In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

  • From the Theatre Review Editor
  • Jeremy Lopez

In this issue, I have instituted some format changes for Shakespeare Bulletin's theatre reviews. Perhaps the most significant change is that reviews are not accompanied by headnotes that list run dates, technical personnel, and cast members; this information, when it is pertinent, is now contained in the text of the review essays themselves. Readers who value the archival function served by Shakespeare Bulletin's headnotes may object to this change, and I would like to say I do not expect that it will be a permanent one. Contributors to this issue were given a new set of editorial guidelines encouraging them to experiment with, and move beyond, the conventions of the theatre review—conventions brilliantly anatomized by Alan Armstrong in his "Romeo and Juliet Academic Theatre Review Kit," which heads this issue's Reviews section. The impetus behind these new guidelines and format is not the desire to discard the conventions of the theatre review simply for the sake of doing so, but rather the desire to reconceive the genre itself: I would like Shakespeare Bulletin theatre reviews to be vividly expressed perspectives on performance rather than meticulously detailed records of performance. This is not, of course, to say that both cannot be achieved simultaneously, only that it might be possible to achieve the former without striving for the latter. Over the course of the 2008 volume we will continue to experiment with review guidelines and format in such a way as to produce a useful archival record as well as innovative, productive critical perspectives.

One consequence of the new guidelines is that the review essays are longer than usual, and that there are fewer of them. This state of affairs does not necessarily reflect my ideal vision of the new theatre reviews section. While the new guidelines will allow me to be more flexible with things like wordcount and structure, I and the rest of the editors at Shakespeare Bulletin are still interested in covering as wide and diverse a range of productions as possible, and we are certainly happy to publish essays between 1,000 and 1,500 words in length. I continue to rely, with much gratitude, upon individual contributors to inform me of interesting productions they have seen and would like to review. Please do not hesitate [End Page 107] to contact me at the email address given on the masthead if there is a production you would like to review, and/or if you have comments about and suggestions for the new theatre review guidelines and format.

...

pdf

Share