What James Boswell tells us about 18th‐century acting theory

James Harriman‐Smith

doi:10.1111/lic3.12600

Abstract

AbstractThis article reads a series of essays on the actor by James Boswell through recent scholarship on the theory of acting in order to elaborate an expansive and historically grounded definition of what was and is meant by ‘18th‐century acting theory’. I thus show how 18th‐century texts on acting are important documents that should be read not as isolated phenomena but as works that can illuminate contemporary stage performance and the culture that produced it. In particular, I follow Boswell by placing a specific, illustrative emphasis on three key themes of professionalism, theatrical expression and ephemerality: each theme is both essential to thinking about the stage (and criticism on this topic) while also, like so much about the 18th‐century theatre, applicable far more widely both then and now.

Highlights

One sometimes sees the study of 18th‐century theatre divided into two complementary processes of extraction and reintegration
I am using here a broad and loose definition of acting theory, one which incorporates everything from concepts employed by those writing about the stage to ideas embedded in professional and amateur practice
Roach's work is still valuable for demonstrating the potential range of 18th‐century thinking about acting, and for the story he tells of science and emotion in the long 18th century as it intersects with past ideas about performance

Summary

Introduction

One sometimes sees the study of 18th‐century theatre divided into two complementary processes of extraction and reintegration. Roach's work is still valuable for demonstrating the potential range of 18th‐century thinking about acting, and for the story he tells of science and emotion in the long 18th century as it intersects with past ideas about performance.

Results

Conclusion