p.36
The director and dramaturg are meeting to talk about the characters in the play and their relationship to the historical people on whom they are based. This has been a point of concern for the production team as they want to be sure to be true to the source material while at the same time giving actors and designers creative license with character and aesthetic. The director is concerned that too much connection to the “real life” people will cause the actors to create imitations or caricatures in an attempt to recreate them. The dramaturg has a whole series of images, writings, and video of the real people as well as thorough character analyses from the text. The two talk through various options of how to balance the historicism with the artistic needs of the actors, and ultimately come up with a plan. In rehearsal the dramaturg’s responsibility is to watch for inaccuracies. Rather than give the actors the context on the real people, he offers a general idea of who they were in conjunction with the character work the actors are doing themselves. Then through the course of the rehearsal he informs the director and the actors when there is something that seems inaccurate or off for the character he is based on. In one case, the person was an avid runner, a detail that had not made it into the script, so when the actor talked about smoking as a bit of business to show the character’s anxiety, the dramaturg stepped in. The director and dramaturg agreed that the most useful way to address the relationship between character and person was to watch for inaccuracies since the accuracies would take care of themselves – they were innate in the text and the actors’ choices.
p.37
The above scenario is notable because it illustrates a particular benefit of the dramaturg’s mindset to a production. One of the primary elements of the mindset is to maintain a clear sense of the general picture, the whole production, the story being told, while being able to navigate details. The dramaturg maintains focus on the larger needs of the production while examining the particulars of which it consists.
The idiom “you cannot see the forest for the trees” is particularly appropriate to understand this aspect of dramaturgy. It is a saying that is frequently used to describe a person who is unable to see the “big picture,” someone for whom practical steps are clear, while strategy and long-term planning are elusive. For the mindset to dramaturg, the saying has more to offer than merely not seeing the scope of an idea. It speaks to the notion that a person can get so fixated on the details that he loses the ability to see the entire structure those details compose. If the attention becomes too particularly focused on the specific – the trees – there is a risk that the whole production will become unrecognizable to the audience. The distinction here is important: it is not that the whole disappears, rather that it becomes indistinguishable. There is no clarity of “forest” when we get too caught up in the “trees.”
While missing the forest for the trees has a negative connotation, however, in the formation of the dramaturg’s mindset, it also offers an exciting image for the work. When reversed, it is not so much a snare as an opportunity to develop a point of view that is decidedly double-visioned – forest and trees, as it were. The presence of the dramaturg allows for a specific member of the artistic team to be focused on the big picture, as well as the detail, and to help maintain clarity of both imperatives throughout the production cycle. The big picture, the forest, is the goal for the production and the story that is ultimately told to the audience. When the dramaturg maintains that image in the forefront of her mind, the mindset stays attuned to the general goal of performance alongside the very specific detail of the production elements, acting and directing choices.
Play production is particularly receptive to that point of view since it is vulnerable to the pitfall of getting lost in the detail, as is any complex system. Production is the composite of the collaboration of different artists working in varying disciples, and each discipline itself having a tremendous amount of particulars with which to contend. It is possible to get caught up in the intricacies of the costume design in a way that obscures the certainty that the costume detail is all in support of the clothes characters wear in a particular production of a certain play. These are details that are created in order to join the composition of the visual landscape of the theatrical event. A dramaturg can be a vital part of this process as she maintains sight of the “forest” of the production in order to keep the “trees” of the elements of production from becoming a discrete focus.
p.38
The relationship between tree and forest, between part and whole, is an integral relationship for the dramaturg. He needs to be able to respond to the piece without getting lost in it, to discuss the particular without removing it from its context. Once again it is the interrelated nature that is important in the mindset to dramaturg, it is the ability to recognize the composite of trees – to continue with the idiom – as a combination that exists for the revelation of the forest. We examine the specific moments of stage composition and look at the particular artistic choices made throughout the production, and we see them as parts of the mosaic of the theatrical event to be revealed to an audience. It is inextricably connected and it is through that connection we can evaluate the parts; the blocking of the scene is recognizable because it is part of the development of character relationship, the revelation of mood, the topography of the production.
The mindset is developed through the balance of big picture and specific detail. It is not enough that the dramaturg maintains a view of the whole picture; she must also be able to connect to the detail. If she does not understand the workings of the stage composition, she will not be able to recognize when that is the piece that is out of sync. The dramaturg works by seeing the pieces and the whole, by seeing the pieces as the vital composite parts of the whole. In addition, she is able to reflect on the process and reassure collaborators that the production is appropriately affirming both forest and trees.
While forests and trees create a useful image, a more specific way of framing this is that the dramaturg looks at the production holistically. What does it mean to look at something holistically? She sees the parts as intrinsic to the whole, and sees the production as a whole system.
The last chapter touched on the dramaturgical reading of a text as one that considers it as a complete work, read without the filter of any single element of production. This sense of looking at the whole is one part of seeing holistically – being able to see how the composition of elements fit together into the whole script and ultimately the whole production. That is only one facet and the ability to see holistically is a broader perspective that affects every aspect of dramaturgical work. It is the ability to recognize that each element of the production from early drafts of a text through the final dress rehearsal is a piece of the larger work, and to hold the image of the whole in place throughout the process. It is this way of seeing, a manner of engaging with the material that characterizes the work and prevents us from losing sight of the whole.
p.39
Seeing the whole is one aspect of seeing. However, the holistic approach also means recognizing that the whole is not just the combination of the parts. A holistic look is the understanding that the parts are interconnected and only recognizable in relation to the whole. When we look at a script, a rehearsal, an event, we seek to understand it as a whole system that exists because of the interrelated pieces in a particular arrangement – and those pieces exist for that composition.
It is not merely the revelation that the parts make up the whole, or even that the whole is more than the sum of its parts. The additional conceptual step for a holistic viewpoint relates to the pieces themselves, and offers a corollary to the idiom of forests and trees. In order to practice a holistic way of seeing and get into the mindset to dramaturg, we must also be diligent and avoid “not seeing the trees for the forest.” The notion is not as effective turned around, yet it does hint at the pitfall of being too “big picture.” If we become so fixated on the whole that we become unable to see how the parts are constructed, we become less effective to dramaturg. The pieces are explicable in relation to the whole in the same way that the composition of the pieces reveals the whole. Thus the “trees” are as likely to be missed as the “forest” and the goal of dramaturgy is to see holistically and keep both in clear view.
For example, the sound design does not stand alone, it is explicable as a part of the complete production and so the dramaturg is able to consider it discretely in terms of response to the sound itself, but is also grounded in the understanding that it is existentially connected to the larger story. The music that is chosen has characteristics that will offer a commentary on the action, and a holistic point of view will see the effectiveness of the music itself alongside its contribution to the overall mood of the scene and the larger style of the production.
p.40
The mindset to dramaturg is a way of engaging with material. It is an expansive outlook that enables us to question, respond, and be creative collaborators. One of the places this mindset is formed is in the approach to material. The way that a dramaturg approaches a subject is a significant part of what determines how he responds to it, and an open and flexible response is the result of a clear and nimble approach. Clear and nimble, specific and flexible, effective and creative; while these are not specifically contradictory ideas, they do require a kind of deftness to hold the balance. That balance is what we are talking about with dramaturg as a mindset. Seeing as a dramaturg prepares one to hold that balance and to be an effective member of a creative team. Thus, the way to maintain and expand the flexible thinking of dramaturgy is to train oneself to see holistically.
Script reading as a dramaturg is well suited to a holistic outlook. While the dramaturg refines his skills at script analysis and seeks to be conversant in genre, style, and structure he also looks at each individual element of the playwright’s work as something woven into the play and inextricably linked to its entirety. Consequently, talking about the text, even when focusing on a seemingly discrete element of the piece, he stays vigilant to the truth of the whole. As discussed in the previous chapter, whether it is thought, the spine, or the theme, the overall meaning of the play, the idea of the play that will be exhibited in the production, is something that the dramaturg clarifies early on. Throughout the production cycle, then, he is vigilant in helping to maintain that production idea. Character, action, language, time, place, metaphor, rhythm, theme; none of these things has a meaningful independent existence, so one consciously examines the element as part of the composition and its determined meaning.
For example, the strength of characterization shown through action and language is an important building block of a playwright’s creation, and the way to look at those clues of characterization is completely case-dependent. The manner in which Troy Maxson is constructed in August Wilson’s Fences is reliant on the specificity of the world Wilson creates, and is assessed and critiqued based on that world’s internal mechanisms. It is not a simple equation of “action and language reveals character” in and of itself. When Troy tells his son that he cannot play football for a college recruiter, there is a whole psychological element to the character that offers insight to that moment. However, there is also mid-century America and the character backstory provided by Wilson that makes that moment mean something different with that character than it would in another circumstance. The construction of character does not happen without context, and the dramaturgical read of the assemblage of the character of Troy is by necessity affixed to its existence within Fences specifically and that is how we engage with it.
p.41
Similarly, rhythm in and of itself has little significance, but the rhythm of the language of Maria Irene Fornes is integral to experiencing her work. She explores different styles in her plays, and Fornes often writes about people trying to educate themselves and change their circumstances, such as in the stark and bleak work Mud. The rhythm of her language, word and silence, is revelatory and a key to understanding her worlds. Once again, it is experienced as part of the larger work, and understood through that connection; rhythm is a tool of analysis not of itself, but of the whole play.
The relationship to the elements of a thing as inextricably linked to the thing itself carries over throughout the dramaturgical activity. When working with a playwright, a production team, responding in rehearsal or preparing materials for the audience, the dramaturgical mindset relies on the ability to hold in mind the larger picture, the whole as well as the part(s). Once again this whole is the overall thought of the text and the overall goal of the production. The dramaturg tries to keep the idea of the whole piece in mind while she asks and answers questions, and it further shapes the way she addresses any given aspect of production, each conversation with each collaborator. Every piece of the production is treated as part of the whole, and is not dealt with in a way that removes it from that essential function. The conversations about the specific imagery in the language spoken are steeped in the context of how it fits into the play as a whole. While all of the production team seeks to keep the individual parts connected to the whole production, it is a primary function of dramaturgy to be sure the production as a whole stays linked to the individual parts.
The dramaturgical read of a text or a situation is one that is both holistic and open; we as dramaturgs strive to meet the work on its own terms without the bias of personal expectation. An additional part of this openness is that we do not limit our focus to any individual element of production and so are able to see how all of the pieces interconnect. We see from the start that a piece can be framed in order to discuss it with specificity, but that piece does not have an identity autonomous from the whole from which it is lifted. This connection is important to maintain and the understanding is vital to developing the mindset to dramaturg. The response we offer comes from our understanding of context, and that starts with the whole play/production/event as the context to any single aspect of it.
p.42
The ability to ask questions and offer context for individual aspects of text and particular elements of production is one of the roles of the dramaturg, and this also requires the capacity to look at the distinct element and understand its particular composition. It is important that we keep the image of the whole in mind – that we remember that each element is part of a whole production – however, we also need the clarity to consider the individual components themselves.
The key is to maintain the balance between the pieces and the whole, between the trees and the forest. The individual elements do not have an autonomous meaning – a costume piece out of the context of the production for which it is designed is not of consequence from a dramaturgical or theatrical perspective. It takes on a particular dramaturgical relevance when it becomes part of the visual landscape of a specific production. It is the interrelationship of production element to production that is significant and is the place we focus on when seeking the mindset to dramaturg. We need to be able to see the individual element clearly, and what we see is its particular composition as it relates to the whole production. The one does not exist without the other, forest and trees exist both simultaneously and inextricably.
It is useful to take a moment to distinguish how the holistic perspective of the dramaturg differs from the director’s point of view. As stated earlier, the nature and practice of that relationship depends on the people involved, and the overlap in roles will vary greatly depending on the nature of the process. However, there is a particular distinction that can be made between the two roles when it comes to holistic seeing. While the director is also looking at all the component parts in order to create the cohesive whole – whatever that may be artistically and stylistically – her point of view is one to figure out how those pieces fit together. The dramaturg looks with the somewhat objective perspective of an external audience member, with the insider knowledge of a creative collaborator. She does not need to figure out how they work together; she responds to their assembly as, “Do they work together?” She represents the audience throughout the creative process, and provides that lens to collaborators. Again, the dramaturg sees without the limiting filter of a single production element, so she has the luxury to look at the effectiveness of each element and how the elements construct the whole composition.
p.43
How do dramaturgs keep the balance? How do they manage not to lose sight of forest or trees? The first step is to acknowledge that the link between part and whole is binding, and consequently any discussion of the one necessarily takes into account the other. It requires embracing the holistic viewpoint and allowing that to guide the dramaturgical work throughout the process. When the dramaturg is seeing holistically and engaging with the material in that manner, she can shape how questions are asked and information is shared in a way that is useful to the project.
Once again the idea of useful and effective comes up, and it is worth reiterating that the process of dramaturgy is about usage and efficacy. Both of these terms have particular resonance in the mindset as they have different objects. The idea of useful indicates the tool itself is able to be put to good effect. Effective, on the other hand, deals with the effect of the usage – the tool was successful in its intended purpose. A dramaturgical mindset allows for practices that are useful to the process and effective in their output. The motivating force that drives process and output is its usefulness in the project, and the outcome is shaped by attention to the effectiveness of its reception. These are encapsulated in the holistic viewpoint, a perspective that creates an effective mindset from which to work. It demands an openness that inspires flexible thinking, as well as a clarity that allows for authentic response.
Flexible thinking is essential in creative collaboration. A dramaturg needs to be open to other ideas and input as well as to constantly find new ways to understand and share context. The holistic approach naturally inspires flexible thinking since each process is unique to that production. If there is not a predictable and fixed process then there is not a standard method the dramaturg uses. The dramaturg needs to be skilled enough to understand the components and how they function and the interpersonal relationship with the artists. She needs to be nimble enough to see how those parts and artists function in different ways for different ends. The openness to the difference and the subsequent flexibility allow for new solutions, creative communication, and more effective collaboration. It is another illustration of how coming into the project with as few presumptions as possible enables a kind of clarity of vision that is crucial to the mindset to dramaturg.
p.44
Seeing holistically also establishes a strong foundation for authentic response from the dramaturg. The idea of an authentic response is to be able to engage with what is seen; taking the work on its own terms rather than shaped by expectations or bias. The questions and comments are for the work as presented, not as anticipated, and that clarity of response offers the most to the collaboration. When the dramaturg is genuinely seeing something based on its own construction, recognizing the identity it presents as well as the reality of its composite elements, it gives him the most opportunity for authentic response. To reflect and respond to what is there.
What does a holistic way of seeing look like in practice? How is it connected to the dramaturgical work in a way that makes it an essential part of the mindset?
In Script Reading
When reading a text, the questions of style and form, given circumstances, characterization, rhythm and metaphor are all part of the initial – and ongoing – familiarization with the script. The dramaturg reads with an eye to structure and composition, word choice and tempo. He looks at how the pieces of the text comprise a performable play. As discussed earlier, a dramaturgical read is distinctive because it is not reading for a purpose such as set design or character creation. It is a read that attempts to take the script as a whole work, a blueprint for performance.
What makes a read holistic in approach is that the image of the text as a complete script is kept in mind while looking at the elements of analysis. In addition, the elements themselves are seen as inextricable from the whole, so are defined by their presence in this text. The word choice is not removed from the context of what it conveys but is discussed as that context. Characterization has no theoretical existence; it is defined by the character it reveals in this particular play. Every element is revealed by and through its contribution to the whole script. The holistic viewpoint reminds us to stay focused on the connections and not lose sight of the end goal of a text for performance. It also gives us a vocabulary to use in script analysis. Our authentic response to the text is formed with the dialogue that connects the words on the page to the essentials of a play.
p.45
A key to reading holistically is allowing the play to reveal the rules of the play. The training and practice in critical analysis is a vital tool, and one gets more facile at recognizing cues and trends. However, the mindset seeks an open view on each work and uses the critical analysis as a structure and vocabulary to apply after the voice of the text is revealed rather than as a way to assess it. In other words, these are diagnostic tools and they provide a way to talk about the play once a person is oriented to it, rather than being a prescription for that orienting. If the play is read based on the expectation of a structure or style, a reader may try to impose that expectation or be critical of ways in which it seemed to fall short. When a play is read as itself, and the structure and style come from the cues the playwright includes, then the dramaturg is getting acquainted with the whole, with the forest of the play.
The dramaturg is reading a new play, and the first time through he is reading with an eye for story and character. He is introduced to the players of the text and goes with them through the events that make up the story. He underlines each word or line that he finds surprising so he has a record of that “first time hearing it” experience which will likely be useful in later rehearsals. He notices character word-choice and action, the descriptions in the stage directions as well as those that the other characters offer. He considers how the story is revealed throughout the text, how time and place are treated, and how the pieces form the whole.
TIP: The first time you read a play, make a note of the moments of surprise, delight, confusion, so you can refer back to the first response.
Each of these elements can be a pivotal point in the production, and the open mindset allows the dramaturg to both see and share it. For example, a reading of Paula Vogel’s How I Learned to Drive reveals how important the treatment of time can be to revealing character. The play is structured in a series of episodes, framed by driving lessons, and a non-linear chronology. This structure is vital as the response to the pivotal character of Uncle Peck is dependent on the initial ambiguity of the relationship. That ambiguity would not be possible with a chronological telling. The detail of time is foundational to the whole of this play, a circumstance that is dependent on its relationship between structure and story revealed by the rules of the play.
This aspect of the mindset is looking particularly at production dramaturgy with a given script, though the idea of an open and flexible entry point into any kind of source material is fundamental to the holistic point of view and a primary characteristic of the mindset to dramaturg.
p.46
With a Playwright
The working dynamic of playwright and dramaturg is completely reliant on the relationship forged between the artists. How the relationship operates is dependent on a number of factors, some personal and stylistic, and others that reflect the process of development. When a dramaturg is working with a playwright on a new work that is in development, the kinds of questions and input he offers is different than when working on a second production. New play development often translates into revisions of the text as part of the process and the dramaturgical work can include helping the playwright to find the shape of the piece. In this context, the ability to clearly discuss the details of the text while understanding where it fits in the whole script is what makes the collaboration effective for the playwright. When we understand what the playwright is trying to accomplish and we can clearly see and respond to what is presented, we are better equipped to ask the questions that will prove useful.
Example:
The dramaturg and playwright talk about the use of musical terminology and accuracy in the piece during a play development process leading up to a public reading. The musical elements are approximate, they offer the mood and tone the playwright seeks, but are not totally authentic for the period. The two have had this conversation twice already and the playwright is pushing back against the dramaturg’s growing insistence that the accuracy of the musical references is imperative. The script development is effectively halted as it gets stuck on the point. The playwright grows frustrated and the dramaturg impatient and both become fixated on this device and that dominates the day’s work. Time is lost and the collaboration is strained, somewhat, because the mechanism took precedence over the play.
p.47
The situation above indicates a scenario where both playwright and dramaturg get caught up in the detail of a production element in a way that stalls the process of the script development. The dramaturg’s responsibility to the whole was not met in this scenario and he needs to refocus on the goal of the process. The musical accuracy is undoubtedly important to the play; however, the fixation on that detail will not serve the goal of the process, which is a public reading of the play. In addition, the conflict can ultimately hurt the process as it can strain the relationship between playwright and dramaturg. That is not to imply that new play dramaturgy should be without conflict or disagreement – the dramaturg’s role is not useful if it is only a source of agreement – but the holistic point of view can recognize the relative importance of the musical accuracy in relation to the reading of the play.
The “forest” when working with a playwright extends beyond the given text, and this is another aspect of a holistic approach that proves valuable. When a dramaturg works with a playwright she is collaborating with a person and a body of work, not just a single text. The work that happens on a script or in a production feeds back into the subsequent work for the artists involved and that is why script development can also be thought of as playwright development. This is also why it is particularly important to form the relationship and collaboration into something useful and productive that may contribute something valuable to an artistic career. Though this is not done at the neglect of the specific text, it is another illustration of forest and trees.
TIP: Remember that working on a new play is investing in the future of the form.
p.48
When it is a long-standing collaboration, the commitment to the body of work is a natural step since the artists have worked on multiple pieces. However, even the first piece they work on has a life cycle that reminds them that this is not an isolated piece. They have the iterations of the script, the questions, and the conversations that end up in varying degrees in the eventual production. The other things the playwright has written are ideally part of the shared knowledge and the dramaturg can see how this piece fits in the writer’s career to date, sees this as part of the whole. If she works on an early iteration of a new play with a writer, she is finding the breath of this play, but it is a play that is part of a career that is part of a theatrical moment. This awareness does not result in the dramaturg’s mindset being less specific on the single play; it clarifies this single play as a part of something larger, too. In practical terms, it reminds the dramaturg that the conversations and questions will be part of this process, and can also influence the subsequent work.
With a Director
As with the playwright, the efficacy of the dramaturgical process is largely dependent on the relationship established with the director. Clear communication and a specific understanding of the nature of the collaboration are paramount to this relationship. After that, things like style and temperament and the artistic vision can determine how smoothly the process will go; though not to imply smooth is necessarily a more effective mode of artistic collaboration. The holistic dramaturgical mindset can offer a director a perspective that emphasizes the ultimate presence of the audience. This is, of course, the significant source of concentration for the director and while he is composing the production in meeting and rehearsal, he can rely on the additional outlook of the dramaturg. The holistic viewpoint keeps keen focus on the elements of production coming together as well as the outline of the shape they will ultimately make and can voice a concern if those things start to diverge.
There is definite overlap between how a director and dramaturg look at a text and a process. Both have “big picture” perspectives and are committed to how the text for performance becomes the production for the audience. In the director-led model, it is the director’s vision and the execution of that vision that ultimately shapes the production, it is she who works with actors and articulates a vision for designers. The dramaturg’s work supports that of the director. He seeks material, asks questions, and shares ideas in order to help sharpen the director’s vision and shape the clarity of the story being told.
p.49
The dramaturg brings his analysis of the text and his understanding of the context of its creation into conversation with the director, who has her own analysis and understanding. This allows for useful conversation about vision and execution. The dramaturg can ask informed questions about the implications and associations and help the director look at her choices from multiple perspectives. Then throughout the process the dramaturg has his continued contextual understanding joined with his firsthand knowledge of the director’s goals and experience of the work in rehearsal. This unique perspective, intimate understanding without the limits of a production element to execute, creates an extremely useful ally for a director. While the director ultimately needs to create the world of the production, the collaboration with a dramaturg who is also looking at the whole production from the beginning will enable a more cohesive vision.
In Production Meetings
Production meetings are perhaps the clearest example of the need to consider the work holistically. While the dramaturg does not typically have a functional role in the production meeting in the same way as designers and management, she is in the room to further her understanding of the intent of the collaborators as well as offer input to the creative process where it may be useful. The production meeting is an opportunity to hear the status of the various elements of production as well as be available for conversations that arise regarding artistic elements. Understanding the goals of the production creates a better understanding of how the elements fit together and provides a foundation from which to ask questions and offer insight into the process. While each collaborator is looking toward the final production for the audience, the dramaturg is able to do so with a specialized point of view. She can keep clear focus on the manner in which the pieces fit together and how they are converging toward the goals of the production without the need to track any single element or solve any specific challenge.
p.50
What does a dramaturg do in production meetings? This is a common question, and once again has a situation-dependent answer to some degree. However, there are two fundamental roles he plays in the meetings: to listen to others and to represent the holistic perspective when called upon.
The dramaturg is in the production meetings to hear what is said, to be present for the conversations about ideas and aesthetics. As things develop and change, he is in the room to know how the production process continues to develop, to know what to look for in terms of content he generates as well as what he is watching for in rehearsal. He is there to listen for the continuity in idea and goal for the production. The production meeting is when the conceptual framework for the production is typically discussed, and how the various elements of production will fit together. Since the dramaturg is attentive to that fit, those are conversations in which he is particularly invested. He can also be an advocate for discussions in a way that will stop potential misunderstanding or conflicting direction among elements from happening.
TIP: Best idea in the room wins.
The direct answer to the question, “What does a dramaturg do in production meetings?” He listens, asks questions, ensures the director’s vision is clearly understood and stays informed on the development of the production. He keeps sight of the end goal of a performance for an audience and helps to make sure everyone is working on the same production.
With Designers, Technicians, and Management
The production meeting is the place in which the overall conversations and updates happen; however, that is not the sole contact the dramaturg has with designers, technicians and management. She can be a content resource for designers and technicians, and vice versa. All members of the artistic team conduct some kinds of research and that can be a shared resource or a point of connection in conversation, as well as common source of materials that can ultimately go to actors and to audience. Once again, the clarity and flexibility of the holistic approach provides a beneficial response to the production work. The dramaturg is connected to the needs of the production in process, while also keeping in mind the future audience for the production. This will inform the kinds of questions to ask or answer with designers and technicians and shapes the way the dramaturg presents context. The context needed for the process of getting a show built is better steered by the knowledge of what the audience will need from that build. It is the holistic viewpoint that gives the dramaturg a vantage point from which to contribute to the technical aspects of the show as well. It is the understanding of how the pieces work in concert and the ability to respond to those pieces clearly and authentically that characterize effective dramaturgy.
p.51
Part of the “trees” the dramaturg sees in the composition of the “forest” of the production is the unique process of designers. Understanding the language and the specific challenges of theatrical design are vital to being an effective collaborator with designers and technicians. He does not need to be able to design a set, but the dramaturg needs to understand the point of view of the scenic designer in order to be a useful collaborator. When he can speak to composition and flow, as well as the conceptual cues of the landscape of the production, he will be more suited to offer effective material as well as a useful point of view. He can offer direct input as well when details of the design are worked out, such as what kind of furniture for Chekhov’s Three Sisters can reveal time, place, status, and action. The dramaturg can offer his contextual understanding of the world of the play to join the designer’s contextual and aesthetic ideas to help that designer come up with a successful selection.
The effectiveness of communication is paramount in these relationships. The director is responsible for the cohesiveness of the production, so it is her vision to which the aesthetic and technical elements need to align. Consequently, the dramaturg is a useful sounding board as well as resource when he is clear and up-to-date on the director’s ideas.
In Rehearsal
The dramaturg in rehearsal acts as a resource, creative collaborator, and surrogate for the audience and all of these roles are improved through a holistic way of seeing. The value of authentic response is greatest here, where she can offer director and actors a reflective commentary on the work being done. This is where listening and participating in production meetings pays off. Continuing to focus on the connection between the elements of production and the goal for the production allows the dramaturg to help navigate that process, through questions asked and answered. Again, removed from the need to come up with a solution, she is able to offer a response to what she sees in a way that gives the artistic collaborators more information about what is presented.
p.52
In rehearsal the dramaturg watches for continuity and specificity within the production. She is watching with an eye to what the audience will ultimately see and so looking for the strength of the constructed narrative. Her role in the rehearsal changes throughout the production cycle, and will be discussed in more detail in Chapter 7. However, the overall arc of rehearsal involvement is as follows. She offers a context presentation at the first rehearsal and helps facilitate the discussion after the first read-through. She listens to the read-through. She makes note of the surprising moments as well as the points in the play that affect the mood of the room. She listens for rhythm and pace as well as any clues to the moments in the play that will offer a particular challenge for cast or audience. For example, if there is a scene that seems to get monotonous in the reading, that may indicate the need for special attention to energy and pace in the staging. Or if there is a significant plot point that is immersed in a fast-paced conversation, this will be a necessary marker for the audience and something to note from the start of the process. In addition, if members of the cast respond to something in the play with discomfort or uncertainty, or seem to have a strong resonance, that will be an indication for the dramaturg to look for specific content to support the cast in those subjects and moments.
The most direct interaction with the full ensemble happens in the early days of the rehearsal process, the read-through and table work when there is discussion about the play and the production and some initial choices are made and explored. Once the process moves into staging the play the dramaturg’s role becomes less visible in some ways, though no less important. She watches how the actor’s choices and director’s compositions fulfill the story of the play and the goals of the production. Throughout the staging rehearsals and the run-throughs, the dramaturg is watching and listening, bringing in materials in support of the questions raised and ideas explored, and offering the director a holistic point of view on the work at each phase of the process.
p.53
When the production goes into technical rehearsals and (possible) previews, the dramaturg is in the room watching, listening, asking and answering questions as needed, and continues to look at what the audience will see – to look holistically at the production and its elements. He looks with attention on what has transpired alongside the knowledge of what was intended. In addition, this final phase helps solidify what kinds of audience outreach and contact will be most useful.
One of the most effective ways to dramaturg in rehearsal is to offer a responsive point of view, to tell the director what she sees and provide that perspective from which to proceed. The questions asked and answered are valuable contributions to the rehearsal process, and when those can be supplemented with a clear vision of what is happening on stage, the dramaturgy is its most useful and effective. Sometimes the best thing to offer is, “She tells him it’s over and she stands there and he says he is sorry and walks across the room.” All that is doing is describing the action of a moment, and it will likely enable the director to see why a scene felt unclear. While the director is focusing on the “trees” of blocking, stage business, characterization and tempo, a dramaturg can watch for the “forest” of the story told in the room.
Some things a dramaturg does in rehearsal:
• be the advocate for the playwright;
• provide the eye of an audience;
• watch for continuity;
• answer content questions;
• offer perspective on cultural/social practices within the play;
• watch for character consistency and clarity;
• ask and answer questions of and from the director;
• look for specific moment/idea if requested;
• take notes on flow, pace, overall rhythm of performance;
• verify historical/cultural practices, watch for accuracy;
• keep rehearsal notes, staying up to speed on process and schedule;
• watch where focus is drawn on stage.
It is impossible to come up with a comprehensive list of what a dramaturg does in rehearsal since it is completely dependent on the show and the relationship. The most accurate statement would be that she dramaturgs in rehearsal. She looks at the needs of the rehearsal and provides context for that work. She pays close attention to how all of the pieces are coming together to form the production the director seeks. She listens and watches, offers content and asks questions, she sees the forest and the trees.
p.54
Non-Production
The examples offered here are particular to the production dramaturg in a somewhat traditional collaboration with a fixed script. However, when we talk about dramaturg as mindset we automatically include projects outside the traditional theatre. Dramaturgy as mindset is a way of seeing the world and engaging with material, and when a dramaturg is working, the only definitive commonality is that she is defining a process in order to collaborate effectively. Whether this happens in another performance and/or storytelling form or something entirely different in scope and mode, the dramaturg is aided by the practice of seeing holistically. Whatever the project, when we as dramaturgs are able to see it as a composite of individual pieces that are knowable through their relationship to the whole we are more able to think flexibly and offer authentic response to what we encounter.
The ability to see the big picture and to think strategically in terms of how the parts work together is something that is useful in any collaborative endeavor. The holistic point of view, and even more so, the open, responsive perspective makes the dramaturgical mindset particularly appealing. The dramaturg responds to what he sees, not what he expected or hoped, but has an informed framework from which to mirror what he sees. He can offer a point of view about the efficacy of what is there without the filter of what he thinks should be there.
This chapter conjures the saying “cannot see the forest for the trees” as a way of understanding a holistic viewpoint as essential to the dramaturgical mindset. A strong sense of where we are going and the ability to recognize the markers along the way is the foundation of effective dramaturgy. In addition, the facility with which one can recognize the markers as inextricably linked to the where becomes characteristic of the mindset. We seek the forest and trees with clarity and creative honesty that provide the context for a useful collaboration and artistic offering.
p.55
Summary
The ability to see both the details and the larger picture of a situation is an integral part of the mindset to dramaturg. The perspective is shaped by seeing the way the particular artistic elements form together to construct the narrative.