The sign above the stage

Text: an original contemporary arts-column-style practice extract.

At the end of the first play, the stage went dark and a small panel above it displayed one word: APPLAUD. We did. The actors had been excellent, yet our appreciation seemed to have been issued to us as an instruction.

The man beside me welcomed the sign. He had not attended this kind of performance before and said that he was never sure when an ending had truly arrived. For him, the panel removed an uncertainty that might otherwise have distracted him. I could understand that. However, by the third play, I noticed that I was watching the panel whenever the lights faded instead of deciding what the ending required from me.

The final scene closed with an actor sitting alone beside an unanswered telephone. The silence that followed felt deliberate and deserved to remain unbroken for a moment. Then APPLAUD appeared, and the room responded before I had finished thinking about what I had seen. An organiser later explained that the sign prevented awkward delays and kept the evening running on time.

I still clapped. The performers deserved thanks, and the panel did not alter the quality of their work. Yet, as I left, I wondered whether they could tell the difference between an audience offering its appreciation and one simply following a cue.

In this extract, the writer tries to show that an instruction intended to help an audience can make its appreciation seem less genuine.

Evaluate how successfully this is achieved. Support your views with detailed reference to the extract.