# Playwrighting obsolescence: why write plays in an AI-enabled society?

Dominic Chamayou-Douglas

<figure><img src="image_1.png" /></figure>

## To cite this version:

Dominic Chamayou-Douglas. Playwrighting obsolescence: why write plays in an AI-enabled society?. Journées d'informatique théâtrale, Oct 2024, Avignon, France. hal-05138767

HAL Id: hal-05138767

https://hal.science/hal-05138767v1

Submitted on 1 Jul 2025

HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access
archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci-
entific research documents, whether they are pub-
lished or not. The documents may come from
teaching and research institutions in France or
abroad, or from public or private research centers.

L'archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est
destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents
scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non,
émanant des établissements d'enseignement et de
recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires
publics ou privés.

<figure><img src="image_2.png" /></figure>
# PLAYWRIGHTING OBSOLESCENCE: WHY WRITE PLAYS IN AN AI-ENABLED SOCIETY?

Dominic Chamayou-Douglas
Universités de Kent et Lille
Dd459@kent.ac.uk

## SUMMARY

AI-powered large language models are threatening to revolutionise our understanding and the value of text. All creatives are being challenged by this disruptive technology, including playwrights who in many countries are already in challenging practical conditions. Several theatre artists have experimented with using LLMs in creative practice with a variety of different approaches although as yet no AI assisted play has sustained a major impact on theatrical culture. This challenge to the position of the playwright may be contextualised with specific national histories examining the place of the play text within theatrical ecologies. Difficulties are ever-present for playwrights, but the potential impact of LLMs may be of a fundamentally existential nature, rather than a generational challenge. This article seeks to ask why should a playwright continue writing in the face of such challenges, arguing that personal values may be vital in sustaining the long-practiced art of playwrighting.

## 1. PREFACE

As a writer and academic, I have watched the rise of AI tools, specifically Large Language Models (LLMs) such as Chat-GPT, Google Bard/Gemini, Meta's Lama and others, with a mixture of amazement and horror. The overriding sensation is akin to witnessing the live birthing of a new entity with all the hopes, fears and abundant energy that accompanies the arrival of a newborn. Perhaps this metaphor is in fact a precise description of what we are experiencing as a society, the sudden parturition of a foreign object within our lives that is expected to alter how we work, live, play and communicate. I am sure I am not alone in vacillating between terror and excitement as we collectively struggle to understand the potential and the consequences of open, free access to this new technology. This article is partly a response to this feeling, an attempt to quantify and qualify the visceral reaction that LLMs can inspire within us, that it often inspires in me. The article is therefore less a fully realised argument, but more an personal exploration of the potential impact AI may have on an artistic practice and career that, at one stage in my life, I was completely dedicated to. In writing about these emotions, about a future at once miraculous and horrible, the hope is that a

more nuanced, less dramatic reflection may help playwrights, theatre artists and other interested parties to understand and perhaps prepare.

## 2. INTRODUCTION

At the start of 2024 the Chinese artist Ai Weiwei embarked on a project titled Ai v AI in which he proposed to ask unnamed AI software (presumably an LLM such as Chat GPT) a series of 81 questions across 81 days. The questions were broadcast live in cities around the world with both the AI software and Ai Weiwei himself providing answers to the sometimes philosophical, sometimes whimsical questions. As part of interviews to promote the project, Ai Weiwei was asked to respond to public criticisms of companies harvesting human created data, such as text, images and videos, in order to train AI systems without paying royalties to the original creators. Ai Weiwei's answer criticised traditional arts teaching and practice for continuing to train students in techniques AI can easily replicate, stating:

> "I think that kind of art should [have died] a long time ago. It takes AI a second to do it.... So that only means what they have learned very often is meaningless." [1]

The 'they' Ai Weiwei is referring to are people, the students of a craft, who spend hours mastering techniques that have been learnt and applied for decades, centuries, perhaps millennia, only to find that AI systems are capable of reproducing their efforts in a matter of seconds. Ai Weiwei is a provocateur of the first order, someone who has spent their entire career challenging received thought and societal norms, the statement must therefore be considered with the knowledge that he intends to perturb, to exercise us into a more profound reflection on the meaning of art. Although visual art is the subject matter here, the statement is equally applicable to any artform that AI programmes are capable of realistically imitating. As a purely text based artform, and considering the increasing ability of LLMs to generate text, the implication for plays and playwrighting as a practice is obvious. This article therefore considers whether Ai Weiwei is correct in predicting the eventual death of the human written play but also whether this potential death might be deserved
due to the essential meaninglessness of the act of
creation. To consider the question I propose to first
discuss some of the different approaches various artists
have taken in using AI to enhance or replace human
playwrighting. I will then try to contextualise this recent
challenge to the place of the playwright in society by
discussing a longer history of displacement with theatre
practice, taking the UK and France as examples. Finally,
I will personally reflect on how a playwright may find
meaning in writing plays despite the technological
alternatives available and the predicted obsolescence of
their utility.

3. AI-ENABLED PLAYWRIGHTING

**3.1. Some Examples of Practice**

The number of artists now experimenting with AI is
forever increasing, the variety of practices similarly
expanding as rapidly. This section is therefore not
intended as an exhaustive review, but rather as a brief
indication of the diversity of approaches to integrating
the technology into performance, which highlights the
work of some of the early pioneers to AI-enabled
playwrighting.

3.1.1. THEaiTRE

The Czech based project THEaiTRE set out to stage
a computer-generated play in order to celebrate the 100th
anniversary of Karel Čapek's R.U.R. Involving a
multidisciplinary team, the project developed software,
named THEaiTRobot, based on GPT-2 which generated
short scenes using template inputs describing action,
characters and dialogue. The first piece to result from
the process, *Ai: when a robot writes a play* (2021), not
only required human action to prompt and order the
scenes, but also intervention to select certain outputs
over others, some manually written lines and selected
editing. The team estimate that 92% of the words used
in the final play text were generated by the software [2]
with the piece being performed in Czech and distributed
online. A second piece called *Permeation* (2022) was
later developed with the express intention that the entire
text be generated with only one prompt, rather than on a
scene-by-scene basis, described as a 'Human in the
loop' process [3]. This approach however did not lead to
entirely satisfactory dramatic results, instead
highlighting the inability of the software to logically and
dramaturgically connect the scenes together in a
continuous and credible whole.

3.1.2. AI

At the Young Vic theatre in London in 2021, a play
titled simply AI directed by Jenifer Tang, was a part-
workshop, part-rehearsal, part-exploratory piece
involving GPT-3. The performance developed an
original playscript live in front of the audience using
inputs from the audience with the production team

selecting the more interesting ideas and developing
them in conjunction with the software. The texts were
then instantly performed by a troupe of actors onstage
thus opening up the development process to the
audience and creating a performance out of an aspect of
theatre, which is normally enacted outside of public
view [4]. Each performance was thus an original,
ephemeral event made possible by the power of the
technology with the audience witnesses to the creative
process. Although the final result may not qualify as a
play, the intention was clearly to display the potential
for human-computer processes to create original text
works.

3.1.3. dSimon

dSimon is a piece created by Simon Senn with
researcher Tammara Leites in which a kind of verbal
 avatar is created through the real-life data of Senn.
 Using Chat-Gpt3 to create this avatar, named dSimon,
 the duo then create a performance by interacting with
 the avatar, posing questions on contemporary culture or
 members of the audience and responding to the avatar's
 answers. The piece is intended to be partly informative
 and partly performative, displaying the capabilities of
 LLMs to analyse masses of data and generate text based
 on the specific inputs. The difference between the
 opinions expressed by the avatar and the real Simon
 Senn are a source of humour and drama while also
 highlighting the limitations of using the software for
 such complex tasks. [5]

3.1.4. plaiwriting

Christoper Hogg has advanced the concept of
plaiwriting in which AI tools are employed in a
'sandbox' environment in order to develop entirely new
and original play texts [6]. Participants of the workshops
are encouraged to experiment, to play around with AI
software including ChatGPT and Midway using a series
of set prompts, reflective practice and dramaturgical
intervention with the object being to rapidly create
entirely fictional, often fantastical worlds and
characters. The process and the tools employed are not
entirely original as other forms of theatrical practice
make use of similar techniques: playwriting workshops
and improvisation tasks often makes use of set prompts
to stimulate creativity while continual reflective practice
is an integral part of the rehearsal process, especially in
the context of devised theatre. The originality in the
process of plaiwriting therefore is the integration of the
software into the creative process itself. The interaction
between human and software to an extent replaces or
supplements interactions the creator might otherwise
conduct with other humans and may alter the reflections
of the artist. The software not only accelerates an
element of the creative process by returning
instantaneous responses to the prompts of the user but
may also propose solutions or questions that a human
interlocuter would not necessarily consider and certainly
not at such speed and volume. Hogg teaches classes in which a ludic limit is firmly established, stressing the importance of setting a marked boundary with clear rules within which the playing can take place. The setting of a limit creates a structured environment allowing for more meaningful experiences to occur and enabling the player to feel comfortable and safe to experiment and create without some of the anxieties or fears which might frustrate creative practice in a more traditional, human centred setting. Hogg similarly encourages the participants to develop trust in the software's capabilities so that a creative rapport is built between human and computer allowing for more productive and fruitful interaction.

## 3.2. Authenticity and the current limits of LLMs

In a previous article, I have experimented with the playwrighting capabilities of Chat GPT and questioned the artistic authenticity of the resulting outputs [7]. Using the version Chat GPT-3, the article initially sought to evaluate the creative and inventive capabilities of the software with prompts to imitate the styles of well-known anglophone playwrights. Throughout the process, all of the prompts provided were relatively simplistic and direct. The initial prompt took the form of a directive to imitate the style of a well-known British or American playwright with follow-up prompts focussed on accentuating certain linguistic traits of the author or to alter the subject matter. The main intention was not to create an accurate facsimile of an author's texts by using a succession of prompts but rather to assess Chat GPT-3's capability to assume the voice of a designated writer with minimal human input. When asked to write a play in the style of Tom Stoppard, Arthur Miller or Caryl Churchill, the software was capable of creating stock characters and situations which one might associate with those writers as well as generating dialogue that replicated certain semantic aspects often found in the most famous texts of those playwrights. For example, the Arthur Miller output bore some relation to works such as *All My Sons* and *A View from a Bridge* being set in 1950s America and dealing principally with male characters challenged by the circumstances of US industrial capitalism. An example of the Martin Crimp output is below.

<figure><img src="image_3.png" /><figcaption>Figure 1. An output from Chat GPT</figcaption></figure>

For those who know Crimp's work, one might recognise some superficial similarity in elliptic phrasing, a sense that the characters are slightly lost or confused and a lack of characteristics defining a place or time. However, the imitation is not of a sufficient quality that any serious reader of Crimp's work is likely to confuse this text as a work by the author himself.

The other avenue explored in this article was in prompting Chat GPT-3 to write specific genre plays such as a family drama or a Greek tragedy. In the case of the latter, the outputs relied heavily on existing tragedies often mixing recognisable elements of well-known plays to produce unoriginal composites. Follow up prompts asked Chat GPT-3 to develop an original text which relied less obviously on existing and widely known myths without much success. The results instead recycled established tropes of Greek myths with alterations in character names. When asked to write a family drama, the ensuing results returned insistently to the same themes, with the software unable to develop the plot once a certain story had been embedded as part of the ongoing output. The follow-up prompts were highly simple, often asking for the next scene in the play with the intention to assess Chat GPT-3's ability to understand how to progress the action of the scenes dramaturgically. However, the following scenes repeatedly reproduced the same dynamic of the first result, offering variations of the original rather than progression from that initial starting point.

None of the outputs convinced in their replication of these standard stories, neither in their dramaturgy, characterisation or language [7]. Their interest was primarily demonstrative as the software's capabilities and limitation were highlighted by the project. Without, and perhaps even with, significant human intervention, the justification for performing any of the outputs appears to be slight to non-existent. However, the fact that AI tools are today incapable of realistically imitating a writer's work or of generating a genre play is no guarantee on the future developmental capacities of the technology.
# 4. THE DISPLACEMENT OF THE PLAYWRIGHT IN THE UK AND FRANCE

## 4.1. A very brief history of displacement

In considering the long-term impact of AI on playwrighting, despite the limitations noted above, the possibility remains that the space for a playwright who writes text independently in advance of the production, as is common in the traditional two-step playmaking process, will diminish. The simple need for a human playwright to write the text may no longer exist considering the continued advancements made by LLMs to generate increasingly complex and nuanced text, including in the field of creative writing [8]. The involvement of writers in the theatrical ecology as a whole may reduce and the occupation of playwright may therefore be expected to recede further from public discourse. Although AI may prove to be a fatal development in the plight of the playwright, a useful framing of the situation may be in seeing the displacement of the playwright as part of a gradual process with multiple causes over the decades with AI only being the latest in a line of perceived threats to their existence.

France and the UK have long histories of producing playwrights and cherishing theatrical texts although the contexts, especially during the twentieth century, are radically different. I will therefore use these two countries as examples to demonstrate the evolving position of the playwright within theatrical culture but equivalent stories could potentially be told about other European countries.

## 4.2. France

From the end of the 1960s, the traditional position of the playwright within French theatre has been challenged by various aesthetic movements and cultural trends which have undermined the work and product of the playwright. The social and cultural movement of May 1968 partly led to the questioning of the authority of the playwright as a sole voice of creative authority, resulting in the rise of collective creation techniques in the 1970s. Companies such as Théâtre du Soleil who devised material with all members of the company helped to alter the traditional creation hierarchies in theatrical production [9]. Later the rise of Director's Theatre, with the likes of Patrice Chereau and Antione Vitez among others, meant that the principal creative force with theatre became the director at the expense of the involvement of playwrights [10]. A decentring of the text occurred in which the provenance of a text and its role within the production massively diminished with the corollary effect being a displacement of the playwright from French theatrical ecology. Productions of living playwrights became increasingly rare through the 1980s until a relative renaissance in playwrighting inspired by the generation of Koltes, Lagarce, and others.

Contemporary French theatre since the turn of the century has often exhibited many of the hallmarks of postdramatic theatre as described by Hans-Thies Lehmann [11], in which the text in performance is often relegated to a place of reduced importance, even by the writer-creators of the works themselves. Although not exclusively representative of all French theatre, many of the major artists of this period combine writing and creating in a novel form, termed 'set writers' (écrivains de spectacle) by Bruno Tackels [12]. Artists such as Joel Pommerat, Rebecca Chaillon or Pascal Rambert are not playwright-directors in the traditional sense as the writing occurs as part of the rehearsal process, with the text neither entirely preceding nor entirely being devised from creatively working with other members of the production team. Furthermore, text is only one element used to write with as their work often incorporates technical elements of lighting, sound and scenography into the creative writing process, not as secondary elements, but with equal status to that of the text. This form of creation is therefore not only textual but multimodal and is entirely different process to the standard image of a playwright writing separately far from the stage itself, often before the performers have gathered for the rehearsal. Joseph Danan has argued that these set-writers are partly a consequence of the decentring of the text and the period of Regietheater that preceded them, as directing one's own work is one of the only ways to ensure that one's play will actually be staged as written [13]. French playwrights may therefore have adapted their practice in response to their displacement by adopting a more active, engaged role in the creative process. By doing so, the space within the theatrical ecology for a pure playwright has further diminished as the practice of writing and process of rehearsing the pre-written words of another may be regarded as unfashionable and out of step with the current contemporary practice. A theatrical creative who solely writes may not only struggle to have work produced but risks being perceived as passé, almost as belonging to a bygone era when such endeavour was still considered innovative.

## 4.3. UK

The 1970s in the UK similarly saw an increase in companies focussed on devising work and writers encouraged to work within companies in workshops rather than in isolation from the other artists. However, the key change in the UK came in the 1980s when political decisions lead to an altered funding climate for the arts with a significant reduction in subsidies and the encouragement of private partnerships and sponsoring. The resultant effect being a noticeable turn towards programming tried and trusted plays from the theatrical canon and other financially viable shows such as musicals accompanied by a significant turn away from new plays and living playwrights [14]. This relative displacement of the playwright within the UK remained until the mid-1990s when the so called 'In-Yer-Face'
generation of Ravenhill, Kane, Ridley and others helped to bring contemporary playwrighting back to a central position within UK theatre. This was followed by substantive alteration in the political and funding climate for culture in the late 1990s, leading to increased budgets for theatre in general and for new writing in particular.

Since the turn of the century, contemporary British playwrighting has seen a renaissance with new initiatives, schemes, prizes and renewed interest in writing for theatre. Allied to increased funding for the arts, this has led to a concurrent increase in contemporary play texts in theatre venues across the country with many theatres becoming specialist new writing hubs. By 2013, new work represented a majority of all productions in the UK with new writing accounting for 55% of all new work once musicals, pantomimes and opera had been excluded [15]. This period was therefore marked by a heightened presence of playwrighting in British theatre and a concurrent increase in the stature of the playwright in culture generally. However, two aesthetic movements may be perceived as questioning the current veneration of the playwright in the UK: verbatim text and immersive theatre.

Although verbatim productions may employ a playwright to perform dramaturgical functions, the words are not written by the playwright but taken from actual speech of real people and therefore may be seen as undermining the authority of the writer as the wordsmith of the theatrical milieu. Certainly, dramaturgical talent is employed in shaping and editing a finished verbatim text, but the distinction lies in 'how it is made, that is to say, the way in which the words have been selected'[16]. Although the frontier between an original play and a verbatim text can be difficult to define with plays such as Dennis Kelly's *Taking Care of Baby* and David Hare's *Stuff Happens* relying on a mixture of fictional and factual material, a verbatim text tends to rely less heavily on the purely imaginative faculties of the writer. In certain productions where the text is entirely reliant on official publicly available material, such as *Justifying War* based on a government inquiry, the title of production dramaturg may be a more appropriate description of the role played by the writer. In immersive performances, whether taking place in a theatre, a factory or bus station, there is a clear disruption of the traditional theatrical form and audience experience. Although sections of the performance may rely on scripted dialogue, the focus of immersive performances is often the impact of the event and the audience experience, whether as individuals or as a group. The key question that is often used to navigate British theatre, that is 'who wrote the play?', is never asked as 'the play' does not exist in a recognisable form, the place of the text within the piece varying in importance. As an example, Punchdrunk, the foremost immersive theatre company in the UK, often do not credit a writer for their productions, although spoken

text can form an important element within their productions.

When taken as a whole, the contemporary theatrical ecology of the UK remains writer-focussed with plays forming the backbone of British productions. However, government funding cuts are now threatening the sustainability of contemporary plays appearing onstage as reductions in theatrical budgets has led to reduced play development budgets in theatres and fewer productions of new plays across the UK landscape [17].

## 5. 'WHY BOTHER' IN THE FUTURE?

Considering the overwhelming technological power of LLMs, their continued advancement, the fluctuating position of the playwright in society and theatre and without mentioning the ever-reducing cultural budgets in many European countries, a playwright might be tempted to ask the question, 'Why bother?' In using this phrase, I am appropriating the title of the well-known essay by the novelist Jonathon Franzen in which he searches for a justification for the continued existence of the novelist considering the ever-increasing number of alternative forms of entertainment, and specifically in the face of technological advancement [18]. Franzen wrote the essay over twenty years ago therefore he is concerned with the increasing dominance of television, CDs and the early stages of the internet and yet the concerns are broadly similar to our present-day angst in the face of a newer, more powerful technology. The extent to which we can relate to the predicament demonstrates how the underemployed and underread writer forever competing for readers is a constant state in modern society. Only the very fortunate ever receive the readership and rewards that are equal to their efforts and yet for centuries people have written regardless. Franzen reflects on a personal level that it is through writing that he is able to make sense of his self-isolation and that there is some solace in the prospect of affecting societal change through your words even if the possibility is very slight. The change can only occur through close readings of his texts, from reader to reader, but the power of changing a mind or contributing to the formation of an opinion through words, is justification enough to pursue the craft of fiction writing.

The purpose of playwrighting is of course different to that of fiction writing, notably in that, whereas both will be read, a playtext is ultimately intended for performance. However, considering the tiny number of plays that receive professional productions and the small number of people who attend the performances of plays, with even the most successful productions only being experienced by a fraction of the population, the situation is somewhat analogous to that of the playwright. Certainly, a playwright is faced with a similar predicament of technological alternatives to watching theatre and the often tiny financial rewards available to those with careers. Therefore, perhaps the argument
advanced by Franzen, that writing is justifiable due to
the potential impact on society, however small, is
justification enough for a playwright to persevere. The
social and emotional connection created in live
performance in dialogue with an audience is perhaps
another compelling reason to pursue the career of
playwrighting despite the mounting obstacles to this
pathway.

The Belgian philosopher Pascal Chabot has recently written on how we might find a sense to our lives in a technologically enabled world with a specific focus on LLMs [19]. Chabot prefers the term artificial communicants to artificial intelligence and highlights the fundamental significance and consequences of delegating text generation to another entity as words are the material with which humans communicate, create meaning and weave their lives. Chabot evokes the likelihood that writing and reading will eventually be entirely outsourced to technology in exchange for payment in a form of ‘linguistic capitalism’, to the extent that we will be dispossessed of language itself and thus of our primary means for making sense of our lives. In the face of such a future, Chabot’s recommendation is not to fight, to enact some form of resistance in the face of globalised techno-capitalist entities, but rather to transition with these highly unsettling changes. Our lives will necessarily morph with this profound disruption to the human experience, but in doing so our task is to identify and pursue alternative sources of meaning and to expand our notion of what constitutes a meaningful existence. Chabot recommends taking a more qualitative approach to life, to value otherwise minor aspects of individual decisions. However, he is unable to provide concrete actions as not only is meaning in life entirely personal and individual but also, as one might expect, there are no simple solutions to making sense of our lives without language. For Chabot, the advancement of AI and specifically LLMs is an existential event for humanity.

6. CONCLUSION

The current theatrical practices involving AI are indicative more of the current limitations of the technology and the limitations of our ability to imagine what is possible, than the potential to integrate the technology into theatre making. At some stage in the future, LLMs or a newer alternative, will most likely be able to produce texts which are performable, theatrically interesting and dramaturgically coherent. The question should therefore centre on how we as humans and writers intend to use this software in our practice and whether relying on artificial text generation is artistically, politically and ethically justifiable. If one imagines two texts of equivalent aesthetic interest to an Artistic Director, one by a human author, the other artificial, is there an obligation on the director to prioritise the human over the machine? In the face of the overwhelming money and power of the technology companies behind AI development, an action of support

for human playwrighting may be a minor act of futile
resistance. However acts of resistance can nevertheless
be valuable for those directly concerned, those
interested in the societal challenge and those supporting
the continuation of a centuries-old artform, the relative
simple act of human written dialogue for performance.

The playwright has always faced challenges, be they
artistic, financial or practical. Struggle is the *modus
 operandi* for the majority of playwrights, regardless of
the period. Perhaps evolving away from the written
word, to occupy the position of an active, in rehearsal
dramaturg, is a natural development for writers in order
to be more engaged with the creative process of other
artists and to be less reliant on the written word. If the
importance of the text is devalued, the importance of the
writer of the text similarly suffers. Therefore, the writer
may have to rely on other talents rather than their ability
to produce the text for interesting, engaging plays. Or
perhaps the surest path forward is to search for meaning
in writing itself, in the creative process of placing one
word after another. The future of theatre, text and the
human experience is ultimately out of control of an
individual, but the freedom to write plays as means to
understand the world, life and the individual's place
within it, will remain. For as long as individual desires it
and is able to write, the personal value of playwrighting
to the individual will remain despite the societal
environment.

7. REFERENCES

[1] Bakare, L. Art that can be easily copied by AI is 'meaningless', says Ai Weiwei. The Guardian. 2024 https://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2024/jan/11/art-that-can-be-easily-copied-by-ai-is-meaningless-says-ai-weiwei

[2] THEaiTRobot 1.0, Košták D., Hrbek D., Rosa R., Dušek O., *AI: When a RobotWrites a Play*. 2021.

[3] Schmidtová P. et al, *THEaiTRE: Generating Theatre Play Scripts using Artificial Intelligence*, 2022

[4] Akbar, A, *Rise of the robo-drama: Young Vic creates new play using artificial intelligence*, The Guardian, 2021

[5] Commeaux, L., *Critique théâtre : “dSimon” de Tammara Leites et Simon Senn, In Le Regard Culturel*, France Culture. 2023

[6] Hogg, C., *PLAIWRITING SESSION USING AI*, MA Immersive Taster Session 2024

[7] Chamayou-Douglas, D., *Towards the Artificially Intelligent Playwright: Experimentation with Chat GPT*, Critical Stages/Scènes Critique, 28, 2023.

[8] Milmo, D. *ChatGPT firm reveals AI model that is 'good at creative writing.'* The Guardian. 2025 https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2025/mar/12/chatgpt-firm-reveals-ai-model-that-is-good-at-creative-writing-sam-altman
[9] Ryngaert, J.-P., *Ecritures Dramatiques Contemporaines*, Armand Colin. 2011

[10] Bradby, D., & Sparks, A., *Mise En Scene French Theatre Now*, Bloomsbury, 1997

[11] Lehmann, H.-T., & Juers-Munby, K., *Postdramatic Theatre*, Taylor & Francis Group. 2006

[12] Tackels, B., *Les écritures de plateau - état des lieux, Les Solitaires Intempestifs*. 2015

[13] Danan, J. *Qu’est-ce que la dramaturgie ? Actes Sud*.2012

[14] Kershaw, B., *British theatre, 1940–2002: An Introduction* In B. Kershaw (Ed.), *The Cambridge History of British Theatre*. Cambridge, 2004

[15] British Theatre Consortium, U. T. and the S. of L. T. *British Theatre Repertoire*. 2013

[16] Garson, C. *Beyond Documentary Realism : Aesthetic Transgressions in British Verbatim Theatre*. De Gruyter. 2023

[17] Chambers, K., “Perfect storm” has led to collapsed theatre ecosystem, agents warn, *The Stage*, 27, 2, 2024

[18] Franzen, J. ‘Why bother?’ In *How to be alone*, Fourth Estate, 2010

[19] Chabot, P., *Un Sens à la vie*, PUF, 2024