This research and my comments are of more than academic interest as you may have gathered. I want to organise a regular sociodrama group linked to our local psychodrama community. The sociodrama is to be a form scientific socialism, influenced by Marx and Moreno.
I’ve been using sociodrama to teach people couple therapy, and that isn’t exactly group-centred sociodrama, because the purpose of the event is stated up front, and only people interested in couple therapy attend. However all that happens from there on is group-centered. There are explorations of couplehood, which is a social phenomenon, I’ve written how I use couple sociodrama to train couple therapy. (Logeman, 2021) This time I’m warming up to revolutionary sociodrama of some sort.
The previous section in this Monograph, Experimental Revolution, warmed me up to sociodrama, yet sociodrama has not been mentioned in the chapter. I have some takeaways from the previous section.
-
-
- Experiment in small group sociodramas with a revolutionary focus
- The sociometric question — What are the the social forces operating in the population?
-
The first mention of sociodrama will be on page 50 of Who Shall Survive, and we’re on page 31. However, we began the Monograph with searches in the Preludes, and sociodrama was mentioned a few times there, I’ve selected several quotes, and I will make comments.
Behind the screen of telling fairy tales to children and staging the sociodramas of a new society I was trying to plant the seeds of a diminutive creative revolution .(p.xi)
OK, right at the start it is the creative revolution that is on his mind. There are whole chapters on this later.
He [Socrates] could have turned the theatre upside down and a “sociodrama” might have ensued … he did not see that a new method of teaching and clarifying human relations was within his grasp . Socrates had the message but the demon within him did not speak loud enough or became prematurely silent. (p.xxiii)
❋
But the emancipation from all values, from religious, family, economic and sexual ties has reached an unprecedented climax in the twentieth century. There are good reasons to hope that this time the sociodramatic methods will be integrated into the social and cultural fabric of a new humanity on the march.(p.xxiv)
Comment: “emancipation from all values”. What does he mean? Values are important, I think he means prejudices, but I doubt much emancipation from those has happened, and twenty first century is worse.
The next entry is pertinent…
1950, COMMUNISM AND SOCIODRAMA
I have heard that a form of socio-psychodrama is used for communist propaganda in the Philippines, India and China, in order to convert people to communism. According to an informant the conductor opened a session by putting before the audience an actor portraying an American business man. The portrayal was purposely biased and was able to arouse the audience to active hostility against the ideological counterprotagonist. This is an illustration in point that highly directive sociodrama can be used for the indoctrination of any set of values, religious, communistic or fascistic.
One may think here of the atomic bomb ; the bomb is neutral, it does not take sides, it will serve the one who has it, the master. It seems to be the same way with all scientific methods, they can- not be harnessed in favor of one or another cause . A particular form of sociodrama, however, is an exception to the rule, the group-centered form. Here the problem and presentation are not coerced upon the group by a mighty dictator-director but they come from the group. If true spontaneity is permitted to the members of the group the denaturalizing tendencies have to give way sooner or later to the spontaneous aspirations of the participants. The group-centered form of sociodrama, unless prohibited by law, is a natural ally of democratic processes .
I’m planning just such a group, i.e. sociodrama in a Marxist frame work.
Imagine…
A study sociodrama group for exploring the state of affairs in our country. The group is prepared with some reading from Marx and Lenin. Only interested people attend.
Director: “What do you see on the stage?”
Immediately, someone gets up and takes on the role of an American businessman—one who is making money by exploiting local labor. There’s a stereotypical element here, humour, an element of bias perhaps, though it’s hard to pinpoint exactly what feels off about the portrayal.
Comment: Drawing on Warren Parry’s five levels of warm-up (Williscroft, 1985), we recognize this as the starting point, the stereotypical level. As the warm-up deepens, someone might step into the role with a richer sense of the compulsions driving that businessman, moving beyond the stereotype.
The drama continues: “Who else is here?” soon there is a small group….
“We’re representatives of the group opposing foreign control of this country.”
This introduces a counter-foil to the stereotypical American businessman—another somewhat simplified portrayal at this point.
As the drama progresses, layers are added. The stage fills: workers in factories, military alliances, theorists at their desks explaining what’s happening from both sides, an ordinary family, immigrants. They interact, creating a dynamic mosaic of roles and perspectives.
“It’s midnight on a Wednesday. Do what you do at this hour.” The lights dim. Participants enact their roles. Some fall asleep; others carry out late-night routines. Then, “It’s 5 a.m.,” the director says. “You’re dreaming now.”
Comment: Imagine this workshop and then read Moreno’s passage above.
Note how a group can be both Marxist study (propaganda) and group centered, and indeed “a natural ally of democratic processes.”
❋
This post is part of a series.
See Intro Marx and Moreno Monograph