Saturday was full of rain and puddles, and shiny wet leaves and vigorous discussions about play writing and culture.

After donning my most celebratory polka-dot frock, I had bundled myself into my ancient car with my favourite road-tripping navigatrix, Melita Rowston in search of coffee at the NSW Writers’ Centre’s coffee van (as promised via Twitter).

It’s a few days after the fact, but I thought I would offer a few thoughts on the topics floated at the festival… I have a hard time NOT having opinions about things… but I’m often aware of my voice detracting from the senior members of our playwriting community. Thank goodness for this site. I can provoke and torture only a select few with my optimistic and somewhat subversive ramblings.

First up a keynote from John McCallum – who is really the Gandalf of the Australian playwriting world ( N.B I identify myself as the Éowyn of the Australian playwriting world) – senior reviewer for The Australian Newspaper, lecturer in theatre at UNSW and a punter with over 40 years experience of Australian theatre-going. McCallum started the festival with a quote from Richard Dawkins regarding the “Tyranny of the discontinuous mind” and a collection of thoughts which asks what we lose in our pursuit of reducing theatre to “I loved it/ I hated it” judgements, or a “star rating.” He urged us (as Australian playwrights/playwriting enthusiasts/ critics) to not look to either/or scenarios in how we are regarding and responding to the work of auteur directors that are taking the helm of many of our mainstage companies and presenting us with “new works” which seem not to require the services of a playwright (or at least a “playwright” who isn’t also an actor appearing in the play they are “writing”).

McCallum gave us succinct and crisp analyses of the recent works of Simon Stone – Baal and Thyestes. He asked us to look at the magical moments within the work – the abstract portrayals of traditional stories – what worked and what didn’t and most importantly an analysis of why. In an illuminating (and gracefully short) history lesson, McCallum explained the old fashioned playwriting tendencies of the new wave – including the desire to extinguish complicated or “impossible” stage directions. He now urged writers to be imaginative – and to think big about their demands in italics – as directors now have the technology, wit and imagination to make anything happen – including a depiction of the big bang.

He urged us to not think in black and white terms about the role of the writer in the age of the auteur director. He urged us not to be so tyrannous in our definition of theatre – nor description/expectation of collaboration with an auteur director. He urged us not to discount ourselves from being a part of this movement/ trend in theatre, nor should we place ourselves in the opposing corner of the boxing ring to the auteur. He called on us to inspire and challenge the auteur director and left us with these words ringing in our ears:

“Write it in, anything you want. They can do it.”

I couldn’t agree more. I am a dramaturg and writer for a Shh Centre for Hybrid Art Shh.org.au and I think that there is space in every genre and form of performance for writers. Why would we not reinvent, re-imagine the role of the writer? Why would we pit ourselves against multiple forms and styles of storytelling? Why wouldn’t we want to wallow in the grey of creation and thought and movement and space and ideas? What a wonderful permission to grant ourselves – to not be intimidated by (“Where did he hide that piano?” we all mutter) , but contribute to, new ways of making theatre.