A director directs, a designer designs, an actor acts and a playwright writes; simply, every main activity in the theatre industry seems to derive from the subject (noun) performing it. However, it wasn’t until the late 18th century in Germany when Gothold Ephraim Lessing interfered with this great order by creating a new role (a role he found himself in) in the industry: the dramaturg. The German playwright invented and popularized the term whilst working as a ‘resident critic’ for the Hamburg National Theatre, where his role was to ‘advise his theatre’s management on play selection, and offer his theatre continuous, sometimes adverse criticism of its productions.’ (Schechter: 1997).
For the contemporary reader Lessing’s ‘job description’ may appear rather narrow, since nowadays a dramaturg’s duties may include everything from education to production responsibilities, from research to script reading duties. The functions of this role expanded over the last 200 years under the influence of great practitioners, such as Brecht or Witkiewicz, playwrights like Heiner Müller and theatre critics such as Jan Kott or Kenneth Tynan. Although a particular verb capturing the role of the dramaturg hasn’t been invented as yet (it is often described as: to serve as a dramaturg (Schechter 1997:16) or to be a dramaturg (Cattaneo 1997: 3) or to work as a dramaturg (Branigan 1999: 27)), the spectrum of duties grows endlessly.
According to Schechter, ‘dramaturgs have also been known to direct plays, translate foreign drama, commission works, prepare essays for inclusion in theatre programs, assist stage directors and actors in background research, and usher’ (Schechter 1997: 17) Martin Esslin broadens the academic and creative duties by reminding of the more practical, almost administrative role of a dramaturg: ‘… the production and rehearsal schedule has to be carefully dovetailed (…)’ and more ‘…the dramaturg has to be constantly on the lookout for developments in world drama. But, as he chooses plays for a given group of actors, he is also something like the casting director of the theatre and part of his function consists in travelling to other theatres looking for young actors who might be recruited into the ensemble.’ (Esslin 1995: 44, 45). One could also add the preparation of educational workshops and lectures.
These are the main duties a dramaturg might have to face in his workplace (of course, one could easily list more of them…). In this field the catalogue of endless responsibilities means that it is impossible to find one verb capturing the essence of the dramaturg’s role (except for: ‘hard work’); on the other hand the diversity of tasks means numerous possibilities to suit ones individual curriculum.
In the academic year 2006/2007 at the School of Drama, Film and Visual Art, Dramaturgy was launched as a new M-level specialism. This unique - in the scale of the country – opportunity meant that three students had the chance to experience and challenge different aspects and fields of dramaturgy in order to decide which path to take in their future career. This essay aims to describe and evaluate the various activities the dramaturgs took part in and delineates the direction I myself will take after graduating.
Minerva Project: Artistic Director.
For the first project the dramaturgs had to work in groups with CPPMT students on a specific assignment and take on the role of artistic directors. My group’s task was to take over a venue (we chose the Minerva Theatre in Chichester) and design its new artistic profile, develop marketing strategies to address the right target group and locate adequate sponsors, who would be interested in supporting the project. At first we identified the Minerva’s target audience, wrote a mission statement and tried to develop a programme template, which could be used to plan each week of the season. It was then that as the artistic director I had to programme a whole year of theatre, live music and comedy.
I started to research theatre companies recommended by diverse institutions (such as the British Council) and studied seasonal programmes of a variety of venues with artistic aims similar to those of the Minerva. However, I found it very hard to choose performers and shows without being able to actually watch any of their work, especially after discovering how vague, meaningless and commercial many of the performance descriptions were (which, of course, opens another field for a dramaturg…). I also had to decide on a structure and theme of the actual season, which would attract the targeted audience; finally, I approached the chosen artists to check their availability and fees. With a yearly plan in place I had to report to the Minerva’s finance manager to see if any changes had to be made in order to comply with financial parameters. As soon as the proposal was accepted, it became my role to write the content for a programme brochure and web-page, using the material received from the companies.
Admittedly, I had great difficulties creating a coherent programme, which would comply with the venue’s artistic mission, its target audience, seasonal theme and financial structures. I strongly feel that in order to create a well-defined and recognized theatrical profile, one should have an in-depth knowledge of the industry (especially regarding the work of various companies) and be able to argument ones choice beyond the usual 3Es – edginess, education and entertainment values. I found it much more satisfying to describe selected performances for the brochure in detail, rather than trying to find a generic theme for all of the productions.
The role of a successful artistic director involves knowledge, contacts and organisational skills as well as a great intuition as to what will attract audiences without compromising the theatre’s artistic duties.
Paines Plough: Script Reader and Director’s Assistant in ‘Wild Lunch’ rehearsal.
Paines Plough is a theatre company, which promotes and produces new writing in the UK. Each year Pippa Elis and Roxana Silbert search for new talents by reading around three hundred scripts. The company commissions eight of the three hundred authors to write a new piece for them. During the writing process the literature manager and company director collaborate on a one to one basis with the authors and give them as much feedback as possible. Eventually Paines Plough produces 2 to 3 of the scripts. However, all commissioned scripts have a public reading during ‘Wild Lunch’, two weeks of new playwriting at lunchtime in one of London’s venues. Paines Plough, who has been running ‘Wild Lunch’ for 10 seasons, has wildly contributed to the development of playwriting in this country. The collaboration between the dramaturgs and Paines Plough consisted of two stages: first the three dramaturgs had an intensive workshop with Pippa Elis and Roxana Silbert discussing three scripts, which all had been commissioned in the past seasons. Later each of the dramaturgs went for two days to London to observe the rehearsal process of a recently written stage reading.
Prior to the workshop the dramaturgs received two versions of three scripts written by three different authors. The task was to read each of the scripts and decide which of the two versions was better and why. Whilst I was reading the scripts I made decisions not only on which of the two versions of each text I preferred, but I also decided which of the play I liked most. During the workshop, whilst discussing a play and its versions, Roxana would ask us seemingly general questions as to what the play was about, what the theme was and how the author approached it from a technical point of view – through language, metaphorical scenes or the text’s construction. Only later I realized that Roxana asked us what we thought of the play and not how/if we actually liked it. During this session I soon recognized that my opinions are very personal and strictly connected to my own taste. My answers to all the questions were very straight – always reflecting my individual judgement on the play. However, my judgement was mainly based on the theme and content rather than construction of the text. I read the script as any drama or literature student would do and therefore failed to analyse the play from a dramaturg’s perspective. Whilst reading a script, a dramaturg should posses the ability to visualize the text, as he is a reader as well as the first viewer of the piece on stage. By visualization I mean not only a great imagination capacity, but most importantly the skill to analyze the main character in connection to other characters, looking at relations from the point of view of roles rather than psychological characteristics. Roxana must have realized my problem, as she said, that script-reading is not about one’s personal taste, but the skill to discover a writer’s potential and his ability to ascertain good dialogue. Hence, my comments would have failed to help the writer to develop his piece as they are far away from constructive criticism. I became conscious of my strong opinions, which are definitely important when one writes theatre reviews, but rather unhelpful in a close collaboration between dramaturg and writer.
It is the dramaturg’s (essentially this is the role Pippa and Roxana are taking on) duty to support the writer’s choice of theme and guide him with questions to a coherent and highly premeditated piece. The dramaturg has to be careful not to influence the author’s choice, to respect his decisions: ‘dramaturgs (as the playwright’s advocate) must be especially cautious that they are serving and not hurting the play. (…) A dramaturg’s job is not to ‘fix’ the play, or offer specific solutions to problems in the text. This is the job of the playwright.’ (Cattaneo 1997: 13). Essentially, the script reader acts as the ‘outside eye’, who comments and directs what the playwright has already started; he helps the writer to recognize the strengths and weaknesses of the text and has to indicate, which parts may be improved by further development and which parts may benefit from changes or complete deleting. However, when suggesting changes, the dramaturg has to be careful not to become too reminiscent as this may result in the dramaturg writing his own play with somebody else’s skills. The thin line between guidance and suggestive comments should not be crossed; however, remaining objective seems the biggest challenge.
A very effective way to guide new writers used by the Paines Plough team is constant questioning, which is how Roxana and Pippa started our workshop as well. Questioning helped us to arrive at constructive criticism and also discover and appreciate some of the not most obvious strengths of a script.
Roxana and Pippa also emphasized the importance of communication and the common goal both – the playwright and the dramaturg - pursue. It is in the author’s best interest to write a well constructed and coherent script as well as it is in the dramaturg’s interests to receive a well-made play, which he will be able to produce or find producers for. As Roxana stated: ‘Since you invest money in the writer before he has written even one word for you (it is common practice that the writer receives 1/3 of his fee the moment the contract is signed by both parties), you should try everything you possibly can to help the writer develop the piece to a good standard’.
A dramaturg has to be almost a demiurge, who not only picks the perfect writers and supports them during their work on the perfect play, but moreover, predicts the theatrical spirit, themes and topics of the forthcoming season in order to target the scripts appropriately. - Shortly after the workshop each of the dramaturgs went to London to take part in the ‘Wild Lunch’ project created by Paines Plough and Graeae Theatre Company.
National Theatre, The Caucasian Chalk Circle: a Director’s Assistant and Educational Liaison, the preparation of a workshop for a school.
On the 9th of January 2007 the National Theatre went on tour with their latest NT education mobile production of Brecht’s Caucasian Chalk Circle. The tour started at the Gulbenkian Theatre in Canterbury. In exchange for this privilege the venue agreed to a rehearsal time of seven days prior to the premiere in the main auditorium. The National Theatre, who worked in collaboration with Filter Theatre Company on this production, stayed in Canterbury for four performances and also agreed to lead a workshop for schools at the venue as well as at a local school in Ashford. These ten days of the National’s presence at a local theatre meant a great opportunity for the dramaturgs.
We started to study Bertolt Brecht’s piece in December 2006. Firstly, we tried to understand the author’s initial aims and intentions by questioning the structure of the piece. We analyzed closely those parts of the script, which seemed incoherent with the rest. The second part of our discussion focused on possible contemporary approaches to the piece; we also tried to establish (based on all the information we had) what the forthcoming production – a collaboration between the seemingly most important theatre in the country and the up-and-coming theatre collective Filter – would possibly bring.
As we exchanged views, I suddenly realized in how many directions any one production could go. Through discussions and a barter of ideas, the dramaturg has a potentially great impact on the creation of a piece. Him and the director (as well as the writer) are supposed to be on the same intellectual level, which means that their debates are more of consultations as to which interpretation to choose and how to maintain the interpretation through the process of creation. The dramaturg’s position is very comprehensive, since his job starts well before the director even meets the cast. A dramaturg has to research and assist the director with ideas and artistic concepts from the very beginning a script is chosen. However, a dramaturg has to find the right balance in order to avoid interference with the director’s role, but still being able to supervise the level and coherency of the performance during the rehearsal process. As Cary Mazer describes it: ‘It is up to the dramaturg to overcome the natural antipathy between scholars and directors. And it is up to the dramaturg to provide material from scholarship that neither dictates to the director the story that must be told in performance, nor merely restates the story that the director has already decided to tell.’ (Mazer 1997: 303) Following this quote, one could almost say that the dramaturg is a guardian of the academic and theoretic level of the production.
All the above was confirmed, when we saw the production and discovered that the performance had taken on yet another artistic concept not even touched upon within our group. Apart from the performance, the National Theatre was supposed to run workshops for schools. One of these was lead by Elizabeth Freestone, the director’s assistant, with a group of young students had seen the show the night before the workshop and had also read the play as well as prepared their own performance a few months before. Elizabeth focused mainly on practical exercises which allowed the young students to direct a few scenes from the play; whilst she read Brecht’s stage directions from the opening scene, the students had to decide how to understand and direct these. Through these simple exercises Elizabeth touched upon basic, but important practical issues such as the use of space and timing. Afterwards she moved on to some theatrical games, which aim to help actors to realize and express all the emotions each of the characters encounters. Elizabeth definitely managed to engage all of them in the exercises and sustained their interest through the whole 3 hour workshop. Sessions like these are of great value as they awake the curiosity in young people and reveal the mechanisms of illusion. They also awake passion for the real experience and allow them to become part of a creative team.
Admittedly, I enormously enjoyed watching the workshop and strongly feel that as a dramaturg in Poland I would try to introduce sessions like these at school. However, I would like to combine practical exercises with theory. I had the impression that the workshop left out the creative process of the making of a play. Elizabeth showed the students how to put a scene together on stage, but she did not answer the important question of why. Why do we actually want to perform/watch Brecht. What interests us, a 21st century audience in this fifty year old text? Why do we choose one artistic concept over another? Elizabeth focused on the mechanisms of making a play as opposed to the creation of this particular performance. These workshops have a great influence on young people and should, in my opinion, be used to reveal the endless variety of possible creative approaches as opposed to a general instruction of how to direct. I am fully aware that my view is influenced by my own profession; nevertheless the shift from utility to creativity could in a long term enrich the performing arts.
Performance: ‘Sample – Between you and me –‘ presented by Accidental Collective. A dramaturg in devised theatre. Workshop and discussion with the theatre company.
Accidental Collective is a theatre company created in 2006 by four UKC Drama graduates. The group has already created and staged 3 devised theatre pieces and is currently working on their latest work-in-progress-project ‘Sample – Between you and me-‘. Accidental Collective started to work on the piece in September 2006 and organized an open rehearsal in November 2006. The company decided to invite outsiders and expose the intimate creation process in order to gain helpful suggestions and constructive criticism. I witnessed another rehearsal in January 2007, a week prior to the group’s official public performance on 1st February 2007. Later on the dramaturgs met the performers and discussed the show as well as a dramaturg’s role in the creation of a devised piece.
Whilst watching the performance for the first time I wrote down questions whenever something appeared as incoherent or unclear. It occurred to me, that some scenes were very comprehensible in their meaning, whereas others seemed to randomly appear as fillers, almost intervals in between the developed parts of the production. The performers admitted in a later discussion that some of the parts were indeed created to bridge the well-rehearsed scenes. The choice of costumes also surprised until the company revealed that they hadn’t actually considered costumes and were wearing their everyday clothing. A dramaturg could have definitely stimulated the development of the Collective’s performance and be of assistance in the creation of a coherent and logic structure for the piece. The production is a piece of devised theatre, which means that there is no text to brace upon or – in most of the cases – no history and facts to research, as well as no director with a clear vision to be assisted. These companies generate material for their shows through training, games, improvisation and stumbling upon themes in the process. It is often emphasized that any text – if any exists - is written and composed by the performers themselves.
Given these conditions, a dramaturg would mainly assist the rehearsals, most probably research workshop ideas rather than provide academic knowledge. On the contrary, he could study companies, which explore similar topics and familiarize and inspire the performers he works with. Whilst observing the process, a dramaturg would have to constantly ask questions and try to help the performers to generate material.
The collaboration between a devising theatre company and a dramaturg can, however, be very intensive and almost destructive as the dramaturg has to question matters, which are part of the performers’ own past, experience or interest and are therefore directly linked to the performers’ personalities. In addition, there are no studies or facts, which the dramaturg could use to support his views.
Conclusion:
Dramaturgy is a wide field, which merges the artistic with the academic, the creative and the administrative, practice and theory. For the dramaturg this broad spectrum implies a variety of duties: he might be asked to prepare and carry out educational strategies, design a programme or event, take control over the whole publicity of a company, or play an active part in the actual creation process of a piece.
A dramaturg combines duties, which usually belong to Educational Officers, PR Managers, Director’s Assistants or Literary Managers. From this point of view a dramaturg is an extremely versatile person, who has the skills and knowledge to fill any weak points a company or venue might have. It also implies an effective way to save money: especially small scale companies could employ one person, who would deal with all the creative issues.
The dramaturg’s responsibilities vary most probably each time he takes on a new position. It is one of those jobs where one has to be extremely flexible and adaptable. However, since the wide spectrum of potential duties makes it impossible to create a general definition of a dramaturg’s role, any candidate taking on that position should assure that his responsibilities are clearly stated in the employment contract. This would prevent the dramaturg to invade other employees’ competences.
It seems that in the UK the position of a dramaturg is not as popular and respected as in the rest of Europe. In this country this role is hugely underestimated, which is a result of the lack of knowledge of company or venue directors. Each of the dramaturgs would ask the companies we happened to work with at some point if they would consider to employ a dramaturg. Not one of them replied positively, always stating that they can’t afford it. But how can these companies afford not to employ a dramaturg – ‘men and women who know several languages, possess a vast knowledge of the classical repertoire, can write and translate, and have a strongly developed critical sense which will enable them to discover writing talent’ (Esslin 1995: 46)? Even if Esslin’s vision is somewhat idyllic, nevertheless a dramaturg is somebody who is willing to take on – what is often seen as the most boring and nuisant - tasks. Employing a good dramaturg would save the company time and, as a consequence, money.
In the UK a dramaturg could undeniably help companies and venues to improve the quality of their work. It is understandable that due to funding procedures, rehearsal time is often limited to a short period of 3-9 weeks, depending on the project. It is humanly impossible to research, create and prepare a full length production of a decent standard within three weeks. A dramaturg could save the director a significant amount of time by researching the play chosen and briefing the director as well as the actors on the most important points. The dramaturg could then help the director to clarify the artistic vision of the production and explore those angles, which the director would like to take on the performance. The close collaboration would contribute to a coherent artistic take on the production. A dramaturg’s presence would avoid situations, in which decisions are taken because of lack of time. Later, the dramaturg could actually create the programme and publicity as he would already know the subject inside out. Once a dramaturg would be employed, the directors would soon discover additional qualities, which could most likely take the company to the next level in an administrative as well as artistic sense.
This academic year consisted of great opportunities to explore the different aspects of a dramaturg’s career and allowed me to make decisions as to the direction I would like to take after graduating. I strongly feel that the academic aspect of the profession suits my personality much more than an active involvement in education or marketing. Script-reading for a theatre or company, research for directors and translations form the core of my interest. In my opinion it is a dramaturg’s mission to constantly develop ones intellect and become a guardian of theatre as part of the enlightment industry rather than the commercial/entertainment industry.
References:
Katie Branigan, ‘Making Maps’, from J Daniel, ed., Dramaturgy: A User’s Guide, Central School of Speech and Drama, 1999, p 27.
Anne Cattaneo, ‘Dramaturgy: An Overview’, from S Jonas, G Proehl, M Lupu eds, Dramaturgy in American Theatre: A Source Book, Harcourt Brace 1997, p 3.
Martin Esslin, ‘The Role of the Dramaturg in European Theatre’, from B Cardullo, ed., What is Dramaturgy?, Peter Lang 1955, p.44-46.
Cary M Mazer, ‘Rebottling: Dramaturgs, Scholars, Old Plays, and Modern Directors’, from S Jonas, G Proehl, M Lupu eds, Dramaturgy in American Theatre: A Source Book, Harcourt Brace 1997, p 303.
Joel Schechter, ‘In the Beginning There Was Lessing… Then Brecht, Muller and Other Dramaturgs’, from S Jonas, G Proehl, M Lupu, eds, Dramaturgy in American Theatre: A Source Book, Harcourt Brace 1997, p 16.