  |
|
|
|
Epic Theatre & Theatre of CrueltyAdvances Towards Postmodern PerformanceThe dramatic models created by Brecht and Artaud aimed towards a non-conventional theatrical event
The Epic Theatre Model In developing his Epic Theatre, Brecht actively sought to oppose the common elements of conventional dramatic theatre and formulated a table showing the change of emphasis between the dramatic theatre and the Epic Theatre. Brecht intended to replace the traditional conventions with a new style of theatre, which would be didactic. In the Epic Theatre, the Aristotelian emphasis on plot would be replaced with narrative of a person; the spectator would become an observer studying the onstage experiences as opposed to being cathartically involved; the growth of a linear story would become a montage of individual scenes, and stage suggestion would be replaced with argument. Didactic TheatreBrecht aimed for a theatre of learning (Didactic Theatre), where the spectator would be capable of thinking, of reasoning and making judgements with a ‘mental and emotional maturity’[i], this theatre would oppose the conventional Aristotelian theatre which he found to be ‘essentially static; its only task is to show the world as it is’. Brecht wanted to develop a theatre that would show ‘the world as it changes’ or how to make that change possible. Since his theories were grounded in Marxist aesthetic Brecht’s Epic Theatre would be political and “designed to reveal contradictions in bourgeoisie society.[ii]. His Epic Theatre would not “satisfy the old aesthetics” used in Shakespearean and contemporary theatre, rather any works created in the Epic style would “destroy them.”[iii] While Brecht opposed certain conventions of the traditional theatre, Artaud called for a complete transformation of common theatrical practice in a more radical opposition to convention. 'Theatre will never be itself again, that is to say it will never be able totruly illusive means, unless it provides the audience with truthful fantasies … utopian sense of life … even its cannibalism, for distillations of dreams where its taste for crime … erotic obsessions … savageness … do not gush out on an illusory, make-believe, but on an inner level.' [iv] For Artaud the conventional theatre was too engrossed in imitation, dialogue was relied on too much and this needed to change for the theatre to continue. Theatre of CrueltyThe first manifesto for the Theatre of Cruelty, motioned for all previous conventions of the theatre, being lighting, costume, stage, auditorium etc, to be revised as to their need and, where possible, be removed. By abolishing these ‘norms’ Artaud could rebuild the theatre as a Theatre of Cruelty. The term cruelty refers to ‘a hunger after life, a cosmic strictness, the relentless necessity of pain in life’. For Artaud, “everything that acts is cruelty. Theatre must rebuild itself on a concept of this drastic action pushed to its limit.”[v] Artaud was inspired by Oriental theatre, particularly the Balinese theatre. The design of the sets (masks hung on walls) and the way the actors would use the physical resources on the stage around them left no theatrical possibility unturned – utilising music, props, movement and gesture to full capacities. Artaud felt that the Western theatre needed to adopt these abilities. [i] Brecht B Brecht on Theatre (trans. John Willett) Ch.21 p.79 [ii] Wright E Postmodern Brecht Ch.2 p.24 [iii] Brecht B Brecht on Theatre (trans. John Willett) Ch.7 p.20 [iv] Artaud A “The Theatre of Cruelty – First Manifesto” in The Theatre and its Double p.70 [v] ibid “Theatre and Cruelty” p.65
The copyright of the article Epic Theatre & Theatre of Cruelty in Modern World Theatre is owned by Tuirenn Hurstfield. Permission to republish Epic Theatre & Theatre of Cruelty in print or online must be granted by the author in writing.
|
|
|
|
