p.171

10

NOTES FROM THE FIELD

Up to this point we have considered ways to develop a point of view and to practice a method that will help to make the dramaturg a more effective artistic collaborator. We have examined dramaturg as a verb, as a way to curate an experience for an audience. This way of seeing helps to create a point of view for the dramaturg that is flexible and holistic, and helps to develop a process that is attentive and responsive. The notion of dramaturg as verb is an effective way to approach the role and the process can help the tasks of the dramaturg.

The opportunity to share stories is a primary path to understanding what is possible as a dramaturg. One of the benefits of professional organizations like Literary Managers and Dramaturgs of the Americas (LMDA) and other opportunities to gather dramaturgs together is the chance to trade ideas and stories. These opportunities to share discoveries and best practices can be incredibly helpful in honing the craft. Sometimes the most useful are the anecdotes of dramaturgical “wins,” the projects and moments in which a solid artistic collaboration occurs. These stories serve as a good reminder of what dramaturgy can be, and provide a way to expand our understanding of what it means to dramaturg.

The purpose of this chapter is to offer a similar kind of experience, to share stories about when it works and offer ideas about the skills and practices that help develop dramaturgy and dramaturgs. These stories give a sample of the kinds of things that professional and student dramaturgs are doing in the field and some of the things that they have learned along the way. For continuity, they will be talked about in the first person, although they are from multiple sources and multiple places. Also, the plays and theatres have been deliberately left out; this is not intended to connect to a specific work but to inspire thinking about different ways to approach dramaturgical work.

p.172

The chapter is separated into sections and starts with a couple of examples of the ways that dramaturgs define the craft. Next there is a discussion about working on productions, including working with directors and actors. Then we will look at some ideas about new plays and devised projects, and then some advice for early-career dramaturgs. Finally, the chapter concludes with some best practices and tips intended to help you develop as a dramaturg. Again, the idea is not a comprehensive guide, but a way to think about dramaturgy. It is a way of seeing and engaging with material and audiences. That is a perspective that continues to develop and expand in our theatre and is a way of ensuring our role as a creative collaborator in play-making of any kind.

Metaphors for Dramaturgy and What Do You Do?

One of the recurrent themes of the story exchange among dramaturgs is the ongoing use of metaphor. It is a go to when asked to explain what one does for a living, be it from family members or people on airplanes. In addition, the metaphor can be useful when explaining what we can offer to a potential employer. There are a number of reasons we resort to analogy when discussing the work, one of which is that it is a difficult job to describe it in general, and then it changes from project to project. In addition, the notion of dramaturgy as a way of seeing and engaging resists limited and fixed definition and relies on other ways to explore this dynamic and elusive perspective. As discussed at the beginning of the book, the metaphor is just a stand-in; however, it can sometimes offer insight into the more substantial question for those working in the field – what can dramaturgy do?

When it works, dramaturgy can be a well-integrated collaborative tool. In describing a tool, metaphors become useful and can perhaps help to shape our understanding of the activity. There are a number of metaphors and analogies that are used to describe the role and they provide insight into how dramaturgs see their work.

Navigational images are useful, the dramaturg becoming the guide who moves the production in the right direction. Similarly, some see the dramaturg as cartographer, shaping the path more than steering it. Scientific images work as well – the notion of the kind of questioning and examining that the dramaturg does through each step of the process of creation, evaluating, and testing his hypotheses throughout the process. There are a number of analogies around the idea of creating or constructing – creative if not generative. These include architectural images of compiling the materials assembled, or cooking images that indicate the role as one that ensures a right combination in order to make the end product.

p.173

The more dynamic metaphors seem to be most effective. To add another one to the mix, the dramaturg functions as a conduit – she amps up the connections between script and production, between production and spectator, between experience and audience. Sometimes the notion of dramaturg as translator or intermediary clouds the impression and implies that she is somehow in between the other collaborators, acting as an intermediary that may hamper the connection. The electrical analogy fixes this by recognizing that the dramaturg on a project can increase the amplitude of the connections. The production does not (should not) need an intermediary standing between content and audience, but a conduit that strengthens the relationships can be a very useful thing.

We as dramaturgs work with images, and sometimes we talk about our work through the lens of what we do, though even that needs to be framed in the more theoretical. Once again, dramaturgy is not a collection of tasks, but a way of working. That way of working can be characterized in different ways. The dramaturg is someone who is equally comfortable in the rehearsal room and the library. The dramaturg is provider of the context. He is the keeper of the story, witness, story detective, historical advisor, structural engineer, mechanic, or surrogate.

Another way we talk about what we do is through the use of active verbs. These are probably some of the most useful ways to think about what it means to dramaturg. Among the verbs that dramaturgs use to define their role: listen, question, excavate, connect, explore, bridge, advocate, support, synthesize, articulate, advise, curate, and contextualize.

Dramaturging Productions

The process of dramaturgy depends on the play, the production, and the personnel. The nature of the process is determined by the amount of time available to dedicate to that work. The more time spent with a collaborator, the greater the trust built and the more expanded the opportunities to sync style and perspective. Many of the formalities can be done away with once you have a working style and relationship that is effective for a process. However, it does not have to take until the third project to have a genuine artistic collaboration. As discussed earlier, open communication and clear expectations are a way to get off to a strong start, and the continued practice of the holistic viewpoint, flexible thinking, and close attention to timing and purpose will add to the likelihood of a useful working relationship.

p.174

It comes down to working with people, and that is the most important part of being a dramaturg, navigating the relationships in a way that lets you do the work and contribute to the production. Sometimes that means weathering a more contentious relationship. One of my favorite stories is one that Mark Bly tells. He was working on a production of Ibsen’s Hedda Gabler and was having a conversation with the director outside the rehearsal. The director was taking issue with the action of the play and flat out said, “People just don’t do that.” To which Mark replied, “Hedda Gabler f***ing does.” This is an example of those times the dramaturg is advocate for the playwright, and also gives the reminder that although the view is holistic and not limited to one production element, the dramaturg is invested.

Working with Directors

The working relationship with directors is one of the primary indications of effective dramaturgy. The production model in most cases has the director in charge of the production, and the director generally vets the materials, information, and communication with actors and designers. Sometimes this will mean all comments and questions go to her and then are disseminated by her, and other times it will simply mean the agreement is clear about what is given directly to a member of the production team and when. The initial meetings with the director will hopefully clarify these expectations and again, the more time spent working with a director, the clearer those lines become.

An effective collaboration means the work gets done, not that it is without conflict. Depending on the styles and personalities of the artists involved, the effective artistic union can be full of argument, as long as that is what is useful to everyone involved. I had a director with whom most of my interactions were arguments about the meaning of things, but it really made us both get very specific and clear in our opinions and I think made the work we both did much better.

p.175

One of my more challenging relationships was more about the director’s concern about his own authority, I think. This director would pretty much shut down anything I said in rehearsal or in production meetings. He was vocal about his discomfort with dramaturgs. But every night he would call me after rehearsal and we would talk for a half an hour and go over what had happened that night. He just could not let that happen in front of the production team; it would be admitting something, maybe? So I could do my job; it just had to be on the phone outside rehearsal.

On the other hand, working with a director once you have already formed a relationship can be really fulfilling and comfortable. There is one director, we work together a lot and we have built a lot of trust so I can just give notes or ask questions directly to the actors. It is a very open rehearsal process so there is never the need to check with the director to make sure this is all right. Of course this was after a relationship was already built and we knew our styles and our points of view were aligned. It feels like such a time save and I can gear my comments directly to the actor rather than feeling that they need to convince the director as well as be meaningful to the actor.

One of the best relationships I had was when the director and I always sat together and we quickly got to a place where I could just reach over and write a note on his notepad, and vice versa. It wasn’t so much a concern about whether to give the note to the actor or not, but when the director wanted to handle the points raised, and if it was something that he or I would take up. It was a great way to work and we both really felt the collaborative nature of the whole process.

It can also happen that the relationship between dramaturg and director is borderline hostile, which tends to be less useful. Even when the relationship is just uncertain, it can feel as if a lot of time is wasted trying to navigate that, and occasionally you are in a situation with a person and you just cannot make it work. Some directors are suspicious of dramaturgs, and other members of the cast and crew may not see value in the presence of another artistic point of view. It is often a misguided understanding of the role that leads to this skepticism – I had a director who told me he did not like to work with dramaturgs because he preferred to do his own research. Unfortunately, this is not an uncommon reaction from directors; however, this perspective can be dealt with when you work with a creative team and have the opportunity to show them what dramaturgy can be. Dramaturgical output is not doing someone else’s research, it is an insider’s knowledge and understanding but with a kind of critical objectivity of an outsider. The artistic input you can bring means you are able to ask the right questions or say something new or in a different enough way that it can open up a moment or a character or a play. Being in the room and knowing what the director wants gives you a special and valuable perspective. One of the best things about the perspective you bring is that you do not have to figure out how to make it work, you just get to see how it is working.

p.176

When the relationship is adversarial from the onset, this may end up stalling your chances of being integrated into the production process. If the director does not want you talking to actors and does not want to hear what you have to say, there is not a whole lot that you can do. It is possible that you can change their mind, and there may be things you can do to improve the situation, depending on why they are opposed.

Sometimes you run into a director who is worried about the dramaturg as a challenge to their authority and this can be a hard thing to work around. Occasionally it can be taken care of by frank conversations about the process and establishing clear boundaries and expectations. Once the collaborators get to know each other a little better, the suspicion can lessen, or you just work in a way that maintains very clear lines of authority. Even when things stay a little uncertain, you can frequently find something to add, whether the focus is more on audience outreach or working with the designers.

A director may have had a bad experience with a dramaturg and this shapes their attitude toward the role. This situation can be more difficult to combat because it often results in active resistance so as not to repeat a previous incident. The impulse is to push back. Just because there was a bad experience does not mean the role should be discounted – that is not the case when you have a bad time with an actor. However, the analogy does not work; productions can and do happen without a designated dramaturg. The purpose is to remind or show the people you are working with why the production is better with one.

p.177

One of the real challenges to the dramaturg is that in some settings you are called upon to defend or justify your place in the room. To address this, the dramaturg needs to find a way to reframe that demand and clarify his autonomous role, while at the same time give himself license to actively occupy his place in the room. Understanding the role as creative collaborator and practicing methods that help your contribution to be effective and vital are the most expedient ways to inhabit that space. Even when the rest of the people at the table are not totally welcoming, it is good to remember that you have something special to offer.

The need to defend is intensified when working with collaborators who are mistrustful or downright hostile to the role of dramaturg. While there are tactics that may mitigate this situation or things that can be done despite the resistance, sometimes the gap is too large. This may be the only time you work with that collaborator and it is good to remember that while the collaborative action may often be instigated by the dramaturg, it is not his responsibility to carry it all. It is not a one-direction proposition or relationship, and if there is not the opportunity for artistic collaboration, it is not a place you want to dramaturg.

Dramaturgy in Practice

The relationship gives you access to the collaborators, which is important in terms of being able to offer content and input. The other important element of that is actually being in the room. Some dramaturgs prefer to come and go in rehearsal; they are very present in the early rehearsal and then want to be able to come in for run-throughs with relatively fresh eyes in order to be more effective at being the surrogate audience. There can be a lot of value in seeing a run-through that you have not watched being assembled piece by piece. It allows for a point of view that mimics the eventual theatrical audience’s experience more closely. To that end, it can be an effective way to explore questions of continuity and structure. That intent may supersede the desire to be in the rehearsal. Other dramaturgs attend as many rehearsals as possible because missing rehearsals means you are not in the room to see where things are going, to build on what happens, to address questions as they arise. Ultimately it is up to the dramaturg, her collaborators, and the needs of the production when she is in rehearsal. Be sure to have a clear purpose that determines when you are in the room, and when you are not.

p.178

Good things can happen when you are in the room, and it is through being there that you learn what is needed. Sometimes the work you do leads up to a specific moment. One of my best moments in a production was during tech when the director had a question about the use of a scrim to create the distinction between indoor and outdoor scenes. There was a technical impetus to the choice, and when we talked about it my opinion was based on how the use affected the story and connected it to some other things in the play. It is funny when you have one of those moments and you realize it is not about the quality of notes or the different things you give the director. That whole process came down to that one moment in tech. I was there, ready for that question.

The revelations that do not necessarily show in reading the script may show themselves only when you see them playing out. I was working on a production and was sitting in rehearsal listening to a character go through the list of names of those who had come before and I was struck by what was happening – it was a kind of litany of saints. As many times as I had read through and talked about the play, I had never gotten this impression, but after hearing it spoken, it was evident that is what was happening. I leaned over to the director and said, “This is his litany; it is what reminds him he is not alone.” It ended up being a huge breakthrough for the character and the play.

Those moments of revelation during rehearsal are great, and it is exciting to be able to share them with the director and actors. On another show I worked on, there is a character who is unable to speak, he can’t communicate, and then there is a very emotional scene where he tests a speech-generating device and he types, “I love you.” It was an action that was intended to disturb his wife and then the scene would continue, but there was something that just did not feel right. One night I was watching the scene and I leaned over to the director and said, “I don’t think that’s about him, I think that’s about her mother.” The director gave that note to the actors and it really helped shape the scene immediately. A couple of weeks later the actor who played the wife told me that moment also really helped her to unlock something significant for the character.

It is exciting when you get to see your work artistically inform the production. I worked on a show about a wrestler. To prepare, I watched hours and hours of wrestling and got a deep sense of the physicality, how wrestlers used the space as well as the signature moves of some of the characters. When there were problems blocking scenes I was able to bring in how wrestlers used the space to inform the blocking so that work was directly connected to the staging of the show. Also the actors then incorporated specific signature moves that were based on real wrestlers so they were an “Easter egg” situation for audience members who knew wrestling. It was a strange kind of research, but it ended up being a physical context that was really important to the production.

p.179

As a dramaturg, there are so many different ways you can find to artistically inform the production. For instance, I often find myself contributing music suggestions for scene changes or curtain calls. The things you find, the pieces you bring in to help create the context for the company, have a funny way of finding themselves on stage. I worked with the actors to create playlists for their characters in a show and we brought them into rehearsals to play during breaks and then started incorporating the ones that became the kind of signature songs into the warm-ups. By the time we got to tech, these songs had been co-opted and were used for all of the scene changes and seemed to make the whole production more connected to the characters.

The ways we work in the rehearsal change from project to project and I find that one thing that is consistent is the fact that you are there as witness. This realization helps to inform the dramaturgy in a lot of ways, and it is incredible how often just allowing yourself to be a witness is what the show needs more than anything else. I worked on a show with a director I had worked with before. We had a really good working relationship but were having a little problem communicating on this one. In rehearsal, the end of the first act was just not working. I had talked with the director a couple of times and asked questions about intent and meaning, but he was just not seeing a way to solve the problem. It was starting to be a real problem because the moment did not make a lot of sense and it caused a real stumble in the tempo of the piece. One night during a break I just described the scene to him, told him what I saw sitting in the audience. I talked through the act, beat by beat, this happens and then this happens, and he just stared at me for a moment. Then he said, “That’s not right.” We went back in and he reblocked the scene completely. I did not need to tell him anything other than what I witnessed.

p.180

The idea of witness is important. You are witness to what is happening in the moment but also to what has happened already. One of the big things a dramaturg offers is the knowledge of the original intentions. For example, I worked with a company that was really committed to the politics of the piece we were doing. There were a couple of points over the course of the production where I felt the play was kind of losing its way and so I brought in some materials about the political issue to get people back into the mindset of why they were doing this work. I did not have to say anything about the various ways the production was or was not effective political theatre; I just needed to remind them of what they were doing.

There are also times when you are really there to witness – to watch what is happening. During a tech run I was in charge of watching for nuances and physical details while the director fine-tuned the bigger-stage picture. During a scene on a fire escape in the bitter winter, I noticed something off – where was the winter cold? The characters touched the metal railings with their bare hands without any kind of physical reaction. They conveyed “cold” only with their hunched torsos. I mentioned it to the director during a break, cluing him into the neglected tangible experiences, and he also noticed their absence and gave the note to the actors. Sure enough, when the actors modified their reactions in accordance with their surroundings, it made the decision to risk the cold rather than stay inside much more effective and enhanced the contrast between that scene and the following one that was set during the warm and sunny spring.

The content you provide for the production team with your casebook and presentations is really important and useful to the process, you hope, and even still I find most of my best moments are things that happen in the moment in rehearsal. There was a play that has several dreams in it and actually ends on a dream. We were having trouble with it because the end was just not effective during tech; it just felt as if we were not ending it. We were watching the dream figures come through the front door and I said, “You know, when I dream things aren’t in the right place.” For the director it was an incredible “oh yeah” moment and she changed the blocking of the scene. On the next run-through the new blocking made all the difference and completely solved the issue. From this offhand comment, “You know, when I dream . . .”

p.181

Working with Actors

Some of the greatest moments in a rehearsal process are the ones that unlock a character for an actor. Whether it is an idea or an image that you bring to them or the right question at the right time, so much of your work goes to the actor and it is exciting to see how they use it. Sometimes you bring in things for them to look at or do – for one show I taught an actor how to play Russian solitaire, and for another one brought in soda bread for everyone to taste. Teaching Russian solitaire was actually so she could play it onstage, but the soda bread was a part of a kind of cultural immersion moment. The play was about an Irish Catholic family who were very devout. None of the actors were Catholic so we had “Catholic Day” and brought in icons and showed the daily rituals of Catholicism so they could not only ask questions but also handle the physical objects and get a sense of the personal practice of the religion. I try to do those kinds of things when I can. These types of experiences are a good way to bond as a company, and it is more significant because you are bonding around or within the world of the play.

Dramaturgy is making connections between the material and the needs of the actor. It is about making sure that your work and output are present in the room, and informing the shape of the production, not merely collating facts. When you find ways to bring a creative point of view into the room and into the process, not in terms of injecting it, but joining the process, that is when the dramaturgy can be most effective for the actor. You can do it in the way you help them work with the language, with the objects and ideas you bring in, and just by being in the room. You know the play, so it is a great vantage point from which to help an actor develop a character.

I got to work on a show that was true collaboration in the real sense of the word. The director had a clear vision and was open to input so I was able to really contribute to the conversations. I worked a lot with the cast and set up movie nights so they could see some work from the period. I circled places mentioned in the script on an old map and we used that a lot, and I brought in a small library of books to rehearsal that we could talk about in breaks and which the actors could borrow. We talked about what kinds of drugs the characters used and their effects and came up with as many ways as possible to explore the world the characters inhabited. The production had characters on stage the whole time, so all of this helped the in-between moments in the play. I discovered there was so much more sustenance when the actor does the work in collaboration with the dramaturg.

p.182

Collaborating with actors is a big part of what I do as a dramaturg and I am always trying to find different ways in for character work. Usually the most effective things are the ones that happen outside rehearsal. One time this worked really well was when the company got together every morning for the week of tech rehearsals and the run of the show at 4:48 am and we just sat together and listened. It was a tough show and everyone was pretty raw by the time it went into tech, and I can’t really tell you why that worked, but there was something about us all being together, just being together. Not doing anything, just fifteen minutes a morning of being in the moment. It was a company bonding thing but it also really brought them into the place of the play. That kind of work can be really useful, as long as you are working with people who are willing to jump in like that. And as a dramaturg, sometimes you just have to take those kinds of chances, too. There was one production where the characters had a daughter who had died. During the process it became apparent that much of the play was defined by the girl’s absence, so I wanted to create a presence for her so they could feel the absence. I basically wrote myself into the play and I wrote two reports as the daughter, and I made a family tree. The kind of things parents would have kept from her childhood. It was possibly the most intrusive I have ever been but possibly the most meaningful work with actors I have done.

A dramaturg takes chances, sometimes with the actors in rehearsal and sometimes with the community she is representing. Sometimes it is just a matter of trying something to see if it will work. I worked on a play where the reveal at the end was that the story was a lie and so I had two lobby displays. When the audience came in, I did a magazine version with the story and then after the show they came out to newspaper headlines – was it a lie or not? I wasn’t sure if the audience would bother to read things on the way out or not, but sometimes you don’t know if it’s going to work but you just have to do it to see. This was a company that was really trying to work on audience engagement so I thought that any chance we could connect with them again was worth trying. The key is to be willing to try things that are not proven yet, to take a risk that something may fall flat, but that is the only way you can find something new that does work. I worked with a director who said that to her actors – “I don’t know, try something.” I think that works as good advice for artists in general.

p.183

There has to be an environment that allows the kind of in-depth collaboration you can have as a dramaturg, and that is either part of the culture of the place or something that you have to really work to establish. Once you have it, there is so much you can offer to the process. We were doing a production where the characters were teenage boys in a boarding school. I gave the actors homework, to build connection to the lives the boys lived – they had to do reports on poets that were mentioned in the script. It helped give the actors a sense of who these boys were, and it became an important part of the ensemble work. That work came out of an environment that had the time and collaboration where you could say something and someone runs with it. That idea had actually come up before; we were reading the script and talking about it a month before rehearsals started and someone said we should give them homework assignments. So I did and it ended up being a key to that production. It’s the same way we came up with the idea of a Hall of Fame of Women Scientists. We asked why we did not know more names and said that there should be cards, like baseball cards. So we made some. It is the kind of company that really relishes the time the artists can spend together talking through ideas and even better, actually following through with the ideas.

The model environment for a dramaturg is one that is completely committed to collaborative art. It’s ideal when it is in that organic place: total collaboration, no ego, just a sense of “let’s everyone bring their best self to the table.” It’s great for ethos. It is an ethos that can be extended into the audience interaction as well. One of the great things about my job is the audience engagement, especially when there is tricky subject matter. We bring in partners as part of community engagement; I reached out to all those people with an intersection work or interest in the piece. Then I had a curated conversation series with the audience as well as with the cast in rehearsal. It really deeply informed the actors and deepened the contextual understanding for the audience. The guests were part of the whole process, so that made it really exciting. There was a really strong sense of us all being part of something, company and audience.

The most rewarding kind of work is when you feel you did something that directly affected the production. It does not have to be something huge, and much of the time it is a small thing that you take away as the “win.” I found this an interesting way to explain something that had to be explained. Sometimes it really is as simple as that. But that’s important. A lot of the time we seem to deal with the minutiae, but it is really the details that we are watching, and you should not underestimate the details. I have a designer friend who says that the quality of a set design is found in the seams, that it is the level of detail and the invisibility of the transitions between one scenic element or material and another that is the real tell about the quality of the work. That works as a construction image, and also in play structure. Think about how many plays are made or broken by their transitions. The point is that the specificity of the details are important to make the piece more immediate, more connected, more real. Having someone who can look with details in mind, and know what they are looking at and for, is only going to help the production. There was a play we were doing that took place in the late nineteenth century and there was a sequence where they had to use an old camera. I had to keep reminding the actors to hold still and that they couldn’t blink for a really long time. It takes a long time and the photographer would stop you if he caught you messing around. Once they got that, it was so much more interesting an event. It wasn’t just that it was more accurate; it was a completely different moment full of energy and tension.

p.184

The kinds of things that you end up needing to learn about through production work tend to be pretty eclectic, and the running joke for some of the truly bizarre things with which you gain some expertise is, “I’m a dramaturg.” It is useful, though. The more information you collect, the more you can draw from when you are working on something, and it is surprising how much overlap you find among different subjects. When there is something that is unfamiliar, then it is usually your job to figure it out and be able to explain it to the company. Maybe it is how you assemble a box on an assembly line, or how different drug paraphernalia is used. There was one time that I had to explain corporate structure to a cast. Another time there was a lot that happened because of the volatility of the stock market. I gave them a spreadsheet with the changing values of their stocks with each switch so they knew at each line exactly how much it would cost them. It was the kind of the thing that the playwright structured deliberately and once the actors had a stronger sense of what the characters would have understood, it was just better. The audience did not need to know the amounts; they would know when it really mattered to the characters.

p.185

Finding context is expected from the dramaturg, but it is more than offering a collection of facts. The things that I learn and the information I bring to my actors are always for a reason, something that they can work with to do their job. Even the most direct entries in the glossary are there for a reason. I will include a location that is mentioned because it may be that is where your character walked from that morning, and you probably want to know that it was six miles away. One time I built an online interactive map so that people could do a guided tour through the real and imaginary places mentioned in the play. I did not make it just because it was a neat thing – although it was – but because it gave the company something they could use to help them make this production.

Working with New Plays and Devised Projects

In the previous chapter we discussed how new-play dramaturgy and devising have their own attributes; however, they work from the same foundation in dramaturgical mindset and process. The successes derive from the same places as well: effective collaboration, open communication, attention to the needs of the production.

Working with a playwright is the best part of my job, and when you have worked with someone for a while and start to have the common language of earlier plays and even other ideas, it can be an incredibly creative partnership. I read his plays and ask questions and do all the new-play dramaturgy things, but sometimes I think the most important part of my job is to give him a chance to say things out loud. He talks through questions, characters, ideas, and problems and I swear he works out ninety percent of it before he actually types a word. The more we work together the better I am at being an active sounding board.

The kind of work we do with new plays varies depending on the circumstances. There have been times when I read a script with specific questions from the playwright: Does the character development seem organic? Does the end make sense? And that was the extent of the work I did on that project. Other times I was there while the playwright took it all apart and put it back together again. You just have to pay attention and be what the play and the playwright need at that moment. There was a piece I worked on, it had been a blog that was shaped into a play and I worked on the very early script development and then later on with the full production. In the original form there was a museum metaphor that was really interesting but by the time it came into rehearsal it was not foreground enough to even be recognizable. It was the thing that tied it into the initial blog and really had been a connecting piece and so I worked with the writer to bring it back in. It ended up being a part of the set and the lobby display, and we ended up creating a whole motif to support the work. Since I knew it had been there at the start, it was a matter of reminding the writer.

p.186

There are also those times when you are the point of negotiation between playwright and director, or are a line of defense for the audience. When the subject matter is particularly difficult, or the treatment of it is problematic, you need to help find a way to something that is workable for everyone. In the second act of a gory new musical, a playwright was firm that a pair of teenaged characters trapped in a high school should be handed guns by their captor and either shoot each other or be shot by their captor. The director was struggling with this literal stage direction, especially dealing with a shooting in a high-school setting. The director suggested changing the text so that the captor shot them but in the abstract and the deaths were offstage. The playwright insisted that the captor be the one to shoot the teenagers and that they die onstage. The crux rested in finding a solution that implied onstage shooting and death with less visceral violence. The playwright, director, assistant director, and I discussed this dilemma throughout an extended lunch break and came to a compromise: the guns were mimed using exaggerated choreography and hand gestures, and the deaths occurred onstage. The playwright was pleased that her conception of the moment stood and the director was pleased to achieve high stakes with less gore.

Sometimes you just need to be able to support the choices the playwright has to make by being there to talk through them. Often the work on play development is helping to navigate between a director who is trying to get the play onto its feet and a playwright who is trying to tell the story he wants to tell.

As mentioned earlier, devising is a practical dramaturgy and the creation of the piece is well suited to – and requires – a dramaturgical point of view. This means that one of the best things about those projects is that you do not have to argue for your place in the room. The thing to do in that work then is to find where you can be the most useful, and do that. I worked on a piece once where my main point of contact was with the director. There were things I brought to the ensemble and I worked with the performers in some capacities, but mostly I worked through the day-to-day plan with the director and helped him stay on schedule and on topic. The notes I had for actors or story went through him, outside of the rehearsal process, and the majority of the questions I answered and input I gave went directly to him.

p.187

Best Practices and Advice to Early-Career Dramaturgs

The best advice I can offer is in terms of how to work as a dramaturg. It is said a lot but it can be said more. The most effective way to go about giving feedback is to ask questions. Describe what you see and then ask if that was intended. Ask what they are going for. Ask as many questions as you can to keep the conversation moving so the production staff are talking about the things they need to. Ask for clarification and ask to point out things that maybe the rest of the company are not seeing clearly. Questions are the most effective way to get information, and they are a great way to point out gaps in someone’s understanding by making them say it out loud.

Another piece of practical advice that is always good to remember is to be someone people want to work with. This sounds obvious, and I hope that it is; however, some people seem to forget it. Even if you are doing a job you are not interested in, or working on a show that you hate, the people around you are people who can potentially get you the next job. And we want to work with good people who want to be there. It is hard enough to do a show; you do not want to do it with someone who makes it harder.

See theatre. As much as you can: new plays, revivals, whatever is happening in your city. See what people are doing, the things that are new, things that feel dated. Notice reactions from the audience, and your own reactions. Watch theatre, read plays, spend as much time as you can and immerse yourself in other people’s art, too. When you see work that you really like, that inspires you, go and meet the people who made it. If you are looking to break into a city as a freelancer, a good place to start is by going to the people who are doing the kind of work you want to do. Who is doing the kind of work you are interested in? Do they have dramaturgs? What kind of lobby display and outreach are they offering? Is that something you can offer? But you start by knowing what kind of art inspires you. That is not to say that you will always be working on that kind of thing, but you should know what it is, and you should aspire to see as much of it as possible and work on it as much as you can.

p.188

Advice for an early-career dramaturg is a challenge because there are so many different paths to get there. There are some who get MFAs in dramaturgy, some who go via internships, some who shift from another creative role in the theatre and some who come in via other fields entirely. There is not a single, or even a best path. It is worthwhile to look at the resume of people who have the jobs that you want, though even with that you need to remember that the industry changes, so do not model your path based on what was effective for someone ten years ago. Even those who come from other areas in the theatre argue about what is the best training for a dramaturg. Some claim acting is the ideal preparation, since you know what an actor needs from a script. Others claim it is directing, since you can look big picture. A lot of dramaturgs are also playwrights, and designers understand composition better than anyone, so that would seem like a good option, too. Once again, the takeaway is that there is not a path laid out, so you will need to be open to the possibilities, you will need to dramaturg your career. I feel that most of the work I have done, I didn’t learn in school. You can’t learn it except by doing it. You learn how to grow in the field and develop your own personal aesthetic and discover what you’re interested in. You need the chance to dig in and figure out what speaks to you.

One of the ways to navigate the early career, and the not-so-early career, is to look at the skills you have. Dramaturgy gives you a skillset that includes research, writing, and communication. It’s a toolbox for working in the theatre or beyond. Dramaturgs are filling a lot of positions in education and community engagement. The challenge is to use that skillset for something that’s marketable and paid work, together with all those other things you know and can learn how to apply. I think it comes down to one main thing: finding a building block of what you want to do.

p.189

It is also worth remembering that it is not an easy career to find. You have useful skills but you need to have your eyes open about the jobs and be open to the experiences you have and where they take you. Put yourself out there with a strong sense of “this is what I want, this is what I can do.” Those things take energy and you spend a lot of your time looking for the next job. There are very few paid gigs, so you have to hustle. Also, remember that it can be really tiring, so it’s OK to take a break and then get back to the hustle.

Recognizing that it is going to be difficult, like any job in the arts, and that there is not a roadmap that you can take is an important part of the process. That allows you to accept the fact and then get to work. Once you do that, you have to find the balance between the art that sustains you and the work that keeps you afloat. There is no path clarity; you have to figure out for yourself a quality of life and how long you are willing to pursue it. No one makes those decisions for you. That is the biggest challenge.

Most important advice? Find playwrights your age. Find the people you’re going to work with.

The final piece of advice I would give is not to get discouraged. Sometimes it does feel as if you spend a lot of your time justifying your place in the room and some of the resistance comes from the reality that a production can happen without a dramaturg. However, the connections can be stronger, the work can be better and the audience more directly brought into the world of the play. Dramaturgy is an important creative presence in a production and, as a dramaturg, the biggest asset you bring to the room is yourself. The skills can be learned and refined, but an outlook that is dramaturgical – a way to see the world and engage with an audience that is inquisitive, creative, and invested – is a benefit in any room.

Spending time with other dramaturgs is useful, as is finding mentors. Listen to what they have to say. The opportunity to share thoughts and ideas with other theatre artists who take on this challenging and sometimes misunderstood role can help you become a better creative collaborator, and help you continue to learn to dramaturg. With that idea of sharing in mind, the gifted dramaturg Anne Morgan shared her rules for life. These are applicable to all aspects of life, and have been especially relevant in her dramaturgical practice.

p.190

The rules are:

p.191

A Final Note

The work is important. To dramaturg is a way to strengthen connections among artists. It is a way to speak more directly to audiences. It is a way to engage with material. It is a way to be open and responsive.

Dramaturgy is a way of looking at the world.