Anna. Rev. Anthropol. 1993. 22:369-93 Copyright 1993 by Annual Reviews Inc. All rights reserved

THE ANTHROPOLOGY OF THEATER AND SPECTACLE

William O. Beeman

Department of Anthropology, Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island 02912

KEY WORDS: performance, cultural anthropology, folklore, linguistics, cultural meaning

IN TRODUCTION: THE STUDY OF THEATER AND SPECTACLE

In this essay I explore studies of theater and spectacle as distinct cultural institutions. Several kinds of cultural activity closely related to this topic have extensive literatures of their own, but I do not treat them here. These include play and games, sports and contests, verbal art and poetry, and dance and music outside the context of theater and spectacle.

The distinction is arbitrary. The boundary between theater and spectacle and many other forms of enactment is difficult to determine. Theatrical activity is a component of many performance genres, and vice versa. Here I attempt to elucidate the specifically theatrical aspect of human life. I have not limited myself to works written by anthropologists. Indeed, I hope to excite anthropologists with an awareness of the work done in other fields.

This essay treats 1. the study of performance in anthropology and related disciplines, 2. the institutions of theater and spectacle, 3. specific genres of theater and spectacle, and 4. the creation of cultural meaning within frameworks of theater and spectacle.

0084-6570/93/1 0 15-0369$05.00 369

Ann

u. R

ev. A

nthr

opol

. 199

3.22

:369

-393

. Dow

nloa

ded

from

ww

w.an

nual

revi

ews.o

rgby

Uni

vers

idad

e Fe

dera

l do

Para

na o

n 04

/08/

12. F

or p

erso

nal u

se o

nly.

370 BEEMAN

THE STUDY OF PERFORMANCE IN ANTHROPOLOGY

Historical and Theoretical Background During the past two decades the social sciences and humanities have seen an exciting intellectual development: a "breakthrough into performance," to quote the title of an influential essay by Hymes (137). The "breakthrough" is a realization among researchers in humanistic disciplines that active performance, undertaken in real time in the presence of a body of designated observers, contributes essentially to what cultural materials mean, and therefore affects interpretation of those materials.

Sociocultural anthropologists, anthropological linguists, and folklorists have studied performance in order to gain insight into more traditional subject matter. Thus what is loosely termed "performance theory" has been applied to ritual by researchers such as Turner (219-225), Kapferer (144), and Frisbie (107); to interaction structures in language by, among others, Beeman (41), Briggs (62), Duranti (83, 84), Irvine (140), Kuipers (156), Sherzer (204,205), Tyler (226), and Urban (227); and to the structure of enactment in folkloric narrative genres, often termed "verbal art," by folklorists such as Bauman (28-30), Ben-Amos & Goldstein (47), and Kirshenblatt-Gimblett (152). Studies of humor often require performative treatment, as seen in studies by Apte (10) and Willeford (233).

Anthropologists have studied performance largely for what it can show about other human institutions such as religion, political life, gender relations, and ethnic identity. Less study has been devoted to performance per se: its structure, its cultural meaning apart from other institutions, the conditions under which it occurs, and its place within broad patterns of community life. This neglect is particularly noticeable with respect to performative activities designed specifically to "entertain": theater and spectacle. This is surprising because theater and spectacle are universal human institutions, to which most societies devote much time and energy.

In anthropology, the earliest theoretically influential work on performance was carried out by Bateson and Mead in Bali. Their film, Trance and Dance in Bali (27), and the accompanying monographs by Jane Belo ('1'1 '16) laid the foundations for considering traditional performance a legitimate field of study. Bateson's later work on the New Guinean ritual performance, Naven (25), and on the nature of play and schizophrenia (24, 26) added an important set of intellectual tools to the study of performance, demonstrating that a culturally conditioned cognitive state frames and orients human action.

Other early anthropological works emphasizing indigenous theater traditions include a remarkable study of the Shi'a Muslim ta'ziyeh passion drama in Azerbaijan by Ivar Lassy, a student of Edward Westermarck (160), and studies of Native American theater traditions by Frank Speck (Cherokee)

Ann

u. R

ev. A

nthr

opol

. 199

3.22

:369

-393

. Dow

nloa

ded

from

ww

w.an

nual

revi

ews.o

rgby

Uni

vers

idad

e Fe

dera

l do

Para

na o

n 04

/08/

12. F

or p

erso

nal u

se o

nly.

THEATERANDSPECTACLE 371

(210), R. B. Spicer (Yaqui) (211), and Julian Steward (Ute) (212). These studies, while interesting, did not found a tradition of theater studies in anthropology.

The elaborate performance traditions of Asia were especially suggestive for anthropologists in the post World War II period. MiltonSinger's study When a Great Tradition Modernizes (207) introduced the notion of "cultural performance" as an institution embodying central symbolic aspects of a cultural tradition.

Victor Turner, in his early works on Ndembu ritual (221, 222), included a great deal of performance material in developing the concepts of liminality and reversal in human action. These ideas were picked up by students of theatricality including Beeman (32, 33, 35-37), Davis (72, 73), and Schechner (196-199). In his 1974 analysis of historical and social events such as revolutions and social disturbances (221, 223-225), Turner extended his concept of the "social drama" to include the structures of ritual. Turner's work. except for his specific analysis of Ndembu ritual, was largely programmatic and inspirational. He mentored students of performance but did not himself carry out extensive direct studies of performance traditions.

Geertz attempted to demonstrate the interrelationship between performance and other general dimensions of culture such as religion, politics, and normative modes of personal conduct in his studies of Balinese life. However, Geertz rarely dealt with performance forms in detail, preferring to discuss them in general terms (114, 115). His most celebrated study of a cultural performance was not of a staged performance but of a sporting event, the Balinese cockfight (113). In a more recent study, Negara, he discusses the inherent theatricality of the political construction of the Balinese state (116). Once again he deals not with the structures of specific performances but with the generalized structure of the performance aesthetic.

Over the past 10 years folklorists have emphasized the performative, as opposed to the textual, aspects of folkloric materials. Dell Hymes's seminal essay (137), which suggests that the meaning of folkloric material inheres in its performance, was an important portent of this new direction. Richard Bauman has been a leader in developing a careful model of oral literature as communication. In this model he analyzes performance events as a means of identifying the fusion of text and context (28-31).

Sociolinguistics has experienced its own "breakthrough into performance." Here again, Hymes has been a leader. In his Foundations in Sociolinguistics (138), he established the model for the study of the performative aspect of language use. He applied this model in his studies of ethnopoetics (139). Paul Friedrich's work has continually emphasized the use of performative language to achieve concrete social and aesthetic ends. In his book The Language Parallax (106) he posits a "poetic imagination" lying at the base of all linguis-

Ann

u. R

ev. A

nthr

opol

. 199

3.22

:369

-393

. Dow

nloa

ded

from

ww

w.an

nual

revi

ews.o

rgby

Uni

vers

idad

e Fe

dera

l do

Para

na o

n 04

/08/

12. F

or p

erso

nal u

se o

nly.

372 BEEMAN

tic function. Michael Silverstein has inteljected the pragmatism of Peirce and Austin into a theory suggesting that language accomplishes concrete aims through its performative dimensions (206). The study of metaphor and metaphoric processes by researchers such as Fernandez (100) has likewise aided researchers in understanding the construction of symbolic representation in performance genres. The strength of these conceptions of language is underscored by observational studies in sociolinguistics. Schegloff (200, 201), Sherzer (204, 205), Tyler (226), and Urban (227), among others, demonstrate that if speakers are to achieve their aims they must use performative skills within the context of discourse.

Richard Schechner has borrowed heavily from both Gregory Bateson and Victor Turner to develop a series of approaches to the study of both traditional and modem theatricality. With the trained eye of the director he has analyzed the ritual and cognitive underpinnings of theatrical performance in detail. Schechner has shown that to study performance a researcher must study far more than just the event that appears before an audience. He has drawn attention to the long process of preparation and rehearsal that has its own socially determined structure. He has also developed several approaches for investigating the intrinsic relationship between performance reality and the events of the real world in which performance is enacted.

He has, moreover, continually treated the stage as a laboratory of performance, experimenting with various performance elements to observe the effects on both performers and audience. One of the most consistent techniques he has used in his work is the incorporation of elements of folk performance into his Western, avant-garde theatrical productions (193-195). His production of Brecht's Mother Courage, for example, incorporated such features of Indian folk performance as the consumption of food, actors' remaining in full view of the audience when offstage, and lengthy performance. The production was later staged in villages in India with some success (196:104). Savran's study of Schechner's performing group documents the legacy of his experimentation (192).

Schechner pioneered in expanding the scope of theater analysis, but he has not been alone. A number of other theater scholars have aimed to study the entire range of performance phenomena. Zarilli' s review of the field of performance studies (240, 241) draws on Schechner, and on the work of Turner, MacAloon (168), and Handelman (127). Other scholars have also tried to expand theater research to include semiotic dimensions (4, 56, 88, 202), and sociological contextualization of performance (17, 49, 63, 72, 86, 87, 122, 185, 186). Several researchers have sought the origins of theater in cultural terms. Theodore Gaster has attempted to trace modem theater to ancient Middle Eastern roots (112a). One of the most anthropologically sensitive works is Ur-Drama by E. T. Kirby (151).

Ann

u. R

ev. A

nthr

opol

. 199

3.22

:369

-393

. Dow

nloa

ded

from

ww

w.an

nual

revi

ews.o

rgby

Uni

vers

idad

e Fe

dera

l do

Para

na o

n 04

/08/

12. F

or p

erso

nal u

se o

nly.

THEATER AND SPECTACLE 373

Considerably less work has been done to refine the notion of spectacle. MacAloon (167, 168) and Handelman (126-128) have done much of the modem research on the anthropology of public events and spectacles, although a body of literature on this topic is growing (77,87,105,134,165).

Theoretical inspiration for anthropological study of performance has come from only a few primary sources. Such sources on the structure of ritualoften used as an analogy for performance events-have been mentioned above, particularly in conjunction with Turner's work. Michail Bakhtin's work (19, 19a,b) has consistently inspired many students of performance-particularly his views on the transforming relationship between art and the mundane world. Kenneth Burke (62a,b,c) has likewise stimulated performance theory, especially as his views have been filtered through the work of Hymes and Goffman. Burke's "dramatistic" view of human existence emphasizes the human use of symbolic materials in communication and the human intent to affect others through symbolic action. Burke makes a major distinction between motion and action in human life. Things move, but human beings act, and it is only through human motivated action that meaningful symbolic transformation of reality can occur. Thus a rock rolling down a mountain embodies no intrinsic symbolic transformation of reality. If someone throws the rock through the window of a house, then this becomes a symbolic act that will require interpretation and will have consequences both for the rock thrower, and for the persons into whose house the rock was thrown (150). Motivated symbolic action of this sort is the foundation on which theatrical meaning rests.

Alfred Lord (166) broadened the attention of folklorists from exclusive focus on text to a study of verbal art as enacted in public. Pierre Bourdieux's work on the concrete effects of language use in social life (57) has also influenced this area. John Blacking (53) has suggested that the basis for all drama lies in the human physical impulse to mark rhythm through dance.

Erving Goffman's numerous studies of theatrical aspects of social life (119-121) have been expanded by others to encompass the study of performance events. A seminal concept in Goffman's work is the psychological "frame" imposed by humans on social activity. Actions within such a frame are governed by rules of behavior separate from those governing the world of everyday action in which they are embedded. The frame concept is borrowed from Bateson (24) but is elaborated in much of Goffman's work (121). Students of performance, notably Schechner and Turner, have used the notion of frames to describe the relationship between performance events and the "normal" world. Garfinkel's ethnomethodological studies (109) of the "routine grounds of everyday behavior" have enabled extensive investigation of theatrical convention. The work of Mihalyi Csikszentmihalyi (69a) has also attracted the attention of performance scholars. He has pioneered investigation of the

Ann

u. R

ev. A

nthr

opol

. 199

3.22

:369

-393

. Dow

nloa

ded

from

ww

w.an

nual

revi

ews.o

rgby

Uni

vers

idad

e Fe

dera

l do

Para

na o

n 04

/08/

12. F

or p

erso

nal u

se o

nly.

374 BEEMAN

phenomenon of "flow." For Csikszentmihalyi, flow denotes the cognitive state attained when total engagement with an activity is achieved, such that consciousness of the physical body is lost. Good examples of flow are the states of bodily unawareness attained when driving a car, typing, or playing a musical instrument. Flow has been used to describe the transformative state that excellent performers achieve during the course of performance (39, 40, 196-198, 199:247).

The Study of Performance Traditions in Specific Cultures

Singer's influential early study of cultural performance focused on India, but few anthropologists have answered Singer's call for additional studies in Indian and Sri Lankan theater. A few anthropologists have done fieldwork in South Asia centering on theatrical traditions. Studies include Beeman's comparison of film and performance traditions (34), Kapferer's classic study of Sri Lankan thovil (144-146), Ostor's analysis of Bengali ritual performance (177), and Reed's study of the ritual and political significance of Kandyan dance in Sri Lanka (186a).

However, the bulk of research on South Asian theater has been undertaken by drama scholars and ethnomusicologists. The work of some of these scholars has drawn on anthropological theory and methodology. These include Ashton's study of Yaksagana (12), Awasthi's careful analysis of the cultural underpinnings of Indian performance traditions (14--16), Emigh's excellent work on masked drama (89, 92, 93), Erdman's study of patronage and social support for Rajasthani performance (95), Hansen's study of nautunki (129), Schechner's (198) and Hess' (133) work on the ramlila, and Zarilli's defininitive studies of kathakali and other South Indian performance forms (237-243). Many other theater studies are either historical or largely descriptive in nature. Nevertheless, useful overall surveys of Indian and Ceylonese theater have been undertaken by De Zoete (74, 75), De Zoete & Spies (76), Gargi (110, 111), Mathur (172), Parmar (179), and Vatsyayan (229, 230). Studies of specific traditions include Hawley's (131) and Hein's (132) work on raslila, Jones' (143) on kathakali, and Marglin's (171) on Puri ritual drama. Mukhopadhyay (173, 174), Vatuk (231), and Wade (232) have prepared collections of smaller studies on a variety of traditional drama and narrative traditions.

Following in the tradition of Bateson and Mead, many anthropologists of theater and spectacle have looked at Southeast Asia-particularly Indonesia. Aside from the work of Geertz (113-116) cited above, anthropological descriptions of performance forms in Indonesia are provided by Peacock (181-183) and Keeler (147), who detail the performance forms of ludruk and wayang kulit. Lansing (159) has provided a study of institutional support for Balinese theatrical performance. Anthropologically important work has also

Ann

u. R

ev. A

nthr

opol

. 199

3.22

:369

-393

. Dow

nloa

ded

from

ww

w.an

nual

revi

ews.o

rgby

Uni

vers

idad

e Fe

dera

l do

Para

na o

n 04

/08/

12. F

or p

erso

nal u

se o

nly.

THEATER AND SPECTACLE 375

been carried out by theater scholars and ethnomusicologists. A lot of attention has been devoted to dance drama in Indonesia. Bandem & deBoer (20) provide an important overview of the changing field of dance. Foley (103, 104) likewise investigates the practice of dance drama from the standpoint of the performer, emphasizing particularly the role of trance. In addition to Keeler's work (147), Clara van Groenendael (67, 68) has also dealt extensively with the art of shadow puppetry. Shadow puppetry in Malaysia is examined by Sweeney (103, 104). Emigh (89-91, 94) studies a wide variety of masked traditions in the region. Brandon (60) provides an invaluable broad survey of literature on dance and drama in the region.

Anthropological studies of performance traditions in other areas of the world have been less extensive. Japan, with its rich performing arts traditions, has rewarded study by theater scholars, but little work has been done by anthropologists. Research being done in Japan centers largely on the classical traditions of noh and kabuki. There is a vast literature on both traditions. Bowers general survey of Japanese theater (58) focuses on these two forms. Bethe & Brazell (50) have come the closest to an ethnographic treatment of noh, and Renondeau (187) has dealt with Buddhist elements in this art form. Ernst (96) and Leiter (162) have carried out somewhat historical and literarybased studies of kabuki. Hoff (135) presents a masterful study of shrine-based folk dance-drama (kagura and related forms). Araki's historical study of medieval ballad-drama (k8waka) ( lOa) provides important insights for the study of today's theater. Yamaguchi (234) examines the comparative role of the clown in Japan and in other cultural traditions. Yamamoto (236) provides an account of a festival in Northeast Japan that includes dance-drama elements. Beeman examines the contemporary theater director Tadashi Suzuki and his ties with traditional theater forms (39, 40). Hsieh has written an outstanding ethnographic study on the little-known Taiwanese hand-puppet tradition (136a), and Mackerras (169) offers one of the few comprehensive studies of Chinese theater traditions that takes a broad view of theater in its cultural context.

Middle Eastern theater traditions have been the focus of a number of anthropologically informed studies. Beeman has provided an overview of the entire region (42). Gaster has attempted to show the role of drama in ancient Mesopotamia (112a). Metin And has written several studies of the theatrical traditions of Turkey including karagoz, the Turkish shadow-puppet theater; and orta-oyunu, a comic improvisatory tradition (5-9). Iranian traditional theater has been the focus of several surveys by Beza'i (51), Jannati-Ata'i (141), and Rezvani (188). Traditional theater in Iran is seen in two primary forms. The first form is fa 'ziyeh, a passion drama focusing on the martyrdom of Imam Hosein, grandson of the prophet Mohammed and fourth leader of Shi'a Muslims. Beeman (33, 35, 37, 38, 43), Chelkowski (66), Ghaffari (117), and Lassy (160) have presented analyses of various aspects of this form. The

Ann

u. R

ev. A

nthr

opol

. 199

3.22

:369

-393

. Dow

nloa

ded

from

ww

w.an

nual

revi

ews.o

rgby

Uni

vers

idad

e Fe

dera

l do

Para

na o

n 04

/08/

12. F

or p

erso

nal u

se o

nly.

376 BEEMAN

second form is a comic improvisatory form known by various names, but often referred to as ru-hozi. In addition to treatments in the broad surveys mentioned above, this form has been specifically studied by Beeman (32, 36, 40-42) and Gafary ( lOS). Baghban (ISa) has investigated folk theater in the Herat region of Afghanistan. An overall review of Arab theater has been undertaken by Al-Khozai (la) and Landau (15Sa). Slyomovics (20S, 209) has dealt with traditional Egyptian Arab performance genres, particularly those performed by women.

Other world areas have been studied more sparsely. In Africa, Drewal and Drewal (81) have studied the role of women in West African performing art. Kennedy (148) has written a general monograph dealing with drama throughout the continent. Kisliuk (154, 155) examines the role of dance and performance in the lives of Pygmies. Fabian (97) has written a classic work about the creation and performance of a politically motivated drama by the Luba people of Shaba province in Zaire. General surveys of African theater materials are provided by East (S7a) and Fiebach (100a). Research in Spain, Latin America, and the Caribbean has covered a variety of topics. In Mexico, Brandes (59) has examined festivals and their social and political context; Briggs (62) and Urban (227) have dealt with the performative dynamics of verbal art and discourse, and Oettinger (176) has treated masks and masked performance. Taussig has analyzed the concept of the devil as it pervades such Latin American festivals as the diablada found in many Andean countries. Crawford (69), Flores (102), and Johnson (142) have written about the Spanish language pastoral drama, called pastorella in Mexico and the American Southwest. Nunley & Bettelheim (175) and Yamaguchi & Naito (235) have explored the variety of Caribbean festivals and festival arts. DaMatta (70, 71, 7 l a) has

. written definitive studies of the Brazilian Carnival in the context of Brazilian society.

Anthropologists writing on the performance traditions of native peoples of the Americas have largely emphasized ritual traditions. Frisbie (107) has edited an admirable collection of studies on a wide variety of such ritual traditions. Babcock (18), Grimes (124), Kurath (157), Kurath & Garcia (158), Spicer (211), and Tedlock (2l7a) have written on drama and ritual in the Southwestern Pueblo Native American tribes. Lawrence (161) has analyzed the rodeo from both Euro-American and Native American perspectives. Steward (212) has described a Ute bear ceremony with definite dramatic overtones. Sherzer (204) has dealt with performative aspects of narrative among the Kuna Indians of the San BIas Islands of Panama.

Surprisingly little work on Western performance traditions has been undertaken by anthropologists. Notable exceptions are studies of aspects of contemporary theater and their relevance for understanding culture by Adler (1), Alland (2), Beeman (37, 39, 40), Dening (79), Duranti & Brenneis (85),

Ann

u. R

ev. A

nthr

opol

. 199

3.22

:369

-393

. Dow

nloa

ded

from

ww

w.an

nual

revi

ews.o

rgby

Uni

vers

idad

e Fe

dera

l do

Para

na o

n 04

/08/

12. F

or p

erso

nal u

se o

nly.

THEATER AND SPECTACLE 377

Garner & Turnbull (112), Giacce (118), McClard ( l72a), Peterson (184), Swiderski (215), and Titon (217b). Mumming traditions (characterized by the use of masks), particularly those of Newfoundland, stand apart as having a unique attraction for anthropological fieldwork. Important studies have been carried out by Halpert & Story (125), Handelman (126), Robertson (190), Sider (205a), and Szwed (216). Glassie ( l18a) has written on Irish mumming, in particular.

Other social historians, folklorists and sociologists have made serious attempts to analyze drama and theater from a theoretical standpoint as a broadly conceived Western social institution. These include Armstrong (11), Blau (54a), Bums (63), Davis (72, 73), Deldime (78), Des Bouvrie (80), Duvignaud (86,87), Goodland (122), Little (165), McNamara ( l72b), and Manning (170). Wilmeth (233a,b) has provided a set of excellent bibliographic sources for the study of theatrical traditions throughout North America.

That theater scholars, by contrast, have applied anthropological methods and concepts to the study of Western performance forms can be seen in the writings of Alter (4), Aston & Savona (13), Bab (17), Barba (21-23), Beneix (48), Bennett (49), Borie (55), Bouissac (56), Canziani (64), Carlson (65), Elam (88), Fischer-Lichte (101), Foster (105), Harrison-Pepper (130), Hornby (136), Kisliuk (153), Lesnick (163), Pavis (180), Phelan (185), Read (186), Rickner (189), Savran (192), Schechner (193-198), Schechner & Appel (199), Schmid & van Kesteren (202), Senelick (203), and Tomasio (218).

Western opera is a theater form with strong affinities to the music-theater performance forms of Asia. Modem studies of Western opera [e.g. Helfgot & Beeman (132a), Kerman (149), Lindenberger (164), Robinson (191), and Smith (209a)], although not carried out primarily by anthropologists, investigate the performance effects of combined song and acting. Investigation of the special conventions of this theatrical form helps to elucidate performance in other areas of human life. Opera is a highly "marked" form of theater. Markedness in linguistics refers to categories of language or cultural material that are stylistically differentiated from the broad class of phenomena to which they belong. They are generally rarer in appearance, and cannot be considered representative of a whole genre. Like other highly stylized traditions of perf ormance, such as Japanese kabuki, or Indian kathakali, opera draws attention not only to the dramatic meanings it conveys, but also to itself as a theatrical form. Because of this marked quality, anything occurring in opera is understood to be theatrical. Thus opera serves as a repository for many of the symbolic conventions that the Western public recognizes as specifically belonging to theatrical expression. As a result, opera is also the bane of theatrical innovators who wish to alter or eliminate the standard conventions of formal theater.

Ann

u. R

ev. A

nthr

opol

. 199

3.22

:369

-393

. Dow

nloa

ded

from

ww

w.an

nual

revi

ews.o

rgby

Uni

vers

idad

e Fe

dera

l do

Para

na o

n 04

/08/

12. F

or p

erso

nal u

se o

nly.

378 BEEMAN

THE INSTITUTIONS OF THEATER AND SPECTACLE

The Unique Qualities of Theater

What fundamentally distinguishes theatrical activity from other kinds of performance activity? Bauman has made several general theoretical statements about the nature of performance. In one seminal article (29a) he includes theater within Singer's general rubric "cultural performance" (207). Cultural performances "tend to be the most prominent performance contexts within a community" (29a:285). They are scheduled, temporally bounded, spacially bounded, and programmed; they are coordinated public occasions "open to view by an audience and to collective participations" (p. 285). Owing largely to their reflexive nature they are heightened occasions for the community. Although these observations situate theater and spectacle within a general class of performance activities, differentiating them from the general spectrum of performance is still problematic.

The performance literature commonly distinguishes ritual activity from theatrical activity. Here Schechner's work is of paramount importance. According to Schcchner, the difference between ritual and theater cannot be stated in essentialist terms. "Whether one calls a specific performance 'ritual' or 'theater' ," he writes, "depends mostly on context and function. A performance is called theater or ritual because of where it is performed, by whom and under what circumstances" (197:120). Table 1 shows Schechner's identification of the principal differences between the two forms.

Victor Turner has written two books exploring the relationship between ritual and theatrical genres, From Ritual to Theatre and Back (224) and The Anthropology of Performance (225). In these he builds on his earlier influential work Dramas, Fields and Metaphors (221). Turner separates theater,

Table 1 Ritual and theater compared (after 197: 1 20)

EFFICACY

Ritual

results link to an absent Other symbolic time performer posessed, in trance audience participates audience believes criticism discouraged collective creativity

ENTERTAINMENT

Theater

fun only for those bere emphasis now performer knows what s/he's doing audience watches audience appreciates criticism flourishes individual creativity

Ann

u. R

ev. A

nthr

opol

. 199

3.22

:369

-393

. Dow

nloa

ded

from

ww

w.an

nual

revi

ews.o

rgby

Uni

vers

idad

e Fe

dera

l do

Para

na o

n 04

/08/

12. F

or p

erso

nal u

se o

nly.

THEATER AND SPECTACLE 379

ritual, and performative processes in public life. Revolutions, public demonstrations, campaigns, strikes, and other forms of participatory public action all have performative dimensions. Moreover, they share certain features with the fundamental ritual process explicated by Van Gennep (228) and elaborated in Turner's earlier books (219, 220). Such "social dramas" involve a break with the "normal" structures of ongoing life, the entrance of groups of individuals into liminal transitory states, and the reincorporation of the liminalized individuals into a reconstituted social order. The efficacy/entertainment distinction is a way of separating ritual from theater, but other performance genres also fall under the general functional rubric of entertainment. Both Schechner and Turner find two other crucial features in theater/spectacle that are not necessary in other forms of performance activity (cf 197:12). First, for theater and spectacle an observer/evaluator audience (as opposed to a participatory audience) is always present. Theatrical forms have no purpose without the audience. This is not true for rituals, sports, play activities, games, or face-to-face verbal interaction, despite their theatrical qualities.

Second, theater and spectacle focus principally on symbolic reality. In theater, the performers represent themselves in roles disjunct from their lives outside the performance. The presentational frame for theatrical performance is also disjunct from even the immediate context of the occasion for the performance. Theatrical performance generally makes this separation through a series of conventions such as the raising or lowering of a curtain, changes in lighting levels, or the use of music to announce the beginning or end of a performance. Although experimental and avant-garde theatrical forms may play with the boundaries of separation between observer and performer, in general, theater maintains a framed separation between the "show" and external reality throughout the duration of the performance. In spectacle, performers present themselves as representative of a larger group or a larger reality. Symbolic reality serves to differentiate theater and spectacle from performance genres such as public speaking (e.g. lectures, sermons), exhibitions, and demonstrations.

The use of three descriptive dimensions-efficacy vs entertainment in intent, participation vs observation in the audience's role, and symbolic representation vs literal self-presentation in the performers' role-thus permits a rough distinction between theater and spectacle, on the one hand, and other performance forms, on the other. For example, one form of performance that does not qualify as theatrical are the kinds of performance genres Schechner calls "actuals" (197). These are events such as feats of daring or athletic competitions that are viewed by an audience entirely for their own sake. The audience, in an observer's role, is entertained, but the performers do not engage in symbolic representation in their roles. They are likewise evaluated for their ability to accomplish specific tasks during the performance, rather

Ann

u. R

ev. A

nthr

opol

. 199

3.22

:369

-393

. Dow

nloa

ded

from

ww

w.an

nual

revi

ews.o

rgby

Uni

vers

idad

e Fe

dera

l do

Para

na o

n 04

/08/

12. F

or p

erso

nal u

se o

nly.

380 BEEMAN

than on their overall presentation. For example, a high-jumper may have bad form, but slbe will be considered a success if slbe jumps higher than other contestants. Likewise, although a tight-rope walker may be costumed as an historical figure, the audience remains interested not in realistic portrayal of this character but in the performer's ability to negotiate the t ight-rope.

Despite the characterizing features discussed above, the distinction between theater and spectacle and other performance genres in a given case may be blurry. A conversationalist or public speaker may mimic someone not present during a narrative. A ritual occasion may contain performative events designed primarily for entertainment, rather than for efficacy. A sports event may include theater or spectacle (such as a half-time show at a football game). In all of these examples, however, the theatrical aspect or portion is a secondary enhancement of the primary nontheatrical purpose for which participants are gathered.

Spectacle

Spectacle is further differentiated from theater in terms of the expectations of the audience. Like theater, spectacle must have an audience; but unlike theater, according to MacAloon, "Spectacles give primacy to visual sensory and symbolic codes; they are things to be seen. Hence we refer to circuses as 'spectacles,' but not orchestral performances" (167:243). As is the case with theater, a spectator may choose to attend a spectacle; attendance at a ritual may be considered a cultural duty. MacAloon further points out that spectacles must be "of a certain size and grandeur" (167:243).

Spectacle is a public display of a society's central meaningful elements. Parades, festivals, and other such events occur at regular intervals and are frequently deeply meaningful for a society. The meaningfulness of a spectacle is usually proportionate to the degree to which the elements displayed to the public seem to represent key elements in the public's cultural and emotional life. It is almost as if the mere event of displaying these symbolic representative elements in a special framed context is enough to elicit strong positive emotional responses from the observing public. Handelman terms such actions "public events," most of which are also spectacles (127). In his study of the Palio of Siena (128), he demonstrates how such public events, by means of their structure and enactment, reconstitute the whole community. In essence, the Palio, a horse race around the town square, allows all quarters of the city first to differentiate themselves, since each quarter is represented by a horse and rider, and then to come together in the enactment of the event. Dundes & Falassi (82) have likewise presented an important analysis of this spectacle. DaMatta (70, 71) makes a similar claim for Brazilian carnival-that in essence the carnival tradition is an example of a people reconstituting itself through spectacle. In his study of the Olympic games (167), MacAloon notes that

Ann

u. R

ev. A

nthr

opol

. 199

3.22

:369

-393

. Dow

nloa

ded

from

ww

w.an

nual

revi

ews.o

rgby

Uni

vers

idad

e Fe

dera

l do

Para

na o

n 04

/08/

12. F

or p

erso

nal u

se o

nly.

THEATER AND SPECTACLE 381

"Insofar as there exists, in the Hegelian-Marxian phrase, a 'world-historical process,' the Olympics have emerged as its privileged expression and celebration" (167:242). Anthropologists have been slow to take up the study of spectacle. Allegri (3), Debord (77), Deldime (78), Duvignaud (86, 87), and Falassi (98) have all attempted theoretical analyses of the spectacle as a general social phenomenon. Among specific studies, Bauman (30) has written about the symbolic dynamics present in a folklife festival in Washington, and Gregor (123) has presented a picture of daily life as spectacle in a Brazilian village. Harrison-Pepper (130) presents an insightful analysis of the street performances that take place in Washington Square Park in New York City as representative of the whole surrounding community and its ethos. Kisliuk (153) analyzes the musical behavior taking place at a bluegrass festival, and Lawrence's study on rodeo (161), Nunley & Bettelheim's analysis of Caribbean festivals (175), and Taussig's treatment of the devil in Andean festivals (217) have been mentioned above.

GENRES OF THEATER AND SPECTACLE

Theater exists in a variety of forms worldwide. Anthropologists generally focus on the functions of theater in supporting other cultural institutions such as religion or politics, rather than concentrating on the various theatrical forms per se. Nevertheless, significant work has been done for a number of theater genres. In order to establish rough categories of theater forms, I adopt here a modified communications analysis of the kind suggested by Jakobson (140a) and Hymes (138). We can discuss theater genres in terms of four variables: the media used in presentation, the nature of the performers, the nature of the content of presentation, and the role of the audience. We can also differentiate these forms according to the degree to which they are codified. More highly codified and elaborated forms have generally produced artistic traditions with widely understood execution standards. Less thoroughly codified traditions may be largely improvisatory and exhibit great variation in local performance standards.

Genre Variables

MEDIA

Music-Text-Dance (MTD) theater MTD is the commonest form of theater and spectacle worldwide. Music, sung or spoken text, and dance are used to advance a dramatic narrative, or form an integral part of such a narrative. Both elaborate codified and simpler less codified varieties of this universal theater form abound. Examples of highly codified varieties include Euro-American opera/music

Ann

u. R

ev. A

nthr

opol

. 199

3.22

:369

-393

. Dow

nloa

ded

from

ww

w.an

nual

revi

ews.o

rgby

Uni

vers

idad

e Fe

dera

l do

Para

na o

n 04

/08/

12. F

or p

erso

nal u

se o

nly.

382 BEEMAN

theater, Japanese kabuki (61,96, 162), Iranian ta'ziyeh (33, 66,117,160), and Indian kathakali (143, 243). Less thoroughly codified forms include Turkish orta-oyunu (5-7, 9), Japanese kagura (135), and Mexican pastorella (69, 102, 142)

Dance theater While theater involving only dance and music, with little or no spoken or sung text, is rarer than MTD theater, it is still fairly widespread. Euro-American ballet is an example of a highly codified variety. Indian nautunki (129) and Bolivian diablada (217) are examples of less thoroughly codified forms.

Textual theater Theater involving only the spoken word, with no music or dance, is rare on a world scale, even though it is the commonest unmarked form of theater in the West. Western spoken drama is a highly codified form of this kind of theater. Storytelling traditions such as Iranian naqqali (32) or the Rajasthani "jester" (93) are examples of less thoroughly codified forms.

PERFORMERS

Human actors By far the commonest variety of theater is undertaken by human performers presenting themselves before an audience. They may be costumed or in make-up, but they are unmistakably human. Some traditions require that all the performers be of one gender, one age group, or one social class. In Japan, for example, women do not appear as actors in noh (50) or kabuki (61,96, 162) theater. In Orissa in India the form Radha-prima lila (89) uses only children. In Gujarat, also in India, performers in bhavai (14-16, 173, 174) are all from a single performer caste.

Masked theater The use of masks for performers is virtually universal. Their incidence in theater and spectacle is so widespread that it is reasonable to categorize them separately. Masks cover the face, a portion of the face, or the face and other body parts. The mask can also be seen as a special form of animated object (see below). Indeed, when the mask covers the entire body of the performer, it has become a full-body puppet. Extremely heavy facial or body make-up, such as in kathakali (89, 229, 230, 243) dance drama in southern India, is often seen as a form of nonpermanent mask.

Animated objects The use of animated objects is widespread in theater and spectacle. The general term "puppet," often applied to these objects, conceals the enormous variety of objects that people regularly manipulate in performance. Shadow puppets are found throughout Eurasia. String puppets come in all sizes and varieties from life-sized varieties to very small forms (3). Rod

Ann

u. R

ev. A

nthr

opol

. 199

3.22

:369

-393

. Dow

nloa

ded

from

ww

w.an

nual

revi

ews.o

rgby

Uni

vers

idad

e Fe

dera

l do

Para

na o

n 04

/08/

12. F

or p

erso

nal u

se o

nly.

THEATER AND SPECTACLE 383

puppets vary both in size and in the complexity of their manipulation (173,174). A complex form, such as used in Japanese bunraku, requires three human manipulators. Glove puppets fit on the hand and are manipulated by the fingers of the operator (136a). Ventriloquists' dummies are manipulated directly by the operator without strings or rods. Full-body puppets are worn by the operator(s), who manipulate them from within. Animated stage devices are operated by mechanisms invisible to the audience. In today's theater, these may include various kinds of film, slide, and video projections. We are just beginning to see robot devices manipulated by their operators through the use of remote-control radio.

Mixed forms Masks and animated objects appear along with human performers in some theater forms. These are most often used to portray supernatural beings or animals. Of course, ventriloquism requires the human operator and the dummy to appear together.

CONTENT

Scripted Many theatrical forms are scripted or semi-scripted-that is, material is performed as an author intended. Scripted theater exists on a continuum with improvisatory theater (see below). No scripted form-even the most rigidly codified, such as noh drama or ballet-is performed without some improvisation on the part of performers.

Unscripted Equally common is the "improvisatory" theatrical form, whose materials are performed without a formal script. This form exists on a contiuum with scripted performance. No improvisatory performance ever takes place in the absence of some previously agreed upon framework for improvisation.

Mixed forms Many forms allow for scripted material to alternate with or interpenetrate unscripted material. Wayang kulit (67,68, 103, 147,213,214), Javanese shadow puppet drama, is one of many theater forms in which the formal scripted narrative that advances the story being presented alternates with comic interludes of improvisatory material performed by clown figures.

AUDIENCE ROLE As mentioned above, the audience is crucial to theater and spectacle. It is not always necessary for other forms of performance.

Some genres predicate performance on audience familiarity with the material being presented. Although some audience members may not be familiar with the content of the performance, in these genres the performers assume prior familiarity and present their material from that perspective (49, 85, 133).

Ann

u. R

ev. A

nthr

opol

. 199

3.22

:369

-393

. Dow

nloa

ded

from

ww

w.an

nual

revi

ews.o

rgby

Uni

vers

idad

e Fe

dera

l do

Para

na o

n 04

/08/

12. F

or p

erso

nal u

se o

nly.

384 BEEMAN

Audience as participant In ritual, the audience is a full participant in the event. The active contributions of the audience-vocal display, direct action (dance, movement, eating, entering into trance, etc), and presentation of gifts to deities, priests, or other participants-are essential to the success of the event.

Audience as witness In some theatrical events, and in most spectacles, the audience must be present to witness the performed events. Although the audience might neither participate actively nor evaluate the performance, it must be present and actively watching for the event to succeed.

Audience as evaluator In many theatrical events the audience is not only a witness, but also an evaluator of the event. This is most often the case when the performance is repeated for different audiences. The good opinion of the audience is indicative of the success of the event. In gemes where the audience is familiar with the material being presented, audience evaluation is predicated on the degree to which performers are able to meet or exceed a standard of artistry in performing specific material that has been established by past generations of expert performers. Examples of these gemes include Euro-American opera and ballet (132a, 149, 164, 191,209), Indian kathakali (89, 229, 230, 243), Chinese opera (169), and Japanese kabuki (61, 96, 162) and noh (50).

In gemes where the audience is unfamiliar with the material being presented, evaluation is based on a general appreciation of the ability of the performers to engage and entertain. This appreciation may be based on a general knowledge of the skills needed to carry out the performance-such as skill at declamation, acting, acrobatics, comedy, music, or verbal art.

Interaction of Modes

The characteristics discussed above can help us to distinguish a wide variety of theater gemes. For example, the Turkish shadow-puppet form karagoz can be described as MTD theater using animated objects with nonscripted text involving the audience as evaluator (5-9). The Rangda-Barong (27, 4-1 -16) ritual dance drama in Bali can be characterized as dance theater involving a mixture of human beings and animated objects, performing a mixture of scripted and unscripted text among an audience of participants. The recitation of a poem at a ceremonial event such as the investiture of a public official, or an official's recounting of a culturally significant historical event on a ceremonial occasion such as a religious holiday might be described as a theater form employing human actors to perform scripted text before a witnessing audience.

Ann

u. R

ev. A

nthr

opol

. 199

3.22

:369

-393

. Dow

nloa

ded

from

ww

w.an

nual

revi

ews.o

rgby

Uni

vers

idad

e Fe

dera

l do

Para

na o

n 04

/08/

12. F

or p

erso

nal u

se o

nly.

THEATER AND SPECTACLE 385

Social Drama Stage Drama

o"ert drama

Figure 1 The interrelationship of social drama and stage drama [after Turner (225a: 17)1

CULTURAL MEANING IN THEATER AND SPECTACLE

Despite a great deal of study of theater and spectacle genres, the ultimate meaning of this form of activity for human society remains elusive. Several suggestions have been made by anthropologists based on much of the fieldwork cited above.

Dominant theories of the origins of theater posit a religious basis for most theatrical activity. Most elaborate theatrical activity seems concentrated in agricultural societies. This has led some researchers (112a) to suppose a religious origin for theater based on celebration of yearly fertility cycles. Kirby, by contrast, claims that theater arises from shamanism ( 151).

Turner likewise assumes that much theatrical activity has its ultimate origins in ritual behavior. Religious ritual serves as a model for social ritual-or social dramas (221, 223)-which serve in tum to supply drama with thematic material to present before the public. Turner and Schechner show how such social dramas and staged dramas are interrelated. Figure 1, familiar to performance theorists, diagrams this interrelationship.

Whatever the ultimate meaning of performance, Schechner suggests that it functions through "restoration of behavior" (196, 197a). Unmediated experience in the world is taken by the theatrical performer and, after extensive rehearsal, restored in a theatrical frame for the edification of spectators. The theatrical experience is meaningful to the degree that it enables the spectator to feel the force of the original unmediated experience (54:253). For this to occur,

Ann

u. R

ev. A

nthr

opol

. 199

3.22

:369

-393

. Dow

nloa

ded

from

ww

w.an

nual

revi

ews.o

rgby

Uni

vers

idad

e Fe

dera

l do

Para

na o

n 04

/08/

12. F

or p

erso

nal u

se o

nly.

386 BEEMAN

the spectator must collaborate psychologically in the total theatrical event. The performer tries to ensure that this collaboration between performer and spectator is maintained throughout the performance. The supportive mechanisms of theater and spectacle-the costumes, lights, language, music, and motion-not only fulfill the poetic function posited by lakobson; they also fulfill a phatic function (140a). The phatic function in Jakobson's analysis of communication is the aspect of interaction that keeps all parties engaged with each other during the duration of communication. Theater does even more than engage participants and spectators in the immediate context of the theatrical event. It evokes and solidifies a network of social and cognitive relationships existing in a triangular relationship between performer, spectator, and the world at large. The phatic connection is fragile, and constantly shifting. Therefore no single experience of theater or spectacle is ever exactly like any other. This indeterminacy is part of what makes theater and spectacle forever intriguing.

Literature Cited

1. Adler H. 1982. Politisches Theater in Lat ein Amerika von der Mythologie uber die Mission zur Kollektiven Identitiit. Berlin: Reimer

l a. AI-Khozai MH.1984. The Development of Early Arabic Drama 1847-1900. London: Longmans

2. Alland A. 1977. The Artistic Animal. Garden City: Doubleday

3. Allegri L. 1978. Per una Storia del Teatro come Spettacolo: il Teatro di Burattini e di Marionette. Parma: Univ. Parma, Cent. Stud. Arch. Comun.

4. Alter 1. 1 990. A Sociosemiotic Theory of Theater. Philadelphia: Univ. Penn. Press

5. And M. 1963-1964. A History of Theatre and Popular Entertainment in Turkey. Ankara: Forum Yainlari

6. And M. 1973. Origins and early development of the Turkish theatre. Rev. Natl. Literatures 4:53-64

7. And M. 1 983. A History of Theatre and Popular Entertainment in Turkey. Ankara: Forum Yainlari. 2nd ed.

8. And M. 1986. Theatres d'ombres: tradition et modernite. Paris: Inst. Int. Marionette/ L'Harmatlan

9. And M. 1987. Culture, Performance and Communication in Turkey. Tokyo: Inst. Stud. Lang. Cult. Asia and Africa

10. Apte M. 1 985. Humor and Laughter: An Anthropologic al Approach. Ithaca, NY: Cornell Univ. Press

lOa. Araki JT. 1978. The Ballad-Drama of Medieval Japan. Rutland, VT: Tuttle

11. Armstrong RP. 1989. The Powers of Presence: Consciousness, Myth and Affecting Presence. Philadelphia: Univ. Penn. Press

12. Ashton MB, Christie B. 1977. Yaksagana: A Dance Drama of India. New Delhi: Abhinav

13. Aston E, Savona G. 1 992. Theatre as Sign System: A Semiotics of Text and Performance. New York: Routledge

14. Awasthi S. 1975. The scenography of the traditional theatre of India. Drama Rev. T-64:36-46

15. Awasthi S. 1983. Drama: The Gift of Gods. Culture, Performance and Communication in India. Tokyo: Inst. Stud. Lang. Cult. Asia and Africa

16. Awasthi S. 1989. "Theatre of Roots": encounter with tradition. Drama Rev. 33(4): 48-{)9

17. Bab J. 1931. Das Theater im Lichte der Soziologie. Leipzig: Hirschfeld

18. Babcock B. 1978. The Reversible World: Symbolic Inversion in Art and Society. Ithaca, NY: Cornell Univ. Press

1 8a. Baghban H. 1977. The context and concept of humor in Magadi theater. PhD thesis. Ind. Univ.

19. Bakhtin M. 1981 . The Dialogic Imagination. Austin: Univ. Texas Press

1 9a. Bakbtin M. 1984. Rabelais and His W orld, Trans!. H Iswolsky. Bloomington: Ind. Univ. Press

19b. Bakhtin M. 1986. Speech Genres and Other Late Essays. Austin: Univ. Texas Press

20. Bandem 1M, deBoer, FE. 1981 . Kaja and

Ann

u. R

ev. A

nthr

opol

. 199

3.22

:369

-393

. Dow

nloa

ded

from

ww

w.an

nual

revi

ews.o

rgby

Uni

vers

idad

e Fe

dera

l do

Para

na o

n 04

/08/

12. F

or p

erso

nal u

se o

nly.

Kelod: Balinese Dance in Transition. Kuala Lumpur: Oxford Univ. Press

2 1 . Barba E. 1 979. The Floating Islands. Holtsebro, Denmark: Bogtrykkeri

22. Barba E. 1982. Theatre anthropology. Drama Rev. 26(2):5-32

23. Barba, E, Savarese N. 199 1 . A Dictionary of Theatre Anthropology. New York: Routledge

24. Bateson G. 1955. A theory of play and fantasy. Psychiatr. Res. Rep. 2:39-5 1

25. Bateson G. 1 958. Naven. Stanford: Stanford Univ. Press. 2nd ed.

26. Bateson G. 1 972. Steps to an Ecology of Mind. Scranton: Chandler

27. Bateson G, Belo J, Mead M. 1952. Trance and Dance in Bali. Distributed by NYU Film Library

28. Bauman, R. 1977. Verbal Art as Performance. Prospect Heights, IL: Waveland

29. Bauman R. 1986. Story, Performance and Event: Contextual Studies of Oral Narrative. New York: Cambridge Univ. Press

29a. Bauman R. 1989. Performance. In International Encyclopedia of Communications, ed. E Bamouw, 3:262-66. Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press

30. Bauman R. 1992. Reflections on the Folklife Festival: An Ethnography of Participant Experience. Bloomington: Ind. Univ. Press

3 1 . Bauman R, Briggs CL. 1 990. Poetics and performance as critical perspectives on language and social life. Annu. Rev. Anthropol. 1 9:59-88

32. Beeman WOo 1977. Traditional Iranian improvisatory theatre. In Catalogue of 11 th Annual Festival of A rts, Shiraz. Tehran: Festival of Arts Center and Sorush Press

33. Beeman WOo 1979. Cultural dimensions of performance conventions in Iranian Ta' ziyeh. In Ta 'ziyeh: Ritual and Drama in Iran, ed. PJ Chelkowski. New York: New York Univ. Press

34. Beeman WOo 1980. The use of music in popular film: East vs. West. India Int. Cent. Q. (New Delhi) 8(1):77-87

35. Beeman WOo 198 1 . A full arena: the development and meaning of popular performance traditions in Iran. In Modern Iran: The Dialectics of Continuity and Change, ed. M Bonine, N Keddie. Albany: State Univ. New York Press

36. Beeman WO. 1 98 1 . Wbydo they laugh? An interactional approach to humor in traditional Iranian improvisatory theatre. 1. Am. Folklore 94(374):506-26

37. Beeman WOo 1 982. Cultural performance and social drama: communicational aspects. Paper presented at Wenner-Gren Found. Anthropol. Res. Conf. on Contemporary Japanese Theater, New York, May 19-24, 1982

THEATER AND SPECTACLE 387

38. Beeman WOo 1982. Culture, Performance and Communication in Iran. Tokyo: Inst. Stud. Lang. Cult. Asia and Africa

39. Beeman WOo 1982. Tadashi Suzuki's universal vision. Perform. A rts 1. 6(2):77-87

40. Beeman WOo 1982. The word is an act of the body. Interview with Tadashi Suzuki. Perform. A rts 1. 6(2):88-93

4 1 . Beeman WOo 1986. Language Status and Power in Iran. Bloomington: Ind. Univ. Press

42. Beeman WOo 1988. Theatre in the Middle East. In Cambridge Guide to World Theatre, ed. M Banham, pp. 664-76. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press

43. Beeman WOo 1 992. Mimesis and travesty in Iranian traditional theater. In Gender in Performance: The Presentation of Difference in the Performing A rts, ed. L Senelick, pp. 14-25. Hanover, NH: Tufts Univ. PresslUniv. Press New England

44. Belo J. 1 949. Bali: Rangda and Barong. New York: Am. Ethnol. Soc.

45. Be10 J. 1 960. Trance in Bali. New York: Columbia Univ. Press

46. Belo J, ed. 1 970. Traditional Balinese Culture. New York: Columbia Univ. Press

47. Ben-Amos D, Goldstein K, eds. 1975. Folklore, Performance and Communication. The Hague: Mouton

48. Beneix R. 1989. Backstage Domains: Playing William Tell in Two Swiss Communities. BernlFrankfurt am MainlNew YorklParis: Lang

49. Bennett S. 1 990. Theatre Audiences: A Theory of Production and Reception. New York: Routledge

50. Bethe M, Brazell K. 1978. No as Performance. Ithaca, NY: Cornell Univ., ChinaJapan Prog.

5 1 . Beza'i B. 1965. Namayesh dar Iran [Performance in Iran]. Tehran: Chap-e Kavian

52. Blackburn SH. 198 1 . Oral performance: narrative and ritual in Tamil tradition. 1. Am. Folklore 94(3):207-27

53. Blacking J, ed. 1 977. The Anthropology of the Body. London: Academic

54. Blau H. 1 990. Universals of performance; or amortizing play. See Ref. 199, pp. 250-72

54a. Blau H. 1 992. To All Appearances: Ideology and Performance. New York: Routledge

55. Borie M. 1989. Antonin Artaud: Ie theatre et Ie retour aux sources: une approche anthropologique. Paris: Gallimard

56. Bouissac P. 1 976. Circus and Culture: A Semiotic Approach. Bloomington: Ind. Univ. Press

57. Bourdieu P. 1977. Outline of a Theory of Practice. CambridgelNew York: Cambridge Univ. Press

Ann

u. R

ev. A

nthr

opol

. 199

3.22

:369

-393

. Dow

nloa

ded

from

ww

w.an

nual

revi

ews.o

rgby

Uni

vers

idad

e Fe

dera

l do

Para

na o

n 04

/08/

12. F

or p

erso

nal u

se o

nly.

388 BEEMAN

58. Bowers F. 1952. Japanese Theatre. New York: Hill & Wang

59. Brandes S. 1 988. Power and Persuasion: Fiestas and Social Control in Rural Mexico. Philadelphia: Univ. Penn. Press

60. Brandon J. 1 967. Theatre in Southeast Asia. Cambridge: Harvard Univ. Press

6 1 . Brandon J, Malm W, Shively DH, eds. 1978. Studies in Kabuki: Its Acting, Music, and Historical Content. Honolulu: Univ. Hawaii Press

62. Briggs CL. 1988. Competence in Performance: The Creativity oj Tradition in Mexicano Verbal Art. Philadelphia: Univ. Penn. Press

62a. Burke K. 1945. A Grammar oj Motives. New York: Prentice Hall

62b . Burke K. 1966. Language as Symbolic Action: Essays un Life, Literature and Method. Berkeley: Univ. Calif. Press

62c. Burke K. 1969. A Rhetoric of Motives. Berkeley: Univ. Calif. Press

63. Burns E. 1974. Theatricality. New York: Holt Rinehart and Winston

64. Canziani R. 1984. Il Dramma e 10 Spettacolo. Rome: Edizioni dell' Ateneo

65. Carlson M. 1989. Places of Performance. Ithaca, NY: Cornell Univ. Press

66. Chelkowski P, ed. 1979. Ta 'ziyeh: Ritual and Drama in Iran. New York: New York Univ. Press and Sorush Press

67. Clara van Groenendael VM. 1985. The Dalang Behind the Wayang. Dordrecht: Foris

68. Clara van Groenendael VM. 1987. Wayang Theatre in Indonesia: An Annotated Bibliography. Dordrecht: Foris

69. Crawford JPw. 1915. The Spanish Pastoral Drama. Philadelphia: Univ. Penn. Press

69a. Csikszentmihalyi M. 1975. Beyond Boredom and Anxiety. San Francisco: JosseyBass

70. DaMatta R. 1991 . Carnivals, Rogues and Heroes: An Interpretation of the Brazilian Dilemma. Trans\. J Drury. Notre Dame: Univ. Notre Dame Press

7 1 . DaMatta R. 1990. For an anthropology of the Brazilian tradition. Work. Pap. #182 oj the Latin Am. Prog. oJthe Woodrow Wilson Cent. Washington, DC: The Wilson Cent.

71 a. DaMatta R. 1981 . Universo do Carnaval: Imagens e Rejlexoes. Rio de Janeiro: Edicoes Pinakotheke

72. Davis NZ. 1982. Society and Culture in Early Modern France. Stanford: Stanford Univ. Press

73. Davis NZ 1975. The reasons of misrule. In Society and Culture in Early Modern France, ed. NZ Davis. Stanford: Stanford Univ. Press

74. De Zoete B. 1953. The Other Mind: A Study of Dance in South India. London: Gollancz

75. De Zoete B. 1958. Dance and Magic

Drama in Ceylon. New York: Theater Arts Books

76. De Zoete B, Spies W. 1938. Dance and Drama in Bali. London: Faber & Faber

77. Debord G. 1970. The Society o/the Spectacle. Detroit: Black & Red

78. Deldime R. 1990. Le Quatrieme Mur: Regards Sociologiques sur la Relation TMfitrale. Paris: Editions Promotion Theatre

79. Dening G. 1993. The theatricality of history making and the paradoxes of acting. Cult. Anthropol. 8(1):73-95

80. Des Bouvrie S. 1990. Women in Greek Tragedy: An Anthropological Approach. Oslo: Norwegian Univ. Press

8 1 . Drewal HJ, Drewal MT. 1983. Gelede: Art and Female Power among the Yoruba. Bloomington: Ind. Univ. Press

82. Dundes A, Falassi A. 1973. La Terra in Piazza: An Interpretation of the Palio of Siena. Berkeley: Univ. Calif. Press

83. Duranti A. 1983. SamOan speechrnaking across social events: one genre in and out of a fono. Lang. Soc. 1 2: 1-22

84. Duranti A. 1984. lntentions. Selfand Local Theories of Meaning: Words and Social Action in a Samoan Context. La Jolla, CA: Cent. Hum. Info. Proc., Univ. Calif., San Diego

85. Duranti A, Brenneis DL, eds. 1986. The audience as co-author. Text 6(3):239-347 (Spec. Issue)

86. Duvignaud J. 1965. Sociologie du Theatre. Paris: Presses Univ. France

87. Duvignaud J. 1970. Spectacle et Societe. Paris: Editions Denoel

87a. East NB. 1970. African Theatre. A Checklist of Critical Materials. New York: Africana Publishing

88. Elam K. 1 980. The Semiotics of Theatre and Drama. London/New York: Methuen

89. Emigh J. 1993. Masking and Playing: Studies in Masked Performance. Philadelphia: Univ. Penn. Press. In press

90. Emigh J. 1979. Playing with the past: visitation and illusion in the mask theatre of Bali. Drama Rev. 23(2): 1 1-48

9 1 . Emigh J. 198 1 . Masking and playing: observations on masked performance in New Guinea. World of Music 3:5-25

92. Emigh J. 1984. Dealing with the demonic: strategies for containment in Hindu iconography and performance. Asian Theatre J. 1(1):21-39

93. Emigh J. 1 986. A joker in the deck: Hajari Bhand of Rajasthan. Drama Rev. 30(1): 101-30

94. Emigh J. 1 990. The domains of Topeng. In Art and Politics in Southeast Asia: Six Perspectives, ed. R Van Neil, pp. 65-96. Honolulu: Univ. Hawaii Press. Cent. Southeast Asian Stud. Southeast Paper No. 32

Ann

u. R

ev. A

nthr

opol

. 199

3.22

:369

-393

. Dow

nloa

ded

from

ww

w.an

nual

revi

ews.o

rgby

Uni

vers

idad

e Fe

dera

l do

Para

na o

n 04

/08/

12. F

or p

erso

nal u

se o

nly.

95. Erdman J. 1985. Patrons and Performers in Rajasthan: The Subtle Tradition. New Delhi: Chanakya

96. Ernst E. 1974. The Kabuki Theatre. Honolulu: Univ. Press Hawaii

97. Fabian J. 1990. Power and Performance: Ethnographic Explorations through Proverbial Wisdom and Theater in Zaire. Madison: Univ. Wisc. Press

98. Falassi A. 1967. Time out of Time: Essays on the Festival. Albuquerque: Univ. New Mexico Press

99. Feld S. 1982. Sound and Sentiment: Birds, Weeping, Poetics and Song in Kaluli Expression. Philadelphia: Univ. Penn. Press

100. Fernandez J. 1986. Persuasions and Performances: The Play of Tropes in Culture. Bloomington: Ind. Univ. Press

1 00a. Fiebach J. 1986. Die Toten als die Macht der Lebenden. Zur Theorie und Geschichte von Theater in Afrika. Berlin: Henschelverlag Kunst und Gesellschaft

l O 1 . Fischer-Lichte E with Weiler C and Schwind K. 1985. Das Drama und seine Inszenierung. Tiibingen: Max Niemeyer

102. Flores R. 1988. "Los Pastores: " performance. poetics and politics infolk drama. PhD thesis. Univ. Texas at Austin

103. Foley K. 1 984. Of Dalang and Dukunspirits and men: curing and performance in the Wayang of West Java. Asian Theatre 1. 1 ( 1 ) :52-75

1 04. foley K. 1 985. The dancer and the danced: trance, dance and theatrical performances in West Java. Asian Theatre 1. 2(1):28-49

105. Foster H. 1985. Recodings: Art, Spectacle, Cultural Politics. Seattle: Bay

106. Friedrich P. 1986. The Language Parallax. Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press

107. Frisbie CJ, ed. 1980. Southwestern Indian Ritual Drama. Prospect Heights, IL: Waveland

108. Gafary F. 1980. Evolution of rituals and theater in Iran. Iranian Stud. 17(4):361-90

109. Garfinkel H. 1960. Studies in Ethnomethodology. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall

1 10. Gargi B. 1962. Theatre in India. New York: Theatre Arts Books

1 1 1 . Gargi B. 1966. Folk Theatre of India. Seattle: Univ. Washington Press

1 12. Garner NC, Turnbull CM. 1 979. Anthropology, Drama and the Human Experience. Washington: George Washington Univ. Div. Exp. Prog.

1 1 2a.GasterT. 1950. Thespis: Ritual, Myth and Drama in the Ancient Near East. New York: Schuman

1 1 3. Geertz C. 1 972. Deep play: notes on the Balinese cockfight. Daedalus 1 0 1 : 1 -37

1 14. Geertz C. 1973. Person, Time and Conduct in Bali. In The Interpretation of Cultures, C Geertz, pp. 360-41 1 . New York: Basic Books

THEATER AND SPECTACLE 389

1 15. Geertz C. 1 976. "From the native's point of view": on the nature of anthropological understanding. In Meaning in Anthropology, ed. KH Basso, HA Selby. Albuquerque: Univ. New Mexico Press

1 1 6. Geertz C. 1980. Negara: The Theatre State in Nineteenth Century Bali. Princeton: Princeton Univ. Press

1 17. Ghaffari MB. 1988. The director speaks. In Ta'ziyeh: Ritual and Popular Beliefs in Iran, ed. MC Riggio, pp. 1 1-2 1 . Hartford, Conn: Trinity College

1 1 8. Giacche P. 1 988. Antropologia culturale e cultura teatrale: note per un aggiornamento dell' approccio socio-antropologico al leatro. Teatro e Storia 3(1 ):23-50

1 1 8a.Glassie HH. 1975. All Silver and No Brass: An Irish Christmas Mumming. Bloomington: Ind. Univ. Press

1 19. Goffman E. 1959. The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life. Garden City, NJ: Doubleday Anchor

120. Goffman E. 1 967. Interaction Ritual. Garden City, NJ: Doubleday

121. Goffman E. 1974. Frame Analysis. Cambridge: Harvard Univ. Press

122. Goodland JSR. 1972. A Sociology of Popular Drama. Totowa, NJ: Rowman & Littlefield

123. Gregor T. 1977. Mehinaku: The Drama of Daily Life in a Brazilian Indian Village. Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press

124. Grimes RL. 1976. Symbol and Conquest: Public Ritual and Drama in Santa Fe, New Mexico. Ithaca, NY: Cornell Univ. Press

1 25. Halpert H, Story G, eds. 1969. Christmas Mumming in Newfoundland. Toronto: Univ. Toronto Press

126. Handelman D. 1984. Inside-out, outsidein: concealment and revelation in Newfoundland Christmas mumrning. In Text, Play and Society: The Construction and Reconstruction of Self and Society, ed. E Bruner, pp. 247-77. St. Paul, Minn: West

127. Handelman D. 1 990. Models and Mirrors: Towards an Anthropology of Public Events. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press

128. Handelman D. 1 990. The Palio of Siena. See Ref. 1 27, pp. 1 1 6-35

129. Hansen K. 199 1 . Grounds for Play: The Nautunki Theatre of North India. Berkeley: Univ. Calif. Press

130. Harrison-Pepper S. 1 990. Drawing a Circle in the Square: Street Performing in New York' Washington Square Park. Jackson: Univ. Miss. Press

1 3 1 . Hawley JS. 1 98 1 . At Play with Krishna: Pilgrimage Dramas from Brindavan. Princeton: Princeton Univ. Press

1 32. Hein N. 1 973. The Miracle Plays of Mathura. Delhi: Oxford Univ. Press

1 3 2a. Helfgot D, Beeman WOo 1993. The Third

Ann

u. R

ev. A

nthr

opol

. 199

3.22

:369

-393

. Dow

nloa

ded

from

ww

w.an

nual

revi

ews.o

rgby

Uni

vers

idad

e Fe

dera

l do

Para

na o

n 04

/08/

12. F

or p

erso

nal u

se o

nly.

390 BEEMAN

Line: The Opera Performer as Interpreter. New York: Schirmer

1 33. Hess L. 1983. Ram Lila: the audience experience. In Bakhti in Current Research 1979-1982, ed. M Thiel-Horstman. Berlin: Dietrich Reimer

1 34. Hill E. 1972. The Trinidad Carnival: Mandate for a National Theatre. Austin: Univ. Texas Press

135. Hoff F. 1978. Song, Dance, Storytelling: Aspects of the Performing Arts in Japan. East Asia Pap. No. 15. Ithaca, NY: Cornell Univ. China-Japan Prog.

1 36. Hornby R. 1986. Drama, Metadrama and Perception. Lewisberg: Bucknell Univ. Press

1 36aHsieh, C-P. 1 99 1 . The Taiwanese handpuppet theater: a search for its meaning. PhD thesis. Brown Univ., Providence, RI

137. Hymes DH. 1975. Breakthrough into performance. In Folklore, Performance and Communication, ed. D Ben-Amos, K Goldstein. The Hague: Mouton

1 38. Hymes DH. 1975. Foundations in Sociolinguistics: An Ethnographic Perspective. Philadelphia: Univ. Penn. Press

1 39. Hymes DH. 1 98 1 . "In Vain I Tried to Tell You ": Essays in Native American Ethnopoetics. Philadelphia: Univ. Penn. Press

1 40. Irvine JT. 1979. Formality and informality in linguistic events. Am. Anthropol. 8 1 : 773-90

1 40a. Jakobson R. 1 960. Closing statement: linguistics and poetics. In Style in Language, ed. T Sebeok, pp. 350-77. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press

1 4 1 . Jannati-Ata'i A. 1955. Bonyad-e Namayesh dar Iran (The Institution of Performance in IranI. Tehran: Chap-e Mihan

142. Johnson AW. 1993. Los Pastores: resistance, opposition and the construction of cultural identity. BA thesis. Brown Univ., Providence, RI

143. Jones, B. T. 1 982. Kathakali dance-drama: an historical perspective. In Performing Arts in India: Essays of Music, Dance, and Drama ed. B Wade, pp. 1 . Washington DC: Univ. Press America

144. Kapferer B. 1 976. Entertaining demons: comedy, interaction and meaning in a Sinhalese healing ritual. Mod. Ceylon Stud. 6: 1-55. Republished 1979 in Soc. Anal. 1 : 1 08-52

145. Kapferer B. 198 1 . A Celebration of Demons. Bloomington: Ind. Univ. Press

146. Kapferer B. 1986. Performance and the structuring of meaning and experience. In The Anthropology of Experience, ed. VW, EM Bruner, pp. 188-206. Urbana: Univ. Ill. Press

147. Keeler W. 1987. Javanese Shadow Plays: Javanese Selves. Princeton, Nl: Princeton Univ. Press

148. Kennedy S. 1973. In Search of African Theatre. New York: Scribner's

149. Kerman 1. 1988. Opera as Drama. Berkeley: Univ. Calif. Press

150. Kimberling CR. 1982. Kenneth Burke 's Dramatism and Popular Arts. Bowling Green, OH: Bowling Green State Univ. Popular Press

1 5 1 . Kirby ET. 1976. Ur-Drama. New York: NYU Press

152. Kirshenblatt-Gimblett B. 1 980. Contraband: performance, text and analysis of a Purim-shpil. Drama Rev. 24(3):5-16

153. Kisliuk M. 1 988. A special kind of courtesy: action at a bluegrass festival jam session. Drama Rev. 32(3): 141-55

154. Kisliuk M. 1991. Confronting the quintessential: singing, dancing and everyday life among Biaka pygmies (Central African Republic). PhD thesis. New York Univ.

155. Kisliuk M. 1 993. Music and dance performance among Biaka pygmies: the making of a fluid c u ltural i dentity. In African Pygmies of the Western Congo Basin, ed. B Hewlett, S B ahuchet. In press

156. Kuipers IC. 1990. Power in Performance: the Creation of Textual Authority in Weyewa Ritual Speech. Philadelphia: Univ. Penn. Press

157. Kurath Gp. 1967. Drama, dance and music. In Social Anthropology (Handbook of Middie American Indians), ed. M Nash, 6:1 58-90. Austin: Univ. Texas Press

1 58. Kurath GP, Garcia A. 1973. Music and Dance of the Tewa Pueblos. Santa Fe: Univ. New Mexico Press

158a. Landau 1. 1958. Studies in Arab Theater and Cinema. Philadelphia: Univ. Penn. Press

159. Lansing JS. 1977. Rama 's kingdoms: social supportive mechanisms for the arts in Bali. PhD thesis. Univ. Michigan

160. Lassy 11. 1916. The Muharram Mysteries among the Azerbaijan Turks of Caucasia. Helsingfors: Lilius & Hartzberg

1 6 1 . Lawrence E. 1984. Rodeo: An Anthropologist Looks at the Wild and the Tame. Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press

162. Leiter SL. 1 979. The Art of Kabuki: Famous Plays in Performance. Berkeley: Univ. Calif. Press

1 63. Lesnick H. 1973. Guerilla Street Theater. New York: Avon

164. Lindenberger H. 1 984. Opera: The Extravigant Art. Ithaca, NY: Cornell Univ. Press

165. Little K. 1993. Masochism, spectacle, and the "Broken Mirror" clown entree: a note on the anthropology of performance in postmodern culture. Cult. Anthropol. 8(1): 1 1 7-29

166. Lord AB. 1960. The Singer o/Tales. Cambridge: Harvard Univ. Press

Ann

u. R

ev. A

nthr

opol

. 199

3.22

:369

-393

. Dow

nloa

ded

from

ww

w.an

nual

revi

ews.o

rgby

Uni

vers

idad

e Fe

dera

l do

Para

na o

n 04

/08/

12. F

or p

erso

nal u

se o

nly.

167. MacAloon J. 1984. Olympic games and the theory of spectacle in modern societies. See Ref. 168, pp. 241-80

1 68. MacAloon J, ed. 1984. Rite, Drama, Festival, Spectacle: Rehearsals Toward a Theory of Cultural Peiformance. Philadelphia: Univ. Penn. Press

1 69. Mackerras C, ed. 1983. Chinese Theater from Its Origins to the Present Day. Honolulu: Univ. Hawaii Press

170. Manning FE, ed. 1 983. The Celebration of Soc iety: Perspectives on Contemporary Cultural Peiformance. Bowling Green, OH: Bowling Green Univ. Popular Press

1 7 1 . Marglin FA. 1 985. Wives of the God-King: The Rituals of the Devadasis of Puri. Delhi: Oxford Univ. Press

In. Mathur, Je. 1 964. Drama in Rural India. Bombay: Asia Publishing House

Ina. McClard A. 1988. Becoming butterflies: the mediation of paradox at Paradise Street Theater. MA thesis. Brown Univ.

Ina. McNamara B. 1976. Step Right Up. Garden City, NJ: Doubleday

1 73. Mukhopadhyay D. 1 978. Lesser Known Forms of Peiforming Arts in India. New Delhi: Sterling

174. Mukhopadhyay D. 1989. Culture, Performance, Communication. Delhi: B. R. Publishing

175. Nunley J, Bettelheim J. 1988. Caribbean Festival Arts. St. Louis/Seattle: The Saint Louis Art MuseurnlUniv. Wash. Press

176. Oettinger M. 1985. Dancing Faces: Mexican Masks in a Cultural Context. Washington, DC: Meridian House Int.

1 77. 0stor A. 1980. The Play of the Gods: Locality, Structure and Time in Bengali. Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press

1 78. Painter MT. 1 97 1 . A Yaqui Easter. Tucson: Univ. Ariz. Press

1 79. Pannar S. 1 975. Traditional Folk Media in India. New Delhi: Geka

1 80. Pavis P. 1 992. Theatre at the Crossroads of Culture. Transi. L Kruger. New York: Routledge

1 8 1 . Peacock J. 1 968. Rites of Modernization. Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press

1 82. Peacock JL. 1 967. Javanese clown and transvestite songs: some relations between "primitive classification" and communicative events. In Essays on the Verbal and Visual Arts (Proc. 1966 Annu. Meet. Am. Ethnol. Soc.), pp. 64-75. Seattle: Univ. Washington Press

1 83. Peacock JL. 1 978. Symbolic reversal and social history: transvestites and clowns of Java. See Ref. 18, pp. 209-24

1 84. Peterson MA. 1 989. On stage: the negotiation of performance in a Denver theatre community. MA thesis. Catholic Univ. America

1 85 . Phelan P. 1 993. Unmarked: The Politics of Performance. New York: Routledge

THEATER AND SPECTACLE 39 1

1 86. Read A. 1 993. Theatre and Everyday Life: A Theatrical Introduction. New York: Routledge

1 86a. Reed SA. 1 99 1 . The transformation of ritual and dance in Sri Lonka. PhD thesis. Brown Univ.

1 87. Renondeau G. 1950. Le Bouddhisme dans les No. Tokyo: Hosokawa

1 88. Rezvani M. 1 962. La Thelltre et la danse en Iran. Paris: Maisonneuve

189. Rickner R. 1972. Theater as ritual: Artaud 's Theatre of Cruelty and the Balinese Barong. PhD thesis. Univ. Hawaii

190. Robertson M. 1984. The Newfoundland Mummer's Christmas House-Visit. Ottawa: Natl. Mus. Canada

1 9 1 . Robinson P. 1985. Opera and Ideas. Ithaca, NY: Cornell Univ. Press

192. Savran D. 1986. The Wooster Group, 1975-1985: Breaking the Rules. Ann Arbor: UMI Research

193. Schechner R. 1973. Environmental Theatre. New York: Hawthorn

1 94. Schechner R. 1 976. Selective innatention: a traditional way of spectating now part of the avant-garde. Peiform. Arts J. 1 :8-19

195. Schechner R. 1982. The End of Humanism. New York: Performing Arts Journal Publ.

1 96. Schechner R. 1985. Between Theater and Anthropology. Philadelphia: Univ. Penn. Press

197. Schechner R. 1988. Performance Theory. New York: Routledge. Revised and expanded ed.

1 97a. Schechner R. 1 990. Magnitudes of Performance. See Ref. 199, pp. 1 9-49

198. Schechner R. 1 993. The Future of Ritual: Writings on Culture and Peiformance. New York: Routledge

199. Schechner R, Appel W, eds. 1 990. By Means of Performance. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press

200. Schegloff E. 1968. Sequencing in conversational openings. Am. Anthropol. 70(6): 1 075-98

20 1 . SchegloffE. 1 98 1 . Discourse as an interactional achievement: some uses of 'uh huh' and other things that come between sentences. In Analyzing Disc ourse: Text and Talk. Georgetown University Round Table on Languages and Linguistics, ed. D Tannen, pp. 71-93. Washington, DC: Georgetown Univ. Press

202. Schmid H, van Kesteren A, eds. 1984. Semiotics of Drama and Theater: New Perspectives in the Theory of Drama and Theatre. AmsterdamlPhiladelphia: Benjamins

203. Senelick L. 1 992. Gender in Performance: The Presentation of Difference in the Performing Arts. Hanover, NHlLondon: Tufts Univ. Press/Univ. Press New England

Ann

u. R

ev. A

nthr

opol

. 199

3.22

:369

-393

. Dow

nloa

ded

from

ww

w.an

nual

revi

ews.o

rgby

Uni

vers

idad

e Fe

dera

l do

Para

na o

n 04

/08/

12. F

or p

erso

nal u

se o

nly.

392 BEEMAN

204. Sherzer J. 1983. Kuna Ways of Speaking: An Ethnographic Perspective. Austin: Univ. Texas Press

205. Sherzer J. 1987. A discourse centered approach to language and culture. Am. Anthropol. 89(4):295-309

205a. SiderG. 1977 . Mumming in OutportNewfoundland. Toronto: New Rogtown

206. Silverstein M. 1976. Shifters, linguistic categories and cultural description. In Meaning in Anthropology, ed. KH Basso, HA Selby, pp. 1 1-55. Albuquerque: Univ. New Mexico Press

207. Singer M. 1 972. When a Great Tradition Modernizes. London: Pall Mall

208 . Slyomovics S. 1987. The Merchant of Art: An Oral Epic Egyptian Poet in Performance. Berkeley: Univ. Calif. Press

209. Slyomovics S. 1990. To put your finger in the bleeding wound: Palestinian theatre under Israeli censorship. Drama Rev. 34(2) : 1 8-38

209a. Smith P. 1983. A Year at the Met. New York: Knopf

210. Speck F. 195 1 . Cherokee Dance and Drama. Berkeley: Univ. Calif. Press

2 1 1 . Spicer RB. 1939. The Easter fiesta of the Yaqui Indians of Pascua, Arizona. MA thesis. Univ. Chicago

2 1 2. Steward J. 1932. A Uintah Ute bear dance. Am. Anthropol. 34:263-73

213. Sweeney PL. 1972. Malay Shadow Puppets: The Wayang Siam of Kelang. Kuala Lumpur: Nat!. Univ. Malaysia Press

214. Sweeney PL. 1972. The Ramayana and the Malay Shadow Play. Kuala Lumpur: Nat!. Univ. Malaysia Press.

215. Swiderski RM. 1 986. Voices: An Anthropologist's Dialogue with an Italian-American Festival. Bowling Green, OR: Bowling Green Univ. Popular Press

216. Szwed J. 1 969. The mask of friendship: mumming as a ritual of social relations. See Ref. 1 25

217. Taussig MT. 1980. The Devil and Commodity Fetishism in Latin America. Chapel Rill: Univ. NC Press

217a. Tedlock B . 1992. The Beautiful and the Dangerous: Encounters with the Zuni Indians. New York: Viking

217b. Titon J. 1988. Powerhouse for God: Speech, Cham and Song in an Appalachian Baptist Church. Austin: Univ. Texas Press

218. Tomasio R, ed. 1984. Semiotica della Rappresentazione. Palermo: Flaccovio

219. Turner V. 1967. The Forest of Symbols: Aspects of Ndembu Ritual. Ithaca, NY: Cornell Univ. Press

220. Turner V. 1969. The Ritual Process. Chicago: Aldine

221 . Turner V. 1974. Dramas, Fields and Metaphors. Ithaca, NY: Cornell Univ. Press

222. Turner V. 1982. Celebration: Studies in

Festivity and Ritual. Washington, DC: Smithsonian Inst. Press

223. Turner V. 1982. Performing ethnography. Drama Rev. 26:33-50

224. Turner V. 1986. From Ritual to Theatre and Back. New York: Performing Arts Journal Pub!.

225. Turner V. 1986. The Anthropology of Performance. New York: Performing Arts Journal Pub!.

225a. Turner V. 1990. Are there universals of performance in myth, ritual and drama? See Ref. 199, pp. 8-18

226. Tyler SA. 1978. The Said and the Unsaid. New York: Academic

227. Urban G. 199 1 . A Discourse Centered Approach to Culture. Austin: Univ. Texas Press

228. Van Gennep A. 1960. The Rites of Pass age. Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press

229. Vatsyayan K. 1977, Classical Indian Dance in Literature and the Arts. New Delhi: Sangeet Natak Academy

230. Vatsyayan K. 198 1 . The Traditional Theatre of India. New Delhi: Sangeet Natak Academy

231 . Vatuk VP. 1978. Studies in Indian Folk Traditions. Delhi: Manohar

232. Wade B, ed. 1982. Peiforming Arts in India: Essays of Music, Dance, and Drama. Washington, DC: Univ. Press America

233. Willeford W. 1 969. The Fool and His Sceptre. London: Arnold

233a. Wilmeth D. 1978. The American Stage to World War I: a Guide to Information Sources. Detroit: Gale Research

233b. Wilmeth D. 1980. American and English Popular Entertainment: A Guide to Information Sources. Detroit: Gale Research

234. Yamaguchi M. 1980. Dokke no Uchu [The Universe of the Clown}. Tokyo: Rakusuisha

235. Yamaguchi M, Naito M, eds. 1987. Social and Festive Space in the Caribbean. Tokyo: Inst. Study Lang. Cult. Asia Africa

236. Yamamoto Y. 1978. The Namahage: A Festival in the Northeast of .Iapan. Philadelphia: Inst. Study Hum. Issues

237. Zarilli P. 1979. Kalarippayattu, martial art of Kerala. Drama Rev. 23(2): 1 1 3-24

238. Zarilli P. 1986. From martial art to performance: Kalarippayattu and performance in Kerala, 1 . Sangeet Natak 8 1-82:5-41

239. Zarilli P. 1 986. From martial art to performance: Kalarippayattu and performance in Kerala, 2. Sangeet Natak 83: 14-45

240. Zarilli P. 1986. Toward a definition of performance studies, part I. Theater .I. 38(3):372-76

24l . Zarilli P. 1986. Toward a definition of performance studies, part II. Theater 1. 38(4):493-96

242. Zarilli P. 1990. What does it mean to "become the character'!" Power, presence, and

Ann

u. R

ev. A

nthr

opol

. 199

3.22

:369

-393

. Dow

nloa

ded

from

ww

w.an

nual

revi

ews.o

rgby

Uni

vers

idad

e Fe

dera

l do

Para

na o

n 04

/08/

12. F

or p

erso

nal u

se o

nly.

transcendence in Asian in-body disciplines of practice. See Ref. 199, pp. 1 31-48

243. Zarrilli P. 1984. The Kathalmli Complex:

THEATER AND SPECTACLE 393

Actor; Peiformance, Structure. New Delhi: Abhinav

Ann

u. R

ev. A

nthr

opol

. 199

3.22

:369

-393

. Dow

nloa

ded

from

ww

w.an

nual

revi

ews.o

rgby

Uni

vers

idad

e Fe

dera

l do