Theatre of the Oppressed

Theatre of the Oppressed by Augusto Boal offers a groundbreaking and innovative approach to performance arts that reimagines the relationship between actor and audience member. The work was written in 1977 under the oppressive censorship of a militant dictatorship, and Boal and other Brazilian artists and thinkers sought to challenge the nature of power while pushing the limits of their fields. Influenced by Brazilian educator Paulo Freire’s work, Pedagogy of the Oppressed, Boal reimagined performance arts as an expression of liberation and protest. Theatre of the Oppressed is therefore a work of both aesthetic and political philosophy, and it also serves as a guide for practitioners of the craft. Boal also questions the Western ideologies that dominate performance arts and traces their origins to Aristotle. Theatre of the Oppressed explores Theater as a Tool for Social and Political Change, The Interaction of Power and Art, and Liberation through Participation.

Boal put his own theories into practice as a director at the Arena Theatre in São Paulo. In his plays, actors and audience members collaborated to shape and develop the story, transforming spectators into active participants in the creative work. 

This guide refers to the 1979 paperback edition published by Theatre Communications Group, Inc. and translated by Charles A. and Maria-Odilia Leal McBride.

Summary

Augusto Boal’s Theatre of the Oppressed is a study of the history of performance arts and a call to action for the future of theater. The work challenges traditional models of theater by reconceptualizing the relationship between actors and audience members. Boal asserts that the history of Western ideology, which emphasizes isolation, is perpetuated through performances that decenter the audience. He takes issue with the traditional theatrical structure, in which the actors alone speak and remain tethered to a single linear narrative, thereby separated from a silent audience; Boal argues that this format maintains hierarchical structures of domination and subjugation. The Brazilian politician and drama theorist then reimagines the boundaries of what theater can do. Using traditional techniques of Western philosophical works to challenge the very foundation of aesthetic philosophy, Boal interrogates the very principles that artists accept as poetic law. He draws from and responds to an interconnected web of ideas and thinkers, both subverting the form of Greek philosophical argument and emphasizing collectivist thinking over individualistic viewpoints. 

Chapter 1 examines the historical relationship of art to power as Boal emphasizes the impact of Aristotle’s thinking on the future of both art and politics. The Greek philosopher perpetuated the myth that all disciplines, including those of art and politics, are innately separate. Boal argues that Aristotle’s participation in a Western tradition of separateness impacts this philosopher’s view of art as a singular pillar that stands independent of other forms. Aristotle’s other ideas about tragedy and theater were also shaped by isolation, and Boal asserts that one of Aristotle’s fundamental flaws is that he never interrogated the ways in which his chosen lens might perpetuate Eurocentric ideologies. Boal proposes that Aristotle’s profound influence on art and other disciplines deserves a second look. Because Aristotle was approaching his philosophy through a Westernized lens, his ideas are forged within a specific frame of oppression and power-seeking. The isolation of art and politics allows power to wield its influence without scrutiny. In Aristotle’s philosophy, art escapes critical political analysis because it is viewed as being holier, more distinct, and therefore impenetrable to other forms.

Boal establishes that the traditional model of theater is a mechanism for power, especially given the isolation of the performers and the audience members. This mechanism creates a structure within which audiences can live vicariously through the experiences of the tragic hero. In this mode, the protagonist exhibits a fundamental flaw that leads to a catastrophic end, and viewers empathize with the hero and learn from the character’s experiences, undergoing a process of catharsis.

Chapter 2 focuses on Boal’s direction of the Niccolò Machiavelli play The Mandrake, or La Mandragola. Boal uses Machiavelli’s narrative to explore questions about the nature of power and manipulation, tracing the history of the relationship between theater and the ruling class and exposing the art form’s relationship to advancing political good. He argues that theater is used to project the ideologies of the bourgeoisie by engaging audiences in complex experiences of catharsis. Machiavelli, influenced by his own context, wrote The Mandrake with the sense that the pursuit of power justifies any means. Machiavelli also constructed the concept of virtù, referring to the virtuous qualities of those in power. These traits have the aim of advancing and maintaining power. 

In Chapter 3, Boal examines the history of the definition of an “epic” and contrasts its iterations with a new form of theater created by Bertolt Brecht. The German director reimagined a theater in which spectators were liberated from the role of passive, empathetic viewers whose primary function was to accept the moral lessons of the performance. Brecht was opposed to the emotional manipulation of audiences through catharsis and proposed that theater should engage audiences in interpreting and understanding their own experiences. 

Chapter 4 offers Boal’s expansion of Brecht’s work. He presents the Poetics of the Oppressed, which utilizes the Joker system to allow audiences to impact the narrative of the performance and the choices of the characters. Chapter 5 explains the role of the Joker as the mediator between audience and actors.