The dramatic basis of role theory

Abstract

Since the first annual conference of the National Association for Drama Therapy in 1979, the organizing profession of drama therapy has attempted to define itself as a new form of healing and new academic discipline. Despite significant strides in the United States and abroad, fully developed explanations of why and how drama therapy works are still lacking. Some in the field have found full blown models for their practice in psychology (e.g., psychoanalysis-Irwin, 1985; development-Johnson, 1982; Jungian archetypal psychology and object relationsParker-Lewis, 1989). I think it has been important for drama therapists to ally themselves with these and related theories in moving toward a healthy eclecticism for the discipline. Further, in doing so, drama therapists have recognized the professional and practical necessity to master scientifically-based practices and frameworks essential for any mental health clinician to survive within a clinical environment. But at this time, some ten years down the road, I think it is imperative to look beyond the conventional psychological models and address the one thing that makes drama therapy unique among psychotherapeutic disciplines-that is, its roots in drama. At the heart of the dramatic experience-whether in ritual, spontaneous play, creative drama, improvisation, or theatrical activity of any kind-is the principle of impersonation, the ability of the person to take on a persona or role. The dramatic experience is one of paradox: I am me and not-me at the same time. It is one of engagement and separation: I take on a role and then I separate from it. In order to explain the dramatic paradox, one can turn to the concept of role, the essential medium of the actor. In many ways, role theory is at the root of a drama therapy model. In drama therapy, both client and therapist work in role and through role. Role may be, in fact, the single most significant feature that distinguishes drama therapy from other forms of psychotherapy and healing. Role theory has largely become the domain of social psychologists (e.g., Goffman, 1959; Linton, 1936; and Sarbin & Allen, 1968). Others, closer to the field of drama therapy, have contributed to role theory, most notably J. L. Moreno (1953). Yet, the concept, role, is primarily a dramatic one, deriving centuries ago from the wooden scroll on which the early actor’s lines were written. In its present form, role is persona rather than person, character rather than full-blown human being, part rather than whole. It is that which holds two realities, the everyday and the imaginative, in a paradoxical relationship to one another. Without role there can be no drama. It could be that there is a finite quantity of roles that we play in everyday life and that would naturally appear within a drama therapy situation. Furthermore, it could be that these roles are equivalent to those that appear and reappear throughout theatre literature and history. If this is true, then theatre is a significant, perhaps the most significant, model that informs role theory as applied to dramatic forms of healing. Yet, a theatrical understanding of role has not been applied to building a theoretical model of drama therapy. The purpose of this paper is to look at role from a dramatic/theatrical point of view and to apply this perspective to the process of drama therapy, helping practitioners to better understand why they