Post-Political Theatre versus the Theatre of Political Struggle

In this article Bérénice Hamidi-Kim tests the hypothesis that two conflicting interpretations of the notion of ‘political theatre’ exist on the French stage today. She suggests that each is based on a specific ideology stemming from a specific conception of history and policy, which results in a legitimation of the theatre and of artists both in the theatrical field and in society at large. One, which she calls ‘post-political theatre’, seems to proceed from a radical anthropological and political pessimism, and has deliberately severed all links with all previous forms of political theatre and given up any revolutionary ambitions. The other, which she calls ‘political-struggle theatre’, proudly embraces the legacy of the earlier forms of revolutionary political theatre – the epic form of documentary theatre in particular – and is attempting to revive the political ambition of contributing to a comprehensive, coherent critical project, based on the assumption that theatre is a preparatory school for reality and for political action. Bérénice Hamidi-Kim's doctoral thesis was entitled ‘The Cities of Political Theatre in France from 1989 to 2007’. She is also author of ‘Quelle place politique et culturelle pour le cadre de l'Etat-Nation dans le théâtre de gauche français?’ in the e-review Sens Public (2006), and of ‘Théâtre populaire, immigration, intégration, et identité nationale’, forthcoming in the February 2008 issue of Etudes Théâtrales.