JANET PILLAI's keynote presentation examines the notion of dramaturgy in Asia and its expanding role in context of the 21st century. It explores how the shaping a production or performance is not necessarily limited to writers and directors but may involve traditional and contemporary cultural leaders or mediators.
The field of Performance Studies has opened up our notions of the ‘performative’ and provided us with a methodology and the analytical tools to study all manner and aspects of performance. Paradigm shifts in the study of performance has opened up the exploration of dramaturgy in traditional and contemporary performance genres, ceremonial, cultural, political and business events, and even in our everyday lives (with or without the presence of a dramaturg).
This presentation attempts to look at the practice of dramaturgy and the role of the dramaturg in different performative contexts and how the practice transcends time and place. Dramaturgy is defined simply as the theory and practice of structuring the dramatic composition of a work. It may involve an interrogative or an interactive process of engagement with composition, analysis, interpretation, structure and communication that facilitates meaning-making of/through a performative ‘event’.
Dramaturgy of Cultural Reform
Playwright, dramaturg and critic G.E. Lessing is seen as one of the pioneers of dramaturgy in the European theatre tradition. In his Hamburg Dramaturgy, a compilation of essays on dramatic theory written between 1767-1769, he discusses the mechanics of dramatic composition and its mode of operation and termed the process ‘dramaturgy’. Underlying his dramaturgical discourse and practice was an interest in cultural reform aimed at producing a theatre that was relevant to a German society at the time, a common aim shared by other 18th century pioneers of dramaturgy after him.
I interject here with my experience at the National Cultural Complex in Kuala Lumpur (1986-1994) as a trainer and director in a children’s theatre program for young people aged 10-16.
I was aware that the two persons Ismail Zain and Krishen Jit, who brought me on board, shared a common vision to develop a kind of ‘Malaysian’ children’s theatre when they mooted the program.
As there were no written masterpieces and no tradition of actor training for children’s theatre in Malaysia I relied on an ensemble approach to performance-making. Creative agency and authorship of the performance-making process was shared by artist collaborators and the young actors. The program harnessed a range of available resources; legends, films and live performances of Malaysian performing arts, observations of urban living, skill classes with traditional instructors in music and dance etc. Drawing upon these eclectic materials and vocabularies participants devised scenes that would articulate “a Malaysian sensibility and a semiotic of their location” (Rajendran 2004).
As a new director I worked intuitively rather than objectively to edit, orchestrate, and structure their improvisations. Krishen as ‘mentor’ would attend showcase sessions of work-in-progress, ask probing questions and suggest dramaturgical possibilities. In retrospect I believe that there were two levels of dramaturgy simultaneously at play. The first was the immediate dramaturgical struggle of a new director attempting to provide shape to devised work generated by the group. The second was Krishen’s larger dramaturgy whereby he framed the context for the development of an identifiable theatre for children which articulated a Malaysian ethos.
Dramaturgy of Other Realities
Over the span of a 100 years, Lessing’ writings inspired a legacy of institutional dramaturgs in Europe, whose role in theatre companies included preparing seasons, casting and mediating the interpretation of dramatic texts. In 1873 when Schiller was appointed dramaturg in Mannheim, he and the director Goethe would engage in critical and creative dialogue on form and content and the two would move between theoretical reflection and practical exploration in the process of constructing coherent, unified performances. By the 20th century however, the textual orientation of dramaturgy was challenged by the rise of post-war avant-garde theatre.
When Artaud attended a performance of Balinese dance at the Paris International Colonial Exposition in 1931 he was struck by how the performance appealed intensely to the senses; how gamelan music and dance movements created a concrete physical language and intense stage poetry (Artaud 1958). This chance encounter was to reinforce his notion of creating a performance language that would awaken the audience’ unconscious with its presence. Artaud’s dramaturgical strategy dealt with the composition of sound, light, image and gesture that would create a visceral assault on the audience senses shocking them on a physiological level to examine their ‘double’ or the darker forces of their inner reality.
Main Puteri, a performative healing ceremony practiced in Southern Thailand and the Malay state of Kelantan, illustrates how music, chanting and movement can induce an altered state of awareness. The bomoh (shaman/medicine man) performs the role of dramaturg ‘live’ in this social event before a village audience. Using the materials of music, movement and energy (angin), he brokers the ‘play’ between protagonist (the patient) and antagonist (the spirits/puteri).
Paul Chen describes how the bomoh assisted by a master of spirits (minduk) and a troupe of musicians, is able to provide a conceptual framework around which the sick individual can organize his vague, mysterious and chaotic symptoms so that they become comprehensible and orderly, drawing the sick individual out of his state of morbid self-absorption and heightening his feelings of self-worth. The involvement of family, relatives and friends tends to enhance group solidarity and reintegrate the sick individual into his immediate social group. (Paul PC, 1979). In trance performance, the shaman works within a metaphysical context to create a performative space that facilitates the performer’s passage between the animate and inanimate realm or in and out of elevated or reduced consciousness.
Textual non-textual performance traditions are a phenomenon found in all geographies. It is as diverse as the ideological, socio-cultural, historical and political contexts from which performance emerges. The cultural phenomenon of ‘performance’ that serves diverse purposes and audiences necessitates that dramaturgy or the practice of dramatic composition is an adaptive process that is able to respond to place, people and use.
Dramaturgy of Disruption
Brecht’s dialectical dramaturgy was a disruptive response to the political climate of the times and a reaction against naturalistic theatre. After experiencing a demonstration of Beijing Opera by the actor Mei Lanfang in 1935 in Berlin, Brecht comments on how Chinese traditional acting understood the estrangement effect and applied it most subtly. He commented on how the everyday is stylized, how the actor holds himself remote from the character being portrayed, and is able to expresses his awareness of being watched (Brecht 1936). Through the application of ‘verfremdungseffekt ’(estrangement effect) Brecht made dramatic structure itself an instrument for facilitating an analysis of social reality. His disruptive devices distanced the audience from the unfolding narrative and enabled the actors to present their social condition to the audience for critical enquiry.
Participatory Dramaturgy
In a move to empower the ordinary people even more, the practice of participatory dramaturgy as pedagogy emerged and became particularly popularly in developing countries in Asia, Africa and Latin America in the 70’s. Examples of companies which were involved in what was termed as Theatre for Development, Popular Theatre and Theater for Education included PETA in the Philippines, KUNCI in Indonesia, Black Tent Theatre in Japan Alternative Living Theatre in West Bengal etc. There were three main variations to the model; theatre by, for and with the people.
Theatre by and with community applied what could be termed participatory dramaturgy. In the absence of, or rather, in rejecting texts, cultural workers or animateurs mobilized participants from communities and worked jointly with them on the process of devising a performance. Participants addressed their own problems, examined cause and effect within the internal mechanisms of their societal structure and used indigenous art forms to communicate findings and solutions to the community. Participants undertook multiple roles as observer, researcher, dramaturg, spect-actor or facilitator while animateurs inculcated group dynamics, social mobilization, theatre skills and helped facilitate post performance discussions with audiences.
Since the beginning of the 21st century, Theater for Development has been overshadowed by the more politically acceptable socially-engaged arts practice. As urbanism grows into an unwieldy problem in Asia, local authorities realize that they lack the know-how to manage urban disengagement, alienation, rural-urban migration etc. There is a growing recognition that arts and culture plays a significant social function in community-building and place-making. As in the West, Asia has multiple and hybrid manifestations of socially engaged arts which includes the co-creation of festivals and performances ‘with’ community, the activation of abandoned and public spaces ‘for’ community and the rejuvenation ‘of’ community agency through self-initiated projects.
Pedagogical Dramaturgy
In Malaysia the organization Arts-ED initiates arts and heritage education projects for young people aged 10-16. These educational projects are meant to complement the conservation efforts undertaken by concerned citizens and heritage groups in the world heritage site of George Town, Penang. The projects are aimed at helping community and younger residents retrace lost narratives of tangible and intangible heritage.
Young residents take on the role of researchers and investigate history, the cultural environment and community in a real-life context. They then take on a dramaturgical role to synthesize and compose their findings in the form of creative outputs such as performance, exhibition, craft, publications, etc.
The role of the project leader and young dramaturgs is to find a way to present the topography of the multicultural townscape and perspectives of the community for reflection and to blurr the lines between spectator and participant. Art-making is used as a cultural force to mediate change of perception in the young residents and community towards their cultural legacies.
Dialogical Dramaturgy
In Japan, the growth of community-based arts initiatives is associated with its post-industrial and post-modernization history. Issues such as large-scale natural disasters, industrial pollution, aging population and the degeneration of rural economies have been the main impetus for revitalization policies since the 80s. These policies, supported by municipalities, universities and local government encourage initiatives that originate from within communities and encourage self-determinism and autonomy.
Small scale art projects such as the Toride Art Project, Yanaka no Otake, Cocoroom etc. tend to focus on connecting communities with their locality, engendering new channels of communication and trust among urbanites. In these projects a mediator coordinates the interface between stakeholders, artists, place and community. The artist as dramaturg frames an art project employing a dialogical dramaturgical process. The art-making process draws the community into social interaction, sharing perspectives and negotiations that lead to creative outcomes. Projects are designed to create new solidarities between migrants and locals, rural and urban or young and old.
Dramaturgy for all Occasions
Sociologist Erving Goffman (Goffman 1959) adapted the term dramaturgy from the theatre and used it to examine micro sociological human interactions which he argues are dependent on time, place and audience. He describes humans as social actors who take on and play various established roles on cue (even donning costumes and props) appropriate to the setting and audience. The arena of politics and business has also been associated with ‘performance’. Dramaturgy is seen to be at work in the orchestration of text, action and mise-en-scene, where crafting of the political event or business presentation is critical to image or impression management in relation to the public or the client.
The examination of dramaturgy demands a more expansive and flexible approach. While positivist forms of categorization such as periodization, genre, authorship and regionalization may be useful for descriptive and analytical purposes, in reality they can be restrictive, defying the immediacy of space, time and context and denying the process of change and chance. Artaud’s and Brecht’s chance meetings with Asian performance that acted as a catalyst in rethinking their dramaturgical strategies points to how a dramaturg is constantly involved in the dynamic process of response and adaptation to the milieu, to material and mediums, to creative relationships between collaborators and their crafts.
The role of a dramaturg is not so easily defined. The dramaturg has been described differently in different circumstances; objective observer, interpreter, creative mediator, coach, intervener, broker, curator etc. The role is shaped by several variables; the context, the content, the type of performance, the audiences, the intentions, creative relationships.
A dramaturg acts to engage with the social (or metaphysical) realities of the time and place; to interpret or promote discourse or viewpoints within a society, to intervene and make aware. The role calls for an understanding of (and sometimes a breaking of) boundaries, cultural codes, semiotics and philosophy shared between maker and spectator. It requires the ability to locate the event within a larger intention and the milieu of the society and to effectively synthesis performance elements to enable the spectator to make meaning.