Conclusion: What ‘Good’ Is Immanent Theatre? Immanence as an Ethico-Aesthetic Value

Abstract

The conclusion of this book needs to operate on a number of levels. At one level, I want to elaborate on the matter of how we might differentiate between theatres of immanence, going further to articulate how and why some theatres tend more towards immanence than others, given our previous argument that all theatre is immanent theatre, to a degree, no matter how transcendent it might seem. I need to say more about how we might position specific theatres along the continuum between immanence and transcendence or, again, how we might discern the degree to which a particular theatre tends towards immanence. And, furthermore, if we are not thinking in terms of mathematical degrees or measurable units here, then what do we mean by the term ‘degree’ in this context? Is there a difference between thinking in terms of degrees of immanence and degrees of participation in immanence? Of what exactly is there ‘more’ in some theatres than others; or again, what can we conclude having more immanence looks or feels like when it comes to theatre and performance? Having done this, though, we also need to move to another level in order to explore to what extent this continuum is not only quantitative, but also a measure of aesthetic and ethical value. We need to ask whether tending towards immanence is necessarily ‘a good thing’ (aesthetically, ethically) in all cases and contexts and, correlatively, whether any traces of transcendence are necessarily ‘bad’.