The Overall Value of Spectatorship
Name
Institution
Course Name
Instructor’s Name
Date
The Overall Value of Spectatorship
Spectatorship is a vital lifestyle in shaping the direction of political theory and philosophy circles. Critiques of spectatorship argue that spectatorship is only passive, and its impact is minute. On the other hand, proponents of spectatorship argue that it is a vital tool that can influence the decision of the critics, making them change their opinion on different things. Jacques Ranciere, in her book, The Emancipated Spectator, explains the role of the spectator by linking the studies to different philosophical views. For instance, Ranciere links spectatorship to acting in a theatre, whereby the actors push the spectators into a state of illusions and play with their mindset and emotions. However, Ranciere believes that society can refuse to be pulled into the theatrics of the actors and instead uses individual principles to determine how they interact with the actors.
Relationship between spectators and theatre
Critics of theatre argue that theatre exists because the spectators exist. To them a theatre without spectators cannot exist. Any imaginations, either put in writing or narrated orally, must be taken to the theatre to transmit the energy to the spectators. During plays, the power from spectators oscillates between them and the people acting on stage. Critics of spectators have derived two formulations that are used to describe theatre. First, for the spectator to give the actors attention, the actors must manifest a unique feature. When the actors succeed in this, through suspense and other hooks, he can change from being a passive participant to an active one. Second, the actor must rob the spectator of their illusion and original thoughts. Every act in the theatre must be aimed at dispossessing the spectator the ability to think independently.
When spectators get into theatre, they marvel at the very attention that they have been robbed off. Ranciere supports Plato’s theory that prohibition of theatre creates the theatre, that is, when the spectator is dispossessed their attention, they become attentive. There are several equivalence and oppositions that theatre uses to increase spectator’s active participation. In the contemporary art, playwrights overlook the importance of translating social relations to the people and instead leaves them struggling to keep up with the act. Besides, most playwrights leave out the spectator out of the equation as far as participation is concerned. The activity makes the spectators to fall back into passive participation. The gap created between the actor and spectator therefore results to the latter practicing prejudice amidst the passivity. However, the actors can choose to change the course of the play without involving the spectator, which further discredits their contribution.
Emancipation spectatorship occurs when the difference between acting and viewing is opposed. In this case, the viewer understands he or she is capable of selecting, interpreting and observing the actors. The viewer can also link a play to another, making them have the same capacity with the actors, although the platforms are different. The connection between the actor and spectator is not dependent on the actor’s actions, neither is it by the attention that the spectator accords the actor. Instead, the two parties connect using a special bond which none of them can claim ownership. It is the same bond that links cause and effect. Ranciere also believes that emancipation opposes the ideals of a theatre’s politics. The scholar believes that the theory of emancipation must re-appropriate a relationship to lose self during a separation of stage and auditorium.
Issues preceding theatrical performances
There are several issues that precede theatrical performances according to Ranciere. First, during a play, the spectator can think and perceive things differently. The fact that they sit close and react the same way during a play does not mean that they have a shared intelligence. Instead, the emancipation in the spectators depends on the ability of the spectators to associate and disassociate with various things. The spectator cannot transform into an actor since every person at the theatre plays a unique role. However, through emancipation, the spectator can relate to what the actor is doing and even make some predictions on the next action of the actor. In order to understand emancipation better, the person must get the point of view from the spectator and actor at a particular moment which is not easy.
Using critical though to explain emancipation is not easy, since every person has a unique school of thought to the same. The proponents of emancipation are divided into those who believe that critical tradition is obsolete, while others like Ranciere believe that the critical is still relevant. Ranciere gives an example of the American war in Iraq that spurred demonstrations. From the images that were collected during the period, one can only guess the cause of demonstrations, as shown in the photos without getting an explanation. Although the picture at the exhibition might appear obsolete, the message relayed to the viewers, who are the spectators, is still relevant. On the other hand, the photo is the theatre, while the soldiers and demonstrators are the actors. In this case, the actors leave the spectators guessing what transpired, while the stage remains intact.
Justification of distrust of spectatorship
Several events that have played out in the contemporary society have justified the distrust of spectatorship. For instance, Barack Obama talked of “our bold experiment in self-government.” This statement meant the citizens had been playing as passive spectators without contributing anything towards the governance. It also meant that the citizens let the government carry out all its activities without being held accountable. Obama had noted that citizens would keep on complaining of poor services yet they did not take the necessary action. When put into a state of emancipation, it would be right to say that the citizens were allowed to watch the government carry out its tasks, compare one regime to the other, but not allowed to correct the government. The distance created between the government and the citizens was similar to dictatorship where all the powers lie with the leaders.
Persuasiveness of the lessons
The critiques on emancipation are comprehensive and fully persuasive. Ranciere uses philosophical approach to clarify every point. He explains the distance created between the actors and audience, together with its impact. According to him, when the actors leave the spectator passive, the spectator reacts. Instead of staying focused, their thought wanders off to other things such as comparison of the play on stage to others that they might have attended. Ranciere also explains the similarities between viewers and actors such as the ability to observe, make comparisons, and contrast. This phenomenon means that the only difference between the two is their participation. Ranciere also notes that the spectators can affect the flow of a play by either participating or not. Whatever decision the spectators take brings out the difference between different audiences.
Lessons learnt
The teaching on spectatorship has enabled me to learn the relationship between players and spectators in sports. The coronavirus outbreak has had a huge impact on outcome of matches. When fans were allowed to enter stadia to cheer their teams, outcomes would favor them in most cases, which is not the case now. I have also learned that the actor should play for the spectator and not for themselves. Every action, on and off the pitch, should be a reflection of what is expected of a player since they are the biggest role models to the fans. Although Ranciere focuses on performance in acting, all the information is relevant to contemporary sports. The fans can watch the players, discuss them, compare them to other players, and make recommendation. All the activities that take place in a theatre performance are therefore similar to what happens in sports.
Conclusion
In summary, emancipated spectatorship is a broad term that requires a deep analysis to understand. Although in most cases the actors overlook the role played by spectators, the impact is huge. Creating a distance between the actor and the spectator might demotivate the spectator who in turn opts to troll the actors. Since the two parties use a bond that neither of them possesses, it is prudent that both of them respect it. Contemporary sports which are the true reflection of the actor-spectator relationship should not elevate and downgrade one another. It is expected that in future, Ranciere principles will be applied in other fields to bring out the right image of emancipation spectatorship. At the moment, the two parties can play their parts well to improve future relationships.