{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.02767175572519084, 'fraction_numerical': 0.007633587786259542, 'mean_word_length': 5.1345029239766085, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Research Methods in Theatre and Performance (review)

could probably claim some production experience, this section is more heavily populated by artists who immerse themselves in a theoretical model with a specific theatrical production in mind. Thus, for example, chapter 16 by Brook Hanemann and chapter 17 by Mello are literally invocations of the book’s title, as these artists play, sometimes with trepidation, in the sandbox of landscape theory (as applied to a project on Tennessee Williams) and feminist theory (as applied to The Three Good Wives), respectively. Thus while this text may not break new theoretical ground, it may be useful in building a bridge over the divide, often vast, between theatre theorist and theatre-maker. As Manon van de Water notes in the second chapter of the introductory section, “theory and practice need each other to sustain each other and the field of theatre and performance in general” (38–39). What could be more compelling than an ontological justification for both sides of the theatrical community?