Theatre is a means through which the mind and conscience of the recipient are addressed as an art, not only from the intellectual side but also from the totality of human activities through which a balanced character is built mentally, emotionally and physically, reaching the recipient’s ideas. It is self-evident to say that the character is the basic and important element that the author relies on, the director moves it and the actor embodies it through the development of its events and transformations and its launch with the ideas and meanings on which the facts in the play are built. Therefore, the theatrical character consists of internal and external actions that transform to reach a common creative goal. The awareness, rationality and understanding of the transformation of the theatrical character expands the imagination and perceptions of the actor, in addition to his artistic skill and the performance technique drawn for the character. He can deal with the various characters he performs by transforming from the real face of the actor to the mask of the performing character. This happens by living the character and transforming all feelings, sensations and emotions from the character of the performer to the performing character. Researchers link the mask in its early stages to the use of primitive man as a means of confronting nature, such as wearing animal skin. Then it was linked to religious rituals, moving to the theater, which used it in various ways, perhaps mostly due to the need and necessity for the presence of one actor and multiple characters, which necessitated the actor's disguise and his performance of different roles for those characters. This duality that the actor achieves through his facial expressions and conviction to reach the embodiment of the required character are instantaneous transformations of the character due to the internal and external psychological symptoms it carries. Therefore, we can define the problem of our research with the following question: (How can the Iraqi actor overcome the duality of the face and the mask in the transformations of his performance through the actor's and character's emotions(.

Importance of the research:

1. It benefits students and workers in the theatrical field.

2. Another preliminary study that complements other scientific, artistic and academic studies.

Research objective:

The research aims to identify the duality of the face and the mask and its transformations in the performance of the Iraqi actor.

Research limits:

1. Time limit: From 2007 to 2012.

2. Spatial limit: Iraq/Baghdad/Shows of the College of Fine Arts (Baghdad) presented by professors of the College of Fine Arts.

3. Objective limit: Identifying the actor's performance between the duality of the face and the mask.

Definition of terms:

First: Duality: Linguistically:

It came in the language of grammar "a feminine noun attributed to praise. Hence, it is an artificial source of praise" [1] The term came in linguistic sciences "a term used to describe the phenomenon of linguistic duality, i.e. classical and colloquial" [2]

Technically:

Jamil Salbia defined it as: "The division of the whole into two types: a type that has a characteristic of the characteristics, and a type that does not have this characteristic." [3]

Procedural definition

The researcher adopts Jamil Salbia's definition, which is (the division of the whole into two types: a type that has a characteristic of the characteristics), so the characteristic of the first is the performative signifier and the transformed characteristic is the performative signifier.

Second: The face: Linguistically:

The face: A word consisting of three letters (w-j-h) and comes as "A verb: a transitive quadrilateral with a letter. W-j-j-h-w-j-h, its source is to direct"[4]. "Face: The face is the master and noble of the people. The plural is: faces. The face is what faces you from the head, and it contains the eyes, mouth and nose. The face is what faces every evil. The face is the thing itself and its essence" [1]

Technically:

The face "is the title of the character, as they say, and it is the space of the main senses (sight-hearing-smell-taste-touch)." [5]. The face "is the screen of communication with the outside world, with the other, which displays and receives dozens of daily messages of joy, sadness, acceptance, rejection, etc." [5] "The first identification card of the person. It is the only place in the body whose expressions are difficult to hide, except by means of a mask" (Al-Faqih, 2010, p. 24). Operational definition:

It is the personal image of the individual in its natural and transformed state.

Third: Mask: Linguistically:

"It came with the meaning of the verb qana'a, which means to cover and cover, which means to put on. As for the word (MASKE-MASGUE), it comes from the Italian (MASCHERA), which means black. It may come from the late Latin (MASCHA), which means witch" [6] "In Spanish (MASCHARA) taken from the Arabic word (مسخة), meaning mockery and clowning, or from the Latin word (MASCA) which refers to a type of devil, from which comes the verb (MASCARA) which means to smear his face with black" [6]

Technically:

Ibrahim Hamada defined it as: "a drawn, shaped cover that is fixed on the face of the actor to hide his basic features in order to give the feeling of other features or appearance of a human, animal, bird... etc." [7]

Procedural definition:

It is the transformation by which the face changes under the influence of the actor's internal emotion.

Fourth: Transformation: Linguistically:

The word "tahawwāla" was used to mean: "to move from one place to another, or from one state to another. To turn away from something: to turn away from it to something else. And someone turned away with advice, commandment, and preaching: he sought the situation in which he would be active to accept that from him" [8]

Technically:

Transformation: Lalande defined transformation as: "the transition from one form to another" [9]. Aristotle defines transformation as “the revolution that occurs in the theatrical character resulting from the unfolding of the dimensions of events when it recognizes the tragic truth, and a revolution occurs in the character’s behavior resulting from the unfolding of the dimensions of events” [10]. Operational definition of transformation: The researcher adopts Aristotle’s previous definition, which is (the revolution that occurs in the character resulting from the unfolding of the dimensions of events when it recognizes the tragic truth).

The first section: The concept of the face and the mask in the theater.

The human eye sees what is in life of constants or movements interspersed with colors, and it places interpretations and analyses for them that may be constants in the human self's understanding of things, and all of this comes together in our understanding of the other face in interpreting its movements and stillness, as the other face is the mask that we need to wear in many factors so that we do not fall from our personal mask on it, "The face is the title of the character and it is the space of the main senses of sight, hearing, smell and touch, and therefore reading the features of the face necessarily means reading what is going on inside the character, at least for what the person wants to inform us of feelings or impressions" [5] that the face is a witness to our momentary happiness, and the thoughts and feelings that we feel under the mask behind which we hide our internal actions, and it is difficult to imagine that life can creep into the face without the feeling being unaware without the conscious, perceptive will being able to prevent that. The face "is the only anatomical part of the human body that is difficult to hide, and it is also the part most exposed to spasms" [11] Through a simple and poor gesture, the expression will appear immediately on the face, as each part of the face works to express to the recipient the current state that the person is going through. The widening of the eyes expresses surprise and shock, and the winking of the eyes has its significance, and the bringing of the eyebrows has its significance in terms of disgust, and the widening of the mouth as an expression of courtesy, and the opening of the mouth indicates surprise and shock as well, and the smile indicates joy and pleasure, and the clenching of the teeth indicates anger, and so on with other facial expressions. From here, the theatrical actor can employ these expressions and manipulate the features of his face according to the situation, position, or action desired from him on the stage in his performance of the theatrical character required of him. The mask has a sacred status in ancient societies, where it has become an important element in their rituals and religious practices, and even a tool for embodying the sacred, as the mask is synonymous with the character that is expressed through the expression, emotion, or type that it represents. “The mask is undoubtedly the first representative, and everything that is said today about the living representative applies to it” [5]. For the Greeks, this sacred character is represented in the embodiment of some gods. Masks had an illusionary function in the tragic conflicts between man and fate, or between good and evil, as “the masks worn by actors in ancient Greek theater were tricks or barracks in order to give the illusion that the actors were not individuals but characters embodying universal themes, the imaginary conflict between good and evil, for example. Through these masks, they aspired to express the mental conflicts that might have remained hidden without these masks” [12] In ancient Greece, two types of masks were known (ritual and theatrical). The first was associated with the celebrations that were held for the gods, while the second formed an accessory in tragic and comedic plays. The ritual mask among the Greeks was only part of a broader issue of the embodiment of the gods. Aeschylus was attested to as “the inventor of the mask, the loose loincloth… and taught actors how to raise their voices and how to walk in high shoes” [13]. “Aeschylus’s aim in using the grand theatrical dress, high heels, and large masks with the Olanchos hairstyle was to give the heroes nobility, splendor, and majesty” [14]. The mask was the first sound effect that could be obtained. The mask was designed in a special way so that the actors could hear their voices for the spectators spread out in those large open-air theaters, as well as creating various sound effects such as the flow of rivers, the ticking of the clock, and the sounds of storms. The use of masks was widespread, as “the role of the character was drawn on it, so that masks were used instead of makeup”. The form here is the meaning and the actor is only part of this general form of tragedy, then it was transferred to the Romans but they did not use it "at first but they exaggerated in using it after a period of time and the actors in the tragic plays wore long dresses that dragged their tails on the stage and in the comedic plays they wore short clothes that provoked laughter and amusement and they also distinguished the actors of the roles of the elderly by what they wore of white clothes and what they put on their heads of white hair and they distinguished the youth by crimson clothes and black hair and the slaves had red hair" [15] The use of the mask was not limited to the Greek and Roman theater, but in the comedy (De Larta) and the Asian theaters in the East. In Italy, the comedy (De Larta) appeared in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries AD, based on improvisation, laughter, popular celebration, the use of carnival games and the use of the symbolic mask as it was considered a theater of actors with specific traditions And a special style in the presentation. "Where the comedic masks were the ones that captured the great admiration of the comedian" [16], and through the duality of the inside and the outside, it was no longer another face but a lost facade, meaning that it was a negation of the face as physical spaces through which the inside appears in a visible and direct way, and the true understanding of the mask in the comedy theater (De Larta) requires looking at it through this duality, where the actor's face is linked to his inner self and psychological depths and his own history and his lost facade despite its stability and repetition as a stereotype remains linked to the outside, but "despite the stereotype of these masks and their singularity and their ability to reduce where the mask is a substitute for the character and its uniqueness, they possessed a semantic energy, a tremendous indication that the spectator quickly receives and deciphers, which was placed on a background or ground familiar to him, culturally, socially, politically and religiously, The movement was liberated from the text but maintained the meaning [17]The mask in De Larta's comedy has symbolic connotations that express the suffering of society. The Japanese considered the mask an embodiment of divine power and it formed a basic element, whether in rituals or in theatrical occasions, as Japan was famous for its masked theater, which is the Noh theater. The extensions of the sacred appearance of the mask within the Noh were known through the transformation from the religious framework to the aesthetic framework, "There is no meaning or justification for the existence of an empty mask without a soul inhabiting it, as the mask played a ritual embodiment role that is almost similar to the role played by the actor as a mediator between the earthly and upper worlds, the material and the spiritual" [5]. The Japanese believe that masked dances have the ability to evoke divine emotion and thus ensure natural fertility and agricultural growth. As for the Noh theater, (Kabuki) Japanese "The theater was reserved for the nobility, and the actors and actresses performed plays of splendor and skill, wearing masks that represented the mythical stories of the Japanese past. These plays were held in special places called (Kabuki), the three syllables of the word meaning songs, dances, and signing. As for their scenes, we find them complex and intertwined. The monks wore silk masks of the goddess in sacred plays to demonstrate the ability to expel evil spirits" [15]. The performance was monopolized by male actors who did not wear masks as in the (Noh) theater, and instead beautified the face, taking into consideration the natural dimension of the actor. The most handsome and beautiful actors were assigned female roles. Barba explains that “the baring of the fangs is a sign for the Kabuki actor himself, who, when he wants to imitate anger, is content to acquire a certain position for his muscles and eyes independent of his feelings, and they are interpreted directly by the recipient. The matter here relates to one of the many implications of the pre-expressive level in the East and the West alike, as the connection is not with the psychology of feelings, but with the anatomy of forms, and from here the mask becomes a face and the face becomes a mask” [16]. It can be said that the Kabuki actor establishes the character from the outside, and through his dialogue with himself, that he represents that character or embodies that state by means of his dancing movements or his signs and gestures, using the flexibility of his body, which is the expressive tool for the various situations and conditions that he passes through in his performance.

Mask components: The work of masks and their great importance because they are an influential factor, as the mask worn by the actor reaches the actor's shoulder, due to the large stage and the long viewing angle, it is not possible to see the actor's facial expressions, as "simple shapes were made of light, carved, painted or dyed wood, but there are more precise and precise models that include almost every light material that can be easily worn, including reinforced cloth, tanned leather, shells, precious metals, beads, feathers and cork" [18], and here adaptation to the mask is required, as "once the actor gets used to wearing the mask and once he begins to discover the possibilities of finding a more lively performance style, he quickly gets used to the idea of ​​acting, clarification and the point of the first true discovery comes when he stops using the muscles of his face inside the mask, he discovers that the character can smile without his smile, and that he does not need to cry inside the mask to make the mask cry, he reaches the inner conviction of the truth that The mask is not limited or limited in the possibilities of expressing emotions [19]. The mask here is not like a puppet, but rather a tragic act with its rules, which is what distinguished the Greeks from other peoples. It has several functions, including theological, spiritual, mythological, ritualistic and ceremonial functions. The mask also helps to define the social and class dimension and to disappear from people within a certain form that conceals one’s personal truth, thus arousing ambiguity, confusion and curiosity among the audience.

The second section: Transformations between the face and the mask in 

Theoretical Framework Indicators

1. The actor can express the situation and event and the different emotions and feelings directly through facial expressions.

2. The actor in the classical Greek theater wore a mask to frame his role and indicate its nature (tragic or comedic). Since the mask has a social and illusory function.

3. The mask is the first means to emphasize the distance between the actor and the character. It indicates the nature of the character and the place from which it came or belongs.

4. The actor obtains internal and external technique through his long experience in the field of theatrical work. The actor has internal and external energy and emotion while on stage that exceeds the average person.

5. The flexibility of the body makes the actor a source of natural signals and he is the expressor of meanings.

The researcher identified the shows presented in the Faculty of Fine Arts and the Department of Theater by the faculty professors. Which were presented from the year (2007 - 2012).

Second: - Research sample:

The play (Al-Hussein Now) by director Aqeel Mahdi.

The researcher chose it intentionally, because it adequately represents the research community.

Third: - Research methodology:

The researcher relied on the research methodology (the descriptive method in analysis).

Fourth: - Research tool:

The researcher used in analyzing the research sample:

1- What resulted from the theoretical framework of indicators.

2- Note from the CD.

Fifth:- Sample analysis:

The play (Al-Hussein Now)

• Written and directed by: Aqeel Mahdi Yousef

• Acting:

• Jabar Khamat - Al-Hussein

• Hadeel Mohammed Rashid - Hind

• Khaled Ahmed Mustafa - Yazid

• Production: College of Fine Arts, Department of Theater Arts.

• Scenography: Najm Abdul Haider.

• Lighting: Haider Adnan and Abbas Fleih.

• Costumes: Imtithal Al-Taie.

• Music: Tariq Hassoun Farid.

• Place of performance: Theater of Theater Arts Department (Jassim Al-Aboudi Theater) - Baghdad 2011.

First: Summary of the play: 

When we see the play (Al-Hussein Now) by Aqeel Mahdi, the writer and director, we see that he has manipulated the events in an aesthetic way, breaking the horizon of expectations for the viewer. The character of Al-Hussein is that historical character known to most viewers, and the events of the Karbala incident (the battle) in which he was killed, and that huge number of warriors present in those events. But the writer and director reduced it to three characters, which are (Al-Hussein, Hind and Yazid), where we see that some of the dialogues for the viewer were with Al-Hussein and Yazid, knowing that in the historical incident they did not meet, but the director brought it closer to us so that we could see the plot of the conflict and shorten the time. And the actor (Khaled) showed us in this show the psychological transformations, that is, what is inside the character of (Yazid), where we see that he is (the brave leader, the sorcerer, the lover, the philosopher, the madman, the rapist, the hermaphrodite, the regretful and the deceitful). As for Hind’s character, she was the pivot between the two characters, as she was the wife of Hussein and then the wife of Yazid. We can describe her as being life, love, emotion, or the conscience that mimicked Yazid.

Second: Analysis of the play: 

The first scene began with a general revelation of the scenography of the show, as we see three levels based on the ground, which are a center and edges. The center’s furnishing resembles the formation of a simple throne, and the edges are not well-defined except for being furnished with traditional bedding. On the side of the stage, there are a group of paper rolls lying on the ground. As for the sky of the scene, it is a large composition of dry wild thorns indicating the desertification of things, in addition to the sound effects that the director used, which harmonized with the show to be a prelude to the entrance of the first character, which is the character of (Al-Hussein), wearing white clothes. Then another disguised person appears wearing the same outfit that the actor of the character of (Al-Hussein) wears. Here, the dialogue begins between them in order to inform Al-Hussein to abandon his path because Yazid is plotting against him and that his advance is dangerous for him. At the beginning of the dialogue, the disguised character had a melodious voice, which made the vocal harmony harmonious between her and the character of Al-Hussein. The physical formations that the disguised character formed indicated in their inner meaning Yazid’s intentions with Al-Hussein, and these were: The formations have intellectual and aesthetic significance. Through the word (O my prince) that the disguised character says, the character’s other side becomes clear to us, to be the beginning of the actress’s formal and physical transformation as she embodies the character of (Hind), as this transformation was a clear sign of the actress’s voice capabilities, in addition to being the beginning of the conflict between good and evil, if I may say so, (Yazid) who enters wearing a virtual costume mixed with historical and contemporary, (Khaled, embodying the character of Yazid) enjoyed the flexibility of a harmonious voice that helped him to separate himself from the self and focus on embodying the character, as he says (I will take the pledge of allegiance from them by force until they go, rise up today, Yazid, rise up to fight the strange sons, make up your mind, be worthy of confronting Abu Bakr, Omar, Ali and Ibn al-Zubayr), then the other side of the actor begins to throw the iron pieces that he dealt with the actress, and this dealing had clear aesthetic connotations, as he formed formations with the actress that helped him embody the role, and the other side of the transformation he created by throwing these pieces and removing the helmet To be another character with political dimensions that are in harmony with the director's thinking, especially in his holding of the scepter of rule, who dealt with the actor according to harmonious performance frameworks and said (I see the pledge of allegiance coming inevitably, with the scepter and behind it the heads will be trampled, broken and humiliated). With the same hypothesis of the show, the character of (Al-Hussein) enters the space of the show to be the axis of support, leaving everything stuck in the mind of the recipient to break the horizon of expectation in the recipient of a quiet entry of the character with holy qualities. The actor (Jabbar) was able, through his performance, to clarify from his first entry the stereotype of the performance of the character being performed, but the actor was able to use his non-physical performance and vocal mechanisms to convey what the director wanted to convey of ideas, and with a mechanical movement, the other side of the actor (Khaled) entered with a new character different from the previous one in performance, costumes and still facial expressions to embody for us the role of (Yazid) that the director imposed to be (the present Yazid) to clarify for us through this scene the intellectual harmony between the past and present. And the present. With a comic movement, the actor (Khaled) or (Yazid) transformed to embody for us the psychological state that was ingrained in Yazid's psyche by wearing the mask. The performing actor was able to convey to us, through his performance mechanisms represented in the voice, body, breadth of observation and imagination, all the character's concerns, such that he led us to lose the horizon of expectation that the recipient wanted to reach. This came as a result of the accumulated experience and academic scientific knowledge, as well as through the director's ideas that he conveyed to him. Therefore, it can be said that the actor can perform any character if he is able to strip himself of his personal self and embody the same role. The gestural gesture used by the actor (Khaled) had its clear psychological dimensions through his formations that he distributed on the areas of the stage, such that he gave each place its own gestures to clarify to us that this place means that state. In the dialogue between (Yazid) and (Al-Hussein) (You eat your money), the actor (Khaled) turned into (Yazid) who was dragging with his tail all the worries of the world that surrounded him by throwing the mask and pulling the red rope that had clear religious connotations in addition to the color of the red rope to indicate to us the shedding of blood from the past to the present. The actor (Khaled) was able to clarify these ideas through the facial expressions that were clear in addition to his spontaneous dealing with the rope to be a clearly indicative symbolic icon. The actor was interacting with the character, meaning that he shed himself from the person himself to enter the role himself through his vocal and physical performance tools. The actor’s interaction with the role is one of the conditions of a successful actor who embodies the role without affectation. This was clear in the scene (a crazy, disfigured creature) that the actor explained through his reactions to the polite character. He was able to perform this scene with great lightness, far from affectation. Here we can say that (Khaled) was, through his performance, diagnosing the character’s flaws and psychological states.

In the next scene, the actor (Khaled) wanted to modernize the character of (Yazid) through his dialogue with (Al-Hussein) who was holding (a cigarette) and dealt with it intelligently until he made them both his assistants in performing the character. As for the character of (Al-Hussein) who was present in all the scenes, it was the character's obsession and was not the character itself. This is clear through the actor (Khaled - Yazid)'s dealing with it. He did not deal with it on the basis of a present character, but rather as a specter, obsession, or ghost roaming the space of the theater, since the actor (Jabbar - Al-Hussein) was centered in the middle of the stage and maintained the character's character and its movement rhythm that the director imposed on him. However, the communication signs between the actors were present through the rhythm of the dialogue and the movement that roamed the space of the show, in addition to the actor's relationship with the scenography of the show, as he dealt with it according to aesthetic intellectual connotations in order to convey the idea of ​​the show, which depended on duality. As for the magician’s entrance, (Khaled-Yazid) entered in a ritualistic manner that refers the recipient to the ritual, which relies in its folds on the sacred and the profane. The sacred is represented by the person of (Al-Hussein) and the profane is represented by the character of the villain. The performer (Khaled) embodied this character in a different performance manner that relied on the spontaneity that the actor himself possesses, but with a different face. The actor (Khaled) was able to stir up controversy among the audience through his ability to transform from one self to another without a time gap. Rather, we find him here as a character and at another moment we find him transforming into a different character from the other with all its physical characteristics through facial expressions and voice, relying on the tone of his voice that distinguishes him from all his peers, in addition to the high flexibility of his body and its relaxation that enabled him to play in the space of the show. In the scene (the hermaphrodite) that he performed, we find him transformed into another different character, as he found that through his facial expressions and body gestures while dealing with his tools of accessories (women's makeup tools), and this was clear when he left the scene. In the scene of the game (Let's play, me and my army), the actor (Khaled) transformed the face and mask into the character of the military general by wearing military clothes. The actor described to us the state of the heads that he was circling in Damascus, using full side and frontal stances to clarify the character of the military character. In his other scene (Remorse), where (Yazid) enters carrying in his hands a group of herbs placed in a plate, and his dialogue (Guide me who will extinguish the call of this head) about his performance by means of his voice layer when he used a voice accompanied by (hoarseness) to indicate shortness of breath and suffocation or the nightmare that is haunting him, as well as his sad and anxious facial expressions. Through this scene, the codes of the work become clear to be clearly defined that what is happening is an illusion and a nightmare that (Yazid) imagines as a result of the sin he committed. In the last scene of the actor (Khaled) entering, the viewer is surprised by that exciting transformation in the present character in terms of facial expressions and the transformation of the character into a pyramidal curve that indicates the weight of those concerns that make the body and voice a basic pillar for understanding the idea of ​​the show. The actor (Khaled) embodied this state in a biomechanical way that was limited to short movement with a broad meaning in terms of thought and beauty, as well as facial expressions that were different from the other expressions present in the theatrical show that were called for by all theorists of the art of acting.

RESULTS:

1. The Iraqi actor is able to control his physical and mental performance mechanisms in order to embody the character he is intended to play.

2. Changing from one state to another requires the actor to be aware of the nature of the character he is playing and its three dimensions so that he can understand the role he is playing.

3. The mask was used as a means to emphasize the distance between the actor and the character.

4. Facial expressions and muscle movement require the Iraqi actor to know the sources of these muscles’ signals so that he can embody the state he seeks to clarify during the scene represented in a state of joy and sadness, i.e. internal emotions.

5. The Iraqi actor tried to pay attention to his facial expressions in order to translate the specific performance states, as the face is more capable and influential in communication.

1. The Iraqi actor can transform from one character to another through facial expressions in order to convey the idea of ​​the show to the recipient.

2. The significance of the mask and the face in producing the aesthetics of the theatrical show.

3. The Iraqi actor can distinguish between the duality of the face and the mask and separate between them in embodying the role.

4. The Iraqi actor was able, through internal emotions, to fully control his tools in expressing the state that he wanted to convey to the recipient.

5. The Iraqi actor can maintain the other face of the performing character throughout the theatrical scene in order to convey the meaning of the character.

1. Pay attention to the techniques of using the transformation processes from the actor to the performing character, i.e. wearing the character mask, and pay attention to the facial technique because it is more capable of conveying the internal and external emotions of the Iraqi actor.

Suggestions:

Adopting the results reached by researchers and students to apply them, practical lessons in institutes and fine arts.

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest

No funding sources

The study was approved by the General Directorate of Education of Wasit Governorate - Ministry of Education - Iraq

1. Academy of the Arabic Language. (1973). Intermediate Dictionary (Volume 2). Egypt: Academy of the Arabic Language.

2. Ahmed Mukhtar Omar. (2008). Dictionary of Contemporary Arabic Language. Cairo: Alam Al-Kutub.

3. Jamil Salbia. (1979). Philosophical Dictionary, in Arabic, French, English and Latin. Beirut: Dar Al-Kitab Al-Lubnani.

4. Abdul Ghani Abu Al-Azm. ( 2007 ). The Rich Dictionary (Volume 1). Rabat: Al-Ghani Foundation, New Knowledge Press.

5. Saleh Saad. (2001). The Self-Other. The Duality of Performing Arts. Kuwait: World of Knowledge.

6. Mary Elias. (2006). Theatrical Dictionary, Concepts and Terminology of Theater and Performing Arts, Arabic, English, French (Volume 2). Lebanon: Lebanon Office.

7. Ibrahim Hamada. (1985). Dictionary of Dramatic and Theatrical Terms. Cairo: Dar Al-Shaab.

8. Ibrahim Mustafa, et al. (1989). Intermediate Dictionary (Volume 1). Turkey: Dar Al-Da'wa, a cultural institution for authorship, printing, publishing and distribution.

9. Andre Lalande. (2001). The Philosophical Encyclopedia (Volume 2, Part 3). (Khalil Ahmed Khalil, translators) Beirut: Awidat Publications, Beirut.

10. Aristotle. (1983). The Art of Poetry. (Ibrahim Hamada, Translators) Cairo: Anglo-Egyptian.

11. Joseph Messinger. (2008). Psychological Body Language. (Mohammed Abdel Karim, translators) Damascus: Dar Aladdin for Publishing.

12. Sami Abdel Hamid. (2009). Innovations of Playwrights in the Twentieth Century. Baghdad: Dar Al-Hana for Architecture and Arts.

13. Horace. (1970). The Art of Poetry. (Louis Awad, Translators) Cairo: Egyptian General Authority for Authorship and Publication.

14. Aradis Nicole. (2000). The World Play (Volume 1). (Othman Nouba, translators) Egypt: Hala for Publishing and Distribution.

15. Louise Malkieh. (1990). Theatrical Decor (Volume 3). Egypt: Egyptian General Book Authority Press.

16. Eugenio Barba. (1999). The Actor's Energy. (Suhair Al-Gamal, translators) Cairo: Ministry of Culture, Cairo International Festival.

17. Nadim Maala. (2004). The Language of Theatrical Performance (Volume 1). Egypt: Dar Al-Mada for Culture and Publishing.

18. Cheney and Seldon. (B.T.). History of Theater. (Derini Khashaba, and Ali Fahmy Fahmy, translators) Egypt: Egyptian Foundation for Authorship and Publishing, Ministry of Culture and National Guidance.

19. Michael Walton. (1998). A New Look at Tragedy, the Greek Concept of Theater. (Mohsen Moselhi, Translators). Cairo: Supreme Council of Culture.