Constellations: Configuration, Dynamic, Dramaturgy
In the course of my work as a dramaturg in choreographic projects, a number of thoughts have occurred to me, which I would like to describe below. They are all related, but not all of them flow seamlessly into one another—neither conceptually nor here in this text.
The position of dramaturgy is a peculiar one. It has no predetermined role or function in the setup of a project. It is difficult to describe in general terms because it is extremely variable. Its necessity, tasks, and possibilities must be redefined again and again more clearly than for any other position in choreographic projects. However, this is not a burden, as one might assume, but rather the basis for the greatest possible freedom in its design. It can be set up specifically for each project in order to tailor tasks, expectations, and responsibilities, thus enjoying great flexibility in the arrangement of positions and tasks.
One could also say that the position of dramaturgy has no inherent responsibility with regard to a specific process or a product to be developed. It can be assigned one, but that is not a mandatory prerequisite for its work. On the contrary, it could be advantageous to view the position of dramaturgy as a wild card, a free pass that guarantees the grand prize as long as it is not reduced to one thing: the position of dramaturgy can do anything as long as it does not have to do anything. The resulting possibilities and complex variations arise from the combination of a simple starting point with a multitude of moving parts and are both the challenge and the appeal of dramaturgical work in choreographic projects.
In her text The Distributive Agency of Dramaturgical Labor1, Christel Staelpert refers to the concept of constellation, coined by Walter Benjamin and borrowed from astrology. She does so primarily to describe the position of observation as specific, subjective, and influential in relation to what is perceived. A constellation that we can see in the night sky exists as such only when viewed from Earth and only now, since the light from the stars reaches our eyes at a point in time when the stars in question may have long since burned out. While it appears to our eyes that the stars of a constellation naturally belong together because they are close to each other and form a (more or less) conspicuous constellation, it may be that these stars are further apart from each other than they are from Earth, the position from which they are viewed. The conspicuousness of the constellation (or its configuration as such) arises from an active decision made from a specific viewing position. If it were possible to take up a position within this constellation, what perception of its components would result—space, time, and the dynamics of the bodies within it would appear completely different.
Anyone moving through space would find it difficult to recognize any of the constellations identified from Earth. That simply means: Perspective creates perception.
For Benjamin, the difference between idea, concept, and phenomenon was the central aspect when mentioning the constellation. In his view, constellations and stars are in the same relationship as ideas and phenomena. Just as the constellation is not identical to the stars (but rather depicts and represents them in a specific form), ideas are not identical to phenomena—they represent phenomena, determine their interrelationships, and form a constellation out of them. The phenomena determine the concepts. The ideas manifest themselves in the concepts. Through this structure of idea, phenomenon, and concept, we are able to create an image of the world, one that is perceived and reproduced from a specific position.
In dramaturgical practice, we could imagine that the projects we create are a structure of points and positions that generate specific proportions, functions, and interactions. Since this structure is established, developed, and perceived from a certain perspective, it is a constellation that behaves similarly to that described by Benjamin and quoted by Staelpert. If we now move through the universe of project development and leave the starting position of our particular perspective through the dynamic interactions of the project, while holding on to the individual points of the constellation, the image (form, aesthetics) changes, while the points themselves remain the same (content). In this way, it is possible to describe how choreographic projects, in the course of their development from initial ideas to completion/publication, perform their own choreography and, depending on the project phase, generate specific requirements and necessities of the project in addition to the ideas, wishes, and requirements of the choreography position, among other things.
One can imagine the forces acting on the connections between the individual points of a constellation when one holds on to them while moving through space at varying speeds and in changing directions. The position of dramaturgy would now be one that ensures that the connections are maintained, that can describe the dynamics within the constellation, and that can continuously balance the needs of the project with the needs of the actors.
When André Lepecki writes in We’re Not Ready for the Dramaturge2 about working from a position of not knowing and suggests that “the dramaturge must engage in an ‘inexact-yet-rigorous’ methodology, not aligned with knowledge and knowing, but with errancy, erring, and error,” then this idea of non-knowledge may point precisely to the nucleus of the position from which a constellation is described and opens up possibilities with regard to Christel Staelpert’s idea of “perpetual modulation,” inspired by Deleuze: the permanent reformulation of a constellation depending on the dynamics of the overall situation. This formulation would then not be a representation of an idea of what should be, but an expression of the possibilities that could be, which change with the development of the situation (with the dynamics of the observing position). The constellation would then be just as dynamic as its actual components and would change according to the movement of the observer (which is exactly what it does in reality: if one were to move through space and hold on to the points of the constellation, they would remain as a constellation, but the formation created would change permanently). In this respect, too, the position from which the constellation is imagined or configured must be defined, formulated, and incorporated into the constellation.
We gaze longingly at the sky, and if we are honest, we have to admit: there are no stars (except in Stanley Kubrick’s films).
Another factor in the arrangement of the imagination is the constellation at the personal level—as a structure of individuals in positions with functions that reflect an idea of a group and its effectiveness. For Staelpert and Lepecki, it is about artistic and content-related constellations and situations, but less about how these relate to the arrangement of a group. In the case of artistic projects, it is not a matter of individual positions from which to view things, but rather several positions that are focused on a common goal. In Staelpert’s description of Meg Stuart’s project Auf den Tisch, dramaturgs Jeroen Peters and Myriam Van Imschoot are an integral part of the group and the performing team, while André Lepecki imagines the dramaturg as a person who encounters a group from the outside at a specific point in time. In line with these different personnel constellations, questions of dramaturgical work or (to use Lepecki’s term) non-knowledge arise differently. The situation in which a dramaturg visits a production that Lepecki describes as physical-content-based can also be described in terms of time, thus potentially revealing other effects.
Deciding who will be part of the work process at which point in the project development is an important means of establishing the basic structure of a collaboration and a key factor in the dynamic development of groups and projects.
The timing, intensity, and quality of participation have a direct impact on the design of the individual positions as well as their connection to each other and to the overall project (identification). Depending on the setup, they make it possible to consider and address different levels at different points in the project development. In particular, the possibilities of the dramaturgy position vary depending on when it becomes part of the constellation and effective in development processes, and are not coincidental. Seen in this light, the decision as to which phase of a project a dramaturg is involved in is a strategic and content-related decision that should be made according to the needs and requirements of a project.
Different types of access and connection in relation to the development phases of a project result in different forms and degrees of responsibility. Responsibility is always a shared responsibility, but not equally so. Its scope and extent depend on many factors, including the position and function in relation to the overall project, the entire group, and the work phase in which a project finds itself. In the course of a project, ideas, interests, and materials shift, and the personnel constellation and responsibility change accordingly—even if the basic formation remains the same. Being part of the group means being part of shared responsibility and of shifts and changes. The dynamics of a work process and a changing constellation of people, functions, and distribution of responsibility within it can lead to qualities that were essentially linked to positions becoming detached from them, or in other words: The structural relationship between group, position, and function remains, but responsibility and activity are oriented toward the situation (in which one finds oneself with others) and no longer solely toward the assigned position. The position in the constellation and the accompanying function are not inseparably linked, thus enabling the “perpetual modulation” mentioned above. This shift is not purely functional, but equally affects the group’s perception of itself. Perpetual modulation is thus an example of the idea described at the beginning of moving within the constellation with the constellation and observing how the image changes with one’s own movement, while (because) the connection between the stars (particles) remains.
In football (soccer), there used to be the position of libero: the “free” man (without a direct opponent) complemented the center backs (which no longer exist) by clearing up behind the defense if an attacker got through or securing the free space behind the defense against through balls. It was a position with both outstanding responsibility and the most freely definable function, requiring great flexibility and situational awareness. In the 1990s, this position was moved in front of the defense, the libero was no longer used, and the now common position of the “6” was developed—an even more dynamic position that combines defensive and offensive tasks to the highest degree and has thus become the control center of modern soccer. As a result, the statics and structure of the game have changed and become considerably more dynamic in all other positions. This fundamental strategic change in soccer has never been revised, and the libero has never been reactivated (or rather, it has only reappeared in the realignment of goalkeeping, with goalkeepers extending their area of responsibility forward and thus taking on tasks originally assigned to the libero).
This shows what a difference shifting a single position by just a few meters can make. In the field of choreographic projects, one can imagine how dynamizing individual positions can set the entire structure in motion and change the self-image (constellation). Here, however, the tactical positioning is not oriented toward an opponent (as in sports) and can be carried out according to the interests and needs or the vision of a project—no matter how anachronistic it may seem in a social, work-organizational, or dance-historical context.
If we understand material not only as something that develops and eventually becomes real, as something that is performed, but also as material that is conceived and becomes effective together in the process, regardless of whether it ever becomes real (haptic, visual, acoustic), we expand the sphere in which we act together.
In Thinking No-One’s Thought3, Maaike Bleeker describes a different understanding of thinking, as proposed by Deleuze and Guattari in What is Philosophy4: “They suggest that it is a process that takes place between people, rather than an individual action. Thinking begins with what they call a certain charm, a spark that lights up between people and makes them friends.” Here, thinking is not an individual process that is stimulated in the context of a project through knowledge, perception, and exchange with others and then fed back into that project by the individuals involved. Rather, it is a joint movement of all participants. A thought no longer arises in the minds of individuals, but in the space between those involved in the process. Constellation then means not only the representation of phenomena, but can also refer to the space between ideas, phenomena, and people—a space that changes its quality with each position added or shifted and can thus be actively shaped.
The first one turns on the light: The constellations we deal with in artistic work processes are subject to two major influences: a) they are limited in time, i.e., they have a defined beginning and end; b) they are not homogeneously balanced; they thrive on specific characteristics and asymmetrical arrangements. The nature and timing of the configuration can therefore have a significant influence on the possible dynamics or dynamic potential of a project. The development of a content-related artistic concept in temporal connection with the conception and staffing of positions—the arrangement and definition of positions, who becomes part of the responsibility when and how—can be a critical aspect of project development and can determine the qualities and possibilities of a project, its flexibility and capacity.
From this perspective, the position of dramaturgy is of particular strategic interest. It can be used to determine or change momentum. The space in which thinking and acting take place changes with individual positions, depending on where and how they are arranged. In particular, the position of dramaturgy, which is highly flexible and effective in the context of an overall situation (at the same time a position of high responsibility and the most freely definable function), can be used to specifically shape the constellation. It is a game changer. Its effectiveness can open and close spaces, make them visible, bring them into focus or hide them, and thus influence the overall movement of the constellation – entirely in line with the space in which thinking and movement take place. Viewed in this way, dramaturgy can have its own dynamic within the dynamic of the constellation. It reveals the constellation as a dynamic configuration as a whole. It is a field within a field that must be defined, positioned, and balanced in terms of its structure, interaction, and potential in order to develop and align its effectiveness. This also includes the how and when of its configuration. When and how the position of dramaturgy is used and applied is not only a personnel decision, it is a conceptual arrangement within the overall configuration of content, aesthetics, and methods, and thus also a means of aligning with a specific product. In this respect, the options for conceptual positioning must of course include not configuring the position of dramaturgy to one person, not only arranging it in a complex, but also dissolving it within that complex (and, under certain circumstances, still working with a person who is designated as a dramaturg). This also takes into account the fact that dramaturgical practice does not only take place within the internal context of a project (in rehearsals), but also circulates in an orbit, oscillating between positions and thereby constantly changing or adapting its definition—but that is a different text.
Based on these thoughts, which are intended to show how dynamic constellations are created in choreographic projects and how dramaturgy can play a specific role in relation to this dynamic, further questions arise:
In choreographic projects, we are dealing with systemic structures whose components are subject to mutual relationships and effects while shaping the development of a project. Typically, this development can only be controlled and predicted to a limited extent. Such structures inevitably develop their own momentum, and despite their fundamentally dynamic nature, the principle of inertia also applies here: energy must be supplied in order to change the state of a system. So how do you keep the constellation in motion? How do you keep positions within the constellation in motion? How does this dynamic give rise to a stable project that has a direction and in which the basic parameters do not have to be renegotiated again and again? These questions could give rise to strategic project management and options for action for the various positions within a project.
With regard to these questions, it might be useful to take a step back and consider how a constellation comes into being in the first place: Who, where, how, and when does a project begin? How does the transition from an idea to a concept take shape? How and at what point does a concept become material? How do the concept and the team (people and positions) come together?
These considerations could give rise to a practical approach to setting up a project that develops from a vague idea in order to become concrete and real, while constantly modulating its own constellation in a specific (intended) dynamic.
hier wird Dir (eine ältere Version) des Textes auf Deutsch vorgelesen
1) in: Dramaturgies in the New Millenium, Pewny/Callens/Coppens, Forum Modernes Theater Band 44, Tübingen 2014
2) in: Rethinking Dramaturgy – Errancy and Transformation, Centro Párraga 2010
3) in: Dance Dramaturgy – Modes of Agency, Awareness and Engagement, Hansen/Callison (Hg.), 2015
4) Gilles Deleuze, Félix Guattari, What is Philosophy?, Columbia University Press, 1994
Gefördert durch die Beauftragte der Bundesregierung für Kultur und Medien im Programm NEUSTART KULTUR, [Hilfsprogramm DIS-TANZEN/ tanz:digital/ DIS-TANZ-START] des Dachverband Tanz Deutschland.
Foto: Matthias Quabbe