Skip to main content

Taboo, Transgression, and (Self-)Censorship in Twentieth-Century British Theater

  • Chapter
  • 195 Accesses

Abstract

In The Cambridge History of British Theatre, Baz Kershaw recently described the secondhalf of the twentieth century as probably the most consistently volatile phase in the history of the British stage (cf. 3: 291). Admitting that the story of postwar volatility is only one of many potential narratives covering that time period, Kershaw identifies four major factors that lend shape to his own account: the changing structure of the theater estate, innovations in production, the impact of technology, and changes in the role and structure of the theater audience (cf. 3: 2920. And while, as Christopher Innes points out, the developments in British theater of the twentieth century cannot be adequately compartmentalized into distinct units—indeed, that twentieth-century British drama is defined by a “lack of clear temporal signposts” (3: 7) that would allow for such an approach—a topical reflection on taboos, their transgression and censorship in British theater can hardly avoid periodizing the twentieth century along the fault line of the Theatres Act of 1968.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD   110.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Works Cited

  • Ahrens, RÜdiger. “History and the Dramatic Context: John Osborne’s Historical Plays.” Fu Jen Studies 16 (1973): 49–75.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beacham, Richard. “Brenton Invades Britain: The Romans in Britain Controversy.” Theater 12.2 (1981): 24–37.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bennett, Alan. “A Question of Attribution.” Plays Two: Kafka’s Dick, The Insurance Man, The Old Country, An Englishman Abroad, A Question of Attribution. London: Faber and Faber, 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bond, Edward. “Saved.” 1966. Plays: 1. Saved, Early Morning, The Pope’s Wedding. London: Methuen, 1983.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brenton, Howard. “The Romans in Britain.” 1980. Plays: 2. The Romans in Britain, Thirteenth Night, The Genius, Bloody Poetry, Greenland. London: Methuen, 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clare, Janet. “Art Made Tongue-tied by Authority”: Elizabethan and Jacobean Dramatic Censorship. Manchester: Manchester UP, 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  • Conolly, Leonard W. The Censorship of British Drama 1737–1824. San Marino, CA: Huntington Library, 1976.

    Google Scholar 

  • De Jongh, Nicholas. Politics, Prudery and Perversions: The Censoring of the English Stage 1901–1968. London: Methuen, 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dukore, Bernard F “A Patriot for Me. By John Osborne.” Theatre in Review 22.1 (1970): 104–5.

    Google Scholar 

  • Findlater, Richard. Banned! A Review of Theatrical Censorship in Britain. London: MacGibbon and Kee, 1967.

    Google Scholar 

  • Foucault, Michel. Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison. New York: Pantheon, 1977.

    Google Scholar 

  • Foucault, Michel..“Of Other Spaces.” Trans. Jay Miskowiec. D/ cn’öw 16.1(1986): 22–27.

    Google Scholar 

  • Innés, Christopher. Modern British Drama: The Twentieth Century. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnston, John. The Lord Chamberlain’s Blue Pencil. London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kane, Sarah. Blasted. London: Methuen, 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kennedy, David. “British Theatre, 1895–1946.” Vol. 3 of The Cambridge History of British Theatre. Ed. Baz Kershaw. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 2004.3-33.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kerensky, Oleg. The New British Drama. London: Hamish Hamilton, 1977.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kershaw, Baz. “British Theatre, 1940–2002: An Introduction.” Vol. 3 of The Cambridge History of British Theatre. Ed. Baz Kershaw. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 2004. 291–325.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Kosok, Heinz. “Traditionen und Konventionen des 19. Jahrhunderts im englischen Dramaund Theater des 20. Jahrhunderts.” Drama und Theater im England des 20. Jahrhunderts. Ed. Heinz Kosok. DÜsseldorf: August Bagel, 1980. 9–24.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kruger, Loren. “‘Our National House’: The Ideology of the National Theatre of Great Britain.” Theatre Journal 39.1 (1987): 35–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lawson, Mark. “One Is Ready for One’s Close-up.” The Guardian September 8, 2006. February 17, 2009 <http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/2006/sep/o8/3>.

  • Maack, Annegret. “Das Drama des kommerziellen Theaters: 1900–1940.” Drama und Theater im England des 20. Jahrhunderts. Ed. Heinz Kosok. DÜsseldorf: August Bagel, 1980. 25–40.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marshik, Celia. British Modernism and Censorship. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 2006.

    Google Scholar 

  • Murray, Oswyn. “The Romans Back in Britain.” Times Online February 22, 2006. February 17, 2009 <http://tls.timesonline.co.uk/article/o-25352–2053163,00.html>.

  • Osborne, John. “A Patriot for Me.” Plays Three: Luther, A Patriot for Me, Inadmissible Evidence. London: FaberandFaber, 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  • Powell, Kerry. “New Women, New Plays, and Shaw in the 1890s.” Vol. 3 of The Cambridge History of British Theatre. Ed. Baz Kershaw. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 2004. 76–102.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ravenhill, Mark. Shopping and F***ing London: Methuen, 2005.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sharine, Richard. The Plays of Edward Bond. London: Associated UP, 1976.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shaw, George Bernard. “Mrs. Warren’s Profession.” Ed. Sandie Byrne. George Bernard Shaw’s Plays: Mrs. Warrens Profession, Pygmalion, Man and Superman, Major Barbara. New York: Norton, 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shellard, Dominic, Steve Nicholson, and Miriam Handley. The Lord Chamberlain Regrets: A History of British Theatre Censorship. London: British Library, 2004.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sherek, Henry. “Can the Modern Theatre Be Commercial?” The Journal of the Royal Society for the Encouragement of Arts, Manufactures and Commerce in (1963): 441–55.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sierz, Alex. In-Ter-Face Theatre: British Drama Today. London: Faber and Faber, 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thomas, Donald. A Long Time Burning: The History of Literary Censorship in England. London: Routledge, 1969.

    Google Scholar 

  • Trassier, Simon. The Plays of John Osborne: An Assessment. London: Gollancz, 1969.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tynan, Kenneth. “The National Theatre.” The Journal of the Royal Society for the Encouragement of Arts, Manufactures and Commerce 112 (1964): 687–702.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wallis, Mick. “Social Commitment and Aesthetic Experiment, 1895–1946.” Vol. 3 of The Cambridge History of British Theatre. Ed. Baz Kershaw. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 2004.167-91.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors

Editor information

Stefan Horlacher Stefan Glomb Lars Heiler

Copyright information

© 2010 Stefan Horlacher, Stefan Glomb, and Lars Heiler

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Degenring, F. (2010). Taboo, Transgression, and (Self-)Censorship in Twentieth-Century British Theater. In: Horlacher, S., Glomb, S., Heiler, L. (eds) Taboo and Transgression in British Literature from the Renaissance to the Present. Palgrave Macmillan, New York. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230105997_12

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics