| Members: 12 |
| Language: English |
|
Group categories:
|
| More group info » |
|
| Jun 2 |
|
| May 19 |
|
| May 19 |
|
| May 19 |
|
| May 19 |
|
| May 19 |
|
| May 19 |
|
| May 19 |
|
| May 19 |
|
| May 19 |
|
from http://script.vtheatre.net/brecht.html 1998 -- 100 years since birth (short bio and some history). Brecht, Marxism, Dialectics (Hegel), Ideology (Check Eisenstein, many references to film). "In order to produce A Effects the actor has to discard whatever means he has learned of persuading the audience to identify itself with the characters which he plays. Aiming not to put his audience into a trance, he must not go into a trance himself. His muscles must remain loose, for a turn of the head, e.g., with tautened neck muscles, will "magically" lead the spectators' eyes and even their heads to turn with it, and this can only detract from any speculation or reaction which the gestures may bring about. His way of speaking has to be free from ecclesiastical singsong and from all those cadences which lull the spectator so that the sense gets lost." (from A Short Organum for the Theatre, 1948)II. REVOLUTION AND CLASS STRUGGLE. Theory of labor (commodity) and Marx on alienation. The crisis of modernity (humanism), the roots of the postmodern. Not to reflect, but to change the real! Socialism, facism and communism. The results of social (and inner) revolutions. III. (SOCIAL) ROLE OF THEATRE Different techniques of the narrative structure (composistion). "Filmic Drama" IV. INDIVIDUAL & SOCIETY V. AFTER THE NOW Modern relevance (themes). War and we.
Connections with Meyerhold's Theatre Theatrical If we are to follow the risky tradition of the "plot-oriented," "character-oriented" and "message-oriented" plays, "Mother Courage" is the last. Bertolt Brecht about his concept of the Epic Theater: ...This is no place to explain how the opposition of epic and dramatic lost its rigidity after having long been held to be irreconcilable. Let us just point out that the technical advances alone were enough to permit the stage to incorporate an element of narrative in its dramatic productions. The possibility of projections, the greater adaptability of the stage due to mechanization, the film, all completed the theater's equipment, and did so at a point where the most important transactions between people could no longer be shown simply by personifying the motive forces or subjecting the characters to invisible metaphysical powers. To make these transactions intelligible, the environment in which the people lived had to be brought to bear in a big and "significant" way. This environment had of course been shown in the existing drama, but only as seen from the central figure's point of view, and not as an independent element. It was defined by the hero's reactions to it. . The stage began to tell a story. The narrator was no longer missing, along with the fourth wall. Not only did the background adopt an attitude to the events on the stage--by big screens recalling other simultaneous events elsewhere, by projecting documents which confirmed or contradicted what the characters said, by concrete and intelligible figures to accompany abstract conversations, by figures and sentences to support mimed transactions whose sense was unclear--but the actors too refrained from going over wholly into their role, remaining detached from the character they were playing and clearly inviting criticism of him. The spectator was no longer in any way allowed to submit to an experience uncritically (and without practical consequences) by means of simple empathy with the chracters in a play. The production took the subject matter and the incidents shown and put them through a process of alienation: the alienation that is necessary to all understanding. When something seems "the most obvious thing in the world" it means that any attempt to understand the world has been given up. What is "natural" must have the force of what is startling. This is the only way to expose the laws of cause and effect. People's activity must simultaneously be so and be capable of being different. It was all a great change. The dramatic theater's spectator says: Yes, I have felt like that too-- Just like me--It's only natural-- It'll never change--The sufferings of this man appall me, because they are inescapable--That's great art; it all seems the most obvious thing in the world--I weep when they weep, I laugh when they laugh. The epic theater's spectator says: I'd never have thought it -- That's not the way -- That's extraordinary, hardly believable -- It's got to stop -- The sufferings of this man appall me, because they are unnecessary -- That's great art; nothing obvious in it -- I laugh when they weep, I weep when they laugh. Brecht, the Epic Theater was supposed to instruct its audience, therefore he also called it the Instructive Theater, and wrote the following about it: The stage began to be instructive. Oil, inflation, social struggles, war, the family, religion, wheat, the meat market, all became subjects for theatrical representation. Choruses enlightened the spectator about facts unknown to him. Films showed a montage of events from all over the world. Projections added statistical material. And as the "background" came to the front of the stage, so people's activity was subjected to criticism. Right and wrong courses of action were shown. People were shown who knew what they were doing, and others who did not. The theater became an affair for philosophers, but only for such philosophers as wished not just to explain the world, but also to change it. So we had philosophy and we had instruction. . . . http://direct.vtheatre.net/brecht.html Larami Project & Brecht -- http://script.vtheatre.net/413/laramie.html
|
|
| Create a group - Google Groups - Google Home - Terms of Service - Privacy Policy |
| ©2009 Google |