Advertisement

Theatre as Co-Creative Space and as Inspiration for Higher Education

  • Tatiana Chemi
  • Pierangelo Pompa
Chapter
Part of the Creative Education Book Series book series (CREA)

Abstract

The director stands up on the left corner of the stage, facing the audience that is sitting in a semi-circle. The actors sit on chairs facing the audience, still sweating and catching their breath after a physically demanding performance. They are having a conversation with a group of scholars. Together we are trying to enquire into the concept of co-creation.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Barba, E. (1995). The paper canoe. London & New York, NY: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Barba, E. (2015). The moon rises from the ganges: My journey through Asian acting techniques. Holstebro & Malta: Icarus Routledge.Google Scholar
  3. Barba, E., & Savarese, N. (2011). A dictionary of theatre anthropology: The secret art of the performer. Taylor & Francis.Google Scholar
  4. Barnett, R. (1990). The idea of higher education. Buckingham: The Society for Research into Higher Education & Open University Press.Google Scholar
  5. Beach, K. (1999). Chapter 4: Consequential transitions: A sociocultural expedition beyond transfer in education. Review of research in education, 24(1), 101–139.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bråten, S. (Ed.). (2007). On being moved: From mirror neurons to empathy. Amsterdam, NLD: John Benjamins Publishing Company.Google Scholar
  7. Chemi, T. (2016a). Distributed problem-solving: How artists’ participatory strategies can inspire creativity in higher education. In C. Zhou (Ed.), Handbook of research on creative problem-solving skill development in higher education. Hershey, PA: IGI Global Publishers.Google Scholar
  8. Chemi, T. (2016b, July 7–9). Transgressive or instrumental? A paradigm for the arts as learning and development. Full paper at 32nd EGOS colloquium, organizing in the shadow of power. Naples, Italy: University of Naples Federico II.Google Scholar
  9. Chemi, T., Jensen, J. B., & Hersted, L. (2015). Behind the scenes of artistic creativity: Processes of learning, creating and organising. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Christoffersen, E. E. (2004). Introduction to peripeti and serendipity. Peripeti, 2, 5–15.Google Scholar
  11. Darsø, L. (2004), Artful creation: Learning-tales of arts-in-business. Frederiksberg: Samfundslitteratur.Google Scholar
  12. Decroux, E. (1963). Paroles sur le mime. Paris: Gallimard.Google Scholar
  13. Dewey, J. (2005). Art as experience. London: Perigee (I 1934).Google Scholar
  14. Dissanayake, E. (1995). Homo aestheticus: Where art comes from and why. Seattle, WA & London: University of Washington Press (I 1992).Google Scholar
  15. Dissanayake, E. (2000). Art and intimacy: How the art began. Seattle, WA & London: University of Washington Press.Google Scholar
  16. Eisner, E. W. (2002). The arts and the creation of mind. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  17. Freud, S. (2003). Beyond the pleasure principle (Vol. 840). Penguin UK.Google Scholar
  18. Gosse, V., & Moser, R. (Eds.). (2004). World the sixties made: Politics and culture in recent America. Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press.Google Scholar
  19. Hanke, M. (1990). Socratic pragmatics: Maieutic dialogues. Journal of pragmatics, 14(3), 459–465.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Hickman, L. A. (2007). Pragmatism as post-postmodernism: Lessons from John Dewey. Bronx, NY: Fordham University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Illeris, K. (2009). Contemporary theories of learning: Learning theoristsin their own words. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  22. John-Steiner, V. (2000). Creative collaboration. Oxford & New York, NY: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  23. Lorenz, E. (1972). Predictability: Does the flap of a butterfly’s wing in Brazil set off a tornado in Texas? American Association for the Advancement of Science, December 29, 1972.Google Scholar
  24. Marwick, A. (1994). Experimental theatre in the 1960s. History Today, 44(10), 34.Google Scholar
  25. Meyer-Dinkgräfe, D. (2005). Theatre and consciousness: Explanatory scope and future potential. Bristol, GB: Intellect Books.Google Scholar
  26. Radbourne, J., Glow, H., & Johanson, K. (2014). Audience experience: A critical analysis of audiences in the performing arts. Bristol, GB: Intellect.Google Scholar
  27. Sawyer, K. (2007). Group genius: The power of creative collaboration. Philadelphia, PA: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  28. Scharmer, C. O., & Kaufer, K. (2013). Leading from the emerging future: From ego-system to eco-system economies. Berrett-Koehler Publishers.Google Scholar
  29. Schechner, R. (2002). Performance studies: An introduction. London & New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
  30. Schino, M. (2009). Alchemists of the stage: Theatre laboratories in Europe. Poland: Icarus.Google Scholar
  31. Stanislavski, C. (1989). An actor prepares. Taylor & Francis.Google Scholar
  32. Turner, V. W. (1982). From ritual to theatre: The human seriousness of play. Paj Publications.Google Scholar
  33. Van den Hout, J. J., Davies, C., & Walgrave, B. (2016). The application of team flow theory. In L. Harmat, F. Ørsted Andersen, F. Ullén, J. Wright, & G. Sadlo (Eds.), Flow experience: Empirical research and applications. Switzerland: Springer.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Sense Publishers 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Tatiana Chemi
    • 1
  • Pierangelo Pompa
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Learning and PhilosophyAalborg UniversityDenmark
  2. 2.Altamira Studio TeaterDenmark

Personalised recommendations