Editorial

In our September, 2012 issue Simon Sladen issued a call to arms on behalf of pantomime, not the traditional form of the late-19th century, but rather the pantomime of today. He urged scholars to undertake research into the forms of pantomime that still exist in Hong Kong, South Africa, and Australasia, for instance. In this issue Michael Pickering urges scholars to take up the cudgels on behalf of variety, particularly the variety of the post-World War 2 era. He admits that his perspective is a British one and takes his point of departure from the recent publication of Oliver Double’s book Britain Had Talent,1 and his Afterpiece refers to the increasing corpus of knowledge now available about popular forms like music hall, minstrelsy and, more recently, circus. Perhaps, he suggests, variety still lacks the scholarly gravitas with which other forms have now been invested. It can certainly be argued that variety contains the essence of popular entertainments: its inclusiveness of song, dance, revue sketch, acrobatic display, prestidigitation and visual extravagance may indeed make scrutiny somewhat difficult. Yet I’m delighted that in the pages of our journal can be found numerous references to differing forms of variety. This issue is no exception.