{"id":172,"date":"2020-04-11T07:08:46","date_gmt":"2020-04-11T07:08:46","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.critical-stages.org\/21\/?p=172"},"modified":"2022-02-05T12:56:14","modified_gmt":"2022-02-05T12:56:14","slug":"a-century-of-south-african-theatre","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.critical-stages.org\/21\/a-century-of-south-african-theatre\/","title":{"rendered":"A Century of South African Theatre"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

By Loren Kruger<\/strong>*<\/a>
273 pp. Methuen Drama<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Reviewed by Temple Hauptfleisch<\/strong>**<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Note<\/strong>: Loren Kruger’s response at the end of this review<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In recent years, I have been having a great deal of fun delving into the recesses of numerous online archival sites, biographies, obituaries, blogs and other personal accounts of the ebb and flow of theatre and performance, in search of information for my own online encyclopedia project (ESAT<\/em>).[1]<\/sup><\/a> In the course of this quest, I have increasingly become aware of a few uncomfortable yet fundamental problems with all so-called \u201chistories\u201d or \u201coverviews\u201d\u2014not only of the arts, but really of everything in the domain of human endeavour.  Besides the fact that no such work can ever <\/em>truly claim to be all encompassing or \u201ccomplete\u201d (at best it can only seek to be as comprehensive as possible\u2014and then battle to keep up to date).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Furthermore, if published in book form, such works can seldom last as the<\/em> authoritative source for more than a year or two before they begin to require correction and expansion. New things are constantly taking place and require to be taken into account, thus potentially affecting our interpretation not only of current history, but of past events as well. Similarly, the past is constantly being revised for various reasons, as we all know. This takes place not only in terms of new material that has been, or may yet be, uncovered, but is also affected by the way we look at things (theoretically as well as methodologically) at a particular time: nothing remains stable, and perspective has a great deal to do with it.  <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Hence, perhaps understandably, the predominance of digital platforms and publications today, since such \u201cpublications\u201d are far more easily kept up to date.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Such issues become even more complicated of course when one starts thinking systemically or, in the case of South Africa, polysystemically <\/em>about the interpretation, role, impact and practical functioning of theatre and performance in society: the variants involved are absolutely mind-blowing.[2]<\/sup><\/a> These thoughts inevitably arose again while I was reading Loren Kruger\u2019s new book. The title initially had me fooled, as it might many a reader, for it led me to expect some kind of encompassing overview of the ebb-and-flow of theatre and performance in the country since 1920. However, I soon perceived that, far from being a totally new <\/em>publication, A Century of South African Theatre<\/em> is in fact an updated version of Prof. Kruger\u2019s impressive and widely known 1999 monograph, The Drama of South Africa: Plays, Pageants and Publics since 1910 <\/em>(Routledge).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Published by Methuen out of London in their series Cultural Histories of Theatre and Performance (edited by Claire Cochrane and Bruce McConachie), the new book was completed in 2018 and published in 2019 (though the final copy I received is dated 2020). So, the additional material contained in the book largely appears to derive from events that caught Kruger\u2019s attention over the course of the past 20 years. Various new insights about and interpretations of previously discussed events are noted and discussed by the author and have been added at various points in the book.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The cover of the 1999 book refers to it as \u201cthe first comprehensive account of drama and performance in twentieth century South Africa.\u201d In the amended version of 2020, this particular claim is not made in so many words, though the first sentence of Kruger\u2019s \u201cAcknowledgements\u201d does suggest something similar with a statement that the book \u201cdocuments more than a hundred years of theatre and performance\u201d (this is repeated on page 16 of the Introduction). In addition, the cover blurb of 2020 quotes Mark Sanders as saying, \u201cLoren Kruger\u2019s grasp of the history of South African theatre is unparalleled.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

One realizes, of course, that the primary function of all cover material is to sell the book and flattering generalities are part of any marketing strategy\u2014modesty has seldom sold books. However, such somewhat hyperbolic assumptions of primacy, comprehensiveness and uniqueness do raise a few questions about the general aim and scope of Kruger\u2019s two books and, in particular, the nature and value of the new edition.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The 1999 Project<\/strong><\/h5>\n\n\n\n

The initial study was based on the (then) latest theoretical models about drama, theatre and performance studies, aligned with a series of new insights, creative practices, facts and perceptions pertaining to events taking place in South Africa and its arts\u2014most of which had surfaced in the preceding two decades, especially the volatile and creative period from the late 1970s to the beginning of the 1990s. This coincided with both a radicalizing of theatre and performance practice on many fronts and a remarkable burgeoning academic interest in drama, theatre and performance research in the country itself, for by the late 1970s and early 1980s a growing number of publications had appeared that emphasised the \u201cre-discovery\u201d of a whole spectrum of forgotten\/previously ignored performance forms and traditions, and recorded the syncretic use made of such forms by a number of local theatre-makers and companies.[3]<\/sup><\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

So, though Kruger\u2019s book was very much a key publication, one that skilfully summarised and interpreted a number of radical shifts in our view of the nature and range of theatre and theatrical systems in the country, it was certainly not <\/em>the first\u2014nor the only one\u2014to do so. Nevertheless, by tapping into the \u201cdiscovery\/re-discovery\u201d of a whole spectrum of forgotten\/previously ignored performance forms and traditions by a number of pioneering studies in the 1970s, Kruger\u2019s study became a significant contributor to the drive to revise and expand the general view of what constitutes \u201ctheatre\u201d in Southern Africa.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

For example, the book sensibly tended to avoid the Eurocentric notions of drama and theatre (and most of the \u201cimported\u201d texts) to place an emphasis on a much wider interpretation of \u201ctheatre\u201d and its occurrence in indigenous work, including such matters as ritualistic performances, dances and songs,  celebratory public events and pageants, and the gradual evolution of a number of new syncretic, urban and rural, performance forms\u2014and, in particular, the rise of the notion of a radical theatre of protest and the use of the arts as a weapon in the struggle for emancipation and freedom.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

What made Kruger\u2019s work relatively unique and very useful at that time, especially for students, lecturers and serious researchers, was that she\u2014unlike many other national and international commentators and writers then and since\u2014really sought to be much less parochial and blinkered in her approach to the subject and the scope of her inquiry. For instance, she based her argument on a wider and more eclectic range of examples than was usual at the time, drawing them from the broader spectrum of eleven official South African languages and a variety of political and cultural groupings. This was at the time in strong contrast to the majority of the more parochial writers from the earlier parts of the century, who tended\u2014for a variety of understandable historical and ideological reasons\u2014to limit themselves to works created in a specific language, a specific region and\/or a specific form of theatre.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Responding to and engaging with the writings of her predecessors and contemporaries, Kruger thus set out to creatively transform the sum total of new and alternative material she had collected, and produced an impressive and timely contribution to our knowledge and understanding of the way South African theatre and performance had evolved and contributed to the overall South African debate.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In view of the foregoing, like many other theatre researchers and critics at the time, I was greatly impressed by the quality of the work when it first appeared and for the past 20 years I have considered Kruger\u2019s 1999 study as one of the more useful English surveys of key themes and events in the evolution of drama, theatre and performance in the country during the twentieth century. Hence, I have tended to refer international colleagues and all novices in the field to the book as essential reading for anyone hoping to understand the complexity of the greater theatrical system in the country.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

However, my recommendation usually came with two important caveats <\/em>to be borne in mind by readers: First, as reviewers such as Edwin Hees pointed out at the time, the book does not offer an easily accessible chronological history of the theatre, for it is, in the first place, an academic interpretation<\/em> of certain events that took place in that long, complex and controversial cultural history. Second, the book has a clearly outlined and narrow focus on the socio-cultural and political impact of works written or created in South Africa, and more specifically works that actually make pertinent and positive suggestions for change.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In other words, it concerns itself with a small but vital sub-section of the total range of performed activities and events taking place in any country, and certainly in South Africa, during the twentieth century. So, virtually all forms of European traditional theatre (unless adapted), most of the commercial theatre, experimental student theatre or the vast untapped body of amateur and semi-professional theatre, are hardly touched upon. The latter mentioned forms are more often discussed in other, less literary and\/or applied studies, such as F.C.L Bosman\u2019s two epic histories (published in Afrikaans in 1928 and 1980 respectively) and Percy Tucker\u2019s entertainingly informal but equally valuable 1997 study, Just the Ticket: My 50 Years in Show Business<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The New Version of 2020<\/strong><\/h5>\n\n\n\n

In this volume, A Century of South African Theatre, <\/em>Kruger largely maintains the general approach discussed above and utilizes the same basic structure. The titles of chapters and sub-sections do differ at times of course, allowing for the introduction of new material and insights, with each chapter dealing with a specific theme. However, the chapters also interact flexibly with one another, containing many useful cross-references to issues occurring elsewhere. What the work as a whole presents is therefore a coherent account of Kruger\u2019s particular and outspoken analysis of a selection of key anti-colonial and anti-apartheid elements in the political theatre of the twentieth century and the nature of what Kruger herself labels \u201ctestimonial theatre.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The book starts off with a brief but important discussion of the meaning of \u201ctheatre\u201d in a (Southern) African context and the notion of a distinctive African<\/em> mode of performance (citing such local practitioner-theorists as Herbert Dhlomo, Mafika Gwala, Credo Mutwa, Sipho Sepamla, and others), which leads on to a comparatively complex theoretical introduction on the nature of cultural products\u2014and specifically theatre and performance\u2014as a public space for debate and a weapon of protest and resistance in a fragmented country. In the chapters that follow, we find substantial discussions of a number of main themes, viewed from the forgoing point of view, the themes tending to revolve around the idea of theatre and performance as a form of public protest.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

So, we have a chapter on \u201cCommemorating and Contesting Emancipation,\u201d which offers an extremely valuable discussion of public celebratory events as theatrical events, followed by chapters titled \u201cNew Africans, Neocolonial Theatre and \u2018An African National Dramatic Movement\u2019\u201d and \u201cCity against Country,\u201d both touching on the dramatic theories and texts of Herbert Dhlomo and the influence of the so-called \u201cNew Africans\u201d on the various types of anti-apartheid protests that would follow. In a shift of emphasis, \u201cDry White Seasons\u201d briefly describes the rise and fall of the Afrikaner and his\/her cultural aspirations, as portrayed in a few examples of Afrikaans political theatre\u2014rather interestingly without any reference to Andr\u00e9 P. Brink\u2019s well-known novel of that name, his own informative study of the \u201cNew Afrikaans Drama,\u201d nor his trenchant political plays.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The following chapter, \u201cDramas of Black Solidarity,\u201d concerns the theatrical activities inspired by the Black Consciousness Movement and the pivotal role that this incentive would play later\u2014an important new theme in theatre studies of the 1980s. \u201cSpaces and Markets\u201d comes next, exploring the concept of \u201ctheatre as testimony\u201d and the rise of stable yet independent alternative theatre companies and venues in the country in the 1970s and 1980s.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In \u201cSpring is Rebellious,\u201d Kruger discusses the world that followed the stirring political events of 1994 and the period she\u2014perhaps most fittingly\u2014refers to as \u201cPost-Anti-Apartheid Theatre\u201d and follows this with her final chapter: \u201cThe Constitution of South African Theatre at the Present Time\u201d\u2014a somewhat misleading title in this case given the disappointingly narrow scope of the discussion that it contains.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

To round it all off, Kruger chooses to replace the conventional practice of tying together the various strings of the overarching argument in a concluding chapter, with something much more tentative. Arguing that the previous chapter ends with the year 2018, that is, at the start of what may or may not be a new political dispensation in the country under President Cyril Ramaphosa, the book concludes with a simple, one-page and open-ended \u201cCoda,\u201d in which she names and outlines a slightly academic-cryptic list of four \u201cnodes of inquiry\u201d that she had found recurring throughout her work. They are: \u201cGenres of performance,\u201d \u201cLanguages and Legacies,\u201d \u201cWords and Music\u201d and \u201cAudiences and Advocates as Active Publics.\u201d  <\/p>\n\n\n\n

From the start, the 2020 book, once again, impresses as an ambitious undertaking. Like Kruger\u2019s own claim that the book documents a century of theatrical events (noted above), the title and list of contents seem to suggest that A Century of South African Theatre<\/em> is to be an attempt to write a relatively comprehensive overview of the history of drama, theatre and performance in South Africa. This notion is reinforced, rather than tempered, by the fact that it has been published in Cochrane and McConachie\u2019s admirable Cultural Histories of Theatre and Performance series. <\/em>However, a closer reading should soon convince the reader that\u2014just as in the case of The Drama of South Africa<\/em>\u2014this impression may be a little misleading, for the book ultimately does not offer a really accessible or comprehensive introduction to and overview of the total <\/em>history of drama, theatre and performance in the country, and most emphatically not a consistently chronological<\/em> one.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Having said that, I might add that it equally soon becomes clear to any serious reader that\u2014judged by internal evidence\u2014this was, in fact, never the true intention of Kruger\u2019s project. What the study clearly does<\/em> offer is a book length and seriously academic attempt to discuss a number of stimulating and highly relevant themes in a critical and comparative way, from her specific theoretical perspective, which tends to lean towards the sociological and literary end of the theoretical spectrum. So, the book\u2014like its predecessor\u2014rather (and perhaps far more importantly) consists of a well-structured and incisive set of in-depth cultural-sociological and cultural-political analyses of key tipping points or themes (as outlined above), providing incisive, largely persuasive, academic interpretations<\/em> of selected events from the past 100 years. In addition, the new material that has been incorporated is clearly intended to augment (or even adjust) the specifics of the arguments and\u2014at least by implication\u2014to support proposals for the correction of factual and interpretational errors made by other writers and critics.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Kruger\u2019s book is finely attuned to the times, of course, for the overall approach she uses is one that was not only highly relevant and popular during the so-called \u201cCultural Struggle\u201d period of the late 1970s and 1980s, but one that appears to have gained new momentum in recent years. This is especially true for a younger generation of critics and researchers concerned with a new set of realities in the country.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The one inevitable downside of Kruger\u2019s theoretical and structural decisions, for those wanting an accessible and relatively comprehensive introduction to South African theatre, is a problem it shares with many more academic publications locally in South Africa and elsewhere in the world. It quite simply cannot detail the full history, or the current shape of, the larger, more encompassing and wide-spread South African theatrical polysystem in the space allotted, nor can it map the broad and diverse sweep of all the performing arts in the country, or what is often referred to as the entertainment industry. So, inevitably, many superb, but apolitical<\/em>, plays, events and performances are not mentioned, nor are most theatrical companies, especially not purely commercial enterprises and productions. Virtually all forms of light entertainment are eschewed, as are productions of international plays or visits by international companies (unless of course the work has been adapted to address contemporary issues of South Africa).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

While all of this is understandable, it is still rather regrettable, for what seems to get lost by the wayside is not only some essential details about the plays, companies and persons (often only referred to in passing), but, more crucially perhaps, insight into the impact (both negative and<\/em> positive) that a few keyshifts in the larger polysystem have had in the shaping of the total South African cultural scene. For example, in the earlier sections, the role of state-funded institutions, such as the National Theatre Organization (NTO) and the later Performing Arts Councils, are given rather short shrift in the narrative, while the later chapters seem to take little notice of the wide-ranging funding provided (if all goes well) by the National Arts Council, which had replaced the apartheid-era state theatres and funding systems at the start of the 1990s, as part of the transition to what was to be a more democratic and equitable dispensation in the \u201cNew South Africa.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Equally bemusing is the fact that surprisingly little attention is given to the very significant role played by the festivalization of culture in the country, when over 40 widely dispersed and multi-cultural arts festivals have come to prominence since the mid-1990s. Often referred to as the \u201cfestival circuit\u201d in the country, this phenomenon is probably one of the most significant changes to come about in the way theatre and performance operates in South Africa. Not only did the festivals provide a new kind of framework for opening up theatre to everyone and becoming significant and popular venues for the presentation of both old and new work, they also became another way of ensuring a livelihood for professional artists after the demise of the state-funded systems. More importantly perhaps, the festivals themselves have become meta-theatrical events in their own right, drawing diverse audiences from all parts of the country and often serving as agents for the eventification of crucial societal issues and, in many cases, providing a (temporary) public space for the kind of debate that the study itself seeks to address.[4]<\/sup><\/a> It would have been most interesting to have had Kruger\u2019s take on this.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The foregoing comments inevitably bring me back to the potential reader and the way in which the choices made by Kruger could affect the achievement of her aims for the book. As already noted, the book is not an easy read, nor is it an accessible one for a novice in the field. It is unashamedly academic and erudite, written by a highly informed and diligent researcher and clearly intended to set up a provocative dialogue with the author\u2019s peers, fellow university lecturers and post-graduate students, particularly those specializing in Southern African studies.  As a result, any true novice in the field (among which I would count a number of researchers and students in other countries, increasingly from the rest of Africa) would almost certainly have some trouble following the argument. Besides possibly being hampered by the dense academic writing and the range of theories and theoreticians brought into play, many a reader would be at something of a loss when faced with Kruger\u2019s side-references to many plays, events and people that are not really discussed and may not necessarily be familiar to people outside the discipline.  The result of all this is that one could almost face a kind of \u201cCatch 22\u201d situation, especially where undergraduate students and non-academic theatre lovers are concerned. Simply stated: To really understand and appreciate the book, and use it as an introduction to the history of South African theatre, the reader should actually already have a relatively good idea about theatre and the contextual socio-political situation in the country.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Fortunately, given what seem to be the specific aims of Kruger\u2019s publication, this latter issue is not a particularly problematic matter, for one of the aims is surely the traditional academic one of questioning prevalent beliefs and assumptions held by the readers themselves\u2014and in that sense the book is basically on target.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

A Concluding Word<\/strong><\/h5>\n\n\n\n

Perhaps not everyone would go as far as Mark Sanders and rate Loren Kruger\u2019s grasp of the history of South African theatre as \u201cunparalleled,\u201d for she is but one of quite a number of prolific and often very impressive authors active in the field. Nevertheless, few of her peers would really deny that Kruger has certainly established herself as one of the foremost figures on that roll. Always a formidable commentator, she also has an interesting personal perspective on the role of theatre and performance matters in the country and a stimulating and challenging approach to addressing the issues. The views as expressed in this book should undoubtedly be taken seriously in any (re)evaluation of the role played by theatre and performance over the course of the past 100 years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In summary, though this new version does not ultimately provide that encompassing general overview and analysis of the broader history a reader may have hoped for, A Century of South African Theatre<\/em>, like its predecessor, does constitute a rather timely and important contribution to our ongoing debate. It is well-presented and provocative, and it is one, I believe, which should be in the library of any serious theatre researcher, theatre maker or student.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Works Cited<\/strong><\/h5>\n\n\n\n

Cremona, Vicky Ann, et al. Theatrical Events: Borders Dynamics Frames<\/em>. Rodopi, 2004.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

ESAT<\/em> Bibliography<\/a>. Accessed 7 Feb. 2020.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

ESAT<\/em>. Entry on \u201cLoren Kruger<\/a>.\u201d Accessed 7 Feb. 2020.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Even-Zohar, Itamar. “Polysystem Theory.” Poetics Today<\/em>, vol. 1, no. 1\u20132, 1979, pp. 287\u2013310.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Hauptfleisch, Temple. \u201cCritical Responses: The Evolution of the Theatre Critic in South Africa.\u201d Syncretic Arenas: Essays in Postcolonial African Drama and Theatre for Esiaba Irobi<\/em>, edited by Isidore Diala, vol. 177, Rodopi, 2014, Cross\/Cultures.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

—. \u201cFrom Trance Dance to PaR: Theatre and Performance Studies in South Africa.\u201d Trends in Twenty-First Century African Theatre and Performance<\/em>, edited by Kene Igweonu, Rodopi, 2011.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

—. Theatre and Society in South Africa: Reflections in a Fractured Mirror<\/em>. Van Schaik, 1997.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Hees, Edwin. 2001. \u201cLoren Kruger: The Drama of South Africa: Plays, Pageants and Publics Since 1910<\/em>.\u201d South African Theatre Journal<\/em>, vol. 15, 2001, pp. 192\u20134.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Kruger, Loren. A Century of South African Theatre<\/em>. Methuen Drama, 2020.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

—. The Drama of South Africa: Plays, Pageants and Publics Since 1910. <\/em>Routledge, 1999.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Lewis, Simon. \u201cLewis on Kruger: \u2018The Drama of South Africa: Plays, Pageants and Publics Since 1910.\u2019\u201d H-AfrLitCine<\/em>, 2001.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Tucker, Percy. Just the Ticket: My 50 Years in Show Business<\/em>. Witwatersrand University Press, 1997.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n\n\n\n

[1]<\/sup><\/a>The Encyclopaedia of South African Theatre, Film, Media and Performance<\/em> (Website<\/a>)<\/p>\n\n\n\n

[2]<\/sup><\/a>See Even-Zohar on the notion of polysystem theory and Hauptfleisch on its relevance for the South African theatrical system.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

[3]<\/sup><\/a>For more on the evolution of research and criticism in South Africa, see, for example, two overview-articles by Hauptfleisch (2011, 2014). For other substantive publications on theatre in South Africa, towards the end of the twentieth century, see the Bibliography of the Encyclopaedia of South African Theatre, Film, Media and Performance (ESAT)<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

[4]<\/sup><\/a>For a discussion of the concepts theatrical events, festivalization and eventification, and an outline of the festival circuit in South Africa, see Cremona et al. <\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n\n\n\n
\"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

**<\/a>Temple Hauptfleisch <\/strong>was founder of the Centre for Theatre and Performance Studies at the University of Stellenbosch and was a long-time Chair of the University\u2019s Theatre Department. He retired in 2010 to devote his time to the online Encyclopedia of South African Theatre, Film, Media and Performance<\/em> (ESAT<\/em>). Co-founder and Editor for many years of the South African Theatre Journal<\/em>, he has also been a member of the editorial boards of the journals Critical Arts<\/em><\/a>, African Performance Review<\/em>, Critical Perspectives<\/em>, and Critical Stages<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n\n\n\n

Loren Kruger’s response<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

Temple Hauptfleisch has made an important contribution to theatre studies in South Africa and beyond, especially in the editorial work that he touts in his long review of my book. The online Encyclopedia of South African Theatre<\/em> (ESAT) is a valuable resource, as is the book Festivalizing<\/em>, coedited with the Theatrical Event group of the International Federation of Theatre Research (IFTR). But when he faults my book for not matching ESAT or other databases, he compels the obvious reply: as a peer-reviewed book, A Century of South African Theatre<\/em> met the requirements of major international presses, including limits on words and images, highlighting key moments, legacies and innovations, while balancing coverage with the obligation to keep the book affordable for South African institutions and instructors. Although Hauptfleisch asserts that some narratives are more objective than others, all books and indeed databases, including his, engage in interpretation, explicitly or not. My book used under-investigated archival sources as well as criticism and recollections\u2014mine and others\u2019\u2014to draw attention to multiple, intersecting and competing histories and present-day practices. As for the charge that I favor political theatre, performances take place in society, contesting representation in the polis <\/em>and are thus per se<\/em> political, especially <\/em>when they disavow politics.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Hauptfleisch also faults me for repeating my previous book The Drama of South Africa<\/em> (Routledge 1999) even though as noted in the preface and approved by Bloomsbury, I deliberately returned to this earlier study rather than, as other publishers wanted, writing a sequel about \u201cnew developments,\u201d because local readers as well as those abroad do not know or have forgotten the historical record without which we cannot appreciate the trends of today. I took the opportunity to revise the historical chapters to engage the work of colleagues that appeared in the two decades between these books, and reshaped the introduction to highlight the longstanding debate, especially among African theatre-makers from Griffiths Motsieloa (active: 1920s-1940s) and Herbert Dhlomo (1930s-1950s) to Gibson Kente (1960s-90s) and Sipho Sepamla (1960s-90s) and Mandla Mbothwe (2000ff) and others, about what may constitute theatre in South Africa. To save words, I also referred interested readers to publications by myself and other colleagues that address topics for which there was no space in this book, such as links between theatre and film or the role of festivals, the latter in my contribution to the Cambridge Companion to International Theatre Festivals<\/em> (2020). <\/p>\n\n\n\n

The real problem with Hauptfleisch\u2019s review is less obvious but ultimately more important than his quibbles about coverage. Although he acknowledges that I avoid \u201cEurocentric notions of drama,\u201d he faults the book ironically for staying true to its title, focusing \u201csensibly\u201d (his word) on South African<\/em> performance, rather than the second-rate revivals of international hits that fill commercial houses in South Africa as in other former colonies, for which he seems oddly nostalgic. He also slights the book\u2019s attention to local syncretic responses to popular transnational forms from the pageant to the musical, as well as literary drama from Europe and elsewhere, and completely misses my insistence, in the face of ongoing ignorance on the part of European and some local writers, on the impact of American forms, whether the musical or literary drama from Eugene O\u2019Neill on, or the long African-American history of hymns and sorrow songs, which have intersected with local practioners that have incorporated this sacred and secular musical heritage into theatrical performance from Motsieloa\u2019s Emancipation Centenary Celebration (1934) to The ReWind Cantata<\/em> (2007), the most moving performative response to the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Indeed, Hauptfleish\u2019s omission of A Century\u2019s central focus on events and analysis that have woven together African and transnational elements for a hundred years, his desire for a focus on commercial entertainment for white audiences celebrated in Just the Ticket<\/em>, the amusing but underedited memoir by Percy Tucker, better known for developing Computicket, a platform for centralized booking, than for insights into performance, and his regret that I don\u2019t give enough weight to apartheid-era institutions such as the National Theatre Organization, which lasted a little more than a decade, as against the anti-apartheid Market Theatre, which recently celebrated its fortieth year, suggest that his main complaint is that my archive simply is not white enough<\/em>. I give due attention to white institutions but, in the larger scheme of things, they do not deserve top billing against the historical and present-day achievements of all South Africans, and I am gratified that scholars such as Professors Gunner and Ravengai with deep knowledge of African traditions have welcomed this book.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

To set the record straight, the NTO and its successor Performing Arts Councils (PACs) were exclusively white institutions in a majority Black country. The NTO may have been white by default, in that it apparently did not occur to the directors to include Black and Brown people in the nation, but the PACs were, as apartheid government documents spell out, explicitly defending \u201cWestern civilization at the tip of Africa\u201d against alleged Black threats. Those who need to know more about the NTO can consult Light and Shadows<\/em>, the autobiography of NTO director Leontine Sagan (edited by me for Wits University Press), or Applous <\/em>by codirector Andr\u00e9 Huguenet; perhaps Hauptfleisch might translate this for those who don\u2019t read Afrikaans. The PACs promoted Afrikaans drama, as government documents, employment statistics, and program records demonstrate; their English offerings were mostly insipid. My discussion of the Afrikaans repertoire may not suffice for Hauptfleisch but I have given this work its due and I hope to have persuaded even Africanists of the value of playwrights from Bartho Smit to his heir Reza de Wet, or N.P. Van Wyke Louw and his, Deon Opperman, as well as writers who emerged after the PACs dissolved, such as Harry Kalmer. As for his demand that Andr\u00e9 Brink\u2019s novel A Dry White Season<\/em> appear in a book about theatre, Hauptfleisch should acknowledge, as Brink himself does, that Brink took the title from a poem by Mongane Serote. Those interested in my views of Serote and Brink, or in poetry, fiction and film rather than theatre, can read my book Imagining the Edgy City<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Hauptfleisch dismisses the post-apartheid chapters of A Century of South African Theatre<\/em> as \u201cdisappointingly narrow\u201d without explaining what he means exactly. In these chapters, as in the rest of the book, my intention was to highlight innovative texts and performances while sketching in background the diversity of themes and practices since the 1990s, from theatrical responses to the TRC, through the transnational experiments of William Kentridge and Handspring Puppets, to the likewise transnational if less ostentatious participatory dramaturgy animating applications of theatre to the realms of health and social work. While I could not include every worthy performance, I think I make a strong case, using the text of the Constitution, for the value of theatre in South African life, even if it is threatened by lack of funding and the dominance of electronic media. Finally, I would end by reiterating the invitation at the end of A Century of South African Theatre<\/em>: it is time for new writers with fresh perspectives to write the next book on this subject. <\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n\n\n\n
\"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

*<\/a>Loren Kruger<\/strong> is the author of several books in addition to those on South African theatre mentioned above, in particular the award-winning Post-Imperial Brecht<\/em> (Cambridge UP 2004) and Imagining the Edgy City: Writing, Performing and Building Johannesburg<\/em> (Oxford UP 2013), as well as numerous articles in international journals in English and other languages. She is a former editor of Theatre Journal<\/em> and Theatre Research International<\/em> and teaches Comparative and English Literatures, Theatre and Performance Studies, and African Studies, including film, at the University of Chicago.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

EDITOR’S NOTE<\/strong>: Prof. Hauptfleisch was offered an opportunity to respond further but respectfully declined to do so.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Copyright \u00a9<\/strong> 2020 Temple Hauptfleisch
Critical Stages\/Sc\u00e8nes critiques<\/em> e-ISSN: 2409-7411<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"Creative<\/a><\/figure><\/div>\n\n\n\n

This work is licensed under the
Creative Commons Attribution International License CC BY-NC-ND 4.0.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":173,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-172","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-book-reviews"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.critical-stages.org\/21\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/22\/2020\/04\/CS-21-Cover-S.-Africa.jpeg","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":473,"url":"https:\/\/www.critical-stages.org\/21\/poland-internet-theatre-and-insufficient-state-support-for-the-artists\/","url_meta":{"origin":172,"position":0},"title":"POLAND: Internet-theatre and Insufficient State Support for the Artists","author":"Temple Hauptfleisch","date":"May 8, 2020","format":false,"excerpt":"Tomasz Mi\u0142kowski* Theatres in Poland have been closed since March 12, 2020. Likewise, cinemas, restaurants, cafes and sports facilities. The pandemic has frozen economic and social life. The theatre\u2014after a short, initial period of shock\u2014has moved temporarily to the internet; actually, it has had a presence there for a long\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Covid"","block_context":{"text":"Covid","link":"https:\/\/www.critical-stages.org\/21\/category\/covid\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.critical-stages.org\/21\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/22\/2020\/05\/flag-pl-400.jpeg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200},"classes":[]},{"id":490,"url":"https:\/\/www.critical-stages.org\/21\/theatre-is-always-alive\/","url_meta":{"origin":172,"position":1},"title":"ROMANIA: Theatre is Always Alive","author":"Temple Hauptfleisch","date":"May 7, 2020","format":false,"excerpt":"Octavian Saiu* Report from the Romanian Section of IATC \u2013 Theatre Studies \u201cTheatre is always dying\u201d is the bewildering statement once made by David Mamet. Yet, we all know, or at least hope, that theatre can never die! This paradox seems to be most suitable for describing the recent processes\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Covid"","block_context":{"text":"Covid","link":"https:\/\/www.critical-stages.org\/21\/category\/covid\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.critical-stages.org\/21\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/22\/2020\/05\/image1.png?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200},"classes":[]},{"id":467,"url":"https:\/\/www.critical-stages.org\/21\/mexico-theatre-in-intensive-care\/","url_meta":{"origin":172,"position":2},"title":"MEXICO: Theatre in Intensive Care","author":"Temple Hauptfleisch","date":"May 9, 2020","format":false,"excerpt":"Lorena Meeser* The coronavirus pandemic has had a substantial impact on the performing arts in Mexico. Theatre productions are on indefinite pause. The curtains are closed until further notice, which puts at risk the survival of the theatre in Mexico, as the infrastructure of most companies will not last for\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Covid"","block_context":{"text":"Covid","link":"https:\/\/www.critical-stages.org\/21\/category\/covid\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.critical-stages.org\/21\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/22\/2020\/05\/flag-mex-400.png?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200},"classes":[]},{"id":605,"url":"https:\/\/www.critical-stages.org\/21\/russia-rethinking-communication-strategies\/","url_meta":{"origin":172,"position":3},"title":"RUSSIA: Rethinking Communication Strategies","author":"Temple Hauptfleisch","date":"May 7, 2020","format":false,"excerpt":"Alexandra Dunaeva* All Russian theatres were closed by order of the Ministry of Culture on March 17. Although in mid-April theatre leaders were still hoping to open their premieres in June, it is now completely clear that there is no reason to expect an early opening. Among the theatre managers\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Covid"","block_context":{"text":"Covid","link":"https:\/\/www.critical-stages.org\/21\/category\/covid\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.critical-stages.org\/21\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/22\/2020\/05\/russia.png?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200},"classes":[]},{"id":515,"url":"https:\/\/www.critical-stages.org\/21\/latvia-all-the-worlds-a-screen\/","url_meta":{"origin":172,"position":4},"title":"LATVIA: All the World\u2019s a Screen","author":"Temple Hauptfleisch","date":"May 11, 2020","format":false,"excerpt":"Lauma Mell\u0113na-Bartkevi\u010da* The year 2020 is probably the strangest year in the world of the performing arts in our (young) century. The Covid-19 pandemic and the related social distancing requirements closed all theatres and forced everyone to move to digital platforms. Unlike many other countries in Europe, Latvia did not\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Covid"","block_context":{"text":"Covid","link":"https:\/\/www.critical-stages.org\/21\/category\/covid\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.critical-stages.org\/21\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/22\/2020\/05\/flag-lat-400.png?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200},"classes":[]},{"id":597,"url":"https:\/\/www.critical-stages.org\/21\/argentina-never-abandon-the-theatre-even-in-the-toughest-situations\/","url_meta":{"origin":172,"position":5},"title":"ARGENTINA: \u201cNever Abandon the Theatre, Even in the Toughest Situations\u201d","author":"Temple Hauptfleisch","date":"May 24, 2020","format":false,"excerpt":"Halima Tahan Ferreyra* Most theatres in Argentina, both big and small, are offering a variety of online programmes, including not only their past shows, but also their new activities. Moreover, the greatest theatres, such as Col\u00f3n Theatre and Nacional Cervantes Theatre, are keeping their workshops working fully. The employees at\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Covid"","block_context":{"text":"Covid","link":"https:\/\/www.critical-stages.org\/21\/category\/covid\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.critical-stages.org\/21\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/22\/2020\/05\/argentina.png?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200},"classes":[]}],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.critical-stages.org\/21\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/172","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.critical-stages.org\/21\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.critical-stages.org\/21\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.critical-stages.org\/21\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.critical-stages.org\/21\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=172"}],"version-history":[{"count":7,"href":"https:\/\/www.critical-stages.org\/21\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/172\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":1103,"href":"https:\/\/www.critical-stages.org\/21\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/172\/revisions\/1103"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.critical-stages.org\/21\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/173"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.critical-stages.org\/21\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=172"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.critical-stages.org\/21\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=172"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.critical-stages.org\/21\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=172"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}