This chapter provides detailed commentary on and analysis of director Daniel Fish’s production of Oklahoma! First produced at Bard College’s SummerScape in 2015, it was then reimagined for an off-Broadway production at St Ann’s Warehouse in 2018 and a Broadway production at the Circle in the Square Theatre the following year. It subsequently toured the US, played at London’s Young Vic Theatre in 2022 and transferred to Wyndham’s Theatre in the West End for a limited run in 2023. The chapter looks at how Oklahoma! can function as a ‘machine for distraction’, addresses historical contexts for the story, including the Dust Bowl, the Trail of Tears and the Black history of Oklahoma, and shows how whiteness, sexual attraction, gun violence and colour-conscious casting all play important parts in Fish’s Regietheater approach.

This chapter explores the various ways in which the legacy of Rodgers and Hammerstein continues in the twenty-first century. It discusses notable high-profile revivals of Carousel, Oklahoma!, The King and I and South Pacific as well as new versions of Flower Drum Song and Cinderella that appeared on Broadway. It discusses the business of Rodgers and Hammerstein, including the Rodgers & Hammerstein Organization becoming part of Imagem, then Concord. The appearance of songs by Rodgers and Hammerstein in television commercials is explored in terms of both content and licensing. The continued popularity of Rodgers and Hammerstein musicals in amateur productions as well as in professional international productions, often in translation, is also covered.

Rodgers and Hammerstein’s first complete musical together, Oklahoma! (1943) remains current and relevant since its premiere in 1943. Looking at the musical as a whole, with an emphasis on the famous ‘Dream-Ballet’, this chapter analyses how and why productions of the musical continue to resonate. Starting with the original production (with choreography by Agnes de Mille) and the 1955 film version, the chapter interrogates the 1998 Royal National Theatre production (directed by Trevor Nunn, choreography by Susan Stroman) as well as those by Washington, DC’s Arena Stage (2010, dir. Molly Smith, chor. Parker Esse), the Oregon Shakespeare Festival (2018, dir. Bill Rauch, chor. Ann Yee) and Bard SummerScape (2015, dir. Daniel Fish, chor. John Heginbotham). The latter played off-Broadway in 2018 and on Broadway the following year; it featured a vastly re-envisioned dream-ballet. Through casting and directorial choices, various subtexts are revealed in these significant revivals.

The Introduction explains the collection’s argument, structure, and its interventions in the field. We challenge the fetishization of firsts in early modern drama studies, first performances, and first editions and highlight problems with privileging “maiden” performances and print “inceptions” of Renaissance plays over their ghost-like “afterlives” on the stage and page. Engaging with recent work in theatre and book history and editorial studies, the Introduction explores the idea that plays are indelibly marked and transformed by their transhistorical movement through different cultural sites of production and reception. We argue, in short, that the social, political, and aesthetic meanings of Renaissance drama were shaped by processes of renewal.

Chapter 2 analyzes how both patent companies used the duopoly to intensify consumer demand through the complementary strategies of engineered scarcity and manufactured prestige. In addition to limiting the number of theatres operating in London, the patentees designated two-thirds of the auditorium for those wealthy enough to spend discretionary income on vastly increased ticket prices. In their pursuit of prestige, the companies also imported various French repertory practices, such as later curtain times and long runs, that did not map well onto the traditional six-day-a-week English performance calendar. Additionally, the early Restoration practice of mounting a pre-1660 repertory, owing to the lack of new playwrights, became an ingrained habit. The resulting repetition within the dramatic repertory failed to realize the box office magic sought by management: premieres of new plays were few and revivals of old plays many, to the consternation of spectators and playwrights alike. To flourish, the Restoration companies needed to offer a varied dramatic repertory that was both affordable and accessible to a large swath of Londoners.