b'Jonathan TaylorThe Visitor: Interactive Audiences and Performance at Hampton Court PalaceDissertation ExtractJonathan TaylorThis is an excerpt from An Exploration of the Use ofof both agents (Klich and Scheer, 2012: 164). Performance to Create Interactive Educational ExperiencesThis real-time activity by a reciprocal actor showed that the at Hampton Court Palace, a third year dissertation. performance respected that a visitor has the agency to alter the work or elicit a reaction to its assertions (Klich and The performances at Hampton Court Palace vary inScheer, 2012: 153). The costumed interpreter was playing scale and style, but they all invite visitors to become ana real historical figure (Past Pleasures, 2018), accessible by interactive audience, placing them at the centre of thea modern audience through real-time human-to-human experience (Jackson and Kidd, 2009: 241). This is donegive-and-take with [] limitless potential for alternative through an invitation for the visitor to interact directlynarrative outcomes (Klich and Scheer, 2012: 166). with costumed interpretations, which we classify as performances. The visitor is given the agency to alterIt was this adaptation and collaborative response to a the work or elicit a reaction to its assertions (Klich andvisitors interaction with the performance that made it Scheer, 2012: 153), encouraging some kind of interpretationmuseum theatre, placing the learner at the centre of the or assisting in the progression of the narrative. At thisexperience (Jackson and Kidd, 2009: 241). The interpreter point the relationship between the viewer and the workdid not seem to fall into the trap of romanticizing the past can be classified as interactive (Klich and Scheer, 2012:and was committed to accuracy when explaining his role 153). Performances at the site achieve this interactivewithin the Tudor household (Sheppard, 2009: 15) (Past relationship by having first-person costumed interpretersPleasures, 2018). The authenticity of the performance available for an interested visitor to interact with.in the visitors eyes was built upon at the end of the interactive performance. The performer gave the visitor I observed one example of this in the Tudor kitchens atthe scroll that he had prepared for her. The visitor could Hampton Court Palace, where a scribe was demonstratingtake this away, having assisted in the creation of something Tudor calligraphy whilst engaging in conversation (Pastthey can take home, that exudes authenticity because Pleasures: 2018).The actor was seated at a table in thesomething one makes for oneself is viewed as inherently centre of the room and not actively trying to gather anauthentic (Donnis and Wilkening, 2008: 22). audience. He was, however, out of place compared to the 21st-century visitors who filled the room. It was thisFor the visitor, they had seen an authentic display of contrast to a regular visitor that drew the initial attentionhistory through the interactive performance and being of visitors, and his actions of simply writing a scroll with anable to take away a newly written scroll reaffirmed the ink quill prolonged their interest. Although he was goingauthenticity of the historical interaction. After all, the about his business, he still appeared available to visitors,interaction was personal, it did not have a predetermined and would often catch their eye and offer conversation toscript, and so it appeared to be authentic. I use the them. One such interaction that I observed was between aword authentic tentatively, as it is impossible to be woman who told him it was her wedding anniversary thatfully authentic when portraying the past. day. Upon volunteering this piece of personal information, the costumed interpreter congratulated her and beganA costumed interpreter is not a person from the past writing a scroll to commemorate the occasion.and objects are only ever authentic within their own context. Objects have history of their own and it is By Klich and Scheers definition, the interaction wasimpossible to identify them as authentic, due to the complex as it [required] the real-time and mutual activityconflicting opinions of what their history may be. 17'