Getting to the Centre of the Play: A Conversation with Katherine Mendelsohn

The Fictions Podcast - Episode Two Transcript

IFM : Today I'm talking to translator and dramaturg Katherine Mendelsohn. Katherine was the literary manager at the Traverse Theatre in Edinburgh for over a decade, working with playwrights like Rona Munro, David Greig and Jon Fosse. Before that, she worked at the Gate Theatre, the Royal Shakespeare Company and the Royal Court. As a translator, she has brought the voices of contemporary Francophone writers from France, Québec and across Africa to UK stages as well as translating French classics.

In this conversation, Katherine really gets to the centre of creating work for theatre. Talking about some of the key things she looks at when involved in developing a piece of work. Some of the things she talks about changed the way I think about writing overnight. The day after we talked, I woke up with a new play in my head. She's inspiring. I hope you enjoy listening.

IFM : So Katherine, just tell me a little bit about your own work.

KM : Well, my work for 25, 30 years was as a dramaturg or literary manager. So working to enable artists, whether they be playwrights... dramaturgs can also work with dancers, with something where there's no words. It's not just about written text. So as a dramaturg, you are helping enable what an artist wants to achieve and make sure that that's communicating fully.

Because as an artist, sometimes you think you're very clear in your head about what you're saying and you are assuming that that's communicating to an audience, but it's not always. Now that could be in a dance piece. So you're checking about what is the storytelling. How are we...is there a shape to this piece? As an audience member? Do we come in at one level and leave enriched so that we leave at a slightly greater level...because we've had an experience and that goes for plays. Also dance works. So a dramaturg is helping to find out what the artist wants to achieve and then helping enable that and refine it to make sure it's communicating as well as the artist intends.

IFM: And you work throughout the production with key members of the team and throughout.

KM: Well, my work certainly at the Traverse Theatre, working with Philip Howard. You know, I did that for eight years. What I would do is I would be involved from point of commission. So first of all, we were at that point, the Traverse would be saying to the writer, what do you want to write? And the writer would tell you what they wanted to write. And you weren't auditioning the idea, you were just saying, great, good luck. Of you go.

And the writer would go off, and sometimes they would come back in six months and go, actually, that was the wrong idea. I was going down a dead end. I'm going to write a totally different play. And that was okay, because what we were commissioning was the writer, not the idea. That was a particular way of working that I think was very beneficial. I think when you put that trust in an artist, everyone, we all respond to trust.

And I think just saying to an artist, I like your writing, I want you to write us a play. Is what the artistic director and myself working for them and with them would be doing with a writer. We'd say, you have the talent. We want to hear what you're going to do with it.

IFM: That must be a creative space for a writer to be working in.

KM: It really was. And we got some amazing results and I don't mean everything was always brilliant. It was mixed. Any new writing, theatre, any brilliant playwright will sometimes hit the mark, sometimes have a bit of a wobble, sometimes hit the mark again next play. You know, it's a really up and down thing with new writing, but it was okay because it wasn't that if you didn't hit the mark...sometimes you'd only find that out in production as a writer, and we would be working to try and make sure the best incarnation of that play possible happened. And then also to trust that artists might well write a totally different play next time.

And really experienced writers like David Greig, who I worked with a great deal, and yourself Iain, actually...but, you know, David always said it was really important that he had plays that did dreadfully. Because you don't progress as an artist if you don't have the highs and lows you are unlikely to be moving forward. So I feel a lot for a lot of artists in today's climate who, are maybe terrified that if a play doesn't go well, they won't be asked again because there are so few opportunities in Scotland currently, and it's just a combination of circumstance... and a sort of pile up of Covid, funding, a whole load of disasters. But there are very, very few opportunities at the moment for production in Scotland. And for commission, actually, very few opportunities to commission which reduces the chances, so you're even more terrified of having a play that doesn't do well.

Whereas actually, I think as an artist, all of us as artists, not just as a writer...but any of us are worried about,'but what if it doesn't go well?' And I think the older you get, and I'm not in my fifties, and I just go, well, actually, it's really important to occasionally mess, ask a really stupid question. It doesn't mean you're not clever, sharp, intelligent, brilliant. It just means you are okay with what risk means. And you understand risk's place in creation.

IFM: Yeah, that's a very good point. So at the start of the process, then, what kind of questions come up with a writer? Even before say the first draft is written.

KM: Oh, gosh. The questions are absolutely based on if it's on a first draft the writer has delivered. They're based on that draft. So they're not the same for every playwright. And, nor the same for playwright with a particular play, then with another play of theirs.

So I'm not trying to hedge the question. I'm just saying that, you know, quite often, you are looking at, what for me as a dramaturg, working with the text, I might be looking at things related to that text. So the areas that do come up in common are... I will always examine title. I will always think about whether that title is the right title for that play.

Sometimes writers know the title before they even start writing. That's just one particular way of working. I'm not counselling it for everyone, but it's just one thing. Other writers won't do the title until they've really understood something about their play. So, quite late in the process, at the point where it might be needing to be programmed, and they will have up till then, they will have a thing called a working title.

And the only reason I would ask about titles with writers delivering drafts is just to go, does this title tell me something about this play? Does it tell me too much about this play? Therefore, there's no point seeing the play because it's all in the title. I've had that. I had one script delivered, which was called 'Socrates, or the man who poisoned himself to death'. And I thought well, there's no surprise there. We know what happens to Socrates.

So... the note I did give that particular writer was, the title is telling us too much. And, you know, it's not that it's a surprise. We might know...people... some people might know some research or whatever, what happened to Socrates, but is that the focus of the play? Is that play...what is its tone? Does the title... sometimes titles are brilliant and sometimes they're oblique, and that is good and right for that play.

And sometimes they're too upfront and there's no surprise. And that's really interesting territory because it's a way to tap into what is the writer wanting the play to be? What is the writer wanting the experience for an audience to be? And that is quite interesting. It's about tonal things and it's about, sometimes surprise, which is a tremendously important ingredient in playwriting. The less good plays have the least surprise.

And I don't mean inevitability. That is different. But, you know, writers have often said to me that sometimes it's good when a character surprises them when they're writing the character. And that is a level of detachment from creation and immersion in the situation where the your creation surprises you. And that is really quite extraordinary when that happens. You can't force it. It's just that that is interesting to think about.

If something is very predictable to you as the creator, might it be as predictable to the audience? And is that a problem or not? So they're all issues you look at. So, you know, I start with simple stuff. I start with title and exploring that, doesn't need to be decided in that moment if it's not ready to be, but it's an important territory for a creator in theatre.

Because the title will go on the poster, it will be the thing that makes people think, do I want to see this play or not? And I've never changed a title for a writer. I'll let it be their decision, genuinely. Because it's very important. It comes from the creator of the play. It's just if it's either misleading or if it has associations that they didn't intend or... I've had plays do that.

The other thing I look at always with plays is...page length. Because I think a play should be as long as the story merits. So if the story merits it being 35 pages, that's okay. And if the play is, on the whole, the average length for a full length evening play, the maximum could be about 85/90 pages. Now, I know that depends on fonts and whether it is double spaced and all of that...

But if it's much longer than that, you've got to start going, does it earn those extra pages? Because are you repeating things you've said before in the story? Is that why it's longer? Because if that's why it's longer, those things are easier to trim back. How many times does an issue need to be said, and is it creatively said in different ways, or is it just repeated? Because those are areas you might look at with the artist as a dramaturg.

IFM: What about finding the very centre of the play? What it's about...  I find that a bit difficult, myself.

KM: That is the most difficult thing, I would say. I don't think that's any one individual's job. It is a collective audience experience about the centre of the play. But for the writer, clearly it is a thing. I mean, I know very, very good, very experienced playwrights... who with certain plays have said, I thought it was about this, but after rehearsal and production and seeing it do a month long run, I realised it was about that. So sometimes you do not know upfront, and that is no fault of the individual. It's about it being about a complex subject. So a play is never about... and then the aunt goes to the funeral... and then... that's not what it's about. That's plot.

And that is not what a play is about. In theory, one of the questions I often search for with an artist is, what is this piece about? In an ideal world, you will be able to sum it up in a sentence. Not a paragraph, a sentence. And it's very hard to get to that point of distillation. And sometimes it's only possible after rehearsals, after it's been explored a lot.

And the thing you thought it was about isn't actually the main focus. It's a moving thing, what it's about. But I think as a writer, it really helps you if you have a sense of what is your play about. An example I sometimes gave is, 'Knives in Hens' where, David Harrower said about 'Knives in Hens', you know, when he's asked what is the play about? He didn't say, it's about a woman who kills her husband.

You know, he didn't say that because that's the plot. The play is about a time before words existed for everything. Because in the play, words are being coined. The word for door handle didn't exist before. So in the play, it's that moment of discovery of language and discovery of identity. Now, I've said it in lots of sentences, because I'm not David, and I don't say it in a beautiful, pithy way.

But with 'Knives in Hens' he said, it's about a time before words existed for everything.

IFM: Is what the play's about different to the theme? How do they articulate with one another?

KM: That's very interesting, Iain. I wouldn't separate them. Are you thinking, it sounds like you might be thinking about a particular example of something where the theme is a bit different to what the play is about?

IFM: Not one particular example, it's more just at that stage of the work, it's really hard work. Even though you're working on a sentence or a couple of sentences or so on, it's...you're really at the centre of it. So it's very difficult when people are asking you, people ask you, which is fair enough...what's it about? What's the play about? And sometimes it's hard to know exactly what to say.

KM: I totally understand that.

I mean, one of the things we just discussed earlier was the fact I now work translating plays from French into English. And one of the pieces I translated, is a piece from France, from mainland France and it's a play from the 1970s and, an artistic director in Scotland when I was beginning the translation and I'd seen the play, I'd been blown away by it and thought, I have to translate this play.

And the artistic director said to me, what is the play about? Say it in a sentence, and I couldn't, and I was struggling. And it's not because I'm not a good play reader, and it's not because I'm unintelligent. It's because what that play is about is actually really bloody complicated. And when you start it as an audience member or as a reader, you start thinking, oh, it's about this.

And then you go along, you go, oh no, it's not about this. And you only find out right at the very end of the play. Now, as the translator, even having seen it and obviously having read it in the original language, I couldn't answer 'what is the play about?' At that moment when the artistic director was trying to pin me down about 'what is it about?'. And he wants to do in a neat sentence, you know, the sort of elevator pitch.

Now, I later, having translated the play and done many drafts of it, I began to understand what the play was about. But it was only at that point. And that's partly about the era tt was written in, in the 1970s. I mean, now, particularly in Britain, there's a lot of very televisual plays where it's about 'it's about this topic and it does this...'

And for me, that's not a play. That's a piece of television, and ideally a play is a complex thing, and it may be about that. But if you think about the plays that you've particularly liked, I bet you they're about several things.

IFM: That was my next question, can a play be about more than one thing? Can it switch halfway to being about another thing?

KM: It can be, but the dominant one... the one that the audience will go home with, is what it's really about. So as an example, if you look at Black Watch, by Gregory Burke... Black Watch is about soldiers of the Black Watch Regiment who've been fighting in Iraq, and it's about their experiences. And that is the...that's the 'sit' of the 'com'. Now, actually, it's about so many things. It's about death, it's about loneliness, it's about trauma, it's about camaraderie... identity. So many things.

But there is a dominant thing of what is that play about. And ultimately a large audiencee... if you asked a hundred different people, they'd all sort of hit on a similar territory of - it's about being a member of the Black Watch Regiment. It's about fighting in current wars, Iraq War... you know, they would hit on similar territory and that is the dominant 'what is the play about?'

Not just the 'what is the sit for the com'. But, it is covering the nature of the experience for the different individuals.

IFM: That's really clearly put, thank you. That's actually helped me a lot, drilling down a bit into what that means. I just ask another couple of questions. What about structure? When do you start looking, tightening up or questioning the structure when you're working with a writer?

KM: I wouldn't unless the piece demanded it. So, I don't worry about structure unless there's some problematic anomaly for an audience in it. And on the whole, working with contemporary writers, I have more often said or encouraged people to maybe take out certain definitions that might be constricting them.

So, you know, the amount of plays I got at one point, which were... and you often get this with writers when they're starting out... that maybe somebody along the way, could be a teacher, could be a lecturer, could be somebody that has said - it has to be a five act play, or it has to be a three act play or it has to have this or that and... And sometimes that's not helpful. So I might say, don't worry about the act, or you're play isn's long enough to have acts, or... the acts have to have an arc.

The ending of an act has to make you want to come back to see what happens in the next act. You know, I mean, I don't encourage people per se, to stick to classical structures. I think you put in structure if it helps the piece or if the piece needs it. Does that make sense?

IFM: It does, yeah, that's very interesting. What's the main driver of a play then?

KM: For me it's intelligence, wit, humour... But sometimes humour, sometimes not, depends on the tone of the piece. It's a lack of predictability. Surprise, as I said, surprises... and also loving the medium it's for. One of the things I would say about play reading, and I've read a lot of scripts. I've read lot scripts for film agencies, for theatres. And sometimes when I'm working with writers starting out and they know they want to write and they are clearly good writers...

It's about going, is this the right medium for you? Is theatre the right one, or should you be writing a novel, or should you be writing songs or poetry or, you know, and it doesn't mean you can't mix those forms. Of course you can. But ultimately there is so much competition in any of these forms that if you're a bit fudge about, well it's a bit of this and a bit of that...you're kind of... it's going to struggle a bit. So, you having a sense of why am I submitting this piece for theatre, not because it's a stepping stone to film or telly. It's not. You know, sometimes it is, sometimes it's not... it depends on you as a writer. But, you know, if you want to write an article, write an article.

You know, opinion pieces on stage can be very problematic because sometimes it's just - I've got a captive audience and I'm going to do a lecture, and that is not a play. It's about understanding theatricality in the bigger form. You know, what makes this a piece of theatre?

IFM: How... this is my final question... so how can a writer do that? How can a writer learn more about the theatrical form?

KM: I mean, it depends, you know, obviously, like anything, it depends on opportunity. How much chance is there to see a play near you? But also... you don't... if money is an issue, because I know as a freelancer, theatre tickets are just increasingly expensive and I can't necessarily see that many plays. So, if you can't see them, can you access reading one from a library?

Can you see a TV film of plays, occasionally on iPlayer or something you can see for free. But digital poverty is also an issue for a number of students nowadays and people. So, you know, one does have to explore. Therefore a library card is bloody useful. And, you know, and reading a play is only half the thing because of course, a production is what goes around the play. But it'll show you the skeleton of the production, the bones that enable the body.

So try and engage in some kind of theatre of some sort. And work out, is this the medium I want to write for? And it doesn't mean that makes it happen is just going - do I love this medium and what is it I love about it? And can I do it differently and can I do it... you know, it's just going... try and engage with it as a form.

And that doesn't mean see every play that's on, because no one can afford it. I can't afford to do that. I don't, you know. But just see if there's something you like. I mean, I know from school when I was at school, you know, and we have to do for our English... we had to do, Shakespeare. So I, you know, I know there's certain Shakespeares I read...and what made that experience different from reading a novel?

And I can begin to separate even as a teenager. Okay, well, you know... no narration. No narrator. And just exploring those things. And that's the nature of theatre. I mean, you know, drama is quite often... if it's not a monologue. It's when one character enters a space with another character, and what happens when there's more than one person in that space.

IFM: Katherine, thank you very much for taking the time to talk today. A lot of things I'm going to go off and think long and hard about and... very inspiring. So thank you very much.