From Stage to Zoom: How Theatre Artists are Adapting In-Person Theatre to the Digital Space

It’s said that Shakespeare wrote Macbeth during the plague of 1606. Edvard Munch, the painter of The Scream, caught the Spanish Flu of 1918 and made art through it. Many artists have created very successfully during isolation. So when COVID-19 hit, it was fair of people to assume that we would experience the “next Modern Renaissance”. But where does that leave the artists who rely on gathering in person to share their art? Would theatre performance be able to be adapted during this time of being together, and by ourselves? These questions inspired me to explore how unique immersive and experimental theatre experiences have influenced theatre in the digital/ COVID-19 age.

Throughout my research, I came up with an answer to my inquiry. Exciting Digital Theatre focuses on an awareness of the audience and the performance space, a creation process led by the acting ensemble, experimentation with form and theme, and the breaking of conventional “theatrical rules”. Many of the theatrical greats of our time, from Stanislavsky to Ionesco, focused a lot of their work on experimentation and stepping away from the realism and naturalism that continues to be popular, even today. In 2020, many theatre makers continue to put up realistic plays, but on Zoom, leaving audiences feeling bored and unsatisfied. No longer is the classic naturalism play cutting it; digital theatre, as it is a relatively new form of theatre, requires experimentation in order to create compelling art that hooks audiences and leaves them thinking.

Many people define experimental theatre as theatre that pushes the boundaries of what is considered traditional theatre at the time. Experimental theatre seeks to “redefine, improve, and advance” (Roose-Evans) theatrical form, and each theatre maker fulfilled that in different ways. For example, Nemirovich-Danchenko, a director at the Moscow Art Theatre in the late 1890’s, was the first to break the theatrical convention of a “picture frame stage.” Gordon Craig believed that there were too many words in theatre making it too complicated; everything that needed to be said could “appeal to the emotions through movement alone.” Max Reinhardt thought “the world was a stage” and so he staged theatre everywhere: from random streets and churches to lakes and mountain sides. Theatre wouldn’t look the way it does today without these theatrical visionaries stepping outside the box.

In order to understand how experimental theatre experiences are crafted today in the digital space, we must first examine the theatre rule breakers of the past. One of the most influential theatre makers the world has ever seen was Bertolt Brecht. Brecht was a German playwright, poet, and director who is most known for his “Alienation Effect”, Verfremdungseffekt. The goal of this effect was to distance the audience emotionally from the material using a variety of techniques. By doing this, audiences are able to think about the political message being displayed more clearly. He used traditional motifs found in theatrical performance and flipped them on their heads in order to shock viewers. Some of these techniques include ending a scene before the pinnacle moment, allowing characters to step out of their roles to explain things to the audience, having characters break into song randomly, and projecting messages onto the stage. All of these techniques reminded the audience that they were watching a play, helping to wake them up to a new perspective (Roose-Evans 66).

Brecht’s experimentations were, at first, despised for being so different. In fact, experimental theatre has proven to be a risky endeavor throughout history. During the time of Stalin (1928-1953), experimental art was banned. Meyerhold, a Russian theatre director and producer, was declared an enemy of the state for continuing to produce theatre. Unwilling to step down, “he defended the right of the creative artist to experiment, and denounced the uniformity that was being imposed upon the arts” (Roose-Evans, page 30). He was shortly arrested and sentenced to death by firing squad, and his wife Zinaida Raikh was killed and disfigured shortly afterwards. Artists will put everything on the line to be true to their art and what they believe in, no matter the cost.

Brecht’s political theatre spread in popularity throughout the 1920s and 30s, inspiring many creators to also consider the role of the artist and if the artist was meant to engage the viewer in this way. Another huge time of theatrical experimentation came in the 30s with the Federal Theatre Project (FTP). The FTP, led by Hallie Flanagan, was a government sponsored program designed to put theatre artists back to work. Flanagan envisioned its mission to be bigger; she aimed to decentralize theatre from the big cities, and make it accessible to all, not just in different locations, but in terms of its content.

The Federal Theatre Project, because it was a funded program, was able to consider the future of theatre and what its role is in modern society without worrying about the cost. Flanagan started many amazing programs that challenged who was allowed to be on stage through the Negro Units, who was allowed to see theatre through the Children’s Theatre Program, and what theatre was allowed to discuss through the Living Newspapers. Throughout this program's four-year run, this project was able to sponsor 1,200 productions which over 30 million people were able to see at 200 theaters nationwide, all for free or greatly subsidized by the government (Houseman 174). And all during a great economic collapse, a time where the country needed to lean on its artists to heal.

As Brecht believed, it is the job of the theatre artist to engage audiences with difficult topics. Which is exactly what the FTP seeked to do through the Living Newspapers. One of the most successful programs of the FTP, this new theatrical form allowed journalists and theatre artists to collaborate and bring facts about current events to the public in an exciting way. Art has been known to spur people to action, and that was certainly true for the Living Newspapers. The most popular show, One-Third a Nation, a production that discussed housing inequality, actually helped to push new housing legislation through because of the wild success of the production. However, this was also the reason why the Federal Theatre Project was shut down. Due to the left-leaning nature of some of their work, many members of the Federal Theatre Project were put on trial on allegations that they were working with the Communist Party, and there weren’t any ways for the FTP members to defend themselves to the press (Witham, 107). The Living Newspapers was another risk taken in the name of art that ended in many people losing their jobs.

Experiments in theatre have continued to take place over the last few decades. One of the most notable pieces of the last decade is Sleep No More, an immersive theatrical experience in which audience members wander around a large space, masked, choosing their own adventure as actors perform Macbeth around them. First performed in London in 2003 and then at the American Repertory Theatre in Boston in 2009, Sleep No More now finds its home at the McKittrick Hotel in New York City. Allowing the audience to roam around the space and not be confined to their seats is one of the most experimental parts of this show. The cast also does not speak much dialogue, and instead, presents ideas through choreographed dance (a little like the work of Craig). This style of immersive theatre, called the sandbox, gives “ the audience the ability to explore a given space and the ability to choose how to experience the narrative or how to interact with characters” (Zombie). This form of theatre challenges the role of the audience in a theatrical experience. Is the audience supposed to be a silent observer, or do they have a say in how the actions on stage unfold?

Theatre has grown and changed so much through the work of theatre experimentalists who found challenges with the art form and developed their own unique solutions. However, what happens when one of the defining traits of a theatrical show, the ability to meet in person, is no longer feasible? This is the question many theatre makers have been asking themselves for the last year. And while many have tried, few have found great success in this art form. What do the ones who have found great victories in the digital space have in common? They think outside the box, reimagine, and take risks, just like the theatre experimentalists.

“The theatre has always lagged behind the other arts, being more resistant to change,” states author James Roose-Evans. This continues to be the case with digital theatre. The pandemic is bringing to light which theatre companies were creating ground-breaking work, and which ones were relying a little too heavily on naturalism theatre, which Peter Brook, theatre experimentalist, coined “‘deadly theatre’- plays which use the old methods and old formulae to a highly reductive end” (Roose-Evans, page 107). However, there are a few theatrical experiences whose attempts to set them apart from the rest are worth noting.

Some people say that food brings people together. This is certainly the case in Experimental Bitch Present’s production of In the Kitchen, written and performed by Hannah Goldman. Because we cannot gather in a theatrical space together, Goldman brings us to the next best place: the kitchen. When an audience member buys a ticket to this digital performance, they are sent ingredients and instructions on how to make Ba’aba Beh Tamur, an Iraqi cookie. While viewers make this cookie alongside their host, Goldman recounts her own experience as a Moroccan Jew, and the stories of other women surrounding “family, identity, heritage, pride and shame, and how we internalize shame and how we combat that through the little things we do everyday,” (Goldman). Through the use of a comfortable space for many, this digital performance manages to create a sense of belonging that has been missing from online theatre. Eating is another activity frequently done with other people, so it is fitting to combine it with theatre for a performance piece. There is a sense of purpose given to the audience members as they make this cookie alongside Goldman, giving them something fun and new to do to distract themselves from the eternal dread of digital performance.

Another impactful performance created in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic and Black Lives Matter Movement, Theatre for One: Here We Are connects one performer with one audience member in a Zoom room for a short, eight to ten minute piece. In the hope to connect more deeply with audiences, “the Here We Are writers have contributed works that span a spectrum of ideas and points of view. Theatre For One elevates a vibrant chorus of voices creating deeply personal works that resonate in this shared moment” (BFPL). This piece, like Sleep No More, challenges what the relationship between the audience and the actor is meant to be. However, instead of giving an audience member a mask, in a way, Theatre for One removes it, completely separating the barrier between audience and performer. The edgy energy of waiting for the actor to ask you something, alongside the gut-punching monologues about important topics of today, does exactly what Brecht wanted: it kept the audience alert and aware that they were watching a play in order to digest the compelling information more easily.

After looking at professional digital theatre experiences making their mark, I wanted to examine digital theatre in my own backyard. The Northeastern University Department of Theatre, the program in which I am enrolled, has continued to give students the opportunities to explore theatre in the digital space. I find that student theatre can be extremely experimental because we are in the process of breaking down our theatrical habits, leaving room for new ones. Although the Department of Theatre has put on quite a few digital productions throughout the last year, the most notable experiences I have observed were Viewpoints class and a digital production of Metamorphoses by Mary Zimmerman.

In the Spring semester of 2020, I was taking a Viewpoints Class with Professor Jonathan Carr. Viewpoints is a style of acting training originating from dance that focuses less on the psychology behind acting, instead honing in on ensemble work, movement, and keeping the energy in the space alive, because in the theatre, anything can happen and you have to be ready for it. Anne Bogart, the theatre artist who transitioned Viewpoints over from dance to acting, argues that there are nine integral parts to physical performance: spatial relationships, kinetic response, shape, gesture, repetition, architecture, tempo, duration, and topography (Dramatics Magazine). My class was halfway through our Viewpoints training when we all got put online.

I interviewed Jonathan about his experience teaching this physically demanding training online. He told me an anecdote about right before the pandemic when the University was asking teachers to consider which classes could go online, which might be able to work online, and which classes to not even try. “Antonio [Chair of The Northeastern Department of Theatre] and I agreed pretty quickly that Viewpoints was a zero on that scale, don’t even try.” And yet, ten days later, we were in a Zoom class, ready to try.

Jonathan and I both agreed that our class was determined to make art that meant something because we needed that art. Jonathan stated that “I think this is the strongest example I’ve had in a class where the class seemed to feel that they were making something for them and not for the class”. This desire to make meaningful art as a way to heal and work through the shock of the pandemic led to us making dramatic discoveries in the digital space. “It was that sort of lifeline to making something real when it felt like things were being taken away,” he said. “That is among my proudest teaching moments for sure, because it was impossible, but it wasn’t.” Over the course of a few weeks, we learned how to turn the cons of the digital space into pros. The distractions of parents bursting into the room to say lunch was ready led to the whole cohort of performers yelling “Lunch!” in different pitches and at different speeds, totally accepting that this distraction was part of the piece now. Or learning that we could “exit the stage” in two ways: through covering our cameras, or though turning them off and making sure our Zoom room hid non-video participants, allowing us to disappear from the space. By accepting that this was no longer the theatre we were familiar with, we were able to create something bold, exciting and new.

Northeastern Alum Des Bennett came to our final Viewpoints Presentation full of curiosity as to how we could make digital theatre compelling. They left feeling invigorated, even tweeting “What if… Jonathan Carr and the Viewpoints Class wrote a book about using the Viewpoints in the age of digital performance.” They had been prepping to complete their Capstone directing Scenes from Metamorphoses written and directed by Mary Zimmerman and were figuring out the logistics of getting a pool on the Studio Theatre stage when the pandemic hit. After watching our Viewpoints presentation, they had a new vigor about the endless possibilities of digital performance, if the work is put in.

What made Des Bennett’s production of Metamorphoses special was the production value. Through the combination of in person filming with masks and filming on Zoom, combined by thoughtful editing, a very clear world was created. As Metamorphoses is about a series of myths, it lent itself well to this performance as it didn’t exist in reality, and the production didn’t try to either. With ethereal costumes designed by Frances McSherry, magical set and lighting design by Oliver Watson, remarkable sound design by Jesse Timm, and thoughtful digital experience design by Matthew Hosking, every aspect of this performance was artfully crafted to design this other worldly experience. The cast’s commitment to theatrical experimentation throughout the rehearsal and performance process created something that was really compelling to watch, even though it was online.

This performance was presented in a way that was unique and unlike any digital theatre performance I had seen so far. The visually stunning website hosted this six episode series in succession, and after watching each episode you were greeted with an interactive element. This came in the form of a question, or a game, even a cookbook. All responses to these elements were posted on the site in live time, forming a new type of audience interaction and reimagining the role of the audience in theatre performance once again. These activities were thoughtful and considered the material of the show, creating a space in which audience members could consider what they had learned and how they could apply it to their own lives, similar to Brecht’s alienation technique. Although this isn’t the Capstone project that Bennett imagined, the work they put into creating something groundbreaking in this online space was well worth it.

Theatre has always been a tool for communities to use to heal, to learn, and to celebrate, especially during hardship. This art form has been evolving for centuries, from its origins in Greece through Brecht, the Federal Theatre Project, and immersive theatre, all the way to today. However, “The theatre has always lagged behind other arts, being more resistant to change” (Roose-Evans 102). Despite spending more than a year creating theatre in this digital space, more often than not, audiences are leaving theatrical performances unsatisfied. This is because many theatre artists are treating this new form of theatre in the same way as live theatre, when that could be farther from the truth. Digital Theatre, because we know so little about it, now falls into experimental theatre. We need to treat it as such and look to the theatrical discoveries made by theatrical experimentalists, from Stanislavsky to Brooks, for inspiration. Roose-Evans states that “the degree of energy, commitment, and sacrifice required for experiment and, above all, group-oriented works, is such that often a group runs out of steam, and creative ideas dry up” (Roose-Evans 188). Although digital theatre experiences require more effort, they provide something so much more fruitful than a naturalist play on Zoom. Someday very soon, theatre will be able to happen in person again. My biggest hope is that theatre artists hold onto what they learned from this year-long digital experiment and bring it to their work. Now, as Tony Kushner wrote in his famous play, Angels in America, “The great work begins.”