66
scripted narrative in which the audience is positioned primarily as observer rather 
than participant. As such, the piece aligns with Balme’s model of “representational 
intermediality”, demonstrating how theatre can extend its aesthetic and  
perceptual capacities through cinematic techniques. 
Rider Spoke both aligns with and extends the framework proposed by  Balme,  
suggesting that his model represents only one aspect of intermediality. The work 
clearly reflects Balme’s notion of incorporating the perceptual conventions of  
another medium, as it integrates digital audio technologies - headphones, GPS 
navigation, and recorded voices - which shape the participant’s patterns of seeing 
and hearing. Rider Spoke reconfigures the structure of performance itself by  
positioning the audience as active participants whose movements, decisions, and 
contributions generate the work in real time. Intermediality therefore operates not 
only through the borrowing of aesthetic conventions, but as an interactive system 
that enables participation and redistributes authorship.  
This comparison therefore suggests that while The Forbidden Zone closely aligns 
with  Balme’s model by transforming theatrical perception through cinematic  
conventions, Rider Spoke demonstrates that intermediality can also operate at the 
level of participation, extending his framework beyond perception to encompass 
different modes of engagement.  
In conclusion, both The Forbidden Zone and Rider Spoke align with the  
framework proposed by  Balme but demonstrate different forms of intermediality. 
Mitchell’s work expands theatrical perception through the integration of  
cinematic techniques, positioning the audience as observers within a  
representational framework. In contrast, Rider Spoke integrates digital audio  
technologies to fundamentally reconfigure the role of the audience, shifting them 
from observers to active participants in the production of the performance.  Both 
productions nevertheless realise, in different ways, the aesthetic conventions and 
patterns of seeing and hearing of other media, confirming the continued relevance 
of his definition (Balme, 2008). This suggests that intermediality operates across 
multiple dimensions - perceptual, spatial, and participatory - each of which  
reshapes the relationship between audience, technology, and performance in  
distinct ways. Intermediality should therefore be considered not as a single,  
cohesive concept but as a dynamic and evolving practice that reflects the 
 ever-changing relationship between media, performance, and audience. 

View this content as a flipbook by clicking here.