This contribution discusses Pope.L’s 2018 provocative restaging of William Wells Brown’s anti-slavery play The Escape: Or, A Leap of Freedom (1858) at the Art Institute of Chicago. Drawing on Linda Hutcheon’s theory of adaptation, it argues against a source-oriented assessment of the production, which would prioritize the original over its interpretation and delimit aesthetic evaluation to questions of fidelity. It proposes to consider Pope.L: The Escape as an interpretive creation in its own right. Engaging in a complex intertextual and intercultural dialogue with its antetext, Pope.L’s staging brings into focus particular aspects of the contemporary moment. While Brown’s play presents race as first and foremost a performative category and stresses the possibility of autopoiesis qua performance, Pope.L reduces slavery to an ontological condition. Its title and manifold multimedia performances notwithstanding, there is no escape from enslavement in Pope.L: The Escape. Performance remains contained in and prescribed by an ongoing condition of physical and psychic enslavement. With this radical adaptation, Pope.L responds to what Paul Gilroy identifies as the “ontological turn” in recent Black thought. In light of the ongoing structural and quotidian violence against People of Color, this approach insists on the central significance of the bodily experience of racializing attributions for understanding social relations as well as Black collectivity. It also provocatively asks whether the performative does indeed suffice to unsettle the structural coordinates of anti-Blackness that continue to impact and overdetermine contemporary lives.
{"title":"Intertextual Inquiry and Interpretive Creation: Pope.L’s Experimental Staging of William Wells Brown’s The Escape","authors":"Ilka Saal","doi":"10.1515/jcde-2023-0023","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/jcde-2023-0023","url":null,"abstract":"This contribution discusses Pope.L’s 2018 provocative restaging of William Wells Brown’s anti-slavery play <jats:italic>The Escape: Or, A Leap of Freedom</jats:italic> (1858) at the Art Institute of Chicago. Drawing on Linda Hutcheon’s theory of adaptation, it argues against a source-oriented assessment of the production, which would prioritize the original over its interpretation and delimit aesthetic evaluation to questions of fidelity. It proposes to consider <jats:italic>Pope.L: The Escape</jats:italic> as an interpretive creation in its own right. Engaging in a complex intertextual and intercultural dialogue with its antetext, Pope.L’s staging brings into focus particular aspects of the contemporary moment. While Brown’s play presents race as first and foremost a performative category and stresses the possibility of autopoiesis qua performance, Pope.L reduces slavery to an ontological condition. Its title and manifold multimedia performances notwithstanding, there is no escape from enslavement in <jats:italic>Pope.L: The Escape</jats:italic>. Performance remains contained in and prescribed by an ongoing condition of physical and psychic enslavement. With this radical adaptation, Pope.L responds to what Paul Gilroy identifies as the “ontological turn” in recent Black thought. In light of the ongoing structural and quotidian violence against People of Color, this approach insists on the central significance of the bodily experience of racializing attributions for understanding social relations as well as Black collectivity. It also provocatively asks whether the performative does indeed suffice to unsettle the structural coordinates of anti-Blackness that continue to impact and overdetermine contemporary lives.","PeriodicalId":41187,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Contemporary Drama in English","volume":"200 ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.5,"publicationDate":"2023-11-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"138506834","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The morality tale Everyman has in recent years seen a notable renaissance in contemporary theater: Everybody (2017) by US American playwright Branden Jacobs-Jenkins, Carol Ann Duffy’s adaptation of Everyman (2015) at the National Theatre in London, and director/playwright Milo Rau’s work Everywoman (2020) have turned to it. In this article, I conceptualize these theatrical works as creative appropriations which stage the vexing relation between canonical text and contemporary theater practice. They are marked by an ambivalent dynamic in that they are far less conclusive about their own return to and reworking of the literary source. Their mode of representation oscillates between adaptation, appropriation, and playful de- and reconstruction. Despite evident contrasts in theme and form, these works openly reference their literary source and draw destabilizing effects from their montage of different modes of language and writing (citational speech, self-narration, confession) and performative elements. As I argue, however, these productions cannot be easily aligned with postdramatic theory’s advocation of a deconstructivist approach towards the dramatic text. The text, rather, is treated as an archive of poetic figures, narrative ideas, and moral concerns. In these productions, the textual material is not deconstructed but rather blended, momentarily decentered, and interwoven with vital performative elements (media, dance, collective speaking) which allows each creative appropriation to explore how canonical literary sources may speak to our contemporary culture and society.
{"title":"Creative Appropriations: Everyman on the Contemporary Stage","authors":"Julia Rössler","doi":"10.1515/jcde-2023-0026","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/jcde-2023-0026","url":null,"abstract":"The morality tale <jats:italic>Everyman</jats:italic> has in recent years seen a notable renaissance in contemporary theater: <jats:italic>Everybody</jats:italic> (2017) by US American playwright Branden Jacobs-Jenkins, Carol Ann Duffy’s adaptation of <jats:italic>Everyman</jats:italic> (2015) at the National Theatre in London, and director/playwright Milo Rau’s work <jats:italic>Everywoman</jats:italic> (2020) have turned to it. In this article, I conceptualize these theatrical works as creative appropriations which stage the vexing relation between canonical text and contemporary theater practice. They are marked by an ambivalent dynamic in that they are far less conclusive about their own return to and reworking of the literary source. Their mode of representation oscillates between adaptation, appropriation, and playful de- and reconstruction. Despite evident contrasts in theme and form, these works openly reference their literary source and draw destabilizing effects from their montage of different modes of language and writing (citational speech, self-narration, confession) and performative elements. As I argue, however, these productions cannot be easily aligned with postdramatic theory’s advocation of a deconstructivist approach towards the dramatic text. The text, rather, is treated as an archive of poetic figures, narrative ideas, and moral concerns. In these productions, the textual material is not deconstructed but rather blended, momentarily decentered, and interwoven with vital performative elements (media, dance, collective speaking) which allows each creative appropriation to explore how canonical literary sources may speak to our contemporary culture and society.","PeriodicalId":41187,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Contemporary Drama in English","volume":"30 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.5,"publicationDate":"2023-11-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"138536371","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
In this article, I ask what happens to theatrical performance when it fails. By describing a performance as “failed,” I do not necessarily imply its normative dismissal – as a “flawed” enactment or an artistic vision not properly executed. Instead, I use failure as a conceptual starting point for the articulation of alternative meaning-making practices. In this sense, failure is a form of creative interpretation that capitalizes on performance’s constitutive contingency, its structural unreliability that for many is part of its appeal, the very “magic” only a gathering of live bodies can create. Specifically, the article looks at two recent US American plays and one musical in order to discuss the theatrical politics of failure: Moisés Kaufman and Tectonic Theater Project’s The Laramie Project (2000), Ayad Akhtar’s The Who and the What (2014), and Dave Malloy’s Natasha, Pierre & the Great Comet of 1812 (2012). By discussing the ways in which these pieces and their performances creatively address failure, I point to three formal and cultural dimensions in which failure can be mobilized theatrically: first, failure problematizes the easy formal subsumption of performance under production, pointing to the ways in which a specific performance may not adequately actualize the conceptual work of the production, be it because audiences intervene in ways not intended by the production or because performers deviate from the production’s script in one way or another. Second, failure can be mobilized to reveal tacit cultural conventions or standards of success that entrench particular (classist, racist, sexist, ableist, etc.) normative behaviors. And third, failure can enable more creative approaches to the relationship between the labor of theater practitioners and its exchange value for spectators, who paid – at least – the price of a theater ticket and typically expect some form of artistic professionalism as remuneration.
在这篇文章中，我要问的是戏剧表演失败后会发生什么。用“失败”来形容一场表演，我并不一定是在暗示它的规范性被抛弃——作为一场“有缺陷的”演出，或者一种没有被恰当执行的艺术愿景。相反，我使用失败作为概念的起点，以表达不同的意义创造实践。从这个意义上说，失败是一种创造性的解释形式，它利用了表演的构成偶然性，它的结构不可靠性，对许多人来说，这是它的吸引力的一部分，是只有活人聚集才能创造的“魔力”。具体来说，本文着眼于最近的两部美国戏剧和一部音乐剧，以讨论失败的戏剧政治:mois Kaufman和Tectonic Theater Project的the Laramie Project (2000)， Ayad Akhtar的the Who and the What(2014)，以及Dave Malloy的Natasha, Pierre &1812年大彗星(2012年)。通过讨论这些作品及其表演创造性地处理失败的方式，我指出了三个形式和文化维度，在这些维度中，失败可以被戏剧性地调动起来:首先，失败使演出在制作过程中很容易被正式纳入问题，指出具体的表演可能无法充分实现作品的概念工作，可能是因为观众以非制作意图的方式进行干预，或者因为表演者以这样或那样的方式偏离了作品的剧本。其次，失败可以被动员起来，以揭示隐性的文化习俗或成功的标准，这些文化习俗或标准巩固了特定的(阶级主义、种族主义、性别歧视、残疾主义等)规范行为。第三，失败可以让我们用更有创造性的方法来研究戏剧从业者的劳动与其对观众的交换价值之间的关系，观众至少支付了一张剧院门票的价格，通常期望某种形式的艺术专业精神作为报酬。
{"title":"Creative Interpretation and the Politics of Failure","authors":"Leopold Lippert","doi":"10.1515/jcde-2023-0025","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/jcde-2023-0025","url":null,"abstract":"In this article, I ask what happens to theatrical performance when it fails. By describing a performance as “failed,” I do not necessarily imply its normative dismissal – as a “flawed” enactment or an artistic vision not properly executed. Instead, I use failure as a conceptual starting point for the articulation of alternative meaning-making practices. In this sense, failure is a form of creative interpretation that capitalizes on performance’s constitutive contingency, its structural unreliability that for many is part of its appeal, the very “magic” only a gathering of live bodies can create. Specifically, the article looks at two recent US American plays and one musical in order to discuss the theatrical politics of failure: Moisés Kaufman and Tectonic Theater Project’s <jats:italic>The Laramie Project</jats:italic> (2000), Ayad Akhtar’s <jats:italic>The Who and the What</jats:italic> (2014), and Dave Malloy’s <jats:italic>Natasha, Pierre & the Great Comet of 1812</jats:italic> (2012). By discussing the ways in which these pieces and their performances creatively address failure, I point to three formal and cultural dimensions in which failure can be mobilized theatrically: first, failure problematizes the easy formal subsumption of performance under production, pointing to the ways in which a specific performance may not adequately actualize the conceptual work of the production, be it because audiences intervene in ways not intended by the production or because performers deviate from the production’s script in one way or another. Second, failure can be mobilized to reveal tacit cultural conventions or standards of success that entrench particular (classist, racist, sexist, ableist, etc.) normative behaviors. And third, failure can enable more creative approaches to the relationship between the labor of theater practitioners and its exchange value for spectators, who paid – at least – the price of a theater ticket and typically expect some form of artistic professionalism as remuneration.","PeriodicalId":41187,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Contemporary Drama in English","volume":"197 ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.5,"publicationDate":"2023-11-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"138506835","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
During the last ten years of his life, Lee Breuer, who passed away in 2021, had been interested in framing Tennessee Williams’s canon, particularly the late plays, through the perspective of the grotesque and the Grand Guignol. Mabou Mines’s Glass Guignol: The Brother and Sister Play (2017), directed by Breuer and conceived by Breuer and Maude Mitchell, views Williams’s work alongside Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein (1818) in order to expose the grotesque truth of the messy and complex creative process. On one level, Glass Guignol is a multilayered exploration of the relationship between Williams and his sister Rose, whose story of courage in facing the mental and emotional challenges that culminated in an eventual lobotomy in 1943 was the inspiration for several of the female characters in both his canonical early plays and his less familiar later works. Developed through various workshops and staged scenes since 2011, the finalized version of Glass Guignol interweaves the story of Rose herself with Williams’s various fictional creations of women who reflect her spirit, if not necessarily her actual experiences: Laura in The Glass Menagerie (1945), Catherine in Suddenly Last Summer (1958), Clare in The Two-Character Play (revised between 1967 and 1976), and Nance in A Cavalier for Milady (c. 1976). While a symbiotic brother-sister love is at the center of The Two-Character Play, which serves as the primary framework of Breuer’s piece, it was also a common preoccupation for Romantic poets. Glass Guignol uses this relationship to delve into broader territory, asking questions about the relationship between creator and creation, and taking Frankenstein as yet another framework for the complexities and contradictions of this partnership. With its nineteenth-century asylum staging, the play foregrounds the grotesque and the Grand Guignol, both sensibilities that embrace contradiction, instability, and a lack of boundaries. Ultimately, Breuer explores how the artist sews together bits and pieces of identity, emotion, and experience in the pursuit of that seamless and perfect illusion of reality.
{"title":"Exploring the Line between Creation and Creator in Mabou Mines’s Glass Guignol: The Brother and Sister Play","authors":"Annette J. Saddik","doi":"10.1515/jcde-2023-0024","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/jcde-2023-0024","url":null,"abstract":"During the last ten years of his life, Lee Breuer, who passed away in 2021, had been interested in framing Tennessee Williams’s canon, particularly the late plays, through the perspective of the grotesque and the Grand Guignol. Mabou Mines’s <jats:italic>Glass Guignol: The Brother and Sister Play</jats:italic> (2017), directed by Breuer and conceived by Breuer and Maude Mitchell, views Williams’s work alongside Mary Shelley’s <jats:italic>Frankenstein</jats:italic> (1818) in order to expose the grotesque truth of the messy and complex creative process. On one level, <jats:italic>Glass Guignol</jats:italic> is a multilayered exploration of the relationship between Williams and his sister Rose, whose story of courage in facing the mental and emotional challenges that culminated in an eventual lobotomy in 1943 was the inspiration for several of the female characters in both his canonical early plays and his less familiar later works. Developed through various workshops and staged scenes since 2011, the finalized version of <jats:italic>Glass Guignol</jats:italic> interweaves the story of Rose herself with Williams’s various fictional creations of women who reflect her spirit, if not necessarily her actual experiences: Laura in <jats:italic>The Glass Menagerie</jats:italic> (1945), Catherine in <jats:italic>Suddenly Last Summer</jats:italic> (1958), Clare in <jats:italic>The Two-Character Play</jats:italic> (revised between 1967 and 1976), and Nance in <jats:italic>A Cavalier for Milady</jats:italic> (c. 1976). While a symbiotic brother-sister love is at the center of <jats:italic>The Two-Character Play</jats:italic>, which serves as the primary framework of Breuer’s piece, it was also a common preoccupation for Romantic poets. <jats:italic>Glass Guignol</jats:italic> uses this relationship to delve into broader territory, asking questions about the relationship between creator and creation, and taking <jats:italic>Frankenstein</jats:italic> as yet another framework for the complexities and contradictions of this partnership. With its nineteenth-century asylum staging, the play foregrounds the grotesque and the Grand Guignol, both sensibilities that embrace contradiction, instability, and a lack of boundaries. Ultimately, Breuer explores how the artist sews together bits and pieces of identity, emotion, and experience in the pursuit of that seamless and perfect illusion of reality.","PeriodicalId":41187,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Contemporary Drama in English","volume":"7 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.5,"publicationDate":"2023-11-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"138536374","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The question of how spectators engage emotionally with what they see on stage has always been of interest to theatre scholars and performance-makers. This article offers a small-scale analysis of audience responses to Patricia Cornelius’s SHIT (2015) that was performed by Dublin theatre collective THISISPOPBABY at the Project Arts Centre in March 2022. The vulgar and aggressive protagonists confront spectators directly about what it means to barely scrape by as a déclassée woman who has to protect herself daily from male violence. Thus, the play allows for an intersectional perspective on gender and class by asking uncomfortable questions about the privilege of spectatorship. Deliberately marking them as Other, SHIT opens up a rift between its protagonists and the middle-class audience it constructs, but occasionally bridges the distance by allowing for feminist attachments between the two sides.
{"title":"“They Think We’re Foul-Mouthed Sluts”: Discomfort, Bourgeois Spectatorship, and Fellow Feelings of Feminism in Patricia Cornelius’s SHIT","authors":"Sarah Busch","doi":"10.1515/jcde-2023-0028","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/jcde-2023-0028","url":null,"abstract":"The question of how spectators engage emotionally with what they see on stage has always been of interest to theatre scholars and performance-makers. This article offers a small-scale analysis of audience responses to Patricia Cornelius’s <jats:italic>SHIT</jats:italic> (2015) that was performed by Dublin theatre collective THISISPOPBABY at the Project Arts Centre in March 2022. The vulgar and aggressive protagonists confront spectators directly about what it means to barely scrape by as a déclassée woman who has to protect herself daily from male violence. Thus, the play allows for an intersectional perspective on gender and class by asking uncomfortable questions about the privilege of spectatorship. Deliberately marking them as Other, <jats:italic>SHIT</jats:italic> opens up a rift between its protagonists and the middle-class audience it constructs, but occasionally bridges the distance by allowing for feminist attachments between the two sides.","PeriodicalId":41187,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Contemporary Drama in English","volume":"596 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.5,"publicationDate":"2023-11-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"138536369","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The Caribbean philosopher and poet Édouard Glissant is not known for his work on theater; rather, he has been influential for a postcolonial reconceptualization of Caribbean spaces and the ways in which they are intertwined with a history of colonization. His theory of relation has been paramount for a rethinking of a concept of connection, theorizing the layered, complex, and often surprising relations between peoples and cultures that have shaped, questioned, imagined, and often also jumbled up the Caribbean as a world in transformation. Glissant views relation as a skein of networks and not as essentialist recovery of an authentic and true point of origin. This article addresses the theoretical transformative possibilities that this approach helps elucidate. I will mainly focus on the production of Simon Stephens’s 2012 The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Night-Time, an inventive adaptation of Mark Haddon’s 2003 novel that was staged in New York City between 2014 and 2016 to much critical acclaim. Finally, in a comparative approach, I would like to read this production with an eye towards Susanne Kennedy’s 2018 adaptation of Jeffrey Eugenides’s novel The Virgin Suicides (1993) for the Munich Kammerspiele and acclaimed Australian theater director Simon Stone’s 2016 rewrite of Anton Chekhov’s Three Sisters (1901) for the theater in Basel as well as Ulrich Rasche’s inventive 2017 production of Georg Büchner’s Woyzeck.
加勒比哲学家和诗人Édouard格利桑特并不以他的戏剧作品而闻名;相反，他对加勒比空间的后殖民重新概念化及其与殖民历史交织在一起的方式产生了影响。他的关系理论对于重新思考联系的概念至关重要，将不同民族和文化之间的分层、复杂和经常令人惊讶的关系理论化，这些关系塑造、质疑、想象，并经常使加勒比海成为一个转型中的世界。Glissant将关系看作是一串网络，而不是对真实原点的本质主义恢复。本文讨论了这种方法有助于阐明的理论变革可能性。我将主要关注西蒙·斯蒂芬斯(Simon Stephens) 2012年的《深夜狗的离奇事件》(the Curious Incident of the Dog in the night time)的制作，这是一部改编自马克·哈登(Mark Haddon) 2003年的小说的创造性作品，于2014年至2016年在纽约上演，广受好评。最后，以比较的方式，我想看看苏珊娜·肯尼迪2018年为慕尼黑Kammerspiele改编的杰弗里·尤金尼德斯的小说《处女自杀》(1993)，备受赞誉的澳大利亚戏剧导演西蒙·斯通2016年为巴塞尔剧院改写的安东·契诃夫的《三姐妹》(1901)，以及乌尔里希·拉什2017年创作的乔治·比奇纳尔的《Woyzeck》。
{"title":"Relations with/to the Text: Four Plays on the Move","authors":"Kerstin Schmidt","doi":"10.1515/jcde-2023-0027","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/jcde-2023-0027","url":null,"abstract":"The Caribbean philosopher and poet Édouard Glissant is not known for his work on theater; rather, he has been influential for a postcolonial reconceptualization of Caribbean spaces and the ways in which they are intertwined with a history of colonization. His theory of relation has been paramount for a rethinking of a concept of connection, theorizing the layered, complex, and often surprising relations between peoples and cultures that have shaped, questioned, imagined, and often also jumbled up the Caribbean as a world in transformation. Glissant views relation as a skein of networks and not as essentialist recovery of an authentic and true point of origin. This article addresses the theoretical transformative possibilities that this approach helps elucidate. I will mainly focus on the production of Simon Stephens’s 2012 <jats:italic>The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Night-Time</jats:italic>, an inventive adaptation of Mark Haddon’s 2003 novel that was staged in New York City between 2014 and 2016 to much critical acclaim. Finally, in a comparative approach, I would like to read this production with an eye towards Susanne Kennedy’s 2018 adaptation of Jeffrey Eugenides’s novel <jats:italic>The Virgin Suicides</jats:italic> (1993) for the Munich Kammerspiele and acclaimed Australian theater director Simon Stone’s 2016 rewrite of Anton Chekhov’s <jats:italic>Three Sisters</jats:italic> (1901) for the theater in Basel as well as Ulrich Rasche’s inventive 2017 production of Georg Büchner’s <jats:italic>Woyzeck</jats:italic>.","PeriodicalId":41187,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Contemporary Drama in English","volume":"12 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.5,"publicationDate":"2023-11-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"138536370","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Aleks Sierz. Good Nights Out: A History of Popular British Theatre since the Second World War. London: Bloomsbury Methuen, 2020, xi + 228 pp., £76.50 (hardback), £19.79 (paperback), £15.83 (Epub, Mobi, PDF).","authors":"Millie Taylor","doi":"10.1515/jcde-2023-0035","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/jcde-2023-0035","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":41187,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Contemporary Drama in English","volume":"10 1","pages":"392 - 395"},"PeriodicalIF":0.5,"publicationDate":"2023-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139296497","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Victor Merriman. Austerity and the Public Role of Drama: Performing Lives-in-Common. Cham: Palgrave Macmillan, 2019, x + 175 pp., £53.49 (hardback), £42.79 (PDF ebook).","authors":"Heidi Lucja Liedke","doi":"10.1515/jcde-2023-0030","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/jcde-2023-0030","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":41187,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Contemporary Drama in English","volume":"195 1","pages":"368 - 371"},"PeriodicalIF":0.5,"publicationDate":"2023-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139306018","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：