In the talk I presented at the ‘Dramaturgy for the independent and performing arts field seminar at Oktoberdans 22, I aimed to show how the act of negating, whether verbally or through conceptual strategies, resolves the untapped potential of dance- and theatre-making processes. Weaving together a collection of ideas by academics, thinkers and makers from a variety of disciplines, together with the design of my own dramaturgical process (which I have preliminarily coined here as Productive Negation), I wanted to bring the omniscient negativity of dramaturgy into focus as a mobilising, dynamic strategy for invention. 

How then, do we productively say no in a collaborative, creative environment? Not only how, but to whom? How do we maintain professionalism while navigating the psychologically risky waters that negative reinforcement can incite? What methodologies are currently in practice that aim to undermine the artist or the creative process, instead of placating or radically accepting the artist’s whims? How can current methodologies be updated to include a more expansive integration of constructive, negative feedback?¹

Definitively, the no I speak of is not the no of Plato’s ‘Stranger’,² a no of otherness or difference and, consequently, the historical perception of negative statements as somehow ‘less valuable than affirmative ones, in being less specific or less informative’. It is also not the no of the I Ching, denoting creativity (activity) to the affirmative Yang, and reception (passivity) to the negative Yin.³ Rather, as practitioners of these proposed negative dramaturgies, our noes are embodied by our ‘destructive characters’: we thrive in misunderstanding and discomfort; we see solutions but do not enact them.⁴ Our noes are brute forces whereby ‘the brutality of the act runs alongside the poetic potential of what the act…releases’.⁵

I presented a sort of cognitive map of divergent methodologies that contributes to the creation of a practice based on physical and conceptual, academic and non-academic, modes of knowledge-making and knowledge-gathering. The difficulty of defining, in academic terms, where to place the methodology that I employed for the current iteration of this work is a result of non-linear, convergent processes that frequently vacillated between reading, performance, sociological, philosophical and historical theory, performative experimentation (both on and offstage), workshop participation, workshop facilitation, memory and anecdote. 

The main characteristics of negative dramaturgies are namely an embodiment of Walter Benjamin’s ‘destructive character’ combined with the ability to selectively sabotage (through the lens of André Lepecki⁶ and Arabella Stanger⁷) and ‘questioning’, as per the writings of Katherine Profeta⁸ and Bojana Cvejić. Performance theorist and dramaturg, Bojana Cvejić, who was also invited to speak during this seminar, introduced her idea of the ‘methodology of problem’ in her 2010 essay The Ignorant Dramaturg.⁹ She explains: ‘Stating a problem isn’t about uncovering an already existing question or concern, something that was certain to emerge sooner or later, a problem is not a rhetorical question that can’t be answered. On the contrary, to raise a problem implies constructing terms in which it will be stated, and conditions it will be solved in’. During the seminar, though, she dismissed these ideas and suggested that the act of problematising is no longer economically viable, and that current global working conditions demand an evolution beyond this paradigm. 

Moving on, I attempted to trace the mythology of Productive Negation via my personal journey towards the creation of this aspiring dramaturgical system through a retrospective of experiences with pedagogies of dissent, risk and failure, while simultaneously showing the historical underpinnings in the development of these methods and their connections to dramaturgical thought. A critique of Liz Lerman’s Critical Response Process¹⁰ forms the basis of the step-by-step programme I developed in the practical application of my ideas surrounding Productive Negationin my workshop Dramaturgical Strategies in the Dance-Making Process. 

It was not my aim, throughout the presentation, to harm dramaturgy’s reputation by exposing its potential for insubordination. Nor, as Beckett might have done with the concept of the parable when he wrote Waiting for Godot¹¹ do I presume to inversely transform dramaturgy, the dramaturg, or the workability of the practice itself simply by speaking against it. Instead, the ideas I am working with serve as evidence of a personal experience with negative dramaturgies, and more deeply, of my engagement with an understanding of an alternative potentiality that the practice of dramaturgy elicits: rooted in antithesis, manifested in tenebrosity.

1. I explore these questions in my workshop Dramaturgical Strategies in the Dance-Makinng Process, first presented at CounterPulse in San Francisco in 2017, then at Brooklyn Studios for Dance in New York shortly thereafter, and most recently in Berlin. I continue to evolve and expand the workshop content every time it is presented within a new context. 
2. ‘There is no need to be surprised, stranger: this is what we do here; probably you handle these things differently.’ Laws by Plato, translated by Benjamin Jowett.
3. Horn, L. 2001. A Natural History of Negation.  Stanford, CA.: CSL
4. Benjamin, W. 2005. Walter Benjamin: Selected Writings. W. Jennings, H. Eiland & G. Smith, eds. Cambridge,  MA: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press 
5. Leslie, E. 2015. Brute Forces. In Bad Feelings. Arts Against Cuts, eds. London: Book Works. 45-53
6. Lepecki, A. 2011. We’re not ready for the dramaturge: Some notes for Dance Dramaturgy. In Rethinking Dramaturgy: Errancy and Transformation. Manuel Bellisco & María José Cifuentes, eds. Madrid: Centro Parraga. 181-197  
7. Stranger, A. 2016. Dramaturgy and Sabotage. In The Practice of Dramaturgy: working on Actions in Performance. Konstantina Georgelou, Efrosini Protopapa & Danae Theodoridou, eds. Amsterdam: Vali. 209-233 
8. Profeta, K. 2015. Dramaturgy in motion: at work on dance and movement performance. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin Press 
9. Cvejić, B. 2010. The Ignorant Dramaturg. SARMA. 
10. Lerman, L. & Borstel, J. 2003. Liz Lerman’s critical response process: a method for getting useful feedback on anything you make, from dance to dessert. Takoma Park, MD: Liz Lerman Dance Exchange
11. ‘Although it is, so to say, a negative fable, it nevertheless remains a fable. For despite the fact that no active maxims can be derived from it, the play remains on the level of abstraction.’ (As stated by Anders, G. 1965. Being Without Time: On Beckett’s Play Waiting for Godot. In Samuel Beckett: A Collection of Critical Essays. Martin Esslin, ed. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. 140-151)