to distract the interrogator as it is clear from the video documentation that
all conversation was initiated by the teacher in role, the participant’s presence
can be described predominantly as reactive. This does not mean it could not
be seen as an exciting piece of theatre. But it could also not be turned into
a DE for a number of reasons. One of them is that the student in the role did
not aim to create a gap in meaning, or explore the meta-text of the situation,
he was trying to solve the situation by getting through it. There was also no
Centre placed as a reference point for this exploration. The acting behaviour
was very much of a living through ‘being’ mode of LTD, which also points at
an important difference between Enactment and ‘being’. While both create
opportunities to explore situations, Enactment realises the aim of a conscious
exploration of the situation and an awareness of some reference points.
There was another recurring issue in relation to the acting behaviour which
I will present with the help of another example from The Tribe. While most
group or pair improvisations happened in the existential ‘being’ mode, there
was a Clear shift in acting behaviour when students got the opportunity to
improvise a situation alone. An example of the shift in acting behaviour was
visible in the recordings®’ of the second lesson of The Tribe.
The highlighted parts in the screenshots illustrate how the boy playing
the role was demonstrating his thinking with his hand gestures and facial
expressions.