All these considerations, when applied to the theatre, make it point-blank clear that one shouldn't consider the idea of "national theatres" as strictly old-fashioned or totally without value.
Do European countries still need national theatres today?
This essay is adapted from National Theatres in a Changing Europe (Palgrave Macmillan, 2008), edited by S.E.
Luckily, the Bulgarian National Theatre, located in the capital city of Sofia, is not at an impasse, in any sense of the word.
It was during their subsequent search for ways to create a new need to communicate through the medium of the stage that the National Theatre's reputation began to rise again.
While most other Bulgarian theatres tried to lure the audience back simply by offering it a new repertoire (plays that were banned or turned away before 1989), along with that the Bulgarian National Theatre focused on painful but much-needed structural reform.
Stefanov also implemented the contract system, through which the National Theatre's company gets complemented by an additional 20-to-40 guest actors per year.
These changes invigorated and rejuvenated the National Theatre, which now has the strongest group of young actors in the country.
IN 1992 AN UNEXPECTED TURN OF EVENTS SUBSTANTIALLY changed the future of the National Theatre. The first studio theatre in Bulgaria, called the Theatre Laboratory Sfumato--founded in 1989 on the principle of the theatre colony, and following a rigorous though not always audience-friendly aesthetic of austerity-meets-high-art--remained homeless.
(He even became artistic director of the theatre for a year, 1999-2000.) Despite Morfov's success, the National Theatre held to its successful new formula of a theatre that doesn't want to belong to or be associated with any one director.
THE NATIONAL THEATRE'S SUCCESS produced one undoubtedly negative effect, though--one that, ironically, falls in line with the company's traditionally non-traditional nature.