Brecht answered brilliantly, but did he win? Looking around, it's a world where Ionescu is shouting louder.
Original: Brecht's Theatrical Legacy
Author | Ma Wenqi, Central Academy of Drama
Picture | network
Brecht's "soft rib" is the heart, which was tossed by it once when he was young, and could not escape its outburst at the end of his life. After his death, Brecht had two rumors around his heart: one was that a dagger was inserted in the heart according to his request, which was really a high-level "performance art", and the great theater artist of the 20th century designed his death as a meaningful expression; and another rumor was equally significant, saying that his heart disease was triggered by the "Stasi" of East Germany, and the purpose of such rumors was nothing more than to make people who believed this rumor sigh. How an artist who embraced the practice of socialism was tragically misunderstood.
"Defamiliarization is historicization"
Obviously, the second rumor reflects more of the message of the times than the first: because the Soviet and Eastern camps have vanished, the history of socialist practice is generally stigmatized in the Western world... So, in the context of such an era, what will happen to Brecht's fate? We have to admit that he is no longer the darling of the times, and more specifically, the most core concept of his theatrical theory, defamiliarization, should not be seriously practiced in theater. In this regard, I would like to talk about some of my own views.
In an interview-style essay, Brecht asked himself through a fictitious viewer: "Mr. Brechst, do you mean that what is at stake in creation is the instructions of classical thinkers: people's ideology depends on their social existence?" He asked himself, "Yes, this is a new way of observation that was not taken into account in the old creative art." ”
In this short question and answer, there is a key meaning in his theory of defamiliarization - the purpose of the defamiliarization method of drama is to guide the audience to conduct a socio-historical analysis of the actions of the characters on the stage. Brecht also deserves attention in another sentence, in which he writes: "To treat the social condition as a historically improvible presupposition of the method of defamiliarization." Therefore, the defamiliarization method has a combative character. In this passage, there is another key meaning of his theory of defamiliarization- the purpose of the defamiliarization method used in drama is to guide the audience to realize that there is no eternal existence, and everything will be changed. In fact, Brecht's theory of defamiliarization, if not from the dazzling method, but only from the function of applying the various methods to produce, is very simple, two words - recognizable and changeable.
Assuming that we are familiar with Marx's famous quote about the role of philosophy, "Philosophers explain the world in different ways, and the problem is to change the world", then we can understand where the inspiration for the idea of "knowable/changeable" in Brecht's theory of defamiliarization comes from. Marx's materialist view of history interprets the complex structure of human society as the dialectic of "economic base/superstructure", which gives rise to the basic principle that social existence determines social consciousness; Marx's materialist view of history interprets the motives of development of human society as the dialectic of "productive forces/production relations", which gives rise to the revolutionary principle that everything is changeable. It is precisely this kind of philosophical thinking that inspires Brecht's theatrical practice of holding high the banner of "defamiliarization"; it is also because of this blood relationship with Marx's materialist view of history that Brecht's "defamiliarization" has a shadow concept called "historicization", he said: "Defamiliarization is historicization, that is, to express these events and characters as historical and temporary." ”
We can imagine a situation in which the defamiliarization function advocated by Brecht can be fully realized in the theater, and the audience will have the greatest honor to enjoy the most realistic, intelligent, and courageous theatrical performance, because according to the principle of "recognizable/changeable", all the appearances of confusing reality will be deeply penetrated, and all the real problems with heaviness will not be expressed as helpless fate. But the problem is that even Brecht himself will face the dilemma that the defamiliarization function cannot be fully realized.
His theatrical art is dead in today's theater
After World War II, Brecht carried out a series of stage practices in East Germany according to his own aesthetic vision, he once directed a work that reflected the reform life of the collective farm, "KatzGraben", but the audience did not buy it after watching the performance, Brecht could not help but complain in the face of criticism, and the interviewer said: "You may say that the new drama needs a new audience!" Brecht became guilty, saying, "Yes, but I shouldn't have spoken like this very often, and if it doesn't work, it's the creator's responsibility." However, it is true that new requirements should be made for the audience. ”
What would that be? Brecht gives an example: In Molière's Abagon, the audience would laugh at him and mock his miserliness. But when usury is the norm for capital, Abagon will not be ridiculed. Abagun became a joke because of changes in the way capital is managed. Then, those audiences who understand the knowledge of the historical development of human society should not only be satisfied with the performance of miserly character on the stage, but should generate new requirements for creators to perform miserliness as a social phenomenon on the stage. Brecht's meaning could not be more obvious, and he has come to understand more and more in practice that the theatrical performance of his materialist view of history as a philosophical basis requires the participation of the audience of the materialist view of history as a structure of thought. Thus, he lamented: "The choice of position is another major part of the art of theatre, and this choice must be made outside the theatre." ”
The fate of Brecht's theory of theatre and its stage practice depends on the choice of positions taken outside the theatre. That's where I feel the most. In one theater, Sophocles's Oedipus The King, a tragedy of ancient Greece, is staged. Logically, the development of history has completely defamiliarized it, but Oedipus's fate still brings aesthetic pleasure to the audience. Why? It is not because of the difficulty of real life, it is so easy for people to breed a sense of powerlessness, a lack, and a helpless sense of destiny in the depths of people's minds. In the face of the huge, complex, and contradictory real world, individuals are very prone to agnosticism and a sense of immutableness.
At that time, when Brecht strongly applied the materialist view of history to observe and analyze the world, Ionescu habitually felt the collapse of the whole world under the domination of absurd philosophy. Once, Ionescu intercepted Brecht in a coffee shop and protested to him, saying: Mr. Brecht, your art is wrong, the world is unrecognizable! Brecht calmly shot back: Since the world is unrecognizable, how do you realize it? Brecht answered brilliantly, but did he win? Looking around, it's a world where Ionescu is shouting louder.
Ionescu
Where the materialist view of history retreats, either the capitalists roar the "end of history", or the postmodernists clamor for "the uncertainty of the world", it is in this spiritual background that the darling of contemporary theater art is something called "post-theatrical theater", and Brecht, whose theatrical heritage has long been divided into various methods - narrator, rap, subtitles, projections, performance jumping in and out, etc., because only the legacy of the art form, So Brecht's theatrical art is dead in today's theater.
But I look forward to its resurrection, which naturally depends on the choice of our position outside the theater, in real real life.
The article was originally published in the 8th edition of the 1688th issue of the Social Science Daily, and its reproduction without permission is prohibited, and the content in the article only represents the author's views and does not represent the position of this newspaper.