#and the inability it feels to communicate with participating broadcasters to do anything about it

[eurovision-del]

Eurovision is only a few weeks away now and normally by this time I’d have started posting my full ranking. However, I’m sitting this year out. Rather than leave this blog hanging, I decided to post this as a wrap up to the 2024 season. Since I’d listened to nearly all of the competing songs over the past few months, and had a rough idea already of how I’d rank them, here’s what my top 10 would probably be for this year, just to have it on record:

10. Australia – One Milkali (One Blood) 9. Ukraine – Teresa & Maria 8. Lithuania – Luktelk 7. Croatia – Rim Tim Tagi Dim 6. Portugal – Grito 5. Ireland – Doomsday Blue 4. Estonia – (Nendest) narkootikumidest ei tea me (küll) midagi 3. Switzerland – The Code 2. San Marino – 11:11 1. Norway – Ulveham

I love Eurovision – it’s one of my main hobbies and I love the music, the spectacle, and the fun of the competition.  But I can’t take part in it right now. I had a lot of fun with national final season this year, and with plenty of good internally selected songs too, I honestly think this had the potential to be a fantastic year. Maybe one day I’ll return to this set of 36 songs and give them the proper review they deserve, but for now, this is the last I’ll be talking about this year.

[sharlmbracta]

producers convinced Nasubi to believe that he was self-recording his day-to-day experiences for further review, when in reality his most confided moments were broadcast for the world to see and make fun of.

Nasubi reached his goal after 335 days, having won enough items with a combined value of ¥1 million. Although he was led to believe that he had won a special trip for surviving the year, he was abruptly blindfolded by producers and moved to a new location (South Korea) where he would have to win enough earnings in order to get a flight home back to Japan. Nasubi was placed in yet another secluded apartment where he was asked to take off his clothes and instructed to enter more sweepstakes. Nasubi was a pro by now, and after a bit of a breakdown, he went all-in and was able to win enough in prizes to afford the tickets within a matter of weeks; the producers didn't like this, so of course they changed the rules and forced Nasubi to be able to afford first-class tickets. Again, though, Nasubi beat the odds and made the money in a matter of weeks. He was able to fly back home to Japan, but again, he was taken to yet another secluded apartment. In despair and resignation, Nasubi began to take off all his clothes without instruction. Suddenly, the walls of the apartment abruptly collapsed, revealing a live television studio filled with cheering audience members. Obviously being confused by the whole situation, Nasubi didn't understand that millions of people were watching his story unfold for the past year and a half, as he was unaware that the show had even aired. The problem with Susunu! Denpa Shonen and the format of reality television in general, lies in the fascination of exploiting participants to simply draw in massive amounts of ratings. In Nasubi's case, the mental and emotion trauma that he suffered, as viewers watched in amusement, is horrifying and astonishing to take in. Being stripped of your clothing, the ability to eat food, communication with the outside world, and degradation beyond anything imaginable is difficult to witness. This isn't limited to Susunu! Denpa Shonen; we can see similar brutality in Survivor, Fear Factor, Born in the Wild, Cheaters, and many others. What's also important to note is Nasubi's physical and mental transition over time. He lost weight and became nutritionally depleted, and was isolated for so long without human interaction that his speech began to slow significantly. Also, Nasubi engaged in conversations with stuffed animals he imagined being teachers, first in an attempt to preserve his sanity (think Tom Hanks and Wilson in Castaway) but eventually as a symptom of its deterioration, and just about as devastating as schizophrenia (albeit for 15 months). "Everything was harsh, and every day was like hell back then", Nasubi told Style Koriyama, "The hardest thing was not to be able to see and talk with anyone. My mental condition was at its worse. I was like, 'Why only me? Why do I have to do all these things? I’d rather die than feel like this'... Although I seemed looked like I was having fun most of the time on the edited show, to me, it was full of pain". What's more revealing is the producer's inability to publicly say that he regrets the show being created or anything he did to Nasubi, while downplaying the mental strain these experiences had on the lives of the contestants (who were sexually abused in one instance, and nearly died as a result of suffering from dehydration in another). Instead, he tries to explain his actions away by glorifying his work, noting that each experience was a miracle caught on film. Following the show’s conclusion, Tomoaki Hamatsu (Nasubi) was a household name in Japan, having been thoughtlessly and non-consensually cast into the public eye. With his fate as a reality star decided for him, he was left to navigate an equally high-pressure, stressful, and anxiety-inducing set of circumstances once Susunu! Denpa Shōnen concluded. With most reality television shows now strictly obligated to offer psychological support and assessment following a contestant’s involvement, Nasubi received no such treatment, and thus, was left to fend for himself in an environment that contained remnants of sordid Black Mirror episode, White Bear.

i just randomly learned about "the nasubi show" which was a tv show in japan and like. what the actual fuck. the japanese media really fucking traumatized enslaved and degraded to fucking hell a fucking college student. what the fuck. what the FUCK. how was shit like that legal. how could they treat a person like some kind of public property prize like THAT. every fucking person related to that "show" is fucking guilty. Seriously what the fuck.

also how is it possible that "so many people have enjoyed the show"???? excuse me???? a person is not a fucking consummable???? he NEVER CONSENTED to any of this shit???? he was locked naked in a room. he didn't even KNOW he was being FILMED. all of them are fucking predators. This is equivalent to fucking rape and it was aired in PUBLIC BROADCAST. All of them are guilty. how are the producers not incarcerated for human rights violations. smh

Fucking inhumane.

[nishiagrawal]

How to Keep Learners from Daydreaming in VILT Session

COVID has turned every business around and virtual classroom sessions are the new norm of the online learning sector, changing the online learning system. What is your opinion about the virtual instructor-led training? Do you, as an organization, think that VILT and online learning is an ill and dull approach to engage the users? What according to you should be the parameters to define the interactivity during a VILT? What should you do to engage your learners? How can you make the virtual classroom more interesting to keep the learners from daydreaming?

In this article, we’ll discuss a few must-try VILT engagement tools and some best practices to implement in your online learning classroom sessions. Virtual classroom sessions are taking the education sector by storm and VILT has several advantages. We have tried our best to throw light on how to make the MOOC even more interesting for the learners. But first, let us discuss some challenges and issues that decrease the engagement level of a VILT session.

Common Issues Faced

Not Being Able To Read Non-Verbal Clues

The main limitation is the inability of the learners to see their fellow learners and participants. Virtual classroom sessions do not allow the learners to see each other. Not being able to decipher the non-verbal clues is one of the biggest challenges of a VILT session. It is impossible to point out the exact reason for boredom and distraction.

Multimodality

Multimodality is another challenge during a VILT. Every participant learns differently and there is no such thing as a one-size-fits-all solution when it comes to learning. In online learning, the options are limited if the LMS does not support multimodality.

Notifications & Distraction

Learners, at their homes, are in their comfort zones. They stay in pajamas with a hot coffee next to them in their study room. Online learning requires supreme self-discipline when they are constantly distracted by the notifications from their gaming consoles, gadgets, pastime, pets, and books.

Gaining The Learners’ Confidence

Gaining the confidence of the learners is one of the biggest challenges in a VILT. It is an important parameter in building a bond that ensures stable levels of communication between an instructor and a learner. In a VILT, the instructor also needs to scale that extra mile to make the participants feel involved.

A VILT becomes interesting with interesting tools that the learners have access to. These tools give the best environment and enhance the learning experience. Let’s now discuss a few VILT engagement tools.

Top 4 Elements For Interactive VILT Learning

Annotation Tools & Whiteboard

It is nice to have some ice-breaking sessions and introductions for a better start. However, in virtual-instructor-led training, the learners cannot see each other. Most of them might be figuring out how to use the platform. You can always introduce the annotation tools and whiteboard. These features are a quicker and interesting way to kick-start any virtual classroom session.

You can use the whiteboard to effectively prepare customized grids. Your learners can easily claim their space and use the annotation tools to insert their names, roles, current location, or anything that they are supposed to share. You should use these features for the group activities in the formal training.

Breakout Rooms

VILT is not a one-time training approach. Your learners can easily break the monotony and have self-learning. Breakout rooms are created within the platform to streamline the learning activities. The collaborative rooms allow your learners to think out of the box and implement their knowledge. Breakout rooms are quite dynamic and cater to different learners with different styles. While one group works on an issue and resolves it, the instructor can assist other groups that require assistance and maintenance. This keeps the learners engaged and energized and also reduces the risk of failure.

Instead of just receiving the information, the learners can share, process, and incorporate the same. This improves the overall learning experience and makes the VILT sessions even more engaging.

Non-Verbal Feedback

Gestures do not work in any virtual meeting or VILT sessions, This is one of the biggest challenges in any virtual meet-up. Learners do not like their names being called upon and on top of that, there is no ‘raise the hand’ option to ask any questions. This is often one of the biggest obstacles in online learning and collaborative discussions.

Non-verbal feedback or chat option is useful to create slides with simple text or images. This helps in setting up a point of discussion for the entire class. Let your learners respond to the slides and MOOCs using chat and non-verbal feedback. This is the best approach to clear any queries or doubts in real-time rather than having to wait.

Worksheet Activities

Worksheet activities have been one of the best approaches for in-person classes and these activities work perfectly fine in the case of a virtual classroom. Online learning should also focus on activities such as brainstorming, team-building, communication exercises, leadership exercises, and other activities. Including these activities in your virtual classroom will increase the engagement and improve the level of participants’ interest.

So these are the top tools for interesting VILT learning. However, several parameters define the efficiency of online courses. Enterprises are vying to get more engagement through customized MOOCs and practices that engage the learners effectively. Let us check out some practices that streamline these online learning sessions.

4 Practices To Improve Engagement In VILTs

Be Prepared

Several factors disrupt online courses. Learners and participants may face issues such as technical difficulties, noisy environments, and distractions. These factors may disrupt online webinars and virtual training sessions. With careful preparations and strategic approaches, these issues can be handled to improve the engagement of VILT sessions.

Shorten The Sessions Of Your Virtual Classrooms

The ideal length of any online course varies from anywhere between thirty minutes and two hours. The exact length of an online course depends on the complexity of the content, type of modules, and interactive elements throughout the course. Shorter courses keep the learners engaged throughout the session.

Content Selection & Preparation

Content preparation and selection play a big part in making the virtual classroom more engaging and immersive. Not all the training materials and topics are suitable for online learning sessions. Selecting a particular topic that ignites interest in the learners is very important. Such topics offer quality learning experiences and this creates engagement.

Integrate Interactive Elements

These days, the learners get distracted easily. Emails, Facebook notifications, music, noisy environments are only a few issues to mention. Using interactive elements is the best way to keep the learners engaged with high interested levels. It is very important to integrate short fun sessions, group activities, surveys, and polls to maintain their active participation throughout the session. Such activities reduce and sometimes eliminate all the distractions.

Conclusion

So these are some practices and tools to make your virtual classes more interesting. We hope this article helps you extract all the important parameters and create better study material and courses that keep the learners and participants from daydreaming in a VILT session. Preparing courses is easy, but the main challenge is to have an ultra-immersive environment that grabs all the attention of the learners.

VILT is no longer a conventional broadcast training approach. It is transforming the way organizations train their employees and instructors train their participants. It offers the tools required to replicate a real classroom in a virtual training session.

In the wake of the pandemic, most of the employees and learners are switching to eLearning rather than attending any offline lectures. MOOCs have changed our lives and will continue to introduce a variety of changes through customized LMSs. If you have made it this far, you should work on creating credible courses and incorporate the best practices to keep your learners from daydreaming.

[agnesgoesadventuring-blog]

I tried to edit in what didn’t get in to this post and accidentally deleted it. So... repost, with the stuff that for some reason got cut off added.

Looking through Twitter this morning, I discovered a great many posts discussing gatekeeping in the D&D community. I had seen some tweets earlier this week where people were talking about how Critical Role and similar shows were "objectively bad" because of some nonsense idea that they're "fake" and not as good or valid as actually playing and that the discourage people from DMing. The stuff from yesterday/today seems to be even more blatant gatekeeping, an unambiguous claim that you can only be a part of the D&D and roleplaying community if you're actually playing.

To this I can only say... no. As in all types of activities and hobbies, there are different ways to engage. When it comes to sports, some people enjoy actually playing the sport, some enjoy merely watching the games on television, some prefer to see the games live in-person, some like to take part in the "fantasy" games for the sport, some get really into the stats and the numbers. When it comes to something like theater, some actually participate in productions, whether they're performing in shows, directing them, or doing something behind the scenes like stage crew or set design and construction. Some prefer to simply watch the shows and plays. For some that means going to the theater and seeing the performances live, and for some that means watching recorded versions of shows. Some people experience musical theater mostly through listening to the cast albums. Every hobby, every form of entertainment has different types of levels of engagement, none more or less valid than the other.

With Dungeons and Dragons, and other roleplaying games, there have always been different types of engagement, even from the earliest days. While some people liked to play as PCs, others preferred to DM. Some people liked to do both. Some people were happy to write adventures and make homebrews for other people to play rather than playing themselves. Some people found the game interesting and would read the books but, for whatever reason, not play. As technology has developed, new ways to engage with the hobby have been introduced. Now people can play online rather than "in person" if they so wish. There's a larger, more in touch community that has led to more involved homebrew creations. The internet has made the content of the  books more widely available for those who wish to read them. And people broadcast their games online, whether through live streaming or putting up a pre-filmed and edited version, for people to see, follow, and fall in love with, and for some people their engagement of D&D and other roleplaying games lies in their enjoyment of those stories. These advancements in the hobby have led to a lot more people becoming players, having interest in the game, and just taking part of the community. Unfortunately, it also means that there's been a lot more gatekeeping, people claiming that there's a certain way to enjoy the hobby, and if you don't meet that criteria, you're not a part of the community.

That's simply not true, and their inability to evolve with the rest of the community, and the world in general, is their own problem. The can try to push others out with all of their might and will, but the "might" is minuscule, especially in comparison to the amount of people in these communities who welcome everyone interested in the hobby, regardless of how you engage with it. At the end of the day, hobbies and communities are always evolving, always bringing in new ways to engage and new people who engage in those ways, and the only people who are going to pushed out are the gatekeepers. And that pushing out is going to be of their own doing.

There are a million reasons people might not actually play the games, or might not be able to. Some people have busy lives, with responsibilities like work, family, and all kinds of other things that simply do not allow them the time to play. Some people can't find a group in their area and don't have the kind of access to the internet that would allow them to play regularly (and that adds a whole level of classism to this whole gatekeeping thing). Some people have social anxieties and other mental illnesses that make it difficult to engage with other people in the way one would have to in order to play. Some people have mental illnesses or difficulties that make the gameplay difficult. The pace, the amount of things one has to keep track of, the unexpected nature of the game, and many other things can be a barrier to people with those issues that can make it difficult for them to play, or that would make playing an unenjoyable experience, or that would even make it so they can't play. There are all kinds of reasons that people might not want to play or won't be able to play, and they're all perfectly valid and none of them makes their engagement with the hobby invalid.

Now, there have been criticisms of these RPG and D&D streams, particularly Critical Role, that are just absurd. There has always been the claim from those angry few that the show, and others like it, are "scripted", and was a particular criticism in this specific instance. The idea that these shows are scripted makes me sad for the people making the claims, because if they think these kinds of stories can only happen if they're scripted, then they haven't had very good D&D games. Some groups are focused heavily on the narrative, and those games tend to be very similar in the way stories and characters develop and different themes and ideas are explored to Critical Role. Perhaps they looks at the fact that Matt and other DMs will sometime clearly have speeches for NPCs planned out, or introductions to character or places written, and use that to make the claim that it's scripted. But this is something a lot of DMs do. It's better to have these things on hand so you don't forget anything important and so that you can make sure things have the most emotional impact they can have. A DM having a few pre-planned speeches or descriptions does not make these shows "scripted", and it's a common practice for a lot of what these people are calling "real games".

One of the more absurd criticisms is the notion of these shows being "reality shows", that people who watch these shows but don't play the game aren't actually interested in the game but in "reality show" drama. One has to wonder about the grasp these people have on what the term "reality show" really means, because something like Critical Role, or The Adventure Zone, or any number of RPG shows, that craft a narrative with fictional characters and locations, and that don't purport themselves to be anything but fiction, isn't a reality show. The only thing that could remotely be classified as such is stuff like the openings of Critical Role, where the announcements and ads are made, but nobody who watches the show is actually invested in those parts. They're invested in the story. The narrative. Which is not and can in no way be classified as a "reality show". Being invested in the story is no different than being invested in any other form of narrative, like television shows, movies, and books. And the investment in that story is very much like the reason a lot of people actually play D&D. They're invested in the story.

There have always been claims that the players on Critical Role are "fake", that they weren't really D&D fans, that they don't have a history with the game. This barely even deserves a response because there's tangible proof that they played the game, the first campaign, for years before they started broadcasting it. There are videos on youtube. Some of the cast have talked about that game being the first they ever played, but others have talked at length about their history with the game and other RPGs, and in a way that anyone who knows anything about the hobby would know is honest.

All of these things, these attempts to exclude people from the community, the different rationalizations for hating certain forms of engagement, these all come from a gatekeeping mentality that based in a person's personal issues. Gatekeepers want to keep people out so they can keep a community feeling "exclusive" because it makes them feel special. They need that feeling of being special, of being a part of something "exclusive", to feel better about themselves. They need to be able to elevate themselves above others, so they can feel like they're better than others, because they get to be a part of this exclusive group, because they get to like something they can tell themselves others don't "get", so they can feel like they're engaging in the "right" way while other are doing it in the "wrong" way. It's all about trying to place themselves above everybody else so that they can feel special. Because nothing else does. It's amazing how often this happens in groups and communities that are made up of people who have been excluded themselves. You see it so much in groups where people are generally considered to be social "outsiders". Video games, comics, sci fi and fantasy, role playing, and similar things all have a lot of people who were bullied, or excluded, who were considered to be "geeks" and "nerds" and weren't accepted. You would think, or at least hope, that being excluded in those ways would help them understand and not want to do that to others, but a lot of the time it just makes people do the same thing in the groups they take part in, because it's the thing that finally makes them feel like they're the ones with the power. There are also matters of things like misogyny and racism that come into play here for similar reasons.

The thing is, though, that regardless of their desperate attempts to make themselves more "special" than everyone else, they're not actually the ones who have the power. Communities evolve. They always do. And those evolutions allow for more means of engagement and more people taking part in the community. The more people who enter through these ways means that the ratio of people who want to gatekeep gets lower and lower and they're vastly in the minority. Ultimately, the only people they'll succeed in pushing out of the community is themselves. They can spout off about who is a "real fan" and who's allowed in the community and what's a valid form of engagement all they want, but they don't have any power to make anything out of it. They don't actually have any power to keep anyone out. They're just as impotent as they're so scared of being.

[newyorktheater]

Bobby Steggert LMSW

Bobby Steggert, actor headshot

Ragtime, 2009 in his Tony-nominated performance as Mother’s Younger Brother

Ivan Hernandez and Bobby Steggert in Yank, 2010.

Big Love, 2015

Bobby Steggert, Frederick Weller, Grayson Taylor and Tyne Daly in Mothers and Sons, 2014

Two years ago, Bobby Steggert, a Tony-nominated actor with extensive credits on and Off Broadway (Ragtime, Big Fish, Yank! etc) , surprised the theater community by announcing that he had switched careers. In an article on Medium, he explained that he was in the middle of getting a degree in social work from Columbia University. “My master’s degree will be a piece of paper, but my life as an artist will make me a great social worker, this I know.” Since July of 2019, Bobby Steggert LMSW has been serving as a psychotherapist in private practice and a staff therapist at the Institute for Human Identity Therapy Center,. Three-fourths of his clients, he tells me, are “actors, singers, dancers, directors, writers, or designers,” and (his staff biography says) he comes to the therapy relationship with “warmth, humor, and a solution-focused approach.” He seemed the right person to ask about the specific mental health needs of theater artists during this stressful period, and he readily agreed to speak with me.

Have you had any new thoughts about your switching careers since you wrote that piece in Medium in 2018?

Time and retrospection have been even more clarifying. I think that what I struggled with most of all near the end of my performance life was a lack of meaningful purpose when not employed. This is obviously part and parcel of any freelance career, but a lot of that sense of purposelessness was within me, and in my inability or unwillingness to find sustainable and grounding purpose in other parts of my life. As a result, I focus quite a bit on finding purpose with clients, and how they can foster these essential elements of a satisfying life, even within the extreme limitations of a time like today.

Based on your own experience as a therapist, and that of your therapeutic colleagues, has there been a general uptick of mental health issues over the past few months?  

Most definitely. I think that we are in a time of great anxiety as a culture and so of course that trickles down to individual experiences. There are a lot of people who are experiencing heightened anxiety and depression, and, as a result of that, dealing with an increase in substance abuse and also relationship issues and, of course, issues with unemployment and loss of income.

My colleagues and I have gotten quite a few inquiries from people who want to enter therapy. I am at capacity so I try to find other therapists for people who call me in order to get them treatment as soon as possible.

People are struggling pervasively because we have been challenged with unbelievable limitations. When you don’t have community and you don’t have a sense of purpose and you don’t have a source of income, those are definite recipes for mental health struggles.

I understand that every person is individual, but are there issues specific to (common in) theater artists during this time of pandemic and unemployment, or ways in which theater artists feel these stresses in a different way?

The most devastating thing about this crisis for theater makers is that there is really nowhere to turn for alternative employment in live performance. Theater artists are singularly gifted in creating work that is shared and felt in one communal, physical space, and in this moment, it’s practically an impossibility. We are all making major sacrifices right now, but theater artists have their hands tied in a way that is unique, and any adjustment to other work is felt as a true loss to one’s core sense of contribution.

What advice or words of comfort have you been giving to artists — or could you give to artists now?

The irony is that so many artists buy the line that they have “no real world skills” and yet they are the most creative, adaptive, and flexible people around. They are made for shifting and unexpected circumstances. They understand the vicissitudes of a highly inconsistent industry, which uniquely prepares them for a highly inconsistent time. I try to remind my clients that their fantastic relationship and communication skills alone make them highly qualified for any temporary adjustments to employment or living situations that are required of them right now. I also like to remind my clients that they are excellent at making meaning – that’s what artists do – and one major thing we have control over now is to make conscious, growth-oriented meaning out of our experiences, even when they’re terrible. And while many can’t make meaning through work right now, they can make it through their relationships, parts of their identities outside of the profession, their bodies through health and self-care, and their creative voices, whether broadcast to the world or quietly to themselves.

What about theatergoers rather than theater makers? Are you aware of ways in which the lack of live in-person theater has had a tangible, diagnosable effect?

I am not sure if I could call it diagnosable but I do think that humans benefit greatly from gathering in groups and physical spaces and in experiencing collective energy together. I think that is why theater is so special. That’s a huge reason why people, for example, attend church. Without that live shared energy, I think that is why people are suffering from loneliness even when staying connected to fiends and family through the Internet.

So what can people do about this?

I think it depends on people’s risk level and how far they are willing to go to be in contact with other humans, but I have suggested to my clients to find as many opportunities as possible to meet friends in the park or to be around other people in outdoor settings as a way to feel more physically connected to other humans.

It’s interesting that you talked earlier about finding purpose, because that of course is the main characteristic of your Tony-nominated role as Mother’s Younger Brother in “Ragtime.” Is that just a coincidence?

In retrospect, I think that as an actor the roles you play can teach you about yourself, and I do attribute that experience to be the seed of an investigation for myself as to how I could find more sustainable purpose than I was able to find as an actor who too often has to wait around for invitations to participate n what they do. Another role really taught me something — Will in “Mothers and Sons.” He was a young man who was so integrated into himself as a gay person. That character taught me that I needed to do more work to embrace the fullness of my own sexual identity.

So you’re saying that your roles helped shaped you as a person?

Very much so. When you inhabit them you take on their energy and you take on their psychology and if you are open to it , that character can teach you new things about yourself.

I admired your performances, and was struck by how much vulnerability you allowed your characters. Feel free to disagree with my premise, but, if you agree, was that vulnerability deliberate, a reflection of your own nature, or just a result of the roles for which you were cast? And is that quality a help or a hindrance or irrelevant to  your new career?

I do agree with the premise. The purpose I did find as an actor was to expose the complexities of the human condition in a way that was raw and that was vulnerable. I think that is because I am naturally a more emotional and more vulnerable person. I think that quality inspires others to be more vulnerable, and so I find it very helpful as a therapist. I’m asking others to become more vulnerable and through that vulnerability to understand themselves and to experience life more deeply.

But do people seeking therapy want vulnerability, or rather somebody who seems confident and authoritative?

I think that the most important quality in a therapist is that the person feel safe with them. That sense of safety can help them to open up and to be braver in their own introspection. [My vulnerability] changes shape because as a therapist there are certainly boundaries, but at the same time I try to exist in a therapeutic relationship with total openness and with a certain kind of vulnerability that I hope can inspire others to be the same.

Where can people go for help?

I have two layers of an answers to that question. Specifically for theater people who are looking for mental health help, I think that the Institute for Human Identity is a great option because they have a lot of availability for therapists who are in the arts or who understand what it is to be in the arts. Another resource is the Actors Fund, which has a wonderful list of therapists who are also in some way connected to the arts. Those are the two places I would send theater people if they are looking to talk to someone.

On another layer, I think the best way to deal with stress especially under these circumstances is to find a physical practice, because being connected a one’s body is sometimes the best option. So I am finding that people are turning to yoga or exercise or mindful meditation.

But what if the theater person doesn’t have any money? As you said, most are unemployed now.

That is really rough. The Actors Fund also provides grants to people who are unemployed. There are also much more affordable options, such as a therapeutic apps called TalkSpace.

Is there anything about theater that you’ve used to help your clients – or yourself – cope with the stresses of the current situation? 

I find it oddly comforting to think about Shakespeare’s time, in which London theaters closed several times due to the plague. He mentions the plague in several of his plays, including The Tempest and King Lear. And during the two year period between 1592-1594 when he couldn’t write plays, he turned to poetry. He adapted just like we all must.

If possible for us to telescope out of this very moment, and while acknowledging all of the suffering and hardship we are enduring, we can be reminded that human history is full of enormous disruptions to life as usual, and yet we keep moving forward, because we have to. Live theater will never leave us – and we will inevitably return to the day when we gather again to take in stories in ways that no other storytelling can replicate.

  Centers for Disease Control: Coping with Stress

Bobby Steggart, Actor Turned Therapist Q & A: Theater Artists Are Suffering Two years ago, Bobby Steggert, a Tony-nominated actor with extensive credits on and Off Broadway (Ragtime, Big Fish, Yank!