File Download

There are no files associated with this item.

  Links for fulltext
     (May Require Subscription)
Supplementary

Article: Editorial: Historiography as Metonymy

TitleEditorial: Historiography as Metonymy
Authors
Issue Date1-Oct-2025
PublisherCambridge University Press
Citation
Theatre Research International, 2025, v. 50, n. 3, p. 233-245 How to Cite?
AbstractThis special issue takes as its conceptual starting point ‘theatrical things’ too commonplace to ordinarily deserve scholarly notice – bits of foam, cushions, mothballs or even elephants. It sheds light on how unassuming features of performance practice constitute critical apertures for the study of theatre historiography, telling us something vital about theatre-making and sense-making. In the study of theatre history, Tracy C. Davis says, there is a premium on asserting originality and innovation, so we are ill-disposed to acknowledge consistency, unoriginality and derivation. Following Davis’s line of thought, we consider how utterly commonplace theatrical things become interfaces between theatre and world-making or microcosms for understanding theatre practice in ways that social ‘context’ does not allow us to imagine. We denote this form of historiography as metonymy.
Persistent Identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/368355
ISSN
2023 Impact Factor: 0.3
2023 SCImago Journal Rankings: 0.142

 

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorNicholson, Rashna Darius-
dc.contributor.authorGusman, Tancredi-
dc.contributor.authorSosnowska, Dorota-
dc.date.accessioned2025-12-31T00:35:12Z-
dc.date.available2025-12-31T00:35:12Z-
dc.date.issued2025-10-01-
dc.identifier.citationTheatre Research International, 2025, v. 50, n. 3, p. 233-245-
dc.identifier.issn0307-8833-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/368355-
dc.description.abstractThis special issue takes as its conceptual starting point ‘theatrical things’ too commonplace to ordinarily deserve scholarly notice – bits of foam, cushions, mothballs or even elephants. It sheds light on how unassuming features of performance practice constitute critical apertures for the study of theatre historiography, telling us something vital about theatre-making and sense-making. In the study of theatre history, Tracy C. Davis says, there is a premium on asserting originality and innovation, so we are ill-disposed to acknowledge consistency, unoriginality and derivation. Following Davis’s line of thought, we consider how utterly commonplace theatrical things become interfaces between theatre and world-making or microcosms for understanding theatre practice in ways that social ‘context’ does not allow us to imagine. We denote this form of historiography as metonymy.-
dc.languageeng-
dc.publisherCambridge University Press-
dc.relation.ispartofTheatre Research International-
dc.rightsThis work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.-
dc.titleEditorial: Historiography as Metonymy-
dc.typeArticle-
dc.identifier.doi10.1017/S0307883325100795-
dc.identifier.scopuseid_2-s2.0-105024494518-
dc.identifier.volume50-
dc.identifier.issue3-
dc.identifier.spage233-
dc.identifier.epage245-
dc.identifier.eissn1474-0672-
dc.identifier.issnl0307-8833-

Export via OAI-PMH Interface in XML Formats


OR


Export to Other Non-XML Formats