Types of task, types of audience, types of actor: interactions between mere presence and personality type in a simple mathematical task

Research into social facilitation effects reveals three factors affecting response performance: types of task, types of audience and type of actor. This study attempts to establish a minimal baseline for task and audience type in order to examine difference between personality types in the actors. Results indicate that performance in both extraverts and introverts increases in the minimal conditions of the mere presence of another person whilst carrying out a simple mathematical task. These results are interpreted through an analysis of Zajonc's (1965) drive theory with Eysenck's (1967) personality theory indicating that through further investigation performance curves might be devised for introverts and extraverts performing under a variety of task and audience conditions.

Le prix de l'individualité. Maine de Brian, Samuel Taylor Coleridge et la volonté: Deux postétités distinctes

This thesis is concerned with Maine de Biran’s and Samuel Taylor Coleridge’s conceptions of will, and the way in which both thinkers’ posterities have been affected by the central role of these very conceptions in their respective bodies of thought. The research question that animates this work can therefore be divided into two main parts, one of which deals with will, while the other deals with its effects on posterity. In the first pages of the Introduction, I make the case for a comparison between two philosophers, and show how this comparison can bring one closer to truth, understood not in objective, but in subjective terms. I then justify my choice by underlining that, in spite of their many differences, Maine de Biran and Samuel Taylor Coleridge followed comparable paths, intellectually and spiritually, and came to similar conclusions concerning the essential activity of the human mind. Finally, I ask whether it is possible that this very focus on the human will may have contributed to the state of both thinkers’ works and of the reception of those works. This prologue is followed by five parts. In the first part, the similarities and differences between the two thinkers are explored further. In the second part, the connections between philosophy and singularity are examined, in order to show the ambivalence of the will as a foundation for truth. The third part is dedicated to the traditional division between subject and object in psychology, and its relevance in history and in moral philosophy. The fourth part tackles the complexity of the question of influence, with respect to both Maine de Biran’s and Coleridge’s cases, both thinkers being indebted to many philosophers of all times and places, and having to rely heavily on others for the publication, or the interpretation of their own works. The fifth part is concerned with the different aspects of the faculty of will, and primarily its relationship with interiority, as incommensurability, and actual, conditioned existence in a certain historical and spatial context. It ends with a return to the question of will and posterity and an announcement of what will be covered in the main body of the thesis. The main body is divided into three parts:‘L’émancipation’, ‘L’affirmation, and ‘La projection’. The first part is devoted to the way Maine de Biran and Samuel Taylor Coleridge extricated themselves from one epistemological paradigm to contribute to the foundation of another. It is divided in four chapters. The first chapter deals with the aforementioned change of paradigm, as corresponding to the emergence of two separate but associated movements, Romanticism and what the French philosopher refers to as ‘The Age of History’. The second chapter concerns the movement that preceded them, i.e. the Enlightenment, its main features according to both of our thinkers, and the two epistemological models that prevailed under it and influenced them heavily in their early years: Sensationism (Maine de Biran) and Associationism (Coleridge). The third chapter is about the probable influence of Immanuel Kant and his followers on Maine de Biran and Coleridge, and the various facts that allow us to claim originality for both thinkers’ works. In the fourth chapter, I contrast Maine de Biran and Coleridge with other movements and thinkers of their time, showing that, contrary to their respective thoughts, Maine de Biran and Coleridge could not but break free from the then prevailing systematic approach to truth. The second part of the thesis is concerned with the first part of its research question, namely, Maine de Biran’s and Coleridge’s conceptions of the will. It is divided into four chapters. The first chapter is a reflection on the will as a paradox: on the one hand, the will cannot be caused by any other phenomenon, or it is no longer a will; but it cannot be left purely undetermined, as if it is, it is then not different from chance. It thus needs, in order to be, to be contradictorily already moral. The second chapter is a comparison between Maine de Biran’s and Coleridge’s accounts of the origin of the will, where it is found that the French philosopher only observes that he has a will, whereas the English philosopher postulates the existence of this will. The comparison between Maine de Biran’s and Coleridge’s conceptions of the will is pursued in the third chapter, which tackles the question of the coincidence between the will and the self, in both thinkers’ works. It ends with the fourth chapter, which deals with the question of the relationship between the will and what is other to it, i.e. bodily sensations, passions and desires. The third part of the thesis focuses on the second part of its research question, namely the posterity of Maine de Biran’s and Coleridge’s works. It is divided into four chapters. The first chapter constitutes a continuation of the last chapter of the preceding part, in that that it deals with Maine de Biran’s and Coleridge’s relations to the ‘other’, and particularly their potential and actual audience, and with the way these relations may have affected their writing and publishing practices. The second chapter is a survey of both thinkers’ general reception, where it is found that, while Maine de Biran has been claimed by two important movements of thoughts as their initiator, Coleridge has been neglected by the only real movement he could have, or may indeed have pioneered. The third chapter is more directly concerned with the posterities of Maine de Biran’s and Coleridge’s conceptions of will, and attempts to show that the approach to, and the meaning of the will have evolved throughout the nineteenth century, and in the French Spiritualist and the British Idealist movements, from an essentially personal one to a more impersonal one. The fourth chapter is a partial conclusion, whose aim is to give a precise idea of where Maine de Biran and Coleridge stand, in relation to their century and to the philosophical movements and matters we are concerned with. The conclusion is a recapitulation of what has been found, with a particular emphasis on the dialogue initiated between Maine de Biran and Coleridge on the will, and the relation between will and posterity. It suggests that both thinkers have to pay the price of a problematic reception for the individuality that pervades their respective works, and goes further in suggesting that s/he who chooses to found his individuality on the will is bound to feel this incompleteness in his/her own personal life more acutely than s/he who does not. It ends with a reflection on fixedness and movement, as the two antagonistic states that the theoretician of the will paradoxically aspires to.

Une étude générique du metteur en scène au théâtre:son émergence et son rôle moderne et contemporain

The theatre director (metteur en scene in French) is a relatively new figure in theatre practice. It was not until the I820s that the term 'mise en scene' gained currency. The term 'director' was not in general use until the I880s. The emergence and the role of the director has been considered from a variety of perspectives, either through the history of theatre (Allevy, Jomaron, Sarrazac, Viala, Biet and Triau); the history of directing (Chinoy and Cole, Boll, Veinstein, Roubine); semiotic approaches to directing (Whitmore, Miller, Pavis); the semiotics of performance (De Marinis); generic approaches to the mise en scene (Thomasseau, Banu); post-dramatic approaches to theatre (Lehmann); approaches to performance process and the specifics of rehearsal methodology (Bradby and Williams, Giannachi and Luckhurst, Picon-Vallin, Styan). What the scholarly literature has not done so far is to map the parameters necessarily involved in the directing process, and to incorporate an analysis of the emergence of the theatre director during the modem period and consider its impact on contemporary performance practice. Directing relates primarily to the making of the performance guided by a director, a single figure charged with the authority to make binding artistic decisions. Each director may have her/his own personal approaches to the process of preparation prior to a show. This is exemplified, for example, by the variety of terms now used to describe the role and function of directing, from producer, to facilitator or outside eye. However, it is essential at the outset to make two observations, each of which contributes to a justification for a generic analysis (as opposed to a genetic approach). Firstly, a director does not work alone, and cooperation with others is involved at all stages of the process. Secondly, beyond individual variation, the role of the director remains twofold. The first is to guide the actors (meneur de jeu, directeur d'acteurs, coach); the second is to make a visual representation in the performance space (set designer, stage designer, costume designer, lighting designer, scenographe). The increasing place of scenography has brought contemporary theatre directors such as Wilson, Castellucci, Fabre to produce performances where the performance space becomes a semiotic dimension that displaces the primacy of the text. The play is not, therefore, the sole artistic vehicle for directing. This definition of directing obviously calls for a definition of what the making of the performance might be. The thesis defines the making of the performance as the activity of bringing a social event, by at least one performer, providing visual and/or textual meaning in a performance space. This definition enables us to evaluate four consistent parameters throughout theatre history: first, the social aspect associated to the performance event; second, the devising process which may be based on visual and/or textual elements; third, the presence of at least one performer in the show; fourth, the performance space (which is not simply related to the theatre stage). Although the thesis focuses primarily on theatre practice, such definition blurs the boundaries between theatre and other collaborative artistic disciplines (cinema, opera, music and dance). These parameters illustrate the possibility to undertake a generic analysis of directing, and resonate with the historical, political and artistic dimensions considered. Such a generic perspective on the role of the director addresses three significant questions: an historical question: how/why has the director emerged?; a sociopolitical question: how/why was the director a catalyst for the politicisation of theatre, and subsequently contributed to the rise of State-funded theatre policy?; and an artistic one: how/why the director has changed theatre practice and theory in the twentieth-century? Directing for the theatre as an artistic activity is a historically situated phenomenon. It would seem only natural from a contemporary perspective to associate the activity of directing to the function of the director. This is relativised, however, by the question of how the performance was produced before the modern period. The thesis demonstrates that the rise of the director is a progressive and historical phenomenon (Dort) rather than a mere invention (Viala, Sarrazac). A chronological analysis of the making of the performance throughout theatre history is the most useful way to open the study. In order to understand the emergence of the director, the research methodology assesses the interconnection of the four parameters above throughout four main periods of theatre history: the beginning of the Renaissance (meneur de jeu), the classical age (actor-manager and stage designer-manager), the modern period (director) and the contemporary period (director-facilitator, performer). This allows us properly to appraise the progressive emergence of the director, as well as to make an analysis of her/his modern and contemporary role. The first chapter argues that the physical separation between the performance space and its audience, which appeared in the early fifteenth-century, has been a crucial feature in the scenographic, aesthetic, political and social organisation of the performance. At the end of the Middle Ages, French farces which raised socio-political issues (see Bakhtin) made a clear division on a single outdoor stage (treteau) between the actors and the spectators, while religious plays (drame fiturgique, mystere) were mostly performed on various outdoor and opened multispaces. As long as the performance was liturgical or religious, and therefore confined within an acceptable framework, it was allowed. At the time, the French ecclesiastical and civil authorities tried, on several occasions, to prohibit staged performances. As a result, practitioners developed non-official indoor spaces, the Theatre de fa Trinite (1398) being the first French indoor theatre recognized by scholars. This self-exclusion from the open public space involved breaking the accepted rules by practitioners (e.g. Les Confreres de fa Passion), in terms of themes but also through individual input into a secular performance rather than the repetition of commonly known religious canvases. These developments heralded the authorised theatres that began to emerge from the mid-sixteenth century, which in some cases were subsidised in their construction. The construction of authorised indoor theatres associated with the development of printing led to a considerable increase in the production of dramatic texts for the stage. Profoundly affecting the reception of the dramatic text by the audience, the distance between the stage and the auditorium accompanied the changing relationship between practitioners and spectators. This distance gave rise to a major development of the role of the actor and of the stage designer. The second chapter looks at the significance of both the actor and set designer in the devising process of the performance from the sixteenth-century to the end of the nineteenth-century. The actor underwent an important shift in function in this period from the delivery of an unwritten text that is learned in the medieval oral tradition to a structured improvisation produced by the commedia dell 'arte. In this new form of theatre, a chef de troupe or an experienced actor shaped the story, but the text existed only through the improvisation of the actors. The preparation of those performances was, moreover, centred on acting technique and the individual skills of the actor. From this point, there is clear evidence that acting began to be the subject of a number of studies in the mid-sixteenth-century, and more significantly in the seventeenth-century, in Italy and France. This is revealed through the implementation of a system of notes written by the playwright to the actors (stage directions) in a range of plays (Gerard de Vivier, Comedie de la Fidelite Nuptiale, 1577). The thesis also focuses on Leoni de' Sommi (Quatro dialoghi, 1556 or 1565) who wrote about actors' techniques and introduced the meneur de jeu in Italy. The actor-manager (meneur de jeu), a professional actor, who scholars have compared to the director (see Strihan), trained the actors. Nothing, however, indicates that the actor-manager was directing the visual representation of the text in the performance space. From the end of the sixteenth-century, the dramatic text began to dominate the process of the performance and led to an expansion of acting techniques, such as the declamation. Stage designers carne from outside the theatre tradition and played a decisive role in the staging of religious celebrations (e.g. Actes des Apotres, 1536). In the sixteenth-century, both the proscenium arch and the borders, incorporated in the architecture of the new indoor theatres (theatre a l'italienne), contributed to create all kinds of illusions on the stage, principally the revival of perspective. This chapter shows ongoing audience demands for more elaborate visual effects on the stage. This led, throughout the classical age, and even more so during the eighteenth-century, to grant the stage design practitioner a major role in the making of the performance (see Ciceri). The second chapter demonstrates that the guidance of the actors and the scenographic conception, which are the artistic components of the role of the director, appear to have developed independently from one another until the nineteenth-century. The third chapter investigates the emergence of the director per se. The causes for this have been considered by a number of scholars, who have mainly identified two: the influence of Naturalism (illustrated by the Meiningen Company, Antoine, and Stanislavski) and the invention of electric lighting. The influence of the Naturalist movement on the emergence of the modem director in the late nineteenth-century is often considered as a radical factor in the history of theatre practice. Naturalism undoubtedly contributed to changes in staging, costume and lighting design, and to a more rigorous commitment to the harmonisation and visualisation of the overall production of the play. Although the art of theatre was dependent on the dramatic text, scholars (Osborne) demonstrate that the Naturalist directors did not strictly follow the playwright's indications written in the play in the late nineteenth-century. On the other hand, the main characteristic of directing in Naturalism at that time depended on a comprehensive understanding of the scenography, which had to respond to the requirements of verisimilitude. Electric lighting contributed to this by allowing for the construction of a visual narrative on stage. However, it was a master technician, rather than an emergent director, who was responsible for key operational decisions over how to use this emerging technology in venues such as the new Bayreuth theatre in 1876. Electric lighting reflects a normal technological evolution and cannot be considered as one of the main causes of the emergence of the director. Two further causes of the emergence of the director, not considered in previous studies, are the invention of cinema and the Symbolist movement (Lugne-Poe, Meyerhold). Cinema had an important technological influence on the practitioners of the Naturalist movement. In order to achieve a photographic truth on the stage (tableau, image), Naturalist directors strove to decorate the stage with the detailed elements that would be expected to be found if the situation were happening in reality. Film production had an influence on the work of actors (Walter). The filmmaker took over a primary role in the making of the film, as the source of the script, the filming process and the editing of the film. This role influenced the conception that theatre directors had of their own work. It is this concept of the director which influenced the development of the theatre director. As for the Symbolist movement, the director's approach was to dematerialise the text of the playwright, trying to expose the spirit, movement, colour and rhythm of the text. Therefore, the Symbolists disengaged themselves from the material aspect of the production, and contributed to give greater artistic autonomy to the role of the director. Although the emergence of the director finds its roots amongst the Naturalist practitioners (through a rigorous attempt to provide a strict visual interpretation of the text on stage), the Symbolist director heralded the modem perspective of the making of performance. The emergence of the director significantly changed theatre practice and theory. For instance, the rehearsal period became a clear work in progress, a platform for both developing practitioners' techniques and staging the show. This chapter explores and contrasts several practitioners' methods based on the two aspects proposed for the definition of the director (guidance of the actors and materialisation of a visual space). The fourth chapter argues that the role of the director became stronger, more prominent, and more hierarchical, through a more political and didactic approach to theatre as exemplified by the cases of France and Germany at the end of the nineteenth-century and through the First World War. This didactic perspective to theatre defines the notion of political theatre. Political theatre is often approached by the literature (Esslin, Willett) through a Marxist interpretation of the great German directors' productions (Reinhardt, Piscator, Brecht). These directors certainly had a great influence on many directors after the Second World War, such as Jean Vilar, Judith Molina, Jean-Louis Barrault, Roger Planchon, Augusto Boal, and others. This chapter demonstrates, moreover, that the director was confirmed through both ontological and educational approaches to the process of making the performance, and consequently became a central and paternal figure in the organisational and structural processes practiced within her/his theatre company. In this way, the stance taken by the director influenced the State authorities in establishing theatrical policy. This is an entirely novel scholarly contribution to the study of the director. The German and French States were not indifferent to the development of political theatre. A network of public theatres was thus developed in the inter-war period, and more significantly after the Second World War. The fifth chapter shows how State theatre policies establish its sources in the development of political theatre, and more specifically in the German theatre trade union movement (Volksbiihne) and the great directors at the end of the nineteenth-century. French political theatre was more influenced by playwrights and actors (Romain Rolland, Louise Michel, Louis Lumet, Emile Berny). French theatre policy was based primarily on theatre directors who decentralised their activities in France during both the inter-war period and the German occupation. After the Second World War, the government established, through directors, a strong network of public theatres. Directors became both the artistic director and the executive director of those institutionalised theatres. The institution was, however, seriously shaken by the social and political upheaval of 1968. It is the link between the State and the institution in which established directors were entangled that was challenged by the young emerging directors who rejected institutionalised responsibility in favour of the autonomy of the artist in the 1960s. This process is elucidated in chapter five. The final chapter defines the contemporary role of the director in contrasting thework of a number of significant young theatre practitioners in the 1960s such as Peter Brook, Ariane Mnouchkine, The Living Theater, Jerzy Grotowski, Augusto Boal, Eugenio Barba, all of whom decided early on to detach their companies from any form of public funding. This chapter also demonstrates how they promoted new forms of performance such as the performance of the self. First, these practitioners explored new performance spaces outside the traditional theatre building. Producing performances in a non-dedicated theatre place (warehouse, street, etc.) was a more frequent practice in the 1960s than before. However, the recent development of cybertheatre questions both the separation of the audience and the practitioners and the place of the director's role since the 1990s. Secondly, the role of the director has been multifaceted since the 1960s. On the one hand, those directors, despite all their different working methods, explored western and non-western acting techniques based on both personal input and collective creation. They challenged theatrical conventions of both the character and the process of making the performance. On the other hand, recent observations and studies distinguish the two main functions of the director, the acting coach and the scenographe, both having found new developments in cinema, television, and in various others events. Thirdly, the contemporary director challenges the performance of the text. In this sense, Antonin Artaud was a visionary. His theatre illustrates the need for the consideration of the totality of the text, as well as that of theatrical production. By contrasting the theories of Artaud, based on a non-dramatic form of theatre, with one of his plays (Le Jet de Sang), this chapter demonstrates how Artaud examined the process of making the performance as a performance. Live art and autobiographical performance, both taken as directing the se(f, reinforce this suggestion. Finally, since the 1990s, autobiographical performance or the performance of the self is a growing practical and theoretical perspective in both performance studies and psychology-related studies. This relates to the premise that each individual is making a representation (through memory, interpretation, etc.) of her/his own life (performativity). This last section explores the links between the place of the director in contemporary theatre and performers in autobiographical practices. The role of the traditional actor is challenged through non-identification of the character in the play, while performers (such as Chris Burden, Ron Athey, Orlan, Franko B, Sterlac) have, likewise, explored their own story/life as a performance. The thesis demonstrates the validity of the four parameters (performer, performance space, devising process, social event) defining a generic approach to the director. A generic perspective on the role of the director would encompass: a historical dimension relative to the reasons for and stages of the 'emergence' of the director; a socio-political analysis concerning the relationship between the director, her/his institutionalisation, and the political realm; and the relationship between performance theory, practice and the contemporary role of the director. Such a generic approach is a new departure in theatre research and might resonate in the study of other collaborative artistic practices.

Audience design in the police interview:the interactional and judicial consequences of audience orientation

Police-suspect interviews in England & Wales are a multi-audience, multi-purpose, transcontextual mode of discourse. They are conducted as part of the initial investigation into a crime, but are subsequently recontextualised through the judicial process, ultimately being presented in court as evidence against the interviewee. The communicative challenges posed by multiple future audiences are investigated by applying Bell’s (1984) audience design model to the police interview, and the resulting "poor fit" demonstrates why this context is discursively counter-intuitive to participants. Further, data analysis indicates that interviewer and interviewee, although ostensibly addressing each other, may orientate to different audiences, with potentially serious consequences. As well as providing new insight into police-suspect interview interaction, this article seeks to extend understanding of the influence of audience on interaction at the discourse level, and to contribute to the development of theoretical models for contexts with multiple or asynchronous audiences.

'Forced to Friendship'? Russian (mis-)understandings of soft power and the implications for audience attraction in Ukraine

This article argues that for all its efforts to implement soft power techniques, the Kremlin still fails to grasp the subtle, voluntaristic essence of soft power. This is reflected in a style of public interaction that has practical implications for how Russian soft power overtures are received by the audience. This is demonstrated through the findings of mixed-method empirical research from four Ukrainian regions. Thus, while surveys show that the worldview promoted by Russian public diplomacy resonates to some extent, insights from focus groups indicate that potential attraction is nevertheless limited by Russia's 'hard' and obtrusive approach to cultural influence.

A seismic shift? An evaluation of the impact of new media on perceptions of freedom of expression and privacy

New media platforms have changed the media landscape forever, as they have altered our perceptions of the limits of communication, and reception of information. Platforms such as Facebook, Twitter and WhatsApp enable individuals to circumvent the traditional mass media, converging audience and producer to create millions of ‘citizen journalists’. This new breed of journalist uses these platforms as a way of, not only receiving news, but of instantaneously, and often spontaneously, expressing opinions and venting and sharing emotions, thoughts and feelings. They are liberated from cultural and physical restraints, such as time, space and location, and they are not constrained by factors that impact upon the traditional media, such as editorial control, owner or political bias or the pressures of generating commercial revenue. A consequence of the way in which these platforms have become ingrained within our social culture is that habits, conventions and social norms, that were once informal and transitory manifestations of social life, are now infused within their use. What were casual and ephemeral actions and/or acts of expression, such as conversing with friends or colleagues or swapping/displaying pictures, or exchanging thoughts that were once kept private, or maybe shared with a select few, have now become formalised and potentially permanent, on view for the world to see. Incidentally, ‘traditional’ journalists and media outlets are also utilising new media, as it allows them to react, and disseminate news, instantaneously, within a hyper-competitive marketplace. However, in a world where we are saturated, not only by citizen journalists, but by traditional media outlets, offering access to news and opinion twenty-four hours a day, via multiple new media platforms, there is increased pressure to ‘break’ news fast and first. This paper will argue that new media, and the culture and environment it has created, for citizen journalists, traditional journalists and the media generally, has altered our perceptions of the limits and boundaries of freedom of expression dramatically, and that the corollary to this seismic shift is the impact on the notion of privacy and private life. Consequently, this paper will examine what a reasonable expectation of privacy may now mean, in a new media world.