Because of my current research into the history of celebration, I have lately become interested in the impact that ritual has on special events.
Many of us often think of ritual in terms of one of its most limiting definitions, "a state or condition characterized by the presence of established procedure or routine." What is also fascinating is how close this is to the definition of an addiction as "the condition of being habitually or compulsively occupied with or involved in something" and the definition of an obsession as "something that preoccupies a person to the exclusion of other things."
Here's an example. We get up and check the Blackberry and Facebook before breakfast every day, then again at coffee break, at lunch, and perhaps several more times during the work day. Is this simply ritual or has it transformed into addiction or obsession? Where does ritual end and addiction or obsession start? If we don't perform a ritual, does it screw up our mind? Do we have to get to the point where doing without it would literally have physical and psychological consequences for it to be labelled an addiction or an obsession?
So what does this have to do with events? Plenty, because ritual is a big part of almost every special event nowadays. Think of a football game. Let's imagine you are a football fan and attend every game of your favourite team. At the game, you love to watch the cheerleaders and have a couple of beers, screaming with everyone else as the heavy rock music urges the crowd on. Every aspect of the game and what you do is really just ritual, from the cheerleaders to the beer to the rock music and the ritual coin toss and kick-off, as well as the players doing victory dances in the end zone. Take all of this away and what would happen to you and to the other fans? Would you still go to games? Would there be "withdrawal symptoms?" I hazard a guess that there would be, just like an addiction. Are you obsessed with the game? Probably, if you have to give up all other activities at all costs to attend. Therein lies the relationship of the three: ritual, addiction, obsession.
What about other event types like an annual corporate dinner? Here's an example from my own experience of producing such an event. It was a business association that one year decided to hold an awards banquet to honour senior businesspeople in the community. As it turned out, the event was so successful that they decided to make it an annual affair. I continued to do all the production work for this event for about 16 years until I sold my company. The interesting thing about the event was that the format and location remained exactly the same year in and year out. Oddly, in spite of this, the event sold out every year, and the association had the audacity to sell an entire table for more than the cost of a table full of single seats only, with attendees happily contributing! It was held in the same hotel ballroom, the physical setup always included two small stages of the same size at opposite corners of the room, there was always a short 20-minute entertainment segment to end the event, and it followed a strict invariant running order with speeches, awards, and meal courses planned in exactly the same order and at the same times each year. It also began with a reception in another part of the hotel and a special procession to dinner with guests being led by some sort of musical group every year. The only thing that changed was the overall theme of the event which was manifested in creative décor and unusual customized entertainment. This event had become a true example of one containing clear ritual activity. While the transformation to personal addiction or obsession was never a possibility, there was a distinct possibility that the business association would have suffered some sort of "corporate withdrawal" if the event had been cancelled.
To summarize, what most of us in the industry don't realize, is that we are integral parts of events that depend on ritual activity. This ritual activity is really the "glue" that holds everything together. It is often how well we recognize and manage these rituals that will lead to event success or failure. It behooves us to learn about ritual behaviour.
More to come.
Saturday, 14 February 2009
Wednesday, 14 January 2009
Why We Celebrate: Part Three
The second group of key players in an event, participants, can be a mixture of actual owner/organizers, external and unrelated entertainers or other entities, and spectators. Their reasons are primarily psychological and commercial. From a psychological standpoint, anyone who has been a performer can understand the concept of flow. “In the flow state, action follows upon action according to an internal logic that seems to need no conscious intervention by the actor. He experiences it as a unified flowing from one moment to the next, in which he is in control of his actions, and in which there is little distinction between self and environment, between stimulus and response, or between past, present, and future.”[i] Most performers at some point in their careers experience this. If they are highly trained, it undoubtedly occurs on a regular basis. For the performer, it is a very desirable mental state, somewhat metaphysical and even transcendental. For them, it is a feeling of wanting to remain “in the moment.”[ii]
Performers also need to have a psychological connection with the audience. This is the ultimate validation for their existence that performers seek. It means that first, the audience has indeed “received the message” (i.e. the message desired by the event owners), and second, the art form and method of delivery are appreciated. This is usually obvious to the performer through the audience’s rapt attention, sustained applause, or laughter at appropriate times. Of course, the simple commercial reason of being paid for their performance is still important to professional entertainers, and whether or not they buy into the organizer’s main reason for holding the event may be irrelevant.
Numerous modern studies have confirmed repeatedly why spectators or audiences, the third group of key players, attend public events or spectacles. These can be generally lumped into social, educational, and psychological reasons. They include the opportunity to socialize, to gain knowledge, to experience high quality art, and to be emotionally rewarded or personally fulfilled (e.g. excitement, ego enhancement). Interestingly, for those familiar with Maslow's hierarchy of needs, these correspond almost perfectly with the higher social needs. What this means for event organizers is that although their reasons may be religious, political, social, educational, or commercial, it does not matter and the chances for a successful event are decreased unless the reasons for the audience’s attendance are matched. And they must be matched through the skillful interpretation of the main message by the participants. Since it is unlikely that human nature has changed over the centuries, audiences of other cultures and eras were likely motivated by the same reasons as audiences of today.
[i] Czikszentmihalyi, M. (1975). Beyond Boredom and Anxiety. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. pp.35-36.
[ii] Matthews, D. (2008). Special Event Production: The Resources. Oxford: Elsevier Inc. pp.14-15.
Performers also need to have a psychological connection with the audience. This is the ultimate validation for their existence that performers seek. It means that first, the audience has indeed “received the message” (i.e. the message desired by the event owners), and second, the art form and method of delivery are appreciated. This is usually obvious to the performer through the audience’s rapt attention, sustained applause, or laughter at appropriate times. Of course, the simple commercial reason of being paid for their performance is still important to professional entertainers, and whether or not they buy into the organizer’s main reason for holding the event may be irrelevant.
Numerous modern studies have confirmed repeatedly why spectators or audiences, the third group of key players, attend public events or spectacles. These can be generally lumped into social, educational, and psychological reasons. They include the opportunity to socialize, to gain knowledge, to experience high quality art, and to be emotionally rewarded or personally fulfilled (e.g. excitement, ego enhancement). Interestingly, for those familiar with Maslow's hierarchy of needs, these correspond almost perfectly with the higher social needs. What this means for event organizers is that although their reasons may be religious, political, social, educational, or commercial, it does not matter and the chances for a successful event are decreased unless the reasons for the audience’s attendance are matched. And they must be matched through the skillful interpretation of the main message by the participants. Since it is unlikely that human nature has changed over the centuries, audiences of other cultures and eras were likely motivated by the same reasons as audiences of today.
[i] Czikszentmihalyi, M. (1975). Beyond Boredom and Anxiety. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. pp.35-36.
[ii] Matthews, D. (2008). Special Event Production: The Resources. Oxford: Elsevier Inc. pp.14-15.
Sunday, 14 December 2008
Why We Celebrate: Part Two
Back in June, I briefly discussed the key players in special events: organizers, participants, and spectators. I left that blog entry with a promise to return and give what I believe to be the reasons why each of these individual groups becomes part of a special event. This is the beginning.
We view the well-rehearsed, slick productions of big-name concert artists, the fast-paced, half-time shows at football games, and the emotionally charged opening and closing ceremonies of the Olympic Games with awe. To most viewers, these elaborate productions seem effortless, moving seamlessly from one act or program segment to the next, each one building on the last until the finale is reached amidst a burst of fireworks and patriotic or high-energy music. Effortless they appear. Easy to plan and execute they are not. They all require an abundance of creativity, superior organizational skill, an intimate knowledge of performance and psychology, and an unwavering dedication to the task at hand, specifically by the two key players and their teams, organizers/owners, and participants. Each of these two parties needs to know why they are contributing their time and effort to the event.
The first of these, event organizers and owners, have any one or more of five primary reasons for holding an event. These are religious, political, social, educational, and commercial. This has been true since prehistory and across all societies. It always comes down to fear of the unknown (religion), drive for power (politics), building or maintaining group solidarity (social), imparting messages and lessons (educational), and lust for money (commerce).
Interestingly, one often has to look deeper to find the real motivation for an organizer to hold an event. At first glance, an organizer may state something else. For example, increasing tourism as a reason is a euphemistic alternative for profit-seeking by local or national governments. Gaining cultural knowledge as a reason typically disguises a play for group power and recognition and later, money, by politically astute cultural groups. Supporting philanthropy in reality is another ploy for gaining recognition and later, power or money through the allying of support behind popular causes, often by individual or corporate sponsors.
If this sounds cynical, it is. It did not take our ancestors long to figure out the power behind what we know today as event marketing. Events – especially large public ones - influence people. Obviously, the larger the event, the more people can be influenced. This influence usually involves spectators taking action in some way, whether it is physical or psychological, as a result of receiving a message from the event. Watching a Super Bowl game or a World Cup soccer final with all the attendant emotional razzmatazz can induce viewers to purchase the products of sponsors (a commercial reason). In the Aztec civilization of ancient Mexico, as witnessed by the Spanish conquistadors, bloody human sacrifices were in part intended to prevent enemies from trying to attack the Aztecs if they did not want to suffer the same fate (religious and political reasons). Likewise, the Nazi rallies at Nuremberg in the 1930s had very clear messages for the German people that produced untold grief in the years to follow (a political reason). A more modern example became blatantly apparent before the 2008 Olympics in Beijing when United States media giant NBC paid a whopping $894 million for the exclusive broadcasting rights for the games. This made them the largest sponsor by far and obvious proof that commerce drives the once noble games that began in 776 BCE with religion as their raison d’etre.
Yes, we have come a long way - technically - from the special events of our ancestors but human nature has not changed. The reasons for staging them have remained the same. A future blog will discuss the reasons why participants other than organizers become part of special events.
We view the well-rehearsed, slick productions of big-name concert artists, the fast-paced, half-time shows at football games, and the emotionally charged opening and closing ceremonies of the Olympic Games with awe. To most viewers, these elaborate productions seem effortless, moving seamlessly from one act or program segment to the next, each one building on the last until the finale is reached amidst a burst of fireworks and patriotic or high-energy music. Effortless they appear. Easy to plan and execute they are not. They all require an abundance of creativity, superior organizational skill, an intimate knowledge of performance and psychology, and an unwavering dedication to the task at hand, specifically by the two key players and their teams, organizers/owners, and participants. Each of these two parties needs to know why they are contributing their time and effort to the event.
The first of these, event organizers and owners, have any one or more of five primary reasons for holding an event. These are religious, political, social, educational, and commercial. This has been true since prehistory and across all societies. It always comes down to fear of the unknown (religion), drive for power (politics), building or maintaining group solidarity (social), imparting messages and lessons (educational), and lust for money (commerce).
Interestingly, one often has to look deeper to find the real motivation for an organizer to hold an event. At first glance, an organizer may state something else. For example, increasing tourism as a reason is a euphemistic alternative for profit-seeking by local or national governments. Gaining cultural knowledge as a reason typically disguises a play for group power and recognition and later, money, by politically astute cultural groups. Supporting philanthropy in reality is another ploy for gaining recognition and later, power or money through the allying of support behind popular causes, often by individual or corporate sponsors.
If this sounds cynical, it is. It did not take our ancestors long to figure out the power behind what we know today as event marketing. Events – especially large public ones - influence people. Obviously, the larger the event, the more people can be influenced. This influence usually involves spectators taking action in some way, whether it is physical or psychological, as a result of receiving a message from the event. Watching a Super Bowl game or a World Cup soccer final with all the attendant emotional razzmatazz can induce viewers to purchase the products of sponsors (a commercial reason). In the Aztec civilization of ancient Mexico, as witnessed by the Spanish conquistadors, bloody human sacrifices were in part intended to prevent enemies from trying to attack the Aztecs if they did not want to suffer the same fate (religious and political reasons). Likewise, the Nazi rallies at Nuremberg in the 1930s had very clear messages for the German people that produced untold grief in the years to follow (a political reason). A more modern example became blatantly apparent before the 2008 Olympics in Beijing when United States media giant NBC paid a whopping $894 million for the exclusive broadcasting rights for the games. This made them the largest sponsor by far and obvious proof that commerce drives the once noble games that began in 776 BCE with religion as their raison d’etre.
Yes, we have come a long way - technically - from the special events of our ancestors but human nature has not changed. The reasons for staging them have remained the same. A future blog will discuss the reasons why participants other than organizers become part of special events.
Thursday, 9 October 2008
Some Thoughts About Dancing and Music at Events
I have just returned from a weekend devoted to my college class reunion. I won't embarrass myself by stating which one it was; however, I do want to recount the experience of our Saturday night dinner and dance.
This was obviously a time when we all wanted to renew old acquaintances and spend a lot of time talking and learning about what we had all been doing for so many years since we last saw one another. The evening went along swimmingly until the band started, shortly after dinner. At this point, it became impossible to talk so we just sat staring at each other. The band, to be sure, was very good and they tried to keep the volume down, but although many people danced, it effectively killed the party.
I experienced this situation many times during my career as an event producer and it reminded me of the necessity to continually be cognizant of the client's purpose for holding an event. An event planner/producer must understand why the client is bringing all these people together. Sure, a loud dance band is great for a group who knows and works with each other daily. Unfortunately, it is not good when the group wants to discuss business or renew old friendships. The assumption that what worked when we were all young and single and saw each other regularly is irrelevant for a reunion after many years of not seeing each other.
So what can be done about this dilemma? The organizer and client want the event to be successful and having a dance band and music makes it at least seem as if everyone is having a good time. It also makes it seem as if everyone is getting their money's worth out of the event. Yet at the same time, most people want to spend the majority of their time talking to old friends, or in the case of a business meeting or convention, discussing business or common interests.
There are several ways to solve it. The first is not to have any music - and indeed this is sometimes best for a talkative group. No music is better than musical wallpaper that nobody is interested in or has to shout over. When the dance time comes, however, there are other ways. One - and probably the best if it is possible - is to put the band in another room, preferably the same one as the bar, which guarantees that people will visit the room. Another is to try what my parents' generation did, and that is to organize the band's music into sets. I have always thought that this idea is one whose time has come again.
When I was in high school, I played in a big band and we used to follow this concept. It involves organizing the evening's music into sets that last approximately 10 to 15 minutes. Each set consists of perhaps three songs and the songs can be of a certain type. For example, one set can be high-energy rock while another set can be slow, belly-to-belly waltzes or foxtrots (yes, there are a couple of very good options for slow dances, complete with proper steps!) In this way, if someone doesn't like fast, it is only a short time until a slow set will be played. The best part of this way of organizing the evening's music is that the time between sets can be varied according to the requirements of the client, such as wanting to have guests talk more (as in my reunion). Thus, if it is a dancing crowd, the time between sets might only be 3 to 5 minutes. If it is a talking crowd, the time might be 10 minutes, so that there is a 15 minute music-10 minute talk pattern to the event. The band would probably still take their regular breaks after an hour or so but this could probably be varied through negotation.
The other interesting thing about dance sets is that they were - and could now be - based on what was known as "dance cards." These were cards that everyone was given before the event that permitted them to go to people they wanted to dance with and write in the names next to the particular music set (i.e. first set, second set, etc). Obviously, this is great for a singles-type dance, but it could also work with other types such as weddings, reunions, or even business meetings. No doubt, there could be other creative ways to use the concept, such as an ice breaker in almost any type of event with dance music. It certainly forces people to talk to each other yet still allows for a lot of spontaneity without disrupting the greater flow of conversation at an event. It also eliminates that embarrassing moment at the end of each song when neither party really knows if the other wants to stay up on the dance floor. With sets, they must quit at the end of the set.
Perhaps it's time to re-examine the way we use dance music at events. There has to be a better way.
This was obviously a time when we all wanted to renew old acquaintances and spend a lot of time talking and learning about what we had all been doing for so many years since we last saw one another. The evening went along swimmingly until the band started, shortly after dinner. At this point, it became impossible to talk so we just sat staring at each other. The band, to be sure, was very good and they tried to keep the volume down, but although many people danced, it effectively killed the party.
I experienced this situation many times during my career as an event producer and it reminded me of the necessity to continually be cognizant of the client's purpose for holding an event. An event planner/producer must understand why the client is bringing all these people together. Sure, a loud dance band is great for a group who knows and works with each other daily. Unfortunately, it is not good when the group wants to discuss business or renew old friendships. The assumption that what worked when we were all young and single and saw each other regularly is irrelevant for a reunion after many years of not seeing each other.
So what can be done about this dilemma? The organizer and client want the event to be successful and having a dance band and music makes it at least seem as if everyone is having a good time. It also makes it seem as if everyone is getting their money's worth out of the event. Yet at the same time, most people want to spend the majority of their time talking to old friends, or in the case of a business meeting or convention, discussing business or common interests.
There are several ways to solve it. The first is not to have any music - and indeed this is sometimes best for a talkative group. No music is better than musical wallpaper that nobody is interested in or has to shout over. When the dance time comes, however, there are other ways. One - and probably the best if it is possible - is to put the band in another room, preferably the same one as the bar, which guarantees that people will visit the room. Another is to try what my parents' generation did, and that is to organize the band's music into sets. I have always thought that this idea is one whose time has come again.
When I was in high school, I played in a big band and we used to follow this concept. It involves organizing the evening's music into sets that last approximately 10 to 15 minutes. Each set consists of perhaps three songs and the songs can be of a certain type. For example, one set can be high-energy rock while another set can be slow, belly-to-belly waltzes or foxtrots (yes, there are a couple of very good options for slow dances, complete with proper steps!) In this way, if someone doesn't like fast, it is only a short time until a slow set will be played. The best part of this way of organizing the evening's music is that the time between sets can be varied according to the requirements of the client, such as wanting to have guests talk more (as in my reunion). Thus, if it is a dancing crowd, the time between sets might only be 3 to 5 minutes. If it is a talking crowd, the time might be 10 minutes, so that there is a 15 minute music-10 minute talk pattern to the event. The band would probably still take their regular breaks after an hour or so but this could probably be varied through negotation.
The other interesting thing about dance sets is that they were - and could now be - based on what was known as "dance cards." These were cards that everyone was given before the event that permitted them to go to people they wanted to dance with and write in the names next to the particular music set (i.e. first set, second set, etc). Obviously, this is great for a singles-type dance, but it could also work with other types such as weddings, reunions, or even business meetings. No doubt, there could be other creative ways to use the concept, such as an ice breaker in almost any type of event with dance music. It certainly forces people to talk to each other yet still allows for a lot of spontaneity without disrupting the greater flow of conversation at an event. It also eliminates that embarrassing moment at the end of each song when neither party really knows if the other wants to stay up on the dance floor. With sets, they must quit at the end of the set.
Perhaps it's time to re-examine the way we use dance music at events. There has to be a better way.
Monday, 25 August 2008
Beijing Olympics: Some Final Comments
Again, kudos to the Beijing organizers for a superb Olympics. At least on television, the venues looked extremely well designed for their particular sports, the TV coverage was the best I have ever seen, the sports timing and organizing seemed from TV to be almost perfect. I enjoyed every minute.
However, now to politics and the reason these Olympics were hosted by China. We have just witnessed the most lavish and expensive rite of passage in history: two weeks of one country trying to prove it is capable of joining the ranks of the major economic powers of the world; two weeks of one country trying to overcome a massive inferiority complex; two weeks of one country daring the rest of the world to do better; two weeks of the rest of the world trying to break through an artifical facade to catch even a tiny glimpse of the true feelings of a nation. At the end, after the light of the last firework has faded, I'm still not convinced that the world knows any more about China than it did in July 2008.
To be sure, the Opening Ceremonies were incredible. Yesterday's Closing Ceremonies were equally impressive - from a technological and organizational standpoint. BUT ----- where was the emotion? I as much as anybody was truly blown away by the mass choreography, the ingenious use of technology, the impeccable timing, all of which was done to perfection by the Chinese. However, if entertainment is to be successful, it must dig very deep. It must tug at the heartstrings; it must pull out a belly laugh; it must make us cry or laugh uncontrollaby or send shivers up our spines. The Closing Ceremonies, in all their glory, did not do it for me, spectacular though they were. Good entertainment is so much more than artificial smiles or loud music or putting thousands of performers through their paces seamlessly. Truly great entertainment does not have to be expensive or huge.
In other places and at other times, I have been moved to tears by a single tiny puppet on a string. I have been moved to tears by a solo musician playing a piece of music with such passion that the moment transcended the music. Great entertainment conjures up what anthropologist Victor Turner has called communitas, that spirit of feeling at one with the universe and fellow human beings. Other Olympics have done this very successfully and with fewer numbers and much lower cost than China. One simple word of advice for China - and it does not just apply to the Olympics but to so much more - replace "rote" with "emote," and mean it.
For Vancouver in 2010 and for London in 2012, I say forget about anyone who asks, "How are you going to top the Beijing ceremonies?" Work with people's emotions and draw them out. You will never successfully compete if you try to match scale - and yes, it is possible to move 90,000 people, or even the entire world - with a single puppet on a string. It just takes a little ingenuity.
However, now to politics and the reason these Olympics were hosted by China. We have just witnessed the most lavish and expensive rite of passage in history: two weeks of one country trying to prove it is capable of joining the ranks of the major economic powers of the world; two weeks of one country trying to overcome a massive inferiority complex; two weeks of one country daring the rest of the world to do better; two weeks of the rest of the world trying to break through an artifical facade to catch even a tiny glimpse of the true feelings of a nation. At the end, after the light of the last firework has faded, I'm still not convinced that the world knows any more about China than it did in July 2008.
To be sure, the Opening Ceremonies were incredible. Yesterday's Closing Ceremonies were equally impressive - from a technological and organizational standpoint. BUT ----- where was the emotion? I as much as anybody was truly blown away by the mass choreography, the ingenious use of technology, the impeccable timing, all of which was done to perfection by the Chinese. However, if entertainment is to be successful, it must dig very deep. It must tug at the heartstrings; it must pull out a belly laugh; it must make us cry or laugh uncontrollaby or send shivers up our spines. The Closing Ceremonies, in all their glory, did not do it for me, spectacular though they were. Good entertainment is so much more than artificial smiles or loud music or putting thousands of performers through their paces seamlessly. Truly great entertainment does not have to be expensive or huge.
In other places and at other times, I have been moved to tears by a single tiny puppet on a string. I have been moved to tears by a solo musician playing a piece of music with such passion that the moment transcended the music. Great entertainment conjures up what anthropologist Victor Turner has called communitas, that spirit of feeling at one with the universe and fellow human beings. Other Olympics have done this very successfully and with fewer numbers and much lower cost than China. One simple word of advice for China - and it does not just apply to the Olympics but to so much more - replace "rote" with "emote," and mean it.
For Vancouver in 2010 and for London in 2012, I say forget about anyone who asks, "How are you going to top the Beijing ceremonies?" Work with people's emotions and draw them out. You will never successfully compete if you try to match scale - and yes, it is possible to move 90,000 people, or even the entire world - with a single puppet on a string. It just takes a little ingenuity.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)