“Transnational” and “intercultural” have become common scholarly terms that refer to the relationship between Western and non-Western culture, especially when talking about a global society, where cultural and non-cultural values travel easily across continents and national boundaries.
Theatre and dramatic arts have witnessed an intense and interesting phenomenon of cultural exchange whereby both Western and Eastern theatre have borrowed elements of each other's theatrical conceptions. Many studies have looked at how Shakespeare and Ibsen, for instance, have been adapted for the Chinese audience, or how eminent theatre innovators such as Brecht or Meyerhold have borrowed elements of Asian, and particularly Chinese, theatre, in their attempt to create new theatrical practices.
Min Tian's book examines both these processes of adaptation and borrowing in a detailed and comprehensive study of 20th century developments in Chinese and Western theatre. Tian refers to intercultural theatre as a phenomenon sui generis, drawing upon the theoretical approaches of Patrice Pavis and Erika Fischer-Lichte as well as Rustom Bharucha's “intracultural” approach. Whereas the first two support the idea of a universal language of the theatre, Bharucha questions the ahistorical and universal assumptions of intercultural theatre and calls for an “intracultural” approach that is respectful of the Other and its cultural, historical and social context.
Tian's study aims to differ from these previous theoretical approaches to account for what he defines as the “poetics of difference and displacement,” a definition borrowed from Homi K. Bhabha. Bhabha states that in the negotiation process between cultures there is always an “overlap and displacement of domains of difference” (p. 6). Tian talks, then, of differences as a “common denominator determining the mechanism of intercultural exchange” (p. 5). His definition implies that as long as there are social, cultural or ideological differences between two cultures, elements of the original model from one culture are inevitably altered and “displaced” in the process of negotiation and adaptation. By showing that this is a Western issue as much as a Chinese one, Tian moves away from a “traditional” and outdated claim that accuses Western cultural colonialism of transforming and oppressing the non-Western Other. The book gives a fair account also of how China has changed and transformed elements of Western theatre.
The book is divided into two parts. The first part looks at how Chinese theatre has been “displaced” in the West by innovators like Brecht, Meyerhold, Barba and Craig in their attempt to discard an overwhelming “naturalist” theatrical discourse and to enrich and change theatrical practices and conceptions.
In the second part, Tian deals with how Chinese theatre has drawn upon Western conceptions of theatre. For instance, Chinese theatre used Stanislavsky's ideas to promote and unify a model of modern national theatre (huaju), and later on avant-garde theatre became part of a counter-discourse against the predominance of naturalistic values. In the last chapter, Tian describes how Shakespeare and Greek tragedies have been adapted for Chinese audiences.
It is this second part of Tian's study that contains the most interesting remark about intercultural theatre, as it highlights that the exchange between cultures is not a one-way path. Tian notes how Chinese theatre practitioners of the 1980s, such as Gao Xingjian, Hu Weimin and Lin Zhaohua, utilized Western avant-garde theatrical practices. It is not a coincidence that avant-garde theatre had previously borrowed elements from Chinese traditional theatre (xiqu). The aim of those involved in 1980s Chinese theatre was, in fact, to move away from modern Chinese theatrical practices (huaju) and turn back towards earlier traditions. In this instance, endorsing avant-garde practices seemed a natural course of action, precisely because of the original link between avant-garde and Chinese traditional theatre. Tian defines this process as an “inter-displacement and re-placement of both avant-garde and the traditional” (p. 191).
The only flaw in this study is of a theoretical nature. In the Introduction, Tian attempts to define the theoretical premises for his conception of the “poetics of displacement and difference,” which is referred to as an aesthetic and ideological construct. He then describes four modes of displacement common to intercultural theatre: displacement by interpretation, displacement by appropriation, displacement by parody (Linda Hutcheon) and displacement by translation (Walter Benjamin). However, he not only fails to define clearly how his study relates to these different modes, but also leaves behind the theoretical premises discussed in the introduction when he examines individual examples in the body of the book. In each chapter he describes every case merely as evidence that cultural exchange is always a generic act of displacement.
As a result, the conclusion of the book appears weakened and further simplifies the theoretical premises. Moreover, despite his attempt to deny the negative connotation of his argument, the judgment he passes upon these cultural practices diminishes the significance of intercultural theatre. This is because Tian does not account for the benefits that processes of intercultural exchanges have brought to both cultures in their attempt to renovate and create new theatrical languages.
Overall, this minor imperfection does not undermine the value of this study which provides useful insight into the mechanism of intercultural theatre and detailed research into the development process of new theatrical forms in both the West and China.
