Part one : introduction [Stanislavsky in the world : the systems and its transformations across continents]

Abstract

The essays in this Part about the transmission of Stanislavskian practices in Europe offer an insightful reminder of the role which contextualization has in the study of theatre and performance. This is not to say, of course, that contextual considerations are pertinent only to the five case-studies collated here. An effort to situate a practice within its context is a recurring motif in this volume, as contextual considerations become necessary when unpicking the creation of hybrid forms (see, for a clear example, how elements from Stanislavsky’s system have been synthesized in New Zealand with Māori customs – Part Five). The European essays found here, however, do manifest to different degrees the four frames which Thomas Postlewait identifies when he problematizes historiographical contextualization, namely the relationships which a particular theatre phenomenon has with its surrounding world(s), agents, reception, and artistic heritage (Postlewait, 2009, pp. 11–18). The case- studies in question tackle the diffusion and implementation of Stanislavsky’s system in France (by Marie-Christine Autant-Mathieu), Italy (Franco Ruffini), Lithuania (Ina Pukelyte), Malta (Stefan Aquilina) and Greece (Maria Gaitanidi).