Episode 79 – Stay with the Trouble (Festival TransAmériques)
Speaker 1: Hello and welcome to Push Play, a Push Festival podcast featuring conversations with artists who are pushing boundaries and playing with form. I’m Gabrielle Martin, Push’s artistic director, and today we have a special episode supported by the Secretariat du Québec aux relations canadiennes, and it’s highlighting listening to everything unsaid, staying in the porosity, revealing the hummus of the local ecology, and preserving experimental nature.
I’m speaking with Jesse Mill, co-artistic director of Festival TransAmériques, and founder of the Clinique Dramaturgique, or Dramaturgy Clinics, at the Festival TransAmériques in 2016. These clinics, uh, which are ongoing, take place over several days and center on 90-minute one-on-one sessions in which about 25 local artists bring clearly articulated questions from an active creative process into dialogue with visiting dramaturgs.
So at Push, these clinics were realized in 2024 and 2025 through close collaboration with FTA, Festival TransAmériques, and, and Jesse, and with Playwrights Theatre Centre and Joanna Garfinkel. So the 25, uh, clinics at both Push and FTA, and today’s conversation, again, were made possible with the support of the Secretariat du Québec aux relations canadiennes.
Here is my conversation with Jesse.
I’m joining this conversation from the unceded territories of the Musqueam, Squamish, and Tsleil-Waututh First Nations, and I offer this acknowledgement as a framing, uh, that reminds us that dramaturgy does not emerge solely from Western theory, and that ways of structuring meaning, time, story, and relation have long been held within land ba- based indigenous and non-Western practices that continue to unsettle colonial frameworks of authorship, hierarchy, and development.
And Jesse, where are you joining the conversation from?
Speaker 2: Hi, Gabrielle. I’m in Tiohtià:ke, Mooniyang, colonially called Montreal or Montreal en français. Uh, this city was built on an indigenous territory that was never ceded by treaty, and the Kanien’kehá:ka Nation are originally caretakers of the land and its surrounding waters.
And I’ve been a visitor for more than 25 years on this territory.
Speaker 1: I didn’t realize that you weren’t born there. Where were you born?
Speaker 2: I was born in Matapédia, uh, in Gaspésie, so the peninsula- Okay … at the east part of Quebec.
Speaker 1: Okay.
Speaker 2: Mm.
Speaker 1: Great. I love these more formal conversations, ’cause sometimes they take us places that, you know?
Mm. I learn new things about you. So I wanna talk about Cliniques Dramaturgiques. So you initiated them, and this was within a festival ecology within, uh, FTA, Festival TransAmériques, and a festival ecology that is oriented toward finished works, public presentation. So what was the initial impulse behind creating a space that prioritizes process, questioning, and unfinished thinking?
Speaker 2: Yeah. The idea of the clinics came up while I was working, uh, with the festival’s former director, Martin Faucher. And I was, first I was artistic, um, counselor, advisor, and then I became dramaturg, uh, in the festival and, and this transformation, this changing of role also has something to do with that. And we wanted to create a supportive space for artists away from the usual production grind of the festival, a space that’s open to the process, expe- experimentational, vulnerability, and even to failure.
And it was also about, um, expanding the community of artists the, that the festival work with, which is still very true today because many artists feels intimidate- intimidated by nature, the nature of the, the festival or generally by the nature of any kind of institution. And sometimes it’s younger artists, but often it’s also any professional artist, uh, that haven’t found their way to the performance spaces.
A lot of artists also from cultural communities saw the, the call for application for the clinic, so that’s something that I, I wanna mention as well. And one of the important goal of the project at the time, so, um, 10 year back, was to invite inspiring people to the festival, those individuals that we encounter along the way when we travel, when we, um, meet in different context, and that don’t necessarily have, like, a immediate reason to be invited in, in a festival.
And I’m thinking about, uh, artistic advisors, dra- dramaturgs of course, but also translators and all kind of allies of creating pr- creative process. People that are, uh, often, um, in the rehearsal room, I would say, that have that proximity to the work and that are not in power position, which is something very in- important.
And from the very beginning, we tried to form, like, a very diverse group of dramaturgs and other type of practitioners that would bring contrasted, um, backgrounds in FDA, and that would, um, also just offer a, a different gaze to the local community And, um, after a while we also realize, Martin and I, but now I’m working with Martin Denvar and, and it’s still the same, that this group of, uh, uh, the one we call Les Cliniciens, uh, provide a critical perspective on our work as well, on the programming, because they have a very distinct and situated point of views.
Um, viewpoints, I should say. And s- in that way they can help to reflect back and just, um, foster the, the artistic, uh, ecology, and I feel it’s like a think tank for the festival now.
Speaker 1: Yeah, there’s so many reasons why I think this project is exciting, and obviously because, you know, I asked if we could copy it and learn from you and work with you on the Vancouver edition.
But I think, you know, early on when I started at Push, having the opportunity to meet with you and talk to you about this project is one of the many ways that, that you and the festival think about the potentiality of the festival and what a festival space can be, and really acknowledging and owning its importance and significance for the artistic ecology.
And so, yeah, taking this opportunity to, um, center, um, some of the arts workers and artists that are kind of behind the scenes, and also just, um, the way that the festival can support and develop the artistic community and, um, you know, expanding the sense of what a festival can be beyond the presentation.
And I just, it’s, um… And then I was able to see it in action, uh, a few years back, and it really, um- Mostly I just really love the conversations around dramaturgy and process that I, I also am often having in isolation or in my head. And I really enjoyed the opportunity to, uh, yeah, to be in the dramaturgy dialogue, kind of public s- uh, facing conversation.
I’m getting ahead of myself ’cause I’m just really excited about this conversation. So I’m gonna rein it back in, ’cause we’re gonna talk about a lot of these things as we go in more depth. But specifically, you actually mentioned that you had been a dramaturg for the festival, and can you just talk about what that meant and what that was as a role?
Speaker 2: Mm-hmm. I think I was bringing almost the same tools and the same approaches that a dramaturgs can, or dramaturgs can bring to, um, artistic processes, but I was bringing that to, uh, Martin Faucher’s artistic process of creating a festival. I was also bringing it to the whole institution. So my wo- role mainly was to, um, be there without so many other responsibilities, which the, the, that doesn’t mean that I was not, like, organizing a lot of activities and workshops and all that, of course, but I was also there to be, uh, close to the community, to listen, uh, to formulate or reformulate questions and, and ideas and issues, um, to do some writing and some thinking on the side as well.
And even if it’s not something that we see, uh, a lot or we see at all here in Quebec or in Canada, it’s, it’s a role that exists in different contexts and countries. Like, uh, we, in Germany they call it haus dramaturg. Um, and- I feel I was also bringing, um, something quite close to the clinic project to the artists when they were, for example, inviting me in their rehearsal room, uh, or in different, um, setting.
I could just be there and try to be as, uh, helpful as I could in terms of giving them like, um, a living image of what they were doing. Being, um, active mirror as we say. Actually, Gabrielle, I feel I’m, I’m still, um, much of a dramaturg today in the festival. I would say that my type of l- leadership, uh, is dramaturging the festival.
I have much more responsibility which make it very much different. And also it changed my relation to the whole community because I’m in a power position. But still in the methodology I’m so focused on the pro- on the processes and I love to be, um To stay with the trouble Ooh … which, which is not always comfortable for the team, but I, I love that moment in time where we move things around, when we brainstorm, uh, when we take a step back and we rethink what we’re doing.
That’s, that’s what I prefer, actually.
Speaker 1: Mm. There are so many … And this is one of the reasons that the cliniques, uh, um, and the dialogues around them are really, um, so potent because it helps, I think, the community expand the concept of what dramaturgy is and can be, especially, you know, in a Canadian context, um, and, you know, different depending on where you are regionally in the history of the role of a dramaturg or, or even the term.
Um, when I hear you talking, I’m thinking about that the dramaturg’s role in the, in the context of outside of just one creative process might be to, to facilitate authenticity with regard to the kind of intentions behind the work and its impact to question the process so that it remains responsive to the needs.
Are there other kind of … And you’ve been talking about it, like I’m reflecting my own interpretations and also some of what I’ve heard. Um, I think a lot of people who are listening, I’m saying this because I think a lot of people who are listening might, it might be a really foreign concept to them. Like, yeah.
Speaker 2: Sure. Um, to listen to what’s, what isn’t being said. Mm. That would be something. Um, for example, when I was meeting artists with Martin at the time, he was the curator, he was the artistic director. He was listening to the project, thinking, “Is it a project that I will do or not in the festival?” And I felt I was listening to everything else, just trying to not be exactly focusing on the, on the same goal.
And then sometimes it could help to just understand what happened, and to also keep trace of the conversation and bring it back another moment in time to say, “Ah, do you remember we…” Like, for example, during pandemic time, it was totally different. The context had changed. So we went back to a lot of our conversation thinking, “Oh, that project, that wasn’t for FTA at the time.
Maybe just now it’s exactly what we need.” So I felt I was being that kind of living archive as well.
Speaker 1: Mm.
Speaker 2: Taking notes. Taking notes also just in another way, I guess. Um, I try to demystify somehow what dramaturge are doing in, in the, in the room. And everyone is different, and we come with our own background.
But, um, m- the making of a festival is so concrete. When you have one year to make a big international f- international festival as you do, and as you know very well, it’s constantly moving, like, forward, and you don’t really have time to slow down and reconsider the f- the foundation of all of it. And I felt very much that I had that privilege, much more than today.
Today it’s so hard for me because I’m in, in this crazy movement of, like, act, like opening every door, activating, activating everything at the same time and trying to be there for the team and there for the artist. And, and there I, I sometime, um- Become a bit anxious of losing this possibility and capacity of refraining myself of, like, being in the production s- productive capi- capitalistic mode.
Because of course we know that festival are not exactly outside of that model.
Speaker 1: There… It’s a very, uh, unique way of practicing dramaturgy, ’cause they’re deliberately, uh, like, they operate as a short, intensive intervention rather than long-term artist-dramaturg relationships, and you’ve described them as being a bit punk rock in their quick and dirty nature.
So what does this compressed format make possible or disrupt?
Speaker 2: I love this question. I, I don’t remember the, the punk rock expression, but I, I understand it. Um, it’s a very intensive and intense program, and somehow there’s a rebellion spirit, uh, in it. Sometimes the clinics want to escape the festival. And so it’s really like a counter space of the festival that try to challenge its event-driven na- nature.
And we want to embrace the unfinished, the chaos by asking the question: Can a festival celebrate the process, the detours, the failures, and the margin without capitalizing on it? And in the, um, in the d- the clinic, uh, that we create for a short time, it’s generally like a one-week project, and the s- like, the service is open just for a couple days, uh, there’s no real selection process.
There’s, like, a matchmaking effort between artists and the dramaturgs to provide the best support possible, but it’s not, like, curated really. And of course now the project has gained recognition over time, but it was really invisible at the beginning. And so I will just re-explain shortly, shortly what it is.
Speaker 1: Mm-hmm,
Speaker 2: mm-hmm. In a, in a simple way. We bring a group of dramaturgs together. They’re not necessarily dramaturgs, dramaturgs, but we see them as people that can play that role, that are comfortable with the processes, with the rehearsal room and all that. They come from different part of the world, different country, and we are very, um, I think m- more and more conscious that it’s so important also to have, uh, dramaturgs from the global south, even if it’s always maybe a little more costly or complicated in terms of visa and all that to bring them, um, in the festival.
So we have this small group. In the morning, they meet, uh, just, uh, all of them, and they exchange insights about their practice and their context and their, they’re just discovering each other and where they are. And in the evenings, they attend performances in the festival or in the FTA or in other, uh, spaces that are existing during, uh, FTA.
And then we invite the local artists to do so to make an appointments, and they have to a- apply with something, a question, a problem, a draft, uh, an idea for a discussion that sometimes change over the course of the, the meeting. And they meet for an h- an hour and a half, so 90 minutes, and that is, uh, either in the headquarter of the festival in a cafe.
Um, it can be a walk outside. In, sometimes it’s in a studio. Artists can also, uh, precise if they, if they wanna meet in a certain type of space. And so the dramaturgs are generally as well prepared as they can. And often in the morning conversations, they talk about the artists that they will meet. So they imagine also together with their colleagues how they can prepare to such an encounter.
And I feel it’s in that sense, um, very different from a usual speed dating ’cause it’s quite, um- profound as a preparation, I would say.
Speaker 1: Mm.
Speaker 2: And, um, I, I, I say that because I dislike, uh, speed dating so much in, in every context. And but this is quite different. And so they have that meeting of an hour and a half, and I think the matchmaking is quite important in that.
We really try to, uh, select someone that can be, in terms of background or discipline of language, uh, very present for the artist, and we see it as, like, an offering. Uh, a colleague that I think you might have met in Montreal, um, philosopher and dramatist Camille Louis, of- often uses the expression se donner des puissances, which is somehow to give oneself powers, and that’s what the clinic are, are doing.
So it’s like bam. And it’s free of charge. There’s no expectation, no result. And for a lot of artists it feels like a real safe space because they are meeting with someone that doesn’t know their work, that doesn’t know their community, their, their difficulties, their, their historic, and that makes the conversation grow in a very different way.
And I would say most of the encounters are important. I, I wouldn’t say useful. I wouldn’t say, uh, happy, but I would say important.
Speaker 1: And you started to speak about how rich of an experience it is or, like, mm, you know, the, the schedule, what’s planned for the dramaturg. It’s very full, right? They have this, um, exchange among peers in the morning, then they work with a local artist in the afternoon, then they see shows and, um, and experience the festival in the evening.
So there’s a huge focus on in terms of the importance for the artist, but you’ve also emphasized the impact on the dramaturg. So- Mm … um, many of these dramaturgs are, you know, developing methodologies in relative isolation. Can you speak a bit more to what you’ve seen shift for dramaturgs through the clinics?
Speaker 2: Mm-hmm. There are very few meeting spaces for dramaturgs, and even fewer for dramaturgs from v- uh, various disciplines and countries. And whether they are somewhat, um, stars of the profession, like a, you know, institutional dramaturg or a Ivo van Hove or Meg Stuart dramaturgs, you know, that’s what I talk about when I say star, or very young dramaturg, everyone is happy to meet, and they listen to each other and they share challenges and approaches.
And even if we didn’t really plan on cr- not … We didn’t plan to create, like, an international network, that’s exactly what has happened throughout the years. And now we have several dozen dramaturgs who have participate to the project. And whenever someone wants to replicate it somewhere, um, I suggest inviting one or two former dramaturgs back to help pass on the memory of the initiative.
And I see the project as a open source project with the f- like, a few rules to maintain the, its integrity. And, um, uh, for my part, I would say that I feel this small community of dramaturgs that con- as if they were, like, con- continuously supporting me in my work now. I, I hear the voices of, uh, Adriana, Quam, Bart, Sarah, Elise, and many others, and it helps to step, step outside of oneself and think differently, you know?
Um, one of the dramaturg that, that was here, um, years ago, Alexandros Mistriotis, who work with, uh, Euripides Lascaridis from, uh, Athens, he mentioned that for him it’s really important that the dramaturg can move forward with the same vulnerability as the artist. So if you wanna have that practice of doubt and fragility and listening, and to, to be brave enough to, to stay in that, in that porosity, I think it’s so beautiful to feel that you’re not alone, that you’re never alone.
So I think that’s the, the most, um, powerful elements that, uh, that it brought to the dramaturgs
Speaker 1: I want to talk a bit more about dramaturgical cultures and the satellite model. So yes, we’ve talked about how the clinics originated at Festival TransAmériques, and since then you’ve supported the satellite editions in Germany, Italy, France, Belgium, and here in Vancouver.
Speaker 2: Mm-hmm.
Speaker 1: What have you noticed about the culture around dramaturgy in Montreal compared to Vancouver, or compared to the other places the clinics have traveled? It’s a big question, but like whatever you feel you can say about
Speaker 2: it. Um, a dramaturg from Rome who, um, hosted two editions of, uh, Clinic used to say that it’s revealing the hummus of the, the local ecology, and I love this expression.
So it’s of course very different from one place to the other. In Montreal, it took us a while to move beyond the discussion about the figure of the dramaturg, their role, place, and importance. And for me, the project aimed to something beyond defining this role, which I see as very open. I want actually everyone to be able to participate in the dramaturgical work, including the lighting designer and the technician.
And, and it seems that in Vancouver, where there’s a strong t- tradition of device theater and collective work, there was less obsession about this question Um, I, I also know that bringing a dramaturg into a production is a luxury. And, um, PTC model is a very important and is all, a very important one in, in Vancouver, and it’s already working very well.
But it’s also interesting to have, like, conversations outside of the spaces specifically designed for that purpose. So that was something I felt, I felt really, uh, uh, maybe, uh, useful in Vancouver. And, um, I was also struck in the first e- edition, uh, you organized at Push how topics of legitimacy, cultural appropriation, and identity were present in almost every conversation, sometimes to the point of blocking other questions.
And that was also specific to Vancouver, I felt. I mean, these questions, of course, are everywhere at the moment, but it was so, so strong.
Speaker 1: And it’s not just the first, uh, edition that you were really present within, but also actually in the last edition, that was a reflection that our, our visiting dramaturgs, uh, brought forward on the- Mm-hmm
of their own. Yeah.
Speaker 2: Uh, um, but yeah, I, I find it, uh, hard to pinpoint, uh, what was really specific to, to each, uh, places, but however, for m- um, for a visitor like me, um, Vancouver scene is extremely stimulating because it escapes from, uh, the well-defined categories. I- I feel there’s, like, more, um, undisciplined approaches, some from the Simon Fraser students, some from, coming from the historical collectives.
Um, a lot of artists from cultural co- communities who demand the use of specific languages and codes, and increasingly, uh, the Indigenous-led processes that we see rising. So there’s, there’s a lot of thing for a, a visitor dramaturg to grasp from, uh, your local scene, I feel.
Speaker 1: Can we talk about how the local artistic ecologies reshape the clinics each time they’re transplanted?
Because you’ve been supporting-
Speaker 2: Yeah …
Speaker 1: you know, you’ve been collaborating closely with the people who’ve been realizing the clinics in all these different places. Yeah. So as it goes from place to place, yeah, how are those, the local- Mm-hmm … contexts shaping it? Or, or, or not?
Speaker 2: Yeah. I, I said it’s like a open source project, and I will come back to the few rules because I think they are helpful to understand how we work with the different, uh, collaborators abroad.
Uh, so it’s always a group of, um, international dramaturgs, and I feel that the person who’s leading the project or hosting the group has to have a direct experience of the local landscape or work, uh, in collaboration with someone who can just answer the numerous questions about, uh, what’s happening there.
And it’s always interesting how the questions coming from the guests will actually, um, help shaping the program, because generally there’s more questions than what one person can actually answer from their own perspective. You know, in Montreal we had to work with an historian at some point, and there was a long walk on the Mont Royal, uh, with someone who was, um, very aware of the, um, uh, the, um, ur- urbanistic realities of Montreal.
So it really depends of what different people are looking for. Um, also in selecting the dramaturg, we try to bring a core that’s also, um, responding to the, to the local need. So for example, um, I’m try to be very precise, but, um- I would say, for example, if I was rethinking of making a new edition in Vancouver, I would try to bring dramaturgs that are resisting a little bit to these, um, new, um, buzzwords of identity, uh, appropriation and all that, that just don’t wanna work with the questions formulated as they are.
I know a few right now, for example. So that would be useful. You already know there’s, like, something that will happen there. So, um, sometimes it was related, for example, to a specific type of dance. If you have a lot of street dance making its way to the more institutional scene, how can you bring dramaturgs that are working with street dance artists and that have the knowledges that will really, um, deepen conversations?
So creating the group is another thing. Um, and then, um, what type of festival or what type of, of context? Generally, the Clinic are held during a festival. The tension between event-driven, um, moment and what we, we generally wanna do in a slightly different, at a slightly r- different rhythm, like slowing down the process, this tension is very fruitful.
So we try to work also with the o- the local offering, and sometimes the festival was, um, bringing thematically questions that were, um, uh, quite bold and, uh, audacious. And then we tried with the, the invi- the invitation of certain dramaturg to, you know, be in conversation with that. Um, the first edition in Belgium It was just after COVID and the festival was canceled.
And it was very special because then we have to reimagine the project without that big fire. And we created some conversations with the local art schools, and that was also very beautiful. Also, generally we, we try to, um, exchange about just the, um, not the improvement, but the, the new i- ideas that have came out from one edition, and sometimes we just bring them in the next edition.
One example you also made in, in PUSH was the
Concert des Pratiques, um, a concerto of practices, which was something that, uh, Sarah Van Dereck initiated in, uh, Belgium. She just brought, uh, I think it was three or four dramaturgs with their art- artist. Generally it’s an artist bringing their dramaturg, but then it was the dramaturg bringing their artist.
And it was a series of ve- very well-prepared conversations with no, um, hosting and no talk with the audience, just like the dramaturg and the artist for 20 minutes, sometimes with images, sometimes no, and they would talk about how they met and how they work. And then we would listen that, to that for a couple hours, and just sit all together after that and talk about what we heard.
And it was very, um I, I- it was clear in so many ways that dramaturgy had, um, could take many forms and didn’t need to be academically, um, framed to be, uh, alive, you know, and to be shared and to be, um, understood. And it was a series also of small short histories. So that kind of format we brought from one ed- edition to the other.
And then we try many, many different things and, uh, when it was fruitful, I would, I would let the next one know. But we came back to the basic elements which are, uh, morning meetings, performances, consultations, and not more than 90 minutes of consultation, because one hour is too short, but more than 90 minutes, it’s another step.
Speaker 1: You know, you were just talking about the public facing piece, making the invisible visible, um, through the Concert des Pratiques and, you know, so usually the clinics have this public facing dramatur- dialogue around dramaturgy, which opens the work to a wider community. So what has been your approach to making dramaturgy thinking visible through this format, specifically how it’s evolved?
Because you’ve spoken about that version, but then also FTA Cliniques, this last, um, version was quite a different approach. Mm-hmm. Yeah.
Speaker 2: Yeah, we’ve, we’ve tried to preserve the experimental nature of the project, and that also means that we’ve been trying different things, sometimes slightly sl- slippery format, not always succeeding in their attempts.
And, um- There is a contradiction in the desire to have, like, a very unproductive and invisible project and no result, and yet to create a public event. So last year was quite beautiful. It was, um, uh, imagined by the co-hosts of, uh, the clinic, Sarah van Drik and Sarah Foteur, so a, a local dramaturge and a dramaturge that has, um, the experience of the, um, of the project.
And they organized, um, a brunch with, um, table full of objects, books, fetish of all kinds, and orchestrated a performative moment along with the people who were present. And it was nice and unique and resonated perfectly with the punk spirit that you mentioned. But I also realized that it was so hard for me in this role that I have now to be fully present and to have the openness and the playfulness I would wish for such a creative time.
So I could feel exactly this tension. And in the past, we’ve tried many things, but, uh, I remember strongly, uh, one of the first public event that we held. It was, um, uh, a series of short recordings where artists from all over the world had reply to one question: “What is your, uh, creative context?” Or, “In what context are you creating?”
And so it was like a radio context. Mm-hmm. And we shaped the whole, um, afternoon around these different voices of people that were not necessarily with us, but that were, like, bringing back other way of, uh, situating, uh, the work. And we also, uh, did some kind of, um, listening and folding, uh, event where there was a bunch of sentences and, and quotes that we heard throughout the week in the different meetings and consultations, n- not keeping the names, making it all, uh, uh, like, um, a collective, uh, background sound.
And they were … These, these quotes were on big paper sheet, and there was, like, a origamic practice that brought us together. And while we were quoting and folding, stories were told about what happened during the week. And it’s always super interesting when the artists are Actually sharing the, what happened in the conversation.
But most of them, they prefer not to talk about it, or it’s so subtle or it’s so specific that it doesn’t make sense to share it. But, um, I mean, I’m, I’m still open to trying different things, and I feel that what have became more important is just to have a moment where all the artists that have had a conversation in private can come together and just talk about whatever they want, but they know that something happened.
They kind of recognize themselves. They’ve been part of that almost of the festival.
Speaker 1: I wanna talk about how you continue to weave together the many perspectives of people who have been in relation, uh, with the festival, with, um, dramaturgical process, um, in your network and through the clinic. So, um, the Curieux Manuel de dramaturgie pour le théâtre, la danse et autres matières à changement.
Uh, so this is something you’ve published. Uh, I, I believe you’re co-editor?
Speaker 2: Yes.
Speaker 1: Yes, co-editor on, and it grows directly out of the clinics and brings together nearly 40 voices across continents, disciplines, and ways of knowing. So why did you decide to work on this publication, and what ideas or provocations from the book have stayed with you most strongly on a personal level?
Speaker 2: When asked the question, “What is your method?” Most dramaturgs respond that they do not have a fixed methodology, that their approach is always evolving and tailored, made s- made to measure. And throughout the editions of the clinic, we’ve tried to conclude with the sharing of tools and practices, and this has always been challenging, as everyone seem resistant again.
And jokingly we said, “Ah, we want to create a manual, like the definite manual, def- you know, where you will find everything.” And it was a fantasy. And however, our dramaturgy manual, um, s- stayed, like the idea of the dramaturgy manual stayed with us, the impossible or the improbable manual or the anti-manual.
And with my colleague and friend Emilie Marckun, um, co-editor of the book, we are also very passionate about approaches and methods and strategies, and even tricks I would say. And so this project really excited us a lot. And life has to be part of it, and friendship, it was really important ingredient. So the book contains methodologies.
Uh, there’s conversation as a dramaturgical practice, uh, text on taking notes, uh, musical dramaturgy, walking dramaturgy, um, listening practice, urban dramaturgy, guideline for more ethical collaborations, uh, bird’s biting, uh, dramaturgy with the, with Lindsay Lachance that’s, uh, close to you. Uh, we are like very concrete suggestion that we can apply directly.
For example, Riccardo Fazzi, again, Italian dramaturg suggesting sh- suggesting in his, um, article that you can, um, attend a rehearsal with a very different music in your headphones than what’s happening on the stage, just to revisit the visual and the structure from a different point of view. Or, uh, Sarah VanDering sharing, sharing with us that before every session as a dramaturg She makes a portrait of herself.
Who am I at this very moment? What am I carrying today? What will I bring in the rehearsal room? And then you make the, you take this, this thing that you have with you, but also you ex- you make, uh, the same exam at the end. So these are ideas and thematic that are, I would say, um, more in the sense of dramaturgy, dramaturgy.
But there are also contributions about dances as spirits, dances for the future, ghost game. Ghost game from Lois Brown from, uh, Newfoundland. Incredible, um, non-orthodox dramaturge. Um, histories about whales, salmons, um, other model of clinics in the world. Jacob Renn talking about individualism. So a lot of different things, and long conversations that we transcripted for the book, um, from people that are very inspiring to us.
So it’s a very original book, I would say. Full of life, full of history, um, non-definitive. And I would say that, uh, uh, the indexes of the book are giving a good idea of it. We have three indexes. One for the presences, one for the worlds, and one for the things that, uh, were saw or read, you know? So just lists Of all kinds of elements.
And I really learned that, um, making a book in an experimental way, um, we were also working with, um, artistic, uh, graphic, uh, director, Daniel Cancey, and with, uh, two designers, tag team. The book becomes its own self, and then you work with it and you accompany it. And, um, at some point, we, we decided that the book was like a conversation, so we had to listen more, to listen deep- deeper, deeply, and to find w- what were the voices that were missing, and then the additions would come like that.
It took us years. Too long. It’s… That, that is a very, very slow and unpr- productive process that we were able to do thanks to the festival and to the support of, um, National Fund and to Art Council of Canada because it’s a, a, a real luxury to do, uh, a book like that. And, you know, I wanted to grab one to have it with me while I was talking to you, and I don’t even have one in my house.
I’m constantly, like, giving them to all kind of people, and for me they are, like, just circulating and, like, like the network that we created, like the voices that I feel I have in my head now, it’s just like companions.
Speaker 1: Okay, so where can people find the book? They, like, you know, in a… Other than just, like, opening themselves and hoping to catch one that comes their way.
Speaker 2: No, it’s, it’s very, it’s very well distributed in any kind of, uh, uh, French, uh, speaking, um, bookstore or online. Um, in, in, uh, Quebec, we have, um, a website called Leslibraires.ca, and it’s a great, great website of all independent, uh, booksellers. And so you can pick your bookshop, and you can pick the book you want, and you can even order English and French book on that website, so it’s great.
You can find it there.
Speaker 1: Thank you, Jesse. Thank you so much for this conversation and the, the generosity and the, the extension of the generosity from the concept of the clinics being open source, and then, you know, sharing what that means, how you’re working, uh, and then the generosity of just being in conversation and, and walking us through your thinking behind all of this.
Thanks so much.
Speaker 2: Great pleasure. I can’t wait to be at Push this year.