Join | Contact Us | Print Page | Sign In
2015 Conference Theme
Share |
Debating the Stakes in Theatre and Performance Scholarship

The illusion of consensus and unanimity, as well as the calls for “anti-politics,” should be recognized as being fatal for democracy and therefore abandoned.

--Chantal Mouffe

Conviction. Commitment. Urgency. Advocacy. Activism. These are terms that evoke a robust assertion of ideals, a principled embrace of political positions, a vigorous pursuit of envisioned goals, and a spirited defense of articulated values. Within the context of theatrical performance, the terms signal artists and practitioners who are willing to choose sides, to take stands or to incur political risks and who understand the work of theatre and performance not as an end in itself but as a catalyst for change and a means to an end. Applied to theatre and performance scholarship, the terms mean nothing less: the stakes are just as high. However, these terms also require a calculated, self-reflective examination of theatre and performance history in order to further a larger political debate. They imply a marshalling of research in support of a particular issue or cause, and engage historical analyses that are crafted into calls to action, deliberate provocations and timely polemics. Such terms ask practitioners and scholars to confront issues in our discipline that require us to stake a claim, pick a side, take a position and to take up spirited debate, animated dialogue and a rigorous exchange of ideas, argument and evidence.

In their relation to theatre and performance scholarship, terms such as “conviction,” “commitment,” “urgency,” “advocacy” and “activism” are bound by—even as they shape—historical context. Their points of reference change from generation to generation, and from location to location. In these respects, such terms are often best defined in work that exemplifies their corresponding concepts in actual practice: articulating new pressing political urgencies; literally calling us to direct action; stirring controversy and thus provoking immediate debate within our profession. In short, they call forth work that identifies the issues in which we currently have a stake and about which we cannot afford to remain indifferent.

It is with the goal of creating a forum for such work and for the constructive yet critical debates that it engenders that we have focused the 2015 ASTR conference on debating the stakes in theatre and performance scholarship. We are as interested in papers that critically examine broadly defined aspects of activist theatre and performance as we are in scholarship that positions itself in terms of advocacy or issues. We also invite proposals that examine the value of past critical debates or that chart those of an imagined future. Above all, we are interested in papers that point us toward and ask us to concern ourselves with the current and emerging issues that we as scholars, practitioners and citizens face.

Program Committee:

Jean Graham-Jones
James Harding
Janelle Reinelt
Patrick Anderson (University of California, San Diego, ex officio)
Kate Bredeson (Reed College)
Joshua Chambers-Letson (Northwestern, Committee on Conferences)
Dorothy Chansky (Texas Tech University, Committee on Conferences)
Matt Di Cintio (Tufts, Theatre Library Association)
John Fletcher (Louisiana State University)
Avishek Ganguly (Rhode Island School of Design)
Christina McMahon (University of California, Santa Barbara)
Stephanie Vella (City University of New York, Graduate Student Caucus)


© 2018 American Society for Theatre Research (ASTR). All Rights Reserved.

Home | Member Login | Privacy Policy | Contact Us
1000 Westgate Drive, Suite 252, Saint Paul, MN 55114
Phone: 651-288-3429 | Fax: 651-290-2266 | Email: