Dialectics in the theater. New principles of acting

“Epic theater” is the theatrical theory of playwright and director Bertolt Brecht, which had a significant influence on the development of world dramatic theater.

Many of my statements about the theater are misinterpreted. The positive reviews convince me of this the most. Reading them, I feel like a mathematician to whom they write: “I completely agree with you that two and two are five!”

Bertolt Brecht

The theory of “epic theater,” the subject of which, according to the author himself, was “the relationship between the stage and the auditorium,” Brecht refined and refined until the end of his life, but the basic principles formulated in the second half of the 30s remained unchanged.

Orientation towards a reasonable, critical perception of what is happening on stage - the desire to change the relationship between the stage and the audience became the cornerstone of Brecht's theory, and all other principles of the “epic theater” logically followed from this attitude.

Brecht’s “alienation effect” (Verfremdungseffekt) had the same meaning and the same purpose as Viktor Shklovsky’s “estrangement effect”: to present a well-known phenomenon from an unexpected side - in this way to overcome automatism and stereotypical perception, or, as Brecht himself said , “simply to strip an event or character of everything that is self-evident, familiar, obvious, and to arouse surprise and curiosity about the event.” Introducing this term in 1914, Shklovsky designated a phenomenon that already existed in literature and art, and Brecht himself wrote in 1940: “The alienation effect is an ancient theatrical technique found in comedies and in some industries folk art, as well as on the stage of the Asian theater,” Brecht did not invent it, but only Brecht turned this effect into a theoretically developed method of constructing plays and performances.

Actor in the "epic theater"

The “alienation technique” turned out to be especially difficult for the actors. In theory, Brecht did not avoid polemical exaggerations, which he himself later admitted in his main theoretical work - “The Small Organon for the Theater”; in many articles he denied the need for the actor to get used to the role, and in other cases he even considered it harmful: identification with the image inevitably turns the actor into either a simple mouthpiece for the character or his lawyer. But in Brecht's own plays, conflicts arose not so much between characters, but between the author and his heroes; the actor of his theater had to present the author's - or his own, if it did not fundamentally contradict the author's - attitude towards the character.

Stanislavsky system

Stanislavsky system- theory of stage art, method of acting technique. It was developed by the Russian director, actor, teacher and theater figure Konstantin Sergeevich Stanislavsky in the period from 1900 to 1910. The system solves for the first time the problem of conscious comprehension creative process creating a role, the ways of transforming the actor into the character are determined. The goal is to achieve complete psychological authenticity acting.

The system is based on the division of acting into three technologies: craft, performance and experience.

• Craft according to Stanislavski, it is based on the use of ready-made cliches, by which the viewer can clearly understand what emotions the actor has in mind.
• The art of performance based on the fact that during long rehearsals the actor experiences genuine experiences, which automatically create a form for the manifestation of these experiences, but during the performance itself the actor does not experience these feelings, but only reproduces the form, the ready-made external drawing of the role.
• The Art of Experience- the actor experiences genuine experiences in the process of acting, and this gives birth to the life of the image on stage.

The system is fully described in the book by K. S. Stanislavsky, “The Actor’s Work on Oneself,” which was published in 1938.

Basic principles of the system

The truth of experiences

The basic principle of an actor’s performance is the truth of one’s experiences. The actor must experience what is happening to the character. The emotions experienced by the actor must be genuine. An actor must believe in the “truth” of what he is doing, must not portray something, but must live something on stage. If an actor can live something, believing in it as much as possible, he will be able to play the role as correctly as possible. His performance will be as close to reality as possible, and the viewer will believe him.K. S. Stanislavsky wrote about this: “Every moment of your stay on stage must be sanctioned by faith in the truth of the feeling you are experiencing and in the truth of the actions you are performing.”

Thinking through the proposed circumstances

The actor's feelings are his own feelings, the source of which is his inner world. It is multifaceted, so the actor, first of all, explores himself and tries to find the experience he needs in himself, he turns to his own experience or tries to fantasize in order to find in himself something that he has never experienced in real life. In order for a character to feel and act in the most appropriate way, it is necessary to understand and think through the circumstances in which he exists. Circumstances determine his thoughts, feelings and behavior. The actor must understand the internal logic of the character, the reasons for his actions, must “justify” for himself every word and every action of the character, that is, understand the reasons and goals. As K. S. Stanislavsky wrote, “ stage action must be internally justified, logical, consistent and possible in reality." The actor must know (if it is not indicated in the play, invent) all the circumstances in which his character finds himself. This knowledge of the reasons, and not the emotional manifestations themselves, allows the actor to experience the character’s feelings in a new way each time, but with the same degree of accuracy and “truthfulness.”

The birth of text and actions “here and now”

A very important feature of acting is the experience of “here and now.” Any emotion, any action must be born on stage. The actor, despite the fact that he knows what he should do as this or that character, must give himself the opportunity to want to perform this or that action. An action thus performed will be natural and justified. If the same action from performance to performance is performed every time “here and now,” then it will not become a kind of “stamp” for the actor. The actor will perform it differently each time. And for the actor himself, performing this action each time will provide the feeling of novelty necessary to enjoy his work.

An actor's work on his own qualities

In order to be able to invent the circumstances of a role, an actor must have developed imagination. In order for the role to be as “live” and interesting for the viewer as possible, the actor must use his powers of observation (notice some interesting situations in life, interesting, “bright” people, etc.) and memory, including emotional (the actor must be able to remember a particular feeling in order to be able to experience it again).

Another important aspect of the acting profession is the ability to manage your attention. The actor needs, on the one hand, not to pay attention to the audience, on the other hand, to concentrate his attention as much as possible on his partners, on what is happening on stage. In addition, there are technical issues. An actor must be able to stand up in the light, be able to “not fall into the orchestra pit,” etc. He should not concentrate his attention on this, but must avoid technical complications. Thus, an actor must be able to control his emotions, attention, and memory. The actor must be able to control the life of the subconscious through conscious acts (“subconscious” in this case is the term used by K. S. Stanislavsky, and the meaning of which is that “subconscious” is a system of involuntary regulation), which, in turn, , determines the possibility of emotionally fulfilling living “here and now.” “Our every movement on stage, every word must be the result true life imagination,” writes K. S. Stanislavsky. Important aspect acting- working with your body.

Interaction with partners

Creativity in the theater is most often of a collective nature: the actor works on stage together with his partners. Interaction with partners is a very important aspect acting profession. Partners must trust each other, help and assist each other. Feeling your partner and interacting with him is one of the main elements of acting, allowing you to maintain involvement in the process of acting on stage.

Monodrama by N. N. Evreinov

Monodrama- principle of N. N. Evreinov’s theatrical theory, deployment stage events, as if projected through the consciousness of the main character or one of the characters. Involves a dramatic performance that presents the world the way he is perceived by the actor “at any moment of his stage existence”, and forces each of the spectators to become in the position of this person, to “live his life”

I. V. Azeeva

THE CONCEPT OF THEATER AND THE TRADITION OF PHILOSOPHICAL KNOWLEDGE (to the problem of the formation of theater theory in the twentieth century)

Significant paradigmatic changes that occurred in the theater of the twentieth century make it relevant to turn to the concept of theater, which is formed in the context of art history and philosophical knowledge. Statement of the problem of solving the concept a separate type art is novel and opens up a significant perspective for the development of the theoretical and methodological field of theater science. The concept of theater, expanded into a system of cognitive tools, brings historical and theatrical research to the empirical level.

Key words: theater theory; philosophy of theater; theater concept.

THE CONCEPT OF THEATER AND THE TRADITION OF PHILOSOPHICAL KNOWLEDGE (to the Theory of Theater of the 20th Century)

The significant paradigmatic changes which took place in the theater of the 20th century draw attention to the concept of theater emerging in the context of art and philosophical knowledge. The concept of one kind of art is new and it opens a relevant perspective to the development of theoretical and methodological area in the studies of theater. The concept of theater expanded to the system of cognitive instruments moves the historical theoretical research to the empirical level.

Keywords: the theory of theatre; theater and philosophy; the concept of theatre.

In philosophical knowledge, there is a strong interest in understanding the concept of theater. Extrapolation of the philosophical concept of theater into the science of theater initiates the development of theater theory in modern times. scientific level. Various levels of the theater concept are manifested in

in its entirety through the prism of the tradition of philosophical, in particular, aesthetic knowledge and study artistic tradition aimed at understanding theater as such.

Our position is to assume that the scientific definition of theater

is not identical to his concept. The concept is based on the category of meaning, that is, the concept involves addressing theater as a category of meaning. The scientific concept considers theater as an art form, the essence of which is the artistic reflection of life through a dramatic action, usually performed in front of the viewer. While not identical, the scientific concept of theater and its concept have both a common part and independent components. For example, such an aspect of theatrical art as genre will belong to both the concept and the concept. The significance of the concept lies in the fact that it has something that cannot be inherent in a concept dealing with formative characteristics, namely, meaning.

The formation of scientific knowledge about the theater is carried out by a complex of theatrical sciences, which are integrated into a large independent scientific discipline (institution) “theater studies”, which studies the theory and history of theatre. Theater studies is one of the “young” art historical disciplines; its final formation as an independent scientific institution occurs in the twentieth century. This statement does not deny the rather deep tradition of theater science. Let us focus on a number of significant milestones along the path of its formation.

A. A. Anikst, a historian and theorist of world theater, whose scientific interests included the theory of drama, calling theater studies a “science of modern times,” asserted its “great development” already in the 19th century, in the second half of which theater studies carried out a systematization of the collected historical and theatrical material and thereby prepared the foundation for a science that “not only states, but also explains the artistic essence of theatrical culture of different eras.”

In the twentieth century, theater studies changed significantly. Anikst believed that the transformation of theater studies occurred not so much under the influence of philosophical and aesthetic theories, but “was the result of that remarkable flowering of the theater, which began at the end of the 19th century and reached its culmination in the first third of our century.” Reflecting on new ways of theater studies, Anikst agrees with one of the founders of European theater studies of the twentieth century, M. Herman*, seeing in his historical and theater studies concept a clear difference between the old theater studies and the new, which lies in the desire of the former to absolutize facts and documents and in the desire the second to strict analyticity.

In theater studies of the twentieth century, the desire for philosophical conceptuality is obvious. And yet theater studies as a science has had and remains a “historical bias.” The theory of theater as the highest form of organization of scientific knowledge of the theater, as the dominant knowledge of the theater, significantly lags behind in its development historical direction in theater studies, occupying a subordinate position (a very common position is that the theory of theater is the quintessence of its history). “Theory, which by its very nature should pave the way for practice, in the Soviet theater degenerated into an usher at the entrance, into the service of names and ambitions. The names are gone. Ambitions have faded..." - one may not agree with the emotional intensity of the maxim of A. Raskin, the compiler of the collection of articles "Theory of Theatre", which is "a modest attempt to put together at least the signs of a modern understanding of the nature of theater and its processes", but one cannot help but pay attention for a very accurate diagnosis

tical state of the domestic theoretical branch of theater science.

And in the Western tradition of forming scientific and theoretical knowledge about theater, there are obvious problems. The famous French semiotician of theater P. Pavy**, author of the famous encyclopedic “Dictionary of the Theatre”, distinguished not only by its theoretical equipment, but also by its fundamental focus on the theoretical understanding of theatrical phenomena, writes in the article “Theory of Theatre”, programmatic in its essence for this publication : “A unified theory of theater is far from being created due to the breadth and diversity of aspects of theorizing: perception of performance, analysis of discourse, description of the stage, etc.” The researcher believes that the main tools of theater theory are dramaturgical analysis, aesthetics and semiology. It is their rapprochement that is so desirable when choosing a single point of view when studying theatrical phenomena, and the difficulty of this rapprochement complicates the formation and development of a scientific theory of theater. Pavi considers it useless to ask which of the disciplines is generalizing, that is, in many ways integrating: each, depending on the specific goals and objectives of understanding theatrical phenomena, from time to time tries to perform this function. “There is no theoretical discipline that can be easily defined,” writes Pavi, thereby largely leaving the question of a complete scientific formulation of theater theory open. The concept of theater is not given a separate article in Pawi’s Dictionary of Theatre***.

Integration of scientific knowledge about theater requires its conceptualization, carried out through the construction of the concept of theater. In the science of theater, the concept as a scientific definition is used extremely rarely. The concept of theater in scientific

In modern knowledge, it represents a certain ordered set of “meanings” of theater as a universe. Conceptualization in the space of theater science is largely represented in the territory of theater theory, which, as already noted, is the least developed scientific layer of theater science. This largely explains the weak demand for concept and conceptualism in the science of theater. The use of a concept in theater studies is often perceived as something that impoverishes the theater and emasculates artistic meaning.

The “work” of the concept of theater basically comes down to understanding theater as a universe, to its explanation, interpretation. The concept of the theater, having integrity, represents a vision of the theater as such in its entirety, which allows us to talk about a certain ontological essence of the concept of the theater, which is expressed in the desire to comprehend the existential existence of the theater. By affirming the ontological fullness of the concept of theater, we also discover its fundamental essence as whole system meanings of theater as such. Being a complex mental complex, the concept includes, in addition to the main content (the meaning of theater as a universe), a number of components: for example, the national-cultural component of the theater concept (the meaning of the theater’s functioning in a certain cultural environment), social (the meaning social function theater), individual-personal (subjective understanding of the meaning of theater by an individual), etc.

It is generally accepted to represent the structure of a concept in the form of a circle consisting of a core and periphery. The theater concept also does not resist such a generalized structural vision, in the center of which is the main

a concept enshrined in dictionary entries, the periphery grows with associative and other meanings that are determined by the above-mentioned number of components.

In the study of the history of theater and the modern theatrical process, the concept of theater is deployed into a system of cognitive tools that make it possible to bring historical and theatrical research to the empirical level. In the science of theater, turning to the concept of theater and its use as a system-forming basis leads to a strict disciplinary organization of scientific knowledge, the deficiency of which is obvious and acutely noticeable in theater studies.

Scientific interest in theater as such, the consequence of which is the formation of the concept of theater, was initiated by the idea put forward by directors at the turn of the 19th and 20th centuries of the independence of theater as a special form of artistic creativity, which contributes to the “liberation” of theater from literature that dominantly defined previous theatrical eras.

Philosophy acts as a catalyst for the formation of the concept of theater in the scientific knowledge of the twentieth century and, in many ways, as its creator. Can the science of theater, without effective support on philosophical knowledge, “work” on the concept of theater independently? Is this necessary? Is, finally, the concept of theater a subject of research in theater science? V. L. Abu-shenko, N. L. Katsuk in the article “Concept” presented in the “Newest Philosophical Dictionary” propose to see in the ability of philosophy to “create” concepts its main difference with science, which does not have its own concepts, but knows only “prospects” and “functionals”, as well as art that produces “precepts” and “affects”.

It will not be difficult to detect signs of the concept of theater in the artistic knowledge of the twentieth century: in the thoughts of directors and theater theorists, theater historians and critics, actors, that is, in theatrical thought, the bearers of which are theater people. In the framework of a small scientific article, without having the task of a detailed analysis of the presence, manifestations, reflections of the concept of theater in artistic knowledge, we will draw attention to its presence, using a number of convincing, in the author’s opinion, examples. The philosophical context will “tell” the origins and essence of a particular artistic concept of the theater.

Since the concept implies an appeal to theater as a category of meaning, the connection between the concept of theater and the idea of ​​theater is natural. The abstractness and discursivity of the concept are developed in the idea, which, once perceived by the theater person, develops the concept into a living theatrical organism.

The relationship between the concept and the idea of ​​theater, in our opinion, is a direct projection of the Schopenhauer connection between the concept and the idea. It is interesting to note that the philosopher’s reflections on the essence of concepts and ideas are formed in the context of reflections on art. Schopenhauer, defining the idea in its complete clarity as an “adequate representative” of an abstract concept, states the usefulness, “necessity and suitability” of the concept for science and its sterility for art, the source of which is the comprehended idea.

The idea of ​​theater, representing the concept and being comprehended artistic practice, is a necessary condition for the consistency of a work of theatrical art. The idea of ​​theater in artistic practice is a concept,

broken up into many components that are specific in their imagery and semantics. It requires the presence of those who perceive it and thereby determines the need for a spectator in which it has to develop. In artistic practice, it is not the concept of theater as such that is revealed, but only its “incarnation” in stage images, its “representation” in a complex of visual ideas.

Universal in its fruitfulness, the soil in which theater theory is formed and developed in the twentieth century is the “intermediate” space: not philosophical knowledge that comprehends, “creates” the concept of theater, and not artistic practice itself, the futility of which directly addresses the concept of theater is obvious, A art programs theater (concepts, systems, manifestos), focused on the author’s conceptual understanding of the theater and belonging, as a rule, to directors, whose appearance in the theater “workshop” became the reason for such significant changes in the theoretical theatrical thought of the last century.

The relationship between philosophical knowledge and the formation of the theater concept is especially evident in the creative laboratory of directors who are inclined to theorize and formulate their ideas in the form of manifestos. As an example, we use the programmatic statements of the French theorist and theater director A. Artaud. Let us also draw attention to the fact that the desire to understand the universe of theater is clearly inherent in directors who are focused on practical activities. As an example, let us use the theoretical understanding of theater as such by the director and theater theorist V. E. Meyerhold. The predominance of theory over practical activity in the process of understanding the concept of theater will explain

deliberate violation of chronology in the Artaud-Meyerhold “connection”.

“The idea of ​​theater has been lost,” Artaud states programmatically. Artaud’s formulation and understanding of the idea of ​​a theater of cruelty is essentially the formation of the concept of Artosian theater. As the main not only cognitive, but also therapeutic tool of the theater concept, Artaud uses cruelty as such, that is, cruelty in philosophical sense of this word: “It is quite possible to imagine pure cruelty, beyond bodily ruptures. However, philosophically speaking, what is cruelty? From the point of view of the spirit, cruelty means severity, an inexorable decision and its execution, unwavering, absolute determination." Artaud proposes a theater “where violent physical images grind and hypnotize the sensory sphere of the spectator, captured by the theater as one might be captured by a whirlpool.” higher powers", a theater that addresses "the whole human body", the "whole being" with the aim of healing it with the help of precisely calculated means. Using cruelty as a tool, Artaud brings his theoretical and theatrical research to the empirical level, which is the performance.

There is a point of view that considers theater theory Artaud as an independent philosophical system. We agree with V.I. Maksimov, the author of a number of monographic works on Artaud, who convincingly proves the fallacy of this view, since the analysis of Artaud’s theory as a philosophical system leads the researcher to the conclusion that there is no system as such. (For more details, see:). It is difficult to talk about a direct extrapolation of any philosophical concept of theater into Artaud’s theory. Artosian

the concept of theater is formed in the context of a number of philosophical traditions that address theater as such. Let us pay attention to the obvious philosophical and theatrical foundations of Artaud’s theater theory, rooted in the paradigm of modernist thinking, within the boundaries of which Artaud’s mentality also exists.

Without setting the task of finding an exhaustive answer to the question “What brings Artaud closer to the ideas of Nietzsche,” we will try to correlate the components of the concept spheres of their theaters. The German thinker “does not want” “any kind of art” that “seeks to intoxicate its listeners and incite them to a moment of strong and lofty feeling - these people of the everyday soul...”. “The strongest thoughts and passions before those who are incapable of either thought or passion - only intoxication! And the former as a means to the latter! Theater, like music, is smoking hashish.” (italics - F.N.) Let us note that the Nietzschean concept of theater is by no means reduced only to the concept of meaning expressed in the metaphor “theater is smoking hashish.” This is just one of the components of the conceptual sphere of Nietzsche’s theater. In the Artosian understanding of the theater, in its longing for a lost idea, there is a fierce (in contrast to Nietzsche’s ironically active “I don’t want”) desire for another theater, “which will wake us up: will wake up both our nerves and our heart.” Nietzsche, whose work “The Gay Science” cited above was formed in the 80s of the 19th century, “diagnoses” a narcotic sleep into which “people of the everyday soul” go with pleasure, as well as with the active assistance of the theater. As a tool to help make a diagnosis, theater as such. Artaud, whose concept of theater developed in the 20-30s of the twentieth century, is trying to return “direct and strong action” to the theater,

capable of tearing a person out of the captivity of entertaining performances, from a hypnotic sleep of both spirit and mind, and returning to the idea of ​​“serious” theater, which “would act as a kind of therapy for the soul,” which creates true reality. Artaud does not need to make a diagnosis, he strives for an active therapeutic process, in which theater itself is again used as a tool. Artaud answers not only the question of what theater is and how it works, but also the question of what a person can achieve through theater.

A direct conceptual “coincidence” between the visions of Artaud and Nietzsche’s theater is not easy to detect. And there is a certain pattern in this, since Artaud follows Nietzsche not as an apologist, but as a successor. The concept of the Arthosian theater is not a direct heir to the Nietzschean one. Artaud uses Nietzsche's mental energy, but pours it into his own millstones.

Meyerhold, formulating the main provisions of the Conventional Theater, uses the conventional method, which is expressed in conventional techniques, as an instrument of the theater concept theatrical technology. With their help, Meyerhold proposes to destroy the “complex theatrical machine”, to bring productions to such simplicity that “an actor can go out into the square and act out his works there, without making himself dependent on the scenery and accessories specially adapted for the theatrical ramp, and on everything seemingly random." The empirical level to which Meyerhold brings his theoretical and theatrical search is the same performance or performance.

Numerous traces of Nietzsche's influence on the formation of Meyerhold's understanding of the essence of theater are known. (About

see this in detail). In an effort to bring new theater the fire of fanaticism, make it a monastery in which the actor - a schismatic (italics - V.M.), “always different from everyone else,” creates alone, “flaring up in the ecstasy of creativity in front of everyone,” knows how to “perform sacred acts in creative work ”, in the famous Meyer-Hold jeremiad “people... everywhere are too people.” the presence of open Nietzscheanism is undeniable. In Meyerhold's understanding of the theater there is a complex of Nietzschean ideas (sometimes their emotional rather than intellectual impact) and only last but not least the direct Nietzschean understanding of the theater as such.

Schopenhauer's philosophical context in the formation of Meyerhold's concept of theater is no less significant than the complex of Nietzschean ideas. At Schopenhauer’s suggestion, the viewer’s imagination enters the conceptual sphere of Meyerhold’s Conventional Theatre: the philosopher considers works artistic only if they awaken the viewer’s imagination. Meyerhold believes that the means of theater are to excite fantasy, which, as Schopenhauer writes, is “a necessary condition for aesthetic action, as well as the fundamental law fine arts". For Meyerhold, the viewer is the fourth creator, after the author, actor and director: “Conventional theater creates such a staging where the viewer, with his imagination, creatively has to complete the hints given by the scene” (italics - V.M.).

An appeal to the theoretical heritage of Artaud and Meyerhold testifies to the promise of using philosophical “tracing paper” in the theory and practice of theater and allows us to reveal the philosophical reflection of the theater. An appeal to Nietzsche and Schopenhauer confirms the existence in philosophical knowledge of attention to the formation of the concept of theater.

The above makes relevant the research, the purpose of which is, on the one hand, based on the analysis of theoretical and practical material of theatrical art, to identify the presence of the concept of theater in it, on the other hand, based on the analysis of philosophical texts, to discover in them not only the foundations of theatrical concepts, but also an expressed interest in the formation of the theater concept.

Let us note that in the course of a deep appeal to theater as a category of meaning, the search for understanding theater as a concept in the scientific and artistic knowledge of the eras preceding the twentieth century is important, right up to the time of pre-scientific knowledge that actualizes its ideas about theater in mythology, religion, and language.

The discovery of the concept of theater in the tradition of philosophical and theatrical knowledge of the twentieth century, the analysis of this phenomenon allows us to confidently assert not only the presence of an integrative use of philosophical discourse in theater studies, but also the obvious prospect of focusing attention on the concept of theater for the development of the science of theater in general and, what is especially important , - for theater theory.

NOTES

* Max Hermann, laying the foundations of the scientific study of theater in Europe, introduced the term “theater studies” itself. (See this in detail.)

** The Dictionary of the Theater by Patrice Pavy was published by Progress Publishing House in 1991. During these same years and further, preparations were underway for its publication in Russian Academy theatrical art. In 2003, the GITIS publishing house finally released its publication, where Pavi becomes Pavis (in the original - Patrice Pavis). This article quotes from the 2003 edition,

since it represents a translation of the new edition of the Dictionary: Pavi made changes and additions to it.

*** “Dictionary of the Theater” by Patrice Pavis is not so much a “dictionary” in the academic sense as a scientific encyclopedic work, the main task of which is the formation and development of the scientific theory of theater. Since its author is a semiotician, he fails to fully escape the dominant semiotic approach to understanding theatrical phenomena. The central position of theater theory in Pavis’s research is evidenced by the placement of the article “Theory of Theater” in three of the eight sections of the systematic index: dramaturgy, structural principles and issues of aesthetics, semiology, i.e., on the territory of those very disciplines, the general “work” of which forms theater theory.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

1. Anikst A. Occurrence scientific history theater in the twentieth century // Modern art history of the West about classical art. - M.: Nauka, 1977. P. 5-29.

2. Arto A. Theater and its double. Seraphim Theater. - M.: Martis, 1993. - 192 p.

3. Koreneva M. Yu. From the history of Russian Nietzscheanism // Leaders of Minds and Fashion. Someone else's name as an inherited model of life. - St. Petersburg: Nauka, 2003. pp. 233-258.

4. Maksimov V. Aesthetic phenomenon of Antonin Artaud. - St. Petersburg: Hyperion, 2007. - 316 p.

5. Meyerhold V. E. To the project of a new drama troupe at the Moscow Art Theater // Articles, letters, speeches, conversations. Part I. 1891-1917. - M.: Art, 1968. P. 8891.

6. Meyerhold V. E. About the theater: Collection of articles // Articles, letters, speeches, conversations. Part I. 1891-1917. - M.: Art, 1968. P. 101-257.

7. Mokulsky S.S. Study of the specifics of the theater // Modern art history of the West about classical art. - M.: Nauka, 1977. P. 44-57.

8. Nietzsche F. Gay Science // Works: In 2 volumes. T. 1. Literary monuments. - M.: Mysl, 1990. P. 491-719.

9. The latest philosophical dictionary. - Minsk: Publishing house. V. M. Skakun, 1998. - 896 p.

10. Pavis P. Dictionary of the theater. - M.: GITIS, 2003. - 516 p.

11. Theater theory: Sat. articles. - M.: International Agency “A. B. & T.", 2000. - 298 p.

12. Schopenhauer A. The world as will and representation // Schopenhauer A. Collection. cit.: In 5 vols. T. I. - M.: Moscow Club, 1992. P. 37-378.

Features of modern theater

According to Boyadzhiev, the avant-garde experimentally developed many new forms, techniques, and solutions to artistic creativity. However, it was the avant-garde that, by destroying traditional aesthetic norms, opened the way to the transition of artistic culture to a new quality - postmodernism or trans-avant-garde. Postmodernism is a peculiar reaction of a passing culture to the avant-garde; it is an aestheticized, ironic surge traditional culture, having already survived the avant-garde, accepted its innovations and come to terms with both it and its decline. With this, the avant-garde fulfilled its function in European culture and ended its existence as a phenomenon in the 1960s and 1970s. For representatives of theatrical postmodernism, R. Wilson and Carmelo Bene (see Boyadzhiev 1988), the dramatic text and the actor are nothing more than a reason for creating mesmerizing original performances-installations (Boyadzhiev 1988: 12).

According to Shevchenko E.N. (2008: 13 ff.), the theater responded to the events and cultural shifts that occurred in the 20th century in a truly theatrical way: it itself embarked on the path of the most complex metamorphoses and, violating the usual rules and canons, not only does not contribute to the restoration of stability, but even more confusing and increases feelings of anxiety and confusion. According to Erika Fischer-Lichte (see Shevchenko E.N. 2008), one of the largest modern theater scholars in Germany, who compared the theater of the 90s - early 2000s with the ever-changing Proteus, taking on more and more new guise, and puts forward a transformation into a number of main aesthetic categories our time. Along with the transformations that make up the essence of theater as such, today we are talking about transformations of a different kind. On the one hand, theater is being transformed into other forms of art, mass media, and artistic events. On the other hand, other types of art, mass media and artistic events are transformed into theater. There is a theatricalization of public life. Theatrical performances compete with performances in politics, sports, mass media, and advertising. Blurred boundaries become a conceptual feature contemporary art. Where does the theater end and the advertising campaign begin? At what point does a talk show turn into theater? When does an election campaign become theater, and when does theater become an election campaign? For each type of performance there are certain rules, a certain “framework” that defines its functions and meaning, and also guarantees a certain behavior of the viewer. But since the 90s, there has been a constant shift, a violation of framework conditions and their various interactions. As a result, the expectations of the audience/participants are not met, they do not know how to behave, and as a result - their confusion, disorientation, and sometimes aggression and anger.

And Shevchenko E.N. in his book he gives the example of the German director K. Schlingensief. This young German director, actor and showman has earned himself fame greatest master to cross any boundaries, to confuse, to arouse hatred and admiration and to raise ocean waves in the quietest swamp. Shevchenko gives such colorful definitions of K. Schliegensief as “First-class provocateur”, “German theater provocateur”, “theater clown”, “political clown”. And, according to Shevchenko, these are not all of the titles that the press and criticism have awarded and continue to generously reward Schlingensief. Born in 1960 in Obergausen, he began his career as a film director. Since 1993, Schlingensief has been director of the famous Berlin Volksbühne theater. In addition, he travels around the world as a director of numerous performances, events, projects, and talk shows. One of Schlingensief's most sensational projects, "Foreigners Out. Please Love Austria," is also known as the "Container Show." Such theatrical events do not rely on pre-written text. Thus, drama in this area gives way to a certain approximate scenario, implying various options stage performance and high degree improvisation, since, in particular, the behavior of spectators/participants is unpredictable.

We dwelled in more detail on the Schlingensief theater, since in many respects, according to Shevchenko, it is the most striking and characteristic embodiment of modern trends theatrical life In Germany, as part of the "Wiener Festwochen" festival, Christoph Schlingensief was invited to Vienna to stage a "political happening against xenophobia." The radicalism of the artist exceeded the wildest expectations of the loyal organizers. In front of the building Vienna Opera a container was installed with the inscription “Foreigners out!”, into which a group of either foreigners who asked for political asylum or actors playing their roles was settled. On a special website on the Internet, one could get acquainted with the biographies of the participants and follow their life in the container. Every evening one of them was chosen by the public and thrown out of the country. Thus, through a simple phone call or over the Internet, anyone had the right to decide the fate of people. On the first evening, 70,000 hits were registered on the site! The title of the festival - "The First European Cooperation Week" - was decisively renamed by Schlingensief into the "First Concentration Week". The Viennese public was seething with indignation, Japanese tourists were clicking their cameras, taking what was happening at face value, and Schlingensief was broadcasting into the microphone: “ Dear tourists, take a photo! Send them all over the world! Show people abroad the true Austria!" Respectable Austrians spat in his direction, cursed the "fascist project", forgetting how shortly before that the Nazi Jörg Haider was successfully elected, and not least for his radical program against foreigners. In the report Schlingensief wrote about the progress of the project that its goal was to create an extreme optical picture of the danger that posed to Europe from present-day Austria. Those present and everyone whose attention was focused on the “container project” more than once asked the question: “What is this? Theater? Reality? Absurd? Provocation? " Apparently, both this and that, and the third, and the fourth. And all together is the result of the metamorphoses that it undergoes modern theater.

According to Shevchenko, another project of Schlingensief is indicative in this regard - the creation of his own party "Chance 2000". The party, as expected, was registered and ran for the Reichstag. At the same time, the election campaign was simultaneously a theatrical performance, a circus performance, and a talk show, smoothly flowing into one another. The participant, who is also a spectator, could not unambiguously decide what he, in fact, was drawn into. In Schlingensief’s actions, all participants are artists, disabled people, the unemployed, his personal fans, etc. - are in a state of “between” - between firm guidelines, rules, guidelines. This radical form of "betwixt and between" opens up new play spaces and scope for innovation. The theater becomes a kind of creative laboratory, in which a crisis situation similar to the one that arises in modern society is artificially created. The Schlingensief Theater is a political theater. But it is different from the political theater of Brecht, Weiss or Müller. He does not teach, does not enlighten, does not inform, he dramatizes politics and exaggerates what is happening, he misleads, pulls the rug out from under his feet and combs modern reality frequent hard comb. Is this a provocation? Undoubtedly, but a provocation that is not an end in itself (like, say, Fluxus and performance art of the 60s), but is strictly inscribed in the political context. At the same time, the boundaries between theater and reality are completely blurred.

Such theatrical events do not rely on pre-written text. Thus, drama in this area gives way to a certain approximate scenario, implying various options for stage implementation and a high degree of improvisation, since, in particular, the behavior of spectators/participants is unpredictable.

So, contrary to public expectations, modern theater has not shown itself to be a moral institution that offers ready-made solutions to problems and pushes the viewer to implement them. On the contrary, he himself goes through the path of the most complex metamorphoses, leading the viewer to a certain borderline state: he must free himself from habitual stereotypes, hitherto unshakable rules and guidelines, and open himself to new opportunities and new experiences. The transformations that modern theater is undergoing further enhance the feeling of crisis caused by changes in public life. But unlike the latter, theater offers the viewer the opportunity, in the form of a game, to engage in solving pressing problems and learn to live in conditions of instability. This is where he sees a chance to continue to play an important role in a new, dynamic, changing world (Shevchenko 2008: 13 - 17).

So far we have been talking about non-theatrical forms of mass action. But changes, as D.A. Chugunov writes, are also taking place in theatrical dramaturgy itself. The most important processes affecting this area take place under the sign of “postdramatic theater”. On the one hand, this term is associated with the fact that drama itself has ceased to be the exclusive basis of any theatrical action. An example is the Schlingensief theater events mentioned above. In addition, in the repertoire of an ordinary German theater, approximately 30% are so-called “projects”, that is, performances based on a certain literary text - prose or lyrical, but not dramatic! At the same time, performances are solved not primarily by dramatic techniques themselves, but mainly by attracting audio and video means. In general, multimedia is a characteristic feature of modern theater (Chugunov 2006: 113).

On the other hand, as Boldyrev N. writes (2002: 4 ff.), the drama itself is subject to serious changes. Heiner Müller is recognized as one of the pioneers of German post-dramatic theater. His play-text "Hamlet the Machine", written back in 1977, meant a rejection of the traditional dramatic form and "high language". Classic elements dramas - action, conflict, characters, dialogues - are replaced by concentrated imagery (see Boldyrev 2002): “I was Hamlet. I stood on the shore and chatted with the surf: blah blah. Behind my back are the ruins of Europe.”

The most prominent representative of post-dramatic theater, according to N. Boldyrev, today is the writer and playwright Elfriede Jelinek. In 1998, her “Sports Play” was created and staged, which went down in the history of the theater. The point is that large group The actors perform certain sports exercises on stage and chant the text. The play is distinguished by the special status of the characters, nameless native speakers. Actors are not themselves, but also not those whom they play. Language is used as material and is separated from the anonymous carrier. Gigantic monologues are put into the mouths of characters devoid of individuality. The text is mechanically divided between them. In this case, the rhythm of speech and its peculiar music play an important role, creating a feeling of a kind of trance into which actors and spectators fall. The text of the play is not intended for reading, but exclusively for dramatization. It is a kind of backdrop for a multimedia theatrical performance. The destruction of language, the deprivation of its usual functions, is a characteristic technique used by Jelinek in drama. The function of stage movement changes accordingly. The body (movement, gestures) is at the center of what is happening. As a result, the stage represents a special intermediate space - it is neither theater nor life, and at the same time both. However, the “Sports Play” is not just a bright, shocking, meaningless form, as it might seem at first glance. It contains a deep thought about the kinship of sport and war, about the danger of fanatical idealization of sport, expressed by Elfriede Jelinek with her characteristic radicalism and originality. At the same time, in the “Sports Play,” according to Boldyrev, the most character traits post-dramatic theater, which has become a high road for the development of modern theatrical art, - blurring the boundaries between theater and life, destruction of the illusion of “here and now” on which traditional theater is based, rejection of traditional drama (criticism and destruction of language, new function of the text, rejection of traditional dramatic action, conflict, character and dialogue, new function of the body).

As Boldyrev N. writes, initially the term “postdramatic” arose from the opposition of Attic tragedy as an example of “predramatic” theater, that is, theater “before drama,” and modern “postdramatic” theater, that is, theater, the basis of which, as noted, is no longer constitutes itself dramatic text. Recently, this term is increasingly used in Germany to denote new trends in modern theatrical practice in general. There is fierce debate surrounding it. Some understand it exclusively as a happening, others - projects in the implementation of which, in addition to actors, artists, poets, dancers participate, others equate text theater with post-dramatic theater, etc. But all these are just partial manifestations of it. Postdramatic theater - broad concept, which includes a wide variety of changes in dramatic form. At the same time, the term “postdramatic” has many similarities with the term “postmodernist”. The latter, however, is more global in nature, essentially denoting an entire era in art, while “postdramatic” is associated with specific issues of theatrical aesthetics. The largest modern theater theorist G. - T. Lehmann, in the book “Postdramatic Theater” (see Boldyrev 2002), published in 1999, conducted an in-depth study of theatrical practice of the last 30 years of the twentieth century in order to identify the aesthetic logic of the new theater. He emphasizes that the term “postdramatic” does not at all mean an abstract negation, a fundamental departure from the dramatic tradition. “Post,” that is, “after,” in his opinion, means that drama continues to exist, but as “a weakened, outdated structure of “normal” theater” within the framework of a new theatrical concept. Müller (see Boldyrev 2002), for example, characterized his postdramatic text as “an explosion of memory in a dead dramatic structure.” Lehmann metaphorically describes this situation as follows: the members and organs of the dramatic organism, although they represent dead material, are still present and form the space of memory in the double sense of the word - both the memory of what is happening and the memory of the traditional dramatic form.

Not all theatrical forms last decades, according to Boldyrev, correspond to the postdramatic paradigm. But we are talking about the logic of development of the very idea of ​​theater. The concept of "new theatre" has been applied to various theatrical concepts throughout history. The formula of any new theater, in principle, comes down to replacing outdated forms with new ones. Studies of modern theater confirm that it is the term “postdramatic” that corresponds to the nature of the innovations that distinguish modern theater, from the point of view of the development of theatrical aesthetics.

Thus, according to Boldyrev, modern theater is a dynamic, multifaceted, complex organism on the path of unpredictable, dizzying transformations. Theater theorists are making the first attempts to comprehend new experience (Boldyrev 2002: 4 - 7).

But, above all, modern theater is live connection times Such plays as "Hamlet" by W. Shakespeare and "Faust" by Goethe still remain popular in modern theater. Again and again Hamlet is tormented by his unbearable burden, looking beyond the line of life and death: “To be or not to be? That is the question?” and again Faust signs a terrible agreement in order to be able to penetrate the secrets of the universe and use them for the benefit of people.

One of the trends in modern Western European theater is the modernization of classics. How should we feel about this? This feature in modern theater can not be called either negative or positive. On the one hand, art must keep up with the times and somehow survive in the conditions popular culture- after all, someone has to buy tickets to the theater for it to continue to exist. But on the other hand, with such a “dressing up” of theatrical classics, its historical originality is lost, the unique feeling of the past, which is also necessary for the viewer, disappears.

Another very important feature of modern Western European theater, as Sorochkin puts it, is close attention to the inner world, complex mental conflicts, and the psychology of modern man. Where, if not in the theater, we can look at ourselves and understand how complex the world around us is. In addition, modern theater is always an intense search for something new. After all, a new view of the world, new rhythms of life must correspond to new directing techniques, new ways of solving the stage space.

Thus, modern drama and theater continue to develop the traditions laid down by the classics and at the same time greatly revise and rework many individual aspects. In addition, new types of plays and productions that were previously unknown are appearing, such as radio plays (Sorochkin 1989: 15).

But art also finds itself forced to serve the needs of the masses. Today's society seems to require only one thing from an artist: to be original and new, spectacularly interesting at all costs.

To be original and new, to be interesting - this is what is required of an artist postmodern culture, according to Boyadzhiev. Nothing more (Boyadzhiev: 4 - 5).

Young people demand action, action, a quick change of events. As soon as modern directors manage to show something “of their own” that is not part of already established theatrical norms, a small rebellion begins. As soon as the director undresses the main character a little, the discontent of the old generation and the emotions of the youth are revealed. Production of classical dramas modern style- criticism, misunderstanding and accusation of violating values. The eternal struggle of two generations.

As Andreev L.G. notes, modern theater is exactly like this. Classics with amazing favorite actors, and new, risky productions by young directors.

However, directors who turn to modern play, often suffer failures that can convince anyone that the main drawback modern dramaturgy in “poor knowledge of the theater”, in “ignorance of the audience”. But in fact, according to Andreev, it is rarely staged, so its shortcomings are not identified - after all, they can only be visible during the production process and in the reaction of the audience. This means that there is no “look” check.

The main thing is that the theater does not indulge the desires of the audience and does not become an object of consumption. The main task of theatre, especially modern theater in such difficult spiritual times, is to educate the viewer, develop his inner world, teach him to see what is hidden from our sight. And no matter what the modern theater is, it copes with this task (Andreev 2004: 76).

Modern theater is democratic and has a strong social orientation at its core. Today's theater has ceased to be an art for the elite - it speaks the language of the masses, embodies complex modern problems. The current theater has firmly won its audience, it is necessary for many people, and the creators of modern performances solve not only purely aesthetic, but also social problems. Of course, something in the theatrical art of the new millennium is dictated by opportunistic considerations, but a little time will pass and everything superficial will go away to allow the development of the real, truthful, organic that is in modern drama.

Page 27. Kaiser Georg (1878-1945) - German expressionist playwright, author of a number of pacifist and anti-imperialist plays; wrote more than 60 plays of a strongly experimental nature. "From Morning to Midnight" - drama 1916
Page 28. Lampel Peter-Martin (b. 1894) - German playwright. His play "Revolt in the Foundling House" (1928) caused a great discussion on issues of education.
SHOULD DRAMA HAVE A TREND?
Response to a questionnaire from the Essen magazine "Scheinwerfer", published in November 1928, along with responses from other cultural figures.
A PLAYWRIGHT'S REJECTION
Apparently, this article, which remains in the manuscript, dates back to 1932.
Page 33. Maugham Somerset (b. 1874) - English novelist and playwright, who gained fame for the comedies Lady Frederick (1907), A Man of Honor (1904), Caroline (1916), The Circle (1921), The Letter " (1927), etc. A collection of Maugham's plays in six volumes was published in 1931-1932.
Sulla Lucius Cornelius (138-78 BC) became in 82 BC. e. permanent dictator, and in 79 BC. e. resigned his powers.
Shakespeare... went into his personal life. - In 1613, in the prime of his life, forty-eight years old, Shakespeare, for reasons unknown to his biographers, left the theater. (See: A. Anikst, Shakespeare, M., “Young Guard”, ZhZL, 1964, p. 303 ff.).
ON THE WAY TO MODERN THEATER
TO THE Mister IN THE PARTERRE
Response to the questionnaire from the newspaper "Berliner Borsen-Courier"; the question read: “What do you think your audience expects from you?” Published on December 25, 1926, along with responses from many theater figures (L. Jessner, A. Bronnen, G. Kaiser, E. Toller, K. Zuckmayer, K. Sternheim, M. Fleiser and others).
Page 38. "In the thicket." - This refers to Brecht's play "In the Thicket of Cities" (1921-1924).
PICTURE EXPERIENCE
Written by Brecht after the performance of "The Tide" by A. Paquet on the stage of the Volksbühne on February 21, 1926.
Page 39. Shakespeare's Coriolanus was staged by director Erich Engel at the Lessing Theater in Berlin on February 27, 1925; Fritz Kortner played the main role.
"Baal" is Brecht's first play, written in 1918.
Burris Emil - playwright, colleague of Brecht, author of the plays "American Youth" (1925), "A Meager Meal" (1926). See Brecht’s two notes about him: “Fruitful Obstacles” and “Objective Theater” (B. Brecht, Schriften zum Theater, V. I, S. 169-172).
REFLECTIONS ON THE DIFFICULTIES OF EPIC THEATER
Published in the literary supplement of the newspaper "Frankfurter Zeitung" on November 27, 1927.
Page 41. ...Munich Shakespearean stage. - I mean Munich art theater(1907-1908), the auditorium of which was located like an amphitheater, and the 10-meter-long stage, devoid of depth, was limited on the sides by towers; The silhouettes of the actors stood out against the back wall. This theater successfully staged Shakespeare's Twelfth Night.
LAST STAGE - "ODIPUS"
Published in the newspaper "Berliner Borsen-Courier" on February 11, 1929. "Oedipus" was staged by Leopold Jessner at the Staatstheater in Berlin on January 4, 1929. A combination of "Oedipus Rex" and "Oedipus at Colonus" into one play (by Heinz Lipmann ). Main role performed by Fritz Kortner.
ABOUT THEMES AND FORM
Published in the newspaper "Berliner Borsen-Courier" dated March 31, 1929, together with notes from a number of other theater figures under the general title "Tomorrow's Theater." The editors posed the following questions: “What new thematic areas can fertilize theater? Do these themes require a new dramatic form or new technology games?"
THE PATH TO A GREAT MODERN THEATER
These sketches, which remain unpublished, date back to 1930.
Page 47. Dayton Monkey Trial. - Dayton is a city in the USA, in the state of Ohio; here was the trial of a schoolteacher who promoted Darwin's teachings.
SOVIET THEATER AND PROLETARIAN THEATER
Written in connection with a tour of the Meyerhold Theater in 1930; In Berlin, the plays “The Inspector General” by Gogol and “Roar, China!” were performed. S. Tretyakov and Ostrovsky's "Forest".
Page 51. ...Attila - leader of the Huns (434-453), known for his ferocity.
DIALECTICAL DRAMATURGY
Selected sketches from 1929-1930, remaining unpublished and extracted from Brecht's archive.
Page 55. Kerr Alfred (1867-1948) - German theater critic, constant ideological and artistic opponent of Brecht.
Page 60. ...works...Deblin, - Brecht is referring to the novel by Alfred Deblin (1878-1957) “The Three Leaps of Wang Lun” (1915), under the influence of which he wrote his early comedy “What is this soldier, what is that” (1924-1926).
Page 63. ...removing the covers from the images in Sais. - This refers to Schiller’s poem “The Shrouded Statue of Sais” (1796), which affirms the Kantian position about the unknowability of the “thing in itself”: an inquisitive young man tore off the cover that hid the Truth from the statue, and was forever speechless.
ABOUT NON-ARISTOTLEAN DRAMA
THEATER OF PLEASURE OR THEATER OF TEACHING?
The article was written in 1936, first published in 1957 in the collection. "Schriften zum Theater". Published in Russian in the book: B. Brecht, About the Theater, M., IL, 1960.
Page 65. Louis Jouvet (1887-1935) - French director, director of the Athenaeum theater. Jouvet was a theatrical innovator who sought new ways of directing.
Cochran is an English director and actor.
"Gabima" is a Jewish theater in which E. B. Vakhtangov staged the play "Gadibuk" ("Possessed") in 1921, which had a great resonance in Europe.
Page 66. ...according to Aristotle. - See: Aristotle, The Art of Poetry, M., Goslitizdat, 1967, p. S3.
Page 72. Psychoanalysis is a theory of psychology created by the Austrian scientist Z. Freud, according to which a person’s spiritual life is explained by the subconscious and mainly by sexual instinct.
Behaviorism is a direction in modern American psychology that considers human behavior as a set of reactions to external influences.
...According to Friedrich Schiller... - Brecht is referring to Schiller’s teaching about theater as a school of morality, which he put forward in a number of aesthetic articles and treatises: “The Theater Considered as a Moral Institution”, “On tragic art", "On the pathetic", in "Letters on the aesthetic education of man."
Page 73. Nietzsche attacked Schiller, calling him Säckingen's moral trumpeter. - Nietzsche, who had dislike for Schiller, ironically called him that, using the title of the famous lyric-epic story in verse by Joseph Victor Scheffel “The Trumpeter of Säckingen” (1854).
GERMAN THEATER OF THE 20'S
This article was published in English in the Left Review, London, July 1936.
Page 75. “Business is Deal” - an anti-bourgeois play by the French writer Octave Mirbeau (1903).
"Mistress Julia" is a naturalistic drama by the Swedish writer August Strindberg (1888).
"The Chalk Circle" is a sensational modernist play by the German writer Klabund (1924), an adaptation of an ancient oriental drama,
Page 76. “The Good Soldier Schweik” was staged by Piscator at the Berlin Theater on Nollendorfplatz (premiere January 23, 1928) based on Hasek’s novel, adapted for the stage by Brecht.
"Merchant of Berlin" - satirical play Walter Mehring (b. 1896), staged by Piscator at the theater on Nollendorfplatz (premiere September 6, 1928).
Gross Georg (1893-1959) - German graphic artist who collaborated in 1928-1929. with Piscator, in whose theater he designed "Adventures good soldier Seamstress". See about him in the book by E. Piscator "Political Theater", M., 1934.
Page 77. “The Flight of the Lindberghs” is an educational play by Brecht (1929), later renamed “Flight Over the Ocean.”
Hindemith Paul (b. 1895) - German composer, one of the leaders of musical modernism.
REALISTIC THEATER AND ILLUSION
Sketches that remained unpublished. In Brecht's manuscript, the title given refers only to the first passage.
ABOUT EXPERIMENTAL THEATER
Report read on May 4, 1939 to participants in the Student Theater in Stockholm. For the re-reading of the report before the ensemble of the Student Theater in Helsinki in November 1940, Brecht revised the text. First published in "Studien", E 12, supplement to the magazine "Theater der Zeit", l959, E 4.
Page 84. Antoine André (1858-1943) - French director, theorist and theater innovator.
Brahm Otto (1856-(1912) - German theatrical figure, founder of German stage naturalism, follower of Antoine.
Craig Gordon (b. 1872) is an English director, artist and theater theorist, a supporter of the director's autocracy in the theater, who saw in the actor only a “super-puppet.”
Reinhardt Max (1873-1943) - German director, a tireless experimenter who innovatively used all components modern performance(music, light, dance, painting).
...natural sites. - Reinhardt carried out productions in circus arenas, etc. in the form of mass folk shows. "A Midsummer Night's Dream" was staged in 1905 - this performance enjoyed particular success.
“Every Person” (or “Everyone”) - a drama by the Austrian playwright Hugo von Hofmannsthal (1874-1924) “Every Person, a play about the death of a rich man” (1911); is a treatment of a medieval mystery play.
Page 85. Trendelenburg heart surgery. - Friedrich Trendelenburg (1844-1924) - surgeon, creator of new methods of operations on the lungs and heart.
Page 86. Grig Nordahl (1902-1943) - Norwegian playwright, author of the epic drama "Our Honor, Our Power" (1935), which attracted Brecht with its depiction of the masses, and "Defeat" (1937), a drama that Brecht remade into his play " Days of the Commune.
Lagerkvist Per (b. 1891) - Swedish writer, a follower of the dramaturgy of A. Strindberg, who later created works of high philosophical and public importance.
Auden Wystan Hugh (b. 1907) - English writer and poet.
Abell Kjell (1901-1961) - Danish playwright. See note. to page 181 of the 1st half volume.
Page 93. ...institute of physicist Niels Bohr. - Niels Bohr (1885-1964) Danish physicist, who headed the Institute of Theoretical Physics from 1920. Under the impression of the message mentioned in the text, Brecht wrote the play “The Life of Galileo” (see about this, vol. 2 present, ed., p. 437).
Page 95. Mimesis. - In his Poetics, Aristotle, following Plato, calls all types of poetry imitative arts or imitation. The term "mimesis" (uiunoic) means "imitation".
Hegel, who created... the last great aesthetics. - This refers to the “Course of Lectures on Aesthetics” read by Hegel in 1817-1819. in Heidelberg and in 1820-1821. in Berlin. The thought given by Brecht in the “Introduction” (see: Hegel, Collected Works, M., 1938, vol. XII).
Page 101. Bruegel. - Dutch painter Pieter Bruegel the Elder, nicknamed Peasant (1525-1569).
NEW PRINCIPLES OF ACTING
BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF A NEW ACTING TECHNIQUE THAT CAUSES SO
CALLED THE "ALIENATION EFFECT"
The article was written in 1940, published in "Versuche", E 11, Berlin, 1951. In Russian - in the book: B. Brecht, About the Theater, M., IL, 1960.
Page 108. “The Life of Edward II of England” (1923) - a play by B. Brecht and L. Feuchtwanger, an adaptation of the drama by Christopher Marlowe, an English playwright of the Renaissance, predecessor of Shakespeare.
"The Pioneers of Ingolstadt" is a play by Marieluise Fleiser.
Page 110. I. Rapoport’s book “The Work of the Actor” made a great impression on Brecht and was discussed by him several times. See special note in "Schriften zum Theater", B. Ill, Suhrkamp Verlag, 1963, S. 212-213.
DIALECTICS AND ALIENATION
During Brecht's lifetime these notes were not published.
BUILDING AN IMAGE
It was not published during Brecht's lifetime. The sections “Historicization” and “Uniqueness of the Image” are included in this series of notes by the compiler of the German edition, W. Hecht.
Page 125. ...your little play... - that is, Brecht's one-act play "The Rifles of Teresa Carrar."
Page 125-126. ...the most outstanding actress is Elena Weigel.
IMAGE DEVELOPMENT
This and the following notes were written mainly in 1951-1953. Some of them were created before and after a conference organized by the German Academy of Arts in Berlin on the topic: “How can we understand Stanislavsky?” Others arose in the summer of 1953 in connection with reading a handwritten translation of N. Gorchakov’s book “Directing Lessons by K. S. Stanislavsky”, 2nd ed., M., “Iskusstvo”, 1951, written by a famous Soviet director based on rehearsals and conversations with Stanislavsky.
IS IT TRUE
Written by Brecht in connection with the production of E. Strittmatter's play "Katzgraben" (1953) - see note. to page 479.
Page 141. “The Trial of Joan of Arc” is a play written by B. Brecht in collaboration with Benno Besson based on the radio play of the same name by Anna Seghers (1952).
Dufour is a character in this play.
pars pro toto (Latin) - part instead of the whole.
LIVING
Refers to notes written in connection with the production of Katzgraben.
Page 142. Danegger Matilda - actress of the Berlin Ensemble.
ARTIST AND COMPOSER IN THE EPIC THEATER
ON STAGE DESIGN IN THE NON-ARISTOTLEAN THEATER
Excerpt from great job, remained unfinished.
Page 150. “Running Run” - a play by V. P. Stavsky (1931), staged by N. P. Okhlopkov at the Moscow Realistic Theater.
Knutson Per is a Danish director who staged Brecht's play "Roundheads and Pointheads" at the Riedersalen Theater in Copenhagen (premiere: November 4, 1936). See present, ed., vol. II, p. 430.
Page 151. Gorelik Max (Mortdecai) (b. 1899) - American theater artist who designed the production of Brecht's play "The World" at the Union Theater in New York (premiere November 19, 1935). See present, ed., vol. I, p. 510.
Page 155. John Hartfield (b. 1891) - German poster and theater artist.
Page 161. Hannibal ante portes (Latin) - Hannibal at the gate. Cicero's words signifying great danger.
Page 163. Guild Theater - American dramatic theater established in 1919; here the existing “star” system in America was contrasted with a strong ensemble of actors. See "Theater Encyclopedia", vol. I, st. 1169-1170.
ON THE USE OF MUSIC IN EPIC THEATER
The article was written in 1935. First published in the book: "Schriften zurn Theater", 1957. In Russian translation - B. Brecht, About the Theater.
Page 164. “The Life of the Asocial Baal” - that is, Brecht’s play “Baal” (1918).
Page 167. “Take it off” (English) - take off, undress.
"Emperor Jones" - play American writer Eugene O'Neill (1888-1953).
"SMALL ORGANON" FOR THE THEATER
Brecht's main theoretical work, written in 1948. First published in 1949 in a special issue of the magazine "Sinn und Form" dedicated to Brecht, then in "Versuche", E 12. In the annotation the author wrote: "Here is an analysis of the theater of the age of science" .
The word "organon" (meaning in Greek in the literal sense "tool", "instrument") among the followers of Aristotle means logic as a tool scientific knowledge. The word "Organon" denotes a collection of treatises on Aristotle's logic. The English materialist philosopher Francis Bacon (1561-1626), wanting to contrast Aristotle’s logic with his inductive logic (that is, based on inferences from particular facts to general conclusions), polemically called his work "New Organon". B. Brecht calls his main theoretical treatise “Small Organon”, continuing the struggle for a new, “non-Aristotelian” theater. Thus, the title itself already contains a polemic against traditional drama and theater.
Page 175. Robert Oppenheimer (b. 1904) - American physicist; During the war, from 1943, he led one of the main American nuclear laboratories. He was subsequently put on trial for anti-American activities.
Page 195. Lufton - see 1st half volume, p. 516.
Page 208. “Tai Yan Awakens” - a play by Friedrich Wolf, staged by Piscator at the Wallnertheater (premiere May 15, 19 (31),
ADDITIONS TO THE "SMALLER ORGANON"
The additions were written by Brecht in 1952-1954. using the experience of working in the Berlin Ensemble.
Page 211. Owl of Minerva. - According to the beliefs of the ancient Romans, the owl is a sacred bird accompanying the goddess of wisdom Minerva.
DIALECTICS IN THE THEATER
DIALECTICS IN THE THEATER
Scattered notes, united under this heading by the compiler of the German edition, W. Hecht.
Page 222. Study of the first scene of Shakespeare's tragedy "Coriolanus". This conversation between Brecht and his colleagues at the Berlin Ensemble Theater took place in 1953. Shakespeare's tragedy Coriolanus was translated and processed by Brecht in 1952-1953.
Page 232. Patria (Latin). - fatherland.
Page 239. Relative haste. - N. A. Ostrovsky’s play “The Kindergarten” was staged at the Berlin Ensemble, directed by Angelika Hurwitz (premiere December 12, 1955).
Page 240. Another case of using dialectics. - The play “The Rifles of Teresa Carrard” was staged at the Berlin Ensemble by Egon Monk under the artistic direction of Brecht (premiere November 16, 1962).
Page 241. Letter to the performer of the role of the younger Herder in “The Winter Battle”. - “Winter Battle,” a tragedy by I. R. Becher, was staged at the Berlin Ensemble by B. Brecht and Manfred Weckwerth (premiere January 12, 1955). The role of the younger Herder was played by Ekkehard Schall.
Page 243. Arndt Ernst Moritz (1769-1860) - German writer, publicist during the liberation wars against Napoleon.
Page 244. "Military Primer" - an album compiled by Brecht during the war, which consists of photographs with poetic captions composed by Brecht.
Page 245. Niobe - in the Greek legend, the wife of the king of Thebes Amphion, whose children were killed by the gods; out of grief, Niobe turned into a rock. Niobe is the personification of suffering.
Page 246. An example of how the discovery of an error led to a stage discovery. - The play by Chinese playwrights Luo Ding, Chan Fan and Chu Jin-nan “Millet for the Eighth Army”, adapted by Elisabeth Hauptmann and Manfred Weckwerth, was staged at the Berlin Ensemble by M. Weckwerth (premiere April 1, 1954).
Page 248. Gottsched Johann Christoph (1700-1766) - German writer of the early Enlightenment. His Essay on Critical Poetics for the Germans was published in 1730.
Page 249. Gender - Brecht is wrong: Paul was not a Roman actor, he was an Athenian of the era of Pericles.
SOME MISCONCEPTIONS IN UNDERSTANDING THE BERLIN ENSEMBLE PLAYING METHOD
This “conversation in the literary part of the theater” took place in 1955 after the premiere of “Winter Battle” by I. R. Becher. First published in "Sinn und Form", 1957, E 1-3. Russian translation (partial) in the book: B. Brecht, About the Theater.
Page 252. Rilla Paul (b. 1896) - German critic, theorist and literary historian, author of the book “Literature, Criticism and Polemics”, Berlin, 1950.
Page 254. Rosa Berndt - the heroine of the tragedy of the same name by G. Hauptmann (1903).
Page 259. Erpenbeck Fritz (b. 1897) - German writer and theater critic.
NOTES ON DIALECTICS IN THE THEATER
Page 268. Nouveaute (French) - letters, news. "Theatres des Nouveautes" was the name of many Parisian theaters, of which the most famous was the theater founded by Brasseur Sr. on the Italian boulevard in 1878, where vaudevilles, operettas and buffet comedies were performed.
E. Etkind

3. Theater and theatrical performances in Ancient Greece.

4. Tragedies and comedies in ancient Greek theater.

5. Theater creators.

6. Conclusion.

The emergence of the theater.
Theater originated in Ancient Greece approximately two and a half thousand years ago.
The very word "theater" Greek origin and means "place for spectacles."
Theatrical performances were the favorite spectacles of the ancient Greeks.
The origin of theater was associated with the religion of the ancient Greeks, namely
festivities in honor of the god Dionysus, the patron saint of winemakers. In one of
myths say that Dionysus wanders throughout the earth along with a crowd
their companions. These are satyrs - forest gods, half-people, half-goats. At the satyrs
long tails, pointed ears and hooves. When to the sounds of flutes and pipes
Dionysus comes to Greece, then spring begins in this country, it is warmer
the sun warms, flowers bloom, all life is reborn.
At the end of March, Greece celebrated the main holiday of the god of wine - the Great
Dionysia. When portraying satyrs, the Greeks wore goat skins and tied
long beards made of oak leaves, painted faces or covered them
goat masks. A cheerful procession of mummers moved through the streets of the city and
stopped somewhere in the square. The singer came forward. He sings
talked about the wanderings of Dionysus, about his meeting with pirates and other
adventures, and the rest of the mummers sang along with him in chorus. I portrayed the lead singer
then one of the heroes of the myth, then Dionysus himself, then one of the satyrs. Scenes,
played out by the participants of the holiday, and were the first theatrical
spectacles: the singer and the mummers were actors, and the spectators were everything
population of the city.

Theater and theatrical performances in Ancient Greece.
In Greek cities from the end of the 6th century. BC e. built for theatrical performances
special buildings. In almost every Greek city, including the colonies
shores of the Mediterranean and Black Seas, there was its own theater, and sometimes several (so,
there were more than ten theaters in Attica). Each of the ancient theaters accommodated
several thousand spectators. For example, the Theater of Dionysus in Athens had about 17
thousand places.
The theater was a favorite spectacle in Ancient Greece, all residents sought
get to the festival of Dionysus, but these celebrations (of which they were part
theatrical performances) were not held daily, but only twice a year.
There were no evening performances in Ancient Greece. Performances in Greek theaters
began at about seven in the morning and continued until sunset: they placed in a row
several performances.
"Ancient Greek theater tickets": they charged a small fee to enter the theater
(in Athens power belonged to to the common people, demos, therefore
the state, taking care of the poorest citizens, gave them money to buy
tickets). The ticket was made of lead or baked clay. Letters are visible on the ticket
"beta" (B) and "epsilon" (E). The letter indicated one of the “wedges” to which
the theater was divided by staircases, radiating rays. As indicated on the ticket
The “wedge” could take any place, starting from the second row. So as not to
sit at the very top, the Greeks went to the theater before dawn. They took with them a bundle of
pies and a flask of wine, a warm cloak, a pillow that was placed under
yourself on a stone bench. The theater was rarely half empty.
Most of the spectators were men - citizens and visiting Greeks.
Women, constantly busy with household chores, attended the theater significantly

less often than men. Slaves entered the theater only as servants accompanying

height. Since the actors' facial features were poorly visible from the last rows

Aristophanes expresses the interests of the Attic peasantry and middle strata

Theater performances were favorites along with the Olympic Games
the spectacles of the Hellenes.

Sophocles (b. c. 497 - d. 406 BC) is a great ancient Greek playwright. Created
in the era of the highest flowering of Athenian slave-owning democracy and its
culture. Together with Pericles, Sophocles was elected strategos (440-439 BC), i.e.
military leaders. Along with Aeschylus and Euripides, Sophocles created and developed
classical ancient Attic tragedy; he increased the number of plays
actors from 2 to 3, reduced choral parts compared to dialogue and action,
introduced decorations and improved masks. Of those written by Sophocles, more than 120
plays, 7 tragedies and more than 90 excerpts have been preserved, including a fragment
satirical drama "Pathfinders". Popularity of Sophocles in Athens
confirmed by the fact that in dramatic competitions he received first place 18 times
reward and neverdid not take third place. Theme of Sophocles' tragedies, closely
associated with mythological subjects. Sophocles' dramas are characterized by
compositional harmony, proportionality of parts, strict subordination of the particular
general - artistic idea. Sophocles psychologically truthfully reveals
the inner world of their heroes. The work of Sophocles had a great influence on
world literature since the Renaissance.
Conclusion.
The most important stage in the development of the theater was theatrical culture antiquity,
In Ancient Greece, a theater was created based on folk traditions and new
humanistic ideology. The theater occupied an important place in public life
ancient Greek democratic cities-states. Its development was
inextricably linked with the rise of Greek drama. Greek theater performances
were part of public celebrations organized by the state,
reflected the most important issues of public life.