Table of contents

Preface

The Mystical Sovereign at the Height of the Crisis of Authoritarian Directing

INTRODUCTION

Structure of the study

Provisional fortifed points and the return of the sovereign

PART I. Reconfgurations of the Categorial Field Surrounding Power and Their Impact on the Study of the Relationship between Power and Directing

1. revising certain categories fundamental to my study through a performative lens

1.1. performance and its derivative forms

1.2. Revising the category of izpulnitelski izkustva (performing arts)

1.3. Revising the category of stsenichni izkustva (stage arts)

2. Confguring the conceptual apparatus surrounding the category of power and applying this apparatus to directing

2.1. Bracketing the metaphysical premise

2.2. Weber’s categories, Uphof’s distinctions, and their application to the domain of theatre

2.3. Derivatives of the power subcategory of legitimacy in the theatrical feld

2.4. Legitimacy as resource in the theatre

2.5. Weber, power as probability, and the three pure types of legitimate authority in the theatre

3. Reconfguring views of power in the social sciences and the relevance of these new confgurations to the question of directorial power

3.1. Guzmán’s proposal for a fourth pure type of legitimate authority and its applicability to the theatre director

3.2. French, Dahl, Raven––the frst dimension of power and its applicability to the analysis of the power relationship between director and actor

3.3. french, Raven, and the applicability of their typology of the bases of power to the analysis of theatrical directing through the lens of social psychology

3.4. power tactics and their use in the director–actor relationship

3.5. Bachrach, Baratz, the second dimension of power, and negative power in the domain of directing

3.6. Lukes––the third dimension of power and the possibility of consensual power in the feld of directing

3.7. foucault and the microphysics of power in the analysis of directing

3.8. The power of the director within and outside the scope of sociological analysis

3.9. The fourth dimension of power, the path to freedom, the neoliberal subject, the organizational subject, and cultural change

PART II. Historical Sediments in the Conceptual Apparatus Surrounding Power and Their Impact on Power in the Theatrical Field

1. extra-indexicalization and a transdisciplinary conceptual apparatus

2. the trend towards desubstantiation of categories and the introduction of the concept of governance

3. Koselleck––metahistorical pregivens and the hiatus between the event and the historical narrative of the event

4. the spatio-temporal trap for the event and the event itself

5. the semantic nest and nuances of meaning in the categories surrounding power

6. a brief nomenclature of the forces, wills, impulses, and drives applicable to the power-element in directing

PART III. Reconfgurations of the Categorial Field Surrounding Sovereignty and Their Repercussions on the Power Identity of the Figure of the Director

1. Shifts in the understanding of sovereignty that establish the preconditions for a study of directorial power by analogy with political power

Historical phase i

Historical phase ii

2. dual sovereignty

3. consolidation and distribution of sovereignty

4. individual sovereignty

5. Self-privileging and legitimate privileging of the fgure of the director

6. Localization of sovereignty

7. Positive and negative sovereignty

8. Active, reactive, and afective sovereignty

9. the emergence of directing from the loss of political sovereignty

PART IV. Reconfgurations of the Categorial Field Surrounding Power in the Debate Between Metaphysics and Pragmatics and Their Refection on Our Understanding of the Power of the Director through Speech and Language

1. dispersion of sovereignty and desemanticization of the concept of sovereignty

2. from metaphysics of presence through linguistic pragmatics to metaphysics of performance

3. directorial power as deferred presence through temporal and sedimentary deferral in the theatrical show

4. Linguistic analysis as a basis and corrective

5. Methodological approaches to verifcation

6. rehabilitating parasitic uses of language as a prerequisite for thinking directorial power through language

7. Limitations of the theory of performatives as an explanatory tool for directorial power

7.1. first limitation of the theory of performatives as an explanatory tool for refecting on directorial power, and brief digressions into hermeneutics, phenomenology, and deconstruction

7.2. Second limitation of the theory of performatives as an explanatory tool for refection on directorial power

7.3. Third limitation of the theory of performatives as an explanatory tool for refection on directorial power

8. force as a possible link between metaphysics and pragmatic analysis

9. Histrionic queerness, queer sovereignty, playful variability, and fuidity of directorial power in the context of felicitous and infelicitous performatives