No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Theatre on the Brink of 2000: Shifting Paradigms
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 23 January 2009
Extract
When I accepted the invitation to address this World Congress and first devised my title, I was drawing on a strong conviction that as we approach the century's end, we are living through a period of profound local and global changes which touch every level of our intellectual and emotional lives. The location of this present moment of our inquiries, poised between the markers of termination and origin, the end and the beginning, the twentieth and the twenty first centuries, seemed to me a powerful and widely understandable trope for our shared contemporary situation, at this conference and in our respective countries. But of course, this is a World Congress, and not for all the cultures of the world is this trope of brinkmanship immediately compelling. Assuming the Roman calendar without initial reflection, I have performed in my title one of the very acts which I planned to criticize: I have assumed in language, imagination, and sociality a centredness and primacy for Western discourse which I no longer believe or support. Indeed, the major important revision of the theoretical, historical, and critical apparatus of our time has been to de centre such governing assumptions. The title, then, marks the limits and difficulties of moving beyond historically inherited and inscribed paradigms, even as I struggle to do so, and I offer this revision of the assumptions of this piece: while for many of us, this talk of the millennium may provide a meaningful context for inquiry, for others it may be perceived as a foreign and local concept, in need of translation.
- Type
- Articles
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © International Federation for Theatre Research 1995
References
Notes
1 See Claude, Lefort, The Political Forms of Modern Society (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1988), p. 19.Google Scholar
2 See Sarlós, Robert K., ‘A. M. Nagler and Theatre History in America’, Theatre Research International, Vol. 9, No. 1 (Spring 1984), pp. 1–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3 Vince, R. W., ‘Theatrical History as an Academic Discipline’, in Interpreting the Theatrical Past, eds. Thomas, Postlewait and Bruce, McConachie (Iowa City: University of Iowa Press, 1989), p. 7.Google Scholar
4 Greenblatt, Stephen and Gunn, Giles, ‘Introduction’, Redrawing the Boundaries, eds. Greenblatt, and Gunn, (New York: Modern Language Association, 1992), p. 5.Google Scholar
5 Schechner, Richard, ‘A New Paragigm for Theatre in the Academy’, The Drama Review 36.4 (Winter 1992), p. 7–10.Google Scholar
6 Dolan, Jill, ‘Geographies of Learning’, Theatre Journal 45 (December 1993), p. 422.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7 Roach, Joseph R., ‘Introduction to Cultural Studies’, Critical Theory and Performance, eds. Reinelt, Janelle G. and Roach, Joseph R. (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1992), p. 10.Google Scholar
8 Quoted in Reinelt and Roach, p. 9.
9 Macaloon, John, quote in Phillip Zarilli, ‘Toward a Definition of Performance Studies, Part I’, Theatre Journal, 38 (1986), p. 372.Google Scholar
10 Schechner, p. 9.
11 Butler, Judith, Bodies That Matter (London and New York: Routledge, 1993), p. 95.Google Scholar
12 For example, Kate Davy writes about Charles Ludlam's Camille: ‘In playing Marguerite, Ludlam negotiated a position somewhere between a Brechtian presentation of the character and an illusionistic portrayal … Although Ludlam mostly played the role for comic effect, he also played it earnestly in moments where he milked the pathos of a scene, hushing the audience, to seduce them into “seeing” a woman as a kind of “set–up” for moments when he dropped the character altogether to deliver a line or two as his actor/playwright/gay–male self.’ (Fe/male Impersonation: The Discourse of Camp’, in Critical Theory and Performance, p. 237).
13 Erika Fischer–Lichte, Introduction, The Semiotics of Theater, trans. Gaines, Jeremy and Jones, Doris L. (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1992), p. 10).Google Scholar
14 The first of these was Pavis, Languages of the Stage, (New York: Performing Arts Journal, 1982)Google Scholar followed by the other three in 1990: Bennett, , Theatre Audiences; A Theory of Production and Reception (New York and London: Routledge)Google Scholar; Blau, , The Audience (Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press)Google Scholar; Carlson, , Theatre Semiotics; Signs of Life (Bloomington: Indiana University Press).Google Scholar
15 Bhabha, Homi, The Locations of Culture (London and New York: Routledge, 1994) p. 242–3.Google Scholar
16 Quoted in Dion, Gregg, ‘From No Man's Land to No Man's Theater: The Theatre of the Eighth Day Returns to Capitalist Poland’, in Crucibles of Crisis: Performance and Social Change, ed. Janelle, Reinelt (University of Michigan Press, forthcoming, 1996).Google Scholar
17 ‘“I Will Open my Mouth in Parables”: Theatre and Evangelism in South Africa Between 1900–1927’, Theatre Journal, 46.3 (October 1994), p. 350.Google Scholar
18 ‘New African Drama and National Representation in South Africa: Notes from the 1930s to the Present Moment’, in Crucibles of Crisis.
19 ‘From Apartheid To Democracy: Theater in Transition in South Africa’, paper delivered to the American Society for Theatre Research, Newport, R. I., November 1992.
20 Martin, Carol, ‘Anna Deavere Smith: The Word Becomes You’ The Drama Review, 37.4 (Winter 1993), p. 45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar