A SURVEY OF ASIAN PLAYS PRODUCED IN THE UNITED STATES FROM 1929 TO 1966 Thesis for the Dogma of M. A. MlCHlGAN STATE UNIVERSlTY Robin Noe} Widgery 1966 i)!“M'--- .- -u L. LIBRARY Michigan State University INI WI H mm WWW! I ‘129; 10731 8224 _ Wmfi_}z__ '31, £353 3 "18112 29 ABSTRACT A SURVEY OF ASIAN PLAYS PRODUCED IN THE UNITED STATES FROM 1929 TO 1966 by Robin Noel Widgery This survey was made in order to accomplish five major objectives: (1) to determine the number and types of Asian plays produced in this country by four-year colleges and selected non-profit theatres, (2) to report prevalent attitudes among American theatre artists toward Asian drama, (3) to detect latent interest in Asian drama among American theatre artists, (4) to describe any apparent trends and developments in the production of Asian plays in this country, and (5) to report information concerning the number of Ameri- can theatre artists having an ability to read Oriental languages. There were 545 institutions included in the survey papulation for Questionnaire I. A second questionnaire was sent to the directors of 132 Asian plays reported in the first questionnaire. Response to the first questionnaire came from 326 institutions, or 60 per cent of the survey population. Robin Noel Widgery Forty-three of the second forms were returned for a response of 33 per cent. Sixty-two institutions (19%) reported having produced at least one Asian play during the period 1929 to 1966. Of 132 Asian productions reported, seventy-three were Japanese, thirty-one Chinese, twenty-four Indian, oneIndonesian, one Burmese, one Korean, and one Thai. There were sixty-three play titles reported: thirty-five Japanese, thirteen Chinese, eleven Indian, and one Indonesian, Korean,-Burmese, and Thai each. In Questionnaire I there were forty-six institutions (14%) reporting plans for the future production of at least one Asian play. 0f the planned productions, eight are Indian, six Chinese, five Japanese, and one Korean. The nationality of thirty-three others is undecided. When asked about their attitudes toward the produc- tion of Asian plays at their institutions, 42 per cent of the respondents had a "positive" attitude, while 11 per cent were "negative." Forty-eight per cent were either "neutral,” "open4minded," or "never discussed." . . Sixteen institutions (5%) were reported having at least one individual on their drama faculty with Oriental language reading ability. Questionnaires from ninety-eight institutions (30%) listed 139 people as having an "active interest in Asian Robin Noel Widgery theatre." Seventy-two per cent of these individuals are from institutions never before having produced an Asian play. A SURVEY OF ASIAN PLAYS PRODUCED IN THE UNITED STATES FROM 1929 TO 1966 BY Robin Noel Widgery A THESIS Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER.OF ARTS Department of Speech 1966 FOREWORD There is a tale about an incident that occurred during the world tour of President Grant. While on his goodwill trip around the globe he visited Japan, which at that time had only recently been opened to the West. During his stay on this beautiful island nation, he was wined and dined by the Shbgun and his royal ministers. As the story goes, the foreign dignitary was treated one evening to a performance of N6h, the ancient classical Japanese theatre. Despite the extremely stylized presentation accompanied by such weird and alien music, the grisly old war general was so moved by the spectacle that he exclaimed to his regal host, ”This should be preserved." I Probably unknown to the guest was the significance of his own words. He was probably unaware that the Nah drama, after five centuries of popularity on the island, was approaching its lowest point of acclaim. Whether it was the President‘s words that stimulated a revival of Nfih is doubt- ful, but revive it did. 0n through the turn of the twentieth century, Nfih, along with Kabuki and the doll theatre, continued to prosper. However, in about 1909 the realistic revolution from the 11 Western theatre began to compete with these traditional forms.1 By 1920 the finest works of Ibsen and Strinberg, Hauptmann and Shaw had been translated into Japanese. Almost immediately after these translations, Japanese drama- tists were writing in the realistic manner at that time common in Europe and swiftly gaining popularity throughout the United States. One modern playwright of the period, Yozan Iwasaki, even studied drama in America, returning to his native land, where he pleased Japanese audiences with his social dramas.2 It probably seems strange to the student of theatre history to note the zeal of the Japanese to mimic the philo- sophical and technical innovations of Western theatre, while tat the same time witnessing such a slight amount of Japanese or other Asian theatrical traditions penetrating the West. During the late 20's, one Chinese dramatist was studying the ”new" theatre of realism in this country. One of Professor Baker's students, J. Wong-Quincey, produced for the first time in the United States a modern Chinese play directed by Alexander Dean at Yale University in 1931.3 lEarle Ernst, The Kabuki Theatre (New York: Grove Press IHCO, 1956), P. m. 2Yozan Iwasaki and Glenn Hughes, Three odern Japanese Plays (Cincinnati: Stewart Kidd 50., T§§3), p. 10. 3Mrs. Alexander Dean, wife of the late professor of drama at Yale University, reported this information in a letter to the survey project. 111 Although the United States had become a doorway by which European dramatic forms were reaching the Orient, this country was too preoccupied with European culture on its front steps to give much notice to the rich theatrical traditions eminating from the Far East. The back side of America still was turned toward the whole of Asia. Not until World War II gave this nation a rude awakening, did it turn around to notice the Asian world it had so long ignored. Since that time this country has learned to keep one eye fixed on Europe and the other on those nations lying across the Pacific. Economically, politically, and socially, the United States has recently begun to realize the importance of the Asian cultures. Communication between that world and our own is no longer a one-way proposition. Though faintly, we have finally begun to listen to the Oriental people. Busi- nessmen, politicians, and scholars have begun to appreciate with increasing awareness the scope of Asian contributions toward Western civilization, not only from a view of cultural enrichment, but from the standpoint of practical, social betterment. American theatre artists, too, are learning to recog- nize the inherent value in Asian dramatic forms. Educational and professional theatre people alike are learning to appre- ciate and enjoy Japanese, Chinese, and Indian dramatic con- tributions. No longer do they hear the word only; but, more iv and more, they are learning to see with their eyes and touch with their hands an increasing body of Asian dramatic litera- ture performed on American stages. Since 1957 the frequency of such performances has increased significantly. The theatrical community through- out our country has come to the threshold of a new dimension in dramatic entertainment and appreciation. The door is beginning to open wide in order to let in Asian drama and to allow it a legitimate place alongside the theatre of Aeschylus, Shakespeare, and Ibsen. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS To make a simple statement of thanks to all those individuals who assisted me in this research, seems inade- quate to express to them my sincere gratitude. Through the ocurse of more than a year's work many have given me their time, advice, and encouragement in the preparation, execu- tion, and reporting stages of this survey. With the completion of the thesis, I find that I am not quite the same individual as when the project began. Challenges have a way of demanding growth and progress of any man. In my case such progress has been prompted by the effort of those assisting me in this project, as well as by the project itself. First thanks must go to the director of this research, Dr. James Brandon. His interest in Asian theatre forms has given impetus to this study and has inepired my own enthusiasm. His kindness and guidance have been in- valuable. I am also grateful to Dr. Kenneth Hance for his advice in the preparation of the survey and for his patient counsel in the final stages of this manuscript. vi For'their evaluations and helpful criticism, I wish to thank Mr. Frank Rutledge and Dr. Sidney Berger. In processing and analyzing the data gathered during the course of this survey, no one was more helpful to me in this effort than Dr. William Lashbrook. And, finally, I must mention the loving support of my wife, Suzanne. The many hours that she has spent typing the rough drafts, and assisting me in many other ways, has been valuable. vii TABLE OF CONTENTS Page FOREWORD. O O O O O O I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 ii AmonEmMENTS O O O O O O 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 v1 LIST OF Chapter I. II. III. IV. V. VI. VII. VIII. IX. X. XI. TABLES C O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 1x INTRODUCTION. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 METHODOLOGY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 SURVEY RESPONSE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 INSTITUTIONS PRODUCING ASIAN PLAYS. . . . . . . 25 ASIAN PLAY PRODUCTIONS. . . . . . . . . . . . . 36 PLANS FOR FUTURE PRODUCTIONS OF ASIAN PLAYS C O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O C 0 O 55 ATTITUDES TOWARD THE PRODUCTION OF As IAN PLAYS O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 6 5 INDIVIDUALS WITH READING ABILITY IN ORIENT“, LANGUAGES O O O O I O O O O O O O O O 77 INDIVIDUALS HAVING AN ACTIVE INTEREST IN ASIAN DRAMA O O O O O O O O O C O O O O O O 83 PRODUCTION SITUATIONAL DATA . . . . . . . . . . 90 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . 96 APPENDIX. C O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 107 BIBLIOGRAPHY......................115 Table l. 2. 9. 10. ll. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. LIST OF TABLES Heeponse to Questionnaire I . . . . . . . . Regional ReSponse to Questionnaire I. . . . Reaponse to Questionnaire II. . . . . . . . Regional ReSponse to Questionnaire II . . . Institutions Reported by Class. . . . . . . Producing Institutions Reported by Region of the Country. . . . . . . . . . . . . . Institutions Reported by Number of Asian Plays Produced. . . . . . . . . . . Institutions Producing the Most Asian Plays by Dates of Production. . . . . . . Nationality by Date . . . . . . . . . . . . Chinese Titles by Year of Production. . . . Indian Titles by Year of Production . . . . Japanese Titles by Year of Production . . . Other Titles by Year of Production. . . . . Dates of Production by Region . . . . . . . Production Experience by Region . . . . . . Reporting of Plans for Future Production. . Nationality of Planned Productions. . . . . Asian Production Experience of Institutions Planning to Produce . . . . . . . . . . . ix Page 17 2O 22 23 26 30 32 34 36 38 39 4O 41 52 53 56 58 59 Table Page 19. Planned Asian Productions by Region of the Country . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61 20. Dates for Planned Productions . . . . . . . . . . 63 21. Percentage of Attitude ReSponses by Class of Institution. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66 22. Percentage of Attitude Responses by Region of the Country . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68 23. Percentage of Attitude Responses by Number of Asian Plays Produced. . . . . . . . . 7O 24. Oriental Languages Reported . . . . . . . . . . . 78 25. Institutions Reporting Language Ability . . . . . 80 26. Institutions Reporting Language Ability by Production Experience. . . . . . . . . . . . 82 27. Reports of Active Interest by Region. . . . . . . 84 28. Institutions Reporting Active Interest. . . . . . 86 29. Individuals Having Active Interest. . . . . . . . 87 30. Active Interest Reported by Amount of Asian Production Experience . . . . . . . . . . 88 31. Size of Budgets by Percentage of Productions Reported. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91 32. Price of Tickets by Nationality of PlaySPI‘OduCed................. 93 33. Attendances at Performances by Nation- alities of Plays Produced . . . . . . . . . . . 94 34. Various Survey Findings Reported by Percentage of Class of Institution. . . . . . . 100 35. Various Survey Findings Reported by Percentages Within the Regions of The Country . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 102 36. Various Survey Findings Reported by Asian Production Experience . . . . . . . . . . 104 X CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION This survey was made in order to accomplish five major objectives: (1) to determine the number and types of Asian plays produced in this country by four-year colleges and selected non-profit theatres, (2) to report prevalent attitudes among American theatre artists toward Asian drama, (3) to detect latent interest in Asian drama among American theatre artists, (4) to describe any apparent trends and developments in the production of Asian plays in this country, and (5) to report information concerning the number of American theatre artists having an ability to read Oriental languages. Though the key focus of the survey is centered on the numbers and types of Asian plays produced, it is nec- essary to realize that the performance of such plays is only the manifestation of an underlying interest in, and concern for, such forms. Therefore, separate sections in this study are devoted to the reporting of attitudes toward Asian drama as well as individual expressions of the advantages and dis- advantages of producing Asian plays. It is hoped that by doing this, a dependable barometer can be constructed indi- l eating the degree of influence Asian drama now holds among American theatre artists. It is also heped that such a gauge may provide clues to the future develOpment of these forms in the United States. In tracing the growth of Asian theatre in this country it has been helpful to observe the frequency of Asian plays produced during the past thirty-seven years. By considering existing translations and their dates of publi- cation, along with socio-political factors prevailing through the intervening years, it has been possible to make certain hypotheses concerning the deve10pment of Asian drama in this country. In short, after presenting Asian play production data, matched with attitude, institutional, and demographic information, this study is designed to describe the present state of Asian drama within the United States and to explain how we have reached the status quo. Former Surveys The basic structure of this study has been largely patterned after the method of John Dietrich in his survey of ”Dramatic Activity in American Colleges: 1946-1947” appearing in the Quarterly Journal of Speech in 1948.4‘ Dietrichis study has been an excellent guide to objective 4John E. Dietrich, "Survey of Dramatic Activity in American Colleges: 1946-1947," Quarterly Journal of Speech, Vol. 34 (April, 1948), p. 183.. research methodology. His methods of quantitative analysis have provided a model. Specifically, his use of demographic factors, such as student enrollment, appears to provide the most logical yardstick in comparing survey findings. In subsequent years, Dietrich's survey has been repeated on a yearly basis. Since 1950 the results of these surveys have been published nearly every year in the Edggg— tional Theatre Journal. During the past sixteen years Theodore Hatlin, Theodore Shank, Edwin Schoell, and Alan Stambusky have served as chairmen for the AETA Production List Committee, reporting survey results for the association. The surveys conducted by these men did not focus attention on the production situation throughout the country for the sake of program improvement, but simply added up the figures and reported them in an organized fashion. Other surveys of broader scope have appeared in the Educational Theatre Journal on a five-year basis. Such five-year studies appeared in 1956 by Edwin Schoell and again in 1961 by Theodore Shank. Because these reports were based on a continuum of activity during several successive years, the researchers were able to observe and report significant trends in the production of various types of plays. The only study previously undertaken to survey Asian plays produced in the United States, was done by Joseph Withey at the request of the Afro-Asian Theatre Project of the AETA. His findings were presented at the 1965 AETA convention in Miami. He reported thirty-five Asian produc- tions, including in his report play titles, translators or playwrights, names of producing institutions, and the year of production. In the report, Withey readily confessed, that though this report could be helpful, it should certainly be considered the embarking point for a more extensive survey.5 Justifications In tracing the growth of one cultural influence upon another, one must begin by realizing that such development is an organic thing, not always easily detected on the sur- face of a society. The process of cross-cultural adoption does not take place within a vacuum, nor does it occur in a short period of time. Seldom in history have cultural values from alien lands found immediate acceptance in new enrivonments. Cultural assimilation usually has been accom- plished through an evolutionary process. During Ancient and Medieval times such currents working within a society may have taken hundreds of years before complete absorption. But as man has broken down the limits of time and Space, he has found the world a small place in which to live, a home that includes the whole family of mankind. When some- thing occurs in this home, it is immediately known by the entire family--all three billion members. 5Professor Withey is a member of the Drama faculty at Hanover College, Hanover, Indiana. This same process is active in assisting members of this family to know and understand all their brothers, regard- less of the thousands of miles by which they may be separated. Thus it is that in the world of the mid-twentieth century, whole societies may assimilate, or at least learn to appreciate, alien cultural values within a radically com- pressed span of time. With the assistance of such a compression of time, it becomes easier to detect the outward signs of cross- cultural adoption. At the surface these social currents appear to be evolutionary, but with the advent of instan- taneous communication and with the possibility of immediate knowledge and comprehension, the term "evolution" is headed toward obsolescence. Indeed, we live in an age of omnis- cience. However, with the acceleration of social develop- ments, objective study has been facilitated. In surveying events occurring during a relatively short span of time, the observer can readily see significant trends. The usefulness of a survey such as this was recog- nized by the delegates to the 1965 AETA convention. Follow- ing the report on the number and types of Asian plays pro- duced in this country given by Joseph Withey, it was decided that a more extensive study of this kind should be made. Such a study, it was hoped, should do more than survey the number and type of Asian plays presented in the United States. It should also gather information on the staging technology of Asian productions. Since this type of survey has never before been con- ducted, and since there has been an increased stirring throughout the country to learn and assimilate Asian dramatic forms, the time seems appropriate to evaluate the degree of Asian cultural penetration within the American theatre scene. Another reason for undertaking a survey such as this is that it may stimulate the interest of American theatre artists in new dimensions of dramatic entertainment. The greatest barrier standing between the individual and his appreciation of any new idea is his own ignorance. With a willingness to appreciate and understand new ideas, such barriers are half destroyed and the way made clear for understanding. Definition of Terms In order to clarify the meaning of essential terms to be used throughout this study, an explanation is in order. Throughout, the term Agign'plgy applies to all forms, traditional as well as modern, originating in the Asian countries extending from the sub-continent of India, through Southeast Asia, including China and the Indonesian archi- pelago, and northward to the Philippine Islands and Japan. For the purposes of this study, plays of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics are not considered to be of Asian origin. In certain instances the question of nationality arose when Asian dramatists were discovered as having written and produced certain plays in this country. In such cases these plays have been considered to be Asian. If, for example, ShakeSpeare had gone to Italy to write Romeo and Juliet, we would still have to consider this work to be part of English literature. There were two types of institutions surveyed. The larger portion of the survey population included four-year colleges and universities having theatre programs. Other institutions included in the survey were those chosen on a basis of their motives for producing plays. The prime cri- terion in this case was that all such institutions must present productions primarily for their educational or cul- tural value. This stipulation automatically included the colleges and universities, but it eliminated many profes- sional and semi-professional companies. Of this latter type, two have been included in the survey pepulation: the Dallas Theatre Center and IASTA (Institute for Advanced Studies in the Theatre Arts) located in New York City. Both these theatre companies are non-profit, and both consider educational and cultural factors as a key guide in choosing their programs. It is significant to note that both insti- tutions reported having produced at least one Asian play. CHAPTER II METHODOLOGY In order to make a survey of the Asian plays produced in this country, it was necessary for the research to be done in three phases: (1) determining the institutions to be included in the survey population, preparing the mailing list, (2) designing and preparing the questionnaires and letters to be mailed, and (3) coding and handling the data received in the responses. Determining the Institutions to Be Surveyed The most obvious place to find a list of colleges and universities having theatre programs was in the most recent directories of the Speech Association of America and the American Educational Theatre Association. Since the former directory listed membership by institution, including department heads, it was used as a starting point for the survey mailing list. Dr. Kenneth Hance, past president of the SAA, was consulted regarding the adequacy of this listing for the purpose of the Asian production survey. According to his estimation, about 90 per cent of the institutions listed in the SAA directory have theatre programs as part of their speech curricula.6 In a cross-checking of the SAA directory with that of the AETA, approximately forty other institutions were added to the previous listing. In all, there were 548 four-year colleges or univer- sities believed to have theatre programs, thus possibly having produced Asian plays. The Dallas Theatre Center and IASTA (Institute for Advanced Studies in the Theatre Arts) were then added to these 548 fourbyear colleges. Preparation of Questionnaires and Letters The second phase of the survey involved preparation of two questionnaires and three letters. Two letters accom- panied the two questionnaires--explaining the purposes of the survey and soliciting the respondents' cooperation. The third letter was mailed to recipients of the first question- naire as a reminder to return the form. Questionnaire I The purpose of the first of the two questionnaires used in the survey was to gather'the maximum amount of infor- mation regarding Asian theatre production at the various institutions. A 6Professor Hance was president of the Speech Associa- tion of America for the year 1960. 10 There were five questions asked in Questionnaire I. The first question asked the respondent, ”Has your Institu- tion ever been involved in the production of an Asian play?" The next question was, "Does your theatre plan to produce . an Asian play in the future?” The third question concerned attitudes toward Asian theatre: "What is the attitude of your staff regarding the advantages and disadvantages of producing Asian plays in your theatre program?" The fourth question asked the respondent to list any member of his staff having "an active interest in Asian Theatre." The last question asked him to list those staff members "who have reading ability in any Oriental language." (See Questionnaire I in Appendix.) I Questionnaire I was designed so that it could easily be filled out and returned through the mail. Only five ques- tions were asked so as to give the form an uncongested appearance, thus encouraging a quick response. It was decided that the form should be printed on colored paper to help insure that it not be lost in the shuffle on someone's desk. To make it easy to return, it was designed as a self- mailer. On the back side of the form, directions were printed for sealing and mailing. A four-cent stamp was placed on each form, to aid in handling. (Among direct mail advertisers, such a practice, though expensive, has been recognized as an effective means of increasing the percentage of response.) 11 Questionnaire II The second questionnaire was designed as a follow-up form for Questionnaire I--having the specific purpose of gathering production situation data from those directors of Asian productions reported by the first questionnaire. Questionnaire II was divided into four major parts: (I) general data, (II) playwright data, (III) translation data, and (IV) production situation data. Part I included a question concerning the origin of the director's interest in Asian theatre, together with a question asking him to explain any special problems he had encountered while producing the play in question. Parts II and III concerned the vital data regarding the playwright and the translator. In the translation section the reSpondent was asked to list where other pro- ductions of the play had been done. This question proved to be extremely helpful in uncovering some productions not recorded in Questionnaire I. Part IV was perhaps the most important section of the form-~asking information concerning the production situation. In this section questions were asked regarding level of production, number of performances, price of tickets, size of audiences, and size of budgets. Also asked were questions about general audience reaction and whether or not there were any special conditions under which the play had been produced. (See Questionnaire II in Appendix.) 12 Letters Letters of explanation There were letters of explanation accompanying Questionnaire I and Questionnaire II. For the first ques- tionnaire these letters were individually addressed to the heads of the various drama and speech departments throughout the country. The letters enclosed with the second question- naire were individually addressed to the directors of the Asian productions reported in Questionnaire I. In order to give these letters the appearance that each had been especially typed for the recipient, special printing and typing services were employed. For the 550 letters mailed with Questionnaire I, offset printing was used. The typewriter used to type the body of the letter for the offset original was later used to print the indi- vidual greetings of the printed letter. (See Sample Letter A in Appendix.) The letters being sent with Questionnaire II to the directors of Asian plays were handled differently. Since there were only about seventy-five of these letters, it was possible to have them individually typed by a stenographic service provided by the university. (See _Sample Letter B in Appendix.) In each instance where the director of this research, Dr. James Brandon, personally knew the director in question, a special letter was sent. 13 When ten weeks had elapsed after sending Question- naire I, a reminder letter was mailed to the fifty largest institutions which had not by that time replied. This letter was also handled by the university stenographic service to insure that each letter be personally typed and addressed. (See Sample Letter C in Appendix.) Coding and HandlinggData In order to organize and analyze adequately the survey data, it was realized that such a great magnitude of information could best be handled through the use of com- puter and data process services. These processes required that all facts reported in the survey be number coded for storage on IBM cards, thus enabling computations and correla- tions to be made. Therefore, it was necessary to code all institutional data, gathered by Questionnaire I, as well as all production situation data gathered by Questionnaire II. In doing this, two IBM card files were kept, one for all the institutions reporting and another for all productions discovered. On the Institution Data cards was entered an institu- tion code number, which included demographic information such as student enrollment, department size, community popu- lation, as well as region of country. Following this insti- tution code number, all data reported on Questionnare I were entered on the IBM card: number of Asian plays pro- duced, plans for future productions, attitudes toward the 14 production of Asian plays, number of individuals with active interest in Asian theatre, and staff members with Oriental language reading ability. (See Questionnaire I in Appendix.) Included on the Production Data cards were the code numbers of the reapective institutions reporting Asian play production. Each production, title, and nationality was given a separate code number. Also encoded onto these cards were translation and production situation data.. These included the name of the translator and the date of his translation, the number of performances of the production, size of the budget, price of the tickets, and the number of people attending all performances. Through the use of these two IBM card files, it was possible to compute by frequency count and correlation all essential factors necessary for a meaningful compilation of survey data. The frequency count of production and institu- tional information was handled with the assistance of the departmental adviser for computer services, Dr. William B. Lashbrook. Upon his advice it was decided that a survey such as this would be more meaningful if simply reported in terms of totals and percentages. Calculations of standard deviations, means, and other measurements would not be essential in this instance. Therefore, it was Dr. Lashbrook's recommendation that the survey employ a program for computer analysis known as One-Way. This program was designed to make frequency counts of all factors encoded on to the IBM cards used by 15 the survey. From the frequency counts thus tabulated by this program, it was possible to observe those factors that might be correlated in order to render significant informa- tion. In order to correlate the survey data by the various factors, the IBM data cards were simply sorted by a card sorter according to the types of information desired. Through this process all correlations and important statis- tical compilations were provided for the tables included in the following chapters. CHAPTER III SURVEY RESPONSE The purpose of this chapter is to report on the response of the survey population. There were 545 institu- tions included in the survey population for Questionnaire I and 132 Asian productions surveyed by Questionnaire II. Questionnaire I The overall response to this section of the survey was satisfactory. From the 545 institutions included on the mailing list for Questionnaire I, 326 forms were returned for a total reSponse of 60 per cent. (See Table 1.) This percentage of response compares favorably with Dietrich's 1948 survey.7 Response by size of institution In reporting statistics on the response to Question- naire I, it was helpful to classify institutions by the size of their student enrollment. The population divisions of this classification are presented in Table l, and are used 7Dietrich surveyed 250 institutions, with 63 per cent of them reporting. 16 17 as a guide in determining institution class throughout sub- sequent chapters.8 TABLE 1 RESPONSE TO QUESTIONNAIRE I Institu- Student No. of Institutions Percentage tion Class Enrollmenta MaIIeH Responded Reporting A 20,000 or more 34 27 79 B 15,000-20,000 29 22 76 C 10,000-15,000 46 33 72 D 6,500-10,000 62 38 61 E 3.500- 6,500 74 42 57 F 1,500- 3,500 112 64 57 G 500- 1,500 142 69 48 H less than 500 31 22 71° Otherb 15 7 47 Totals 545 326 60 8These figures are based upon 0 enin Fall Enrollment 126;, published by U. S. Department of HeEItE, EducaEIon, and e are. bThis class includes institutions not included in the above publication, and two professional companies (Dallas Theatre Center and IASTA). cMany of those in this class reported having no theatre prOgram. - One observation to be made about Table 1 concerns the percentage of reportings by class of institution. Note that the percentage of reportings per class progressively declines from classes A through G. Although class H has a A 8Dietrich found that it was helpful to report various statistics by size of institution. 18 high percentage, many of the respondents in this class reported having no theatre program. There is a clear indication that the larger the institution the higher the preportion of response. There may be two reasons for this phenomenon. The smaller the institution, the smaller the drama program. The smaller the drama program, the smaller the prospect for the production of Asian plays. If such is the case, these non-producing institutions may be less inclined to reSpond to this survey than those who have produced Asian plays. Another probable cause for the poorer reaponse among smaller institutions could be that the smaller the institu- tion, the greater the probability that the institution has no theatre program at all. In other words, those institutions having never produced an Asian play, or having no drama program, are less likely than other institutions to respond to the survey. Rggicnal response In Table 2, the reSponses to Questionnaire I are reported by region of the country. As shown in Illustra- tion I, there are four of these regions: Eastern, Central, Southern, and Western.9 These regions include those states 9The states included within the four regions are as follows: Eastern re ion--Connecticut, Delaware, District of Columbia, MaIne, MaryIand, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, West Virginia. l9 ILLUSTRATION I NATIONAL REGIONS Central Pemion Western Region* Eastern Region Southern Regio *Included in the Western Region are Hawaii and Alaska. 20 as they have been apportioned by the national organization of SAA. These regional classifications will be observed throughout subsequent chapters. TABLE 2 REGIONAL RESPONSE TO QUESTIONNAIRE I Surve Res onse Region Surve Po ulstion' % 0% I of TOTEI % 0T T0531 Total Region Pop. Total Pop. EASTERN 124- 23 75 60 23 CENTRAL 202 37 121 60 37 SOUTHERN 122 22 72 59 22 WESTERN 97 18 58 60 18 Totals 545 100 326 60a 100 3This figure represents the percentage of total response. Probably the most notable feature of Table 2, is that although the total responses per region vary greatly, ranging from 58 to 121, these replies are about in proporb tion to the number in the region's original survey popula- tion. This has resulted in a nearly identical distribution Central re ion--Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Michigan, MInnesoTa, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Dakota, Wisconsin. Southern re ion-~Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, ou s ana, M ssissippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Virginia. Western re ion-~Alaska, Arizona, California, 0010- rado, HawaII, 13550, Montana, New Mexico, Nevada, Oregon, Utah, Washington, Wyoming. 21 in the percentage of response from the four regions. The East, Central, and Western states each show a reaponse of 60 per cent, while the South has 59 Per cent. The evenness of this response distribution would indicate that whatever factors affected the reaponse in one region were equally operative in the other three regions. Questionnaire II 0f the 132 productions surveyed through Question- naire II, 43 of the forms were returned, giving a response of 33 per cent. (See Table 3.) Although this may appear to be a poor showing for Questionnaire II, it must be remem- bered that many of the Asian productions surveyed by this form were staged several years ago. Many of the directors reported as having produced an Asian play were no longer in the employment of the reporting institution. Several of the questionnaires were returned, some with notes attached saying that the director was no longer alive or that his present address was unknown. Response by size of institution Table 3 shows the response to Questionnaire II by institution class. The range of response is from 17 per cent in Class D to 69 per cent in Class E. There is abso- lutely no indication of a relationship between institution size and degree of reaponse. One probable reason for this lack of relationship between size of institution and response is that many of the 22 directors intended to receive Questionnaire II were no longer at the producing institution. This apparently was true of institutions regardless of class. This theory is given support by the fact that of the 43 productions reported in Questionnaire II, 36, or 83 per cent of them, were productions taking place since 1960. This indicates that date of production was a strong factor in determining the reaponse to this questionnaire. TABLE 3 RESPONSE TO QUESTIONNAIRE II No. of In- No. of Pro- Insti- stitutions No. of ductions % Reaponding tution Producing Plays Reported in to Question- Class Asian Plays Produced Questionnaire]! naire II A 9 22 8 36 B 7 26 5 19 C 9 18 6 33 D 8 l2 2 17 E 7 l3 9 69 F 7 l2 4 33 G 9 17 3 18 H 3 4 l 25 Other 3 8 5a 63 Totals 62 132 43b 33° 8'This figure represents only the plays reported by IASTA. bThis figure does not include forms returned blank. °Percentages have been rounded. 23 Regional reaponse Table 4 shows that the response to Questionnaire II varies greatly among the four regions. The South leads with 50 per cent responding, followed by the Central region with 40 per cent. The East is next, having 29 per cent reSponse, while the West shows only 15 per cent. TABLE 4 REGIONAL RESPONSE TO QUESTIONNAIRE II :=============================================================== Asian Productions Res onse Regions Surve ed % 0? Re- % OT ToTaI NumEer % OT ToTaI Number gional Total Survey EASTERN 28 21 8 29 19 CENTRAL 52 39 21 40 47 SOUTHERN 18 14 9 50 21 WESTERN 34a 26 5 15 12 TOTALS 132 100 43 33b 100 aThis figure is significantly affected by the Univer- sity of Hawaii's having produced fifteen Asian plays. bThis represents the percentage of the total reaponse. In total number of production reSponses to the second questionnaire, the Central region, with twenty-one, leads all others by better than a two to one margin. The South is next with nine responses, followed by the Eastern region with eight, and the West with five. It is apparent that geography is not a factor in the amount of response to Questionnaire II. 24 Conclusions Although size of institution and regional factors are correlative to the degree of response received from Questionnaire I, this does not appear to be true of the response to Questionnaire II. In the case of the second questionnaire, the response seems to hinge more on the date of the production in question. Recent productions are more likely to be reported than earlier ones. The more recent the Asian production, the greater the probability of having the questionnaire reach the hands of the production’s director. Many reapondents to the two questionnaires did not fill in their forms completely. Despite this fact, however, the amount of data gathered by the survey was large. About 10,000 facts were compiled for the 87 variables included in the two forms. Subsequent chapters will be devoted to the detailed reporting and analysis of this information. CHAPTER IV INSTITUTIONS PRODUCING ASIAN PLAYS This chapter is devoted to reporting significant data regarding those institutions having produced at least one Asian play. Through Questionnaire I, 62 institutions reported having staged a total of 132 Asian productions during the period 1929 to 1966. Of the 326 respondents to Questionnaire I, the 62 institutions producing Asian plays represents 19 per cent. (See Table 5.) To make this data more meaningful, it has been pre- sented in this chapter by institution size, region of the country, and the number of Asian plays produced by the various institutions. Class ofpgnstitutions EgoducingpAsian Plays In Table 5, Asian play productions are reported by institution class. In this table there are several inter- esting correlations that can be pointed out-~perhaps the most obvious being the even distribution among the classes of the number of institutions having produced at least one Asian play. Classes A, C, and G each have nine producing 25 26 TABLE 5 -_-5-1m'~m 1w ' 1+ r N -.J-A~v::0;13 5.4.1. .LA mtJD 131A, («DIAS b #1 Class of Institution 5* c D :5 F G Raiser of institutions included in the survey Number of institutions returning Ques- tionnaire I' ‘ 01" CI insti.doio s r “rO'jL101h‘: Asian plays 'umber of Asian plays produced 5 of insti- tutions pro- ducing of sur- vey population 3 of Total of plavs produced Average 30. of productions per producing ' institution "‘4 (A \21 O 29 a; £2 74 112 142 '. . 7.- - a v .\.’- ‘ '77. 3d 13 12 13 12 17 7 2.0 1.5 1.8 1.7 1.8 [U ~1 \.~.i G) (A \r.‘ h.) 545 \fi 1‘.) C '\ (;\ F0 132 15 100 2.1 *This colu .n is strw ily affected by the University 'with fifteen productions. Hawaii, 27 institutions. Class D has eight, while B, E, and F have seven each. The only radical deviation is seen in Class H, having three institutions with Asian production experience. Though this distribution may lead one to assume at first glance that size of institution is not a determining factor in the production of Asian plays, this distribution is mis- leading. The fact is that size of institution is a strong factor in both number of Asian plays produced and percentage of institutions producing. The number of plays produced by institutions in classes A through H tends progressively to decline. Only in classes B and G is there a significant reversal to this progression. Notice, however, that the University of Hawaii falls into class B. This institution alone accounts for fifteen of the twenty-six Asian productions. The only explanation to the reversal indicated by the seventeen productions in class G is found by taking into account the exceptionally large survey population of 142 institutions in this category. A similar progressive decline is also apparent in Table 5 when noting the percentage of institutions producing among the eight classes. Here there is a near perfect pro- gression from 26 per cent in class A to 6 per cent in class G. Only the 10 per cent in class H does not conform to the pattern. Again, size of institution is a factor when observing the per cent of the total number of plays produced. It is 28 not as pronounced in this correlation as in others, but it is apparent. Classes A through 0 note 17, 20, and 14 per cent, respectively, while D through H have 9, 10, 9, 13, and 3 per cent. The last indication of the effect of institution size upon the number of Asian productions is seen in the average number of productions per producing institution. In this correlation, classes A through 0 average 2.4, 3.7, and 2.0 productions per producing institution, while classes D to H average 1.5, 1.8, 1.7, 1.8, and 1.3, reSpectively. There may be two reasons for the strong correlation between size of institution and frequency of Asian produc- tion. First, it is probable that larger institutions gen- erally have larger drama programs with larger faculties. This being the case, it is reasonable to assume that the larger the faculty of a particular drama program, the greater is the probability that there will be members of the faculty having an interest in producing Asian plays. A second possible explanation for the greater fre- quency of Asian play production with the increase in insti- tution size may be found in the results of Dietrich's survey of 1948.10 In his report he found that as student enroll- ment increased, there was an increase in the total number of productions offered by institutions during the season. This being the case, it is likely that as the number of play IODietrich, op. cit., p. 184. 29 offerings increases, the probability for the selection of Asian plays for production also increases. Institutions Producing Asian Plays by Region Perhaps the most striking statistic in Table 6, which depicts producing institutions by region of the country, is the marked lead by the Central states in total number of Asian plays produced. This region reported 52 productions, or 39 per cent of all 132 plays reported by the survey. The West is next with 34 productions (26%), followed by the East, having 28 (21%). From the South there were 18 productions, for 14 per cent of the national total. Though the Central states are far ahead of other regions in total number of Asian productions, this fact is misleading. One explanation for this greater number of productions is that there is a significantly larger number of institutions in the Central region than in any other region. The important fact to notice in Table 6 is that though the Central states lead in number of institutions reporting Asian productions, twenty-six to fourteen, ten, and twelve, the percentage of institutions producing does not vary greatly. The Eastern, Central, and Western regions show about the same percentage figures, 19, 21, and 21 per cent, respectively. Only the South shows a large difference with 14 per cent. 30 TABLE 6 PRODUCING INSTITUTIONS REPORTED BY REGION OF THE COUNTRY _ Regions Eastern Centr Southern western Totals N0 0 0f IrLSt 11311- ticns Returning 75 121 72 58 326 Questionnaire I No. and Percent of Institutions Pro- 14 26 10 12 62 ducing Asian Plays (19%) (21%) (14%) (21%) (19%) No. and Percent of Asian Plays 28 52 18 34 132 Produced (21%) (39%) (14%) (25%) (100%) Average Number of Plays per Producing Institution 2.0 2.0 1.8 2.8 2.1 A similarly even distribution can be seen in the average number of plays per producing institution. The Eastern, Central and Southern regions average 2, 2, and 1.8 plays, respectively. Although the Western region shows an average of 2.8 plays, this significant difference is due to the University of Hawaii having fifteen productions to its credit. Aside from this institution, the Western region would average about the same number of plays per producing institution as the other three regions. It is apparent from Table 6 that in the Eastern, Central, and Western regions of the United States, geography is not a factor in determining the per cent of institutions 31 having produced Asian plays. Only in the South is this factor evident. In the Eastern, Central, and Western regions there is a proportionate distribution of interest in Asian theatre production while Asian productions have not been encouraged in the South. Asian Play Production by_1nstitution Experience The number of Asian plays produced at various insti- tutions is reported in Table 7. There are two things in particular in this table that are interesting to note. First, the 33 institutions producing one Asian play each accann:for 53 per cent of all the producing institutions, but this 53 per cent has produced only 25 per cent of the 132 productions recorded by the survey. Perhaps this is an indication that many of the pro- ductions at these thirty-three institutions were unsuccessful, thus discouraging further attempts at Asian drama. Several reSpondents remarked on the "poor audience acceptance" of their Asian productions. One director said that he would "never again" try to produce an Asian play. ' Remarks such as the latter imply that the lack of production success discourages further interest in Asian play production. As it will be shown in a later chapter, some of this production failure may be due to a general lack of knowledge of Asian staging technology. 32 TABLE 7 INSTITUTIONS REPORTED BY NUMBER OF ASIAN PLAYS PRODUCED W Number of Fla 8 Produced I 2 3 4 5 ‘6“ More Totals Number of Producing Institutions 33 14 6 4 2 2 1a 62 % of Total Institutions Producing 53 23 10 6 3 3 2 100 Number of Productions 33 28 18 16 10 12 15 132 Percent of Total Number of Productions 25 21 14 12 8 9 11 100 aThis figure represents the University of Hawaii. The next point worth commenting on in Table 7 is that 29 (47%) of the institutions producing have staged 2 or more Asian plays, or 75 per cent of the total number of 132 productions. Fourteen institutions staged Asian plays twice. Six institutions produced three times; four pro- duced four times. Two institutions presented five plays each, while two others staged six apiece. One institution, the University of Hawaii, has pre- sented fifteen Asian productions. Since Earle Ernst produced the first post-World War II Japanese play in this country in 1947, entitled The Defeated, this university has led the way in the performance of Asian theatre. The fifteen Asian 33 presentations at this institution account for 11 per cent of all productions recorded by the survey. All institutions producing more than one Asian play are listed in Table 8. The number of productions at these twenty-nine more experienced institutions is indicated by dates. In Table 8 there are seventeen instances in which institutions have produced two or more Asian plays within a single year. Note, too, that there are twelve instances in which Asian plays are produced at the same institution in succession of two years. Both of these facts would imply that plays presented by institutions where these two phenomena occur were done with some degree of success. At these institutions it was likely that some member of the staff was acquainted with the production techniques of Asian theatre: Earle Ernst, American scholar on Asian theatre, directs the theatre pro- gram at the University of Hawaii East-West Center; at Michigan State University another prominent scholar in Asian drama, James Brandon, has presented Asian plays with excel- lent success; Lester Moore of the Rutgers University drama department has demonstrated a consistent interest in Asian play production; and IASTA's John Mitchell has endeavored to bring the best theatre artists of the Orient to this country to teach professional theatre people the technology of staging Asian plays. ‘v -50. Produc- " . i. U l OALS AS P BY D 3L: T 11131.: 13 8 RODUCIHG THE MOST ASIAN PLAYS ATES OE PRODUCTION Institutions O\ O\ [‘0 ID MR) ODUJWUU-IKNKN b-P #‘kb’lU'IC-C-U‘I MMMI‘JMMPOIUIU University of Hawaii IASTA U. of South Dahota Nichigan State University Rutgers University Iowa State University Lake Erie College (Ohio) University of Illinois U. of Southern Calif. Abilene Christian College Elmira Cells 0 (N.Y.) Hanover College (1nd.) Northwestern Col. (Iowa)a University of Arkansas University of Oregon Art Inst. of Chicago Columbia U., Teachers Col East Carolina Col. (1.0.) Long Island University Kary Washington College (Virginia) Ohio University Pomona College (Calif.) Stanford University Texas Christian Universit University of Iowa University of Yichigan University of Washington Western Kentucky State Yale University swooi k» PH m H FHJFJ . '3 I MIDI-'4 R) y I_ I F“ {U |’-’ "4 \O U1 Totals 13 3 8 8 7 4 7 10 l3 l7 aThe production dates of bOne date was not report these three plays were not reported. ed. 35 Because of their Special knowledge of and apprecia- tion for Asian theatre, these four men have made their institutions leaders in the production of Asian drama in the United States. Conclusions In concluding, there are several implications and trends presented in this chapter worth recapitulating. 1. Size of institution is an important factor in production of Asian plays. The larger the institution, the greater the frequency of Asian productions. 2. The percentage of institutions producing Asian plays in three regions of the country is nearly equal; however, the South trails the other regions in the proportion of institutions having produced Asian plays. 3. Most Asian plays (75%) have been presented by a minority of producing institutions (47%). CHAPTER V ASIAN PLAY PRODUCTIONS Of the 132 productions of Asian plays reported by the survey, seventy-three were Japanese, thirty-one Chinese, twenty-four Indian, one Indonesian, one Burmese, one Korean, and one Thai. (See Table 9.) These reportings cover a thirty-seven year period-~from 1929 to 1966. Although it is certain that several Asian plays were presented in this country by professional and amateur groups before 1929, none was reported in Questionnaire I. However, in the course of reviewing the earliest English translations of Asian plays, several such productions were discovered. Earliest Asian Plgys Produced in the United States The emission from this survey of all the very earliest productions of Asian plays is regrettable. How- ever, it is known that two such presentations were performed by institutions that fit into the survey population. But probably because of limitations of memory by respondents, they were not reported in Questionnaire I. 36 37' The earliest of these was a production of Kalidasa's Shakuntala at Smith College in 1904, directed by Miss Alice Morgan Wright.ll Another production of Shakuntala was . staged in 1914 at the University of California when Arthur Ryder staged his own version. His translation was again used in 1919 at a New York production at the Greenwich Tillage Theatre.12 A In 1924 Ryder's translation of The Little Clay Cart was produced at the Neighborhood Playhouse in New York.13 From 1930 to the present day, this play and the Chinese, Lady Precious Stream, have been produced more frequently than any other Asian plays. (See Tables 11 and 12.) Since that year, each has been produced ten times. It would seem likely that between the 1924 production of The Little Clay [2551 and the one reported in 1930, there probably were others not accounted for by this survey. Titles of Asian Plays In Tables 10 through 13, there are listed by nation- ality, the dates and titles of various Asian plays produced in this country. In all, there are sixty-three titles: llsamuei A. Eliot, Jr. (ed.), Little Theatre Classics Vol. 4 (Boston: Little Brown and 00., I922), p. VI. 12Ibid. 13Sudraka, The Little Cla Cart, trans. Arthur Wm. Ryder (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard UnIversity; Harvard Oriental Series, 1905). nHu “(J H, F\ H H n n A H n N n N H H .IHIvOH H AL— a) 01 (U pa :4 rd .4 F‘ vi FJ I4 r‘ C) rd F1 H H sedan a cough seam use uncanny .ueaaaenm nee-nopas on“ one: no sauna can oaaacualoo ea aaocvn onn aneuu uflhoflh OOHHHGO ‘05.“ «A msaaeooauu degrees can one no sauna . so: season sauna nauuopuem sense we saunas any sauna» neeaoonm neon udduoa r -IIflflflflulflflunuflnflflflflflflflHWl mm mo #0 no mo Ho 00 mm mm pm mm mm em mm mm Hm om as J as as es me as me as as ea an on pm mm mm en nn mm an on mm Iodvda 1‘ onaoonomm mo «4%» »m mmans mmMZon essamqa mnH om mm Ha ad ma m nausea e ms em an a sa mm m a e a a s e NH N m N H sheave enouanun H nadcuH H oaonanu nausea ooumo sauna mouao ooumm mm1sm mmumm emnnm mmuan cm.awmenbwlmwnms «suns meuas oeumn nnnsn onnmn snunn mnuan onnam mama seasonease- meaa rm yeHgaonem—>2 E—Lafl 1ICCCC-——C2 OcmmH—Ozz>—wm _ Emacao: 2930 “Comic: i253: ZOHm” m3: 2. 6.: mamas—no: ram :22. @3983 9: >39: 13.. an .1:— mvvnnnmmnn v65. 835322.. :— manta—wan "Em 9.812538. 8» am: nous—9 :5 $8033 «o: :m. .592 Acnmao: oan “2. 32:2 968:? IA ‘1 I | All! 1" <3. 20 H. In... v65. mamas—no: «<2. can: 3376a 3 3n Eons—nae: o... m: >3»: 23% A v A V = :vdm... Beam» :3 Ava—on: Euvxcx. H—Hrm Om vr>< z>doz>EH< wr>Hm 40m 2o. N. Comm «9:. 92:3 Es: 8 Eons...» s: >3»: 33. A: :5 322% A V A v 8 : zit... an»: :9 ea_o.m..,t. PEPE—h 65m m H—Hrm .r. “MA... .EQIH omzwm Z>H52>EH< Om. vwoccnfioz w. arm: Am :8 33:9... cm «65. m8 . i..-_._,. awam are mmmpm= 135 A: v.2: 32:3 Rom—dare A. @535 :3 2:. 30.3763 om v.9: mg: £er :36 a: snag 383m" A: >mms= "ram—Sm. Z>zm vow—:02 m. trauma :3 are 32:72.6 om SE. was: 15 ruse Sufism 93:3. was: 012.3— _m=mcomn Amy. z>zm F>Zac>om Amy No return envelope necessary. Remove tape cover to seal. Fold here james Brandon Speech Department 1-15 Auditorium Michigan State University East Lansing. Michigan 48823 Fold hch -A...__ 109 ASIAN PLAY PRODUCTION QUESTIONNAIRE II Name of Institution Address Name of respondent Title of play in question NOTE: Your production of an Asian play is a pioneer effort. What you have done, how you have done it, and why, is of interest to many people. Please share your experience with others by taking the time to fill in this form. PART I. GENERAL DATA 1. What significant experiences have formed your interest in Asian theatrical forms? 2. Were there special problems encountered in pro- ducing this Asian play? (Economic, Artistic, Academic, etc.) Explain PART 1. 110 II. THE PLAYWRIGHT Name Nationality Address (if living) ’ PART III. THE TRANSLATOR(S) l. Name(s) Of translator(s) Address (if living) Position (if living) Approximate date of translation The original language of the play DO you know of productions of this translation by groups other than your own? Please list. (producing group) (pIace) (date) (producing group) (placeT ITdaté) Has this translation been published? Publisher's name Address Comments: 111 PART IV. PRODUCTION SITUATION 1. At what level was this play produced? (Major bill, experimental, classroom, etc.) 2. How many performances? 3. Prices of tickets 4. Approximate size of audiences 5. General reactions of the audience 6. Approximate production budget 7. Please describe any Special conditions under which the play was cast, rehearsed, and pro- duced, (i.e., guest director, foundation assistance, Asian student assistance, extra long rehearsal period, etc.). 8. Comments: 112 Sample Letter A Dear Dr. Ernst: The AfrO~Asian Theatre Project of AETA is engaged in a survey Of the production of Asian plays in educational theatres in this country. Your cooperation is indispensable to the success of this project. Please take a few minutes to answer the five questions on the attached form. The form is very short, being primarily designed to gauge your institution's interest in the production of Asian plays in the past and in the foreseeable future. Even if you have never produced such plays, please complete the form. As you will notice, it is designed for Speedy return, being stamped and self-addressed. I want to express to you my sincere thanks before hand for giving this request your attention. Best regards, James Brandon Associate Professor AETA Afro-Asian Theatre Project Asian Theatre Production Survey 113 Sample Letter B (Address) Dear I was delighted to learn from your reply to the ques- tionnaire of the AETA Afro-Asian Theatre Project, that you are one of the select few who has produced an Asian play. Your unique experience staging oriental drama is of value to many other theatre artists. The AETA Afro-Asian Theatre Project would like to know as much as possible about how you went about producing Asian drama with American college students. Could you please tell us about your experience by filling in the enclosed form? It relates to your total production situation. The amount of time that you take to fill in this questionnaire will be small, but what you have to say is very necessary to making our research meaningful. When you finish the questionnaire, use the stamped, self- addressed envelope included for your convenience. Please accept my sincere thanks for assisting in our survey. With my very best regards, James Brandon Associate Professor AETA Afro-Asian Theatre Project Asian Theatre Production Survey JB/cs enc. 114 Sample Letter C (Address) Dear : In January we sent a letter to your institution concerning the AETA Afro-Asian Theatre Project. In con- junction with this project we were surveying the Asian plays produced in this country by educational theatre groups. As yet we have not received a reply from your institution. . Even if you have never roduced an Asian la at your institution, wouId you pIease take one mInuIe to return the enclosed form. The amount of time you take to reply will be small, but what you have to say is indispensable to making our research meaningful. I am sure that this request has simply been over- looked. Please accept my sincere thanks for assisting us in this survey. With my very best regards, James Brandon Associate Professor AETA Afro-Asian Theatre Project Asian Theatre Production Survey JB/cs 9110 o BIBLIOGRAPHY BIBLIOGRAPHY Ch'uan, Wang Pao. Lady Precious Stream. Translated by S. J. Hsuing. New York: Liveright Publishing Corp., 1935. Duran, Leo. Plays of Old Japan. New York: Thomas Seltzer, 1921. Ernst, Earle. The Kabuki Theatre. New York: Grove Press Inc., 1956. Hui-lan-chi (Klabund). The Circle of Chalk. Translated by James Laver. Lofidon: William Hernemann Ltd., 1929. Iwasaki, Yozan and Hughes, Glenn. Three Modern Ja anese Plays. Cincinnati: Stewart Kidd Co., I923. Keene, Donald. Major Plays of Chikamatsu. New York and London: Columbia University Press, 1961. Kerymberg, Alfred (ed.). Poetic Drama. New York: Modern Age Books, 1941. Kwan, Kikuchi. Tojuro's Love,_and Four Other Plays. Japan: Hakuseida Press, 1925. Mishima, Yukio. Five Modern N5 Pla 8. Translated by Donald Keene. London: Seeker and Warburg, 1957. Miyamori, Asataro and Nichols, Robert. Mastegpieces of Chikamatsu. London: Kegan, Pau , French, Tru ner and Company, Ltd., 1926. Obata, Shigeyoshi. The Melon Thief. New York: Samuel French Inc., 1923. Scott, A. C. The Kabuki Theatre of Japan. London: Allen and Unwin, 1956. Waley, Arthur. The NO Plays of Japan. New York: Grove Press, Inc., 1922. 116 117 Article Dietrich, John E. "Survey of Dramatic Activity in American Colleges: 1946-1947,“ uarterl Journal of S eech, Vol. 34 (April, 1948), p. I85. HICHIGQN STRTE UNIV. LIBRQRIES ! !!|!!! !! l!!!|! ! l 1293107318234 !!| 3