Prison Performing Arts Program

The analysis of the prisoners performance of Hamlet was very insightful and something that I found very well presented to the listener. I think a lot of what the interviewer was able to uncover in his study of the Prison Performing Arts Program were things that I would almost certainly have overlooked if it weren't for his bringing them to light.
One of the reasons that the interviewer was able to provide such detailed and relevant information regarding prisoners was that the group of people included in the subculture he was studying were not many. If he were to study the prison population as a whole, there would have been points that he may have overlooked due to the vastness of that group. By studying such a focused group, he was able to cover their activities and personalities well. Another reason that I think that his fieldsite worked well was that it was not something that most people encounter or even know of in their lives. By choosing to look into such a unique group the interviewer was able to raise interest in the group just by highlighting the uncommon nature of what they did. Another reason for the effectiveness of the fieldsite was that the author was able to show how the program improved the lives of the prisoners. He never seemed to say whether or not they should be released, but he did point out that they seemed to be reformed to some degree by participating in the play. The greatest advantage of the fieldsite is that every prisoner who participated in the play seemed to have a deep connection with the characters they played because of the moral dilemmas that they had faced in their own experiences. If the interviewer had reviewed Hamlet as performed by normal stage actors, it would not have been near as intriguing as the one pieced together here.
The interviewer drew a lot of attention to the fact that the players all understood Hamlet at a level that most people never will. I think the interviewer was attempting in some way to create irony over the fact that most people consider criminals ignorant or less educated, but by showing their thoughts regarding the play, he was able to contradict these assumptions. One of the most important observations that the author made was his attention to the individual players characters. He did a good job of creating an image for the listener about how Big Hutch might appear, or how passionate Mr. Word might have been during his performances. The author didn't seem to waste too much time describing what the prison looked like, because most people already have a basic idea in their head of what they expect in a prison. The author did make a point over certain features of the prison, but he was able to save time and keep the listeners attention by not going into too much detail.
The interesting aspects of the topic that the interviewer chose is that it behaves in many ways that most would find far more sophisticated than their expectations. The set of standards that the players seemed to follow were not quite what one would expect when asking prisoners to put on a performance of a play such as Hamlet. The respect that they had for each other was comparable to what one would expect in a typical theater, maybe even more. Even more striking was their acceptance of each others faults. Whenever one of the actors was unable to pronounce a word, or made a mistake with their lines, none of the other prisoners mocked their mistakes. Instead, they did what they could to help each other. The only thing that approached mockery was when a player would flub a line and they would all laugh, more an example of shared emotion than belittling. The other interesting thing is that through it all, the players did manage to keep the tough images that they found so important in prison. They even admittedly avoiding being too public about their roles in the regular prison population, so that they wouldn't tarnish their image, but as time passed, they seemed to throw caution to the wind and were noted as reading openly from cell to cell practicing lines. The other important observation regarding the social norms of the players is that they still stuck to the prison hierarchy that was so important to them. In fact, the author noted that they even applied the system to the play.
The authors style of interviewing was critical to how he was able to present the piece to listeners. He had to be careful in his questioning and not do too much to upset his interviewees so that he might get useful information from them without upsetting them and driving them away, especially since he noted the rigors that they had to go through just to be interviewed by him. He stayed away from touchy subjects, such as their crimes, until he was almost done interviewing them. This seems to be a very beneficial tactic because not only was he able to build their trust enough to get them to answer the difficult questions when he asked them, but if they had decided to shut him out, he would have gathered ample material to present his case.
I really enjoyed this piece and thought that the interviewer presented a subject that I had many incorrect assumptions about. In this, I think he accomplished his goal by presenting the material in a manner that was able to spark interest in the listener. I'm sure that I have overlooked some aspect of what the interviewer did to make his piece effective, but using simple interviews and observations he was able to compile a story that may influence many peoples' concept regard the humanity of convicts.