Reviewed by:

• Ruins: Classical Theater and Broken Memory. Theater: Theory/Text/Performance by Odai Johnson
• Krishni Burns (bio)

Ruins: Classical Theater and Broken Memory offers a comprehensive history of ancient theatre, from its earliest incarnation in fifth-century Athens to its lingering existence in the Christian world of late antiquity. Odai Johnson places ancient theatre within its historical context in order to explore its sociocultural significance. The work paints historical periods in broad strokes, but Johnson manages to touch on all the relevant sociocultural movements while still incorporating engaging anecdotal evidence. For example, Johnson analyzes an apocryphal story about the playwright Eupolis's murder at the hands of Alcibiades (85–87). The story is rarely noted in the study of Athenian comedy, but Johnson gives it full consideration as part of the mythos of Athenian drama.

As well versed as Johnson is in the historical material, he occasionally misses more recent trends in classical scholarship. Much of his discussion on the relationship between theatre and religion is based on scholarship of the 1980s and early 1990s. Johnson situates his discussion of Roman theatre in a problematic model of Romanization, the theory that Rome imposed its culture onto all of its conquered territories and eradicated their former culture. The model is product of nineteenth century colonialists' wishful thinking and has been thoroughly discredited by the archaeological record. Johnson also falls into the common trap of reading his textual sources uncritically. He assumes that Socrates is sincere in Plato's Apology when he cites Aristophanes's Clouds as the true reason that he is on trial for corrupting the youth (77–79) and assumes that a crowd's horrified reaction to a performance of Nero is meant to be a sign of the crowd's lack of sophistication, not the Emperor's bad acting (183). Such readings are possible, certainly, but unlikely to have matched the authors' intent. [End Page 120]

Even so, Johnson's extensive knowledge of the historical context of ancient theatre makes this book an asset to scholars. Scholars of the history of theatre and European literature, particularly English theatre, will find this book especially helpful. Classicists may be disappointed by the lack of textual support and readers interested in performance may find more contextual information than they need. In the right hands, it might make a good textbook for a class on the history of ancient theatre.

The most distinctive thing about Ruins is its pessimistic theoretical frame. Johnson assesses ancient theatre in its many forms by focusing on what has been lost or deliberately excised from the genre. He encourages the reader to look at the surviving remnants of theatre as a kind of ruin of the original genre, a memorial to its own vanished greatness. The approach is occasionally hard to keep in the forefront of the mind, especially when Johnson is discussing periods with a vibrant 2000-year history of artistic and literary significance, such as fifth-century tragedy. It also disregards the significance of performance, treating ancient plays as static historical texts.

Despite its limitations, the approach does offer unique insights, even when it seems least applicable. Johnson points out convincingly that our lauded jewels of classical tragedy were nowhere near as emotionally moving as the historical dramas that were banned early in theatre's history (chapter 2). The argument forces the reader to reassess the importance that we have placed on ancient theatre in a way that is similar to David W. J. Gill and Michael Vickers's revolutionary theory that Greek painted pottery was a cheaper alternative to metalware in Artful Crafts: Ancient Greek Silverware and Pottery. Just because we place a high value on ancient art today does not mean that it had the same significance in the past.

One final observation about the book as a whole: it is extremely well-written and engaging to read. The language is beautiful, evocative, and occasionally shocking. Thanks to the book's chronological structure, its internal narrative is easy to follow. Occasionally, though, Johnson's prose becomes a little...

审核人：

• 废墟：古典剧院和破碎的记忆。戏剧： Odai Johnson的理论/文字/表演
• 克里希尼·伯恩斯（生物）

废墟：古典剧院和破碎的记忆提供了古代戏剧的全面历史，从五世纪雅典的化身到其在上古基督教世界中的悠久存在。欧代·约翰逊（Odai Johnson）将古老剧院置于其历史背景下，以探索其社会文化意义。这幅作品勾勒出历史时期，但约翰逊设法触及了所有相关的社会文化运动，同时仍然吸收了有趣的轶事证据。例如，约翰逊（Johnson）分析了有关剧作家尤波利斯（Eurpolis）在Alcibiades（85-87）手中被谋杀的惨状。这个故事在雅典喜剧研究中鲜为人知，但约翰逊充分考虑了它，将其作为雅典戏剧神话的一部分。

尽管约翰逊对历史资料很精通，但他偶尔会错过古典学术方面的最新趋势。他关于戏剧与宗教之间关系的大部分讨论都是基于1980年代和1990年代初期的学术研究。约翰逊将他对罗马剧院的讨论置于一个有问题的罗马化模型中，该理论认为罗马将其文化强加于所有被征服的领土，并消除了它们以前的文化。该模型是19世纪殖民者一厢情愿的产物，已被考古记录彻底抹黑。约翰逊还陷入了不加批判地阅读他的文字资料的普遍陷阱。当他引用阿里斯托芬斯的《云彩》时，他认为苏格拉底在柏拉图的《道歉》中是真诚的作为他因腐败青年而受审的真实原因（77-79岁），并认为人群对尼禄表演的恐惧反应仅是表明人群缺乏成熟度的表现，而不是皇帝表现欠佳的标志（183） ）。当然，这样的阅读是可能的，但不可能符合作者的意图。[完第120页]

即便如此，约翰逊对古代戏剧历史背景的广泛了解使这本书成为学者们的财富。戏剧和欧洲文学史的学者，尤其是英语剧院，会发现这本书特别有用。缺乏文本支持可能会使古典主义者感到失望，并且对演奏感兴趣的读者可能会发现比他们需要的更多的上下文信息。在正确的地方，这可能是一本很好的教科书，用于一堂古代戏剧的历史课。

关于废墟的最独特之处在于其悲观的理论框架。约翰逊（Johnson）通过关注流派丢失或故意切除的内容来评估古代戏剧的多种形式。他鼓励读者将幸存的剧院遗迹视为原始流派的一种废墟，以纪念其消失的伟大。这种方法有时很难保持在思想的最前沿，特别是当约翰逊正在讨论具有生动的2000年艺术和文学意义的历史时期时，例如第五世纪的悲剧。它还忽略了表演的重要性，将古代戏剧视为静态的历史文本。

尽管有其局限性，但该方法确实提供了独特的见解，即使它似乎最不适用。约翰逊令人信服地指出，我们备受赞誉的古典悲剧中的珠宝在情感上远不及剧院历史早期被禁止的历史剧（第2章）那样动人。该论点迫使读者重新评估我们对古代剧院的重视程度，类似于大卫·W·吉尔和迈克尔·维克斯的革命性理论，即希腊彩绘陶器是《Artful Crafts：古希腊银器和陶器》中金属器皿的廉价替代品。。仅仅因为我们今天重视古代艺术，并不意味着它在过去具有同样的意义。

关于这本书整体的最终结论是：这本书写得非常好，阅读起来也很吸引人。该语言优美，令人回味，有时令人震惊。由于本书的时间顺序结构，其内部叙述很容易理解。有时候，约翰逊的散文有时会变得有点...