I believe meaningful work is never neutral. Every system, whether it’s a rehearsal room, newsroom, or law office, has hidden power structures that shape how people work and behave. Work feels more meaningful when these structures are built on purpose, with safety, participation, and ethical responsibility in mind. For me, meaningful work means using an absurdist mindset, grounded in consent and risk, to create spaces where people have real agency. Albert Camus argued that absurdism is not simply that life is devoid of meaning, but that because life lacks meaning, one must create it themselves (Wheaton).

When creating, emotions enter one’s work, and safety and consent must be at the forefront. Through performing in various productions, I noticed how backstage interactions, especially interpersonal conflict and leadership, directly influence the depth, control, and sincerity in performance. Unmanaged backstage drama can create intense emotion, but often without the clarity and control needed on stage, resulting in work that feels tense and unstable rather than vulnerable. These experiences led me to question how to manage safety, risk, accountability, and performance within a rehearsal space, and how that affects the audience’s perception.

I approach theatre-making as a form of research to address ethical and emotional questions, while also following Shnecker’s seven purposes of performance: to entertain, to make something beautiful, to mark or change identity, to make or foster community, to heal, to teach persuade or convince, and/or to deal with the sacred and/or demonic (Gawankar). Through writing and producing Fight or Flight, I examined how safety and emotional pressure were essential to the production and story. After completing and publishing the script, the process moved to rehearsals, where I paid close attention to my fellow performers' moments of strain and vulnerability. By observing this, I used techniques to increase or decrease tension. When performers could not achieve the required emotional tension, we reviewed the material together and discussed the scene's seriousness. This allowed the actors to think beyond themselves and into their characters. This experience deepened my interest in how ethical care enables performers to bring new choices into the rehearsal room and fosters trust in the creative team’s choices and processes. I also ensured that the art piece itself was meaningful by meeting all seven purposes of performance.

Combining absurdism with risk and consent creates not only an ethical rehearsal space but also an ethical audience experience. While Camus positioned audiences as ethically aware yet silent witnesses to absurdity (Wheaton), I am interested in extending his philosophy through participatory storytelling. In a media landscape shaped by interactive platforms and constant feedback loops, audiences are no longer conditioned to remain passive. Byung-Chul Han argued that the digital media era has shifted us from a disciplinary society to a psychological one where constant connectivity and pressure to produce content lead to burnout, narcissism, and a loss of deep, contemplative, and ritualistic experience (Dergisi). I would expand this argument and state that this is an opportunity to restore agency within narrative structures. By inviting audiences to vote, engage physically, or influence outcomes within carefully designed limits, I move them from spectators to participants. However, participation without structure can mirror the tyranny Camus warned against (Wheaton); agency must exist within consent-driven boundaries. In this way, interactive storytelling becomes an ethical practice that asks audiences not only to observe meaning but to share responsibility in its creation. As further explored in the accompanying essay, “Albert Camus: A Deep Dive Into Absurdism”, I examine how The Misunderstanding and The Caligula position audiences within ethical silence and how participatory design creates a system in which audiences thrive.

Meaningful work is not about eliminating uncertainty or resolving the absurd. It is about designing structures in rehearsal rooms, institutions, and narratives in which consent enables risk and agency to thrive within limits. Through my work across theatre, media, and advocacy, I choose to act ethically within imperfect systems, creating spaces where others can participate in meaning-making. In accepting the absurd, I do not surrender to it; I design within it.