If you follow Devilvet's blog, you may have read some of these things, but I'm reposting some of those things here in a more coherent way.
Most people only interact with the playwriting process through critique or reviews. I wonder if there are other options we haven't explored yet. I'm curious to see what can happen if we take a more exploratory approach (at least at this stage), something that can help writers see the potential directions their work can take in form, content, and interpretation.
Central to this process would be the concept of safe space (drawn from my experiences as someone who inhabits minority space). To explain sort of what I'm getting at, let me draw a parallel between what I'm aiming for here and the experience of minority space vs. privileged space. Privileged space often - even unintentionally - serves to maintain the status quo (which is often problematic for people on the margins). As a result, the environment feels imposing and judgmental rather than open. OTOH, when I'm in minority space, I feel freer to express what I think and feel about things because the atmosphere is one of sharing. It's not about agreeing with or liking everyone or everything. It's about shared visions, values, and/or experiences.
The environment I want to foster for WIP is very much like that in minority space. There needs to be an engagement with the work that's more substantial than "liked it" or "didn't like it" but not as rigorous as a critique. The idea is to figure out what a WIP is doing, not whether it's any good or not. What I'm going for is getting a stronger grasp on what Stuart Spencer calls a script's Ur-play. That is, the play you really need to write (often oh so different from the one you put on paper).
Let me be clear: I definitely don't want to analyze my plays to death before I'm done. However, I do want to get a better sense of my play's style and content and become aware of the possibilities these present. Although on the surface these conversations don't do much, they do serve an important function once the serious revisions begin. Namely, they keep me in touch with the emotional core of my work. One of my weaknesses as a writer is that I try to do too much with each piece. I tinker so much that I often chip the heart of my script away. As a result, I tend to spend more time un-writing than writing or rewriting. Something like this can help me stay focused as I'm revising my work.
I don't have a precise methodology for this, only general concepts and principles, various areas of emphasis (described above). Overall, I like a format that offers an observation followed by a related question (a version of "Yes, and...") But this is not set in stone. It's just an idea of what I hope to get out of all this.
There's a great framework for play development that's in use at Chicago Dramatists, which I wish I knew more about - but it comes back to the well-formed question. For me, that's usually a question that has very little superlative language in it - it's less about what the reader liked, didn't like - but it is often a diagnosis of what themes or moments resonate - identifying the moments where the audience is reacting without passing judgement on whether they enjoyed being resonated in that way, or the specific images or memories that they were reminded of. It's then (part of) the playwright's job to decide why they think the audience reacts and craft the play to achieve the effect they want to achieve.
ReplyDeleteWhat questions have opened up a play for you as a playwright? Is blogging a suitable place to react to a play? I for one can't really understand how a play functions without hearing it read. I think if I were to build the perfect online play development workshop, it would have to include some kind of recorded spoken word, even with unfinished work. How about you?
...it comes back to the well-formed question. For me, that's usually a question that has very little superlative language in it - it's less about what the reader liked, didn't like - but it is often a diagnosis of what themes or moments resonate - identifying the moments where the audience is reacting without passing judgement on whether they enjoyed being resonated in that way, or the specific images or memories that they were reminded of. It's then (part of) the playwright's job to decide why they think the audience reacts and craft the play to achieve the effect they want to achieve.
ReplyDeleteThis is the kind of thing I was going for. I think Liz Lerman's method is one tool it's possible to use, but I'm eager to find others as well.
What questions have opened up a play for you as a playwright? Is blogging a suitable place to react to a play?
It depends on what you get out of it. I'm more comfortable writing than speaking because of my introverted temperament (not anti-social, just drained by a lot of social interaction; I need a lot of time to recharge through solitude). Also, I almost always feel as if I'm speaking out of turn, which makes me reluctant to share my perspectives unless openly and frequently asked to do so. It's not that I don't have thoughts I want to share, but I rarely assume people want to hear them. It takes great effort for me to speak without invitation or to interrupt people. If I'm in the room with one or more people who are on the opposite end of the spectrum (extremely outgoing), I clam up or shut down then feel like I wasted my time.
I for one can't really understand how a play functions without hearing it read. I think if I were to build the perfect online play development workshop, it would have to include some kind of recorded spoken word, even with unfinished work. How about you?
There are ways around that. YouTube, for one. I think we can put video and/or audio on our blogs too. Granted, I am very camera shy, so I won't be putting myself out like that. However, if people can find a way to post a "reading" of each other's work online, that would actually be awesome.
But a reading usually requires coordination with actors and what not, off the net sort of stuff. Unless we are all going to read our scripts into our laptop mics and put that out on the web.
ReplyDeleteInteresting? I'm not sure. Sustainable? Maybe...I'm doubtful.
It is achievable. Just see a lot of obstacles.
To add to Nick K's thoughts about Chicago Dramatists methodology for responding at readings...The audience is not really allowed to ask the playwright to justify or explain anything. Usually a moderator will ask the audience questions about what they saw and how it affected them or guided questions the playwright has about the piece.
I find that the end result can definitely cushion the author from a emotional exchange with the audience based on how the audience perceives the work. Judgments are still present and still shared even if in subtle non superlative ways.
The playwright is sometimes a fly on the wall, something the elephant in the room no one is talking about or too, sometimes the playwright will speak, sometimes they will just listen.
Perhaps the net is the answer. But should it be the public sphere? Or is there something to be gained by a closed network...i.e. a blog that only the participants have access to? Using the tools of the blogosphere more like a meal your invited to at someone's house rather than an invitation to a picnic at the local park?
If receiving a very specific kind of feedback is important, maybe your net doesn't have to always be world wide. Especially if the clay on the wheel is still to soft.
That's the hard thing about going world wide. It seems that it unavoidably becomes part of a market for lack of a better term.
The sketches in the sketchbook are not necessarily product in the same way the oil painting based on those sketches are. The sketches are "process". Or are they? Specificity is probably one key to communicating what is "process" and what is "product" when it comes to text like RVC's been sharing.
Is there anything else that is essential?
BTW, RVCbard...thank you for putting this stuff out there on your blog. I dig the new layout. And, even if I haven't read all the entries yet. I am excited too. I think though I should save any thoughts I have until I get a clearer notion of how and who you want to respond to the "work"
Does any of that make sense?
Perhaps the net is the answer. ...Using the tools of the blogosphere more like a meal your invited to at someone's house rather than an invitation to a picnic at the local park?
ReplyDeleteI always assumed this as the default stance on anyone's blog, including my own.
I think though I should save any thoughts I have until I get a clearer notion of how and who you want to respond to the "work."
I pretty much invite any playwright or other theater artist to weigh in, especially those who're interested/participating in avant-garde theater.
As far as how to respond, that's another thing altogether. At this stage, I'm still not exactly sure what I want, but I know I clearly don't want critique, review, or instruction.
I think what Nick posits is one approach I'm open to right now:
...it's less about what the reader liked, didn't like - but it is often a diagnosis of what themes or moments resonate - identifying the moments where the audience is reacting without passing judgment on whether they enjoyed being resonated in that way, or the specific images or memories that they were reminded of.
Maybe it's because I majored in English, but this sort of discourse seems natural to me, especially in light of the fact that I had to read and give thoughtful responses to a lot of material that really wasn't to my taste. In general, everything I wrote was a variation of one question: What did I think was really going on? There were many approaches to take (try a Freudian analysis of a medieval Chinese novel), and they all reveal something about what I read that I hadn't considered before. Of course, unlike a term paper, you don't need a thesis; you can just ask the questions.
That's one thing I'd appreciate. I hope that makes things a bit clearer.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeletedv:Perhaps the net is the answer. ...Using the tools of the blogosphere more like a meal your invited to at someone's house rather than an invitation to a picnic at the local park?
ReplyDeletervc:I always assumed this as the default stance on anyone's blog, including my own.
Of course, I respect your wishes, but I don't think it is safe to assume that default as the one you encounter when posting material for public consumption.
I am not concerned completely with safety. Especially in regards to avant garde work. Usually I am asking the audience to take a risk. The reciprocity that almost always seem to occur whether I assume/allow for it or not...is that I take a risk as well. When the writer has such very specific guidelines about how one is allowed to respond...animosity and negativity are not the only things lost.
Perhaps the question swimming in my head is, once published in a public forum is it ever really still a WIP?
The intent of the author falls away from anything once it goes public.
...once published in a public forum is it ever really still a WIP?
ReplyDeleteI have my own ideas about that, but my mind is more focused on the work I'm creating now.