sistency’, and in doing so open up possibilities for intervention (51). Travelling these ideas across the rest of the chapters, Greer analyses the ‘wounded attachment’ of the pariah as manifested by the works of artists such as David Hoyle (79). In Hoyle, he sees the pariah as a social commentator: ‘the outcast who sticks around’, as often taking the neoliberal homonormative as his target as the heteronormative (85). The ‘public unhappiness’ in the figure of the killjoy is explored through artists such as Ursula Martinez and Adrienne Truscott (107), and he goes on to interrogate the ‘out of placeness’ that lives in stranger pieces such as Kay Adshead’s The Bogus Woman (2000) and Lladel Bryant’s Nine Lives (2016) and the improperly bodied misfits as represented by Bobby Baker and Katherine Araniello among others before ultimately arriving at the optimism of works such as Deborah Pearson’s The Future Show (2015). Greer makes the case that performance can – and the performances herein do – articulate and highlight ‘a range of possibilities for resistance and critique’ of neoliberalism, particularly where it comes to bear on identity, offering these possibilities not from a position attempting to be removed from the ‘demands and condition’ of neoliberalism, but from the place of exception: not only as other but always already as a part of the one (219). Something of a rarity in academic publishing, this book leaves us with a queer, radical optimism, a present full of possibility, rather than either the nihilism of Lee Edelman’sNo Future (2004) or the delayed optimism of José Muñoz’s Cruising Utopia: The Then and There of Queer Futurity (2009). It offers the reader a sense of possibility even as it reiterates the problems of the neoliberal. Greer finds potential in these problems as and for radical theatre and performance making, and through the performance analyses demonstrates a radicality of the present rather than in the idea of a utopia to come. This wide-ranging, brilliant, and scholarly volume adds a much-needed perspective on and assessment of queer solo performance: one that does not simply venerate it as identity validation nor dismiss it as a tool of neoliberal identity consumption, but that instead articulates how the works analysed offer twenty-first-century radical performance politics looking at, out, through, and beyond the performance of ‘the singular subject in neoliberal times’ (2).

中文翻译：

---

戏剧的五大洲：关于演员物质文化的事实和传说

sistency'，并在这样做时开辟了干预的可能性（51）。格里尔在其余章节中遍历这些想法，分析了贱民的“受伤依恋”，这体现在大卫·霍伊尔 (David Hoyle) 等艺术家的作品中 (79)。在霍伊尔那里，他将贱民视为社会评论员：“被抛弃的被抛弃的人”，与异性恋者一样，经常将新自由主义同性规范作为目标（85）。通过乌苏拉·马丁内斯 (Ursula Martinez) 和阿德里安·特拉斯科特 (Adrienne Truscott) 等艺术家 (107)，探索了杀戮者形象中的“公众不快乐”，他继续审问生活在陌生作品中的“不合时宜”，例如凯·阿兹黑德的《假女人》（2000 年）和拉德尔·布莱恩特的《九命》（2016 年），以及以鲍比·贝克和凯瑟琳·阿拉尼罗等人为代表的身材不合适的人在最终达到黛博拉·皮尔森 (Deborah Pearson) 的《未来秀》(2015) 等作品的乐观情绪之前。格里尔认为表演可以——而且这里的表演确实如此——阐明并突出了对新自由主义的“抵抗和批判的一系列可能性”，特别是在涉及身份的地方，提供这些可能性而不是从试图被移除的立场来自新自由主义的“要求和条件”，但来自例外的地方：不仅作为他者，而且总是已经作为一个人的一部分（219）。这本书在学术出版中很少见，它给我们留下了一种奇怪的、激进的乐观主义，一个充满可能性的现在，而不是李·埃德尔曼的《无未来》（2004）的虚无主义或何塞·穆尼奥斯的《巡航乌托邦：酷儿未来 (2009) 的彼时和那里。它为读者提供了一种可能性，即使它重申了新自由主义的问题。格里尔在这些问题中发现了激进戏剧和表演制作的潜力，并通过表演分析展示了当下的激进性，而不是未来乌托邦的想法。这本范围广泛、精彩纷呈、学术性强的书为酷儿独奏表演增添了急需的视角和评估：它不仅将其作为身份验证加以崇敬，也不将其视为新自由主义身份消费的工具，