Thing Dramaturgy

Christina Lindgren

Åsa Johannisson

Liv Kristin Holmberg

In this part you find three perspectives on how dramaturgy of things in performance can be explored, formed, experienced.

Costume designer/ director Christina Lindgren elaborates on what she calls Costume Thing Dramaturgy by reflecting on its what, why, who and where. 

Director/ actor Åsa Johannisson reflects on three different costumes; how they triggered action in her, how she responded during the improvisation and how she would describe the dramatrugy that emerged. 

Performance artist, organist and researcher Liv Kristin Holmberg reflects on her practice, where concepts and intentions forms the starting point for her performances, and how she, through the costume jam sessions, discovered some new aspects and potentials of the costume she brought to the workshop.  

 
Costume Thing Dramaturgy and its what, why and how by Christina Lindgren

Three costumes and three dramaturgies. Åsa Johannisson in conversation

Dramaturgy of things and dramaturgy of intention. Liv Kristin Holmberg in conversation

Costume Thing Dramaturgy – and it's what, why, how, who, where

Christina Lindgren

Our tendency to see the world—and the non-human—through a lens of hierarchy and utility shapes not just our daily lives, but also our approach to things in the performing arts. What if we opened our eyes, hands, and minds to perceive both human and non-human as intricately woven together, each dependent on the other, both on stage and beyond? Could this shift in perspective help us move away from patterns of exploitation and destruction, and instead nurture the very foundation of life? 

Introduction

In this article, I introduce and clarify the concept of costume thing dramaturgy, a perspective developed from my experiments and performances in which costume serves as the starting point or center of gravitation. While my research focuses on things like costumes, this dramaturgical principle can apply across various performance contexts. Costume thing dramaturgy is thus presented as a flexible framework—something practitioners and audiences can intentionally adopt when creating or experiencing performances. 

COSTUME THING DRAMATURGY: WHAT? 

I am a costume designer, scenographer, director, teacher, and researcher. As an artist (costume designer, scenographer, director), I work in independent performance constellations, mostly in devising processes. As a teacher and practitioner of artistic research, I explore the agency of costume and how it can form a starting point for performance, as seen in the research project Costume Agency (2018–2023). Most of the performance productions I have worked on were not based on a predetermined script or concept, but rather on a process-oriented creation in which nonhuman things have played an essential role. Findings from my research and artistic practice have fostered an interest in dramaturgy in me; from the conclusion that things can do things, I now would like to explore how things do things.

In January 2025, I visited a conference on dramaturgy held in Prague, titled "Between Presence and Meaning: Strategies of teaching practical dramaturgy of contemporary performance". Hosted by The Department of Alternative and Puppet Theatre (KALD) at the Theatre Faculty (DAMU), the Academy of Performing Arts in Prague. [1]. Before going to the conference, I was hoping for some clarity on the term' dramaturgy,' including its perspectives, methods, and tools. But I was quickly surprised. Among more than 40 presenters, there were more than 40 distinct approaches; some had developed their own operational systems of tools and methods, while others had developed theoretical approaches and concepts. In other words, my impression was that almost everything can be called dramaturgy, and dramaturgy can be everywhere and anything. The term dramaturgy is up for grabs. Travelling back from the conference, I was filled with conviction and trust that I had to let the inspirational days shape my own definition of dramaturgy, based on my experience and research in costume. This has led me to develop a dramaturgy of costume things and thing dramaturgy. 

There are multiple researchers and artists who have explored post-humanist perspectives on dramaturgy, the dramaturgy of human and non-human things, and the dramaturgy of the more-than-humans.[2] These are important contributions to expanding our view of dramaturgy, but unfortunately, the frame of this article does not allow us to go deeper into these concepts. 

I define Thing Dramaturgy as a composition/assemblage of human and non-human elements in events unfolding in a performance setting. This means that humans and non-humans are on the same footing in the creational process, as well as in the performance that unfolds for the audience. 

I relate to the term unfolding. Synne Behrndt describes dramaturgy this way: Dramaturgy, as I understand it, is engineering or constructing the unfolding of a performance for the audience. (Behrndt 2023, p. 33). 

Dramaturgy is a composition, meaning it is the organisation of several parts into a unity. Another term I use is Assemblage of human and non-human things, which I borrowed from Jane Bennett, who relates to Deleuze/ Guattari: 

Assemblages are ad hoc groupings of diverse elements, of vibrant materials of all sorts. Assemblages are living, throbbing confederations (…). Assemblages are not governed by any central head. (…) The effects generated by an assemblage are, rather, emergent properties, emergent in that their ability to make something happen (…) is distinct from the sum of the vital force of each materiality considered alone. Each member and proto-member of the assemblage has a certain vital force, but there is also an effectivity proper to the grouping as such: an agency of the assemblage. (Bennett, 2010, pp. 43-44)

Using the term assemblage covers the seamless interaction between humans, like the performers and audience, and the things, like, for example, the costumes. 

My research has mostly focused on costumes, which are a special category of things, as they are worn on the body and are perceived together with the body. A mere costume garment on stage often carries traces of a human body, and the absent human body is often perceptible. Aoife Monks states, "When a costumed actor appears onstage, it is often very difficult to tell where the costume leaves off, and the actor begins." When we speak of costume, we are often actually talking about actors; and when we speak of actors, we are often actually talking about costume. (Monks, 2010, p. 11). 

As I perceive it, the unity of a costume is a complex and dynamic entity of the garment, the body connected to it, what is being said and done with it, and the context in which it happens. I use the following term: Costume = dynamic entity of four elements: garment + body + action + context. (Lindgren, 2021) The fact that costume garments and the body (the human and the non-human) are perceived so closely interlinked makes the task of exploring and describing the dramaturgy emerging most challenging and thrilling. 

WHY? 

Contemporary theatre and new forms of dramaturgy. Traditional theatre focuses on text, but contemporary theatre fosters a wide range of new performing arts. This results in a need for new models of dramaturgy, such as device theatre dramaturgy (Zupanc Lotker 2024), physical dramaturgy (Bowditch, Casazza, Thornton and others, 2018), dance dramaturgy, queer dramaturgy (Mackrill), landscape dramaturgy (Vujanovic, 2018), eco dramaturgy (Idaszak 2024) and much more. 

Jane Bennett and Thing Power. I believe that research and theory within New Materialism are particularly valuable for understanding dramaturgy, where scenography and costume design are involved. In the book Vibrant Matter (2010), Jane Bennett uses the term “thing power”. If we understand how objects influence us, we understand, and we discover that we are part of a larger whole. We discover the thing power. In her bookVibrant Matter (2010), she describes the inherent agency, vitality, and capacity of inanimate materials to act, resist, and produce effects in the world, challenging the human-centred view that only humans possess true agency, suggesting all matter is active and interconnected. She argues that non-human things have a power, and their influence can be felt in everyday experiences, highlighting our shared materiality.

My encounter with Thing power in performing arts. The first time I experienced the thing power was by a performance almost two decades ago. The stage floor was overall covered with a 20-centimetre layer of couscous. The performance lasted close to two hours, and I sat comfortably in an auditorium seat at the magnificent opera house, enjoying the beautiful music. But my mind centred on the couscous covering the stage, and images from the news of people starving popped into my head. My thoughts also wandered to the materiality, and I started thinking about how they had shuffled the tons of couscous during the rehearsal period and what the plans were for what they would do with it after the final performance. Suddenly, I got fantasies about bugs or beetles thriving in the couscous heaven – how did the opera house handle that? With freezers? Of what size? I recoiled in disgust and discomfort. I started to wonder how the singers felt. Was there maybe a singer who did not want to perform in food but felt forced to do so to avoid turning down a job offer and future career opportunities? The couscous was very dominant. I cannot recall which performance it was, the year, or who performed in it. To me, I experienced the thing power of couscous on a stage. This was the live performance of the power of things. 

And things – such as couscous or costumes – have the potential to do things in the mind of the audience, for the performers, for the opera house, for bugs and beetles and for the economy. Understanding what human and non-human things really do demands a process of opening up perspectives and doing physical material try-outs. By doing so, the chance heightens that we will see the human and non-human power in a different way. 

HOW? 

How do things do things? How do things work? How did costume create a performance?

The dramaturgy of things in performance is closely connected to the performance that is being created. In a text-based performance, the words are the starting point and main elements. Likewise, in dance performance, it is the movements; in opera and music-based performances, the music serves as the starting point and main element. The performances where the non-human things are the starting point and main elements are not so common, but they can be found. I will here focus on some knowledge gained from working and researching performances generated by costumes. This does not mean that the dramaturgy of things cannot be found in other performances. I believe that it can be regarded as a pair of glasses; one can put on the “thing-dramaturgy-glasses” and experience a theatre, dance, or opera performance. 

The artistic research Costume Agency (2018 – 2023) included the creation of twenty performances emerging from costume (Lindgren and Lotker (eds) 2023). The creation process for most of these costume-generated performances was as follows: improvising with the costumes, exploring their potential, selecting actions, deciding on the order of the actions, and refining and developing each action into scenes. This way, the dramaturgy emerged in the process through the interaction between the human and non-human.

I will here mention some observations I have of costume thing dramaturgy works: 

The importance of the first encounter between the garment and the performer lies in the special moment when the human is curious, and all senses are open. This is a precious moment that deserves special attention and focus. It includes a first encounter with the garment, in which its physical and non-physical properties are recognised, as well as the first interaction between the garment and the human, in which they respond to each other’s movements.

The term “listen to” the costume is often used to describe the performer's attentiveness and openness as they approach the garment. I find inspiration in Lisbeth Lipari and her term interlistening, as she suggests three forms of interlistening:

Polymodal interlistening; simultaneous combination of two or more sensory modes, “Occurring across multiple sensory modalities such as seeing, tasting, speaking, listening, and so forth. Polymodality pertains to the embodied dimension of interlistening. (…) It involves all senses, interacting and mutually influencing each other.“

Polyphonic interlistening: the simultaneous combination of two or more tones or melodic lines, occurring through the voices of different characters. Polyphony refers to (…) notions of voice and point of view as well as to the musical and punctuated rhythmic dimension of interlistening –all of the auditory and nonverbal qualities of the communicative interaction –that characterise the “confused multiplicity” of interlistening.”

Polychronic interlistening: the simultaneous combination of two or more times

Occurring in a confused multiplicity of temporal modalities such as past, present, future, duration, and so forth. Polycronicity involves the rhythmic aspects of interlistening, such as timing, order, sequence, coordination, syncopation, repetition, and punctuation, as well as the tensed aspect of interlistening, and disrupts linear conceptions of time expressed by grammatical notions of past, present, and future.” (Lipari 2020, p. 37).

Unfolding of the thing power

In order to find the thing power, and thereby the embedded possible costume thing dramaturgy, it is important to be open to the multiple potential of the costume. By researching with costumes, methods of improvisation have proven useful. Through improvisation between the human and the non-human, things emerge – as images, sculptures, abstract shapes, characters, pop figures, and creatures. Especially in the first phase of creating a performance, it is extremely useful to play with the garment. Following the response to the sensations in the body, trust the intuition and impulses, and go with the flow. From what emerges, the most interesting parts are collected, refined and further explored, and this forms the foundation for the dramaturgy. 

An important method for improvising with costumes has been the costume jam sessions, which derive from Costume Agency Workshop #2 Devising Garment (DAMU, March 2019), led by Sodja Zupanc Lotker. 

Potentials of the costume things

Dramaturge and researcher Sodja Zupanc Lotker has described what she calls levels of potential of material. These are embedded aspects of the garment that might be at play in the dramaturgical equation, and can be developed into performative material. Examples of levels of potential are, for example, basic levels of what we call it, the functional potential, sensory potential, symbolic potential, potential to look like something else, potential to move or reflect, potential to look familiar or strange, and more (Lotker 2023, p.162)

In this current research catalogue exposition, Zupanc Lotker offers insight into her method. In the text Devising from costume tasks, she writes: 

What this method has to do with dramaturgy is that dramaturgy is based on looking for potential. (…) You always base dramaturgy on a specific story, or an inclination or an irritation. And following the story, inclination, irritation or whatever is guiding you, is following the potential at the core of the work. The same way you can follow the physical material, its logic, its dynamics, the way it performs, moves, speaks, rolls, eats… (…) In order to see what is in the material, one has to play with it. (Lotker 2026)

By considering these potentials during the creative process, they can influence and shape the dramaturgy. From my experience, a dramaturgy that builds on improvisations with things like costumes, does very seldom form a narrative or a linear story. Rather, it is a circular dramaturgy where the potential of the costume is revealed – as onion scales – and we get to know the costume garment and its thing power. 

Composing

In the search for words to describe the interaction of human and non-human things, compositional terms from the field of music and painting can be useful. The list below presents questions that can help generate and compose dramaturgy with humans and non-humans. The list is a non-exhaustive list:

Unity: is the human and non-human unity perceived as a merged unity or separate parts? Is there an indivisible fusion between humans and objects? Describe this fusion. Are there tensions between the parties?

Material and texture: are the materials and textures of the human and non-human corresponding and contrasting?

Form: do the human and non-human create a third shape? How?

Technique and media: what are the techniques and media of the human and non-human?

Power relation: how does the power relationship between people and objects change? If the garment had a voice, what would it be like and what would it say?

Balance: is the costume garment, or the body perceived as dominant, or balanced?

Contrast: are the human and non-human in contrast in terms of size, form, temperature, material qualities, visual intensity, strangeness and more?

Semiotics and beyond: how is the semiotics created by costumes and humans, appearing? Are they in continuous flux, meaning occurs, disappears and transforms? How does it alternate between ‘openness’ and ‘concreteness’?

Origin: Does the origin of the human or non-human trigger actions and meaning?

Time: how to describe the rhythms, repetitions, patterns, life-time-perspective?

Actions: are there mirroring, contrasting or repeating preceding actions?

Emphasis: where does our attention go, and how does it move?

Emotions: what touched you by the interaction of the human and non-human? In what way were you touched?

Transformation: Is a transformation occurring?

Transformation “route”: Is there a transformation route through the performance of the human and non-human?

Proportions: Who, when and how is leading the action and/ or having the attention? 

Relation to other elements of the experience: How does light, sound, space, words, audience, theatre space, the city/country/world the experience takes place, influence the experience? Where does the focus and attention go?

Organising of elements; are there sections of actions that are longer, more exciting, more emotional, to a larger extent fulfilling an idea? Where are they placed in the composition? What elements will be in the start and the end? How long will each part last? 

Pattern: if you divide the performance into time-based sections and play with the order of them, do you see any patterns emerging, as a spiral, a rule of the thirds or the golden triangles? 

The time aspect. I believe that human and non-human things in performance have different time parameters. Humans have time parameters as a second, a scene, an act, a performance, a performance production period, a year, a lifetime. Non-human things have temporal parameters, which are consciously and subconsciously perceived by both the audience and the performers during the performance. The time dimensions of the material include, for example, the crafting of scenic elements and costumes, the time of moulding/dismantling, the time of repair, and the time of recycling/returning/deconstruction. A costume made of a synthetic material can live for a hundred, if not thousands, of years. What we have in common is the cycles of nature that we are a part of – day, night, winter, summer. 

WHO AND WHERE?

Thing dramaturgy emerges for everyone who creates, produces, and experiences the performance – both human and non-human. All involved in a performance experience the event from their unique point of view; therefore, multiple meanings and dramaturgies are perceived. Thing dramaturgy can be applied everywhere performing arts happen. It can be regarded as a lens or a pair of glasses to put on. My experience is that in performances generated by costumes or other non-human elements, I often encounter a rich and thorough dramaturgy.

CONCLUCION

I see costume thing dramaturgy as a composition/assemblage of human and non-human elements in events unfolding in a performance setting. This means that humans and non-humans are on the same footing in the creational process, as well as in the result, which unfolds for the audience. 

Thing dramaturgy emerges for everyone who creates, produces, and experiences the performance – both human and non-human. It can be applied everywhere where performing arts take place. 

Our dominance over non-human things extends to how we approach the performing arts, especially in our interactions with costumes and materials. By reconsidering both human and non-human elements as interconnected components within performance, we can shift away from exploitative tendencies. 

Costume Thing Dramaturgy can be a space for critical reflection. Reflection on the origin, process, use, maintenance, and recycling of the material, as well as the methods, tools, and craft behind the costumes. A place for reflection on how humans and non-humans interact. I therefore ask myself: What does the performance I am involved with seek to convey? What does it say about how I relate to the world, how human and non-human things perform together? 

REFERENCES

Behrndt, S. 2023. Conversations. In Behrndt, S. and Lotker, S. Dramaturgy and Research in Devised Theatre. Academy of Performing Arts, Prague. ISBN 978-80-7331-657-0.

Bennett, J. 2010. Vibrant materiality. A Political Ecology of Things. Duke University Press. Durham and London. 

Lindgren, C. 2021. Unfolding a vision embedded in a garment: Three tools from a toolbox for generating performance from costume design, Studies in Costume & Performance, 6:2, pp. 201–15, https://doi.org/10.1386/scp_00047_1

Lipari, L. 2020. Phenomenological Approaches, in Worthington, Debra and Bodie, Graham, 2020, The Handbook of Listening, Wiley Blackwell.

Lotker, S. 2023. The double Agent. Dramaturgy of costume. In Lindgren, C. and Lotker, S. 2023. Costume Agency Artistic Research Project. Oslo National Academy of the Arts. 

Lotker, S. Z. 2026. Devising from Costume Tasks, In (Eds) Østergaard, C. & Lindgren, C, Costume Dramaturgies – the dramaturgy of things in performance, Stockholm University of the Arts (Sweden), Research Catalogue exposition: https://www.researchcatalogue.net/editor?research=4011823&weave=4064362.Accessed January 6th, 2026.

Monks, A. The actor in costume. Palgrave Macmillan Hampshire 2010.

[1] Convener doc. MgA. Sodja Zupanc-Lotker, PhD. The symposium is organised by the KALD department of the Prague Performing Arts Academy in collaboration with Residenz Leipzig, Hochschule für Musik und Theatre Felix Mendelssohn Bartholdy Leipzig, and DAS Theatre/Amsterdam University of the Arts. https://www.damu.cz/cs/katedry-programy/katedra-alternativniho-a-loutkoveho-divadla/open-call-symposium-between-presence-and-meanin-4320/

[2] Post-humanist perspectives on dramaturgy by Maike Bleeker (Bleeker, Maaike. 2020. The Mise en Scène of Post-Human Thinking. Parse Journal, Human (12). Woynarski, Lisa. 2020. Ecodramaturgies: Theatre, Performance and Climate Change. Cham: Palgrave Macmillan. And Žeželj, Tery. 2022. Dramaturgy as a more-than-human practice. Maska, 37(3),6477.10.1386/masks_00130_1. Eeg-Tverbakk, Camilla(2024). Thinking Matter(s) in Theatre Practice - A Dramaturgy of Assemblages. Nordic Theatre Studies. Vol. 35.

Download this text

Dramaturgy of things and dramaturgy of intentions

Researcher and performance artist Liv Kristin Holmberg

in conversation with Christina Lindgren

Stockholm Arts University, December 18th, 2025

CL: Thank you, Liv Kristin, for agreeing to this conversation. We will focus on dramaturgy based on our experiences from working in the workshop with costumes as a starting point. But first, I was wondering if you could tell us a little about your background?

LKH: Yes, I have a background in music, visual arts, performing arts, and theoretical subjects such as the history of ideas, philosophy and psychology. For the past ten years, I have been researching the connection between art and religion – via liturgy – which is the name given to Christian rites. If one were to think of liturgy as an artistic form, what does that lead to as an art form? It is in this context that I have become interested in dramaturgy. I have always been particularly interested in the aspect of dramaturgy in the performing arts, because it is the aspect of the performing arts that most resembles philosophy. I usually work conceptually, taking my starting point in theory or theses or something I want to explore and test. This has created an interest in dramaturgy and, by extension, art theory. I am interested in understanding the ‘essence’ of art. What kind of activity is it, or what are we doing when we engage in art? Or how do we know that what we are doing is art? 

Interest in dramaturgy

CL: Very nice. Can you think aloud a little about the concept of dramaturgy?

LKH: Yes. I think of dramaturgy as a variant of composition. For me, music is often the starting point that frames and gives direction to the dramaturgy. And the space provides a structure that guides the dramaturgy. Then there are the scenic actions and other elements such as light, touch, anxiety and absence – yes, I often compose with quite abstract elements – that guide the dramaturgical form.

CL: Yes, can you say something about all the elements that can be included in your works?

LKH: Anxiety or vulnerability are often themes that preoccupy me. For me, boundaries are an artistic material; for example, being led towards a boundary, touching a boundary or working around boundaries that exist either dramaturgically or purely architecturally. And then there is sound and the absence of sound. And darkness and light. Temperature. The aspect of time. The cycle of the year; seasons, the rhythm of nature, whether it is autumn, whether it is night. Whether it is Easter morning. What is the right time to make something happen? Then the time and season are important elements. And touch preoccupies me. Yes, what else?

You could call it a kind of poor theatre – I work within that tradition in a way. And costumes are also an element, of course, but they are not always as prominent since I often work with blindness: I take away the audience's sense of sight by using darkness and blindfolds. For me, as a performer, what a costume can enable is more important than how it looks visually. I think I've covered everything then. I probably haven't. But, yes, and thinking, of course. Existential problems and speculative philosophy.

CL: What do you think about the physical, the material – such as costumes?

LKH: I think there is a slight paradox here, that I compose or create dramaturgy based on abstract elements when I am actually very concerned with the body – in a way, it is physical theatre that I am interested in. How to receive something, through the senses. 

I want to create an art experience where the audience can form a new relationship with a type of theme; something that is negative and a problem can be rethought or re-established with a new relationship. That was also what we did in the workshop, in a way we created new relationships with an object – the costume. It was something we had to figure out. It was something we didn't know. So in a way, perhaps the dramaturgy in the costume jam session method is similar to the method in my performances. There was also something ritualistic about it, with the repetitions...

In a way, I take something physical as my starting point in my performances and stage works. The liturgical structure, the liturgical script and the dramaturgy reside in the various architectural spaces I work in. One could think of the space as an extended garment, an extended costume. In that sense, I have both an immaterial and a material starting point for the formation of dramaturgical structures.

From inherent potential to composition

CL: You could say that the costume has a number of inherent possibilities. And by exploring the costume's potential, we were able to realise this potential through physical interaction. 

LKH: Yes, we had thorough and focused sessions with each object, item or costume. But the question is, how do you compose with this inherent potential? It was something we didn't explore further, but which we also talked about: seeing these inherent potentials, whether there was some kind of guidance for a sequence or form. Do you think you got any kind of indication of a sequence or form? 

CL: Well. I remember a situation, right after our joint jam session was over, when one of the workshop participants continued to explore the costume on her own – it kind of exploded. She kept at it for ten minutes and a composition emerged. But I also think that we composed when we explored the costume's potential together in our costume jam sessions; we responded to each other's actions, based on actions that had already been done, and repetitions emerged. This formed a dramaturgy. 

LKH: It did.

CL: Can we then say that a costume has an inherent dramaturgical potential, in line with that of a church? 

LKH: When I'm going to do something in a church, I spend a lot of time getting to know that church in order to understand what I'm creating within it and what it points to. So, naturally, if we had sat down over several days and got to know these costumes, it could definitely have been a kind of driving force for creating a kind of appropriate sequence. But now, as I said, I work quite conceptually. I work with rituals, and intention is crucial for me. It's something I want. It's something that's at stake in me that I need to physically express in reality. Whether it actually comes to fruition... That's another question. And it's very nice if it happens.

Costumes and other scenic elements as instruments of intention

CL: And is it the case that your costume is just a tool or an instrument for you? And that the elements you work with are tools for your intention? More than...

LKH: ...more than values in themselves. Yes, that's actually the case. But that's precisely why the perspective in this research project is interesting, because it opens up something completely different from what I do in my own practice. Because there are many things you become blind to when you think constantly about function and see objects in the world only as means to achieve your sacred goals. 

For example, if we were to think about my costume, the artliturgical cloak*, which for me has been more of a symbol or a mask. But I discovered that there is an incredible amount of potential that I had overlooked, or been blind to what this cloak can do. And that it is almost like a being in itself... I had a hunch that there was some life there. And that I cared so much for it – as if it were a pet. So here are things I haven't explored that I'm curious about and wonder what they might lead to. 

The potential of the artliturgical cape

CL: Can you tell us what you noticed during your improvisation with the cloak?

LKH: I realised that it has a kind of lock because it is a kind of commissioned work in my artistic practice, and that I have used it very functionally, which makes me want to try something completely different with it, and with completely different costumes that could provide completely different opportunities to be co-creative in a stage work. The cloak has a kind of persona in itself. And then I realised that I am obviously so attached to it. That was surprising. And that it was provocative in a way: everyone had a bit of a difficult relationship with it, a bit like I do. So there is a power that I can't quite put my finger on what it actually is. Does that make sense? And it may be that there were things that you saw that I don't see.

CL: I follow you on that. And I think that was reflected in the dramaturgy that emerged in the jam session with the cape. It was a dramaturgy that dealt in part with power relations between the cape and the person wearing it. It has many semiotic signs in it, which evoke associations with, for example, queens, royal power and how to relate to royal power. That was perhaps what was most prominent about it. 

LKH: Yes, it's absolutely true that it both provokes and awakens the anarchist in you, so that some people wanted to tear it to pieces or trample on it. And then there were those who felt sorry for the cape and comforted it in a way. So we were animating the costume – humanising it.

CL: So the actions that arose with the cape was largely about how to relate to the claok. And that the claok became a manifestation of something that one perceives as power. It became a kind of...

LKH: ... yes, it became a kind of power struggle. Yes, the structure that emerged was that you became a bit “black and white” in your head. There is something assertive about it. But how does that relate to the dramaturgy? I think there is a missing link: we found the potential of the costume. But how to build up the dramaturgy? That's the next step. Although at the same time, on one level, a kind of dramaturgy also emerges. But it was perhaps governed more by other things than by the costume. I'm a little unsure whether the order and sequence were governed by the costume? But, of course, it was also governed by the costume. It was. But there were coincidences at play.

Dramaturgy in improvised sequences versus dramaturgy in composed sequences

CL: Could one say that it was not a linear but a circular dramaturgy that emerged? Because it is not like reading a book from the first to the last page, but rather circularly exploring a potential through various actions. A form of circular dramaturgy. 

LKH: I think that's right. Now we're back to the topic of method. When we introduced the method at the start of the workshop, the focus was on the costume, not on building a sequence. Even though that happened, it wasn't necessarily the focus. 

CL: Composed dramaturgy might have emerged if we had had a new step that involved putting together what we had found, based on what is most potent about the costume. 

LKH: Yes. The very title of the research project is the dramaturgy of things. So, there it is implied that things have a dramaturgy that we as humans must figure out. But I wonder if that's true? If things have a dramaturgy. Because it's about movement, action and agency. But of course, everything is in a state of decay in a way. It erodes. That it is perhaps the underlying dramaturgy of everything.

CL: Yes, that's right. And then we come to time, don't we? Maybe things have a different dimension of time than we humans do. If that coat is left alone, it can last for a thousands years. Whereas we humans only have a few decades.

LKH: Do you think it can last that long?

CL: It's made of synthetic fibres. So if it's stored in the best possible conditions, it could probably last a thousand years.

* the artliturgical cloak is the name of the costume of Liv Kristin, that she  brought to the workshop. When the garment was introduced, she did not mentioned the name of it, nor how she uses it in her performances. During the workshop, and in reflections here in this exposision, it is often called “the golden cape”.