Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorKunderová, Radka
dc.date.accessioned2022-07-01T09:12:23Z
dc.date.available2022-07-01T09:12:23Z
dc.date.issued2021
dc.identifier.urihttps://library.oapen.org/handle/20.500.12657/57169
dc.description.abstractThe issue of (dis)continuity in the pre- and post-1989 situation has been a contentious one in the Czech public debate and intensely discussed particularly in the early 2010s. In the field of theatre, the question of (dis-)continuity has not been raised yet, though its answering might fundamentally shape future interpretations of the three post-1989 decades in Czech theatre. In general terms, Czech theatre historiography has devoted only minor attention to the issue of how the 1989 political events influenced theatre and its social relevance. In his text, Libor Vodicka conceptualises the situation of Czech theatre after 1989 as a crisis of theatre . His evaluation of the early 1990s strikes one as especially negative coming after a laudatory description of the preceding phase. Vodicka sees one factor contributing to the crisis of theatre in the chaos and inconsistency and decrease of subsidies coming from state institutions that, purportedly, significantly interfered with theatres operation.en_US
dc.languageEnglishen_US
dc.subject.otherCulture, 1989en_US
dc.titleChapter 9 Crisis?en_US
dc.title.alternativeCzech theatre after 1989en_US
dc.typechapter
oapen.identifier.doi10.4324/9780429294167-13en_US
oapen.relation.isPublishedBy7b3c7b10-5b1e-40b3-860e-c6dd5197f0bben_US
oapen.relation.isPartOfBook6a3023b3-4819-487e-9719-018e5718eb8den_US
oapen.relation.isbn9780367266103en_US
oapen.relation.isbn9780367676667en_US
oapen.imprintRoutledgeen_US
oapen.pages11en_US
oapen.remark.publicFunder name: Institut für Theaterwissenschaft – Marie Skłodowska Curie Individual Fellowship
peerreview.anonymitySingle-anonymised
peerreview.idbc80075c-96cc-4740-a9f3-a234bc2598f1
peerreview.open.reviewNo
peerreview.publish.responsibilityPublisher
peerreview.review.stagePre-publication
peerreview.review.typeProposal
peerreview.reviewer.typeInternal editor
peerreview.reviewer.typeExternal peer reviewer
peerreview.titleProposal review
oapen.review.commentsTaylor & Francis open access titles are reviewed as a minimum at proposal stage by at least two external peer reviewers and an internal editor (additional reviews may be sought and additional content reviewed as required).


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record