“The Open Houses Investigation: A Democratic Experience?”
Introduction:
“Instead of reasoned conviction, only habit and tradition, as well as a rather vague faith in the fulfillment of civic duties, send a considerable percentage of the remaining fifty percent of people who still vote to the polling stations.”[1]
This quote highlights the role of habit, tradition, and a “vague” faith in civic engagement among voters, according to John Dewey in 1927. For many people, voting is a routine acquired over time, dictated by social and family influence, rather than an informed decision based on solid political principles. This raises questions about the quality of democracy and the representativeness of electoral results, as participation may be motivated by habits rather than critical reflection on political issues. This quote also underscores the need to strengthen citizen involvement in decision-making processes by fostering active participation and promoting models of participatory democracy.
The OPEN HOUSES project, through the social investigation carried out by youth collectives in theaters, offered a unique experience. The youth debated, analyzed situations, and engaged in dialogue with institutions to propose concrete solutions, challenging assigned places and roles. This experience had effects on individuals, groups, facilitators, and structures, enhancing knowledge of institutions and placing participants within collective perspectives.
Through observations during collective sessions and interviews with the youth and professionals involved in the project, we will attempt to answer the following question: How did the social investigation conducted within the framework of Open Houses constitute a democratic experience for the actors involved?
1. Changing the relationship with “research”
The social investigation conducted within the framework of the OPEN HOUSES project had varied effects on participants’ relationship with research. For some, it was a transformative experience that shifted their perspective on research by providing an opportunity to engage in a process of data collection, analysis, and proposal formulation. They developed research skills and gained a deep understanding of how research can be used as a tool for social change.
Other participants may have been more reserved or less enthusiastic about research. For some, this could be due to factors such as personal preferences, past negative experiences, difficulty grasping the initial issues, or a lack of initial interest in research. However, even in these cases, the social investigation often opened spaces for dialogue and reflection, offering young people the opportunity to express their concerns and viewpoints, even if they were not directly involved in the technical aspects of research.
“Before starting, honestly, it wasn’t something that caught my attention. But afterward, I realized that, in the end, it did because I’ve always been involved in things that question, where I was doing research…” (A young person from the French collective)
It is important to note that the effects of the social investigation on young people’s relationship with research were influenced by individual factors such as their level of engagement, personal interests, and socio-cultural context. Some young people may have felt particularly invested in the research process, finding a renewed passion for discovery and exploration of social subjects. Others may have been less enthusiastic but still gained valuable lessons on how research can contribute to understanding social issues and promoting change.
In summary, the social investigation conducted within the framework of the OPEN HOUSES project had diverse effects on young people’s relationship with research. Some were profoundly transformed, developing research skills and gaining a deep understanding of its social utility. Others may have been less enthusiastic but still benefited from the opportunity to express their concerns and viewpoints. In all cases, the social investigation contributed to broadening young people’s vision of the importance of research as a tool for dialogue, reflection, and social change.
2. Getting to know institutions to criticize and modify them
– Discovering cultural institutions: an enriching exploration
“Before Open Houses, I almost never went to the theater.”
(A young person from the Romanian collective)
The investigation carried out as part of the OPEN HOUSES project offered young participants an opportunity to explore cultural institutions in depth, enabling them to gain a more enlightened understanding. Some discovered theater for the first time, while others deepened their existing knowledge. Through direct interactions with professional actors and the exploration of various aspects of theater such as public relations, technical aspects, and staging, they developed a better understanding of these institutions. By concretely understanding how theaters function, they were able to more precisely grasp their role as young individuals and imagine solutions to address difficulties or limitations observed in their communities.
Furthermore, the investigation allowed participants to address social, cultural, and political issues that surround them. By studying and analyzing concrete situations, they were encouraged to reflect on societal challenges such as discrimination, homophobia, and social exclusion. Debates were conducted, and they took the time to deeply understand these issues. However, it is important to note that awareness of these problems does not always guarantee immediate action and a positive response from institutions. For example, the proposal to establish gender-neutral toilets by a group of young people in one of the theaters involved in the project was not accepted, leading to a sense of indignation among some members of the group. The commitments and actions desired by young people are closely linked to their individual motivations but are also dependent on the available opportunities and offerings.
This project also had a significant personal impact. One participant testifies to this effect: “I learned a lot about myself. The difficulties encountered with the theater allowed me to realize that there are other ways of doing things. I would have always favored diplomacy, but this project opened my eyes to different possible approaches.” Participation in a social investigation provides young people with an opportunity to express themselves and be heard, which can strengthen their self-confidence and their belief in their ability to have an impact on society. However, individual influence can vary depending on various factors such as existing power structures and the availability of channels to express their opinions. Young people may feel valued and recognized as important contributors, but the actual impact of their participation will also depend on the context in which they engage.
– Establishing Dialogue: Youth and Cultural Institutions
It was not a sociological research but a subjective investigation, about our experience in the theater, based on our feelings and observations. And this was not always understood and valued by the institution, which perhaps expected something else, more evidence…” (A young member of the French collective)
Based on this quote, it is important to recognize that in some cases, despite the efforts of young participants to express their opinions and concerns, the institutions being investigated did not always listen to or fully consider their views. When institutions are not receptive to the concerns of young people, it can lead to feelings of frustration, disappointment, and discouragement within the collective. It can also question the effectiveness and usefulness of social investigation as a tool for dialogue and change.
It is crucial to note that the lack of listening or consideration of young people’s opinions can be due to various factors. Some institutions may have rigid power structures, opaque decision-making processes, or resistance to change. They may also face budgetary, logistical, or political constraints that limit their ability to respond to the demands of young people. Despite this difficulty, the young people in the Open Houses project continued to defend their ideas and proposals. They sought different means to make their voices heard by proposing spaces for dialogue and negotiations throughout the project.
It is also important to note that even when institutions do not immediately or favorably respond to the demands of young people, their participation in the social investigation still holds value. The process of expressing concerns, conducting research, and formulating proposals allows young people to develop their skills in civic participation, strengthen their self-confidence, and raise awareness of important social and political issues. In summary, although institutions did not always listen to or consider the opinions of the young collective, their participation in the social investigation remains a crucial step in the development of their civic engagement and in highlighting important issues. This also underscores the need to continue promoting inclusive and democratic mechanisms of citizen participation, where the voices of young people are truly taken into consideration.
3. Experiencing Collectivity
– Building Local Collectives
“We didn’t have clearly defined roles in the formation of the collective. We discussed for hours, which was also great for the project, but at some point, there was a lack of guidance in building the collective, even just to find our roles.” (A young member of the French collective)
While the OPEN HOUSES project benefited from the guidance of professionals, it is important to highlight that the construction of the collective and the allocation of roles among the young participants were a democratic experience in themselves. Initially, roles were not clearly defined in the formation of all national collectives. For some groups, hours of discussion were necessary, which proved particularly beneficial for the project. However, at some point, participants felt a lack of guidance in structuring the collective and defining their roles.
The guidance from professionals aimed to guide participants in carrying out the social investigation and to support them throughout the process. However, group dynamics and task allocation can sometimes be complex, especially for young people who are still in the process of learning these skills. As a result, some participants encountered difficulties when it came to finding a balance in responsibilities and making collective decisions, particularly within the French collective where some regretted being burdened with too many responsibilities at times.
These difficulties are an integral part of the collective experience of OPEN HOUSES. They allowed participants to learn from their mistakes and rethink the traditionally assigned positions and roles. They faced situations that led them to collectively reflect on how they could cooperate more equitably. They defined their own rules and ways of doing things. It is important to emphasize that learning role allocation and collaboration is an ongoing process that requires time and experience to fully develop.
The guidance from professionals plays a crucial role in providing advice and tools to facilitate task allocation. However, it is also essential for participants to have the opportunity to explore and overcome these challenges on their own in order to strengthen their autonomy and ability to make democratic decisions. The participation of young people in OPEN HOUSES has allowed for a rethinking of hierarchies and assigned roles, providing an emancipatory experience where participants were encouraged to see themselves as important actors in the democratic process, capable of making meaningful contributions.
Furthermore, intercultural encounters and mobility to other countries played a significant role in strengthening the collectives within the OPEN HOUSES project. In this regard, one participant explains: “The other part, but the impression is that it is separate from the research, is about mobility in Germany and France” (a young member of the Romanian collective). Traveling, seeing how things were done there. It was a human adventure. By allowing young participants to meet people from different cultures and backgrounds, these experiences fostered greater open-mindedness, a better understanding of diversity, and an increased ability to work as a team.
– Intercultural Exchanges
“Sometimes it wasn’t easy to understand each other, even with whispered translations, because there are differences between us” (A participant from the German collective).
Intercultural encounters provided young people with the opportunity to discover new perspectives and challenge their own viewpoints. By interacting with participants from different cultures and backgrounds, they were able to develop a greater sensitivity to cultural differences and learn to work collaboratively and respectfully, leveraging each other’s strengths and skills.
Mobilities to other countries also contributed to strengthening the collectives by offering participants an immersive experience in a different cultural environment. These experiences often involved challenges such as language barriers, cultural differences, and adapting to new situations. However, these challenges also stimulated their ability to adapt, problem-solve together, and strengthen their solidarity as a group.
By fostering mutual understanding and a willingness to collaborate, intercultural encounters and mobilities helped forge strong bonds among the participants. They were able to build trust, overcome differences, and support each other in achieving the common goals of the project. These intercultural interactions not only strengthened the collectives but also paved the way for greater tolerance and appreciation of diversity within a democratic context.
It is important to note that these intercultural encounters and mobilities are not without challenges. Cultural differences can sometimes lead to misunderstandings or conflicts, requiring open communication and a willingness to find common solutions. However, these challenges are also opportunities for young people to develop mediation skills, intercultural understanding, and the strengthening of collective bonds.
In summary, intercultural encounters and mobilities to other countries have played an essential role in strengthening the collectives within the OPEN HOUSES project. They have promoted open-mindedness, a better understanding of diversity, and enhanced the capacity of young people to work together collaboratively and respectfully. These experiences have contributed to creating strong connections among participants, fostering tolerance, appreciation of diversity, and a broader vision of democracy.
Conclusion
In conclusion, the social investigation conducted within the framework of the OPEN HOUSES project has had significant effects on the participants and the theater institutions.
Firstly, it has contributed to changing the participants’ relationship with research by engaging them in a process of data collection, analysis, and proposal formulation. Some have developed research skills and a deeper understanding of its social utility, while others have benefited from the opportunity to express themselves and reflect on social issues.
Secondly, the investigation has allowed young people to gain a better understanding of cultural institutions by exploring their various aspects and understanding their functioning concretely. This has enabled them to develop a more informed understanding of these institutions and reflect on solutions to address the difficulties observed in their territories. Moreover, the investigation has led them to address social, cultural, and political issues, thereby strengthening their awareness and commitment to these matters.
Thirdly, the social investigation has facilitated the construction of local collectives, although this process has encountered difficulties at times. Participants have had to find a balance in responsibilities and make collective decisions, which required time and experience. Despite these challenges, the collective experience has allowed young people to rethink traditional roles and consider more equitable modes of collaboration.
However, it is important to note that the effects on theater institutions have varied. Some institutions have listened to and taken into account the opinions and concerns of young people, while others have been less receptive. This highlights the need to continue promoting inclusive and democratic mechanisms of citizen participation, where the voices of young people are genuinely considered.
In summary, the social investigation conducted within the OPEN HOUSES project has provided a democratic experience for the actors involved. It has transformed the participants’ relationship with research, enhanced their knowledge of cultural institutions, and facilitated the construction of local collectives. While acknowledging the encountered challenges, this experience has contributed to the development of participants’ engagement and shed light on important issues for theater institutions. To ensure lasting effects, it is essential to continue encouraging the participation of young people and promoting open and inclusive dialogues between young people and theater institutions.
[1] Excerpt from The Public and its Problems (1927), included in John Dewey: The Later Works, Vol. 2, edited by JoAnn Boydston and associates, Carbondale, Southern Illinois University Press (Feed., 1977), paperbound, 1983. Translated from English by Joelle Zask