Kasia Lech
Dramaturgy of Form: Performing Verse in Contemporary Theatre
How does verse function on stage from a dramaturgical point of view? How is verse always heteroglossic, always āin dialogueā, and always the result of multiple interpretations? Where is verse located in performance now, and why has it slipped out of view as a formal and compositional device?Ā
In this Library interview Kasia Lech introduces us to Dramaturgy of Form: Performing Verse in Contemporary Theatre (London: Routledge, 2021), which pays attention to the dramaturgical effects of verse on the contemporary stage, exploring case studies from playwriting, musicals, experimental performance, hip hop and gig theatre and digital media, across a number of cultures and languages.Ā Ā
Kasia Lech is a scholar, actor, storyteller, and puppeteer. She is a Senior Lecturer in Performing Arts at Canterbury Christ Church University, where her research focuses on verse, translation, and cross-cultural encounters.Ā
Ā
[00:01:22] WHAT IS THE BOOKāS TITLE?
The title of this book is Dramaturgy of Form: Performing Verse in Contemporary Theatre.Ā Ā
[00:01:35] HOW DID YOU COME TO WRITING THIS BOOK? / WHERE DOES IT SIT IN RELATION TO YOUR PREVIOUS WORK AND INTERESTS?
The idea for the book and my work on verse goes back all the way toĀ theĀ early 2000s, studying in a drama school inĀ WrocÅawĀ ā a Polish state drama school.Ā In my second–year assessmentĀ āĀ Interpretation ofĀ Verse runsĀ for three yearsĀ in a Polish drama school, and thatās a separate subject from voice work, for exampleĀ āĀ in the second year you work with the classics.Ā SoĀ anything from Polish romantics to PolishĀ renaissance to Shakespeare andĀ CalderĆ³n,Ā etĀ cetera.Ā But you work in aĀ sort of two-threeĀ weeksāĀ system.Ā SoĀ you work on aĀ monologueĀ but you never finish it, you leave it andĀ then you go to the next one,Ā the next one, the next one. AndĀ then for the assessment you pick one of them that you worked onĀ and youĀ perform it.Ā And I picked this precious 19th–century monologue ofĀ PrincessĀ WiÅniowiecka. She has aĀ vision,Ā she is a woman that marriedĀ belowĀ herĀ āstatusāĀ and alsoĀ was haunted by visions ofĀ Poland ā thereāsĀ a lot of things happening in thoseĀ dramatic Polish dramas!Ā In that textĀ she needs to performĀ thatĀ sheās okay to marry somebody else, even though sheās already married to someone else,Ā and at the same time sheāsĀ haunted byĀ a vision that sheās trying to suppress because she doesnāt want people around her to seeĀ that she has that vision. ItĀ is written inĀ aĀ beautiful way byĀ JuliuszĀ SÅowacki,Ā that when she goes into aĀ vision, it starts getting sing-songyĀ because sheĀ is half-Ukrainian,Ā has Ukrainian roots.Ā And I really wanted to perform it.Ā ThatĀ was my favourite subject, Interpretation ofĀ Verse, so I spent hours researching it,Ā tryingĀ it,Ā playing with it,Ā and just hadĀ thisĀ wholeĀ visionĀ to perform it. MyĀ professor was totally with me, so you know he might have not been exactly happy withĀ how I wasĀ performing, but he was getting theĀ vision and my ownership of it.Ā Ā
And then cameĀ the assessment. InĀ a Polish drama school, at that time āĀ I donāt really know how it is exactlyĀ at the momentĀ āĀ it wasnāt that the professor that was assessing you wasĀ the professor that was training you, it was the entireĀ professorshipĀ of the school coming in,Ā watching it as a performanceĀ and then meeting forĀ an hour,Ā two, three hours and marking every single one of us individually. AndĀ weāre trying to listenĀ toĀ whatās happeningĀ and not being able to.Ā And he came out of that assessment, andĀ he said:Ā āWell, you know, Iām going to giveĀ yourĀ gradesā,Ā because you get the grades publicly, thereās noĀ feedback, just grades.Ā AndĀ he said:Ā āWell, before I read theĀ grades, I just want to say that there is oneĀ gradeĀ I disagree with.āĀ And that wasĀ my grade.Ā I got three and a half, which isĀ really poor,Ā and that broke my heart because I did not understand what was happening and I couldnāt get any feedback.Ā IĀ was really upset because I had this vision. AndĀ he didnāt understand as well because, you know, people were saying:Ā āOh,Ā the dress wasnāt this and the dress wasnāt that,Ā andĀ she wasnāt looking where I wanted her to look.āĀ AndĀ thatĀ was very difficult.Ā OnĀ the same day ā that wasĀ a morning assessmentĀ āĀ on the same night we had ContemporaryĀ SceneĀ assessment with a professor that was there as wellĀ at that assessment.Ā He gave us feedbackĀ at the end for our assessment, and he was saying:Ā āKasia,Ā you know I also want to address yourĀ verseĀ performance.āĀ And I said:Ā āYesā,Ā you know, still heartbroken. And he said:Ā āThere were a lot ofĀ things said about you,Ā that you know aboutĀ too much thoughtĀ wentĀ into costume, allĀ that stuff.Ā But actually, noneĀ of that was a problem. The problem was that you got yourself so much intoĀ rhythmĀ that it became very emotionally monotonous,Ā and that was the biggest problem.Ā I disagree with everything else that was said.āĀ
AndĀ it made me start thinking about that,Ā and I wrote myĀ MastersĀ thesis about acting with verseĀ and how verse provides acting tools and means of expression.Ā ThatĀ wasĀ supposed to be then turned intoĀ aĀ PhD with ProfessorĀ PiÄczkaĀ at the University ofĀ WrocÅaw, who unfortunately died aĀ few months after I graduated.Ā AtĀ the same time straight after that assessment,Ā my professorsĀ ofĀ verse,Ā three of them,Ā asked me to sit in the classes and start doing assistantship. ItāsĀ the way dramaĀ schoolsĀ in Poland work: you doĀ aĀ PhD, thatās one thing,Ā but also you need to doĀ āassistantshipāĀ to be lecturers.Ā I started doing assistantshipĀ with them, soĀ I was sitting in the classes and watching others and giving feedback and helpingĀ professors to communicate with younger students. And that happened stillĀ afterĀ I graduated from dramaĀ school,Ā I continuedĀ that.Ā SoĀ there were those two things happening…Ā Then it allĀ wantĀ onĀ pause when I went to Ireland.Ā I just took a complete a career breakĀ that I needed.Ā I went toĀ Ireland by accident,Ā I stayed by accident,Ā and two years later I woke up one dayĀ andĀ said:Ā āOkay, so whatās happeningĀ withĀ that PhD?āĀ
AndĀ I contacted universities inĀ IrelandĀ andĀ I started talking.Ā I picked University College Dublin with my wonderfulĀ supervisorsĀ DrĀ Cathy LeeneyĀ and DrĀ Catriona Clutterbuck.Ā I wanted initially to write something aboutĀ training and how can we train actors for that,Ā becauseĀ that ideaĀ that wasĀ stillĀ there:Ā whatĀ were theĀ tools that I needed to address that feedback from the assessment and exam?Ā But they asked me:Ā āOkay, but why do you need that newĀ method?āĀ I said:Ā āWellĀ with the currentĀ methods, the focus is on the rules and whatĀ an actorĀ has to do,Ā but actuallyĀ nobody talks about what it gives you.āĀ And they asked me:Ā āBut what does it give you?āĀ And then,Ā you know, I could answer, intuitivelyĀ butĀ IĀ actually hadĀ no evidence, hardĀ evidence.Ā So actually, myĀ PhD was about what it gives you and whatĀ does verse bring to the performance?Ā That got funded byĀ theĀ Irish Research CouncilĀ ā aĀ postgraduate scholarshipĀ āĀ and that was great. And Iām very, very grateful for that.Ā Ā
But even then,Ā it wasnāt thatĀ argument in the bookĀ āĀ itĀ wasnāt there. ItĀ was really about what it does, what functionsĀ itĀ performs. But at the sameĀ timeĀ I was still performing and creating work in Ireland,Ā in Polish theatre inĀ Ireland,Ā work that wasĀ multilingual.Ā AndĀ that idea of multilingualismĀ and heteroglossiaĀ andĀ my practical experience of thatĀ made me shift how IĀ understandĀ andĀ made me clarify exactly,Ā name what it is that the verse does in a performance in one sentence. AndĀ thatās what the book is about.Ā
[00:09:00] WHAT IS THE BOOK ABOUT AND WHAT IS THE MAIN OVERARCHING THESIS OR ARGUMENT?
SoĀ theĀ book looks atĀ verseĀ in theatre, but also across other media like social media,Ā like movies,Ā transmedia projects,Ā across different languages and cultural contexts.Ā SoĀ theĀ main focusĀ is Ireland,Ā PolandĀ and the UK, because thatās whatĀ my experience of theatre is rooted in.Ā But it addressesĀ productions from Russia, Spain,Ā Nigeria and artists working across several linguistic and cultural contexts. All those works were created inĀ theĀ 21stĀ century ā soĀ the performances.Ā
TheĀ overarching argument is thatĀ verse isĀ heteroglossic.Ā WhatĀ it means is thatĀ itĀ is builtĀ on the dialogue,Ā it has a dialogic nature, which means that there areĀ oftenĀ contradicting viewpoints interacting with each other. And some of those viewpointsĀ areĀ facilitatedĀ byĀ the words,Ā and some of those viewpoints areĀ facilitated by the structure, rhythmic structure thatĀ structures theĀ words as well as grammar and syntax.Ā And thatās theĀ basic argument. But then what happens isĀ thatĀ heteroglossicĀ nature,Ā those dialogues,Ā thatĀ āin dialogueāĀ qualityĀ of verseĀ has dramaturgical consequences.Ā AndĀ thoseĀ dramaturgicalĀ consequences are particularly suited for contemporary theatre practice andĀ that constantly changing world, those contexts that escapeĀ in simple geographical,Ā culturalĀ or national boundaries,Ā thatĀ heteroglossicĀ nature ofĀ theĀ contemporary world. And thatās the overarching argument.Ā Ā
Ā
[00:10:57] WHAT DOES THE BOOK CONTRIBUTE TO THE EXISTING BODY OF KNOWLEDGE IN ITS FIELD?
So this is the first book to look at verse as a dramaturgy and to look at it as a performance rather than something that is rooted in literature. And it shifts that discussion, which is on the one hand central for theatre because Western theatre has been created in dialogue with verse and in a strong relationship with verse ā you know, from all Shakespeare, Greek drama, CalderĆ³n, MoliĆØre, Racine to contemporary dub poetry and hip hop, verse is there all the time ā but at the same time, as a subject of research in performance, it has been very peripheral, and, in particular, in English language scholarship thereās that 20th–century sentiment that somehow verse is dead to theatre. Some American scholars have expressed the view that it is something that is from the past, you know, covered with dust. So it changes that perspective and it very much shows verse as something that is at the forefront of contemporary theatre in terms of aesthetics, its politics, its engagement with society.Ā
It also offers a new way of analysing verse in a performance context through that dialogic interaction. And that suits dramaturgs, directors, people interested in studying verse or verse drama in the broadest sense of performance, so also, for example, poetry. But it also starts questioning existing methods of verse-speaking training because it also shows that actors are at the forefront of that, an actor is central to the process of verse dramaturgy. And itās interesting that thereās only very few of the productions I talk about that actually have a named dramaturg. In a lot of those productions, a lot of those works, the dramaturg role is either occupied by an actor, or they shared and collaborated between different members of the team. And itās not because they are in that traditional paradigm of playwright to director, quite the opposite ā they challenge that paradigm. But itās about actors taking much more ownership, and agency in contemporary verse performance.Ā
It also shows that verse is shifting the broader ecologies of theatre and aesthetics of theatre. In a sense it makes the use of what Hans-Thies Lehmann said in his Postdramatic Theatre book that ā and Iām paraphrasing now, I havenāt learned the book by heart! ā that there will come a time when theatre will shift to that stylised approach again. And it shows how the postdramatic aesthetics and verse are meeting in those contemporary works, shifting ā challenging definitions of theatre, of postdramatic, of actor, of character [of form and content relations].Ā
[00:14:13] WHAT IS THE STRUCTURE OF THE BOOK AND WHY?
The structure of the book responds to ā in my head, itās not articulated in the book, itās for me, but I think itās worth sharing it ā [it] responds to that idea that verse is somehow stuck in the past.Ā Ā So when I was thinking about the book, I had to make the tough choices of things I want to write and the productions I will write about, because there was so much ā and it was painful making that decision of what I will not write about.Ā Ā
First of all of course there is an introduction, and then thereās a theoretical chapter that introduces my theory and explains how that method of analysis works. But then the remaining three chapters ā chapters two, three and four ā look at verse in that context of past, present and future. So the second chapter looks at translation and adaptation in the context of verse, but it looks how verse re–energises those ātreasuresā from the past, like a Greek tragedy, like CalderĆ³n, like romantic drama in Poland. The third chapter then looks at the current political context. So it looks at identities that escape simple geographical, national or linguistic boundaries. It looks at precarity, it looks at protest and how verse provides a platform of engaging with that moment, now, and how it gives voice to voices that are marginalised in contemporary theatre and the broader cultural context. And then the final chapter, the fourth chapter, looks at verse in new forms of theatre. So looking exactly in that postdramatic context, how it shifts and problematises our understanding of the relationship between content and form, how it plays with temporal structures. It uses Rebecca Schneiderās idea of new materialism a lot, in particular when I talk about work by Marta GĆ³rnicka, which is postdramatic chorus. The structures she uses are verse, but at the same time I call it āverse on steroidsā. What she does is just versified verse āāÆI donāt know if that makes any sense but thatās what it is. So itās the future, if you like.Ā
Thatās how the book is structured.
[00:16:48] HOW ENJOYABLE/DIFFICULT WAS IT TO WRITE THE BOOK?
It depends āwhenā. So the constant choice of what I will not write about, especially that when I was finishing, there were so many new exciting works being created [I could not write about it]. So that choice was very painful, and it was not enjoyable at all.Ā Ā But at the same time, because it comes from love and it comes from my practice and comes from the whole journey that I went through from Poland, Ireland, to the UK, it felt like an expression of something that was important and long–time coming. In a sense there were parts of the book that were just swimming out of my mouth, in particular that chapter about marginalised identities ā so, chapter three. It was just there! It was just there and was waiting to come out. So in a sense, it felt very much cathartic.Ā Ā
[00:17:58] WHAT IS YOUR FAVOURITE PASSAGE, CHAPTER OR IDEA FROM THIS BOOK?
There are a lot of favourite moments and it depends on which hat I have on ā as a Polish theatre writer, a theatre–maker, a scholar. I have always battled with Polish romanticism and patriarchal ideas, so any time I write about a production that challenges it, these are always my favourite moments to have a dig at Polish romanticism. But I think overall my favourite section is that section three, chapter three that looks at verse that is no longer as Ibsen once called it āthe language of the godsā ā verse was the language of the gods and therefore no self-respecting playwright should ever use verse in theatre.Ā Ā
But the fact that some verses now reclaimed by those that are not allowed to have a voice in theatre that are somehow pushed to the margins, that idea I find very powerful and it somehow feels like a karma coming back. So I loved writing that chapter, and this is probably my favourite in terms of my work as a theatre-maker as well and working with stereotypes.Ā But I also really enjoyed those elements where the actors come to have ownership and claim their agency over the production, when they become the force, whether as a playwright or playwright-performer or whether as a dramaturg or a translator. So all those moments that really shift the existing ecologies of theatre making that shift the ownership and where the agency is ā these are my little pearls that I really like in that book.Ā Ā Ā Ā
Ā Ā
Transcription by Nick AwdeĀ
Clips Summary
[00:00:15 to 00:01:19] Montage of video material from YouTube trailers for Marta GĆ³rnickaās Hymn do miÅoÅci (2017), Teatro Inversoās Rosaura (2016) and Inua Ellamsā The 14th Tale (2009), selected by Kasia Lech and edited by Juan SalazarĀ
Works Cited
Lehmann, Hans-Thies (1999/2006) Postdramatic Theatre, London and New York: Routledge.Ā
Ā