Abstract
This study investigates the role theater historiography, censorship, staged repertoire, anthologies, and educational institutions’ syllabi have played in the theatrical canon formation in Cuba. I argue that each of those processes does not contribute to the development of the Cuban theatrical canon in the ways in which dominant narratives of Cuban Theater history and hierarchical naming powers have been traditionally addressing it and, consequently, informing our understanding of the subject matter. I examine how the production of discourses on Cuban Theater deals with questions such as periodization —not only because of what they include but also because of what they leave out— and practices that legitimize or censor. In order to evaluate the impact that theater anthologies have on the formation of the canon, I introduce the conceptual distinction between anthologies of diachronic intention and anthologies of synchronic intention. I argue for a much-needed reconsideration of the scope of anthologies and staged repertoire in the process of canon formation, and, consequently, of the systematic canonization operated by historiography from a perspective that validates the centrality of the stage in order to evaluate a theatrical canon. This dissertation contributes to our understanding of the combined processes that have been shaping and continue to shape what can be called Cuban Theater.