Abstract
Whatever may be deemed necessary to define it, the inclusion of historically documented characters or events, the authenticity of its subject-matter, the presentation, as Coleridge demanded, of the audience's own past,' or what have you, historical drama will embody and convey a concept of history. This seems inevitably so. Since all drama exists in time, it will , explicitly or implicitly, make statements about the nature of time, its progression and direction, and thus about history. Yet to call all drama historical because of that were to use a comprehensive and therefore meaningless label. Further restrictions are needed, if "historical drama" is to he usefully employed as a generic term in literary criticism. Two such restrictions suggest themselves: the first, that the play's concept of history must be presented through historical matter either known or established as such; the second, that this concept is to be communicated through theatrical and rhetorical means shaped by it and therefore expressive of its very essence. If these limiting conditions are adhered to, subject-matter and audience expectation, literary form and the fiction of historicity, can be seen as interdependent, and the history play emerges as a dramatic sub-genre with its very own formal and thematic properties.
Published Version
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call