Categories for Audience

Seminar Advantage and Disadvantage Essay

Seminar Advantage and Disadvantage Essay

* The advantage in preparing your seminar in two months prior to your seminar is that you can prepare everything with excellence because you have a lot of time to prepare. * You have a lot of time to locate a good venue, decide a design so that can capture the audience interest by seeing the area so relaxing and refreshing. * Whatever food you plan to fix, try to keep to the middle of the road in your selections of what to fix.

Think of the food not only for its basic food value but for how much enjoyment it will give in the eating of it. Once you have your menus made, purchase all of your groceries that can bought ahead * You can also get a very good speaker or host in your seminar * You can decide how many audience you are going to invite, and what your target market are. * You also have a lot of time to expand your prospective list.


* The disadvantage of this longer preparation is that there is a tendency that you are going to change everything of what you have planned earlier, because of changing of your plan every day to make your seminar beautiful until the day will come.


* The advantage in this stage is you can allocate more of your time to perform what is your task in this period. * Make sure that your invitation card is amazing and creative. This time, you can change anytime your invitations if there is a computer error in your invitation. * You should check how obtaining and testimonial the speaker is, it is for you to know how effective he is as a speaker so that the audience will digest the agenda of your seminar clearly. * Preparing your agenda to cannot commit mistake in front of the audience. * You must check your site for the temperature problems, check the average of your sets, room type and shape of the area, for the finalization of the set ups of the venue.


* The disadvantage of this week there’s so many seminars are marvelously full of content but somehow more difficult to digest because there is one keynote in the introduction by the speakers and the subjects is common chain of reasoning or unified body with perhaps many details but one overriding theme.


* The advantage of this week you will know that if they are available and interested in your seminar. * Distributing your list of potential attendees will shorten the time for you to look for an audience. * You have a little more time to develop your list of audience if the other response that they cannot come to the seminar. * You have a chance to convince the audience to attend the seminar by calling them. * By having the tarpaulin, media, and brochures, you do not need to come to that person and convince them to attend the seminar. * People will come and have a registration if they are interested.


* The disadvantage is that there’s an audience will refuse your invitation and there are times the publicity you made is not that effective most specially if you are lack of finance in conducting your seminar or your publication is too plain to get the attention of an audience to be in your seminar.


* The advantage of this week is that you have final attendees in your list. * The thing to do is to send them letter to confirm if ever they change their mind, you still have time to look for a replacement. * Obtain the material for presentation to prevent problems. * Create evaluation sheet and checklist for attendees in advance, for the event come the list is prepared. * Create a certification or token in advance to prevent hassle.


* The disadvantage of this week, you do not have much time to handle a big problems is there is, must especially in the venue.


* This week you have a confirm attendees on your list book and you will instruct them where the venue is, what time it will be and the registration fee. * The event you are planning is well prepared and done.


* You do not have time if there will be an audience to back out. In venue, materials, invitation, token problems etc. there is no more time to fix.

How did the group plan for a range of audience responses? Essay

How did the group plan for a range of audience responses? Essay

Through our performance we wanted to convey a series of responses from the audience based around the many different feelings you can experience if you were trapped. As the topic didn’t really allow for the dynamics you can create with humour, we had to enable the audience to mentally separate their emotional response for each scene, in order for them to feel a new emotional experience. We did this by carefully planning the emotional journey we wanted to take them on, by first easing them into feeling scared – with the kidnapping scene, and eventually taking them to the paranoia featured in the final scene.

We even monitored how the audience responded to the performance by asking them to fill in a questionnaire. In the first set of scenes which revolved around the kidnapping of a little girl, we wanted the audience to be shocked at the fact that this can happen in broad daylight. We therefore set the scene at the end of a school day, with the kidnapper stood in audiences view watching the little girl.

This immediately creates suspense within the audience as they know something is going to happen. When the girl slowly follows her and reluctantly holds her hand we wanted the audience to feel shock and helplessness.

The second part of this scene was a news report on the kidnapping. This scene was one that we planned to be short, yet grasp the audience’s attention and make them realise the seriousness of the situation. Though this scene was simple with its lighting and no sound effects, it was evident that the audience felt concerned. One of the scenes where we intended to emotionally shock the audience was mentioned many times through the questionnaires. It was the scene in which the mother interacts with the audience. For this we intended to use a Brechtian technique of breaking the fourth wall, and ‘mingling’ with the audience.

We wanted her tone of voice to be very screechy and powerless to shock the audience into really believing that she has lost her child, and the use of close eye contact makes them feel inadequate to help. The audience said that they felt disturbed by closeness of the interaction between Laura (the mother) and themselves. We wanted to continue the Brechtian theme through the use of placards, as they create visual captions that interrupt and summarize the action. We planned to shout at the audience to make them feel uncomfortable.

Another change is made when we add some loud and fast drum and bass music, and in corporate flashing lights. We thought that by creating something visually stimulating, we could make the audience feel vulnerable. Using physical theatre, we as a group wanted to physically represent being trapped. Charlotte (who played the girl being kidnapped), and then violently shaking and moving whilst Charlotte attempts, yet fails to escape and reach out. We planned to provoke an emotion of vulnerability and powerlessness but in such a way, that it would shock the audience.

The use of physical theatre explicitly allows the audience to actually ‘see’ the scene, and leaves it open to interpretation. Also, the anorexia scene was a mixture of both naturalism – with the character of Sophie – and surrealism, in that Charlotte is physically representing anorexia. This in its own right should make the audience uncomfortable and nervous. Like Antonin Artaud’s theatre of cruelty, we wanted to create a character that’s physical representation would shatter the false reality and disturb the audience. That is how we came up with Anna’s character.

However we firstly wanted the audience to feel sorry for Sophie (the character with anorexia, played by me), so we gave her a monologue in which she gradually became weaker as she was talking. This use of breaking the fourth wall by addressing the audience was intentional, as it would create an intimate connection with the audience. I started off with a confident tone of voice, but gradually got quieter and my body language more timid as I came to the end of my monologue. We thought that the use of monologues would help to engage the audience.

The emotional journey we planned to take Sophie on was to give her a range of emotions, so the scene didn’t become dull and lose audience interest. The contrasts of the shouting at Anna, and then running away crying, were an attempt to take the audience on the same journey I was experiencing. When Sophie collapses at the end, it signifies her physical and mental exhaustion, that again we wanted the audience to feel after watching the performance. The poverty scene was used, in order to show the selfishness within our society, and how we ‘turn a blind eye’ to what is right in front of us.

We wanted to use physical theatre to make the piece quite abstract. In order to do this we again thought a Brectian technique would work well, as we didn’t want the audience to be spoon fed there emotions. This method of distancing ourselves from the audience was a great way of allowing the audience to question what they are seeing. We wanted them to create there own interpretation of the scene and how they really felt about the issue of poverty. As there were no words, we used music which we felt embodied a lot of feeling. At one point in the music, the rhythm changed.

We decided this would be a good point to interact with the audience, so we looked up and stared at them. This was an attempt to single out the audience members, in a way as if to say ‘you can change this’. We also repeated the scene again but with masks. We wanted to represent the facelessness of society, and how people are too self involved to see what is going on around them. However, after reading the questionnaires we had asked the audience to fill in, many of them wrote down that they didn’t understand the scene, especially when with the masks.

We maybe could have thought this scene through a little more, and perhaps not have used the masks as it just seemed to confuse the audience, which we did not want to do. In conclusion, the groups plan for a range of audience responses was really dependant on what type of technique we wished to follow. As we have studied many practitioners and their theories; we felt that using a variety of different acting styles and techniques, we could plan and create our desired audience responses. However, we also had to consider the genre and context of the scene, so that we could create the response that we wished the audience to have.

The Road Home Essay

The Road Home Essay

The Road Home catches the senses of the audience through spectacle and thrill as the inspiring love affair in the recent past is reminisced with profound exaltation of the Chinese tradition and the exotic settings and style of presentation. The movie conveys the importance of experiences in the village life and the dedicated teachers in such communities. Lu Yusheng, an urbanized young man, narrates the love story of his parents as he returns to his native village in northern China where his parents started as couple for more than 40 years (Arnold, 2001).

Events like funerals or sickness are the best time to remind us about the past, especially about the dead persons’ life, not because we want to feel sorry about misfortunes or failed accomplishments but rather to highlight the important memories that have happened so we can learn and be inspired as we continue our journey on earth. It is worthy noting about how Luo Changyu, a village schoolteacher, Zhao Di, having a naive personality with supreme and heroic passion, crossed paths.

It was unusual for an illiterate Chinese girl to dream of catching the attention of an educated man and win his heart because Chinese tradition is basically conservative and embodies the belief that women remains feminine in nature. Stalking a man is unacceptable in the society, especially in remote villages but Zhao Di was able to pursue her romantic motive despite the circumstances brought by political and social pressures during their time.

            The movie shows the very nature of love that it bares and endures all things. It has no preference and it is able to realize even the inconceivable once true love is mutually felt. Changyu and Di’ romance may sound ordinary but it conveys that cultural changes happen and we should preserve the best values for our present and future endeavors.


Arnold, G. (2001).`Road’ Leads to Romance. The Washington Times (June 8, 2001), 6.

Target Audiences and Stylistic Technique: Lynda Hurst Versus Allan Hutchinson Essay

Target Audiences and Stylistic Technique: Lynda Hurst Versus Allan Hutchinson Essay

Lynda Hurst and Allan C. Hutchinson both have different thoughts about the topic of surrogates. Their articles consist of stylistic techniques that are used to attract readers from two dissimilar audiences: Lynda’s audience is directed towards the average person, where as Allan’s audience targets a more higher educated reader. Both authors use different types of diction, structure and reasoning to capture their intended audiences. Lynda and Allan both use two distinct choices of words in order to attract their different target audiences.

Lynda uses informal diction as well as simple language in order to create an emotional appeal to her readers. An example of this would be, “[t]he recommendations make many of us shiver in distaste” (Hurst, Lynda. 23). Lynda connects with her audience using words that they can relate to emotionally by using the pronoun “us” as in the example above to make the audience feel connected to the text. The language within her piece is simplistic, making it easier for her readers to understand.

This appeals to her target audience as it is in terms that everyone could relate to and comprehend. Allan on the other hand uses complex word choices that has an intellectual appeal to his audience. This type of diction makes Allan’s tone more informative, serious and impersonal. He does not connect himself with the topic as he relies on laws and facts about surrogates. An example of this is; “[a]lthough there was a powerful dissent, the majority of the law reform commissioners maintained that, as a matter of public policy, surrogacy ought to be permissible “(Hutchinson, Allan. 4).

This appeals to his higher educated audience as it is more intricate and has language that is more in depth. The audience would not feel threatened by his vocabulary and instead would enjoy its complexity. His use of word choice might not have as much appeal to the average reader. Each author employs a different type of structure in order to captivate their desired target audiences. In Lynda’s article she uses sub-titles and has an informal layout to intrigue her readers.

One example of her use of sub-titles is the following, “[t]elevised Battle: Keane, the couple.. (23). Lynda’s use of subtitles cuts her writing into sections in order to draw the audience’s attention to her major points. She uses shocking sub-titles in order to engage her audience in what her opinion is about surrogates. This structure appeals to her audience as it is simply telling them what her major points are instead of them trying to figure them out themselves, thus using a simplistic style in order to appeal to her target audience. Allan on the contrary does not use sub-titles and has a more formal editorial approach when trying to attract his audience.

As seen in the following quote Allan looks not just at surrogates but at the bigger picture, “[a]ny improvement must begin with opportunities for women to reclaim and redefine their sexual roles and responsibilities”(25). Allan’s structure flows nicely and is structured like an essay as he clearly states a thesis and does not use personal pronouns. He outlines his facts to support his thesis and has a generalized conclusion. This structure appeals to this type of audience as it is more organized, succinct and laid out in sequence linking to the facts that he provided.

His scope of the topic was a lot larger and more multi layered and presented more dimensions to his argument. Both authors use contrasting types of arguments in order to interest their two diverse audiences. Lynda uses inductive argumentation in order to persuade her readers onto her idea of surrogacy. For instance, she states her theory at the end of her article; “I think that Canada should follow the lead of Britain and state, without qualification that the bearing of children for commercial gain simple isn’t on”(24). Inductive argumentation is going from empirical truth to broader generalization and then to theory.

This is precisely what Lynda did in her article as she starts her article with examples of surrogacy in Britain and then connects it back to what she thinks about surrogacy in the end. This type of argumentation connects with the audience she is reaching out to as they can base their opinion on the examples Lynda first provided. This appeals to her audience as it connects to them in a simplistic personal level. The examples she used are familiar to her audience, making them easier to identify with her writing and her way of reasoning.

Conversely Allan chose to use deductive argumentation in his article in order to engage his audience. Deductive argumentation is starting with a theory and then proving that theory. Allan definitely uses this approach as he states his theory as his thesis right at the beginning, “[t]he report’s recommendations for legal reforms make good sense”(24), and throughout the rest of his article he uses facts in order to prove his side of the argument on surrogates. This appeals to his target audience as it induces a higher level of thinking and knowledge of the topic which can evoke broader ideas about the impact of surrogacy.

Allan stating right away what his opinion is on surrogacy can captivate his audience as it makes them think more about his proof and judge it based on his arguments from both perspectives. Allan gives a more two sided approach versus the one sided approach presented by Lynda. In conclusion, both Lynda and Allan use different types of diction, structure and argumentation in order to captivate their two dissimilar audiences on the topic of surrogates. Lynda’s target audience is the average person and Allan’s target audience is that of a more educated reader.

What May Be the Audiences Opinions of Hector? Essay

What May Be the Audiences Opinions of Hector? Essay

One of the obvious opinions that the audience may have for one of Bennett’s main characters, Hector, the eccentric general studies teacher with an educational philosophy of enrichment, would be disgust and an uneasy sensation after having learnt of his inappropriate relationship with the namesake boys. Though in the first act of the play, nothing is specifically admitted, though it is heavily suggested; for example, “A hand on a boy’s genitals at fifty miles an hour, and you call it nothing?”.

In my opinion, the fact that, though his behaviour has not only been recognised by other teachers, but has actually been called upon by Felix, and still he makes no move to take responsibility for his actions, choosing instead to respond with wit and imaginative quotes. This influences comedy within the play in two ways, one of which in the use of emotional disengagement, in which he reflects the conversation away from himself and his mistakes- “The transmission of knowledge is in itself an erotic act.

In the Renaissance…”. The second effect on the comedic aspect of the text would be playfulness used throughout, belittling serious subjects and acting as if there’s nothing wrong with what had been happening by mocking them or not taking any particular action against them/ to fix them. On the other hand, however, the thing that makes myself, as a reader, truly uncomfortable is the sympathy that I feel for the Hector, when in reality, I know that I should not. The audience may feel pity for his character because of his implied loveless marriage: “I’m not sure that she’d be interested”. This gives the impression that Hector is a very isolated character, who has nobody he can really turn to, as his wife doesn’t care what he has to say, when he seemingly needs somebody the most, as he comes to terms with his own sexuality, as well as several other characters within the play.

This enhances the comedy genre through the use of a strong, pragmatic character, as the problems that he faces are aspects of everyday life, that many people also struggle with- he seems to try to make it through his problem one day at a time, relying on his love for literature and teaching, possibly the only thing he has that makes him who he is, to get him through the day, showing how much he truly depends on his career and how much it means to him- “What did you call them? Gobbets?”, giving the impression that he was truly offended that what he teaches is considered nothing more than meaningless factoids. The final emotion I believe that the audience will feel after having seen Act 1, would be frustration, as I certainly find myself feeling that way inclined.

Frustration that Hector is unable to compromise so much, in particular with Irwin and his opposing educational philosophy of function rather than enrichment, in order to prepare the boys for their upcoming Oxbridge examinations. Despite the fact that Irwin is willing to negotiate with Hector after having realised how useful what Hector was teaching them truly was, agreeing at one point that education is not simply about exams (“For what it’s worth, I sympathise with your feelings about examinations”), Hector is still too stubborn to let go of his views and work in harmony with him for the benefit of the boys.

This heightens the comedy of the play as it suggests that his character is not adaptable, which the audience find to be amusing, especially as it also enhances the idea of the clash between the 2 teachers- Hector representing disorder whilst Irwin portrays order as we advance through the text and see what is wrong, be righted, though Irwin’s role is made significantly more difficult through hectors lack of co-operation: “I count examinations,…, as the enemy of education.”.

Modern Audience Essay

Modern Audience Essay

“It is impossible for a modern audience to feel comfortable with the Taming of The Shrew” with close reference to Shakespeare’s presentation of Katharina, comic conventions and having the above question in mind, write about your response to the ending of the play…

In my opinion, The Taming of The Shrew tells the story of an abusive marriage and I would agree with the view that it is impossible for a modern audience to feel comfortable with the play, especially the conclusion of the story.

Shakespeare’s presentation of Katharina at the end of the play seems to me to be one of a broken person; she is almost robotic in her obedience and without spirit, except for when singing the praises of wifely submission. “Thy husband is thy Lord, thy life, thy keeper, thy head, thy sovereign” is a prime example of the disturbing brainwashing Petruchio has carried out on her. This humbled ‘Kate’ is a far cry from the feisty Katharina we are first greeted by in Act 2, where she exchanges a vicious battle of words with Petruchio; “Asses are made to bear and so are you”.

This phrase in itself shows that she is fearless, and defies her society’s conventions, cursing at strangers; a sad contrast to the plays ending, where she has totally conformed to what’s expected of her. The ending of the play also contains very little comedy, with the exception of the argument as to who is the real Vincentio, and the fight between Kate and the Widow. This is because the Taming of the shrew defies most Shakespearian comedy conventions, as the marriage takes place midway the play, rather than at then end as was traditional. I believe that this adds to the discomfort of the modern audience, as after the supposed ‘happy ending’ we are faced with the harsh reality of Petruchio’s treatment of Kate.

Shakespeare presents Katharina as completely changed by the end of the play. At first she is wild and seemingly untameable; we see her tie up her sister and argue violently with both Petruchio and her father. “So may you lose you arms, if you strike me, you are no gentleman, and if no gentleman, why then no arms” Here, Shakespeare presents Katharina as highly skilled with word manipulation, generating humour with her insulting play on words with “arms” as she brands Petruchio simply a commoner if he would strike her.

This is in stark contrast to the ending of the play where she seems to have no free will. She is practically enslaved to Petruchio, agreeing with his every thought and whim. An example of this is Act 4, Scene 5, Petruchio and Kate see Vincentio and Petruchio refers to him as a “fair and lovely maid”, instructing Kate to “embrace her for her beauty’s sake”. Shakespeare’s use of a command word clearly shows Petruchio’s power and utter control in their relationship. Vincentio is obviously a man, but despite this, and despite a warning from Hortensio that this pretence will anger Vincentio, “a will make the man mad, to make a woman of him”, Kate does indeed embrace him for his beauty’s sake; “Young budding virgin, fair fresh and sweet”.

This elaborate language with its piling up of adjectives is an example of hyperbole used for comic effect. It is perhaps also, on a less humorous note, an instance of what many feminists would see as the darker side of The Taming of the Shrew, and the destruction of Katherina’s personality; this is a strong interpretation as she could be seen to be using this elaborate language due to her desperation to please Petruchio or her fear of punishment. Petruchio further exerts his power over Kate by then changing his mind and accusing Kate of madness.

“I hope thou art not mad, this is a man” she readily agrees, ignoring the fact that Petruchio has undermined and humiliated her, and begs for his pardon over her stupidity. This scene is a prime example of the change Petruchio has caused from Katharina to Kate. She is not the character we met in Act 2, and this transformation could be said to be uncomfortable for a modern audience to watch. It is unpleasant to see one human being so completely at the hands of another, and whether this total obedience is due to love, fear or desperation is down to the audience to decide. I think this adds a more disquieting edge to the play as Shakespeare seems to condone Petruchio’s taming, or what most modern audiences would see as abuse.

However, some critics, for instance Lucy Bailey, director for the RSC, have stated that the play is a curiously misunderstood love story, not the abusive tale of misogyny some modern audiences would see it as; Bailey says that Petruchio and Kate’s attraction is instant, and that what follows after their first meeting is simply fore-play. Nonetheless, this interpretation is hard to digest in the face of the cruelty Petruchio inflicts on Kate, why would a man in love treat the object of his affections like one of his farm animals? This treatment is particularly shown during Act 4 where Petruchio begins his ‘taming’, he attempts to train Kate as one would train a dog. EXAMPLE. Evaluate language. Other critics have explained this treatment by saying that Petruchio is driven mad by grief after the death of his father he “takes out his disaffection and anger on other people almost as an experiment.” (Director David Farr)

The best example of Shakespeare’s changing presentation of Katharina to Kate can be seen in the final scene, in her speech. She has not spoken for several pages, but then, on Petruchio’s command, launches into the longest speech in the entire play, expelling the virtues of being a good wife. The first reason that most modern audiences would find this scene uncomfortable to watch is the way that Petruchio instructs Kate to “Tell these headstrong women what duty they do owe to their Lords and husbands”.

This phrase itself could be seen to be problematic for modern audiences to digest. In the 21st century, men and women are equal, so the way that Petruchio refers to men as “Lords”, implies a power and control over women that is uncomfortable for most modern audiences to hear. Shakespeare cleverly prioritises the word Lord over Husband in this line emphasising the debt Petruchio feels women owe their husbands, like peasants owe their Lords. In this statement, Petruchio also uses headstrong as an insult, whereas in modern Britain, although it can have negative connotations, headstrong is often a positive personality attribute, implying one knows ones own mind.

The ending of The Taming of the Shrew contains very little comic elements, making it all the more uncomfortable. There is the scene in which Vincentio encounters the pedant impersonating himself .

The audience has not seen Kate as impassioned during her speech since she was Katharina; we see some of her old spark when she refers to Bianca and The Widow as “froward and unable worms”. However, this insult could be seen as a sad reflection of how Petruchio has twisted her feisty nature to suit his own needs. Most modern spectators would see the entire speech as incredibly anti-feminist, and I believe that due to this it is impossible for most modern audiences to feel comfortable with The Taming of The Shrew. Kate suggests women should “kneel for peace” and “place your hands below your husband’s foot”. These phrases evoke feelings of servitude and to most modern audiences are difficult to hear. Kate’s ‘realisation’ that women are weak, their “lances nothing but straws” contrasts to her physical violence at the start of the play where she attacks Petruchio. “That I’ll try (she strikes him)”.

Shakespeare uses regal imagery in this speech to show the total infatuation and obedience Kate feels towards Petruchio. She refers to husbands and ‘Lords’, ‘Sovereigns’, ‘Heads’ and ‘Princes’, and these words show the power Petruchio has over Kate and the power she believes all husbands should have over their wives: one of absolute control, akin to the monarch. Shakespeare’s effective listing of these nouns emphasises Kate’s uncanny passion towards Petruchio and wifely obedience. Similes are also widely used in Kate’s final speech; for example, “to dart a scornful glance” at ones husband “blots thy beauty as frosts do bite the meads”. Kate now believes that obedience is beauty, and for most modern audiences who live in a society where independence is valued and celebrated, it is impossible to feel comfortable with these ideas.