Journal of Art and Civilization of the Orient

The Autopoietic Feedback Loop,Rethinking Performer–Audience Interaction in Theatre, from Bharata and Zeami to Erika Fischer-Lichte

https://doi.org/10.22034/jaco.2026.559054.1504
Volume 14, Issue 52
Summer 2026
Pages 14-23
Journal of Art and Civilization of the Orient

Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

Morteza Ghaffari
Majid Sarsangi
Behrooz Mahmoodi Bakhtiari

Department of Performing Arts, college of Fine Arts, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran

Abstract
Audience studies remain one of the most challenging fields within theatrical theory. Despite the expansion of this field in recent decades and the sustained efforts of contemporary theorists to redefine the role of the audience in the performance process, a significant portion of classical Eastern approaches has received comparatively limited attention in cross-cultural and comparative scholarship. The present study aims to examine the concept of the autopoietic feedback loop in Erika Fischer-Lichte’s aesthetics of performance and to compare it with audience-oriented communicative models articulated in major theoretical texts of classical Eastern theatre—namely the Nāṭyaśāstra (attributed to Bharata Muni) and the treatises of Zeami Motokiyo, including Fūshikaden and Kakyo. The central question of this article is to identify the points of convergence and divergence between the communicative approaches proposed by Bharata and Zeami, and Fischer-Lichte’s concept of the autopoietic feedback loop. This qualitative study adopts a descriptive–analytical methodology and examines the three fundamental components of the autopoietic feedback loop—reversal of roles, community formation, and touch—in relation to audience-centered approaches in Indian Sanskrit theatre and Japanese Nō theatre. The findings reveal deep affinities among these theatrical systems, particularly in their shared emphasis on live, community-forming interaction between performers and spectators. At the same time, notable cultural differences emerge: while Eastern traditions foreground inner transformation and the spiritual dimension of performance, Fischer-Lichte’s framework focuses on the ephemeral, unpredictable, and processual nature of performative interaction.By bringing these distinct theatrical systems into dialogue, the study facilitates a convergent exchange between Eastern and Western traditions and opens a new horizon for rethinking performer–audience interaction within a global context of theatre studies.

Keywords

Theatre
Autopoietic Feedback Loop
Bharata
Zeami Motokiyo
Erika Fischer-Lichte
Balbir, J. K. (1962). «Sanskrit Drama and the Spectators: A Study Based on Published and Unpublished Dramaturgical Texts.». Indo-Iranian Journal, 6(1), 38–44.  https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00157140
Bennett, S. (1997). Theatre audiences: A theory of production and reception (2nd ed.). Routledge.
Bharata, M. (2016). The Nāṭyaśāstra: English translation with critical notes (A. Rangacharya, Trans. & Ed.). Munshiram Manoharlal Publishers.
Chattopadhyay, M. (2013). A Historical Study of Ancient Indian Theatre-Communication in the Light of Natyasastra.Global Media Journal – Indian Edition, 4(2), 1–16. https://l1nq.com/pjv0tmw
Carlson, M. (2001). The haunted stage: The theatre as memory machine. University of Michigan Press.
Coorlawala, U. A. (2010). It matters who is dancing: Audience participation in rasa theory. In P. Chakravorty and N. Gupta (Eds.), Dance matters: Performing India on local and global stages (pp. 117–139). Routledge.
Fischer-Lichte, E. (2008). The Transformative Power of Performance: A New Aesthetics (S. I. Jain, Trans.). Routledge.
Freshwater, H. (2018). Try the new Your Library (M. Akhgar, M. Brahimi, G. R. Shahbazi, M, Nasrollehzadeh., & N, Yazdi, Trans.), 76-115. SAMT Publications. (Published work original 2009)
Hare, T. C. (1996). Zeami’s style: The Noh plays of Zeami Motokiyo. Stanford University Press.
Heim, C. (2016). Audience as performer: The changing role of theatre audiences in the twenty-first century. Routledge.
Higgins, K. M. ( 2007). An Alchemy of Emotion: Rasa and Aesthetic Breakthroughs. The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism, 65(1), 43–54. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-594X.2007.00236.x
McConachie, B. (2008). Engaging audiences: A cognitive approach to spectating in the theatre. Palgrave Macmillan.
Narayanan, M. (2022). Space, Time and Ways of Seeing. Routledge.
Odom, G., & Raghunathan, G. (2022). Which global? Which local?: Aucitya, rasa, development, Àṣẹ and other demands on the audience. In M. Reason, L. Conner, K. Johanson, & B. Walmsley (Eds.), The Routledge companion to audiences and the performing arts (pp. 96–110). Routledge.
Ortolani, B. (1972). The aesthetic of Noh: Zeami’s concept of audience participation. Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism, 31(2), 157–167.
Perić, T. (2016). Understanding versus experiencing: An interview with Erika Fischer-Lichte. Critical Stages/Scènes critiques, 14. https://www.critical-stages.org/14/understanding-versus-experiencing-interview-with-erika-fischer-lichte/
Pollock, S.(2016). A Rasa Reader. Columbia University Press.
Pronko, L. C. (1968). Oriental theatre for the West: Problems of authenticity and relevance. Educational Theatre Journal , 20(1), 3–10.
Pinnington, N. J. (2019). A new history of medieval Japanese theatre: Noh and Kyōgen from 1300 to 1600. Palgrave Macmillan.
Quinn, S. F. (2005). Developing Zeami: The Noh Actor›s Attunement in Practice. University of Hawai‘i Press.
Rajpurohit, S. (2019). Audience in theatre: An analysis from the perspective of Bharata and Abhinavagupta. Journal of Indian Theatre, 1(1), 1–11. https://sl1nk.com/s4i6uxm
Rajurkar Raj, V., & Vrat Singh, D. (2021). Theatre Communication: Revisiting Bharatmuni’s Nāṭyaśāstra.Theatre Street Journal, 5(1), 36-58. https://l1nq.com/t782pa0
Rancière, J. (2009). The emancipated spectator. Verso.
Reason, M., Conner, L., Johanson, K., & Walmsley, B. (Eds.). (2022). The Routledge companion to audiences and the performing arts. Routledge. 
Schechner, R. (2003). Performance theory (Rev. and expanded ed.). Routledge. 
Schwartz, S. L. (2004). Rasa: Performing the divine in India. Routledge.
Tillis, S. (2003). East, West, and world theatre. Asian Theatre Journal, 20(1), 71–87. https://doi.org/10.1353/atj.2003.0013
Waley, A. (1998). The Noh plays of Japan. Grove Press. (Original work published 1921)
White, G. (2013). Audience participation in theatre: Aesthetics of the invitation. Palgrave Macmillan.
Yarrow, R. (2001). Indian Theatre: Theatre of Origin, Theatre of Freedom. Curzon Press.
Yusa, M. (1987). Riken no Ken: Zeami›s theory of acting and theatrical appreciation. Monumenta Nipponica, 42(3), 331–345.
Zarrilli, P. B. (2000). Kathakali dance-drama: Where gods and demons come to play.  Routledge.
Zeami  , M. (1984). On the Art of the Nō Drama: The Major Treatises of Zeami (J. T. Rimer & M.‌Yamazaki, Trans.; J. T. Rimer & M. Yamazaki, Eds.). Princeton University Press.

Home

Submit Manuscript

Contact Us