Update: In support of the fourth wall: proscenium arch theatre’s surprisingly radical history

A report from The Guardian — Culture focuses on “Update: In support of the fourth wall: proscenium arch theatre’s surprisingly radical history” and sets out the main development contained in the supplied source material.

Dominic Dromgoole’s new book, Time Frames, indicates how this format’s stuffy reputation belies the room it has made for daring experiments from Chekhov to Brecht and beyond How do you make theatre history come alive? The report also notes that One way is through creating lists backed up by quirky essays. I tried that myself in The 101 Greatest Plays , which is one reason why I’m in awe of Dominic Dromgoole who, in Time Frames extends the possibilities of the format and comes up with a book that is passionate, personal, informative and argumentative. It just seems unfair that a director should outperform most of us critics. He starts with the advantage of a strong framework. His book covers the years from 1865 to 1965, when the proscenium theatre was dominant, and deals with more than 70 playwrights. Today we celebrate the limitless possibilities of theatre with open, apron, traverse and circular stages but Dromgoole enthuses over a time when plays were mainly enclosed behind a proscenium arch. He describes the form as “liberatingly restrictive” like the 14-line sonnet or the 12-bar blues and he has a point.

Any statements, estimates or characterisations remain attributed to the people or organisations identified by the source. The excerpt alone does not provide a complete documentary record or necessarily include responses from every party involved.

Official statements or subsequent reporting may add context as the story develops. For now, this account is confined to information directly supported by the provided headline and excerpt.