Theatrical activity in Algeria 1945-1980

Introduction 11 Editor’s Note: A Proposed Framework for Interpreting M. Djellid’s Magister 15 I. General Approach I 29 I.1. On the General Logic of the Essay 29 I.2. On the Objectives, Subject Matter and Choice of Case Studies 30 I.3. General Research Question 41 I.3.1. General position on the period: 1954–1978 41 I.3.2. General position on significant processes 42 I.3.3. General position on methodology and overall structure 51 General remarks 1 51 General remarks 2 51 General remarks 3 52 In conclusion 52 II. The Central Conceptual Matrix (The Unity of Diversity) 57 II.1. General remarks on fundamental concepts 57 II.2. A general attempt to position fundamental concepts 62 II.2.1. The concept of the theatrical nebula 62 II.2.2. The concept of conglomeration activity 68 II.2.3. The concept of representation and dissemination activity 73 General remarks 1 77 General remarks 2 78 General commentary 79 III. The central conceptual matrix (open outline of positioning) in relation to the F.E.S 81 III.1. The general relationship to the period: (change – general division – periodisation) 81 III.1.1. General profile of development 81 III.1.2. General indications regarding changes 82 III.1.3. General profile of the development of theatrical activity 84  III.2. The general relationship to the F.E.S. 90 III.2.1. General profile 90 III.2.2. Schematic summary 95 III.3. The general relationship to the transition 97 III.4. General positioning of the central conceptual matrix 110

The author conducted a thorough, meticulous, and original investigation, initiated by examining embryonic theatrical forms (songs, folk dances, poetic recitations, festive performances in homes and madrasas, school ensembles, etc.) found in all social practices and cultural genres of Algerian society over approximately four decades (1945-1980). He deserves credit for integrating these forms into the concept of "theatrical activity," which he defines as follows: "In terms of theatrical activity, more than any other artistic and cultural activity, it is a highly 'socialized' activity, deeply intertwined with the economic and social foundations of social formation" (p. 37). This study is remarkable for the breadth and importance of the corpus it explores. The following statistics suffice to illustrate the sheer scale of the undertaking and the subject matter: "They focus primarily on nearly 700 theatrical conglomerates out of almost 2,000 identified or inventoried between 1949 and 1980" (p. 53); "As for the theatrical performances identified, 1,500 plays, themes, or theatrical outlines" (p. 53); "Eight years of research" (p. 68). This gives it a rare, perhaps unique, historical and heritage-related function in this field of research. The documentary value of this study stems from its comprehensive approach, encompassing all cultural expressions of this society within a specific historical period, from their most basic social manifestations in everyday life to their culmination in the refined aesthetic forms of dramatic art. Theatrical expression is merely the visible manifestation of the profound evolution of any society, a paradox often obscured by its reduction to aesthetic appreciation as an end in itself. The researcher's consistent commitment to initiating their analysis through in vivo observation throughout this work confirms, by its very coherence, the methodological and scientific contribution of this research. Its unique nature, rooted in the practical application of fieldwork, attests to the specific nature of its transcription into an academic tool (dissertation). The stages of this process are punctuated by observations on the inherent difficulties of data collection, as well as the reluctance of participants to share their experiences with the researcher. These reflections on these stages ultimately lead to the development of a metadiscourse on the methodology employed in this assiduous pursuit of information.