Dramaturgical midwifery and the examination of belief in contemporary play development

In many theatre rehearsals and developmental workshops, people try to avoid strong judgments. Respondents often speak in ways that keep discussion open: a moment may be said to “work,” or to “feel right,” without much pressure to explain why. While this can seem generous and collaborative, it creates a central problem, especially for dramaturgical practice: decisions still have to be made, and certain ways of understanding the play begin to guide the work even when they are not clearly stated or examined.

This thesis examines the role of the dramaturg within this situation. It asks what is happening when these unspoken assumptions shape a play’s development, and why they are often left unexamined. The argument is that such assumptions are not accidental, but are built into how a play comes to take form—affecting what counts as a meaningful action, a convincing character, or a necessary event.

To explore this problem of unexamined assumptions shaping a play’s development, the thesis turns to a comparison with Socrates in Plato’s Theaetetus. Socrates describes his role as a midwife, helping others bring their thoughts into the open so that they can be tested. He does not offer answers, but asks questions that make it harder for an idea to remain vague or unchallenged.

Seen in this light, the dramaturg’s role can be understood in a different way. Rather than offering solutions or helping a play move forward more efficiently, the dramaturg may at times slow the process down. By asking precise questions, the dramaturg makes it possible for the assumptions guiding the work to become visible and to be examined.