Comparative Techniques in Physical Theatre: Western vs. East Asian Traditions

Thesis Abstract

The study investigates how physical theatre practices in Western and East Asian traditions manifest divergent and convergent techniques in body-based storytelling, aiming to elucidate how cultural paradigms shape movement vocabularies, ensemble dynamics, and audience perception within contemporary performance. The problem addressed is the lack of integrative cross-cultural analyses that systematically compare kinaesthetic methodologies, training regimes, and dramaturgical approaches across these regional theatre practices, limiting cross-cultural pedagogy and collaborative production. The aim is to identify discretely measurable technique sets and their interpretive effects, with specific objectives (1) to catalog core physical theatre techniques characteristic of Western and East Asian ensembles; (2) to examine training histories and pedagogical influences shaping contemporary practice; (3) to analyze performance outcomes—emotional arousal, cognitive engagement, and perceived authenticity—across diverse audiences; (4) to model the relationship between technique choice and audience interpretation using a multi-method framework; and (5) to propose a cross-cultural pedagogy for physical theatre that integrates best practices from both traditions. The study adopts a comparative mixed-methods design, integrating qualitative and quantitative strands to triangulate findings. The population comprises professional and semi-professional physical theatre ensembles in the United States and Japan, with a targeted sample of 12 Western companies and 12 East Asian companies, and a purposive subsample of 120 performers for technique inventories and 360 audience responses collected via standardized instruments. Data collection utilizes three instruments (a) an expert-validated technique catalog and training history questionnaire for performers; (b) expert studio observations and video coding using the Movement Analysis System (MAS) to quantify kinaesthetic features such as weight, momentum, duration, and spatial patterning; (c) audience reception measures including a post-performance survey incorporating the Self-Assessment Manikin (SAM) for arousal, the Godin Engagement Scale for cognitive involvement, and a semantic differential for perceived authenticity. For data analysis, the study employs (i) descriptive statistics to establish technique prevalence and training backgrounds; (ii) thematic analysis of interview transcripts with choreographers and actors to identify interpretive frameworks and pedagogical ideologies; (iii) multivariate regression to assess associations between technique profiles and audience responses; (iv) ANOVA to compare cross-cultural differences in perception across performance types; and (v) structural equation modeling to test a proposed conceptual framework linking training lineage, technique selection, and audience interpretation. The theoretical underpinnings draw on theories of embodiment (Merleau-Ponty), cultural rehearsal practices (Bourdieu’s habitus in performance), and performance aesthetics (Jarman’s orality and visuality in corporeal theatre), alongside action and gesture theory (Kinesics and Laban Movement Analysis) to ground cross-cultural comparisons. It is anticipated that Western physical theatre will emphasize externalized, expansive space carving and explicit gesture grammars, while East Asian practices will foreground constrained breath, micro-modal control, and inward kinesthetic focus, yet both traditions converge in ensemble synchrony and dramaturgic intention toward collective transformation. Expected findings include distinct technique clusters with differential effects on arousal and perceived authenticity; cross-cultural adaptations may reveal transferable training modalities that enhance cross-border collaboration. The study contributes to knowledge by providing a systematic, empirically grounded cross-cultural model of physical theatre technique, informing pedagogy, and guiding international co-productions. It also offers a validated measurement framework for comparing kinaesthetic practice and audience interpretation across regional theatre contexts. The conclusion is that while substantive stylistic differences exist, shared commitments to ensemble coherence and embodied storytelling enable meaningful cross-pollination, with implication for curriculum design in conservatories and for directors seeking transnational collaborations. Recommendations include the development of an integrated cross-cultural physical theatre curriculum emphasizing modular technique exchanges, joint rehearsal protocols, and audience-informed dramaturgy, as well as further research into longitudinal effects of technique transfer on performer well-being and collaborative creativity.