Signs and Stage Props in Tennessee Williams' Camino Real

  • Parvin Ghasemi Department of Foreign Languages and Linguistics, Faculty of Humanities and Literature, Shiraz University, Eram Campus, Eram St. 7194684795, Shiraz
  • Roshanak Yazdanpoor Department of English, Razi University
  • Aref Faghih Nassiri Department of English, Mazandran University
Keywords: signs, semiotics, drama, stage props, stage directions, contradiction


Humans from the early times have used signs to facilitate the communication in the early societies. Semiotics is an approach wherein howness is dominant; it is the investigation of how meaning is created and communicated through systems of signs. In the dramatic texts meanings are conveyed by two different forms of language, stage direction and dialogue. Stage direction and dialogue are complementary and interdependent signifying systems. Stage directions are integral to the structure of dramatic texts and have important functions in their semantic construction. Tennessee Williams is one of the dramatists who use notes or stage directions in his plays. Through such stage devices as lighting, music and sound effects, colors, objects as symbols, transparent walls, the fluctuation of time, etc., he is after the representation of an abstract or spiritual meaning through concrete or material form. This study aims at analysis and examination of Williams’ Camino Real’s stage props and devices as signs and their relationships in the play with regard to semiotics as the theoretical framework and approach


Download data is not yet available.


Artaud, A. (1958). The theatre and its double. (M.C. Richards, Trans.). New York: Grove Press.

Aston, E., & Savona, G. (2005). Theatre as sign-system: A semiotics of text and performance. New York: Routledge.

Birch, D. (1992). The language of drama: Critical theory and practice. Hong Kong: Macmillan.

Chandler, D. (1994). Semiotics for beginners. Retrieved December 2010, from

Cookson, L. (1987). Practical approach to literary criticism. (R. Adams, Ed.). London: Longman.

Clay, J. H., & Krempel, D. (1967). The theatrical image. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Cless, D. (1983). Alienation and contradiction in Camino Real: A convergence of Williams and Brecht Author(s). Theatre Journal, 35(1), 41-50. [CrossRef]

Durham, F. (1971). “Tennessee Williams, Theatre Poet in Prose.” South Atlantic Bulletin. Vol. 36, No. 2, pp. 3-16. [CrossRef]

Elam, K. (2002). The Semiotics of Theatre and Drama. 2nd ed. New York: Routledge.

Fleche, A. (2010). “The space of madness and desire: Tennessee Williams and Streetcar.” Modern Drama. Vol. 38, No. 4, P. 496. Academic Research Library, ProQuest. Web. 2 Jan.

Jackson, E.M. (1975). “Tennessee Williams.” The American Theatre. Ed. Allan S. Downer. Washington, D.C.: Voice of America Forum Series. Pp. 81-95.

Scholes, R. (1982). Semiotics and interpretation. London: Yale University Press.

Newton, K. M. (Ed.). (1990). Twentieth-century literary theory. London: Macmillan.

Williams, T. (1958). Camino real. (E. M. Brown, Ed.). Aylesbury: Penguin.
How to Cite
Ghasemi, P., Yazdanpoor, R., & Nassiri, A. (2012). Signs and Stage Props in Tennessee Williams’ Camino Real. K@ta, 13(2), 202-220.