The relationship between novels and drama has been a significant topic in literary studies since the rise of the novel. Over the past three decades, theatricality has become a hot topic in interdisciplinary and cross-media research. Its metaphorical expansion has both broadened the boundaries of drama/theatre and led to a loss of concrete reference. Graham Wolfe proposed the concept of "Theatre-Fiction" to liberate theatre from metaphor, focusing on the specific references to drama, theatrical practices, and the industry within novels. Wolfe defines Theatre-Fiction as a cross-media genre, emphasizing its close connection with the practices and industry of dramatic art. This type of novel not only deals with drama in terms of themes and material but also provides opportunities for reflecting on and transcending the novel genre itself, while also indirectly affirming the enduring appeal of drama.

In defining "Theatre-Fiction," Wolfe particularly emphasizes the importance of the "concrete" and "artistic practices and industry." He chooses to use "theatre" rather than "drama" to highlight that theatre encompasses not only literary texts but also the physical spaces, conditions, and materials required for performance. Since the 20th century, the division of labor in the theatre industry has become increasingly specialized, and its norms and mechanisms have grown more complex. Once a dramatic text is performed, it transforms from a private act into a collective act within a public space, necessitating engagement with different "agreements of storytelling and consumption." Therefore, Theatre-Fiction is not only connected to dramatic texts at the level of creative conventions but also introduces non-literary dimensions related to practice and industry into novelistic narratives.

Wolfe also distinguishes between the meanings of "theatre" and "theatrical," noting that "theatrical" often carries a negative connotation, reflecting biases against theatre. Drawing on David Kurnick's call for "theatre demetaphorized," he proposes restoring theatre as a place, mechanism, and art form without rejecting "metaphorical theatricality." Although the concept of "dominant" presents some ambiguity in defining "Theatre-Fiction," it offers an inspiring perspective for research, guiding readers to focus on the relationship between non-theatrical/dramatic elements and theatrical/dramatic elements within novels, and to interpret novelistic texts within their social and cultural contexts.

Wolfe argues that significant changes in novels' references to drama at the end of the 19th century marked the rise of Theatre-Fiction. During this period, the relationship between novels and drama evolved from opposition and hostility to accommodation and creative utilization. When the novel emerged in the 18th century, it often borrowed forms and creative conventions from drama. However, by the 19th century, drama had generally declined while the novel flourished. In the 1870s, the relationship between novels and drama transformed again, revolving around the core issue of "realism." Ian Watt, in The Rise of the Novel, emphasized the importance of realism in the development of the novel, while scholars such as Ira Konigsberg and Anne F. Widmayer further explored the novel's borrowing from drama at the levels of form and creative techniques.

From a social and historical perspective, drama was part of the historical and cultural context during the rise of the novel. The theatre became a dominant force in public culture during the reign of King George, its ideology and practices permeating various fields. As an emerging literary form and cultural product, the novel naturally referenced and addressed various aspects related to drama. Gillian Russell views novels and drama as "adjacent and symbiotic cultural phenomena," noting that novels not only employ metaphorical meanings of theatre when dealing with concepts of character, the nature of social "performance," and issues of "reality" and "fiction," but also engage with the materiality of theatre, particularly viewing playgoing as a social activity.

However, anti-theatrical prejudice also existed in 19th-century novels, inheriting the Platonic tradition and serving as a means for novelists to differentiate and promote their own medium's modes of expression and reception. Jonas Barish, in The Antitheatrical Prejudice, explores the historical roots of this prejudice, pointing out that vocabulary derived from theatre often carries derogatory connotations. Nevertheless, drama remained vibrant in the 19th century and was an integral part of public life. Dramatic texts held a place in pure literature, and the revival of closet drama promoted the development of formal elements of drama. Meanwhile, newly added theatres and diverse performance forms expanded the content and scope of theatrical performances.

By the end of the 19th century, drama entered a new phase. Innovations in theatre design, stage lighting, and set design provided new conditions for presenting the world on stage and new means for audiences to connect with it. Theatre not only aimed to entertain audiences but also began to address serious social issues, aspiring to achieve a serious representation of British social life on stage. After Ibsen's plays were staged in England, the manner of dramatic presentation changed significantly, with realism becoming a goal pursued in theatrical performances.

Conclusion

This discussion explores Theatre-Fiction as a cross-media literary form, analyzing its manifestation of the "dialectical relationship between the one and the many" within the differences between novels and drama. It points out that its charm lies in providing a privatized public experience. Simultaneously, it emphasizes that Theatre-Fiction represents "virtual intermediality" within a single medium. While it cannot provide the experience of drama itself, it can pursue "thinking beyond its bounds," innovate in the multimedia era, and achieve interactivity.