Hmmm...
Just received this article in me inbox.
Interesting.
http://arts.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,,1817769,00.html
Interesting.
http://arts.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,,1817769,00.html
posted by ramganeshk at 7:51 pm
The artist’s will is secondary to the process he initiates from idea to completion. His willfulness may only be ego. - Sol Lewitt
posted by ramganeshk at 7:51 pm
6 Comments:
Yeah -- I was at the Royal Court a couple of nights ago and everyone was muttering about it. I would guess that what he says is somewhat directed at the Court, about which he does not have very positive feelings these days. I should say that Peter Gill is one of my oldest friends, though I don't see much of him these days. He was at the Court as a very young man in about 1960 and feels it has abandoned its standards in recent years.
I wish I was bold enough to write something myself in reply. My own feeling is -- based on having talked to so many writers for my recent book -- that there is no one right way to write a play. Most writers go through many drafts -- Terry Johnson said he goes through over 20 sometimes -- so really as long as the writer is confident that they will know what to accept and what to reject, I personally can't see why other peoples' feedback cannot be part of the process.
But what do the rest of you think?
By the way, I will send a couple of copies of the new book-- called Looking Back: Playwrights at the Royal Court, 1956-2006 -- as before, one to Maia and one to Ram.
"One of the problems of interventionist theatre is that it is not collaboration at all: it is autocracy masquerading as collaboration and it is essentially conservative, with all the conservative's misunderstanding of certain vital facts." - OUCH! That's a bash...
I'm a little puzzled as to where this is coming from though? I am also quite interested in his comments on dramaturgy which pose interesting questions for a writer.
There's been enough chatter about the ideal 'Royal Court Play' ... any idea on what can best describe this species? Considering it surely must exist?
And to respond to your question Harriet...
Yeah, I do believe that feedback is integral to playwriting. However the degree to which the nature of this feedback influences or even tampers with the voice of the playwright is a point of contention. I say any feedback is good feedback and I personally am a big believer of ruthless drafting iterations.
But then there's all kinds of tricky issues that arise - at what stage in the writer's evolution is this intervention being provided? Is this feedback prescriptive or facilitative? Is this feedback motivated purely by commercial viability or is it willing to risk exploring new territory?
I get spooked while giving feedback because I feel that I'm nudging the play in a direction that 'I' think is interesting and not necessarily what's best as per the writer's intentions, and as a consequence what's best for the play.
Anyway... eagerly awaiting the book. Thnx millions for the literature supply!
maia, send it to me. i don't want to let our bangalore bastion down ;))
WTF!!!
Ok ok ok. Yeesh man...
Public whack on head with newspaper not reqd please thank you very much. Tonight without fail.
And you there with the blue chalk drawin on the back of a chair - wtf is this B'lore bastion you spk of!?! N wipe tht silly grin off yer face!
:-p
"There's been enough chatter about the ideal 'Royal Court Play' ... any idea on what can best describe this species? Considering it surely must exist?"
When you get my book of interviews you will see that that was one thing I was trying to find out when I started the project. Nobody will ever give you a straight answer to that question because in one sense there is no such thing. RCT plays can be anything from tough, scary, political to gentle, funny, romantic. HOWEVER -- from the very beginning in the 1950s, when my dad said: "I want the theatre to be continuously disturbing. I want people to ask questions. I want to make them anti-conformist..." to the present day when the buzzword there is "oppositional" or "challenging" there is evidently a sense that plays that are done there must in some way or other challenge peoples' preconceptions.
Re. feedback/interference -- I also had quite a few discussions about this with the younger/newer writers I interviewed. The general feeling is that they welcomed it but felt it was important to be true to your own feeling of what you want to say and how you want to say it -- of course you listen but if that does not feel right to you, don't do it just to please the dramaturg or whoever is giving the feedback.
But what Peter's article also raises I think is the question of what happens when a play is workshopped to the point where the text is no longer by the writer -- the actors and the director have intervened to the extent that it is their play as much as (or more than) hers/his. Of course this can happen. It did even happen to some extent with some of your (all of you I mean) scenes. The thing is, does this matter? It depends, perhaps, on how much reverence one has for the act of creativity, and indeed what the act of creativity is anyway. Is it solely what happens inside the brain of a supremely gifted individual sitting in the silence of her/his room, or can it be as valuable if it is taking given materials (wherever they originated) and knowing what to do with them to produce a satisfying final product? I think the latter is just as valid. And as for commercial viability -- well, I suppose we can't say that has no importance at all, but it surely should not be the primary consideration.
Phew!
Post a Comment
<< Home