There were four main approaches to the collection
of data and the development of empathy with the subjects of this research.
These were a series of taped interviews with a selection of individuals
from both traditional and non-traditional circus; attendance and subsequent
documentation of a number of circus performances; the collection and collation
of archival material in the form of programs, promotional material, policy
documents, and correspondence (where such material was available); and,
many hours of informal contact with performers and other circus professionals,
including informal conversations, attendance of acrobatic workshops and
juggling clubs, as well as informal training sessions with individuals
and impromptu performances in parks, pubs, street corners and other public
places.
| �Generating a theory from data means that most hypotheses and concepts not only come from the data, but are systematically worked out in relation to the data during the course of the research.� (Glasser and Strauss:1 971:6) |
This is more useful than attempting to verify
theory because generated theory tends to be more useful in the substantive
area in which it will be used:
| �The first prerequisite property is that the theory must closely fit the substantive area ... Second, it must be readily understandable by laymen concerned with this area. Third, it must be sufficiently general to be applied to a multitude of diverse daily situations. Fourth, it must allow the user partial control over the structure and process of daily situations.� (Glasser and Strauss:1 971 :2 37) |
Theory is generated through a constant comparative analysis of data, which begins from the moment the research process begins.
This research commenced with �a partial framework of �local� concepts� (Glasser and Strauss:1971:45), to be used in designing the interviews. These were animals in circus, narrative in circus, circus audiences, gender construction in circus, and the appropriation of circus form. A certain amount of sensitivity was used in phrasing the questions according to the subject of each interview, considering the sensitivity of some of the issues. Animals in circus, which is a particularly sensitive area. was chosen because it was a distinction between the two types of circus that was best understood outside of the industry through the public campaigns run by Animal Liberation and media portrayal of circus. Anecdotal evidence suggested that this was the case. �Circus Oz? That�s the circus without animals, isn�t it?� represents a common understanding of non-traditional circus. For those who had attended both types of circus, difference in narrative structure seemed to be an immediate way of differentiating the two types of circus. Deduced from attending contemporary circus performances, there also seemed to be a certain incompatibility between dramatic narrative and the physical performance of circus. Considering the history of contemporary circus in radical arts practice, as well as the existence of the Women�s Circus, gender issues also seemed to be an important distinguishing factor. Finally, probably as the result of prematurely applying �grand� theory (Glasser and Strauss:1 971:10-12) to the substantive area of research, it appeared that circus had been appropriated from its tradition by the mainstream arts establishment, thus assimilating it into the dominant culture. A final category of interview questions was left open at each interview, anticipating that certain issues may be raised during the course of interviews that should be pursued. An attempt was made to remain sufficiently theoretically sensitive in order to �conceptualise and formulate theory as it emerges from the data� (Glasser and Strauss:1 971:46). This is evident in the evolution from the original interview design and the final formulation of the findings.
The first two categories, animals and narrative, have remained unchanged in title, but have undergone considerable conceptual development. Personal prejudices against the use of animals had to be dropped quickly in order to empathise with the traditional position on their use in circus. This has led to a deeper understanding the role they play in the circus performance, as well as an understanding of the way the issue effects the pattern of circus performance and the complex composition of circus audiences. The issue of narrative has also opened up the initial conceptualisation of narrative, and the way it is produced in both traditional and non-traditional circus.
The concept of audience proved to be more pertinent in understanding other issues, such as the use of circus animals, and more generally as a way of understanding the cultural differences in circus, and as such does not appear in the findings as a separate chapter. Questions designed in this area in regard to nontraditional circus did raise the importance of community arts philosophy. The line between spectator and participant proved to be an issue of great theoretical and practical importance in the development of non-traditional circus identity. In addition, a new concept was raised in the interviews pertaining to the formally political content of non-traditional circus performance, and general question of political expression in performance. This seemed to relate directly to the experiences of the community theatre movement, and explained a great deal about the points of departure between the two circus cultures. It is for this reason that �Circus and Community� eventually became a separate chapter. In addition, gender construction did not eventuate into a significant issue in contemporary circus (at least, not specifically important beyond its general social consequence), and therefore merged into the chapter on community.
If community politics became a useful way of differentiating the two circus cultures, then the nature of circus training and performance became a significant point of contact. Almost all of the interview participants were either current or retired performers. It is natural, and in hindsight obvious, that they should refer to the issues in contemporary circus in relation to their practice. As such, issues pertaining to the circus performer became central to the findings of this research. In fact, recognition of this led to the opening of a category of circus performance shortly after the commencement of research.
Finally, it became apparent that the question of appropriation was an act of theoretical insensitivity, committing �exclusively to one specific preconceived theory� (Glasser and Strauss:1971:46). Through the interview process, it became apparent that this concept drastically oversimplified the relationship between the two circus cultures. Discussions that these concepts raised, however, lead to discussions of what constituted circus life, aside from the specifics of performance. This became the material for the final chapter, which deals with circus culture.
Great care was taken in choosing the research
participants. Not only was it necessary to represent the two cultures,
but also to predict potential variations within each culture:
| �The researcher chooses any groups that will help generate, to the fullest extent, as many properties of the categories as possible, and that will help relate categories to each other and to their properties. (Glasser and Strauss:1971:49) |
The final list of participants was in no way
fixed at the outset. Rather, as new ideas became clear research participants
were chosen to reflect the greatest width of opinion relating to the categories
under investigation. For example, whilst conducting interviews at with
the Flying Fruit Fly Circus, it was discovered that Silver�s Circus was
one of the more innovative traditional circus, incorporating non-traditional
elements such as magic acts and significant narrative construction in performance,
while Perry Bros was one of the more conservative of the traditional circuses.
As Glasser and Strauss (1971:50) point out:
| �In research carried out for discovering theory, the sociologist cannot cite the number and types of group from which he (sic) collected data until the research is completed.� |
The following is a final list and accompanying description of individuals interviewed. They are arranged in chronological order both here and in transcript in Appendix A, in order to give an indication of the way in which the hypotheses of this research developed.
1. Lorraine and Gary Grant (Ashton�s Circus)
Lorraine and Gary Grant are the proprietors
of Ashton�s Circus, and represent seventh and sixth generation circus families
respectively. Lorraine Grant is President of the Circus Federation of Australia,
an organisation of traditional circuses, and has been the public face of
traditional circus, lobbying in particular for the retention of performing
circus animals. The opportunity to conduct this interview happened completely
by chance. During first contact by telephone it was discovered that the
Grant�s were passing through Melbourne on their way to tour Queensland.
The interview was conducted half an hour after this initial phone call
in a rented car parked behind McDonald�s in Tullamarine, an outer suburb
of Melbourne.
2. Greg Pyers (Education Officer, Melbourne
Zoo)
The Grants raised many comparisons between
circuses and zoos in regard to their respective educational qualities concerning
exotic animals. It therefore seemed appropriate to canvass the opinion
of a zoo to provide an interesting comparison of husbandry systems and
ethical considerations concerning exotic animals.
3. Chris Belli (Campaign Coordinator for Performing
Animals, Animal Liberation - Victoria)
Animal Liberation has been very vocal in
its campaign to abolish performing animals from circus, having been involved
in demonstrations and direct action which has received a great deal of
attention from the media. It was vital therefore to canvass their opinion.
4. Tim Coldwell (Circus Oz)
Coldwell was a founding member of both New
Circus and Circus Oz and has also had experience in traditional circus.
He is the only remaining member of the original company who is still in
the current performing company, and as such has played a critical role
in the development of contemporary circus.
5. Simon Yates
Yates is a former member of both the Flying
Fruit Fly Circus and Circus Oz. He represents what might be considered
a later generation of performer in non-traditional circus culture. He holds
strong views on contemporary circus.
6. Charles Parkinson (Artistic Director, The
Flying Fruit Fly Circus)
Although he is relatively new to circus (he
moved to his current position from work in youth theatre), as artistic
director of the Fruit Flies his role in the future direction of contemporary
circus is considerable. The Flying Fruit Fly Circus has played a major
role in the development of contemporary circus, particularly in the areas
of community and youth circus, and in circus training.
7. Anton Gasser (Silver�s Circus)
Gasser is the proprietor of Silver�s Circus.
This circus is known for its innovation within traditional circus parameters.
The circus includes magic acts and experiments occasionally with narrative.
It has several animal acts, but has talked to Animal Liberation on a number
of occasions. At one time it indicated to Animal Liberation that it might
drop some of its animal acts, but later withdrew.
8. Warren Brophy (Perry Bras)
Brophy is a performer with Perry Bros Circus.
The interview was conducted with him because the proprietors were reluctant
to speak publicly. Perry Bros bills itself as �Australia�s oldest and most
traditional circus�. Both the standard of the acts, and the state of the
equipment indicate that it is considerably poorer than the other two traditional
circuses contacted. The circus has
recently returned from a ten-year tour of
Western Australia.
9. Jane Mullet
Mullet was a performer with the early Circus
Oz, and has been Head Trainer at the Flying Fruit Fly Circus. She is currently
attempting to fund a feasibility study into the establishment of a national
circus school. Her experience of contemporary circus has been considerable,
giving her strong convictions on many issues, particularly on circus training.
10. Sally Forth
Forth was also an early performer with Circus
Oz, and is now head trainer with the Women�s Circus, which is one of the
most impressive community circus projects ever undertaken in Australia.
11. Robyn Laurie
Laurie was a founding member of the APG,
Soapbox Circus, and Circus Oz. Her depth of experience of both contemporary
circus and the political climate that proved to be its genesis is considerable.
She has been involved with the community theatre movement since its conception,
and has recently directed the first production by Club Swing, a new circus
company.
12. Sue Broadway (Circus Oz)
Broadway is the first full-time artistic
director of Circus Oz, having taken up her position two years ago. She
was a founding member of Circus Oz, leaving the company in 1984 to pursue
her career in Britain. She returned to Australia to take up her current
position.
13. Kym Olsen
Kym Olsen has worked extensively both in
circus and as a solo performer in Britain and Australia. She teaches juggling
at the Women�s Circus and runs the Thornbury Community Circus.
14. Steve Brown and Karina Oates (Rock�n�Roll
Circus)
Oates trained in Melbourne and moved to Brisbane
to join Rock�n�Roll Circus. Like Yates, she represents a later generation
of performer, and has strong opinions on gender construction in circus.
Brown began his circus career with the Tasmanian Youth Circus. He left
Rock�n�Roll Circus at the end of 1994.
1 5. Other Interviews
Interviews that were conducted in 1992 for
some earlier research, became pertinent to this research during the analysis
of the data. These are interviews with Anna Yen who was, at the time, a
performer with Rock�n�Roll Circus, also formerly of the Tasmanian Youth
Circus, and David Bell, who was at the time directing the first production
of Rock�n�Roll Circus�s highly successful production, �Bodyslam�.
Data gathered from archival material and observations made during performances were woven into the interviews, to encourage elaboration of core issues raised from these two sources. An attempt was also made, where possible, to meet with participants before the interview in order to give each of them some idea of the conceptual framework, so that they could reject or modify during the interview where they felt it might be necessary. This was particularly difficult with the traditional circuses, which proved difficult to track down and often reluctant to talk. This points to an unfortunate under representation of traditional circus in this research. Many of the participants from non-traditional circus were easier to find, more willing to talk, and the work of these circuses were also much better documented. It would have been desirable to spend some time traveling with one or more traditional circuses, but such a venture proved to be beyond the scope and resources of this project.
The next stage of research consisted of a
comparative analysis of the data, using the constant comparative method
(Glasser and Strauss:1971:105-1 13). This method consists of:
| �(1) comparing incidents applicable to each category, (2) integrating categories and their properties, (3) delimiting the theory, and (4) writing the theory.� |
Each incident in the transcribed interviews and documentation was coded and then compared with other incidents, until a series of core variables emerged from the data (for example, �Circus Oz is a hard environment in which to work�). Constant comparison and categorisation incidents were undertaken simultaneously, until every incident in the relevant data had been included. A comparison of variables was also conducted during this process, following the advice to �stop coding and record a memo on your ideas� (Glasser and Strauss:1 971:107). For example, it became apparent that the working conditions at Circus Oz might be related in some way to the strong sense of family in traditional circus. By constant comparison and categorisation, the important issues began to emerge from the data as each new incident naturally fell into an established category, contributing to the evolution of general categories mentioned earlier. As some categories emerged later in the process, the need for additional data collection became evident (for example, the emergence of community as a significant category meant that further archival research was conducted at Street Arts). Unfortunately, there were occasions when additional research was not an option, particularly in the case of the traditional circuses, which are difficult to track down in the best of circumstances. This comparative process was continued until a point of �theoretical saturation� (Glasser and Strauss:1971:111-112) had been reached thus leading to the conclusions in each chapter enabling a general theory to be expressed.
Following on from the logic of this process the review of literature and conceptual framework were completed after the generation of theory was nearing completion. Material in both of the sections was chosen to reflect and further verify the theoretical conclusions formulated from the data.