Interpretation Australia

We welcome IA members and non-members to post their thoughts here, about whether interpretation should be entertaining.  Why or why not? Do you have any good (or bad) examples?

Same here, Jen.  I'd be interested in what you're learning about stand-up comedy and interpretation.  I see little difference except that the outcome the comic is trying to produce is 100% entertainment, or if you prefer "infotainment".  Of course, for most interpreters the entertainment aspect of their work is not the endgame, but rather a means to an end (which most interpreters call "provocation" following Tilden's lead. 

But I think both you and John P. are right on in saying that entertainment is required in the sense that a non-captive audience's attention has to be attracted and held long enough to provoke thought.  In psychology, "entertainment" = "attention holding" -- they are one in the same.  It does not necessarily imply frivolous fun or laughter or juggling acts.  In this sense, sad stories, scary movies and accounts of tragic events can entertain us just as much as stand-up comics, movies and footie.  In the TORE model, the O, R & E signify the infotainment -- two thirds of an interpreter's challenge.  The T?  That's where the provocation part comes in. 

For whatever that's worth.

Thanks for posting such a good and important question!

These interesting responses called to mind a related thought by an interpretive colleague who, sadly, passed away just recently. He was David Larsen of the National Park Service. Regarding interpretive techniques and opportunities for connection at an elemental level, David made the analogy to a joke. To be successful, one needs to carefully share a cohesively developed idea and arrange it to create a meaningful experience for the visitor - setting up the telling of a joke to get a laugh. So, I guess in terms of knowing your audience and using timing to your advantage there are indeed relationships to entertainment!