This chapter explores the interplay of voices, poses, and masks that mark all of Nietzsche’s writings, but especially his later writings. His models are the ancient Cynics and “Lui,” the titular hero of Diderot’s satirical dialogue, Le Neveu de Rameau. A latter-day Cynic, Lui is a pantomime artist who uses physical and vocal mimicry to expose social hypocrisy through a shameless display of parrhēsia. Both Lui and the Cynics, literary artifacts themselves, explore philosophical problems in a performative mode that is hostile to conventions of all kinds, including those that govern literature and philosophy. Nietzsche follows suit with his own polyphonic and multi-gestural style of presentation, now directed at a late nineteenth-century audience. A self-conscious poseur and master of the falsetto, Nietzsche is supremely aware of his ability to trigger and lay bare his contemporaries’ ideas, fantasies, and fears by giving voice to them, not least by “sampling” them through a kind of theatrical extroversion of roles that are even today routinely mistaken for his own. A cultural pathologist whose primary object is the material of cultural fantasy itself, Nietzsche is ultimately concerned to critique the conventions that produce the very categories of literature and philosophy.

The court assembled around the prince consisted of his family and ministers, but also attracted all those who might need to seek royal authority for their own affairs. Molière was one of the King’s officers and was well acquainted with this milieu, which took form throughout the seventeenth century. During the first decades of his reign in particular, Louis XIV used entertainment to keep the members of his entourage in place by offering them opportunities to meet and experience his power in a pleasant way. The Parisian theatre troupes were regularly invited to appear before the King and Molière displayed a notable talent not only in presenting his own plays but also in combining within a single spectacle – the comedy-ballets, which were the highlights of these usually composite entertainments, and which were particularly well-suited to their context – spoken drama with music, meals, balls, and even fireworks. Devised to suit the individual circumstances, theatre could thereby offer a welcome moment of relaxation, particularly during the carnival period – a true breathing space in this environment where all was constrained according to the power relations in operation.

An exploration of brecht's most overtly tragic play .

This chapter tracks what happened when America’s virus crisis became heavily politicized, even weaponized. Moreover, the pandemic was politicized not only at home but abroad, specifically regarding Sino-American relations, which deteriorated significantly from what they had been for four decades previous. At home were two obvious casualties. The first was the truth. The president’s proclivity outrageously to lie, now also about Covid-19, and his enablers’ proclivity no matter what to protect him, became increasingly costly. Now the cost was not only public trust but people’s lives. The second casualty to be chronicled was the comity of the American body politic. The growing divisiveness was symbolized by the wearing, or the not wearing, of masks which came to be emblematic of what here is called the politics of the pandemic.

The scientific understanding of the disease was broadly the same the world over. But in some instances, scientific disagreements did have repercussions for the preventive tactics chosen. The authorities there accepted Traditional Chinese Medicine as a tool against Covid-19 in a way not true elsewhere. Herd immunity was the belief that if the disease were allowed to run through the population, killing many in the process, the outcome would be broad immunity among the survivors. That would bring the pandemic to a halt. Some nations seem to have toyed with this strategy, though the increased mortality it would cause was politically hard to stomach. Asymptomatic carriers were the infected who spread the disease even though they did not themselves suffer any apparent ill consequences. They could be identified only through widespread testing and posed dangers to others since no one knew who was an asymptomatic carrier. Some people and places were thought to be superspreaders, conveying the disease to many more people than would ordinarily be true. If they could be identified, the payoff in preventive terms was great. Masks, finally, were an initially controversial means of prevention that gradually gained recognition and acceptance. Nonetheless, their use remained a suspect technique, disregarded by many.

Public health has been given over ever more to individual citizens to vouchsafe. Democracy requires its participants to take responsibility for themselves, not be ordered about by a state. That applies primarily to chronic and lifestyle diseases, where the individual can have an effect. But epidemic diseases have not disappeared, though they are no longer as important in the industrialized world as earlier. To prevent pandemics, the state and its interventions are still needed. Because every infected person poses a threat to others, and no one wants to bear the inconvenience of preventive measures, statutory enforcement is required. This dilemma came out starkly in the coronavirus pandemic. In effect, the state held a third of humanity in house arrest during the spring of 2020. In other ways, it regulated its subjects drastically, with fines and even jail for violating pandemic restrictions. But not all violation of required behavior could be just made unlawful. To get people to wear masks, for example, passing laws and regulations was not very effective. Citizens had to buy-in to the need for masks and adopt them voluntarily. Much the same will hold for a vaccine, if and when one becomes available.

What can be done about the relative lack of doctrinal protections for privacy while in public? How can society – and the law – begin to recognize and appreciate that privacy while navigating public space is of critical importance, particularly for marginalized communities, and worthy of doctrinal protection? In this chapter, after first elaborating and deepening extant proffered justifications for a right to public privacy, I bolster these justifications by underscoring what is, perhaps, a more direct constitutional/doctrinal value served by a right to public privacy. In addition to facilitating future speech and attempts to freely associate (as rightly emphasized by many defenders of public privacy), attempts to preserve a degree of privacy or anonymity in public (often undertaken by members of marginalized groups) are frequently a form of performative and expressive opposition to an ever expanding surveillance society and, as explained in Chapter 3, may be protected as symbolic, expressive conduct under the First Amendment.

This chapter examined the foundations of Judge John T. Noonan Jr.’s personalist jurisprudence. It looks first at some principal sources for his work, in particular Étienne Gilson and Jacques Maritain. It then engages in a close analysis of Noonan’s book, Persons and Masks of the Law, reflecting on the ways in which Noonan insists that while rules matter in the legal process, rules depend for their efficacy on the persons applying, complying, and evaluating those rules. The chapter then shifts its focus to consider two further aspects of Noonan’s thought: the centrality of narrative and love to the operation of the law. We are defined by narrative, Noonan demonstrates. This is so for us as individuals and as communities. Thus the legal process can only be understood through story. And we must relate to one another in love. This is true as much for individuals responding to the needs of others as it is for lawyers and judges seeking to interpret the words of contracts or wills.

This chapter will explore the fundamentals of drama, both as a skill and as a methodology for teaching other curricular requirements. It also offers practical activities and assessment practices, as well as theoretical underpinnings and methods to further develop teaching methodologies beyond this text. You will have the confidence and knowledge to engage learners of all ages and abilities to explore their own ideas through dramatic performance and to evaluate the performance of others. The key to drama is not only the development of skills, but also the ability to apply processes and value these processes as equal to the end product of a drama activity. The application of drama in literacy, numeracy and other areas of learning will be embedded throughout. A great deal of the focus on drama in the classroom, in Australia, is from a Western perspective.