Dominic Dromgoole’s latest publication, Time Frames, challenges the conventional perception of proscenium arch theatre as stagnant, revealing a surprisingly dynamic history of innovation. The book demonstrates how this architectural format provided the stage for daring experiments by influential figures ranging from Anton Chekhov to Bertolt Brecht.
Dromgoole structures his narrative around a curated selection of more than 70 playwrights active between 1865 and 1965, a period when the proscenium arch was the dominant theatrical model. Rather than viewing the constraints of this era as limiting, he characterizes the format as “liberatingly restrictive,” drawing parallels to the creative discipline found in the 14-line sonnet or the 12-bar blues structure.
While contemporary theatre often celebrates diverse configurations such as open, apron, traverse, and circular stages, Dromgoole’s work rekindles appreciation for the historical framework that once enclosed plays. The author, known for his own previous efforts in theatrical curation, brings a director’s perspective to what could easily have been a standard critical overview, resulting in a text that is described as both deeply personal and rigorously argumentative.
Does this mean the open stage trend is just another phase? I wonder if modern audiences still connect with the framed perspective.
I was shocked to learn about the sheer volume of experimentation in that era. Brecht and Chekhov used it so differently than we do today.
Finally, someone recognizes that constraints can be creatively liberating. A refreshing counter-narrative to the ‘proscenium is dead’ crowd.