The Cambridge History of American Theatre, Vol. III: Post-World War II to the 1990s ed. by Don B. Wilmeth and Christopher Bigsby (review)

Reviews DON B. WILMETH and CHRISTOPHER BIGSBY, eds. The Cambridge History of American Theatre, Vol. Ill: Post-World War II to the 1990s. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000. Pp. xvii + 582, illustrated. $79.95 (Hb). Reviewed by David Krasner, Yale University In the final volume of their three-volume series, editors Don B. Wilmeth and Christopher Bigsby assemble a distinguished group of authors to examine theatre from World War II to the mid-1990s. Wilmeth and Bigsby can be credited with exacting scholarly standards, demonstrated by the volume's superb reliance on primary sources and by its meticulous documentation. Chapters may be read individually or as part of the whole; each provides a wealth of valuable information. Most impressive is the prodigious research that has been invested in this project, as evident in Christopher Bigsby's introduction and Arnold Aronson's "American Theatre in Context," both of which serve to develop the critical, social, and historical backdrop. Though covering somewhat similar ground, Bigsby and especially Aronson establish the important correlations between theatre and culture. Given Aronson's prescient analysis of the relationship between theatre and politics, it would have been interesting to read his assessment of two of the most important political (and theatrical) figures of the late twentieth century, Ronald Reagan and Bill Clinton. The four essays in section two, "A Changing Theatre: Broadway to the Regions," make up a strong unit. Laurence Maslon explains the contributions of three principal producers, Harold Prince, David Merrick, and Joseph Papp. Mel Gussow, as a former New York theatre reviewer, shares his broad knowledge of the off- and off-off-Broadway scene, and Martha LoMonaco does an excellent job of surveying the potentially unwieldy subject of regional Modern Drama, 44:4 (2001) 491 492 REVIEWS theatres. Marvin Carlson adds his considerable expertise on the avant-garde, describing the major companies that set the course of America's alternative theatre. The next five chapters discuss the major plays, musicals, directors, actors, and designers that influenced American theatre. June Schlueter analyzes the plays and playwrights from the end of World War II to T970, and Matthew Roudane picks up where Schlueter leaves off. Roudane raises the point that American playwrights during the second half of the twentieth century have made "significant contributions to the rhetoric of nationhood, to the languages that define the 'Americanness' of American drama, and to the symbology of the self' (331). John Degen examines the musicals of the time, taking considerable care to describe not only great successes but disastrous flops as well. Samuel L. Leiter focuses on the important directors, attending to their individual contributions. He also describes two "trends" of the 1990s: first, that, because of the precariousness of professional theatre, many well-known directors had begun accepting "professional positions in important universities " (481); second, that many well-established artistic directors left regional theatres to become "freelance artists" working primarily in New York and Hollywood, since regional theatres required more attention to fund-raising than to producing and directing plays (482). Both the diminishing pool of directors and the potentially unsettling situation for regional theatre bear watching. Following Leiter's essay, Forster Hirsh assesses the direction of American actor training, paying close attention to the impact of the "Method" on American actors. Finally, Ronn Smith undertakes the daunting task of covering an enonnQUS number of costume, lighting, and stage designers. The contributors thus collectively provide the necessary perspective for a critical evaluation of the past and current state of American theatre. Despite the importance of this work, there are shortcomings. For example, a sense of inconsistency arises from the fact that some authors are reluctant to engage critically with their subject, while others judge their subject unabashedly. Also, though the editors apologize for the occasional repetitions, the problem is not that the redundancies per se become labored; rather, it is that the uniformity of opinion becomes monotonous. It would have been far more interesting to hear some disagreements among contributors. For instance, Julian Beck is deservedly praised throughout this work, while the commercially popular Neil Simon is largely ignored or dismissed as a mere "conservative" playwright. The American spirit of bourgeois populism is reflected more in Simon's...