The Stage Should Be Accessible to Everyone: An Interview With Justyna Sobczyk

teatr-justyna-sobczyk-fot-leszek-zych-polityka.jpg, default, Teatr 21, photo: ⓒ POLITYKA / Leszek Zych

'In our theatre, there’s a secondary process in addition to the purely theatrical process – namely, the familiarization of a collective presence. Someone might say: well, but this isn’t the aim of theatre. But for me it is,' says Justyna Sobczyk, a drama instructor, theatre director and founder of Teatr 21 (Theatre 21).

Founded by Justyna Sobczyk, Theatre 21 has evolved over the past 15 years from workshop performances in a school gymnasium, attended only by the actors’ families, to the theatrical mainstream and a Passport Award from Polityka magazine. The group has consistently focused on development – both its own and that of its audience. Since 2018, the Theatre 21 Foundation has also been running Centrum Sztuki Włączającej (The Centre for Inclusive Arts), a community cultural institution that is currently seeking a stationary location.

Marcelina Obarska: It is often said that people who live in a larger human-animal group have stronger immune systems because they’re surrounded by a more diverse microbiome. The concept of biodiversity appears in Theatre 21’s manifesto describing the current year of your activities. What is biodiversity in theatre, and what gains can be made from it beyond better resilience in a metaphorical sense?

Justyna Sobczyk: We understand biodiversity very simply – it involves making a case for the presence of artists with disabilities in the field of art, but also for a more diverse audience. For broad representation in both these fields. We sense an acute and visible lack of artists with disabilities on stage, and I see the great importance of activities that bring artists together in a diversified community. I would like to see a change in this direction – not only in the reality of Theatre 21, which explores this area, but for diversity to become the new norm in public theatres. We are also pushing for the presence of students with disabilities. Stories are reaching us about people who show up for art school entrance exams and surprise lecturers with their presence. The lecturers don’t know how to interpret such actions that deliberately go against the school’s tenets. We see the practice of biodiversity as a step towards the democratization of artistic and public space. We firmly believe that the assumption that certain people are automatically excluded from such a space is harmful. We feel that this is a reproduced act that is passed down in the theatre tradition. Currently, these old assumptions are being ripped apart, and myths and preconceptions are collapsing when it comes to the world of theatre academies. I feel that theatres intuitively seek diversity and need it. I observe this, and I want to believe that it’s not just a matter of finances and annual statements in which institutions must show their cooperation with NGOs. Of course, these types of collaborations are mutually beneficial, but I want to believe it’s a gesture that demonstrates the need for contact with other actors and artists who bring different issues, energy, and presence to the theatre.

This year of Theatre 21’s activities should be an incentive for people to strive for such encounters. The stage should be accessible to everyone. In this context, I recall something from the small, now defunct 'Inspiro' community centre near Krakow. There was a ramp leading to a stage intended for children instead of stairs. The ramp was both a super-attractive solution that allowed children to run freely, and also allowed children in strollers and wheelchairs to reach it. This is a very inspiring symbolic gesture.

Picture display

standardowy (864px desktop)

Scene from the play 'Superspektakl' directed by Justyna Sobczyk and Jakub Skrzywanek, 2017, photo: Magda Hueckel/Powszechny Theatre in Warsaw

Picture image

superspektakl_0220.jpg

MO: You mentioned the 'new normal'. You and Theatre 21 recently received a Passport Award from 'Polityka' magazine for 'practicing diversity and collaboration on a human, social and artistic level'. You could say that a group that seems ‘different’ organically puts into practice what should be the norm in any theatre: inclusion, diversity, collaboration, openness to one another…

JS: I have a feeling that we, as Theatre 21, are a tiny, new island. Rebecca Solnit has written about the metaphor of the island as another vital voice with liberating power. Through years of work, we have established our place in the theatrical archipelago. We give ourselves permission to take risks and are constantly exploring how to work in diverse ensembles. This makes me smile because my creative processes trigger a lot of different thoughts in me. At first, I was convinced that the actors working with us should ‘act less’ so that the difference between them and the Theatre 21 actors wouldn’t be so conspicuous. But then I thought, why shouldn’t they act, since this is their workshop? Let them share whatever they’ve got. Stage actors talk a lot, they have a lot of questions, because we as a group always start without a script – it’s created during our sessions together. But Theatre 21 actors don’t like to talk, they get bored, they yawn ostentatiously while the director gives long speeches, and sometimes they even fall asleep. They are like a living tissue that we constantly observe.

It’s impossible to include everyone in the same process. And the process itself doesn’t have to be a ‘success’ in which everything always goes well and dynamically, good material is produced at every rehearsal, the director has a clear idea about everything, the actors carry it all out perfectly… In our theatre, there is a secondary process in addition to the purely theatrical process – namely, the familiarization of a collective presence. There occurs a meeting of people who often function in such distant worlds from each other that, in principle, they would normally never meet at all. Someone might say: well, but this is not the aim of theatre. But for me it is.

MO: Taking this diversity into consideration in terms of pace, personality and needs is at the heart of inclusive education, in which the students aren’t forced to fit into the system, but rather the system becomes flexible and accommodates these differences. One of your planned projects is Free School 21, inspired by the concept of democratic schools.

JS: We are trying to get funding for this project from the Batory Foundation. I think it’s a big challenge for us as a theatre to apply for support for a project that isn’t artistic at all. Together with Justyna Lipko-Konieczna and Justyna Wielgus, we are currently trying to construct a template that would indicate what such a school ideally would be like. Of course, a huge inspiration for us is the field of alternative education, which goes beyond such beliefs as, 'I have to go to school, to some place, so that someone will teach me something.' Rather, it is about making development centred around interests. In Poland, people with disabilities have a structured education up to the age of 24, then the only solution is occupational therapy workshops, which are meant to prepare them for work, of which there isn’t much on the market. We asked the actors a simple question: would they be interested in learning more? The rest of us have the opportunity to go to college, to explore what interests us. In the system that is prepared for people with intellectual disabilities, there is no such thing. The roles they are given are third, fourth rate, and are rarely creative activities. In response to the question of whether the actors would like to develop further, a lot of ideas came up – that they would like to learn to speak clearly and in full sentences, they would like to learn how to be independent and to develop in the romantic sphere. I must admit that a big surprise for me was that poetry came up repeatedly in the context of development. The actors said it was a wonderful sphere of creative activity, and they wanted to learn how poetry is written, and how to read it. We once had a discussion about advertising – if each actor were to have a portfolio, he would have to indicate what he wanted to advertise. Advertising poetry was at the top of the list.

MO: Perhaps advertising poetry would solve the problem of low readership of poetry books in Poland.

JS: Maybe we should suggest it to them… The actors feel that poetry is in a lousy situation. That’s why I think diversity is great. At first, we think it’s people with disabilities who can get so much from us. But the funny thing is that in the collective process, the give and take flows in both directions. This is what Free School 21 is supposed to be based on. It’s also important for us to bring people with disabilities into the position of those who teach, and to build leadership competence in them. Our actors are increasingly ready to take responsibility for leading workshops. And in turn, people like us can learn to withdraw to give people with disabilities space. Over the years, a situation has developed in which I’m forced to be in a supportive position, but I’m always perceived as the front person. We now want to open a space for training artists and educators working with people with disabilities, so that they can learn to consciously yield ground and leadership to them. The idea isn’t to work less, to take less responsibility, but to take a conscious step back – towards a change that leads to artists with disabilities becoming more independent and confident about accepting leadership challenges. We feel that this process needs to be designed and implemented very carefully and consciously. We want to facilitate this process.

In a democratic education, a child is consciously followed and allowed to move forward. The teacher is present, but they’re not the one leading. Free School 21 is intended to be just such a project, through which it may be possible to generate in people with disabilities a readiness and willingness to introduce others to areas in which they feel themselves to be experts. We’re committed to diversity at both the level of instruction and participation. We see that this approach is already present in the world. Some time ago, Maja Kowalczyk [an actress at Theatre 21 – ed.] and Justyna Wielgus participated in a workshop in Hamburg, which inspired us to seek a change in the quality of cooperation with actors with disabilities. The very form of the invitation was new to us: 'We invite artists with disabilities together with their assistants.' At first, we were surprised: 'But what do you mean by "assistants"? With us there are no assistants, we are the artists!' But in fact, this framework was clearly delineated during the workshops: people with disabilities were conducting activities that had the right dramaturgy for them, someone would suddenly stop, for example, and then start moving again after a long pause… and there was full permission to do so. You asked about biodiversity – in this context, the way a forest functions, for example, is very inspiring. It’s like the structure of tree roots, which connect and grow horizontally. A forest is not a space full of trees that are equally strong. Some are weaker than others. And when we remove diseased trees, it creates too much vacant space, which poses a threat to those that remain.

I’m deeply moved by the sight of trees that are almost lying down, propped up by those that are young and strong. All trees are on an equal footing… This is an image that strikes me whenever I’m in a nature reserve. It’s an amazing feeling to be in such a landscape.

Picture display

standardowy (864px desktop)

A scene from the play 'Rewolucja, której nie było' (The Revolution That Never Was), directed by Justyna Sobczyk, 2018, photo by Grzegorz Press/Theatre 21

Picture image

rewolucja_ktorej_nie_bylo_3.jpg

MO: In the context of such a diverse theatre ecosystem, audience development is also important. You said in an earlier interview that Theatre 21’s activities are largely for the benefit of the audience. How has your relationship with the audience changed over the past dozen years?

JS: I think that, in general, our greatest success has been in the field of audience development. We started with audiences consisting of families and friends. I recall the first performances at the Theatre Institute, when a couple of strangers were sitting in the audience, and we wondered whether we should perform for them at all. I still remember when I went to the actors before the performance and knew that there were only four people sitting in the audience. This triggered coaching energy in me; I told them that it didn’t matter that there were only four people, because these four people made the decision today to come to us in a city where there are so many other theatres, there’s an opera house and a philharmonic hall. And that it’s for them that we’ll perform today. It has changed a lot now; we have a very richly diverse audience. There are teachers who come with their students, there are parents, and we also have fans who have been accompanying us for years. There are a lot of people from the theatre community, and this is something for which we’ve been waiting for a very long time. The initial low attendance didn’t worry us because we didn’t have unreasonable expectations. We were determined to perform consistently, and the most important thing has always been this consistency. It paid off. We gained an audience that perhaps had been slightly afraid of such an encounter. Some told us, 'God, I’ve never seen so many people with disabilities in one place at the same time!' One woman, as soon as the actors came out onto the stage, moved from the first row to the last. She apologized for her behaviour, but she said she’d had to move away because it was too strong an image for her. I remember how for some people – even my immediate family – the sight of a performance involving people with disabilities triggered sadness. I have a lot of understanding for the audience and I keep my fingers crossed for them. It’s great when you feel, after so many years, how the tense atmosphere is loosening up. More often now, people in the audience allow themselves to laugh. There were times when one audience member nudged another one who was laughing, trying to point out that one shouldn’t laugh at a performance by people with disabilities.

The story of how our audience developed is a very interesting tale about the theatre, and I regret that no one photographed this process. All camera lenses were directed at the stage.

MO: I would also like to ask about your personal perspective. I know that you became interested in the creative work of people with disabilities early on – as early as high school. How have your beliefs changed over the years? Have you dismantled any stereotypes within yourself? Has anything surprised you, in particular?

JS: The knowledge that I acquired at the special pedagogy centre in Toruń has become completely outdated. Thanks to the work of Justyna Lipko-Konieczna and Ewelina Godlewska-Byliniak published in the field of disability studies, I became an advocate of the social, rather than medical, system of knowledge regarding disability. As a student, I learned the degrees of disability and was questioned on whether I recognized them and could diagnose them. I rejected all this with tremendous ease. When I started working with Theatre 21, I didn’t want to familiarize myself with any diagnoses and said that we would get to know each other onstage, in practice. The social model says that disability is the result of exclusionary strategies present in society. I also think that by meeting my female colleagues, I have become a person enabled to do strongly emancipatory work. Previously, Christian ideas had been working in me, which have fallen away one by one over time. Jean Vanier’s ideas were at the forefront; I read his works during my studies [Jean Vanier was a Canadian social activist working with people with disabilities and the organizer of a Christian community called L’Arche; in 2020, after his death, it was discovered that he had sexually abused several women – ed. note]. I was inundated with texts written by ‘secular saints’. Now I’m as far as possible from approaching work with people with disabilities in this way – in the context of religion, mercy, aid. I’m interested in emancipation movements.

MO: Nowadays, collective work is a popular creative model. People are talking a lot about it, and it has even become quite fashionable. What is your creative process like and how do you deal with hierarchy? You always start without a script. Who decides on its final shape and themes?

JS: We work on the performances as a trio – three women named Justyna. We’re often joined by Wisła Nicieja, who’s responsible for set and costume design. Our close, deep and long-lasting cooperation has allowed us to be flexible in giving priority to each other. If one of us is absent at a rehearsal, it’s no problem for another one of us to lead it. We mutually ensure that the material is constantly being developed. I’m in charge of directing, so I make the final decisions, but they’re worked out in an intense, collaborative discussion. I produce the stage material with Justyna Wielgus. I work on the script with Justyna Lipko-Konieczna. Fields of individual responsibility exist, of course. We don’t fully throw ourselves into collective work understood as the lack of division into specific roles in the creative process. Wisła creates the set during the process; she doesn’t come to us with a finished design, which is quite difficult to imagine in the theatre. I recently talked with the other women about how our work process can be compared to a dance in which the role of the person who leads is transitory.

Picture display

standardowy (864px desktop)

Justyna Sobczyk, photo by Mikołaj Starzyński, courtesy of the director

Picture image

justynasobczyk-1.jpg

MO: I would also like to ask you, as a theatre educator, about the role of this profession in the current crisis. At the beginning of the pandemic, there were claims that the inability to present live performances due to the pandemic was fertile ground for pedagogical activities, not necessarily for feverish streaming of archival performances and hastily created performative ephemera. And that concern for the relationship between institutions and their audiences is more important than production and visibility. What is your opinion on this subject?

JS: I advocate an attitude that allows us to align ourselves with circumstances. If everything slows down or completely stands still, I’m interested in what happens to us in such a situation – how we interact in this slowed-down pace. I don’t want to pretend that nothing has changed and continue to produce shows that are only for the internet. I’ve heard many stories from actors about how they’ve done pretty much anything for the internet merely to show that they’re still working, and that they’ve been paid on that basis. This line of thinking about work creates AND perpetuates a hoax. It is absurd to produce artificial material because institutions need to pay their employees for something. During the pandemic, we didn’t stop having rehearsals – we held them over Zoom. The actors were the first to come up with the idea of doing an online project. Justyna Wielgus and I observed what actors were doing at the time: some of them made recordings, others kept diaries or dreambooks… Very naturally, our rehearsals oscillated between talking about what was happening and sharing material with each other. Our project titled 'Strategie przetrwania' (Strategies for Survival) was based on what the actors of Theatre 21 had prepared, which was far from typical dramatic expression. We gave these materials to Magda Łazarczyk and Łukasz Sosiński, who are visual artists, and they developed them for the internet.

I will also admit that when all the stories of violence began to be revealed, my reflex was to radically stop performing in front of an audience. I felt that, as theatre artists, we shouldn’t present our critical performances to the public when violence is being carried out behind the scenes. I feel that it’s time to get in tune with the pandemic, and with its much slower pace. This is a time to speak AND listen. It’s significant that this is happening when theatres are deserted, no one is there, and we’re holed up in our respective burrows with our loved ones. At this time, a shadow like this emerges. And we’re outside the area that’s in danger of collapsing. That’s why I think this isn’t a time when we should be rushing into productions, but rather trying to linger in the situation. To hear voices that have been hidden for a long time. Everything needs to stop for a while. And I wouldn’t be frightened of this.

MO: In your statement for International Theatre Day, you call for mutual respect and point out that it’s high time for a change. Are you optimistic in this regard?

JS: I’m full of childlike naiveté. But ‘naiveté’ might not be the best word because it doesn’t sound very serious, and I’m a 43-year-old woman. It’s more of a critical kind of hope – I’m aware that things are very bad and the system is breaking down. But drawing from personal experience, I believe that when things break down, it sometimes means they were built from material that was too weak. It’s natural that the world will collapse from time to time. Ways of thinking, relationships, interpersonal relations sometimes run out of steam. I believe that this happens in order to make room for something else. I think we don’t yet know that our experience of confinement, isolation and inability to work is a valuable resource that will be useful to us in some way. A certain perception of theatre is collapsing, but inwardly I’m very happy that this is happening because I’ve always had a big problem with this perception. I know that this won’t be a pleasant process, but it represents an opportunity for us. I accept the situation as it is. My principle is to immerse myself in it, feel it, focus on it and slowly – in cooperation with experts, students, theatre people, a wide spectrum of people including even non-theatre people – develop a new scope for theatre. We’ll survive this situation. Perhaps it’ll take longer than we’d like, but it’s only a matter of time.

Translated from Polish by Scotia Gilroy

Language English

justyna sobczyk

teatr 21

centrum sztuki włączającej

contemporary polish theatre