‘Theater Historiography Critical Interventions Henry Bial and Scott Magelsen, etivors ow ‘Te Unersinof bigan Pre Aen Aor Introduction HENRY BIAL AND SCOTT MAGELSSEN sw ‘These Bisoringraply means the susiy of the foundational asemptions, neples, and methodologies that determine ow thester history i wit ‘ea, To practice theater historiography means lokebeyend the reend af Swat happened” to analyze ho and wy such records are constructed “Thor we might say that theater historiography isto theater fSSory at ysis isto enginering or economics sto basins: he fandamentalthe= ‘rer and lippothese rom which all abeoquent dessons few: Compared ta thowe other disciplines howeve,thetterhtorograpy has come ate to the party Ies only in he ls thiry yeas oreo tha theater scholars have aid ert auendon w how cheater his i waicen, and many i ot most theater history textbooks give te subjectsean tention... moa seavion a, “This isnot because caer generations of theater historians lacked ear methodology, Nether were they lckng in conseentionsess or sl ‘erarenes. On the conty, theater Sistoriography did not—and, in a Sense, could not—emerge as long a hearer histary was defined sey the accumdaton of fctaal knowledge about the dramatic terarre and staging practices astocated withthe emon of Western dviztion. Tas Biting semumpeion pointed leaty to a methodology that valocned the chia document andthe archaeological record overall other ways of ua- derstanding she thease] past Theater histarians igh (aed did) apace ach other interpretation ofthe archival record, but virtually al of tem presumed the existence ofan Zmpircal truth that existed a priori tuth Ievas thei jb to revel Tate in the twentieth cenary, however, theater istry ike mest of che ‘aumanities and socal sciences, as jolted by the postmodern recognition hac even on the axe occasions that fem and events themes are verfabie, che narratives throw whi we order hove fe and erent ae necesiy robjensve,inerpettons ofthe pass are Ur alae aren shaped bythe values judgments and desires of he present Or, as historianand theorist Michel de Certeao argod in The Writing sf History (1973), ‘aes and evens only exist as such becase they have at some paint been deamed worth remembering—and have no inherent mesnings outside ‘howe that have been generated and inposed pon them through the “i= cnsive formations” and aquired rationalization” of historian, ‘Mesnvhile, ‘members of previously “sahisoried” populations — ‘women etinie and racial minorities, aon-Western nations —bepaa toe ter the academy in large numbers Tn dheater sie, thie shit -combined vith postmodern philosophy’ estique of hierarchical strucrares of kxomi- faigebad swo lasing consequences fst many ther scolas gained + (rete cogeiznce of end appreciation forthe contibusons of oppressed ‘oc marginalized person to he history of wold drama; second, becase the ‘cubodid tadtons of uch population did noc aera to Gee category of “hened” as conreationally defined in the Euro-American tradition, « signifcanc amber of scholars chose instead wo pursue tei research under ‘he broader heading of “performance” Overtime the ft approach led theater historians to develop new hitoringraphie spproaches, methods ‘more estble toa sochierarchia nd monte understanding of the- ster, while the second approach led many in che emerging displine of per- formance studies o beak fom theater history, which they dismissed «5 overly concerned with unimaginative recounting ofhioria fact. Pevfor mance seuies ew its methods not oly from ewer but aso from «wide rage of other scholarly disciplines, including bu no limited to anthro- ology, payeiology, and gender sendin, Over time, performance audit (Lrerped from theater ory m9 the point where the two deplines of seem tobe rials wicling competing asumpdons, terms, and methods “Today, those who would write these history sand onthe threshold of| nother cpterological shit. A new generation of would-be scholar, ‘ised on the hftingsindsof te Tntenet and global medi culture, read history froma fondamentally diferent perspective can prio generation, "The hardowon undersending tht ory is not and cannot be an ipa ‘al reoond of fctsand eveat i, for such stent, «commeanplace. They understand dha history complex and contested ae of cular memory. What they don' know is whatto do about Thi i expecially tua re sur to the theater history clasroom, where strtepes for cicl engage ‘eat withthe archive mbst often be learned in parallel with a wealth of ames, dates, and entize plays that sradents ere expected to commit to ‘metaoy. At ce ineittional level sheatar and performance history is un- der siog in many univer theater deparcmens, even arts methods ond atadgms gain tacton clewhere inthe academy. Are we meely poser erduion 3 ing de ose of medium whose glory days ie inthe pat? Or ae we mar- © > shalng the resources of theater resurgence? Inerdiscplinariy 2nd mule ‘altaralsm have become oar watchword, bute theater students andi ‘ovine continue to broaden the seope of our search, considering texts an performances hitherto ignored, out tm paper, lab, and curicla rein losing race, tying square a twenset- century ideal ofexcylo~ = pedic nowledge wits tht ewunty- Set cennry explosion of ideas and i= © Tormation, Eyes 28 we embrace more complex snd embodied forme of _ mowledge, we cotinoe to rely on the archival document. As we forge «bridge wth other disciplines, we face the potential af losing cove things thar make theator history anigue. There hap never been a mote eel ‘orm trajectory throwgh thie complex intellecral semorper, The twenty one essays in the pages at alow have Been wt by scolae conde ing es, dynamic, and inreresting new work in dear history across 2 ‘wile range of sabjec ares, fom dlsial aniquiy to the eoaerporacy ‘American musical The nedhodologies hase asthors employ ae eqully ce ‘ere spanning fom the lerary tothe anthropologeal, fom the aceiva | the phenomanalogcal This nos an ecient. rom the Denning We leven that for this oko truly make al nterveasin into thea i torigraphy, we would need to assemble a group of theater historians wa representa any schools iteclly and fgustivey) as possible Some of the aut! epproaches are peace. Some are specsltve Some depley old erablshed principle and methodologies in new way or ‘new purpses. Several loo what we might all he history of theater i ‘orforaphy grounding ther contemporary interventions in lose readings of histoial accounts that have themes pasted into hisy, Sever ‘more drew ther das and werms in equal measare om both theater his- tory and performance sues, deronszating tha these once-stal schools of though are moving toward reconelintion. Regsrdes of method, each chapter sees in i own way to demonstrate how theater history can be ‘more ehely pextiend, more nesively writen, and more cogenty read ‘The books orgmiztion is intended to demonstrate that hitovio- ‘graphic approaches need not be Tumped togesher by geographic or ‘chronological perspecivs. Pav, “Unearthing the Pas presents series ‘of methodoiogral lemmas, queens of the or that each historian mst learnt confont on his or er own terms. Thoogh they vary widely nthe calures and peviods they eddresy, ese author all recognize the necosity of assembling evidence in support of historia inquicy. The quesson of