WRITING GUIDE FOR THEATER PAPERS:
AN INTERVIEW WITH PROFESSOR GAY SMITH

Vanessa: What is the difference between a dramaturgical essay and an analytical paper you would turn in for an English class?

Prof. Smith: Well, it's a good question. The changes in English departments and expectations make the distinctions smaller than they used be because I think a lot of English professors now look at drama in terms of performance as well as theater. But at least traditionally there has been a big difference between the two in that a dramaturgical essay approaches the script as a script, not as a piece of literature. So when you're looking at a play by Shakespeare the analysis has to take into account the performance elements . . .  it just has to be at least imagined on stage even if it's not an actual production. So a dramaturgical essay may take some aspects of literary analysis . . . Metaphor, images, rhythms, rhyme schemes, all of those things are important, but it's how they are performed, how then they come together in a concept for two and a half hours. So, simply stated, a dramaturgical essay takes into account the performance elements.

Vanessa: What major problems do students encounter when writing a dramaturgical essay?

Prof. Smith: Well, that certainly is one of the problems, trying to imagine it in your head . . . with students who have not had hands-on experience in theater production, it's that much harder. I've known lit professors who have been teaching for 30 years who cannot stand to read plays, because for all of their wonderful imaginations, they don't like that exercise of trying to imagine... it's so sketchy, without any of the background material that a fiction writer gives you. It's like a musical score: if you can't play the instrument, you can't hear it. I think that's the biggest frustration. So that then students will take the easy way out and say "OK, then I'll write it as an English paper," and avoid dealing with it as though it is a musical production or score.

Vanessa: Do you think there is a correlation between a well-written paper and good thematic content in the paper?

Prof. Smith: Well, I don't know. When I'm reading a paper I sort of mentally switch back and forth; if I get stuck (kind-of hung up on) on the style and the technical writing aspects I have to go back and look at the thematic because there are so many writing problems whereas if the writing problems take care of themselves I can focus on the subject right off...But I do think that sometimes a student can write technically very well and not say anything very interesting, and sometimes a student can write very poorly but has some interesting ideas, even if they're not able to put it down very well -- I don't know if I think there is a "direct correlation." I mean, I assume there is, but I think there are a lot of assumptions . . .

Vanessa: What are the major problems you have seen in the Theater 101 papers in terms of structural organization?

Prof. Smith: I'm trying to get students to focus on the experience of drama. So structurally, I'm almost not asking them to for beginning, middle and end, although ultimately that's what they do if they do it well. To jump right into the experience is the most poignant part of the experience for them, and then to start writing about that. So they start descriptively, and then work from description to some larger interpretation and some of the students never get beyond description. And if they do well with the description, I'm quite pleased. In other words, if I can feel that progress, if they're at least evoking that experience for me on paper, then they've made a big leap. And then the next leap is to go from that descriptive writing to real interpretive writing. I don't have a general expectation for that because it depends on each individual student. If I had them for another semester I'd start pushing them more in the interpretive.

Vanessa: What are the major problems you see in grammatical and syntactical structure... things like passive voice...

Prof. Smith: Actually, this year it was a real breakthrough for me to see when they fall into using passive voice. It's usually when they fall into using "is" all the time... it's when they lose interest and they start seeing it as character analysis as opposed to dramatic action, although it keeps rearing its head. Other areas syntactically ... again, it's an individual thing. Shorter sentences. Simplicity. I think many students confuse simplicity with simple-mindedness, and therefore will go for the longer, more convoluted phrase or choose what they think sounds like more complicated, intelligent vocabulary words. So for me it's really important to emphasize simplicity and precision through expression.

Vanessa: What is an "A" paper to you?

Prof. Smith: I know there is a lot of subjectivity involved on my part, especially towards the end of the term... I tell students at the beginning of the semester, "I really want to track your work individually, not in comparison to others." I think there are A papers for students that would be C or B papers for other students. Very specifically, it does have to be well-written. It does have to show that kind of care. If I can see they've just done one draft, gotten it down, done nothing about cleaning it up and re-writing to focus it, it's not going to be an A paper. It really needs to have more than one draft. Also, I love to see the development of an original idea, take it from the beginning and follow it through. That's again getting students to think not smaller in thinking but smaller in subject matter so they really can explore it. Well-written generalizations will not get an A from me. The more specific the work, the higher the grade.