ABSTRACT
Historiography must take into account the positions assumed by writers in their writing of history. But what happens when there is little material to go on, and what does exist was written under conditions that obstructed freedom? Between the last decades of the nineteenth century and the middle of the twentieth century, Tunisia shifted from a colonised country to an independent state that was then subjected to dictatorial rule for fifty-five years. At present, it is developing a democratic process after having gone through a revolution that saw people battling for their rights in the streets. The country now looks towards a future where the right to freedom of expression no longer has to be defended. The power dynamics across society that resulted from the different types of political regime, and that have influenced the writing of history, oblige the historiographer to find ways to examine the past not only through what has been written about it, but chiefly through perspectives of the present. Within this context, how does one account for theatre’s position vis-à-vis the power structures that play a determining role in its evolution? Michel Foucault’s concept of genealogy provides a critical interpretive tool to analyse theatre’s power relations that are only partially recorded by history. To what extent was theatre practice determined by power, and how did practices resist official power structures? What kind of power relations did theatre itself create with respect to the regime that controlled it and its audiences?
