Interviews with and essays by twenty-two prominent directors of Samuel Beckett's work

A critical look at the work of one of the twentieth century's most influential playwrights emerges from the viewpoint of numerous Beckett actors and directors and includes the author's personal experiences as well.

A study of the 30-year collaboration between playwright Samuel Beckett and director Alan Schneider, Bianchini reconstructs their shared American productions between 1956 and 1984. By examining how Beckett was introduced to American audiences, this book leads into a wider historical discussion of American theatre in the mid-to-late 20th century.

Samuel Beckett claimed he couldn't talk about his work, but he proves remarkably forthcoming in these pages, which document the thirty-year working relationship between the playwright and his principal producer in the United States, Alan Schneider. The 500 letters capture the world of theater as well as the personalities of their authors.

If in the theater the rehearsal process is a way of "discovering" the play, of suggesting alternative readings, would the same hold true if the critic encountered works like Eh Joe, Ghost Trio, or Quad by going through the actual process of filming and then editing them?

The critical discussion highlights the unique fusion on Beckett's stage of cosmic scenery and humorous individualism."--Jacket.

This book examines the role of Samuel Beckett in contemporary philosophical aesthetics, primarily through analysis of both his own essays and the various interpretations that philosophers (especially Adorno, Blanchot, Deleuze, and Badiou) have given to his works. The study centres around the fundamental question of the relationship between art and truth, where art, as a negative truth, comes to its complete exhaustion (as Deleuze terms it) by means of a series of 'endgames' that progressively involve philosophy, writing, language and every individual and minimal form of expression. The major thesis of the book is that, at the heart of Beckett's philosophical project, this 'aesthetics of truth' turns out to be nothing other than the real subject itself, within a contradictory and tragic relationship that ties the Self/Voice to the Object/Body. Yet a number of questions remain open. 'What' or 'who' lies behind this process? What is left of the endgame of art and subjectivity? Finally, what sustains and renders possible Beckett's paradoxical axiom of the 'impossibility to express' alongside the 'obligation to express'? By means of a thorough overview of the most recent criticism of Beckett, this book will try to answer these questions.

This collection of essays the first volume in the Dialogue series brings together new and experienced scholars to present innovative critical approaches to Samuel Beckett s play Endgame. These essays broach a broad range of topics, many of which are inherently controversial and have generated significant levels of debate in the past. Critical readings of the play in relation to music, metaphysics, intertextuality, and time are counterpointed by essays that consider the nature of performance, the history of the theater and the music hall, Beckett s attitudes to directing his play, and his responses to other directors. This collection will be of special interest to Beckett scholars, to students of literature and drama, and to drama theorists and practitioners.

Seminar paper from the year 2002 in the subject English Language and Literature Studies - Literature, grade: very good, University of Nottingham (English Studies), language: English, abstract: It is a well-known fact that Beckett condemned all productions of his plays which ignored his precise stage direction or tried to work freely with the text and possible interpretations. His own directing was rigorous and very strict and he did not allow actors any freedom for a personal interpretation of their depicted character. About an ′interpretative′ production of Endgame by The American Repertory Theatre, Beckett once noted that it `is a complete parody of the play′, since it `dismisses [his] directions′.1 It seems strange that Beckett was so anxious and almost paranoid to lose control over his plays and their reception, as soon as they were actually performed and directed by someone else other than himself, or, at least, without him being closely involved in a production. Beckett once said: `I produce an object. What people make of it is not my concern.′2 Obviously, and quite contrary to this statement, Beckett seemed to be very concerned with what people, especially directors, made of his objects, the written plays, and whether they presented them differently from what he originally suggested. Not that Beckett only did not trust directors, but he was also very suspicious when it came to the so-called actors: `the best possible play is one in which there are no actors, only the text.′3