By Kiera Watson
When reflecting on the relationships and groups that form my identity, I think of three things: Student, Camper and most importantly, Performer. These experiences shaped and developed my personality, my self-esteem, and my overall image of myself. So, it is easy for me to understand the notion of reliance and defense of these groups that helped build my foundation. In reading and investing interviews taken at the 2022 Kick and Push Festival, I noticed a trend that interviewees with substantial experience in performance, self-identified performers, were challenged to separate this aspect of their identity from their understanding of their relationships within an audience. In other words, they often isolated themselves from the audience with whom they sat in preference for their experiences onstage. Here I will attempt to examine and offer suggestions to explain this trend through the lens of Social Identity Theory and in-group favoritism.
To begin, it is important to establish a definition of Social Identity Theory, hereafter referred to as SIT. SIT describes the phenomenon of individual identity and self-understanding being influenced by group and intergroup relationships. It suggests that individuals favor the ingroup to which they feel strongly connected over outgroups due to the ingroups influence on their self-identity. This favoritism can be described as a self-defense response. Henri Tajfel and John Turner suggested that this favoritism stems from a desire to protect one's own self-image by setting it in competition with relevant outgroups. This is referred to as social comparison and can be applied to our understanding of performer identity within an audience.
I would suggest that the in-group of the performer is so frequently set in contrast or in relation to that of the audience that it is challenging for performers to feel that they belong to a collective audience. Tajfel and Tuner suggest that there is an aspect of competition between in-groups and their relative out-groups and that in-groups themselves can only exist when set in comparison with other groups. Further, in-groups often engage in downward comparisons towards relative out-groups to establish themselves as high status within the social hierarchy. I suggest that individuals who identify as performers have spent extensive amounts of time placed in contrast with those of the audience resulting in a favoritism towards those onstage even when asked about their perceptions of the audience and their experience within one. Thus, they tend to isolate themselves and disconnect from the audience they have spent so long being in competition with. A trend I unearthed within the Kick and Push interviews was the tendency for performers to approach questions from two separate points of view, that of an audience member and that of a performer. In one such interview, when asked to consider what makes a piece of theatre more or less live and real, a participant responded “The realness I think comes from like an acting perspective, like doing like the work and stuff. And then it's like, wow, they're acting so good, that's so real. Um, and then I think like from a participatory perspective, it's like you're getting real reactions from the audience and everything.” (26-28, 15Sept2022530pm-B-Individual-Transcript). The participant separated the question into two perspectives of realness and even so, it could be argued that these points of view both align more strongly with the performer’s perspective than that of the audience.
SIT also brings into question the performer's opinion of the audience. If we presume that the performer in-group does attempt to establish themselves as higher status than the audience, what does that imply about the relationship between individual performers and the audience they engage with? Do they believe themselves to be more valuable than the audience? These are questions that I cannot answer at this moment but are worthy of larger consideration when discussing theatre-maker/audience respect.
In conclusion, the connection between SIT and performer identity may help to explain the trend of performers isolating themselves from the audience group when discussing their experiences in theatre. Moving forward, these discussions can help to explain audience intergroup relationships and bring awareness to our own ingroup biases when attending theatre. I know I have been guilty in the past of performer favoritism and this exploration has helped me to recognize my own partiality in audience settings. To further this discussion, I would like to investigate the hierarchy within the theatre, especially as it applies to respect between theatre makers and their audiences.
Works Cited
Hornsey, M.J. (2008), Social Identity Theory and Self-categorization Theory: A Historical Review. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 2: 204-222. https://doi-org.proxy.queensu.ca/10.1111/j.1751-9004.2007.00066.x
Park, S., Kryston, K., & Eden, A. (2021). Social norms and social identity explain the selection and anticipated enjoyment of in-group versus out-group films. Psychology of Popular Media, 10(3), 382–392. https://doi-org.proxy.queensu.ca/10.1037/ppm0000331