OnStage - Goodman Theatre

The young are particularly likely to be drawn into a movement
that represents an unconventional or unexplored aspect of
their identity, and these types of social identity movements
thrive on college campuses where self-discovery and freedom
of expression are paramount.
ments of their time, like advocating for
workers’ rights, students in the 1960s
fought for reform both in public policies
that affected their generation, as well
as issues relevant to campus life: they
spoke out against the Vietnam War and
its toll on their generation and pushed
back against restrictions on personal
freedom (particularly for women) and
civil liberties imposed by institutions that
saw it as their responsibility to provide
students with moral guidance as well as
an education. The student movements of
the 1960s achieved mixed results, but
they successfully established student protests
as a permanent tool with which to
achieve social and political change. And
after the turbulent protests of the 1960s
retreated into the history books, a whole
new type of social movement begin to
take over college campuses.
While student movements through the
end of the 1960s tended to focus on
achieving specific changes within an
institution—whether it be a university
or the government—the new social
movements that have emerged in later
decades focus primarily on cultural issues
and advocate for change within a society.
These movements are typically built
around a single broad theme, and strive
to create a cultural environment that
embraces the values and individuals that
these groups represent, with the greater
goal of achieving mainstream acceptance
of a marginalized group or fringe issue.
Often they form on behalf of a group of
individuals with a shared common identity,
like feminists or LGBTQ individuals,
and work to alter the perception of that
demographic both within the greater
culture and within individual group members
themselves. In such movements
the goal is threefold: to clearly define
the identity of their members on their
own terms; to create an environment
in which individuals can thrive as their
most authentic, uninhibited selves; and
to advocate for mainstream acceptance
of new or unconventional lifestyles.
Since the intention is to change the culture
within a community rather than at
an institutional level, new social movements
are often built through grassroots
micromobilization, with recruitment
dependent on social networks and informal
existing relationships among individuals
of the group in question. Usually
movements form spontaneously through
the convergence of individuals with a
common identity, and establish solidarity
as individual members’ own sense
of identity develops in tandem with the
group identity as the collective struggles
to boldly accept itself and define “who
we are” as a group within a society.
Often, the movements are so closely tied
to the public identity of a demographic
that participation is assumed, as Debra
Friedman and Doug McAdam outline
in their essay “Collective Identity and
Activism: Networks, Choices, and the
Life of a Social Movement”:
“Most movements do not arise
because isolated individuals choose
to join the struggle. Rather, established
groups redefine group membership
to include commitment to the
movement as one of its obligations;
the threatened loss of member status
is usually sufficient to produce high
rates of participation. As a result,
the movement is largely spared the
need to provide selective incentives to
attract participants.”
The young are particularly likely to be
drawn into a movement that represents
an unconventional or unexplored aspect
of their identity, and these types of social
identity movements thrive on college
campuses where self-discovery and freedom
of expression are paramount. And
although most universities aim to encourage
self-discovery in students, social
movements on campuses have always
experienced push-back from administrators
as the balance between allowing
free speech and permitting destructive or
distracting behavior on campus is continually
in negotiation. Some universities
implement “speech codes” that define
the terms under which an institution permits
various forms of demonstration and
protest. While these codes are created
as a well-intended tool to limit conflict
and violence on campus, a 2011 study
by the Foundation for Individual Rights
in Education found that up to 65 percent
of the colleges had inadvertently created
policies that violated the Constitution’s
protection of free speech. (Public universities
are prohibited from limiting
nondestructive free speech, while private
institutions are granted more freedom
with their speech codes.) And while
students are free to organize and demonstrate
as they choose, often even peaceful
movements come into conflict with
contemporary university administrations
hesitant to draw attention to any degree
of discontent on campus.
New Work Fast Fact
Between 2004 and 2011, the Goodman’s New
Stages series offered staged readings of 45
new plays. Of these, 34—including Teddy
Ferrara—have gone on to full productions at
the Goodman or elsewhere to date.
Goodman Theatre would
like to thank all New
Work donors for their
help in making this program
possible.
13