Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-tf8b9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T21:41:46.791Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Live theatre as exception and test case for experiencing negative emotions in art

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 November 2017

Thalia R. Goldstein
Thalia R. Goldstein*
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, George Mason University, Fairfax, VA 22030. [email protected]://psychology.gmu.edu/people/tgoldste
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Distancing and then embracing constitutes a useful way of thinking about the paradox of aesthetic pleasure. However, the model does not account for live theatre. When live actors perform behaviors perceptually close to real life and possibly really experienced by the actors, audiences may experience autonomic reactions, with less distance, or may have to distance post-experiencing/embracing their emotions.

Type
Open Peer Commentary
Information
Behavioral and Brain Sciences , Volume 40 , 2017 , e362
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2017 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Apperly, I. A. & Butterfill, S. A. (2009) Do humans have two systems to track beliefs and belief-like states? Psychological Review 116(4):953.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Benedetti, J. (2007) The art of the actor: The essential history of acting, from classical times to the present day. Theatre Arts Book.Google Scholar
Brunner, J. (2017) Why immersive theatre isn't just a fad. Playbill, April 22. Available at: http://www.playbill.com/article/why-immersive-theatre-isnt-just-a-fad.Google Scholar
Chartrand, T. L. & Bargh, J. A. (1999) The chameleon effect: The perception-behavior link and social interaction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 76(6):893–910.Google Scholar
Coplan, A. (2006) Catching characters emotions: Emotional contagion responses to narrative fiction film. Film Studies 8(8):26–38.Google Scholar
Dinesh, N. (2017) Memos from a Theatre Lab: Exploring what immersive theatre 'does'. Routledge.Google Scholar
Gerbner, G. & Gross, L. (1976) The scary world of TV's heavy viewer. Psychology Today 9(11):41–45.Google Scholar
Goldstein, T. R. & Bloom, P. (2015) Characterizing characters: How children make sense of realistic acting. Cognitive Development 34:39–50. Available at: http://doi.org/10.1016/j.cogdev.2014.12.001.Google Scholar
Goldstein, T. R. & Filipe, A. (2017) The interpreted mind: Understanding acting. Review of General Psychology. Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/gpr0000116.Google Scholar
Hatfield, E., Bensman, L., Thornton, P. D. & Rapson, R. L. (2014) New perspectives on emotional contagion: A review of classic and recent research on facial mimicry and contagion. Interpersona 8(2):159.Google Scholar
Hatfield, E., Cacioppo, J. & Rapson, R. (1994) Emotional contagion. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Kelly, J. R., Iannone, N. E. & McCarty, M. K. (2016) Emotional contagion of anger is automatic: An evolutionary explanation. The British Journal of Social Psychology 55(1):182–91. Available at: http://doi.org/10.1111/bjso.12134.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Krach, S., Cohrs, J. C., de Echeverría Loebell, N. C., Kircher, T., Sommer, J., Jansen, A. & Paulus, F. M. (2011) Your flaws are my pain: Linking empathy to vicarious embarrassment. PLoS ONE 6(4):e18675.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Neumann, R. & Strack, F. (2000) “Mood contagion”: The automatic transfer of mood between persons. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 79(2):211–23. Available at: http://doi.org/10.1037//0022-3514.79.2.211.Google Scholar
Preston, S. D. & De Waal, F. B. (2002) Empathy: Its ultimate and proximate bases. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 25(1):1–20.Google Scholar
Stanislavsky, K. (1989) An actor prepares. Theatre Arts Book/Routledge.Google Scholar