After two weeks without a guest
dramaturg, I was happy to have Page 73’s Producing Director, Michael Walkup,
join me for this session. I want this project to introduce theater artists to
dramaturgs, in the plural and in general, and this week was a good reminder
that the greater variety of dramaturgs I involve, the better. For the visitors,
and for me: it’s not often I’m in the same room with another dramaturg, talking
about new plays with theater artists of multiple disciplines. Getting to do so
here, listening to the different ways other dramaturgs have of communicating
their ideas, is teaching me plenty. I’m always looking for more ways to talk
about plays, and to approach conversations about plays, and so when I see my
colleagues do something particularly well in this arena, I adopt (steal) it.
People have been staying long after
the questions they came with have been answered, and this is the case even when
I make clear that nobody should feel obligated to linger—I welcome their participation,
but the drop-in ease of this is part of the design. However, the artists visiting
the open office hours often stay to hear what others have to talk about, and to
engage in conversation with them, as much as with myself and the guest
dramaturg. There’s a definite hunger for other people to listen (and to listen
to). The questions we’re getting are not simple, certainly, but it strikes me
that they’re often as much about the content of the inquiry as about the
opportunity to voice it.
At several points over the past few
weeks, as some of the same questions have arisen repeatedly, I’ve wondered whether a
blog or website of “frequently asked questions” could serve equal good as an
in-person session, and my guess is: no. Maybe an online discussion forum could
accomplish it, because there is an opportunity to build community. A hope of
mine is that artists will meet others at the open office hours who can provide
that community to each other in an ongoing way—that they will create for
themselves the forums for discussion that will fuel their work.
Some discussion topics from this
session:
--One writer had questions about copyright
law; he wants to incorporate existing photographs, radio broadcasts, and music
into a play. We weren’t able to answer all his questions, but one of the other
writers suggested he call the Dramatists Guild, and Michael added that if the
works were indeed under copyright, then permission would be needed for each
production, and it would be the producers’ job to work through that. (Which is
not to say that the writer shouldn’t look further into the situation at this
point, but that he will have allies in working through it.)
--There were a few play structure
questions. A beginning playwright who is starting to write comedies while
reading books on craft, asked how the rules he was learning about applied
to writing in general, and to comedies—the use of a protagonist and antagonist
made more sense to him when thinking of dramas. We talked about the different
kinds of conflict central characters can have (with other characters, with
themselves, with nature, with society), and that obstacles show up as much in
comedy as in any other type of “well-made play”. We talked also about the rules
of playwriting being less like laws meant to control or limit writers, but more
like principles drawn from an understanding of the way people experience
storytelling, and intended to harness storytelling power—not always to be
followed exactly, but to be consciously molded to the artist’s purpose.
Another writer asked about getting
the action going quickly versus easing into it. There isn’t, of course, any
single answer to this. An audience will be looking for clues about the world
they’re entering, why they’re being introduced to these characters and
situations, from the first moments. Providing information that will pay off
later is helpful; delaying or toying with this, can be a conscious tactic on
the writer’s part. Hearing the play out loud and seeing how an audience
responds, I suggested, could be useful in assessing whether the writer is
achieving something in line with her vision.
--A writer who is taking her
musical to a NAMT-style festival that does
45-minute presentations of full-length work, asked for advice about choosing a
segment to present. I’ve never been in the position of working in one of these
festivals, but having watched a number of these presentations, I articulated
that I always find it much more satisfying to see a consecutive 45-minute chunk
of the piece, rather than a condensed version of the entire thing. With the
former, I’m at least seeing a piece of the actual
creation; with the latter; it’s like I’m watching the extended trailer, and
suddenly I’m paying attention to how the trailer was put together—its flow or
lack thereof, the narration tying the scenes together—and don’t end up learning
very much about the show itself. We also talked about what her main goals were
in this process—presenting the most polished section of the show she could, to
entice producers, or to work on sections she wanted to explore with performers
in rehearsal. I also said that if I were in her position, I might track down
writers who had been through this sort of process, and pick their brains about
what worked for them.
--One playwright came with
questions about finding the right dramaturg to work with on some in-development
scripts. (This project is, I hope, one of those ways, with different guest
dramaturgs joining almost weekly.) Literary Managers and Dramaturgs of the
Americas (lmda.org) has searchable dramaturg profiles, although theirs is far
from a complete database. A search on Google or LinkedIn, for
dramaturg+[location]+[specialty] could also work. (I include “location” in
there because, while technology certainly allows for dramaturgy to take place
over geographical distance, establishing a face-to-face rapport first is
something I’m always eager to do, whenever possible.) After finding someone who
seems like a good match, set up a meeting to discuss backgrounds, working
styles, shared interests (both within theater and beyond), and your desired
goals. Ask a lot of questions about how the dramaturg works. The dramaturg should be someone who ‘gets’ the artist and
the artist’s work; not every skilled dramaturg is a match for every person
or project.
--Michael was asked about the
biggest issue he comes across in encountering new work, and he talked about
(I’m paraphrasing him with his permission) plays that end before the dramatic
action is complete, seemingly because the writers are beholden to a page or
time limit. He’s seeing a trend of writers setting up a lot of conflict just
before the 90-minute mark, and then leaving it there rather than seeing it
through. There was some discussion about writers intentionally satisfying or
not satisfying dramatic action and audience experience, and how those choices
align or not with a producer’s attraction to the work.
Thanks for reading. More next week,
Jeremy
No comments:
Post a Comment