Image via University of Derby

The first visit on our Professional Development Programme was to Geese Theatre, a team of actors and group workers who facilitate workshops, training and consultation within the Criminal Justice System. Geese Theatre use participatory practice in order to engage individuals in self-reflection about their own behaviour and the choices they make. They work primarily with people who might be classified as ‘vulnerable’ or ‘hard to reach’ so a starting point for our enquiry into their processes was how to engage people to feel safe and included.

Led by Louise Heywood (Head of Development), our visit took the form of a workshop, demonstration and general conversation, with plenty of opportunity to slow things down, ask questions and reflect on the processes we were enacting/seeing. Simple, active exercises demonstrated to us how we could encourage participants to take part and open up in a non-threatening environment. This included, for example, the general rule that when working with young people fictional characters and hypothetical situations are more appropriate than asking for autobiographical stories or reflections, which might alienate or threaten.

Geese are perhaps most renowned for their use of masks, particularly the ‘fragments masks,’ each of which visually represents an archetypal aspect of the performances people enact on an everyday basis – in order to connect with others, to protect ourselves, to become a certain person in the eyes of others. Dramatic workshops in which participants are asked to play with masking and unmasking are designed to encourage self-reflection and introspection. We are all invited to examine the masks we make use of and how they affect our behaviour. Though I don’t think it is always as uncomplicated to separate the ‘masked’ and ‘unmasked’ aspects of ourselves, the visual impact of those masks is a powerful reminder of how our own behaviours can be affected, false and destructive.

I was interested in the levels of genuine participation work by Geese facilitates – would young offenders and prisoners be too cynical, disinterested or simply unable to put themselves into these role plays, performances and exercises? Louise said that most people become invested in the activities once they managed to loose some of that acute self-awareness that most people have when confronted with participatory drama. It reminds me that something pitched just right, that is thoughtful and considerate of its environment, can overcome barriers.

I asked Louise how she feels about straddling multiple sectors and the different identities they confer. Is she primarily an artist, or does she feel more invested in the aspects of her work that affect personal and social change? For her, the two are a perfect fit and the distinction often artificial. Geese is a definite example of how the arts and third/public sector institutions can deliver work in partnership. It’s hard to decide if they are ‘art’ or ‘social action’ or ‘therapy’ or something in between, but that’s ok.

After the workshop Lyn Jenkins (Kinship Narratives), Kate Peel (Fine Art Student at BCU), Heekyung Han (Cultural Policy student at Warwick University) and I continued some of the conversations half begun at the workshop. Interestingly the idea of masking, self-reflection and performance was something we were all interested in with regards to our own practices and professions. We talked about:

• The artistic process as a personal journey and a matter of looking inward but at the same time we are aware of and interested in the social practices and institutions that affect our work. It can be difficult to consciously relate the two and to figure out how to address political and social issues we care about in work that seems removed from this purpose.

• The desire for a sense of legitimacy – whether it is in terms of qualifications, client or partnership work, acquiring funding from a prestigious body… It can be important for artist practitioners to acquire a professional identity in these ways, which are often more important than salaries and renown.

• The idea that artists have to do things for themselves – there is little support within educational institutions and students are taught that they have to make things happen. This can be difficult when they want to explore different avenues, particularly in terms of delivery outside the contexts of exhibitions.

• Measuring the value/success of the arts, and participatory practice specifically. At Geese there are ongoing attempts to quantify the impact of their work but problems with knowing whether concrete changes were due to one factor, or many. Evaluation and analysis are often built into their projects all the way through, with qualitative methods seen as more reflective of the real success. But we all acknowledged that there are new pressures in the arts that lean towards quantification and converting success into monetary value. Artists working in participatory practice, particularly when the conditions of their commission or funding require it, need to know how to effectively measure the value of what they do

• Karen's blog