Dictionnaire du théâtre. Termes et concepts de l'analyse théâtrale by Patrice Pavis (review)

Book Reviews PATRICE PAVlS. Dictionnaire du thidtre. Termes et concepts de ['analyse thealraie. Paris: Editions sociales t980. pp. 482. There are many encyclopaedias oftheatre on the market but few dictionaries oftheatrical tenns, either in French or in English. In English, for example, Wilfred Granville's A Dictionary ofTheatrical Terms (I952) specializes in the technical vocabulary oftheatre, opera and ballet. In French, Cecile Giteau's Dictionnaire des arts du spectacle (1970) serves the same purpose but also offers a French~English·German lexicon and covers the tenninology of the arts of cinema, radio, television, puppetry and the circus as well. Some reference books attempt to combine the fonnat of an encyclopaedia with that of a dictionary of dramatic tenns. Such is the case with Phyllis HartnoWs The Oxford Companion 10 the Theatre (1957), which provides invaluable data on famous world playwrights, plays, genres and stagecraft, or with John Russell Taylor's The Penguin Diclionary o/the Theatre (1966), a more modest, wellvpresented book which contains entries as varied as "Weigel", "Weiss", "Well-made play" and " West Side Story". [n French, as far as I know, there is nothing comparable to either Hartnoll's or Taylor's book. Patrice Pavis's Dictionnaire du thtc'Jtre is different from its predecessors because it is a purely conceptual dictionary of theatre and drama which claims to define and investigate most ofthe abstract notions underlying any metatheatrical fooos ofctiscourse from Aristotle to Bob Wilson. The author has deliberately eliminated proper names from his entries, although they appear everywhere in his discussions of such diverse notions as "absurde," "acteur," "action," "brechtien," "catharsis," "comique," "hamartia," "happening," "icOne," "s6miologie th6atrale," "tempo," "vaudeville," etc. Pavis's dictionary presents about 500 tenns and, as it has 482 pages, many of its entries constitute a series of short scholarly articles which include several theoretical developments and end with relevant bibliographical references. For example, Pavis devotes three pages to the word "choeur" (chorus), dividing his article into an historical survey and a structural analysis. He organizes the latter around four different functions of the chorus: its de-realizing, epic function; its idealizing or generalizing effect; its sociological impact; and its use as a means of political protest. The historical development refers to Greek and medieval theatres, Shakespeare, Goethe, Brecht, Anouilh, and musical comedy; the structural analysis is based on Schlegel, Schiller, Brecht, and Lukacs. In his introduction, Pavis outlines the limitations of his dictionary, whose referential corpus is restricted to Western theatre and favours four major areas: (I) Greek tragedy; (2) seventeenth- and eighteenth-century European classical drama; (3) the nineteenthv century realist tradition and its contemporary offShoots; (4) contemporary stage practices since the "discovery" of mise en scene. He also describes the seven domains of methodology he has attempted to cover and combine in his work: (I) the study of dramatic structures or dramaturgy which examines the organization of action and dramatic speech; (2) the aesthetics of reception which focuses on the spectator and his reactions; (3) ethics and politics which assess the impact of theatre on its audiences; (4) newspaper play-reviewing which describes especially significant moments of the perfonnance and concentrates on actors; (5) the analysis ofproductions which deals with the stage interpretation of the written text and its means ofexpression; (6) semiology of theatre which, contrary to a common misconception, is not "a new science" trying to Book Reviews replace all other approaches, but rather a methodological reflection on the creation, interrelation and reception of signs; (7) the aesthetics of theatre which compares panicular plays and productions to a theoretical norm or cultural model and attempts to situate them in the evolution of artistic forms. Such a vast project may seem extremely ambitious and almost impossible to achieve, and Patrice Pavis admits that his work has raised a most urgent and thorny problem: reconciling a structural view of theatrical concepts with precise references to the history of theatre. Having used and consulted this dictionary for the past two months. I find it exciting and rewarding, no doubt because, like many other students of theatre, I am trying painfully to steer my own course between our hermeneutic and critical tradition founded on history and interpretation - which I highly respect...