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

  • Introduction: Drama and Philosophy 2.0
  • David Kornhaber (bio)

In his prefatory note to A Study of the Drama, from 1910, Brander Matthews lists philosophy as one of four primary categories to be used in assessing the merits of any playscript (v). His use of the term is essentially vernacular: philosophy, in his explanation, encompasses “a message of high importance” and a “vision of human life” (217). Yet the usage is significant. At the time Matthews was writing, drama had not yet secured wide acceptance as an art form with a capacity for speculative investigation and was just as likely to be seen as an intellectually bankrupt mode of entertainment. Matthews’s suggestion that philosophy might have anything at all to do with the drama was largely a rebuke to these aspersions. “To many of us the drama gives merely unthinking amusement in the playhouse,” he concedes, in The Development of the Drama (3). But, almost tentatively, he adds, “To some its chief quality is that it enables them to disentangle the philosophy of the dramatist himself” (3). If Matthews’s writings are largely archived and forgotten today, his place in the history of drama scholarship is surely still pertinent. He held the first collegiate appointment in dramatic literature in the United States, and he took it as part of the purpose of his position to justify the standing of the material he was tasked to study. That the drama might have some capacity for and inclination toward philosophy was an essential part of that validation.

The subject of the present issue of Modern Drama is one that would have been familiar to Matthews and to many of the earliest professional scholars of modern drama: a consideration of the relationship between drama and philosophy. It is a subfield that, in recent years, has experienced something of a renaissance. There have been dedicated sessions on theatre and philosophy at several of the most recent conferences of the American Society for Theatre Research, the Association for Theatre in Higher Education, and other scholarly organizations, in many cases supported by standing interest groups. A new professional organization with the name of Performance Philosophy was started in the United Kingdom in 2012 and held its inaugural conference in [End Page 419] 2013. Two years ago, “Theatre, Theory, Philosophy” was the special topic of the Mellon School of Theatre and Performance Research at Harvard University. And, most significantly, nearly a dozen new monographs or edited collections have been published on the topic within the past decade (three of them within the past year), with several more forthcoming.1

For many observers, the interdisciplinary study of drama and philosophy is a relatively recent critical development. Writing in their joint introduction to the collection Staging Philosophy – a work that can be credited with helping to inaugurate the recent spate of academic interest in this area – David Krasner and David Saltz observed, from their vantage point in 2006, that, in the previous decade and a half of scholarship, “performance theorists rarely dr[ew] on works emanating from American philosophy departments. Similarly, very few professional philosophers . . . focused in depth on questions pertaining to the phenomena of theater or performance” (1). Less than ten years later, the field looks altogether different. Publication on the intersections of drama and philosophy has reached such a level of profusion that Laura Cull even speaks of what she calls “‘a philosophical turn’ in the international field of theatre and performance research” in her recent Theatres of Immanence (2). Yet this turn within recent drama scholarship might also be considered as a kind of return: a critical re-engagement with many of the questions and concerns that were at one time, in decades past, not just grist for a disciplinary subfield but part of the larger project of studying modern drama at all. I am thinking, here, of figures and works like Eric Bentley’s The Playwright as Thinker, Martin Esslin’s The Theatre of the Absurd, or Robert Brustein’s The Theatre of Revolt. These figures and these works may hold a vaunted place in the history of twentieth-century drama scholarship, but they are seldom alluded to in the mainstream of drama research...

pdf

Share