Theatres in the later Greek world did, in fact, serve as venues for political
debate and decision-making.^20 Wefind echoes of this in later eras: when
English playhouses were closed in 1642, one cause was the Puritanism of
parliament; but another was the fear of the‘lawless assembly’.^21
Access and public expression
Theatre has traditionally been a place where powerful people–famous
spectators or notables–can be seen and accessed by those who wouldn’t
normally have the chance. Obviously, this can be a vehicle for the display
and reinforcement of political power, but it can also be an opportunity for
the direct expression of dissatisfaction from the company or from the
audience. As for the former: it has been suggested that the set-designs of
the architect Inigo Jones were constructed so that only from the seat of the
King could they be fully appreciated; other spectators would therefore be
constantly reminded of their inferiority.^22 The tradition of having spec-
tators sitting on the stage at French classical drama meant that arriving
late at a theatrical performance could itself become an ostentatious perfor-
mance. As for the latter: that the presence of powerful politicalfigures
can be an opportunity for the expression of dissatisfaction is shown, at the
extreme, by a long tradition of high-profile political assassinations at
theatres. Two of the most significant, in terms of their historical impact,
are,first, the assassination of Philip II of Macedon at the theatre of Aegae
in 336BC–which allowed his son, Alexander, to take controlfirst of
Macedon and then of the known world; and, second, the assassination of
Abraham Lincoln in Ford’s Theatre, Washington, D.C. at a performance
of Taylor’sOur American Cousin. Although the theatrical venues of these
assassinations may seem insignificant, they point to a broader trend:
theatres and theatrical performances have frequently offered access of var-
ious kinds to the rich and powerful. Criticism may therefore be expressed
through the content of a particular play–as when a play performed in
front of Charles I criticises absolutist monarchy.^23 A crowd can also express
its approval or disapproval for a politicalfigure in the audience, without the
threat of being singled out and punished. Thus, according to Cicero, a
particular line uttered by an actor and taken out of context–‘our misery
has made yougreat’–could be taken by the crowd to be a criticism of the
unpopular Pompey the Great and thus cheered and applauded.^24
Where a governing regime places severe restrictions on what can and
can’t be expressed in a public setting, the presence of a Pompey or of a
Philip II is not required: simply the public expression of approval or
disapproval amounts to something powerful and political. At perfor-
mances of Chekhov’sThree Sistersin Soviet-ruled Czechoslovakia, it was
known for Masha’s line,‘the army is leaving’, to make the entire audience
Collective action 175