b'T3 Journal - Student Writing in Drama, University of Exeter 2018-19furthers the argument seen in Revermans The Appeal ofgender a social act (1988: 519), to one which is enhanced Dystopia which concentrates on the twentieth-century desireand reflected within theatre, specifically in Mnouchkines to expand and exploit the otherness already seen in GreekLes Atrides. The performative social act of the actors tragedy, that they have an irresistible tendency to indulgeidentification with role and costume is then in difference (Reverman 2008: 109). Here, although Kekisprojected onstage. Whereas Butler claims that links focuses on twenty-first century plays which do seem tobetween a theatrical and social role are complex (1988: indulge in difference, they instead normalise otherness.527), for Bryant-Bertail, it is these links which allow In Peeling, Kekis states, the least important element of thisthe inherent patriarchal view to be reflected onto the theatrical mlange is that very disability (2018: 198). Theaudience, further enhancing historically responsible female characters, Kekis argues, show their strength eithernature of Mnouchkines work. (2000:184).through or in spite of their otherness and it is this which makes the adaptations female Writ ofBryant-Bertails choice of Mnouchkines Les Atrides is Habeus Corpus (2018: 211). well suited to her discussion of both gender and empire. Mnouchkines feminist stance, as well as her Theatre du Kekis chapter successfully highlights the hyper-theatricalSoleils tradition of borrowing from Asian culture allows layering that takes place between Peeling and Trojan Barbiean in depth and interlinked exploration of the relationship and Euripides original. Although perhaps the explorationbetween the two discourses. Bryant-Bertails states that is not entirely a palimpsest due to a lack of consideration ofgender and empire are inherently linked as the coloniser the cultural hegemony of the play, Kekis uses the conceptoften imagines the colonised as an other by feminising, of the other as a clear through line for her argument thatdemonising and depriving the other of language (2000: 176 the text is adapted as female Writ of Habeus Corpusmy italics). This view of the other as both feminine and (2018: 211). colonised is shown, Bryant-Butler argues, semiotically in the production, not as a reproduction but as a staging of historical consciousness (2000: 177). In this idea, Bryant-In her chapter Gender, Empire and Body PoliticBertail applies Edward Saids statement that the Orient within Space and Time in Epic Theatre: the Brechtian Legacy,is an idea that has a history and a tradition of thought, Sarah Bryant-Bertail, an Associate Professor Emeritaimagery and vocabulary that have given it reality and of Theory and Criticism with a strong understanding ofpresence in and for the West (Said 2003: 5) to both empire European theatre, explores discourses of gender and empireand gender. It is the tradition of thought of the colonised within Ariane Mnouchkines 1991 adaptation of Aeschylusand the feminine as other which maintains the hegemonic The Oresteia. Through placing this twentieth centuryand patriarchal structures of the West and is the historical production, Les Atrides, in dialogue with the original text,consciousness (2000: 176) which Bryant-Bertail praises Bryant-Bertail argues that Mnouchkine resists re-producingMnouchkines work for demonstrating and reflecting onto cultural hegemony through systematically revis[ing] thethe audience.major assumptions of traditional mimesis (184). Instead Les Atrides allows the inherent critique of a patriarchalLes Atrides has, however, been at the centre of feminist and imperialist Greek Empire to be reflected onto theand scholarly controversy, much of which disagrees with audiences own interior psyche (Bryant-Bertail 2000: 184).Bryant-Bertails view. In Playing against the Text: Les Bryant-Bertail emphasises that it is this reflection whichAtrides and the History of Reading Aeschylus, Sallie Goetsch makes Mnouchkines production historically responsibleargues that Mnouchkines ideological reading of the text (2000: 176). Published in 2000, Gender, Empire and Bodyas propatriarchal in fact disempowers female characters Politic follows a rise in feminist critical theory occurring(1994: 76). Ironically, both Bryant-Bertail and in the late twentieth-century, with feminist writers suchGoetschs arguments focus on letting the text speak for as Judith Butler redefining gender as a stylised repetitionitself. Whereas Bryant-Bertail argues that Mnouchkine of acts which are tenuously constituted in time (1988:brings out the inherent patriarchy of the text (2000: 519-520). Butlers influence on Bryant-Bertail is clearly seen184), Goetch emphasises her reliance on translations of in her discussion of Mnouchkines rehearsal processes; the Greek texts instead of originals and states a failure to This practice of actors trying on roles and costumes [is]. recognise the text as Aeschylus most radical work (1994: identification as a performative social act in Butlers sense78). Bryant- Bertail counters negative critical reception in (2000:184). However, she extends Butlers interpretation ofthe conclusion to her chapter, arguing that it is these 24'