Although you should never mention your premise in the dialogue of your play, the audience must know what the message is. And whatever it is, you must prove it.
Sentiment: POSITIVE
You have to sort of see the way that the character behaves, and what the character says and does, and claim it in the same way that you claim anything, really.
No, you don't have to start your play with a premise. You can start with a character or an incident, or even a simple thought. This thought or incident grows, and the story slowly unfolds itself. You have time to find your premise in the mass of your material later. The important thing is to find it.
The rhetoric is the key to the character. It's the verbal music of the piece.
You have to find ways to relate to the characters you get to play. Put it in terms and in a context that speaks to you.
Sometimes I'll get a premise, you know, for a book. In fact, I get those quite often. And I don't commit to it until I really know the voice of that character. It's almost as if the character is speaking to me.
I prefer more to kind of show people different things than tell them 'oh, here's what you should believe' and, over time, you can build up a rapport with your audience.
I'm not at all sure dialogue is meant to advance the story; I know that sometimes it is the story.
When you do not have the dialogue to explain things, you will use everything to show and to tell the story. I think that this is what makes you believe that it is impeccable.
I don't think you should do something just to prove to an audience that you can do it, that's way out of your wheelhouse.
I write plays because writing dialogue is the only respectable way of contradicting yourself. I put a position, rebut it, refute the rebuttal, and rebut the refutation.