Spider’s Work is part of a research project called: The work of a spider – developing an educational drama training programme for teachers and community workers to help them deal with value conflicts
The purpose of the study is to train people who do not have educational drama training to use a particular educational drama methodology that helps young people to discover how their values work to motivate their behaviour. The specific focus of this particular workshop is to find out how transferable the knowledge is for facilitators unskilled in Educational Drama techniques. The idea is to create a learning experience for the facilitators that compare to the experience they will be able to create for their own learners/ youth groups. They will reflect on the process throughout to discover the teaching elements that make it work.
October 5, 2008 at 1:40 pm |
Hallo,Ek het vanoggend die Recipes for Stories gelees, baie interessant. Omdat ek niks van stories geweet het en selfs amper nooit ‘n storie lees nie, het ek gewens dat ek dit voor die playshop kon gelees het, dan sou ek baie beter verstaan het.
Die ander vraag; wie was die hero in ons storie?
Gaan jy nog vir ons/my ‘n idee gee van wat jy nou van verwag? Hoe moet ek dit wat ek wys geword het toepas of is dit net dat ek met nuwe insig na my ou wereld teruggaan?
October 9, 2008 at 12:22 pm |
I wondered about who the hero was of our story too. Just a reminder that the hero , the main character and the protagonist are different concepts for similar thins. I like to view the hero and the main character as the same thins, while the protagonist is something different. So, the hero, or main character, is the one who grew personaly. since growth was the aim of the whole process, each one of you were the hero’s of your story. You only know the story from your own perspective and you know how much you leart and grew. If you tell the story, you will tell it from your own point of view, making you the main character. However, the protagonist refers to the character who had the job of fulfilling the main purpose of our story: going to the cave to find answers. As to who fulfilleed this role? I guess it was Conrad the explorer, but the debate is an open one depending on who is telling the story. So, anyone can comment: who was the hero in your eyes?
As to the question what nest? I will answer that in a separate blog post soon.
October 10, 2008 at 9:39 am |
hi, should this discussion not rather be a seperate blog entry? …and the feedback questions as well?
October 10, 2008 at 9:41 am |
could you also please post the Recipes for Stories, please – I think I left my copy at the theatre by mistake.
October 10, 2008 at 10:08 am |
…as for the question about who the hero was: it’s difficult to give a clear-cut answer.
definitely in our planning it initially seemed as though Conrad the Explorer would be our hero, but Hakkim was the only one who did anything heroic per se, “saving” my life in his post-eruption version of the story.
the rest of us all “grew” as characters, Esther found purpose, I gave up my leadership role, etc. but none of us truly fulfilled our “supposed” destiny… maybe because the story came to a sudden end, or maybe because we were all constantly involved in the main scene(s)…
in our planned version, Conrad and Hakkim goes to the cave alone, with Hakkim clearly in the supportive role. in our acted version, however, we all ended up in front of the cave as part of the tribe’s ceremony, with no clear heroic action taken by anyone in particular.
therefore, I would say that we didn’t have a hero… also because there was in the end no “real” quest.
it could be interesting to see how the value interpretations change if there were to be more clearly defined protagonists and antagonists, and supportive roles…
was one of the goals to formulate a cohesive story – or was the story just used as a means to an end? …should the storyline in the end be edited or revised, or is the ad lib impromptu acting a key element of the whole exercise?