Advertisement

Deconstructing Audiences’ Experiences

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

Abstract

This chapter grapples with some of the most fundamental questions of audiencing: What is going on when audiences engage or are engaged with performance? How important is the live element of audiences’ experiences? What kinds of experiences do audiences have when they engage with the performing arts? Which elements and phenomena characterise and differentiate these experiences from other kinds of experiences? Can audiences’ experiences be truly restorative or even transformative? The chapter offers a theoretical discussion of the nature of performing arts experiences before moving on to explore the relative agency that audiences have in engaging with performance. It then explores the phenomenology of audiency, including the roles that empathy, immersion, arousal, catharsis, intersubjectivity, and embodied and enactive spectatorship play in shaping audiences’ experiences.

References

  1. Alston, A. 2016. Beyond immersive theatre: Aesthetics, politics and productive participation. London, Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Auslander, P. 2008. Liveness: Performance in a mediatized culture. 2nd ed. Oxon, Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bakhshi, H. and Whitby, A. 2014. Estimating the impact of live simulcast on theatre attendance: An application to London’s National Theatre. London, Nesta.Google Scholar
  4. Barker, M. 2013. ‘Live at a cinema near you’: How audiences respond to digital streaming of the arts. In: Radbourne, J., Glow, H. and Johanson, K. (eds.) The audience experience: A critical analysis of audiences in the performing arts. Bristol, Intellect, pp. 15–34.Google Scholar
  5. Belfiore, E. and Bennett, O. 2008. The social impact of the arts: An intellectual history. Basingstoke, Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Ben Chaim, D. 1984. Distance in the theatre: The aesthetics of audience response. London, Ann Arbor.Google Scholar
  7. Bennett, K. C. 1981. The purging of catharsis. British Journal of Aesthetics, 21(3), pp. 204–213.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bennett, S. 1997. Theatre audiences: A theory of production and reception. 2nd ed. London, Routledge.Google Scholar
  9. Berlyne, D. E. 1971. Aesthetics and psychobiology. New York, Appleton.Google Scholar
  10. Blau, H. 1990. The audience. Baltimore, The John Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
  11. Bleeker, M. and Germano, I. 2014. Perceiving and believing: An enactive approach to spectatorship. Theatre Journal, 66, pp. 363–383.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Boehner, K., Sengers, P. and Warner, S. 2008. Interfaces with the ineffable: meeting aesthetic experience on its own terms. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction [Online], 15(3), pp. 1–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Brown, A. S. 2006. An architecture of value. Grantmakers in the Arts Reader, 17(1), pp. 18–25.Google Scholar
  14. Brown, A. S. and Novak, J. L. 2007. Assessing the intrinsic impacts of a live performance. San Francisco, WolfBrown.Google Scholar
  15. Buchanan, I. 2010. A dictionary of critical theory. Oxford, Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  16. Bundy, P. 2014. Engagement and liveness. In: O’Toole, J., Adams, R.-J., Anderson, M., Burton, B. and Ewing, R. (eds.) Young audiences, theatre and the cultural conversation. Dordrecht, Springer, pp. 115–127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Burland, K. and Pitts, S. 2012. Rules and expectations of jazz gigs. Social Semiotics, 22(5), pp. 523–543.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Carù, A. and Cova, B. 2003. Revisiting consumption experience: A more humble but complete view of the concept. Marketing Theory, 3, pp. 267–286.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Colbert, F. and St-James, Y. 2014. Research in arts marketing: Evolution and future directions. Psychology and Marketing, 31(8), pp. 566–575.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Csikszentmihalyi, M. 1988a. The flow experience and its significance for human psychology. In: Csikszentmihalyi, M. and Csikszentmihalyi, I. S. (eds.) Optimal experience: Psychological studies of flow in consciousness. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, pp. 15–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Csikszentmihalyi, M. 1988b. Introduction. In: Csikszentmihalyi, M. and Csikszentmihalyi, I. S. (eds.) Optimal experience: Psychological studies of flow in consciousness. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, pp. 3–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. De Marinis, M. 1987. Dramaturgy of the spectator. The Drama Review, 31(2), pp. 100–114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Dewey, J. 1980. Art as experience. New York, Perigee Books.Google Scholar
  24. Ehrenreich, B. 2007. Dancing in the streets: a history of collective joy. London, Granta.Google Scholar
  25. Falassi, A. 1987. Time out of time: Essays on the festival. Albuquerque, NM, University of New Mexico Press.Google Scholar
  26. Fırat, A. F. and Dholakia, N. 1998. Consuming people: From political economy to theaters of consumption. London, Routledge.Google Scholar
  27. Freshwater, H. 2009. Theatre & audience. London, Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Golden, L. 1973. The purgation theory of catharsis. Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism, 31(4), pp. 473–491.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Heim, C. 2016. Audience as performer: The changing role of theatre audiences in the Twenty-First Century. London and New York, Routledge.Google Scholar
  30. Hirschman, E. C. and Holbrook, M. B. 1982. Hedonic consumption: emerging concepts, methods and propositions. Journal of Marketing, 46(3), pp. 92–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Holland, N. 1968. The dynamics of literary response. New York, Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  32. Konijn, E. A. 1999. Spotlight on spectators: Emotions in the theatre. Discourse Processes, 28(2), pp. 169–194.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Machon, J. 2013. Immersive theatres: Intimacy and immediacy in contemporary performance. London, Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Mackintosh, I. 1992. Architecture, actor and audience. London, Routledge.Google Scholar
  35. McConachie, B. 2008. Engaging audiences: A cognitive approach to spectating in the theatre. New York, Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. McConachie, B. 2013. Introduction: Spectating as sandbox play. In: Shaughnessy, N. (ed.) Affective performance and cognitive science: Body, brain and being. London, Bloomsbury, pp. 183–198.Google Scholar
  37. McKinney, J. 2013. Scenography, spectacle and the body of the spectator. Performance Research, 18(3), pp. 63–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Morris Hargreaves McIntyre 2007. Audience knowledge digest: why people visit museums and galleries, and what can be done to attract them. Manchester, Morris Hargreaves McIntyre.Google Scholar
  39. Nesta 2010. Beyond live: Digital innovation in the performing arts. London, Nesta.Google Scholar
  40. Nussbaum, M. C. 1986. The fragility of goodness: Luck and ethics in Greek tragedy and philosophy. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  41. O’Toole, J., Adams, R.-J., Anderson, M., Burton, B. and Ewing, R. (eds.). 2014. Young audiences, theatre and the cultural conversation. Dordrecht, Springer.Google Scholar
  42. Popovici, V. 1984. Is the stage-audience relationship a form of dialogue? Poetics, 13(1–2), pp. 111–118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 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
  44. Radbourne, J., Glow, H. and Johanson, K. 2010. Measuring the intrinsic benefits of arts attendance. Cultural Trends, 19(4), pp. 307–324.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Radbourne, J., Johanson, K., Glow, H. and White, T. 2009. The audience experience: Measuring quality in the performing arts. International Journal of Arts Management, 11(3), pp. 16–29.Google Scholar
  46. Reason, M. 2008. Did you watch the man or did you watch the goose? Children’s responses to puppets in live theatre. New Theatre Quarterly, 24(4), pp. 337–354.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Reason, M. 2010. Asking the audience: Audience research and the experience of theatre. About Performance, 10, pp. 15–34.Google Scholar
  48. Reason, M. and Reynolds, D. 2010. Kinesthesia, empathy, and related pleasures: An inquiry into audience experiences of watching dance. Dance Research Journal, 42(2), pp. 49–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Reinelt, J. G. 2014. What UK spectators know: Understanding how we come to value theatre. Theatre Journal, 66(3), pp. 337–361.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Reynolds, D. and Reason, M. (eds.). 2011. Kinesthetic empathy in creative and cultural practices. Bristol, Intellect.Google Scholar
  51. Sartre, J.-P. 1961. Beyond bourgeois theatre. The Tulane Drama Review, 5(3), pp. 3–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Sauter, W. 2000. The theatrical event: Dynamics of performance and perception. Iowa City, University of Iowa Press.Google Scholar
  53. Sawyer, K. 2007. Group genius: The creative power of collaboration. New York, Basic Books.Google Scholar
  54. Schechner, R. 2003. Performance theory. 2nd ed. London, Routledge.Google Scholar
  55. Sedgman, K. 2016. Locating the audience: How people found value in National Theatre Wales. Bristol, Intellect.Google Scholar
  56. 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
  57. Slater, A. 2007. ‘Escaping to the gallery’: Understanding the motivations of visitors to galleries. International Journal of Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Marketing, 12, pp. 149–162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Thompson, E. 2007. Mind in life: Biology, phenomenology, and the sciences of mind. Cambridge, MA, Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  59. Walmsley, B. 2011. Why people go to the theatre: A qualitative study of audience motivation. Journal of Customer Behaviour, 10(4), pp. 335–351.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Walmsley, B. 2018. Deep hanging out in the arts: An anthropological approach to capturing cultural value. International Journal of Cultural Policy, 24(2), pp. 227–291.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Whalley, J. and Miller, L. 2017. Between us: Audiences, affect and the in-between. London, Palgrave.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School Performance Cultural IndustriesUniversity of LeedsLeedsUK

Personalised recommendations