How does the physical environment impact on families' perceptions of an arts event?

8/13/2019 How does the physical environment impact on families' perceptions of an arts event?

1/46

How does the physical environment

impact on families perceptions of an

arts event?A research paper commissioned by Wild Rumpus

the

PEOPLE


2/46

Rowan Hoban and Sarah Bird, Directors of Wild Rumpus

Leggings sriracha kale chips wes anderson, irony before they sold out mumblecore fap tattooedchambray etsy mlkshk seitan photo booth. Occupy truffaut bicycle rights +1 american apparelfanny pack, pour-over letterpress readymade blog. Godard authentic brooklyn, helvetica porkbelly fap before they sold out keytar squid banh mi leggings gluten-free bicycle rights. Pour-overecho park single-origin coffee readymade williamsburg photo booth. Organic butcher godardbanh mi bicycle rights twee high life mustache. Fingerstache jean shorts synth, wolf put a bird onit vinyl keytar gentrify tumblr. Williamsburg bushwick hoodie odd future, artisan yr banksy retroterry richardson twee kale chips hella sartorial photo booth tattooed.

Forage squid food truck, quinoa viral +1 vegan kogi. Echo park photo booth food truck,whatever yr cosby sweater small batch art party chambray. Ennui swag wolf banksy, etsygastropub occupy american apparel leggings iphone vegan farm-to-table 8-bit mlkshk.Mumblecore echo park tattooed, retro occupy PBR leggings cardigan gluten-free vegan godard.3 wolf moon forage chambray jean shorts banksy four loko, echo park readymade. Srirachabiodiesel freegan, irony salvia mlkshk pinterest mixtape. 3 wolf moon vice echo park, raw denimselvage fap helvetica authentic fingerstache photo booth shoreditch american apparel.

Foreword


3/46

Project Management

Jim Ralley - Te Big Art PeopleAbigail Gilmore - Institute for Cultural Practices

Field Research

Lottie ClarkePaul Mayfield

Jenny OakenfullJemma OBrienracy Simpson

Literature Review

Ginger Carlson

Documentation

Drew ForsythJake Ralley

Contents/Contributors

Research Aims and Objectives - p.01

Methodology - p.02

Literature Review - p.03

Spellbound Forest - p.12

Context and research interestsField observationsPost-event survey

Just So Festival - p.21

Context and research interestsField observationsPost-event survey

Focus Group Findings - p.31

Discussion - p.37

Bibliography - p.38

Research Team - p.43


4/46

Wild Rumpus CIC commissioned Te Big Art People and Abigail Gilmore(Institute for Cultural Practices, University of Manchester) to research therelationship between their events, the experiences that families have asparticipants in their events, and the environments in which they take place. Tecentral question for this research is:

How does the physical environment impact on families perceptions of an artsevent?

Wild Rumpus are particularly interested in exploring impact of encouragingparticipation outdoors and in natural (as opposed to urban) landscapes.

Te research aims to contribute to an understanding of the effects thatenvironments have on the experience of families, in order to help Wild Rumpusand other organizations to maximize and enhance positive effects in the future.

It also aims to support advocacy for Wild Rumpus, providing evidential materialfor discussions within the arts sector about the need for this kind of artsprovision.

Te research team had an initial scoping conversation with Wild Rumpusto help us define the research terms and requirements and, develop a clearerunderstanding of the work and motivations of the company. Wild Rumpusprogramme activities that:

Encourage whole family engagement

Foster individual creativityIncrease family cohesionake place in wild natural environmentsCreate an immersive environment

Have a festival feel to them

Phrases like taking risks, making memories, and creating transformativemoments were also prominent in the conversation. Wild Rumpus have highexpectations for the events that they produce, and the feelings that these evokein event participants. Tis research explores how these aims are met through theSpellbound Forest and Just So Festival events.

Research Aims and Objectives

01


5/46

We conducted the research with a mixed methods approach. Tis broughttogether a number of methods and types of knowledge into dialogue with eachother, to question and explore the nature of experience in outdoor events. Temethods included:

Desk research taking the form of a literature review of academic research, policy,

and practice, to develop a knowledge base for the subsequent field research. Tisresearch provided evidence based on secondary analysis of the kind of benefitsand impacts we would expect Wild Rumpus events to have. It also pointed tothe challenges for cultural programmers and supported a framework for primaryenquiry.

Empirical research focusing on Spellbound Forest and Just So Festival events

Ethnographic research during both events, which included:

Observation of behavior at the events; Semi-structured conversations with participants, using a set of predefined

questions/prompts Documentation of both events in photo, video, and audio, and Non-intrusive participatory activities at the events

Follow up online surveys to all participants at both events.

Discussion groups with self-selecting informants who responded to a calloutfrom Wild Rumpus, exploring their families habits, practices and experiences of

participating in the arts in a variety of environments.

Data from the primary and secondary research is discussed and analyzed throughthe lens of the research question to draw out common and emergent themes.Many of these are also identified by the literature review, below, divided intosections on outdoor spaces and physical techniques, artistic programming andnatural environments, and families engagement with the outdoors and with artsprogramming.

Methodology

02


6/46

By Ginger Carlson

Tis study offers an overview of some of the key issues and common themes thatemerge from the research question, how does the physical environment impacton families perceptions of an arts event?. Te study draws on literature frompolicy documents, academic and grey literature, from a diverse selection ofsources, in order to present a broad introduction to the contextual environmentof the research question.

In order to address the issues that arise from the research question, this reviewhas been divided into three sections. Firstly, this review discusses the benefits andtechniques involved in the utilization of outdoor spaces. Secondly, the benefitsof artistic programming are discussed as well as its relationship to natural andgreen spaces. Lastly, families experiences of both outdoor spaces and artisticprogramming are addressed.

Outdoor spaces and physical techniques

Tere has been a growing interest in the last few decades in the nature and valueof play to the development and wellbeing of both children and adults in eachpolicy, practice, and theory (Brooker & Edwards, 2010). In 2008, the NationalPlay Strategy was launched by the UK government, which focused on thedevelopment of areas in which children play as well as the aim of consideringhow communities can become more child-friendly, on the basis that Funand exciting opportunities to play are at the heart of a happy, healthy andenjoyable childhood (Play England, 2008). Tis perspective was supportedby a comprehensive review of play that was completed by Stuart Lester and

Wendy Russell entitled Play for a Change: Play, Policy and Practice: A review

of contemporary perspectives, which drew upon evidence from a wide range ofacademic disciplines, policy documentation, and practice (2008). Te reviewdemonstrated that play can help build resilience - the capacity for children tothrive despite adversity and stress in their lives (Lester & Russell, 2008, p. 14)by enabling children to sample their environments and to try out a range ofbehaviors in a relatively low risk fashion (Lester & Russell, 2008, p. 22). Teevidence presented in Play for a Change emphasized the interconnectedness ofenvironment, health, well-being and development by reconsidering play throughits intrinsic and neurological benefits, rather than its instrumental benefits (Lester& Russell, 2008, p. 24). Tis focus demonstrated the difficulties in measuringthe impact of play and instead suggested that public provision for play focus onproviding suitable environments for play rather than on instrumental outcomes(Lester & Russell, 2008, p. 45).

Literature Review

03


7/46

Te importance of unpredictability and flexibility to play has been linkedboth in Play for a Change as well as in other literature to environments thatprovide opportunities for diverse play forms and a degree of risk (2008, p. 23;Lester and Maudsley 2006; Wells and Leckies 2006). While many differentkinds of environments provide these factors, much research has emphasised the

particular suitability of natural spaces as optimal settings for children to engageand actualise their drive to play (Wells and Leckies, Play, naturally: A reviewof childrens natural play, 2007, p. xiii; Fjrtoft & Sageie, 2000; Tompsonand ravlou, 2009; Tompson, 2011; Moss, 2012). James Gibsons concept ofaffordance has been utilized in much recent literature on landscape experience(Wells and Leckies, 2001, p. 7; Aspinal, 2011; Gibson, 1979). Affordancesare properties of environments, of all types, that indicate the possibilities oftheir utility. Essentially, the concept of affordances emphasizes how types ofenvironments might encourage or support certain activities, for instance,small twigs might afford a variety of experiences, such as grasping, throwing,

drawing, digging, and so on (Tompson and ravlou, 2009, p. 14-15). Interms of play, Wells and Leckies have argued that it is precisely the diversityand complexity of natural environments, which offer a wide range of possibleinteractions that makes nature so suitable to play interactions (2001). Researchby Fjrtoft & Sageie has also convincingly demonstrated the affordances ofnatural environments to play activities. Teir study, which focused on how akindergarten group described and interacted with a forest indicated a strongrelationship between the structure of the landscape and different play functions.For instance, woodlands and cliffs were used for climbing, whereas smoothtopographies with open space and shrubbery were used for more traditional

games like hide and seek (2001, p. 92). Further research by Fjrtoft has indicatedthat natural outdoor environments have numerous benefits: for example, childrenbecome more creative in their play and demonstrate better motor skills thanchildren who play in a traditional playground (Fjrtoft, 2001; Maynard, 2007, p.326).

Te beneficial relationship between outdoor environments and play has beenutilized across the UK at what are called Forest Schools or Nature Schools.Originating in Scandinavia, Forest Schools involve regular interaction withnatural landscapes over an extended period of time (OBrien, 2009). Te ForestSchool Network has defined Forest Schools as an inspirational process that offers

children, young people and adults regular opportunities to achieve and developconfidence and self esteem through hands on learning experiences in a woodland

04


8/46

environment (Forest Education Initiative, 2007). As of 2009, OBrien recordedover one hundred Forest Schools in England and twenty in each of Scotland and

Wales, a number which is steadily increasing (p. 45).

Te expanding literature on the benefits of interaction with outdoorenvironments and the increasing number of Forest Schools points to a changing

understanding amongst governmental and non-governmental bodies of thepotential of natural spaces. Tis potential is not limited to young personsdevelopment, however, as is evidenced by a number of studies which examine therelationship between access to natural spaces and the activity, physical and mentalhealth, and quality of life of a variety of ages, ethnicities, and social groups (deVries, Verheij, Groenewegen, & Spreeuwenberg, 2003; Kim & Kaplan, 2004;Mitchell & Popham, 2007, 2008; Tompson, 2011). Tompsons 2011 paper,for instance, drew from a wide variety of sources in order to investigate patternsof woodland use by various groups across a wide range of UK contexts and foundthat access to green and natural spaces correlated with higher levels of physical

activity, health, and quality of life (p. 254). Other findings have indicatedthat participation in wilderness results in positive benefits such as enhancedself esteem and is of beneficial use for therapy, education, and leadershipdevelopment programmes (Friese, Pittman & Hendee, 1995).

Te beneficial impacts of participation in outdoor spaces has been the subject ofmuch recent research. Equally, the kinds of physical techniques that are carriedout in natural environments have also been of much interest to researchers.For instance, how natural landscapes afford certain physical activities has beenexamined by studies that focus on green exercise (Pretty, Peacock, Sellens,

Griffin, 2006; Barton, Griffin, Pretty, 2011). Green exercise refers to formal andinformal activities that are carried out in natural settings. According to a numberof studies, green exercise contributes to positive short and long-term physicaland mental health and wellbeing at a much higher rate than similar exercisescompleted indoors (Pretty, Peacock, Sellens, Griffin, 2006; Barton, Griffin, Pretty,2011; Tompson Coon, Boddy, Stein, Whear, Barton, Depledge, 2011). Furtherevidence suggests that maintenance of physical activity is most likely to occurin unstructured natural environments rather than formal structured facilities(Hillsdon, Torogood, Anstiss & Morris, 1995). Pretty, Griffin, Peacock, Hine,Sellens & South (2005) identifies three levels of engagement with nature thatinclude: viewing nature, as through a window or work of art; being in or nearby

nature, which includes nature study, walking or cycling in a park, or outdoorarts activities; and active participation with nature, such as gardening, camping,

05


9/46

trekking or farming. Pretty et al. demonstrate that each of these levels have thepotential to significantly enhance individual and social health and wellbeing(Pretty et al., 2005; Physical activity and health alliance, 2007).

In spite of the benefits of interaction with outdoor spaces, much literature hasfound notions of perceived risk to be a powerful hindrance to the use of natural

environments (Gill, 2006). In a review of the literature on barriers to youngpeoples use of the outdoors, ravlou (2006) identifies an almost unanimousconsensus that points to notions of risk, such as safety and injury, bullying,getting lost, etc., as the primary hindrances towards use. Tese notions arepowerful contributors to what Gill (2006) has called a growing culture of fearand which he argues strongly influences the shrinking horizons of childhood.It is important to note that these conceptions of the outdoors are not uniformacross cultures, as for instance, in the case of Scandinavian countries in whichthere is a long tradition of emphasizing the value of interaction with outdoorenvironments (Gill, 2007).

Artistic Programming and Natural Environments

Te publication of Francois Matarassos Use or Ornament: Te Social Impactof Participation in the Arts Programmes, was the first large-scale attempt in theUK to bring together evidence of the social impacts of participation in the arts.Te study considered some 90 projects, including interviews and questionnairesby over 500 people, and identified 50 social impacts of participation in the arts(1997). Use or Ornament provided a definition of the potential social benefits ofthe arts sector and a methodological approach for the assessment of their impactand was influential toward the publication of academic and policy literature

that further considered the importance of the arts and culture to the well-being, personal growth, and social development of the individual within society(Hallsworth, Levitt & Krapels, 2008).

A recent study by Ramsden et al. revealed that participation in arts activitieshave a number of beneficial effects, including, enhanced health and wellbeing;increased self esteem and self confidence; improved communication and socialskills; and the development of leadership skills (2011, p. 10). Te beneficialimpacts of the arts on health and wellbeing are perhaps the most common andmost publicized effects of participation in arts activities. According to a 2007report by Arts Council England (ACE) entitled Te Arts, Health and Wellbeing,

there is increasing recognition that peoples health and wellbeing is influencedby a range of interconnecting factors and that the arts have an important part

06


10/46

to play in improving the health and wellbeing of people in many ways (p. 4).Te report further argued that the arts should be integrated into health policyand funding. In a review of medical literature, Staricoff (2004) cited almost fourhundred peer review papers that demonstrated the benefits of arts participationon a wide variety of health outcomes.

As Ramsden et al. identify in their study on the impacts of grassroots artsactivities on communities, arguably the most contested and most difficultimpact to measure is that of aesthetics (2011, p. 30) Indeed, as Eleanor Belfioreand Oliver Bennett (2007) conclude in their study on the impact of encounters

with the arts, it is not possible to develop a rigorous protocol for the assessmentof the impacts of the aesthetic experience that can be boiled down to a handful ofbullet-points and a user-friendly evaluation toolkit (p. 262-263). Despite theepistemological complexities inherent to notions of the aesthetic, much researchhas examined the relationship between aesthetic encounter and experiences ofnatural landscapes. A 2009 report prepared for the Forestry Commission, for

instance, identified a wide range of philosophical and theoretical approachesto landscape aesthetics and perception (Tompson and ravlou). As definedby Gobster and colleagues, landscape aesthetic experience includes a feelingof pleasure attributable to directly perceivable characteristics of spatiallyand/or temporally arrayed landscape patterns (Gobster et al, 2007, p. 964;Tompson and ravlou, 2009, p. 5). Gobster further acknowledged however,that differences remain on which characteristics of landscape are considereddirectly perceivable and on how extensive, immediate, and direct a role cognitiveprocesses and acquired value systems play in landscape aesthetic experiences(Gobster et al, 2007 p. 964; Tompson and ravlou, 2009, p. 5). As identified

by Tompson and ravlou, perhaps the most divisive debate in landscapeaesthetics concerns the objective - subjective divide, in which the extent towhich aesthetic response is objectively or subjectively based is questioned (2009,p. 5). Gibsons concept of affordance has been further developed by HarryHeft in order to bridge the divide between these two conceptions of aestheticexperience (2010). According to Heft, affordances are neither mental constructsthat a perceiver imposes on environments nor are they interpretations located inthe eye of the beholder. Rather, affordances are properties of the environmentthat are both objectively real and psychologically significant (Tompson andravlou, 2009, p. 6). Hefts conception of landscape experience is thus locatedin immediate experience of landscape, in which aesthetic and other responses to

nature are dynamically perceived... in the context of action (Heft, 2007, p. 22).

07


11/46

As identified by Tompson and ravlou, most empirical research on aestheticengagement with nature is focused on visual dimensions and affectual responses,the latter of which are usually expressed in terms of like or dislike (2009, p.11). Although some recent work has experimented with computer-generatedvisualizations, behavior patterns, and public engagement approaches, includingfocus groups and interviews, more research is needed in order to properly

consider the aesthetic dimensions of natural spaces (Tompson and ravlou,2009, p. 13; Jensen, 2006; Ode et. al, 2009; Moore and Cosco, 2010).

Aesthetic engagement with outdoor spaces might be further encouraged throughthe implementation of artistic programming in natural environments, as inthe case of public artworks, sculpture parks, and sculpture forests. Te ForestryCommission, for instance, has collaborated with artists since the late 1970s, whenit began to initiate artist residencies in Grizedale forest (Forestry CommissionScotland). A 2007-2008 report by Dave Pritchard provides the first nationaloverview of the Forestry Commissions artistic programming and gives a detailed

account of the arts activities that occurred up until 2007 (Artistic License).Although the report acknowledges that initial study of the benefits and outcomesof the Forestry Commissions artistic programming has been underdeveloped,Pritchard collates a wide variety of external and internal research in order toascertain some potential outcomes, which he divides into: social and culturalvalues of woods, social inclusion and community engagement, communicationand education, health and well-being, perceptions of risk, attracting visitors,economic impacts, forest design and aesthetics, and artistic achievements. Underthese headings Pritchard identifies a number of positive outcomes that linkprevious research on both engagement with art and with green spaces, especially

in regards to benefits to health, personal and community development, socialinclusion, and well-being (2007). As Pritchard puts it:

It seems clear that the Forestry Commissions arts activities add in unique waysto peoples awareness, understanding and valuing of trees, forests and woodland.Tey can be effective in addressing intangible values such as sense of place,cultural history and identity; and they help with reassessing the relationshipbetween nature and society, and in rebuilding some of the lost connections(2007, p. 5).Families engagement with the outdoors and with arts

programmingResearch examining characteristics of family leisure have consistently

08


12/46

demonstrated a positive relationship between participation in family leisureand family strength (Holmon 1989; Orthner & Mancini, 1991). It has alsobeen suggested that leisure has become the most important variable in thedevelopment of healthy relationships between a married couple as well as betweenparents and their children (Couchman, 1988). Green spaces and parks provideeasily accessible and cost efficient opportunities for the building of cohesive

family relationships. Just as research has shown that engagement with naturehas positive individual effects, so too does it positively benefit family groups(GreenSpace, 2011). In 1997, Potter & Duenkel explored the meaning andstructure of families residential camping experiences through qualitative research.Teir findings suggest that such outdoor recreation programming is capable ofenhancing the wellness and cohesiveness of the family unit. In 2002, Freemanand Zabriskie brought together two studies that explored the relationshipbetween structured outdoor programming and family cohesion. Trough anexamination of the studies findings, Freeman and Zabriskie demonstrate a strongpositive correlation between structured outdoor family recreation programming

and family strength, a finding that further builds on research that has consistentlydemonstrated that participation in family recreation and leisure activities canstrengthen families (Hawkes, 1991; Zabriskie, 2000).

While much research has indicated that engagement with the arts has a varietyof benefits, as Shaw notes in a literature review on the arts and neighbourhoodrenewal, there is a lack of research into the impacts of the arts on family life(1999). A recent study by RAND Corporation offers some insight into thisshortcoming. Entitled Gifts of the Muse Reframing the Debate About theBenefits of the Arts, the report brings together a wide variety of literature in

order to ascertain, evaluate, and improve current understanding of the effectsand benefits of participation in the arts (McCarthy, Ondaatje, Zakaras &Brooks). McCarthy et al. provide a comprehensive analysis of the literature inorder to consider both instrumental and intrinsic benefits of the arts and offerrecommendations for their continued development (2005). Te reports valuationof intrinsic and personal benefits along with instrumental benefits offers a broadunderstanding of the impacts of arts participation (2005). In moving awayfrom an understanding of the benefits of artistic programming through purelymeasurable outcomes and towards one that acknowledges the complexity anddiversity of art experiences, the study underscores the importance of sustainedinvolvement in the arts and its relationship to both instrumental and intrinsic

benefits (2005). Importantly, MCarthy et al. identify that although there hasbeen a wide body of research that makes the case for the arts instrumental

09


13/46

outcomes, the lack of research that considers intrinsic benefits such as pleasure,creation of social bonds, and cognitive growth, points to a missing element inthe understanding of arts effects. As McCarthy et al. put it, people are drawn tothe arts not for their instrumental effects, but because the arts can provide them

with meaning and with a distinctive type of pleasure and emotional stimulation(McCarthy et al., 2005, p. xv). Tis point is particularly revealing when the lack

of research on the impacts of the arts at a family level is considered. Althoughstudies have repeatedly shown that one of the primary reasons for attendingarts events is related to family interests, the relationship between arts activitiesand family experiences remains under researched (Walker, 2002) Tis researchpaper aims to contribute to that small body of research, given its importance forcountless arts organizations working with the arts, children, young people, andfamilies.

Key points to take forward into analysis of the eld research

Te findings from the literature review highlight the relationships assumedby families participating in arts programming in outdoor settings and naturallandscapes, and point to a range of evidence of the benefits and effects thisparticipation may have.

Tese include the impact of the aesthetic and physical structures of naturallandscapes on the different play functions which these environments support,leading to greater creativity in childrens play, and better motor skills. Greaterin fact than in play which takes place in other environments. Access to naturalspaces is related to increased quality of life for a wide variety of ages and social

groups, including enhanced self-esteem and therapeutic, educational, andleadership development uses. Green exercise physical recreation outdoors isfound to have greater wellbeing impacts than indoor activity.

Whilst there is clear evidence of correlation between play/recreation andwellbeing/quality of life, the benefits of focusing only on measuring instrumentaloutcomes are questionable. Instead, the research suggests there should be morefocus on creating environments for playful and recreational activities, throughpolicy initiatives and programming which take advantage of the affordances ofoutdoor, natural landscapes.

Research suggests there are three levels of engagement in natural landscapes viewing, being in, and active participation and associated benefits with all

10


14/46

three types. Te cognitive process and aesthetic experiences associated with theaffordances of environments are linked to the active participation of individuals.Tey interpret their environments through interaction and engagement, looking,touching, and other sensory experiences.

Tere is also a wealth of evidence about the social and cultural impacts of arts

engagement, particularly in relation to health and wellbeing factors. Indeed,causal relationship between the arts and their benefits (and potential negativeimpacts) to society has been a central theme of cultural policy since the writingsof Plato. Tere is less focused evidence about the experiences of families andtheir relationship to the arts, although there is a growing understanding andconfirmation of the importance of family-based practices and familial role modelsin the on-going participation and tastes of children as they grow up.

Barriers to increasing families outdoor arts participation are predominantlyconcerned with perceptions of risk safety, injury, fear of getting lost. Tese

perceptions are cultural (in the wider sense) in that some societies in thisresearch most notably Scandinavian countries have more established practicesand infrastructures which encourage engagement in the outdoors, and widelydifferent perceptions and concerns about risk.

Arts programming in managed natural landscapes like Forestry Commissionsites - is actively encouraged by the research which demonstrates a wide rangeof impacts and values. Tis includes extrinsic benefits to individuals and tothe localities of these sites (for example through visitor economies), as well ashighlighting the unique properties and affordances of natural landscapes that

make these impacts possible.

We now turn to the empirical research undertaken for this project to explorethese findings further.

11


15/46

I believe in fairies.

First time I have seen my Dad smiling!!!

I liked spending the day with my mummy.I saw the tree and it had an eye.

I loved doing crafts

Playing in the muddy puddles.

Hill sliding on my bottom

Meeting prince Fredrick.

Im free.

Spellbound Forest


16/46

A new day-long event for 2012, Spellbound Forest took place in DelamereForest, Cheshire on the 19-20th May. Families entered on a timed ticket,and were directed to three separate paths through the forest. Each path tookparticipants through a different traditional English fairy tale. Te stories weretold in a participatory manner, through theatre, music, spoken word, writing,and dance, employing actors, dancers, creative writers, willow-weavers and other

creative practitioners alongside conventional event staff to produce an immersiveenvironment which encourage families to collaborate in the story-telling.

Tere was a two-circuit route for the timed journeys through the stories, alongthe paths of the Delamere Forest, which ended in the in a picnic area with food,drink, and dancing. It was anticipated that most families would spend 3-4 hoursin the forest.

Entry was 12.50 per adults and 7.50 for children aged 3-16. Children under 3were free.

Spellbound Forest was designed as an immersive, magical, participatory, wholefamily experience. Participants were invited to step out of their ordinary livesinto a fairytale world with characters from the page who came to life, who wereclothed by children or spied running through the forest. Tere were multiplestructured and semi-structured participation opportunities which were offered bythe Spellbound Forest, which included:

Reading text extracts dotted around the forest, which drew participants alongthe path of the stories;

Interacting with the actors answering questions, and acting out parts onrequest; Adding tatters to attercoats dres; Co-producing an English fairytale by writing elements and drawing

characters, in a project supported by Manchester Metropolitan University; Dancing with the Princesses and playing hide-and-seek at the Fairy Ball; Making hobbyhorses and wands from found branches and twigs and other

materials; Making and adding to the origami crane birds in the Earl Mars Daughter

story Listening to the sounds and music in the Forest, including a specially

commissioned piece, Te Book of Imaginary Beings which was written bycomposer James Stephenson see http://www.spellboundforest.org.uk/book-

Context

13


17/46

imaginary-beings/

Ahead of the experience, parents could prepare their children for the event,through listening to and reading the the four English fairy tales that formed partof the event. Tese can be found at http://soundcloud.com/wildrumpus-1

Tey could also follow-up the event by contributing to a crowd-funded andcrowd-sourced brand new English fairy-tale which brought together thecontributions from children during the two event days see http://www.spellboundforest.org.uk/help-crowdfunding-english-fairytale/

Specic Research Interests

Te design of Spellbound Forest was such that it presented a number ofinteresting elements which posed new questions for the empirical field research.

Duration of participation: Participants were engaged for a short amount of

time relative to the Just So Festival, but a longer amount of time relative toother arts activities which families might usually attend (workshops, stories,films, etc)

Te outdoor environment, natural landscape and opportunities to engagewith the forest: Te event took place in a public, outdoor space, wherefamilies may ordinarily undergo more mundane types of participation andrecreation walking, nature trails, and so on. Tere were predefined pathsalong which participants were directed but which they did not have to take

Te uniqueness and difference of the kind of experience (relative to morefamiliar participation experiences): Te stories that formed the core of the

experience were relatively unknown compared to traditional fairytales, andalthough the craft activities may have ones familiar to children at home, thecontext of outdoor forest setting where the materials are found and whichrelate to elements of the stories, may have a role in producing the immersiveexperience and bring particular benefits to participation.

14


18/46

Field Observations, Informal Interviews, and the Memory Tree

N.B. Verbal consent was attained for all interviews at the event, and no names areused.Tree field researchers attended the Spellbound Forest event. Tey observed theactions and interactions of participants, asked questions in as unobtrusive amanner as possible, and captured everything in written form on the day. Teyalso ran a Memory ree exercise that aimed to capture immediate impressionsand feelings about the festival from adults and children. Te event was alsophotographed and filmed for further post-hoc observation. Te comprehensiveset of field notes have been condensed into a series of themes and quotations thataim to give the impression of Spellbound Forest from a research perspective.

Active Participation

During the event, the forest was alive with the movement of families followingthe trails of stories, the design of which led to pulses of groups moving throughthe different staged activities. Some of these were timed by the narration of

actors or by the time it took to undertake a task or make something beforemoving on. Other areas were free-flowing as children and adults were engaged inactivities almost outside of time. Te opportunities for structured participationproved hugely popular, with clusters of families grouped around these areasand taking time out from their paths in the stories. Some parents revealed theirsurprise at the amount of time they stayed in forest, particularly around the FairyBall in the centre.

Tere was a gender divide in some of the modes of participation, for example,boys were observed to be more likely to run off and play in the woods, and

less likely to stay engaged in the stories (which were generally performed forthe children by the actors in promenade theatre style). Tis divide was mostclearly displayed at the Grand Ball area, where the dance floor was full of girlsdancing with the princess, and the boys were climbing up the banks and hidingin the woods. In general, for the structured activities there seemed no differencebetween the enthusiasm of boys and girls for taking part.

Despite the encouragement to engage with the natural environment offered bythe location, and the use of natural materials, most families appeared to engage inthe Forest as part of the event rather than in and of itself. Tey were fully investedin taking part and staying predominantly within the boundaries created by thestories. Tis was noticeable in observation of peoples use of mobile phones,

where there seemed a reluctance in allowing phones calls and other uses of digital

At the Event

15


19/46

technologies to intercede in the forest environment or interrupt engagement.Tere was widespread observed use of cameras, and of smartphones forphotography. Te dressing up, props, and characters provided many photoopportunities, and the chance for memory making.

Aesthetic Experience

Participants described the event with words like lovely, simple, magical. Teyrecognized and supported the aims of the event, and could explicitly relate themto their own objectives for parenting and for their childrens experiences. Oneparent discussed memory making with a researcher, explaining the importancethat fairy stories had played in her life, and how she was keen for her children tocapture these things at this age.

Te immersive experience was therefore supported and co-created by parents.Tey were complicit in the suspension of disbelief, helping to create the magicalenvironment for their children by encouraging attention on the objects they

were making, keeping their roles in the performance going, and helping childrento participate fully in the artifice of the stories. Often they covered for lack ofresponse to actors, embellishing links to the stories.Grandfather to Grandchild: Look! Tere is something in the swamp! Im sure Isaw something move out there. Have you got your tasers?

Te event management and grouping/coding of the activities encouraged thiscollusion, and the cracks that inevitably appeared in the make-believe (missingprops, high-viz jackets, phones ringing) were generally either papered over orignored.

Many children were clearly immersed in the experience. One researcher observeda boy between activities retelling the story he had heard up to that point. Testories were real and exciting to him. Similarly the exchanges between parentsand children, often led by the children, were concerned with preserving thecontinuity of the story and/or the interpretation of what to do in the forest Im just going to put some magic dust on my horse to make him real; Ah. Tehorse is tired, put him up on the pushchair so he can sleep. Children were alsoreally instrumental in explaining elements of the story back to their parents - hehas lost his daughter and that is why he is sad (re old Lord in attercoats).

Engaging with the EnvironmentSeveral parents commented on the safe atmosphere, and also that they felt like

16


20/46

they were amongst like-minded people. In conversations with the researchers,parents remarked on their own reference points articles in the Guardian, theirmembership of the National rust, their own childhood experiences of EnidBlyton, which signaled shared symbolism as well as socio-economic and politicaldemographics.

Te activities in the event enveloped and worked with the natural landscape.Tere was little engagement with wildlife as the properties and activities of

the event took over. However, there was some spontaneous adaptive use of theaffordances of the environment: sword and den making specifically outside of thestructured activities.

Most families were prepared for the natural environment, and many embraced itby setting up picnics en route to or around the Fairy Ball, eschewing the on-sitecatering outlets.

One father expressed concern at the impact that this event would have on thenatural environment as he noted the bark shavings down in the Grand Ball area.

His three boys loved the outdoor environment and were hungry for more activeengagement with nature. Tey mentioned that dens dotted around the centralarea would have been nice.

Management of the Environment

Managed risk was obvious around the Grand Ball with its high banks around thestage. As mentioned above, boys were scrambling up the slopes and playing,

whilst some of the characters were playing hide and seek in the trees withchildren, which although enjoyable was a clear source of concern for someparents who wanted to keep children in sight. On the second day these banks hadbeen roped off and site management were denying children access to them. Terisk element had been taken out of the experience.

Not all participants were happy with being given the responsibility for self-direction and self-management offered by the events emphasis on co-creation.Tere were some comments about the lack of signage, or clear direction, and thatthe first few activities would have really benefitted from volunteers directing theaction. Tere was also frustration at the curated activities being swamped by largegroups of participants, which was exacerbated by disjointed groups appearingat performance areas in staggered stages. However this is balanced by the

overwhelming response of engagement, and in many cases awe shared by families as borne out by the comments from the post-event survey discussed below.

17


21/46

How much did your family enjoy the event? (n.101)

Not at all A lot

1% 2% 1% 0% 3% 2%12%22%22%36%

How would you rate the quality of the performances and activities? (n.99)

Not at all A lot

2% 2%1% 1% 3% 6% 11%24%26%23%

How would you rate the practical facilities? (n.101)

Awful Brilliant

Yes 83% No 17%

Did your family participate in new typesof arts activity? (n.102)

No 38%Yes 62%

In the last 12 months, has your familytaken part in arts activities?(n.101)

No

4%Yes 96%

Would you attend a similar Wild Rumpusevent again?(n.101)

No

9%Yes 91%

In the last 12 months, has your familyvisited a museum or art gallery?(n.99)

Yes 95%No

5%

N.B. Tis online survey was targeted at the ticket buyers. As such the answers do not representthose of children and young people.

Post-Event Survey18


22/46

By mapping the postcodes gathered at the point of booking we quickly build a picture of howfar people travel to attend Spellbound Forest. As the event lasts between 3 and 4 hours it is

unsurprising that most participants are from the North West and Staffordshire.Within the North West they are clustered around South Manchester, Sale, Altrincham,Macclesfield, and Bollington. Tere is also a strong concentration around Liverpool and the Stokearea.Te longest distance travelled was a family from Redhill in Surrey. 214 miles and 4 hours awayfrom Delamere Forest.

Postcode Mapping19


23/46

What kind of people came to Spellbound Forest?

Attenders are already very engaged in the arts and culture, with 96% havingtaken part in arts activities in the last year, and 95% having visited a museumor gallery. Tis compares highly favourably with the national statistics akingPart data, which records a national average of 79% and 51% for adult annualarts engagement and museum visits respectively (DCMS, 2012).

Tere was also relatively little ethnic diversity, with just 6% non-whiteattenders (lower than the total in England and Wales of 12.7%. ONS). Te

origins of attenders were heavily concentrated around the North West,specifically Greater Manchester, Liverpool, Chester, and rural Cheshire.

What were peoples expectations and concerns for the event?

Te data shows that the weather was the main worry parents had beforecoming to the event. Te field team observed that most families were wellequipped for the wet weather, with raincoats, wellies, and umbrellas.

Te majority of families who attended tried out arts activities which were newto them during the event. Te qualitative feedback accompanying this figure

shows that it was the making elements that were new for most people: thewand-making, the hobby-horse construction, and the contribution to thewillow birds nest.

Any other comments?

We invited participants to feed back any other comments that they felt hadntbeen covered in the survey. Tese comments can be grouped around a set ofthemes, explored below.

The Environment

- Participants liked the outdoor experience, the mud and the wet were seen asreal positives- Several commented that it was lovely being outside for a change- Te space had been transformed: the forest looked enchanting


- Magical was a word used by a lot of participants- Activities encouraged really active participation with both parents andchildren it was a whole family experience for many- Families reported being captivated by the magic, enjoying the immersiveexperience

- Would have been nice to have a book of stories as a takeaway- ake a lot of it back to use in my Primary classroom

20


24/46


25/46

Tis was the third annual Just So Festival. Te two previous festivals have beenvery successful, with the 2011 festival winning the Green Parent Best FamilyFestival award. In 2012 the festival moved from the 65 acre forested Barnswoodsite in Staffordshire to Rode Hall Park in Cheshire.

Te festival took place from Friday 17th to Sunday 19th August. Families could

buy weekend tickets or day tickets, and they could decide to camp, stay in a yurtprovided by the festival, bring a campervan, or not to stay at all.

Over the three days there were 124 scheduled activities in 11 designated areas,covering much of the Rode Hall park and garden land.

Te event tagline is evocative, and indicative of the emphasis on an immersivetransformative experience that Spellbound Forest aimed to create:

ake your family on a journey of the imaginationa magical weekend of

creative adventures.

Specic Research Interests

Te festival has four principle aims that helped to frame our field research, surveyanalysis, and subsequent write up. Tese are:

- o embed the arts in a natural landscape, a wild, woodland space. Givingchildren the freedom to engage freely with no pressure.- o challenge expectations of the arts, by allowing spontaneous and impulsiveengagement. Children should be allowed to respond immediately without the

restrictions present in galleries and concert halls.- o offer an intense experience for families. Enabling full immersion in anartistic landscape, in an environment designed to surprise and inspire at everyturn.- o encourage a legacy of active participation in the audience. o involve themin making events, performances, and artworks spectacular.

Tere are some challenges for participating families embedded in this valueproposition, and which raised research questions for the field researchers.

How will families respond to the encouragement offered by the affordances of the

environment to be spontaneous and impulsive?

Context

22


26/46

What are the correct ways to behave and what is unacceptable?

What is the capacipty of parents and families to sustain participation over a 3-dayevent?

What are their expectations of the events organization and how might they

change their behaviours to relate to the context? For some families this would betheir first time camping, whereas others would have experience and expectationson what a camping holiday is like.

Similarly, this would be some families first experience of a festival, and otherswould be quite accustomed to the format. - How did the experience of day-trippers differ from that of weekenders?

What are the implications for experience of time and routine? Unlike SpellboundForest there was no cohesive set of narratives drawing the activities together. -

How were notions of risk and uncertainty apprehended by parents (andchildren)?

23


27/46

Field Observations, Informal Interviews, results from the Postbox,

and Have Your Say

N.B. Verbal consent was attained for all interviews at the event, and no names areused.


As with the Spellbound Forest, and with the Just So Festivals in previousincarnations, the structured and semi-structured opportunities to participate inarts, creative and recreational activities proved hugely popular and the vast arrayof tents, workshops, areas, and interactive environmental materials (dressing upclothes, play areas, circus skills equipment, stone-balancing, and many more)

were constantly animated by those taking part. Some of the activities which werefamiliar to previous attenders were alighted on with delight and recognition for example, the popular Fairy Queen whereas others engaged new audiences

with new activities for example, pirate training and saw violin playing. Tispopularity sometimes meant queuing and running out of workshop materials,

however, the wide range of timed performances and activities in the differentlocations meant the variety and proximity of opportunities to do, listen, and

watch others was sufficient to exhaust the hardiest of active participant.

Alongside the many curated activities, workshops and timed activities, activeparticipation also took the form of co-presence with other families, in festival-going character, complete with face-paint and suitable clothing. Participationdidnt necessarily need to take the form of the festival workshops prescribed alot of time and interest was devoted to bubble-blowing (and popping) and toskimming stones in the lake.

A performer commented that he experienced a genuine feeling of co-production, that there were few restraints placed on him by the management/creative team. As a counter to this though he also said that they could ask muchmore from performers, shaping a more cohesive and quality offer.

Tere were also observed instances of performed parenting the act of gettinginvolved in activities but with an element of self-awareness and even deprecation.Tese were external signs of commitment to taking part in family/childrenactivities, for example the performing dads who dressed up, wore face-paint, andget stuck in physical activities. For some (for example, those who took part in themoustache competition) this commitment was quite extensive highly visible andbegan outside of the bounds of the festival event.

At the Event

24


28/46


Participants and performers agreed that the atmosphere is unique. Onecommented that it is more like a village fete in feel than a festival. Te lackof powered sound systems and pressures that other festivals have creates thisatmosphere.

Some participants were clearly delighted at the fact that they just happenedupon things whilst wandering around, and the incidental affordances of thedifferent zones and layout within the festival allowed for surprises and hiddentreasures (most notably in Wild Tings and the High Seas, which was the hardestplace to locate). Tere was also observation of the mild anxiety of parents who

werent able to navigate the festival site and some frustration that they wouldnt beable to get their children to the places they wanted to visit or to timed activities.

o properly experience the festival, one father said that you should try to fit

with kids time, not adults time. Te design of the activities and space doesallow for serendipity, but he wasnt sure this worked for adults, who try to stick toa schedule, take part in timed activities, and fully participate in the programme.

Engaging with the Environment

Participants and volunteers perceived the lake as the area of highest risk thedanger of small children bowling themselves into the water was too anxiety-raising for one, who commented Im going I dont feel safe here. Similarlysome areas presented other natural dangers, being home to piles of logs, patchesof nettles, and areas of thistles. Children were observed falling into the nettles

and reacting with horror and pain.

Other comments articulated the participants experience of landscape andenvironment - the festival was described as a place that wasnt the city. Teperception of the environment was that it wasnt a planned space, and in that itpromoted freedom of action and freedom of thought.

Management of the Environment

Te camping facilities at the festival site produced negative and positivecomments from families, depending on their expectations and previousexperiences of festivals and camping.

25


29/46

One father commented that there is a pervasive feeling of fear about childrenroaming free in todays society (echoing the culture of fear described in theliterature review above). Te festival space as a managed space, with event staffon hand to support and help with any problems, mitigates for these fears to somedegree. However many parents are understandably loathe to let their childrenout of sight (a reason often giving for not attending regular festivals). Temanagement of the site for Just So provides opportunities for parents to take partor to sit close by and watch as children take part freely in play in a more managed

and open environment, however, and the crowds are made up of families withsimilar interests and concerns.

Some liked the ways in which the site had been managed to allow them tonavigate nature with small children in pushchairs e.g. through the tarmac paths.Te risks proffered by engaging in new experiences camping, outdoor festivals,particular types of participation, were also evident amongst some comments fromfamilies in relation to their expectations. One family, who were regular campers,

were disappointed with what their experience of the site, based primarily on whatthey felt it should facilitate. Tey were critical of the camping facilities, and that

they had been prohibited from riding their bikes, and commented that therewasnt enough for their older children.

In general, responses from the families were articulate, knowledgeable and alsojudgmental, particularly in relation to the elements of the festival experience theyfelt they should expect. Tis was most notable in relation to Just So regulars,

who used their previous experience at Barnswood as a benchmark for Just So2012. Tey were consistently appreciative of the Just So offer and knew whatthey felt they could expect in terms of activities, places to visit and find andfacilities, and used these experiences as frame for judging this years festival,

placing a focus on the differences between sites and environments. It becameclear from the consistency of answers that Just So regulars want to (re)createsimilar or the same experiences they wanted to know that a Beach was availableor that there would be a midnight feast.

Postbox Results

Te non-intrusive participatory activity that the research team implemented atJust So Festival was a giant postbox. Children and adults were given a gold coinand invited to vote for their favourite area of the festival. Tey were also given thechance to have their say, by standing on a box and shouting across the festival

with a megaphone. Te results of these exercises are below.

26


30/46

(n.170)

Wild Things 23%

The High Seas 17%Away With the Fairies 13%Lazy Days 12%Forty Winks 9%Nowhere Now 6%

The Social 6%Elsewhere 4%

The Worlds a Stage 4%

Footlights 4%Jitterbug 2%

Peekaboo 1%

I like playing with bubbles!I like it outside cos its muddy!Best thing about being outside - playing on the trampoline!Te best thing about camping is SORIES!Best thing about outside is fresh airBest thing about camping is the bonfire.Im looking forward to seeing Michael Buckey! (author)Te best thing about today was building dens!Best thing about today was playing pirates!

I liked playing with the Queen in the woods!I like free porridge!Im really looking forward to making wings!Te best thing about outside is lots of room to run!Best thing about today was seeing all the plays.Te best thing about Just So was the Gruffalo.Te best thing about outside is bikes!Just So is amazing! Its great!Te best thing about being outside is spending time together.Im looking forward to digging a hole!

27


31/46

N.B. Tis online survey was targeted at the ticket buyers. As such the answers do not representthose of children and young people.

Post-Event Survey

How much did your family enjoy the event? (n.305)

Not at all A lot

0% 1% 1% 2% 2% 6%15%25%18%30%

How would you rate the quality of the performances and activities? (n.301)

Not at all A lot

0% 0% 3%4% 4% 10%

21%

31%17% 10%

How would you rate the practical facilities? (n.300)

Awful Brilliant

2% 6% 7%4%12%15%21%18% 9% 6%

What new activities did your family participate in? (n.167)

18% Circus skills10% Camping8% Stone balancing6% Making4% Dancing

4% Trapeze3% A festival

3% Campfire2% Pirate training

2% Clay faces

2% Baby yoga

2% Dissecting owl pellets

1% Pirate puppet show

35% Other

Which of the following best describesthe ethnicity of members of your family? (n.98)

93% White5% Mixed

1% Asian/Asian British

1% Other

How would you rate this experience against moretraditional arts forms and venues?(n.290)

Better 74% Other 26%

Did your family participate in new typesof arts activity? (n.278)

No 34%Yes 66%

In the last 12 months, has your familytaken part in arts activities?(n.294)

No1%

Yes 99%

Is your family likely to attend the festivalnext year?(n.305)

No 18%Yes 72%

In the last 12 months, has your familyvisited a museum or art gallery?(n.294)

Yes 96%No4%

28


32/46

By mapping the postcodes gathered at the point of booking we can again quickly build a pictureof how far people travel to attend Just So Festival. As this event lasts for up to 3 days it is

unsurprising that many participants travelled long distances.Tere was less concentration around the North West than with Spellbound Forest, with morefamilies coming from Staffordshire, the Birmingham area, and up the A38 corridor towardsSheffield. Tere were also many families from London.Te longest distance travelled was a family who came from Jersey for the event. Tis is a 353 mileand 10 hour journey. Visitors also came from Scotland, Devon, and East Kent.

Postcode Mapping29


33/46

Of the 218 comments that were made on the feedback form, the most commonlyused words/phrases were:

Next year in 25% of the commentsActivities in 23%Children in 19%Booked in 8%Organization in 8%Rode Hall in 6%

Improved in 5%Sand pit in 5%Facilities in 5%Ice cream in 4%

Te findings from the field research were confirmed through the responses to thefinal question of the online survey, asking for any other comments. As such, mostof the condensed responses below serve to highlight recurrent themes.


People liked the interactivity of the activities, and that many of these activitieswere collective experiences, some of them seemingly spontaneous (like dancingand singing around the campfire).

Participants enjoyed the serendipitous discovery of activities that they would notnormally do their children.


Tis was described as being better than most museums. A unique and eccentricexperience.

Tere was repeated use of the words freedom, happiness, togetherness, memories,and thanks.

Environment

Families enjoyed the lack of structure and the freedom that the naturalenvironment afforded them.

Many were positive about the new venue, and commented on the excellent use ofthe space and the grounds.

30


34/46

As part of this research into families experiences of arts activities we interviewedfour women who had attended Just So Festival 2012 with their families. Tey

were recruited to two focus groups through the Wild Rumpus email list andthrough existing contacts made at the festival itself. Full consent was granted byall participants for us to transcribe, use, and paraphrase their responses to thediscussion. We have made the findings anonymous, drawing out key themes that

emerged in each of the groups.

Tey were conducted as semi-structured conversations, with some promptquestions used to focus the participants. But they were not rigidly facilitated.Te conversations flowed in relation to the families specific experiences, familydynamics, and interests.

Below we gather together the emergent themes, using some commentary tosupport quotes. Our headline question is: How does the physical environmentimpact on families experiences of an arts event? As with the field work, it is

useful to unpack this question, looking at:

Te physical environment, specifically looking at the natural environment Te idea of the family and how that is a definition constantly in flux Experience, and how different people experience different activities in

different ways based on their previous knowledge and expectations Arts events. Asking if there is a substantive difference between an arts event

in a natural environment and any other kind of event, or indeed any otherkind of environment

In breaking the question down like this we aimed to approach the researchquestion in this context with as little bias as possible.

Families

Te families in the focus groups were clearly divided along age lines. Te firstgroup had children aged between 9 and 13 yrs, and the second group between2 months and 5 yrs. Teir experience of the arts and family activities in generalis defined by the age of their children. Tey all spoke about how the types ofactivity they can do as a family changes over time.

Tere was definitely a window when we could all do whole family things together. Maybe itll

happen again when theyre all teenagers.

Focus Group Findings

31


35/46

For families with younger children there was the expectation that they would beable to do more with their children once they were older. And for families witholder children the main concern was that they would grow up too quickly. Oneparticipant spoke about how their son was starting to take a really active choice inhis own arts participation, but that this meant he sometimes declined an offer todo something with the family.

Tey spoke about a constantly shifting idea of whole family participation, withactivities rarely catering to the oldest and youngest members of a family: oftenbeing slightly too advanced or basic to keep everyone fully engaged.

Environments and Activities

In addition to Just So Festival (and for some, Spellbound Forest) we asked whatother kinds of activities the participants did as a family. Tey were generallyhighly engaged, visiting art galleries, museums, theatres, and more commercialevents. Several locations were mentioned several times throughout the focus

groups: Yorkshire Sculpture Park (YSP), National rust (N) properties, ImperialWar Museum North (IWMN), and Te Lowry.

Tey found out about events and exhibitions in these locations through a widevariety of sources: email, word of mouth, Facebook, witter, flyers, with no realpreference for any one. Opportunistic attendance was clearly common, meaningthat they would look for events that coincided with a trip to a specific city or visitto see a relative.

Each environment has affordances that make it conducive or not to families

enjoyment. Broadly the YSP was seen as the most enjoyable space from this pointof view for some of the families.

I think freedom is a massive thing for (the kids). Something like the YSP hit us because it wasnt

age specific. Its awesome. Not weather dependent. Its hands on.

Te freedom, and the serendipitous discovery of huge, man-made objects in anatural landscape was commented on by all of the participants. Tey liked thattheir children could run and make noise without them having to parent them.

For the parents with the younger children, National rust properties offered

similar experiences to both the YSP and Just So Festival.

32


36/46

Its probably the most comparable experience to Just So. It combines outdoor roaming around,parents like it, in a beautiful place, and its accessible. If you want to go for a walk and youre nota walker, or you have a pram, theyre great. You know there are going to be toilets and you knowthat you can get a cup of tea. We go to specific kids events at N properties too. You can involve

grandparents, and you can go again and again.

N properties, like the YSP, are beautiful managed environments. Tey are safespaces with clearly defined boundaries, where parents can let their children runfree without fear of losing them. It was though, the outdoor element to bothN properties and the YSP that the participants thought appropriate for familyactivities, not the indoor elements. In such indoor spaces they spoke about howthey felt they do more parenting. About how being in a gallery or museum spacebrings with it inherent rules and restrictions, and expectations on calmness, order,and quiet.

Its the adults who feel awkward that their children might be upsetting some other people. Youre

tense which you pass on to them.

Te Imperial War Museum North (IWMN) was mentioned in this respect, as aspace with lots of interesting and engaging objects, but nothing for children totouch or play with outside of the handling table.

Surely they could have a few things? Tey should have some kind of experience there that allows

them to be children.

Tere is a clear expectation here from the parents that public galleries andmuseums should cater more to families, and specifically more to children. Tat

they should provide objects for children to touch, and spaces for them to runaround and be loud in.

At the end of the day an art gallery really is a runway, and they just want to leg it down there.

It is not, however, just the fact that the experience of IWMN is indoors, thatthe parents were critical of. Tey all talked positively about experiences atTe Lowry Teatre, and how their children of all ages were captivated by themagic of immersive performances in a really traditional theatre space. Tisraises some interesting questions about the design of spaces and experiences forbroad and narrow audiences, and how that might impact on programming and

curating. Te Lowry is a sit-down experience, but one where the content of eachperformance is highly tailored towards an audience and an age-range. Galleries

33


37/46

and museums choose to cater to a broad audience, and their exhibitions generallyfocus on their core, adult visitor. Tis is why family friendly arts activitiesare generally programmed alongside the core exhibitions. Te YSP and Nproperties in contrast are open spaces where families, children, and adults of allages define their own activities. As a kind of hybrid of all these, Just So Festivalaims to engage with whole family groups of all ages through structured and semi-

structured activities, in an open, natural, and managed environment.

In terms of how the physical environment impacts on these experiences, it is clearthat the activities themselves both shape and are shaped by the environment.Te environment is not a wholly determining factor on the kind of activity thatmight take place, though it is a restricting factor in terms of the freedoms thatprogrammers might have. Families have expectations of what organizationsand spaces are going to provide for them, which are determined throughcommunications, through previous experience, and through word of mouth.

Letting Children Be ChildrenAll of the focus group participants camped for the full weekend at Just SoFestival. Tey had all also camped before, and in more basic conditions than wereat the festival. Whilst not an arts activity, camping (and similarly, trips to thebeach) made possible the kind of open, whole family experience that the YSP andN properties afforded.

Camping is good because theres that freedom again. Children do revert to being children if you

take away the things that stop them being children.

Freedom is the key idea here, and one that was repeated many times during bothof the focus groups. Te children and families look for a space in which to play.Tey want something out of the ordinary. Tey talk about camping as a kind ofvoluntary disconnection from the everyday world where children arent allowedto be children. An exploration of this idea of what children should be acting likeis outside the scope of this research, but its interesting to reflect on what thesethings are that stop children from being children, and how a parents idea of

what children should be and do might be different from a childs own conceptionof this.

In addition to freedom, the participants talked about the sense of responsibility

that being in an open, natural environment gave to their children. In a non-linearand relatively unrestricted setting they have agency to choose their own activities

34


38/46

and create their own fun. In the case of camping, children can choose to playan integral role in the familys experience, within the safety of a semi-structuredframework.

Teres a responsibility, were cooking over a stove, were all in it together.

At the Just So Festival parents can choose to hand over a similar level ofresponsibility to their children, to structure and define their own experience ofthe event. Tere is no one correct way to be or act at the festival, as there is sucha variety of activities and workshops to attend, and experiences to be had.

As mentioned briefly above, parenting emerged as a recurrent theme in both ofthe focus groups. Tey were very self-aware about the amount of parenting thatthey do, and feel they have to do at different kinds of events and in differentsettings. Indoors where there are more tacit social pressures they do much moreactive parenting, as opposed to outdoor environments where theyre much

happier to do less. Tey were frustrated by the role that a parent often takes inmanaging a childs experiences of the arts.

Whod want to be an adult? We had festival anxiety [at Just So] about not being able to do

everything.

Tey were relatively self-critical regarding this, citing the difficult balancebetween looking after their children and giving them space to explore in naturalenvironments. Clearly the age of the children makes a huge difference, withparents of older children being much more inclined to let them go off alone. Forparents of younger children they demanded much more of the environment, ofthe organization around an event or public space.

I think those practical things make everything a bit easier, they mean that you can just throwyourself into it and enjoy it. You need to have the infrastructure there to be quite seamless, for

everyone to get quite relaxed.

Tese parents want to be given the opportunity to relax, and to not feel likeparents.

Co-Creation

A final theme that emerged, mainly from discussions around the Just So Festivalin particular, was that of co-creation, and the increased level of engagement that

35


39/46

children have with activities where they are encouraged to participate. Tis linksstrongly with the ideas of freedom and responsibility that are key elements ofengagement in arts activities. Many of the structured and unstructured activitiesat the festival are designed so that the children alter the environment aroundthem. Tis might be by doing some messy free-drawing on a giant easel in acommunal space; creating something out of recycled materials and hanging it in

a tree; sculpting a face out of clay and embedding it into a tree trunk; or buildinga lantern for use in the nighttime lantern parade. Handing over responsibility tothe children to augment the physical environment around them, and giving themthe freedom to do so in whatever way they chose, is hugely empowering.

Te challenge with co-creation is to effectively structure an experience so thatchildren can bring their creativity to bear, and that whatever emerges is broadlysuccessful as a piece of collective art.

36


40/46

Trough the Spellbound Forest and the Just So Festival, Wild Rumpus produce andmanage successful outdoor environments in which families actively take part in creativeactivities together. Tese events display the aspects and properties the affordances which, according to our research, influence the likelihood of positive benefits andexperiences for children and their families. Tese include:

A focus on providing suitable environments for free play, which encompasses theimportant functions of unpredictability and flexibility

Te management of natural environments to highlight and promote theirparticular affordances for certain activities, e.g. the use of small twigs in a variety ofexperiences, such as grasping, throwing, drawing, digging

Te promotion of access to green and natural spaces which correlates with higherlevels of physical activity, health, and quality of life, and other positive benefits suchas enhanced self esteem

Te management and understanding of perceptions of risk and the mechanismsto address and propose changing the culture of fear. For example, providing safe

spaces for risky and extraordinary behavior, new experiences in arts participation,and changes in experience of time and routine

Providing environments which emphasise the positive relationship betweenparticipation in arts and cultural programming, family strength, and wellbeing.Tese relationships are enforced concurrently through shared memory making.Tere are significant opportunities for active collaborative participation whichhighlight the importance of shared memory at both events like the chance todraw and display your family portraits at Just So, and the memory tree and photoopportunities at the Spellbound Forest.

Research on the relationship between aesthetic encounter and experiences ofnatural landscapes suggests the affordances of the environment are objectively andpsychologically significant, and dependent on interaction and engagement: aesthetic andother responses to nature are dynamically perceived in the context of action. In other

words they rely on collaborative participation and co-creation.

Different benefits are related to different types of engagement in natural landscapes namely, viewing, being in and active participation. Successful arts programming innatural landscapes provides ways of facilitating these different types of engagement, tomaximize the benefits of the environment and the structured opportunities for takingrisks, experimenting, feeling free, getting your hands dirty, losing your sense of time,

becoming or watching others become fairy tale characters and co-producing sharedmemories and spaces.

Discussion

37


41/46

Barton, J., Griffin, M., and Pretty, J. Exercise, Nature and Socially InteractiveBased Initiatives Improve Mood and Self-esteem in the Clinical Population.Perspectives in Public Health, 2011Beames, S and Ross, H. (2010) Journeys outside the classroom, Journal of

Adventure Education & Outdoor Learning, 10: 2 pp95 109.

Belfiore, E. and Bennett, O. (2007): Determinants of Impact: owards a BetterUnderstanding of Encounters with the Arts, Cultural rends, 16:3, 225-275.

Bowers, C. A. (2008) Why a critical pedagogy of place is an oxymoron,Environmental Education Research, 14: 3, 325 335.

Brown, E. and Ratzkin, R. (2011) Making Sense of Audience Engagement,WolfBrown

Coon, J. Tompson, K. Boddy, K. Stein, R. Whear, J. Barton, M. H. Depledge.Does Participating in Physical Activity in Outdoor Natural Environments Have aGreater Effect on Physical and Mental Wellbeing than Physical Activity Indoors?

A Systematic Review. Environmental Science & echnology, 2011

Couchman. (1988). As cited in Canadian Parks/Recreation Association, (1997).Te benefits catalogue. Gloucester, ON. Canada: Canadian Parks/Recreation

Association

Coultt, G & Jokela, eds. (2008) Art, Community and Environment:Educational Perspectives Intellect books

De Vries, S., Verheij, R.A., Groenewegen, P.P., & Spreeuwenberg, P. (2003).Natural environmentshealthy environments? An exploratory analysis of

the relationship between greenspace and health. Environment and Planning A,35, 17171731.

DCMS, aking Part 2012/13, http://www.culture.gov.uk/what_we_do/research_and_statistics/4828.aspx

Foxx, J (2002) Eyes on Stalks, Methuen Drama

Gibson, J. (1979). Te ecological approach to visual perception. Boston, MA:

Bibliography38


42/46

Houghton-Mifflin

Gobster, P. H., Nassauer, J.I., Daniel, .C. and Fry, G. (2007) Te sharedlandscape: what does aesthetics have to do with ecology? Landscape Ecology22(7): 959-972.

GreenSpace. Blue Sky, Green Space: Understanding the contribution parks andgreen spaces can make to improving peoples lives. GreenSpace, 2011.

Gruenewald, David A. Te Best of Both Worlds: A Critical Pedagogy of Place,Educational Researcher, 32: 3 (2003)

Hallsworth, M., Levitt, R., & Krapels, J.. Vital Communities: Review andanalysis of the research. RAND Corporation. 2008.

Hawkes, S. R. (1991). Recreation in the family. In S. J. Bahr (Ed.). Family

Research: A Sixty Year Review,19301990 (pp. 387433). New York, N.Y:Lexington Books.

Hawks, S. R. (1991). Recreation in the family. In S.J. Bahr (Ed.), Familyresearch: A sixty year review, 1930-1990. New York: Lexington Books

Heft, H. (2003) Affordances, dynamic experience, and the challenge ofreification.Ecological Psychology 15(2): 149-180.

Heft, H. (2007) Affordances in the Landscape. In Aspinall, P., Bell, S., and WardTompson, C (eds) Open Space: People Space 2: Innovative Approaches toResearch Excellence in Landscape and Health, Edinburgh: OPENspace ResearchCentre.

Hillsdon, Torogood, Anstiss & Morris, (1995) Randomised Controlled railsof Physical Activity promotion in Free Living PopulationsL a review Journal ofEpidemiology and Community Health Vol. 49; 448-453.

Holman, . B., & Epperson, A. (1989). Family and leisure: A review of theliterature with research recommendations. Journal of Leisure Research, 16, 277-

294

39


43/46

Kim, J., & Kaplan, R. (2004). Physical and psychological factors in sense ofcommu-nity: New urbanist Kentlands and nearby orchard village. Environment Behavior,36, 313334.

Maynard, risha (2007) Forest Schools in Great Britain: an initial exploration,

Contemporary Issues in Childhood, vol. 8, no. 4, 2007.

McCarthy, K., Ondaatje, E., Zakaras, L., & Brooks, A.. Gifts of the Muse:Reframing the Debate About the Benefits of the Arts. Research In the ArtsCorporation. 2005.

McGonigal, Jane. (2011) Reality is Broken New York: Penguin Press

Mitchell, R., & Popham, F. (2007). Greenspace, urbanity and health:Relationships in

England. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health, 61, 681683.

Mitchell, R., & Popham, F. (2008). Effect of exposure to natural environment onhealth inequalities: An observational population study. Te Lancet, 372 (9650),16551660.

Moss, S. (2012) Natural Childhood National rust

New Economics Foundation (2011) Five Ways to Wellbeing, London: NEF

OBrien, Liz. (2009): Learning outdoors: the Forest School approach, Education3-13: International Journal of Primary, Elementary and Early Years Education,37:1, 45-60

Ofsted (2008) Learning Outside the Classroom, London: Crown Press

Orthner, D. K., & Mancini, J. A. (1991). Benefits of leisure for family bonding.In B. L. Driver, P.J. Brown, & G. L. Peterson (Eds.). Benefits of leisure (pp. 215-301). State College, PA: Venture

Oskala, A et al (2009) Encourage children today to build audiences for

tomorrow: Evidencefrom the aking Part survey on how childhood involvement in the arts affects arts

40


44/46

engagement in adulthood, London: Arts Council England

Physical Activity and Heath Alliance. Woodlands and Greenspace and thePromotion of Health and Physical Activity. 2007.

Potter, . G. (1993). A journey through wilderness weekend experiences.

Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Alberta, Canada.

Potter, . G. & Duenkel, N. (1997). Exploring the meaning of family residentialcamping experiences. Unpublished manuscript, Lakehead University, Ontario,Canada.

Pretty J., Griffin M., Peacock J., Hine, R., Sellens M., & South N. A Countrysidefor Health and Well-Being: Te Physical and Mental Health Benefits of GreenExercise. Report for the Countryside Recreation Network, 2005.

Pretty, J., Peacock J., Sellens M. and Griffin M. Te mental and physical healthoutcomes of green exercise. International Jornal of Environmental HealthResearch. Vol. 15, Iss. 5, 2005.

Rockwell, D with Mau, B (2006) Spectacle, Phaidon Press

Rose, C (2002) Te family factor: a guide to family friendly arts activities,Cambridge: EastEngland Arts 2002

Shaw, P.. Arts and neighbourhood renewal. Department for Culture, Media andSport. 1999.

Staricoff RL. (2004). Arts in Health: a Review of the Medical Literature. London:ArtsCouncil England.

Te Play Strategy. Policy Summary. 2008http://www.playengland.org.uk/media/120444/play-strategy-summary-long.pdf

Tompson, W. Children and the natural environment: experiences, influences

and interventions Summary. Natural England, 2001.

41


45/46

ims, C (2010) Born Creative, London: DEMOS

Walker, C. Arts & Culture: Community Connections: Contributions from newsurvey research. Te Urban Institute, 2002.

Wearring, B. (1993). Te family that plays together stays together: Or does it?

World Leisure and Recreation, 35(3), 2529.

Wells, N (2000) At home with nature: effects of greenness on childrenscognitive functioning, Environment and Behaviour, 32(6): 775 795.

Wells, N and Lekies, K (2005) Nature and the life course: pathways fromchildhood natureexperiences to adult environmentalism, Children, Youth and Environments,16(1): 1-24.

Wood, E. (2008): Everyday play activities as therapeuticand pedagogical encounters, European Journal of Psychotherapy & Counselling,10:2,111-120.

West, P. C., & Merriam, L. C., Jr. (1970). Outdoor recreation and familycohesion: A research approach. Journal of Leisure Research, 2, 251259

Zabriskie, R. B. (2000). An examination of family and leisure behavior amongfamilies with middle school aged children. Unpublished doctoral dissertation,

Indiana University, Bloomington, Indiana.

42


46/46

aken at the Fantastical Photobooth in Nowhere Now.

Jim RalleyDirector, Te Big Art People

[email protected]+447928 119686Skype: jimralley@jimrali

The Research Team43

Documents

How does the physical environment impact on families' perceptions of an arts event?