From format mess to timeless wonder
I can't remember the exact moment, but emotionally it is clear as yesterday when I discussed enthusiastically with my then-fellow student now film director Selma Vilhunen, what a great screenplay means to a project. We felt like the script was a magician's tool and that if the script is good then you as a director with your crew can conjure it to life, but if it's bad you don't have a chance.
I found my deep interest or in better words love for dramaturgy during the turn of the millennium. I wanted to grasp professionally something that would not become useless the next day when a new thing would appear. The digital revolution was around the corner but we were not there yet. I was extremely frustrated with the constant changes and endless talk about formats and upcoming tech that would change everything. I tried to see what persisted, what was that one thing that would not be renewed before I even got the hang of it. I asked myself: is there anything permanent? It didn't take long to land on dramaturgy. At that time I was mostly interested in fiction film though I had started to get more into documentary and performing arts.
I slowly became aware through impactful experiences and also from failed attempts to move the audience that the most valid things can be traced back to the script and structuring of a narrative. It became clear to me how even for example mediocre camerawork and low production value could deliver a meaningful and strong experience if the script and editing were well done and how even the best choices in lighting, sound, acting, set design, etc. didn't help if the structural choices were lacking. This seemed to me to be the case on every level in artistic practice between writing and editing. If for example one felt the need to start boosting expression and felt the need to save and fix things in a film project the problem was usually in the script. On a less conscious level, I started to make these same observations on theater, performance, and dance though I could not put it into words back then.
I always try to see the structure if, and as it often happens, I experience that in a time-based project, something is lacking. I have also realized that if I have a fulfilling and meaningful experience I rarely notice the structure but if I go back to analyze it the structure is 10 times out of 10 well put together. Note that I do see great moments in many works of art with weak structure but then I tend to think how could the rest of this be lifted to that same level and the peak. Thanks to this perspective of looking at structures or in other words the “bigger picture” I nearly always feel I can find constructive things to offer.
I have met plenty of artists who claim in so many words that they want to follow their instinct, that knowing too much about structures takes the "magic" away. I could not disagree more. I wish to share my point of view and encourage more people to think about how the structures of their projects have been developed or undeveloped.
For me, it is nothing less than a timeless wonder when removing, rearranging, or adding content within a time-based project it in a metaphorical sense suddenly draws breath and starts its unique life. In a film, dance piece, performance, song, or stageplay when it happens it does feel like magic.