Of Kings and Clowns is an interesting title that suggests the existence of a conflict between two parties: one holding power, the other resisting. As an Egyptian, I can say that contemporary Egypt is stuck between these two fronts; authorities and revolutionists, who are both moving in circles trying to get out. It is a clever decision of the author, to study this timeline, which comes between two revolutions that were unfinished as a result of the decisions of the political authorities. The first was the 1952 revolution, which turned Egypt into a republic with a local leadership of Nasser, starting with victory and ending with naksa (defeat). The second was the 2011 revolution, which broke out against Mubarak’s regime, yet was thwarted once more by the old regime. The author presents this political conflict by discussing the theatrical techniques of four contemporary Egyptian playwrights who resist political and social authorities through their work: Yusuf Idris, Abul-‘Ela El-Salamouny, Fathia El-‘Assal and Lenin El-Ramly, followed by a small discussion of younger-generation playwrights of post-2011 theatre, which I wished had been given more extent. Taking this political conflict to a theatrical context, the author presents another conflict between conventional theatre and a more liberal theatre, which speaks the unofficial truth. Hence ‘kings’ obviously refers to political authorities and conventional theatre, while ‘clowns’ is more complex, referring to rebellions, unconventional theatre practices and intellectuals. Simply put, the debate suggests that ‘clowns’ means whoever can speak the unofficial truth. In a more specialized way, the author gives an interesting argument (specifically useful for theatre scholars) about theatre practices and techniques that can help artists, intellectuals or playwrights to unfold the unofficial truth, escaping authoritarian restrictions and engaging more with the public. The author first presents a new term, tamasruh, which literally translates to ‘theatricalization’. This term was first used by the Egyptian playwright Idris, in his search for an authentic and more engaging theatre, which relies on popular forms. The author ties this term with Bakhtin’s ideas about carnival, as a revolutionary state, and compares Idris’s suggested character/performer, Farfur, with Bakhtin’s medieval clowns, who both are fools and buffoons and speak the untold truth. In the frame of this discussion, all works of the four playwrights are analysed, the identity of each king and clown is defined, and the techniques used for making the theatre more of a carnival are illustrated.

Though the first theoretical chapter would be of interest to academics, the analysis could also be attractive to any reader. The analysis of El-Salamouny’s work highlights the role of Egyptian intellectuals – especially artists – in facing authoritarian domination over art in order to make it a tool in the hands of kings. It also reveals El-Salamouny’s commitment to criticizing extremist Islamist groups in Egypt. Further, the author discusses El-Salamouny’s theatrical techniques, which put theatre in front of its own mirror (reflecting on theatre itself), as well as his use of indigenous forms that, he argues, make his plays more engaging with the public. On the other hand, the chapters on Idris and El-Ramly are more political, discussing Egypt in the light of political transformations between the rules of Nasser and Sadat, criticizing both. Finally, the discussion of El-Assal’s work gives a strong presentation of Egyptian patriarchal society, making El-Assal herself a clown (like her fellow writers) who speaks the unofficial truth about the mechanisms of power between men and women.

In conclusion, through this solid study, Tiran Manucharyan shows deep understanding of Egyptian political systems, folk practices and social issues. The study, along with his previous works about Egyptian theatre, is ideal for academics working on Arabic or Egyptian theatre specifically, and scholars of theatre and performance in general, as it raises an important debate about conflicting and ambiguous theatrical terms. In addition, it will be of great benefit to scholars studying mechanisms of power in both politics and theatre. General readers also will find it a good source of information about Egyptian theatre, history and society.