Co creation and collaboration are at the centre of my arts practice as a Facilitator, Director and Dramaturg. Growing up within a Youth Theatre setting where devising and collaboration between peers and facilitators has been encouraged, has given me a strong foundation in collaborative practice and the processes associated. In hindsight reflecting on my early creative practice especially within education, I believe the collaboration model that most aligns is the family style of collaboration detailed by Lisa Candy. This method of collaboration incorporates a creative team that have assigned amongst themselves different roles, in which if they have worked together on past projects or even a current project, have been transient and changeable within the process dependent on need and expertise (Candy, 2019).
I employed this style of collaboration throughout my time studying my undergraduate degree with my cohort of students as a whole, as well as within smaller groups on specific projects. During my studies the Coronavirus pandemic affected collaboration greatly within education and the wider context of the creative industry. Within this time the family collaboration model was prevalent as contact with other people became limited. Within my degree we were put into groups and stayed in those groups for the duration of the year. Different projects required different roles and we experimented changing role from project to project. My criticism with the family style of collaboration is that I find the line of professionalism can be blurred as well as confusing the expectations of work needed within each role. I believe although the family style of collaboration is something to aspire toward I think this model must be undertaken by a company or cohort who know each other well and are not afraid to hold one another to account. Furthermore, even though the family style seems to promote an equal leadership within the group I think it would be beneficial that in practice there is a leader to hold people working within the project to account, monitor deadlines and be responsive to the roles that are assigned to creatives within the venture.
Although the family collaboration style of working is prevalent within my early creative practice I feel the collaborative model has shifted since navigating the professional world associated with my creative practice. Since working within theatre companies facilitating on youth and community groups I have identified that the Integrative model of collaboration that Candy outlines is more appropriate for the work I undertake and my creative practice at present. Candy states;
“Integrative collaboration is characterised by creative closeness accompanied by the suspension of differences in order to achieve a common vision” (Candy, 2019, pg. 113)
Using this practice method, I have been recruited on particular projects to deliver and produce an outcome, determined by the creative in charge of project managing the result. I have often been recruited because of my distinct approach to my process which at times often aligns with an institutions values or approach to creating work, in particular their work with young people. Throughout my professional collaborative career, I have noticed that as a freelancer the Integrative model of collaboration is common within the established theatre company with a traditional leadership and board of trustee’s structure. I have concluded that to ensure productivity and efficiency the Integrative model is best used to ensure professionalism can be maintained and promoted. Much the same with my criticism of the family model I believe it important to have a leader or steering group responsible for steering the institution so the creatives working within have an agreed practice to ensure the quality and efficiency of production related to their work.
As a Dramaturg I am interested in how I can use my creative practice dramaturgically to facilitate between young people, communities and a creative, to help best tell stories that are important to those groups of people. In the past I have admired the work of Ann Jellicoe and her approach to the Community Play, exploring the past stories and history of a town and its community, approaching the locals of that town to collaborate within that creative practice between her as the director and in addition a writer.
“The empowering and liberating effect on the cast was firstly to do with the anti-hierarchical joining together of local people and professionals (writer, designer, composer and stage manager, as well as Ann Jellicoe herself as director, were from the profession). A further empowerment had to do with the type of play the local people were encouraged to engage with.” (Painter, 1996, pg. 116).
I believe a Dramaturg within this process could strengthen the connection between the writer and the research and therefore the local community. As a whole this would facilitate a more in depth and attentive relationship between community, director and writer something that within my creative role and practice, I would endeavour to take forward. The use of anti-hierarchical structure also promotes community within the development of the piece and allows for all involved to be considered integral to the project. In addition to this work with communities I hope to bring this approach in my future work with young people and the development of writing for that particular demo graph. Liaising in collaboration with writer and young person to facilitate a process that is fruitful and productive to both parties and ensuring a good quality of work that can be co collaborative between writer and performer. In doing so I would hope my dramaturgical expertise would help strengthen the relationship between young performers and writer who often struggle to understand one another especially when the writer is unfamiliar with the young people they are working with and essentially writing for. This also applies to a young person’s probable inability to navigate such situations, and ask for clarification from fear of judgement from their peers. This lack of dramaturgical dynamic I think is obvious in writing that is created in collaboration with young people in that the quality can sometimes seem stunted and far removed from the young person’s lived experience or point of view, in which a conversation may have been misinterpreted by the writer.
Through our seminars within the Introduction to Collaborative Practice module I have interrogated and experienced several different methods and approaches to collaboration. The first being our assigned task through the New Work Lab to create a response piece to the word ‘tomorrow’. Through this task, the group I worked in collaboration with applied a “yes and..” approach to the task. I felt this served the concept of our idea of their being an anthology style of stories and scenes all connected by a single event that the characters were related by. I felt in the early stages of development that this “yes and…” approach was a helpful way to accumulate ideas and provide a multitude of possibilities that the work could explore and develop within the stimulus.
Within our seminar on the different devising techniques a group I worked with also used the “Yes and…” technique to make a response piece to the word “Vacations”. I personally found that using this technique on this particular project worked in conflict with the intended purpose of the technique. I was aware of myself self-censoring and avoiding putting forward my ideas due to my confidence in them and not wanting the other creatives to feel like they had to say yes and incorporate the idea. Ironically when we experimented with applying a director to steer the devising process and that their creative decisions and steering took prominence, I found myself contributing more of my own ideas, knowing that the director may not want to incorporate them within the piece. However, I felt freer in my suggestions as they were going through a central creative vision that could help steer the piece of work in the right direction.
Based on these experiences of collaboration within the seminars I have been reminded of De Bono’s thinking hats. I have thought about how these could be used in relation to creating work but also responding critically to work made and establishing whether things could undergo a creative overhaul or interrogate the process in which to make improvements. Much like Liz Lerman’s Critical Response Process, I find using the process of De Bono’s thinking hats works well with a facilitator or chairman overseeing the process and allowing everyone present to wear the different ‘hats’ and interrogate the critical and development process together:
“So everyone present wears the black hat at the appointed time. Everyone present wears the white hat at another time. That is parallel thinking and makes fullest use of everyone’s intelligence and experience.” (De Bono, 2000, Pg. 7).
From using Critical Response Process within seminars, it has given a framework within which to deliver critique and personal opinion to an artist. However, the use of the Thinking Hats I think provides a more in-depth analysis. Providing the artist with more avenues and possible solutions to problems that they could explore further and how to interrogate those viewpoints in a constructive and productive way.
Considering all the above what I understand about collaboration is that it needs to be effective and efficient in order to create work that is productive and beneficial to an artist or collective.
“a dramaturgy that is unrestricted and that makes connections between theatre and context… we need to break the glass that reflects a single image of dramaturgical practice.” (Trencsényi & Cochrane, 2014).
Using structures and agreed working methodology helps keep the focus on the creative task in hand and helps individuals understand the direction in which to take their creative choices. Although some artists may find that structure limiting I believe rules and method serve a purpose and within those parameters approach can be explored. It’s also important to mention that in my opinion once those boundaries have been set there can be experimentation in breaking or bending them if it encourages the artist or piece of work to flourish or take a new undiscovered interpretation. Through this work it’s important to take into consideration the role of Dramaturgy and how using the rules and interrogating them, how that can be used to diversify the methodology at hand for practitioners and how that reflects a more diverse and multi methodical way of working.
As a Dramaturg what I want to take forward from this collaborative process is how we navigate the approach to the core questions and themes of the work that is being developed. How we not only as Dramaturgs interrogate the written text, but bridge the gap between performers and creative team, so that they can better understand the core question and can also explore it’s potential within the roles that have been assigned.
I also want to take forward the role of Dramaturg as facilitator for open communication within the writing process with communities and young people. This group, of often non artistic professionals, may lack the formal language and expertise to vocalise their lived experience. Therefore, hoping to contribute in creative collaboration with a writer that may not be used to working in partnership with those groups of people or are preoccupied with what they think the piece should be. Approaching the work with eyes that are fresh to the creative process and inferring from what they say, the questions and comments that may go unsaid for fear of ridicule from their peers or professionals.
Bibliography:
Candy, L. (2019) The Creative Reflective Practitioner. Routledge
De Bono, E. (2000). Six Thinking Hats. London: Penguin Life.
Katalin Trencsényi & Cochrane, B. (2014). New dramaturgy : international perspectives on theory and practice. London ; New York: Bloomsbury Methuen Drama.
Painter, S. (1996). Theatre of Community: Entertaining Strangers and Heartlanders. In Edgar The Playwright (pp. 114–128). London: Methuen Drama. Retrieved November 11, 2025, from http://dx.doi.org/10.5040/9781350054820.ch-005
