opment. In the early 1950s, a man named Peter Slade wrote a book entitled Child Drama. The world was changing; people's perceptions were changing. Children were finally seen as people who needed to be nurtured, directed, guided. Unfortunately, there were still some groups who felt that the traditional outlook (drama with an audience) was the way to go. Slade was advocating drama for personal development. He stated that he sees "formal theatre as a final stage in a child's development"(Bolton 22). Many traditionalists extrapolated from this statement that he was anti-theatre. He was not anti-theatre, he merely felt that not all activities had to be performed; some were for self-exploration only. He wanted to turn away from the formalised styles designed to make all children sound like 'little adults' and turn back to the natural direction that children wanted to take. Slade stood for 'personal circles' and 'child-centred activity' and individualisation. It was not until Dorothy Heathcote came along that the focus went back to the "importance of the collective experience and in doing so brought again to the fore the possibility of group members becoming united in their shared response to dramatic symbols"(Bolton 31). Dorothy Heathcote concentrated on the material objects that the drama was based on. She took a scientific approach; to her "the material objects of the world provide the common source of" the scientist's view of knowledge (Bolton 59). Content is very important to her; the action must be focused on some topic or object. The child will be aware of the object and by examining and exploring it, he/she will celebrate it. Brian Way, another celebrated dramatist, has a different view of drama and development from Dorothy Heathcote. He is very close associate of Peter Slade, and hence their styles are similar. Way tried to educate teachers to understand that children were capable of more than just clowning around on a stage. They cou...
