axminster, Triarchy Press.Google Scholar
  37. Silvia, P. J. 2005. Emotional responses to art: From collation and arousal to cognition and emotion. Review of General Psychology, 9(4), pp. 342–357.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Tepper, S. J. 2008. The next great transformation: Leveraging policy and research to advance cultural vitality. In: Tepper, S. J. and Ivy, B. (eds.) Engaging art: The next great transformation of America’s cultural life. Oxon, Routledge, pp. 363–383.Google Scholar
  39. Vincs, K. 2013. Structure and aesthetics in audience responses to dance. In: Radbourne, J., Glow, H. and Johanson, K. (eds.) The audience experience: A critical analysis of audiences in the performing arts. Bristol, Intellect, pp. 129–142.Google Scholar
  40. Walmsley, B. 2018. A plea for audiences: From active spectatorship to enactive audiency. In: Bonet, L. and Négrier, E. (eds.) Breaking the fourth wall: Proactive audiences in the performing arts. Elverum, Kunnskapsverket, pp. 196–209.Google Scholar
  41. Walmsley, B. 2019. The death of arts marketing: A paradigm shift from consumption to enrichment. Arts and the Market, 9(1), pp. 32–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School Performance Cultural IndustriesUniversity of LeedsLeedsUK

Personalised recommendations