Advertisement

Parsifal a Game Opera

Experiential Learning in Gameful Performance Art
  • Rens KortmannEmail author
  • Arlon Luijten
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 10056)

Abstract

Richard Wagner’s Parsifal was recently rewritten and performed as a ‘game opera’. We used observations, questionnaires, and interviews to study how the 700+ audience were facilitated to experientially learn about the show’s main themes: compassion and collaboration. This case study contributed to our understanding how performance art may improve games for learning and training purposes, many of which now are notoriously ‘boring’. We concluded that performance art’s main contribution, in particular to games discussing fundamental values such as compassion, is to captivate players and ‘lure’ them into their natural behaviour. Thus the Parsifal game opera emotionally confronted its audience with their – callous and selfish – behaviour and intensified their learning through embodied experiences. However, some players lacked time and support to (collectively) reflect on their experiences and lacked catharsis. Therefore, we recommend using gameful performance art for learning and training purposes, provided that all activities in experiential learning are sufficiently facilitated.

Keywords

Real-life games Performance arts Interactive drama Experiential learning Informal learning Game-based learning Professional training 

References

  1. 1.
    Boggs, J.G., Mickel, A.E., Holtom, B.C.: Experiential learning through interactive drama: an alternative to student role plays. J. Manag. Educ. 31(6), 832–858 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Davies, L.: Informal Learning: A New Model for Making Sense of Experience. Gower, Aldershot (2008)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Egenfeldt-Nielsen, S.: Third generation educational use of computer games. J. Educ. Multimedia Hypermedia 16(3), 263–281 (2007)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Hardin, G.: The tragedy of the commons. Science 162(3859), 1243–1248 (1968)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Kolb, D.A.: Experiential Learning: Experience as a Source of Learning and Development. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River (1984)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Kolb, A.Y., Kolb, D.A.: Learning to play, playing to learn: a case study of a ludic learning space. J. Organ. Change Manag. 23(1), 26–50 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Kortmann, R., van Daalen, E., Mayer, I., Bekebrede, G.: Veerkracht 2.0: embodied interactions in a servant-leadership game. In: Meijer, S.A., Smeds, R. (eds.) ISAGA 2013. LNCS, vol. 8264, pp. 44–51. Springer, Heidelberg (2014). doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-04954-0_6 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Loorbach, D.: Transition management for sustainable development: a prescriptive, complexity-based governance framework. Governance 23(1), 161–183 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Madge, C., Meek, J., Wellens, J., Hooley, T.: Facebook, social integration and informal learning at university: “it is more for socialising and talking to friends about work than for actually doing work”. Learn. Media Technol. 34(2), 141–155 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Paradise, R., Rogoff, B.: Side by side: learning by observing and pitching in. Ethos 37(1), 102–138 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of Technology, Policy, and Management, Department of Multi-Actor Systems, Section Policy AnalysisDelft University of TechnologyDelftThe Netherlands
  2. 2.Independent Theatre Maker, Parsifal Playingfields, and Operadagen RotterdamRotterdamThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations