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

Theatre Journal 52.4 (2000) 589-590



[Access article in PDF]

Book Review

Documentary Theatre In The United States:
An Historical Survey And Analysis Of Its Content, Form, And Stagecraft


Documentary Theatre In The United States: An Historical Survey And Analysis Of Its Content, Form, And Stagecraft. By Gary Fisher Dawson. Contributions in Drama and Theatre Studies, no. 89. Westport: Greenwood Press, 1999; pp. xix + 249. $65.00.

American documentary theatre has had an interesting history in the twentieth century, notably gaining attention in the 1930s with the Living Newspapers created by the Federal Theatre Project. In the 1960s and 1970s, politically committed playwrights turned to the form to explore such issues as racial prejudice in the United States and the protest against the war in Vietnam, with works like Martin Duberman's In White America and Daniel Berrigan's Trial of the Catonsville Nine. Other plays dealt with the trial of Ethel and Julius Rosenberg, the surrender of the Pueblo spy ship, and the hearings of the House Un-American Activities Committee. Most recently, oral history has been transformed into theatre pieces by Emily Mann, Anna Deavere Smith, and the Tectonic Theater Project. In his historical survey, Gary Fisher Dawson sets out to explore the American contribution to the world of documentary theatre.

It is clear that Dawson cares about his subject deeply. It is also apparent that he has researched the subject: his bibliography is extensive, and he has conducted interviews with documentary playwrights. Curiously, he gives much coverage to the international antecedents in a book dedicated to American work. In fact he does not begin to discuss the origins of American documentary plays until chapter three. Chapters one and two first define what constitutes documentary theatre, then discuss it in semiotic terms.

Despite that by its very nature documentary theatre deals with real events, Dawson spends little time delving into the relationship between the events and the resulting pieces. Early in the book he promises to do so: "The direct relationship between tragic events that emanate out of American violence and how these end up as documentary plays is a characteristic that will be noticeable in almost all of the twenty or more documentary plays appearing here" (13). That discussion, however, is not fully developed, nor is his claim for documentary theatre as a catalyst for social change and a healing art.

Some of Dawson's strongest material deals with the work of Emily Mann, whom he interviewed for the book. Through his conversations with the playwright as well as his study of the writings of social historians, Dawson examines the interest in oral history and the contemporary trend of developing theatre works from it. Mann, who calls this history alive, and says that in her play Having Our Say, about the Delaney sisters, she used living history to challenge public history.

Dawson rightly considers the influence of Erwin Piscator on documentary theatre: his work in 1920s Berlin; his documentary play In Spite of Everything!, co-written with Felix Gasbarra; his directorial techniques, including incorporation of newsreel footage, photographs, captions into his productions. Dawson terms Piscator's techniques "authentifying sign systems" and defines the merits of productions according to their use of these stage practices. His enthusiasm for the director, however, leads him to call Piscator, who taught at the New School for Social Research in New York City in the 1940s, the first actual director-teacher of the twentieth century. This statement ignores figures such as Richard Boleslavsky and Michael Chekhov, to name just two director-teachers whose work had an impact on American theatre.

Because evaluating a production means talking not just about the script but also the performance, Dawson tries to re-create the event and relies heavily on newspaper reviews to do so. In fact, he devotes an appendix to excerpts of reviewers' (whom he calls responders) remarks, saying that this appendix provides a meta-analysis of the performance texts that reconstructs the historical moments of the performance. But, throughout, Dawson does not distinguish among reviewers; he gives [End...

pdf

Share