1 5 2020-2021 1 alirezafarahbakhsh@guilan.ac.ir 2 atefe.arefe.mozhde@gmail.com Alireza Farahbakhsh (Corresponding Author) 1 Associate Professor of English Language and Literature, University of Guilan, Rasht, Iran Ameneh Ebrahimpour 2 MA in English Language and Literature, University of Guilan, Rasht, Iran DOI: https://www.doi.org/10.34785/J014.2021.831 Article Type: Original Article Page Numbers: 69-84 Received: 14 July 2020 Accepted: 15 January 2021 The present article aims to analyze the notion of metatheatricality in Peter Shaffer’s Equus and to investigate the functions of such metatheatrical notions as self- reflexivity and fictionality in the overall structure and theme of the play. The central questions of this survey include: In what ways are typical metatheatrical techniques employed in Peter Shaffer’s Equus, and what are the structural and thematic functions of these elements? The present research shows that there are inner plays in the narrative structure of Equus, which are aligned with the characteristic features of metatheatricality as delineated by Richard Hornby in Drama, Metadrama, and Perception (1986). These plays within a play, which belong to the so-called “the inset type,” construct two sharply distinguishable structural layers. As metatheatrical plays within a play, they self-reflexively call attention to the fictional nature of the play as well as to the possibilities of narrative diversity. Equus breaks the fourth wall of the realistic drama when its lead character directly addresses the spectators, thereby getting them physically and mentally involved in the action. The spectators, as a result, step into the fictional world of the play and start to interact with the characters as the characters start to interact with them. Judgment and interpretation become reciprocal as both the audience and the performers take part in the process of narration and meaning-creation. Metatheatre; Play within a Play; Breaking the Fourth Wall; Direct Address; Peter Shaffer. Postmodernism encompasses complex sets of practices which at times evade clear-cut definitions. Its affinity as well as animosity with modernism is a long and by now trite debate. On the one hand, there are critics like Jon Whitmore who argue that “Postmodernist principles that reject modernism include the highlighting of self-referentiality, deconstruction, and popular culture” (3), and on the other, there is a host of contemporary scholars who insist that characteristic postmodernist features such as ambiguity, abstractness,