Freedom of Performing Arts in Presenting Political Issues after the 2014 Coup; Case Studies from Crescent Moon Theatre and B-floor Theatre.

Main Article Content

ภัธทรา โต๊ะบุรินทร์

Abstract

This research on “Freedom of Performing Arts for Presenting Political Issues After the 2014 Coup: Case Studies of the Crescent Moon Theatre and the B-Floor Theatre” aims to study on freedom status of the Crescent Moon Theatre and the B-Floor Theatre after 2014 Coup as well as to analyze on adjustment/ negotiation of both small theatre groups to affirm their freedom.


This research was conducted based on case studies of the Crescent Moon Theatre and the B-Floor Theatre by studying through forms and content of 5 performing arts presenting political issues during 2014 – 2017 consisted of “Between”, “Being Paulina Salas and the Practice”, “Something Missing”, “Cecin'est pas la politique”, and “Fundamental”. The research methodology was Content Analysis emphasizing on Analysis of Qualitative Data conducted through Interpretative Approach.


The results revealed that political situations, before and after 2014 Coup, explicitly affected to freedom of small theatre groups. However, the Crescent Moon Theatre and the B-Floor Theatre remained insistent on creating more performing arts throughout these 4 years in order to communicate “freedom of thought” to audiences and affirm that art is the incomparable model of democratic action in Thai society.


Adjustment/Negotiation of small theatre groups with competent authorities utilized for affirming freedom after 2014 Coup was divided into 2 parts including: Utilization of performing arts as the weapon in the war of position based on 5 performing arts in order to question on various social/political issues/situations leading to essentially common issues, and Utilization of performing arts as the key to open art spaces to all parts to participate in politics and administration fully through the forms of theatre presented by the Crescent Moon Theatre and the B-Floor Theatre under commonly remarkable feature, i.e., Collaboration – building participation in creation process among director, performers, and crews as well as building participation between performers and audiences, that were considered as esthetic of controversy in lieu of acceptance, connection among persons who had never realized that they were related to one another, and political opportunity provided to persons who had social roles.

Keywords

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Article Details

Section
Performing arts

References

ณัฐนนต์ สิปปภากุล. (18 ตุลาคม 2555). จากศิลปะเพื่อชีวิตสู่ศิลปะสร้างสรรค์สังคม.สืบค้นจาก https://art-culture-academy2.blogspot.com/2012/10/004.html
วันรัก สุวรรณวัฒนา. (10 ธันวาคม 2553). ศิลปะ เสรีภาพและประชาธิปไตย. สืบค้นจากhttps://www.matichon.co.th/news_detail.php?newsid=1291958039&grpid=&catid.
omuretto. (26 มกราคม 2558). บางละเมิด :The land ‘We’ do not own. สืบค้นจาก https://pantip.com/topic/33155192
Gramsci, A. (1971). On Intellectual. In Prison Notebook. Quintin Hoare and Geoffrey Nowell. Smith (ed). New York: International Publisher.
Rancière, Jacque. (1998). Dis-agreement: Politics and Philosophy. University of Minnesota Press. Minneapolis
___________. (2006). “Thinking Between Discipline : an aesthetic of knowledge,” Jon Roffe (trans.) PARRHESIA. (1), 1 - 12.