Setting the stage for change

Staging Prison Theatre in Canada: Setting the Spotlight on William Head on Stage
by Thana Ridha and Sylvie Frigon

Ottawa: University of Ottawa Press, 2025
$39.95  /  9780776644905

Reviewed by Susan Sanford Blades

*

When you picture an incarcerated man, what sort of image comes to mind? Does this man wear make-up and sequins? Does he share his feelings? Is he accepting of others? Is he standing in a circle with his fellow inmates, holding hands with them, and encouraging them? Believe it or not, inmates at the William Head minimum-security institution in Metchosin, British Columbia have done all of these things through the William Head on Stage (WHoS) program. WHoS has been operating as an inmate-run not-for-profit society within the prison for 44 years, putting on a theatre production every fall that welcomes members of the general public into the prison gymnasium as their audience.

Staging Prison Theatre in Canada: Setting the Spotlight on William Head on Stage, by Thana Ridha and Sylvie Frigon, is a published criminological exploratory case study done through the University of Ottawa, in which Ridha interviewed 15 current WHoS participants and 6 former WHoS participants to gain an in-depth, qualitative perspective on how this program has affected the men who’ve taken part in it. The book does read like an academic study in that it includes appendices, tables, figures, and a description of the methodology used, but it is easy to read, does not include a lot of jargon, and contains so much heart in the many quotations from the men interviewed that I think anyone—academic or not—could enjoy this book as a work of nonfiction.  

Ridha’s purpose in performing this study was to use “imaginative criminology” to study the WHoS program in terms of its aesthetic and emotional effects on the men involved, rather than its quantitative results—recidivism or reoffense rates, its cost-effectiveness (its “social return on investment”). As mentioned, the researcher performed in-depth interviews with 21 men about the program and includes quotations from these interviews to make up a large quantity of this book’s content. In this way, Ridha allows the men involved to have a voice in the explanation of the effects of this program. She found that WHoS has a profoundly positive impact on the men who take part in it, in a variety of ways.

Importantly, WHoS is a voluntary program that is not run by the institution. In this way, it differs from other institution-mandated personal-growth courses that the men are required to take part in. As one participant, Andrew, noted, those courses don’t really have their intended effect because the men don’t get the chance to apply the skills learned in a practical context: “there are only so many programs … and then go sit in your room for 15 years. Well, what do you do?” Being able to choose whether or not to take part in WHoS gives inmates a feeling of agency—something they are generally not afforded in the prison context. Taking part in this non-prison run activity allows them a break from “routinized activities, scheduled tasks, and an overall regimented environment.” Ridha explains that this program enables a type of what Erving Goffman calls “secondary adjustment”: a way to “acquire elements of freedom and uphold the restrictive environment.” As participant Armin put it, the experiences through the WHoS program help to “get the prison out of you.”

Participating in an arts-based program also had the effect of freeing the men involved from the “hyper-masculinity” that arises in the prison context. Ridha explains that, in prison, men feel required to both “mask”—suppress any vulnerability, weakness, and fear—and “front”—overtly display their masculinity. While working on these productions, the men found they could feel free to share their feelings and connect their experiences with those of the characters they were playing. This again is partly due to the fact that none of the people involved in WHoS are prison authority figures. To prison authorities, the men are seen as “offenders” and are treated as such. As participant Dylan stated, when interacting with authorities, the men can’t “say what they want because they are afraid it’s going to go on their file.” Participating in WHoS allows them to drop their masks and fronts and to connect with themselves and others. “[M]asculinity can come to be renegotiated and deconstructed within WHoS.”

Another element that Ridha focussed on in this book is the community building that happens through WHoS, both among inmates and between inmates and the people from the “outside” involved—the community volunteers who help out with the program, as well as the audience members at their performances. She explains that there is a certain “prison culture,” “prison politics,” and “con code” that inmates tend to follow and which leads to judgements and intolerances of other inmates based on their offences; for instance, antagonism toward sex offenders. The men who participate in WHoS must overcome these intolerances and work together to make their performance a reality. As Dylan said, “that space was where everyone was just human.” I was really touched to read about the effect that knowing the volunteers from “outside” cared about them and about their work had on the men. Many of the men described never having felt care from another person in their lives and some astonishment that a perfect stranger would care for them. As participant Zane stated, “you start seeing that, hey, I’m not just a nobody.” The interactions with the general public at their performances themselves also had a huge impact on the prisoners’ sense of self-worth and sense that they had a place in the world outside the prison. Part of the proceeds of each performance are given to a charitable organization in the community, and this makes the men involved feel as though they’re giving back and doing something good. The Q&A sessions they hold after each performance also allows them to “challenge public perceptions of prisoners and incarceration more broadly.” Even just the feeling of being applauded, which is something new for most of the men involved, improves their sense of self-esteem and self-worth. As participant Brandon says, “I’ve never in my entire life received that much positive affirmation and feedback for anything I have ever done.”

This was, surprisingly, one of the most heartwarming and uplifting books I’ve read in a long time. Hearing the authentic voices of the men involved in WHoS directly allowed me to feel a great sense of connection with them and their struggles to find humanity in a setting where humanity is often lost. It also served as a reminder of something good and heartfelt that is making a real difference in peoples’ lives at a time where it seems we are more often than not hearing about selfishness, greed, and an utter lack of humanity in the world around us. As an artist who is often questioning or being questioned about the importance of art when there is so much suffering in the world, I’m glad to read about this shining example of how the arts and being creative, in and of itself, can offer an immense change in people and enrich their lives. Now that this book has informed me about WHoS, I look forward to attending their performance this autumn, and for many autumns to come.

*

Susan Sanford Blades lives on the territory of the Lekwungen peoples. Her debut novel, Fake It So Real, won the ReLit Award and was a finalist for the Ethel Wilson Fiction Prize. Her second novel, Girl on Paper, will be published by Nightwood Editions in Spring, 2027. [Editor’s Note: Susan Sanford Blades has reviewed titles by Anna Maskerine, Margot Fedoruk, Pamela Anderson, and Sheila Norgate for The British Columbia Review.]

*

The British Columbia Review

Interim Editors, 2023-26: Trevor Marc Hughes (non-fiction), Brett Josef Grubisic (fiction)
Publisher: Richard Mackie

Formerly The Ormsby Review, The British Columbia Review is an on-line book review and journal service for BC writers and readers. The Advisory Board now consists of Jean Barman, Wade Davis, Robin Fisher, Barry Gough, Hugh Johnston, Kathy Mezei, Patricia Roy, and Graeme Wynn. Provincial Government Patron (since September 2018): Creative BC. Honorary Patron: Yosef Wosk. Scholarly Patron: SFU Graduate Liberal Studies. The British Columbia Review was founded in 2016 by Richard Mackie and Alan Twigg.

“Only connect.” – E.M. Forster