Challenging Global Shakespeare: Non-Anglo-American Shakespeare in Anglophone Academic Discourse, 1970s-2010s

This dissertation investigates the position of non-Anglo-American Shakespeare within English-language Shakespeare studies, focusing on the late twentieth and early twenty-first centuries. It argues that although studies devoted to Shakespeare as produced outside Britain and America have always been part of academic Shakespeare scholarship, these studies have occupied a paradoxical position of simultaneous inclusion and exclusion within a discipline otherwise centred on British and American Shakespeare. Through a combination of historical overviews and case studies, this dissertation examines how scholarship devoted to Shakespeare’s worldwide dissemination has related to the cultural authority of Anglo-American Shakespeare. Employing Thomas Kuhn’s model of scientific paradigms, this dissertation distinguishes between a “singular Shakespeare paradigm” and a “pluralistic Shakespeares paradigm.” In the former, which predominated for much of the twentieth century, Shakespeare was treated as a universal genius whose meaning transcended time and culture. Shakespeare reception was treated as a linear progression toward the right kind of appreciation, with Anglo-American Shakespeare often setting the standard. In contrast, the pluralistic Shakespeares paradigm, emerging in the 1980s and 1990s, reconceptualised Shakespeare as a cultural construct whose meanings were historically contingent and plural. This paradigm shift championed global inclusivity and challenged the privileged position traditionally afforded to British and American Shakespeare. The first chapter traces early twentieth-century approaches to non-Anglo-American Shakespeare and includes a case study of Shakespeare Quarterly’s theatre review practices in the late twentieth century. Under editor John F. Andrews, review coverage was expanded to countries worldwide. Yet, this initiative proved limited and transient: after Andrews’ tenure, non-Anglo-American Shakespeares ceased to be reviewed, and their distinct perspectives were never incorporated into the broader discourse on performance criticism. Chapter two examines the paradigm shift of the 1980s and 1990s. While the new pluralistic Shakespeares paradigm recognised the value of global Shakespeare in its difference from British and American Shakespeare, this dissertation finds that academic discourse often focused on European and American directors and audiences, while non-Western elements remained under-examined. A case study of Kathakali King Lear’s academic reception illustrates how limited engagement with non-Western theatrical traditions impaired scholarly analyses of intercultural performance. The third chapter turns to the early twenty-first century, contrasting scholars who embraced Shakespeare’s global diversity with those who maintained a largely monolingual and monocultural Anglo-American research focus. A case study of the 2012 World Shakespeare Festival illustrates this tension: celebrated as a showcase of global Shakespeare, its academic reception was split between Anglo-America-centric and global perspectives. In conclusion, this dissertation finds that while the pluralistic Shakespeares paradigm has fostered scholarship attentive to global diversity, Anglo-American Shakespeare maintains its privileged position within the field. By examining the study of non-Anglo-American Shakespeare across four decades, this project provides a systematic analysis of Anglo-America-centrism and reconsiders the history of what is now termed “global Shakespeare studies.” It challenges the current tendency to locate this field’s origins in the early 1990s and underscores the need for further research into the dynamics of inclusion, exclusion, and disciplinary bias in English-language Shakespeare studies.