{"id":211,"date":"2023-12-06T20:42:48","date_gmt":"2023-12-06T20:42:48","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.critical-stages.org\/28\/?p=211"},"modified":"2023-12-29T15:41:29","modified_gmt":"2023-12-29T15:41:29","slug":"the-art-of-taking-part-dramaturgies-of-encounter-in-theatre-for-early-years","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.critical-stages.org\/28\/the-art-of-taking-part-dramaturgies-of-encounter-in-theatre-for-early-years\/","title":{"rendered":"The Art of Taking Part: Dramaturgies of Encounter in Theatre for Early Years"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

Sally Chance<\/strong>*<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Abstract<\/strong><\/strong><\/h5>\n\n\n\n

An emergent feature of Australian Theatre for Young Audiences (TYA) and its sub-set Theatre for Early Years (TEY) is an ethos of encounter. This positions children as co-creators of and participants in professional works constructed to respond to their presence as an artistically intentional aspect of its materiality. This practitioner account describes the dramaturgical principles underpinning The Thing That Matters<\/font><\/a>, by Adelaide-based TEY company Sally Chance Dance, in the context of its goal of crafting the relationship between the prepared and spontaneous aesthetic dimensions of the adult performers\u2019 rehearsed material and the children\u2019s participatory responses to the world of the work.

Keywords: <\/strong>theatre for early years, co-creation, participation, babies, young children, early childhood, family dance labs
<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Prologue<\/strong><\/h5>\n\n\n\n

The audience enters the performance space. Its members\u2014young children and their adults\u2014are invited to place their shoes across the width of the space to create a fourth wall, temporarily delineating spectators from performers.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The performers\u2014young children and adults\u2014start to roll towards the audience. Twice, three times they repeat their pathways in a cycle of life, time and generations. In their midst, Stephen clasps a suitcase. He comes to a stop for a quiet game of peek-a-boo with the audience. Eyes meet across the fourth wall in a delicate intersubjective moment of playful familiarity.<\/p>\n\n\n

\n
\"\"
The Thing That Matters<\/em>. Sally Chance Dance. Director: Sally Chance. The Church of the Trinity, Adelaide. Performer: Stephen Noonan. Premiere: 23 May 2023. Photo: Sam Oster<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n<\/div>\n\n\n

Stephen rises to standing. He takes the suitcase towards the audience. From behind it a new character\u2014Little Stevie\u2014magically arrives by means of Stephen\u2019s fingertips walking along his own arm then leaping into thin air with an excited wheeeeeee sound. Little Stevie lands securely in Stephen\u2019s upturned hand.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Stephen repeats the fingertip walk and a child\u2019s voice launches itself into the sonic environment from among the performers. \u201cI can do that\u201d he says. The child, newly three years old and very familiar with Stephen from the company\u2019s Family Dance Labs, knowledgeably cups his own hand for Little Stevie\u2019s landing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Stephen responds to his initiative with another playful wheeeeeee and flying fingertips. The child catches Little Stevie securely.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The child\u2019s expert contribution to the very top of the show arises from his enjoyment of the action and the sound so redolent of joy, release and sensation. It also comes from his confidence with the image as a co-creator and performer. The audience delights in his enjoyment. The audience children are curious, perhaps emboldened by their peer. Gently they breach the fourth wall as the work begins to fulfill its aim of becoming a meeting point between performers and very young audience.<\/p>\n\n\n

\n
\"\"
The Thing That Matters<\/em>. Sally Chance Dance. Director: Sally Chance. The Church of the Trinity, Adelaide. Performer: Stephen Noonan and Family Lab participant\/child performer. Premiere: 23 May 2023. Photo: Sam Oster<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n<\/div>\n\n\n
Introduction<\/strong><\/h5>\n\n\n\n

Australian Theatre for Early Years (TEY) is no longer in its infancy. Since the late 2000s the development in our region of the practice as a sub-set of the venerable and more broadly practiced field of Theatre for Young Audiences (TYA) has consistently demonstrated the capacity of children aged three years and younger, including babies, to \u201cnegotiate and regulate their relationship\u201d (Fischer-Lichte 391) with performers, with each other and with their adults in theatrical worlds carefully prepared for their participation.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Some Australian TYA practitioners suggest that over the last ten years this approach has become a characteristic of practice in our region motivated by a desire to explore the nature of participation and its purpose in live performance for children (Brown) and by the socio-political act of positioning performance for young audiences beyond adult-centric definitions of theatre (Giles).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

A strong feature of Australian TEY is that its practitioners attend to the relational dynamics of the work, carefully creating the conditions for theatrical encounter. In this context, the participation of young children as a potential aspect of the materiality of TEY works arises\u2014not because young children\u2019s pre-acculturated status as new to theatre attendance means anything goes, and not within pre-determined sections of (potentially rather simplistic) audience participation\u2014but because their impulses are responses to the world of the work, brought about within and through intentional acts of aesthetic reciprocity with performing artists and with each other.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Geesche Wartemann notes that an essential challenge for TEY is that children \u201cdo not focus their attention on specific events on stage\u2026because of pre-established conventions [but] are attentive and focused on certain events on stage for only as long as those events are able to capture their interest\u201d (13). For this reason, TEY creators must attend carefully to all the factors that achieve or undermine this.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This essay provides an account of some of the dramaturgical choices made in the devising and presentation of The Thing That Matters (TTTM), <\/em>a TEY work co-createdand presented by Sally Chance Dance and Adelaide-based families at the Adelaide Festival Centre\u2019s May 2023 DreamBIG<\/em> children\u2019s festival. I describe how the dramaturgy of The Thing That Matters<\/em> crafted a relationship between rehearsed and spontaneous material and unpack examples of the dramaturgical layers that helped the work become a participatory encounter between performers and audiences.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

My conclusion extends these aesthetic considerations into the socio-political suggestion that young children\u2019s participation in TEY \u201ccan help us disrupt the\u2026structures underpinning traditional understandings of everyday childhood practices\u201d (Thiel 72) by providing a powerful artistic representation of early childhood by young children for young children.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Participation<\/strong><\/h5>\n\n\n\n

The term participation warrants careful definition in the TEY context. A mobile child\u2019s participation as embodied and visible and therefore active<\/em> can be readily pictured, however this can lead to the unhelpful idea that the opposite of activity is passivity. Matthew Reason considers that \u201cspectatorship can be conceived as an act of doing and not a passive lack of doing\u201d (172). Erika Fischer-Lichte asserts, \u201cthere is no such thing as a passive spectator\u201d (177).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

I use the term participation to represent the variable and nuanced nature of young children\u2019s responses along a spectrum of spontaneous involvement. Their attending to the work by viewing<\/em> it is positioned conceptually at one end of this spectrum, with locomotor contributions to the performance\u2014described by me and by others (Fletcher-Watson 2013; Fischer-Lichte 2016) as doing<\/em>\u2014positioned at the other.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

I have refined this in the course of my practice using the terms gaze<\/em> and initiative<\/em>. Matthew Reason\u2019s neologism \u201caudiencing\u201d (172) describes the pleasure for young audiences of watching, gazing, witnessing and staring, and underpins his assertion that viewing is as active as doing, particularly for babies for whom the choice of where to place their gaze is one of the earliest, they can make. The baby has total control over this choice and so gazing, or withdrawing their gaze, is the baby\u2019s first experience of agency.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

My concept of initiative refers to young children\u2019s explicit aesthetic offers, manifesting in gestural and locomotor choices such as reaching, bouncing, crawling or standing, travelling to join in with the performers and contributing original input into the performative material. Initiatives are intentional contributions to the show and involve most or all the following factors:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    \n
  1. They begin with a clear embodied impulse.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
  2. They have a purposeful quality.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
  3. They are co-creative.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
  4. Whether short or extended they have an observable arc, or \u201ca temporal contour or time profile as it begins, flows through, and ends\u201d (Stern 4) in ways determined by the child.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
  5. They appear to be satisfying to\/have meaning for the child.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n

    Following ideas that seek to \u201cforeground the role of body, place, affect and atmosphere\u2026over design, intentionality and rationality\u201d (Hackett and Rautio 1020) in young children\u2019s meaning-making, the show itself, its structure, the people and objects in it and the spatial environment it offers become a means of creating \u201cthe conditions in which multimodal meaning-making might emerge,\u201d inviting the children into a process of \u201cbecoming with the world\u201d (ibid) of the show.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    In this sense performers and audiences affect each other to \u201cco-determine the actions and behaviour of others\u201d (Fischer-Lichte 391). The Danish Teatercentrum\u2019s<\/em> Peter Manscher and Peter Jankovic individualise the exchange still further in articulating their vision that \u201cevery child must feel\u2014both during and after the show\u2014that if I hadn\u2019t been there, the show would have been different\u201d (Reason 41).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    This was the goal of The Thing That Matters<\/em>, which I now introduce, before describing how the dramaturgy flowed from \u201crecognition of the roles that very young children can play in a theatre [so that] participation becomes not an interruption of the theatrical moment but vital to its success\u201d (Fletcher Watson 19).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    The Thing That Matters<\/em><\/strong><\/h5>\n\n\n\n

    The Thing That Matters<\/em> was created over an eighteen-month timeframe. The project enjoyed support from funders Arts South Australia, producers Insite Arts and presenter the Adelaide Festival Centre. The work was developed by the company (two dancers, a circus artist and a live musician) in phases of devising their own material and within participatory Family Dance Labs\u2014weekly sixty-minute movement-based sessions for families with children aged four months to three years. Forty-two families took part in the Labs over the four stages of the project. This slow build allowed families to participate at various stages without the final season creating any undue pressure. The fourth Lab series began to anticipate the performance season, with sixteen families opting to join the ensemble for the culmination of the project\u2014a six-show performance season.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    The work was structured in six sections traversing a human lifespan. The sections were presented by the company or by the entire ensemble of company and families in an arc of images representing the vivid sensory playfulness of childhood, the powerful autonomy of young adulthood, the bitter-sweet responsibilities of adulthood and the solemnity of the end of life.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    A series of circular images (the entire ensemble rolling in long repetitive pathways, a solo circling pathway and a circle of shoes of various sizes) alluded to life as a cycle rather than a linear journey and to the ontological completeness of children at every early life stage. The physical, gestural, vocal, playful and relational initiatives of the children present enabled early childhood to be represented throughout. This arose from very young audience members in both spontaneous and invited response to the world of the work and from the manifestly skilled initiatives of the children who had taken part in the Labs. The latter children\u2019s capacity as performers relied, as for any performer, on their knowledge of and preparedness for the work.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    The Labs aimed to be intrinsically motivating for adult and child participants, generating enjoyment, skills development and community and supporting parent\/carer-child relationships through movement. The evaluation of the project with families revealed that activities reserved for the private context of the Labs, such as singing a welcome song, were as memorable and important as performing the show. However, the Labs were primarily designed to harness \u201cthe generative role that child collaborators and performers can have in the development of\u2026performance practice\u201d (Hopfinger 61) by exploring movement images with communicative clarity, performative skill and dramaturgical coherence suitable for ticketed audiences.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    The project\u2019s involvement as co-creators and performers of babies and young children from the same age range as the work\u2019s target audience (four months to three years) functioned dramaturgically in several ways, each linked to a range of roles available to the children at various stages of the project.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Table 1 summarises the children\u2019s roles and the function of each.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Role<\/strong><\/strong><\/td>Setting<\/strong><\/strong><\/td>Activity<\/strong><\/strong><\/td>Dramaturgical Function<\/strong><\/td><\/tr>
    Audience<\/td>Lab<\/td>View short sections of draft performance material and the first iteration of the complete work.<\/td>Extended consultation with children. Multiple trials of company\u2019s performative material.<\/td><\/tr>
    Artistic Co-creators<\/td>Lab<\/td>Take part in workshop\/devising sessions, make creative offers, devise emergent performance material, rehearse.<\/td>Co-creation of performative material shared by company and families. Co-curation of all material, supporting the process of keeping, re-ordering and discarding. Testing \u2018sticky\u2019 images over time.<\/td><\/tr>
    Performers and audience<\/td>Performances<\/td>Present performance material*. View performance material. *NB. Children were always at liberty to decide not to perform.<\/td>Spontaneous performative initiatives. Make visible child expertise.<\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table>
    Table 1. Young children\u2019s roles in TTTM<\/em><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

    Each of these functions made visible the children\u2019s preferences and the capacity of their adults to scaffold their movement. This informed my choices of the images\/material selected to be finessed over time. Our goal was not to try to control<\/em> the wide range of factors influencing the children\u2019s responses, nonetheless, we attempted to \u201cexamine what kind of activities are enabled or even encouraged by the aesthetics and probe the mechanisms<\/em> reinforcing the choice to engage in or avoid a particular activity\u201d (Fischer-Lichte 177). The next section describes how this played out through some of the dramaturgical choices made with the art of taking part in mind; but first a brief excursion into the performers\u2019 specialist skill set is necessary.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    This can be summarised as attuned responsivity within and throughout the pre-prepared material using strategies that frame the children\u2019s initiatives. The realisation of The Thing That Matters <\/em>depended on the formidable experience of dancers Stephen Noonan and Felecia Hick, the warmth of musician Kelly Menhennett and the mature intuition of emerging circus artist Juliet McLeod, whose perceptual skills enabled them to read<\/em> the nature of the experience for the children and to adjust their material spatially, or by curtailing\/prolonging material and in terms of where to place their own gaze.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    When the performers in a responsive performative relationship explicitly harness the children\u2019s participation, it becomes \u201cthe means <\/em>to create the performance as well as the performance <\/em>itself\u201d (Knapton 60-61) allowing the entire work to be an encounter rather than confining the children\u2019s participation to pre-determined sections.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Probing the Mechanisms<\/strong><\/h5>\n\n\n\n

    The Thing That Matters<\/em> evolved several dramaturgical features that supported the artistic aim of creating a work with a formal arc but \u201cnot fixed in a pre-composed verbal narrative, nor providing a free playing installation space\u201d (Hovik and P\u00e9rez 101). Audiences were initially seated in a delineated zone behind a temporary fourth wall of audience members\u2019 shoes. This allowed the audience children time and literal space to take in the objects, performers and setting from a safe distance.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    As host of the show, I explained to parents\/carers in a pre-show enrolment phase that their children could permeate this notional divide if they were drawn into <\/em>the action.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    The phrase \u201cdrawn in\u201d was carefully chosen because it conferred the choice-making (to stay close to the parent\/carer or to move into the action) on the children according to their own impulses in relation to their experience of the work, and not on their adults.<\/p>\n\n\n

    \n
    \"\"
    The Thing That Matters<\/em>. Sally Chance Dance. Director: Sally Chance. The Church of the Trinity, Adelaide. Performers: Felecia Hick, Stephen Noonan, Juliet McLeod and Family Lab participants\/child performers. Premiere: 23 May 2023. Photo: Sam Oster<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n<\/div>\n\n\n

    An unfolding journey of distinct sections played out in a pre-determined order, contrasting sections of set performative material, which at all times was open to the close presence of children, with sections of carefully scaffolded invitations framed as play. Play windows were always optional and allowed for a slow build of participation. Furthermore, transitions to new sections allowed for the children\u2019s personal play window to finish (or even continue) in their own time, or for the entire audience to be re-set by the host as needed.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    One of the most satisfying play sections for the children in the audiences and from the ensemble arose in the section, The Dance of Childhood. This had evolved collaboratively during the Labs and provided an opportunity to reprise the inviting vocal element introduced by Stephen\/Little Stevie at the very beginning.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    During the Labs parents had been invited by email to share images from their own childhoods. The company\u2019s Dance of Childhood consisted of movement phrases drawing on some of these. One referred to watching planes. We linked a long pathway with a sweeping gestural arc to Little Stevie\u2019s wheeeeeee<\/em> sound and tested with the Lab participants whether they were interested in cupping their hands as a place for the company performers to land their fingertips. The children\u2019s cupped hands functioned as an invitation to complete the action and it was therefore entirely within the child\u2019s control to extend the invitation, or not.<\/p>\n\n\n

    \n
    \"\"
    The Thing That Matters<\/em>. Sally Chance Dance. Director: Sally Chance. The Church of the Trinity, Adelaide. Performer: Felecia Hick and audience child. Premiere: 23 May 2023. Photo: Sam Oster<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n<\/div>\n\n\n

    In performance, the Lab participants modelled the game for the audience children. The children\u2019s security within the game was supported by the far and near nature of the action. Stephen, Felecia and Juliet watched for the cupped hands from a long distance and moved closer to complete the transaction only at the explicit invitation of the child.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Child-informed Dramaturgy<\/strong><\/h5>\n\n\n\n

    TEY is an exciting field with its own critical debate. Many wonderful works showcase young children\u2019s capacity for spectatorship, others favour the frisson of co-creative exchange. Given that \u201cmuch more than a collection of skills, professional practice is intimately entangled with identity and belief\u201d (Andersen 10), perhaps TEY practice is united by the broader philosophical implications of young children\u2019s presence at or in live performance which are that early years cultural provision warrants a high level of ambition in its scope, content and delivery, as well as in terms of its \u201cemotional and intellectual engagement\u201d (Reason 39).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    This essay has used The Thing That Matters<\/em> to describe how underpinning children\u2019s participation\u2014<\/em>encompassing at its simplest a spectrum from viewing to doing\u2014<\/em>has deeper nuances that re-position the viewing-doing binary along a complex continuum of artistic activity. If \u201cto dramaturg [is] to curate an experience for an audience\u2026which relies on the clarity of what characterises that experience\u201d (Lang 7-8), then my hope is that the visibility and expertise of young children as co-creators of TEY provide a clear artistic representation of early childhood by young children for young children.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    John Dewey notes, \u201cesthetic rhythm is a matter of perception and therefore includes whatever is contributed by the self in the active process of perceiving\u201d (1934 169), and so, perhaps we are looking at new kinds of child-informed dramaturgies that \u201ccan help us disrupt the\u2026structures underpinning traditional understandings of everyday childhood practices\u201d (Thiel 72), privileging young children\u2019s perceptions, framing them artistically and highlighting the aesthetic power of their participation.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    \n\n\n\n
    Bibliography<\/strong><\/h5>\n\n\n\n

    Andersen, Jennifer. Acting with Care: How Actor Practice is Shaped by Creating Theatre With and for Children. <\/em>2017. University of Melbourne, PhD by Research thesis.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Brown, Dave. The PaperBoats<\/a><\/em>. n.d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Dewey, John. Art as Experience<\/em>. <\/em>Capricorn Books, 1934.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Fischer-Lichte, Erika. \u201cThe Art of Spectatorship.\u201d Journal of Contemporary Drama in English<\/em>, vol. 4, no. 1, 2016, pp. 164-79.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Fletcher-Watson, Ben. \u201cChild\u2019s Play: A Postdramatic Theatre of Paidia for the Very Young.\u201d Platform<\/em>, vol. 7, no. 2, 2013, pp. 14-31.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Giles, Sue. Young People and The Arts: An Agenda for Change<\/em>.Quarterly Essays on the Performing Arts from Currency House, Platform Papers, vol. 54, 2018.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Hackett, Abigail and Pauliina Rautio. \u201cAnswering the World: Young Children\u2019s Running and Rolling as More-than-human Multimodal Meaning Making.\u201d International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education<\/em>, vol. 32, no. 8, 2019, pp. 1019-1031. \u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Hopfinger, Sarah. \u201cChildren, Performance and Ecology.\u201d Performance Research<\/em>, vol. 23, no. 1, 2018, pp. 61-7.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Hovik, Lise and Elena P\u00e9rez. \u201cBaby Becomings: Towards a Dramaturgy of Sympoietic Worlding.\u201d Nordic Theatre Studies<\/em>, vol. 32, no. 1, 2020, pp. 99-120.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Knapton, Benjamin. Activating Simultaneity in Performance: Exploring Robert LePage\u2019s Working Principles in the Making of Gaijin<\/em>. 2008. Queensland University of Technology, Masters by Research thesis.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Lang, Theresa. Essential Dramaturgy: The Mindset and the Skillset<\/em>. Routledge, 2017.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Nagel, Lisa and Lise Hovik. \u201cThe SceSam Project\u2014Interactive Dramaturgies in Performing Arts for Children.\u201d Youth Theatre Journal<\/em>, vol. 3, no. 2, 2016, pp. 149-70.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Reason, Matthew. The Young Audience: Exploring and Enhancing Children\u2019s Experiences of Theatre<\/em>. UCL Institute of Education Press, 2010.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Stern, Daniel. Diary of a Baby<\/em> (2nd<\/sup> ed.). Basic Books, 1998.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Stern, Daniel. Forms of Vitality: Exploring Dynamic Experience in Psychology, the<\/em> Arts, Psychotherapy, and Development<\/em>. Oxford UP, 2010.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Thiel, Jay Johnson. \u201cRed Circles, Embodied Literacies and Neoliberalism: The Art of Noticing an Unruly Placemaking Event.\u201d Journal of Early Childhood Literacy<\/em>, vol. 20, no. 1, 2020, pp. 69-89. <\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

    \n\n\n\n
    \"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

    *<\/a>Sally Chance<\/strong> is one of a specialist handful of Australian Theatre for Early Years practitioners. She has directed six works. Her doctoral study at the Queensland University of Technology (2020) analysed the performative contribution of young children to live performance and codified a framework of performer response-ability to their presence.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Copyright \u00a9<\/strong> 2023 Sally Chance
    Critical Stages\/Sc\u00e8nes critiques<\/em> e-ISSN:2409-7411<\/p>\n\n\n

    \n
    \"Creative<\/a><\/figure>\n<\/div>\n\n\n

    This work is licensed under the
    Creative Commons Attribution International License CC BY-NC-ND 4.0.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":215,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"advanced_seo_description":"","jetpack_seo_html_title":"","jetpack_seo_noindex":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[10],"tags":[12],"class_list":["post-211","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-special-topic","tag-home-page"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.critical-stages.org\/28\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/29\/2023\/11\/image4-2.jpeg","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.critical-stages.org\/28\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/211","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.critical-stages.org\/28\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.critical-stages.org\/28\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.critical-stages.org\/28\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.critical-stages.org\/28\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=211"}],"version-history":[{"count":5,"href":"https:\/\/www.critical-stages.org\/28\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/211\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":1078,"href":"https:\/\/www.critical-stages.org\/28\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/211\/revisions\/1078"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.critical-stages.org\/28\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/215"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.critical-stages.org\/28\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=211"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.critical-stages.org\/28\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=211"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.critical-stages.org\/28\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=211"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}