Blog

The term dramaturgy first appears in the work Hamburg Dramaturgy (1767–69) by Gotthold Ephraim Lessing, who is also credited with first creating and practicing this discipline. Although every production inherently has its own dramaturgy by virtue of the artists working on the context of the play, a dramaturg is a dedicated person on the creative team whose primary task is to support the production’s development by asking key questions, researching, providing context, and helping the artists to create the intended performance. 

Sophia Stepf is the Artistic Director of Flinn Works (Berlin/Kassel). She was recently in India to run the Using Dramaturgy workshop that she designed in collaboration with Jehan Manekshaw of Drama School Mumbai. Our writer Pranita Pandurangi caught up with her to discuss what dramaturgy was all about. 

“Dramaturgy is not an approach to theatre-making but it’s an inherent process in every performance. It has two meanings: Firstly it refers to the sequencing of events, the aesthetic choices and the distribution of information through time. Secondly can also mean the process of a dramaturg accompanying the production. The dramaturg acts as a proxy for the audience and helps the director or the creative team achieve their vision.”

When asked what are the different roles that a dramaturg performs, Sophia continued, “A dramaturg performs a combination of roles such as being a  sounding board, outside eye, working from concept to rehearsal to running shows, keeping the big picture in mind and making sure the production team stays on track, curating the experience for the audience including publicity texts, program brochures, background texts, etc. Dramaturgs can also act as creative producers. The role can also involve research, creating a historical road map for the production, finding material – both visual and text that correlates to the vision of the director and the team.” However, what if someone else involved in the production could perform these roles? Affirming this, Sophia says, “You can eliminate the dramaturg from the production, but you can’t eliminate dramaturgy.” 

The need for dramaturgs and an interest in dramaturgy as a profession has been widely discussed in the Indian theatre scene in the last decade. What is still needed is a formal understanding and framework of the profession plus learning and practicing dramaturgical tools. Speaking about the experience of conducting the recent dramaturgy workshops, Sophia said, “ I really enjoyed creating the workshop. I did not want to replicate the way I studied dramaturgy, which was purely knowledge based, I wanted to created an empowering, experiential and contextual room of learning. The point of the workshop is to enable experienced theatre practitioners to work as each other’s dramaturgs in the future. We had a really diverse and dedicated group in both Kolkata and Bangalore with a great work ethic. We worked up to 11 hours a day plus homework and I am happy to say that all 24 participants finished this first part of the project. We have given them as many useful tools as we could without a strict definition of what dramaturgy is – every creation process is different and part of being a dramaturg means being flexible, being able to adapt to various artistic visions. Also not every dramaturg is the same. Someone might be good at historical research, someone else might be good with scripts and script analysis and someone else is an expert of devised forms. The participants are all working on someone else’s play as a dramaturg in the next six months and when we meet them in September 2020, at a 3-day- seminar, we will find out how useful the learning of the workshop were in real life. 

Dramaturgy being essentially a German theatre practice, we asked Sophia if it’s really needed in Indian theatre scene today. She responded, “I’ve seen a lot of theatre in India for the last 18 years. There’s incredible creative potential and skill in terms of  script-writing, acting, dancing, singing, music plus rich traditions in various art forms to draw from. But there are a lot of projects I have seen in the urban scenario that haven’t reached their full potential. So dramaturgy makes sense all the more. Also many urban theatre makers are experimenting with new forms – from devised to documentary theatre to social gaming to working with marginalized groups – these new forms can develop much better with the help of dramaturgs. As theatre makers we all need professional help from time to time – dramaturgs provide that help. This can take many forms, one important tool for example is feedback. Feedback can be harmful and useless if egos, opinions and hierarchies get in the way. There is a need for a structured, affirmative feedback, that focuses at what works as opposed to what doesn’t work. Feedback can be a supportive and constructive process if done right. another tool I find very important is performance analysis, which means to understand and to describe how meaning is made on stage (through semiotics) and how emotions are created. That is a tedious exercise which we did in the workshop a lot and which is immensely helpful if practised regularly. It helps you understand why something works or doesn’t work because you distance yourself from your immediate reactions while watching. It is a bit like Vipassana meditation – instead of reacting to  your physical sensations and emotions, you watch them and understand them. This is not new to the Indian context of course, the Natyashastra is one of the most extensive texts on dramaturgy ever written. I just see that the practice of contemporary performance analysis is not used in the urban context enough – and this is one of the dramaturgical tools that can really help make performances better.

On being asked if there would be more such dramaturgy workshops in India in the future, Sophia commented, “Yes, it would be great to have more workshops to heighten the impact on the theatre scene and to create a sustainable practice. At the moment we have created a ripple in the ocean. We want to create a wave. The workshop is ready to go, we just need to find more funding. We received over 100 applications for the 24-seat workshop that we had, so we already know there’s a demand for it.”

Chandradasan (born December 1958) is a theatre director, actor and writer from Kerala, India. He has directed 35 plays in Malayalam, English, Sanskrit, Kannada, Lithuanian, Finnish and Tamil. Chandradasan won the National award for the best play at Mahindra Theatre Festival for his play Karnabharam, New Delhi in 2008. He has achieved many awards for best play, direction, acting at theatre festivals all over India, apart from being a resource person in many theatre institutes, and universities. Chandradasan received the State Award of Kerala Sangeetha Nataka Academy for his outstanding contribution in theatre. He was awarded with the Fulbright-Nehru Fellowship 2014 to visit USA and do research on the social connectivity of theatre in multiple contexts. He is the founder of Lokadharmi Theatre Group and Mazhavillu (rainbow), a children’s theatre group, both based in Kochi, Kerala, India. He is the director board member of RRC, Bangalore of NSD. DSM writer Pranita Pandurangi caught up with him to chat about his session at the recent dramaturgy workshops conducted in Bangalore.

What was it that you specifically spoke to students about?

It was just one hour guest lecture so I didn’t pack too much in. I spoke about my approach to dramaturgy when I do my own productions. We don’t have a dramaturg as such but the director does it himself. I explained what I am using and doing as a dramaturg using the example of my latest production, Shakuntala. I asked them to watch the video recording of my play on YouTube, asked them to read the text as well. They discussed it later and they asked me about their own issues.

Going forward, are you open to the idea of having a dramaturg?

In the future, I don’t know what will happen in the theatre. We already have technicians to help the writers and directors to help understand the sociological context. As time passes, the relevance of dramaturgy is seeping in even if the director does it himself. Thought goes behind it. Travels in different levels – sometimes, it’s a classic, sometimes it’s a text of your own, sometimes, it’s a post-dramatic text so dramaturgy has its different functions and purposes. Study, research, reading of material, art material – paintings, music, history, news, incidents, which can be collected when you’re devising a production. This search is going on so as theatre becomes more and more professional, this gets hardened. The dramaturg, according to me, could be the director or someone who assists him. Depends on the group and if they have the potential to appoint someone as a dramaturg and the director also has a mind to do so.

Supposing it wasn’t a budget constraint, then would you employ a dramaturg?

I wouldn’t mind getting a person to do it, but I generally like doing the research myself. I always get suggestions from friends. Before I enter into production, I talk about the play and do my own readings based on it and talk to a host of people but I don’t know if someone can really spend so much time and do this for me. An amount of the work I would do anyway. Partly I would do it myself and partly open to introducing a dramaturg. The amount of dramaturgy clarifies my position taken in the play. My perspective deepens. Dramaturgy can go in many different directions. That’s what I feel.

Abhishek Thapar (1985, Moga) is a theatre maker, performer, puppeteer and artist based in Amsterdam. He holds a post-graduate diploma in Physical Theatre from LISPA, London and a Master in Theatre degree from DAS Theatre, Amsterdam. Currently, he is building an artistic research and practice in post-colonial epistemologies, historiographic metafiction and storytelling. DSM writer Pranita Pandurangi caught up with him to chat about his experience of building his latest work, My Home at an intersection. 

What was the experience and process like of working with a dramaturg?

I met my dramaturg, Maria, in Amsterdam. She’s also a writer and editor. Her role was very much was to look at the material from a distance – reflecting on it and looking at how it relates to the Western audience. She also became a critical eye and was helpful in looking at histories which are being represented and performed not in the place where they belong. She answered questions like how much of history does one need to know to reach the core of the work. She was also looking at creating logics within the work and what it means in the the larger context of globalization. She would have studio visits where I would show her part of the work. She would ask me informative questions. She would also describe how she experienced the work and ask probing questions about things which she could see but I couldn’t see. There were a lot of roles put on my shoulder as a solo performer so she helped me break them down and look at it from a strategic, organized way and also shape the timeline of the work. I was talking about a very specific time in the play. There was the question of what to share and what not to share as well as so much of theoretical referencing and conceptual ideas like – what this word or colour could mean, etc.

Could you take us through the step-by-step process?

She was there right from the start – within the work, there are various elements – one is storytelling and then there is film and there is 400 kgs of what seeds of the floor which becomes the landscape of Punjab. Then there is the lemon pickle which is 27 years old at the start of the performance shared with the audience. There was a lot of writing – film material of the reconstruction of the house so she helped me dig more into the references, and what the lemon pickle could mean (could also be the last memory of my grandfather) . We looked at the performativity of the lemon pickle, thinking more about food as a way to access memory. It was a difficult choice for the audience to consume it as it’s black in colour but it’s the natural aging process which makes it so. At some point I would refuse to let anyone enter if they did not eat the lemom pickle. But then those choices changed over the course of time though. We looked at how the pickle could be a motor that drives the entire one hour of the performance. From there to working on how the text which I had written could be boiled down to the questions which I wanted to address. She also helped me sharpen those questions. I was too caught up in my studio so she became an outsider/ collaborator / conversation partner who helped me draw those linkages and connections.

What was the experience like of working in Europe? 

I had to learn a lot when I moved to Europe in terms of learning the language, understanding contemporary art, etc. 

Going forward, would you use a dramaturg for other productions? 

Maria and I work very closely so we’re working on two more productions. 

Götz Leineweber holds an MA in cultural anthropology, theatre studies and philosophy from University of Cologne. He worked as an editor and journalist and got his postgraduate degree in cultural journalism from the University of Arts, Berlin in 2004. From 2004 he has been working as a dramaturg, first at Volksbühne (2004-07, Artistic Director: Frank Castorf), Schauspiel Köln (2007-2013: Artistic Director: Karin Beier) and Residenztheater Munich (2013-2019, Artistic Director: Martin Kušej). He has worked as a dramaturg with Karin Beier, Christoph Schlingensief, Martin Kušej, Dimiter Gotscheff, Gintersdorfer / Klaßen, Alvis Hermanis and Gob Squad amongst many others. Since 2015 he has been teaching ‘Theatre History and Dramaturgy’ at the Academy of Fine Arts in Munich and he taught “The Inclination to Gesamtkunstwerk” at the class of Anna Viebrock at the Academy of Fine Arts in Vienna in 2016/2017. As of July 2019, he is a freelance dramaturg for Burgtheater Vienna and others.

DSM writer Pranita Pandurangi caught up with him to chat about dramaturgy. 

What does dramaturgy mean according to you?

Dramaturgy is a role (not to forget the relation to dramaturgy as a characteristic, as a function). By history the dramaturg is the person in the theatre who views the production with critical distance. A part of it, but also removed, the dramaturg continuously questions the production as a whole. She/(them)/he reflects on its needs, necessities and obstinacy but also on its practical constraints, regulated processes and automatisms. In a best-case scenario she/he relates the production back to the contexts in which it stands. In this way she/he embodies the demands of history, society and politics within the artistic process and, on the other hands, represents these to the outside world.

However, in the context of a changing political, cultural and media landscape, and in view of new forms of music theatre, dance and performance, the tasks of dramaturgy become more complex. Next to knowledge of the theatre as it actually exists, of its traditions and general framework, characteristics that a good dramaturg should posses include a social imagination, a knowledge of other possibilities, a sensitivity for the new and the unknown, the ability to articulate the new and the unknown. In order to do this, in addition to the specialist’s knowledge, she/he needs above all the basic virtues of every researcher: she/he should be able to read, look, think, hear, listen, write, and have the courage to use her/their/his own intellect. (Taken from the job description at Goethe University, Frankfurt)

Do you feel a need for dramaturgy workshops in India? If yes, why?

I cannot answer this question, Jehan Maneckshaw and Sophia Stepf should, they know the situation much better. I enjoyed curiosity of the participants in the workshop conducted this year in Bangalore and Kolkata and it looks like a lot of the hassles in theatre making are the same everywhere in the world. Dramaturgy can help that.

Can we expect more such workshops in the years to come?

I would like to continue the work. 100 dramaturgs in the country are better than 25. 

Have you worked with a dramaturg for any of your productions before. If not, do you look forward to working with one in the future?

But sometimes I do direct. Then I always work with a dramaturg.

If more and more trained dramaturgs were to be employed in Indian productions, how would it affect the work being created in India?

It’ll simply get better. If you sharpen the vision of the makers, look for coherence in the means, know your audience, ask the right questions, then theatre gets better. As simple as that.

What, according to you, sets apart a play that uses a dramaturg from one that doesn’t?

It’ll get better (not only a play, any kind of theatre).

Tell us about your role in the dramaturgy workshops conducted by you and Sophia. What was your experience like?

Apart from the fruitful conversations with the participants about their projects, I enjoyed the dialogue with Sophia and Jehan, to question my own practice and to understand that “the dramaturg” is a state of mind rather than a job. It is a good thing to be the oldest.

Yuki Ellias is an actor, theatre- director and corporate coach. She trained at the Jacques Lecoq School of Theatre in Paris and is a trained pedagogue from the London International School of Performing Arts. As an actress, she has performed in the UK, US, Canada, Australia, Italy and India. Her theatre company Dur Se Brothers has produced the multi-award winning play Elephant in the Room, Hello Farmaaish, Yatagarasu and Basti Mein Masti. Her one-woman show Elephant in the Room has traveled to the Edinburg Fringe Festival, Zimbabwe, Singapore, Perth and Hong Kong. She endeavours to make theatre for diverse spaces and diverse audiences, creating original scripts and is now working on her first film screenplay. She recently co-curated a seminar series on “Copyrights and Ethics- Best Practices for Professional Theatre-artists.” And talks on “The Economics of Creating Theatre” As a corporate coach she delivers communication training programs for various organisations across the country. She has been invited to give a Ted Talk with her father on the ‘Fine Art of Losing Money – why invest in creative pursuits.’ DSM writer Pranita Pandurangi caight up with her to chat about her production, Elephant in the Room and her take on dramaturgy. 

Did you use a dramaturg for your production, Elephant in the Room? 

No. There was a first writer who did a lot of research and then, a second writer and we tried to be our own dramaturgs.

Going forth, will you be using a dramaturg for any of your productions? 

I do a lot of research for my work, since I haven’t attended the dramaturgy workshop but I am open to it. To be honest, I don’t really know what it constitutes and I do take feedback – I prefer different people to come into my work and get different sides to it. I curate that group of people who understand the kind of work I like to make and what I want to talk about. Another group who understands what I want to do aesthetically and so on. I choose people who are from the same world and understanding and whose inputs I would value for aesthetics, political context, music, etc. I don’t think one person has all those capacities and neither do I. I believe in getting a group of people in and that’s my team who has expertise on various aspects. 

I do believe that I need to have the right heads for the right aspects. I could work with a dramaturg for part of the process. 

Do you feel a need for dramaturgy in Indian theatre today?  

I think it can be useful – it’s one more skill to have. Perhaps for some theatremakers, they would want that one dramaturg. You can have a dramaturg and the problems can still arise but I think it’s pretty open in its meaning. I’m sure there are groups that might want to work like that. And there are directors who would like to work with a group of people. So I say it’s all open and it’s to be tried. So far I have not needed to have a single person as a dramaturg. I feel quite good with the team of people that I had and all my outside eyes and feedback that I had. But do I need it in the future? It could be. It still is a collaboration and you have to feel good in it. 

I don’t feel one person can be with me on the journey and I still prefer different people for different legs of the journey but they do interact and we often very quickly set the tone. Having a dramaturg might take me on another tangent which I don’t want to go to on. Constant feedback can make it harder to finish a script so I guess it has to be someone whom you can totally trust. 

If having a dramaturg wasn’t a resource constraint then would you consider it?

Frankly, I’m not looking for that one person. I’m looking for my team. I put together a team who can ask me the right questions.