Theater of State is a study of performance at the United Nations and other international institutions. Ball uses theater theory to analyze the acts of diplomats and the political interventions made by performing artists.

Combining great learning, interpretative originality, analytical sensitivity, and a charismatic prose style, Clifford Geertz has produced a lasting body of work with influence throughout the humanities and social sciences, and remains the foremost anthropologist in America. His 1980 book Negara analyzed the social organization of Bali before it was colonized by the Dutch in 1906. Here Geertz applied his widely influential method of cultural interpretation to the myths, ceremonies, rituals, and symbols of a precolonial state. He found that the nineteenth-century Balinese state defied easy conceptualization by the familiar models of political theory and the standard Western approaches to understanding politics. Negara means "country" or "seat of political authority" in Indonesian. In Bali Geertz found negara to be a "theatre state," governed by rituals and symbols rather than by force. The Balinese state did not specialize in tyranny, conquest, or effective administration. Instead, it emphasized spectacle. The elaborate ceremonies and productions the state created were "not means to political ends: they were the ends themselves, they were what the state was for.... Power served pomp, not pomp power." Geertz argued more forcefully in Negara than in any of his other books for the fundamental importance of the culture of politics to a society. Much of Geertz's previous work--including his world-famous essay on the Balinese cockfight--can be seen as leading up to the full portrait of the "poetics of power" that Negara so vividly depicts.

This first systematic study of a wide range of Persian and European archival and primary sources, analyzes how the Muharram rituals changed from being an orginally devotional practice to public events of political significance, setting the stage for the emergence of the early modern Iranian public sphere in the Safavid period.

In this innovative study of performance in international relations, James R. Ball III asks why states and their representatives come to the United Nations to perform for a global audience and how those audiences may intervene in the spectacle of global politics. Theater of State looks at key spaces in which global politics play out: in debating forums of the UN, at the International Criminal Court in The Hague, and in peacekeeping operations in Africa and the Middle East, as well as in a variety of related media productions. Ball argues that culture and politics form a unified field organized by the theatricality of its actors and the engaged spectatorship of its audiences. He provides a theory of global political spectatorship: of how the world watches itself in institutions and beyond, and of what citizens and diplomats do by watching. This study of the lived experience of spectacular politics on the world stage draws on theories of theater, performance, and politics to offer new ways of approaching issues of war, cosmopolitanism, international justice, governance, and activism. Situated at the nexus of two disciplines, performance studies and political science, this volume encourages conversations between the two so that each might offer lessons to the other.

This work has been selected by scholars as being culturally important, and is part of the knowledge base of civilization as we know it. This work was reproduced from the original artifact, and remains as true to the original work as possible. Therefore, you will see the original copyright references, library stamps (as most of these works have been housed in our most important libraries around the world), and other notations in the work. This work is in the public domain in the United States of America, and possibly other nations. Within the United States, you may freely copy and distribute this work, as no entity (individual or corporate) has a copyright on the body of the work. As a reproduction of a historical artifact, this work may contain missing or blurred pages, poor pictures, errant marks, etc. Scholars believe, and we concur, that this work is important enough to be preserved, reproduced, and made generally available to the public. We appreciate your support of the preservation process, and thank you for being an important part of keeping this knowledge alive and relevant.

Relations between theatre and state were seldom more fraught in France than in this period. F. W. J. Hemmings traces the vicissitudes of this perennial conflict.

Debido a su relativo aislamiento y a una larga tradición de investigaciones y estudios, Bali se ha convertido en una rica fuente de información sobre el tradicional “Estado-teatro” hindú del sudeste asiático. En esta obra, Clifford Geertz aplica su conocido método de análisis cultural a la organización social del Bali decimonónico y ofrece un vívido retrato de los símbolos, mitos, rituales y ceremonias –en breve, del “teatro”— que constituían en esencia el negara precolonial, el Estado balinés. El negara no era ni una tiranía ni un gobierno burocrático. De hecho, ni siquiera puede decirse que fuera un gobierno. Por el contrario, era un espectáculo organizado, un Estado-teatro diseñado para dramatizar las obsesiones dominantes de la cultura balinesa: la desigualdad social y el orgullo de pertenecer a un determinado estatus. Geertz, como conclusión, afirma que el Estado balinés desafia las conceptualizaciones más fáciles procedentes de cualquiera de los modelos y lugares comunes familiares en el marco de la teoría política occidental. Analizando los principios organizativos del Estado balinés, a través de sus diversos niveles y funciones, demuestra las limitaciones de todos los intentos de distinguir el carácter «práctico» del ritual de dicha organización. De esta forma, el autor remedia las deficiencias y distorsiones de las modernas nociones occidentales que reducen la política al poder, el Estado a un artefacto organizativo comprensible en términos puramente instrumentales y los procesos simbólicos o culturales a un mero accesorio del arte de gobernar.

The dissertation analyzes the projects of popular theater devised by the republican governments and assemblies, 1878 to 1893, in order to understand the conflicted point of view of republicans with regard to the democratization of art. In the 1880s, the four state-subsidized theaters (the Opéra, the Opéra-Comique, the Comédie-Française, and the Odéon) had a very select audience. Yet, republicans were divided on the issue of its diversification. On the one hand, the purportedly inferior moral capacities of the popular public made dramatic performances hazardous without a prior education of its will. On the other hand, it was fair to let people who paid for the upkeep of state-subsidized theaters access these institutions and to fulfill the wish of a significant part of the population to acquaint themselves with high-brow culture. The successive projects of popular theater represent the various solutions imagined by republican governments to reconcile two contradictory impulses, democratization and discrimination. They show how a culture of prejudices, inherited from previous regimes, progressively came to terms with a new conception of justice, more respectful of individuals' autonomy and sovereignty. At the end of the 1870s, the minister of public instruction and fine arts Agénor Bardoux denied that the state had any responsibility to democratize art. He variously argued that democratization happened spontaneously or that the artistic mission of the state did not include the dissemination of works. Jules Ferry believed that the state owed a theater to the lower classes, but, convinced that lower classes were inferior in their aptitudes, he imagined a popular lyric theater that would be the pale copy of the Opéra. Finally, Léon Bourgeois accepted the director of the Opéra's proposition that the institution should organize reduced-price performances. Bourgeois thought it more conducive to social peace to promote a common culture than to cultivate separate class identities. In his mind, the difference between the people and the elite should consist in their respective degrees of exposure to high-brow culture. The study of theatrical democratization in the 1880s shows that French republicans abided by two principles of government. One, which reflected the republicans' universalist credo, advocated the equal treatment of individuals by virtue of their equal rights. The other, inspired by utilitarian tenets, defended the differentiated treatment of individuals on the grounds of their unequal aptitudes. This dissertation argues that the ambiguity of the notion of merit in the republicans' discourse (did it lie in the essence of a social group or was it the result of individuals' actions?) informed a tension between the desire to extend liberties and democratize elite practices, on the one hand, and the perceived necessity to control activities and discriminate against the people, on the other.

Reports for 1980-19 also include the Annual report of the National Council on the Arts.