Male cross-dressing in leading female roles in the Elizabethan theatre has, at different extremes of modern stage practice, been either ignored as a no longer relevant convention or appropriated to make some kind of sexual-political statement. In either case, at issue is the ‘lifelikeness’ or otherwise achieved, and how far modern deployment should or should not be taken to challenge our own assumptions. John Russell Brown takes a recent production by the Wooster Group, in which Kate Falk played the eponymous male lead in Eugene O'Neill's The Emperor Jones, to suggest that cross-dressing can engage us with other perceptions of reality altogether – and demand, in relation to Shakespearean performance, a reading of the text that responds to resonances more often ignored or avoided. He illustrates his argument with close reference to the presentation and representation of sexuality in Romeo and Juliet. John Russell Brown was the first professor of Drama and Theatre Arts at the University of Birmingham and, subsequently, Associate Director at the National Theatre in London. More recently he has taught and directed in the USA, New Zealand, and Asia. He is now based in London, and is Consultant in Theatre at Middlesex University. His most recent book is New Sites for Shakespeare: Theatre, the Audience and Asia (Routledge, 1999) and his most recent theatre work a production of Surrena Goldsmith's Blue for the Wandsworth Arts Festival (November 1998) and an acting and Living Newspaper workshop for the National School of Drama in Delhi (March 1999).

Variously raising hackles and acclaim, the work of Peter Sellars is wider-ranging than the occasional observer might suppose – rooted in an apprenticeship as a puppeteer, followed by some sixty productions in a variety of media during the decade of the ‘eighties. But it is for his eclectic approach to opera that Sellars has become best known on the international festival circuit – which, suggests Maria M. Delgado, he is forced to travel by default, since his socially critical stance combined with an anti-realist aesthetic deters the sponsorship on which so much American theatre depends. Maria M. Delgado here offers an overview and an assessment of a career and a philosophy dedicated to an awareness ‘both of theatre’ s role as a force of political and social responsibility and understanding and of the need to rise above the literal’. The author teaches in the School of English and Drama at Queen Mary College in the University of London.

Anton Chekhov's dissatisfaction with Konstantin Stanislavsky's early productions of his plays is well known and oft-discussed. However, it may be argued that the detailed analysis to which Stanislavsky subjected the script of The Seagull, though offensive to the author's intentions, led to the germination of Stanislavsky's acting system as well as laying the foundations for the success of Chekhov's own dramatic career. Bella Merlin, Lecturer in Drama and Theatre Arts at Birmingham University, explores this avenue of debate by assessing the possible reasons for the Alexandrinsky Theatre's failure in its premiere of The Seagull in 1896. Thereafter, the mutual dependency of Chekhov and Stanislavsky is discussed with reference to the success of the Moscow Art Theatre's production of 1898. In the following article in this issue, she links these reflections on the play's early fortunes to its relevance to the ‘Method of Physical Actions’ developed by Stanislavsky towards the end of his career.

As a complementary piece to her preceding article on the formative significance of The Seagull to Stanislavsky's early thinking, Bella Merlin here looks at the play in the context of Stanislavsky's later work, when he was developing the Method of Physical Actions – an approach to a text which placed improvisation and the physical exploration of a scene at the centre of the actor's rehearsal process. This was in some ways a contravention of what was becoming codified in the West (through limited material being available in translation) as the psychological basis of the system. In 1995, Bella Merlin undertook a ten-month course of actor-training at the State Institute of Cinematography in Moscow, where she worked with acting ‘master’, Albert Filozov, who had trained with Mikhail Kedrov, one of the first developers of Stanislavsky's work following his death in 1938. Here, she examines the roots of Filozov's training and the nature of the Method of Physical Actions in theory and in practice. Bella Merlin trained as an actress in Britain and Russia, and has worked extensively in theatre and television. She is currently a lecturer in Drama and Theatre Arts at Birmingham University, where her area of research is acting processes and the psycho-physical nature of performance. This article is based on a paper delivered at the ‘Flight of the Seagull’ conference at the Alexandrinsky Theatre, St Petersburg, in November 1996, to celebrate the one-hundredth anniversary of the premiere of The Seagull.

In NTQ50 (May 1997) Irving Wardle offered his reflections on forty years of theatre reviewing, from the point of view of the seasoned practitioner. Here, Ian Herbert looks at the craft of the reviewer in the wider context of the British theatre since the war, and sees an ironic similarity between the venerable, gentlemanly generation against which Kenneth Tynan pitted his considerable wit, and the generation of Tynan's disciples now no less firmly entrenched in their seats on the aisle. His article, first presented as one of the public lectures celebrating the Golden Jubilee of the Society for Theatre Research on 15 January 1998, is as much an informal history of London theatre during the period as a discussion of the part played in it by the members of the Critics' Circle drama section, of which he is currently secretary. Having completed the last of three editions of Who's Who in the Theatre to appear under his editorship, in 1981 Ian Herbert, started London Theatre Record, now Theatre Record, the fortnightly journal which gathers together the unabridged reviews of all the major British theatre critics.

The flurry of Shakespearean adaptations in the 1960s and 1970s represents a significant yet largely neglected chapter of recent cultural history. This article assesses two of the more enduring adaptations – Edward Bond's Lear (Royal Court Theatre, 1971) and Charles Marowitz's Measure for Measure (Open Space Theatre, 1975) – in order to show how these controversial texts anticipated later mainstream critical approaches which still affect our reception of Shakespeare in the late 1990s. Several parallels between Marowitz and Bond's adaptations and recent materialist readings of their Shakespearean sources suggest that the adaptors anticipated the critics, and that both sought meaning from their Shakespearean originals by focusing on certain aspects of the text and by disregarding others. By demonstrating that whilst Marowitz and Bond's adaptations should best be regarded as a form of stage-centred criticism, Sonia Massai suggests that literary critical approaches inevitably reflect an arbitrary and historically determined appropriation of the Shakespearean original. Sonia Massai is a Lecturer in English Studies at St. Mary's, Strawberry Hill, a College of the University of Surrey. She has published articles on Shakespearean adaptations in Studies in English Literature, Analytical and Enumerative Bibliography, and in a special issue of Textus: English Studies in Italy. She is currently collaborating with Jacques Berthoud on the New Penguin edition of Shakespeare's Titus Andronicus.

In the fall of 1997, Robert Lyons assisted at the Berliner Ensemble on the production of Leben des Galilei directed by B. K. Tragelehn, who himself had assisted on Brecht's 1955 production of the play, his last before his death. The following article comprises a series of notes, thoughts, and insights gathered and written by the author during the course of rehearsals, research into the theatre's archives, and following discussions spurred by the centenary celebrations of Brecht's birth. Issues arising include the autobiographical elements within Galilei, the nature of ‘alienated’ acting and the relevance of gestus, the treatment of time in the epic theatre, the parable and the need for context in the epic theatre, the necessity of coming to terms with Brecht for our own times, the potential for using ‘Brecht’ in the American theatre, and the future of the Berliner Ensemble. Robert Lyons, who studied at Wabash College, UCLA, and Humboldt University, is an independent director currently living and working in Berlin.

Sarah Kane was born on 3 February 1971 and committed suicide on 20 February 1999. She achieved reluctant notoriety with Blasted at the Royal Court in 1995, which, like many plays later recognised as dramatic landmarks, was villified at the time by the critics but passionately defended by many theatre practitioners. Dan Rebellato mourns the death and celebrates the life of the writer, and assesses her plays and their lasting significance.