Clockwise, loan Guillen (Spain), lana Prekova (Czech Republic), Elzbeita Terlikowska (Poland) and Rakefet Levy (Israel) received costume design awards. of the range of design in a particular countr\'. but made it difficult to judge the qualit\' of a single indil'idual. The architecture e\hibits. \I'hich had been somewhat problematic for the JurI' in 1995. \\-ere of generalh high qualitl' this time \I'ith manl' outstanding projects. The JurI' tended to fal'or tho. e that created intere ting spaces for performance-the e\terior of the building and the ancillarl' structures \I'ere of minimal concern. The JurI' also farored those theatres that \I'ere innol'ati\'e in soll'ing particular problems (unusual space. challenging reslOrations or renol'ations. conl'ersions of non-theatrical space). Utimately. the major concern Il'as for theatres that created a \I'arm and hospitable elllironment for spectators and performers alike. Thus. the more 'high-tech" and postmodern theatres tended 10 he less 26 \ I I I'J '! '! TI).\:T fa\'ored. The Gold \I'as a\l'arded to Brazil for a range of theatres that e\emplified these ideals in a I'ariet\' of categories: nel'l' theatres. renol'ations. restorations. and conl'ersions..-\ Special Gold ~Iedal \I'as a\l'arded to the Glyndebourne Opera House in Great Britain for the \I'al'. it successfulll'. met the challenge of significantly e\panding an e\isting theatre \I'hile maintaining the intimacl' and charm of the older space. The Thematic Section \I'as somewhat problematic. Past themes hal'e been unamhiguous-design for Chekhol'. illozart. or Janacek. for e\:unple-hut manl' felt that their I'ery specificitl' was unfair to countries (often non-\X'estern countries) \I'hose theatre traditions mal' not hal'e included appropriate I1'0rk. This Icar a more generic theme \I'as announced: Trihute to Scenograph\'. This led to a \'eritahle potpourri of displal's: retrospectil'es of a single designer. historical recreations, ol'erl'ie\l's of design for a single \I'ork. e\hibits of the \I'ork of relatil'e ne\l'comers. ol'erl'ie\l's of a range of \I'ork in a gil'en countrl'. Sel'eral e\hibits drew the attention of the jury. but ultimatell'. it \\'as clear that the Gold had to go to the German retrospectil'e of :\chim Freyer. The importance of his \I'ork and the c1aril\' and thoroughness of the e\hibition ol'ershado\l'ed annhing else in the Section (and possibll' el'en in the PQ). Similarll'. the \rork of Korean designer B\llng-Bok Lee. though not as "thorough." \I'as stunningll' elegant in its unified and harmonious presentation and clearl\' deserl'ed the Silver. In the process. thoroughll' fascinating e\hibits bl' Hungarl'. Poland. Brazil, Russia. and Slol'akia had to be ol'erlooked. .-\l'l'il'ing at the medals for set and co tlune design \I'as a bit more difficult simpll' because of the I'ariety in the forms. media. and quantitl' of presentations. Interestingll'. the Gold illedal \I'inners in both ets and costllmes (Jaume Plensa of Spain-Catalonia for sets. joan Guillen of pain-Catalonia and jana Prekol'a of Czech Republic for costlllnes) \\-ere presented primarill' in 1\1'0 dimensions-photographs. sketches. and renderings and \I'ith no three-dimensional artifacts. But the documemation was thorough and rich allO\l'ing a good sense of the del'elopment of the designs and their e\ecution on stage. The creatil'itl' and originality of these \l'Orks (and the I'arietl' of \I'ork presented) placed them ahead of most of the competition. .-\s is often the case. relatil'ell' I'oung de-