About
Community
Bad Ideas
Drugs
Ego
Artistic Endeavors
But Can You Dance to It?
Cult of the Dead Cow
Literary Genius
Making Money
No Laughing Matter
On-Line 'Zines
Science Fiction
Self-Improvement
Erotica
Fringe
Society
Technology
register | bbs | search | rss | faq | about
meet up | add to del.icio.us | digg it

Back to basics at the Berliner ensemble: Directors

BACK TO BASICS AT THE BERLINER ENSEMBLE:
Directors Discuss the _Ur-Faust_ and Ur-Brecht

Neither New York nor Los Angeles were really ready for
Bertolt Brecht's _The Life of Galileo_ when he and Charles
Laughton brought it to the stage in 1947, aided by Joseph Losey.
Nonetheless, this definitive version was for Brecht a change and
an improvement over the first, or Danish, text he had finished in
November 1938. A few months before Brecht's death in East Berlin
in 1956, he had begun rehearsals of this version with the
Berliner Ensemble. In 1947, he had Ruth Berlau photograph the
Laughton prodoction, which was later coupled with photos of Ernst
Busch in the title-role of the Ensemble production, in the model-
book, _Aufbau einer Rolle: Galilei_(Berlin: Henschelverlag,
1962).
It might be assumed, considering Brecht's thoughtful
revisions of his concept and his tgext, as well as his concern
with preserving a visual and textual record of definitive
productions of _The Life of Galileo_, that this was indeed the
final view and vision of Galileo he wished to project on the
stage. With the decision of the current members of the Berliner
Ensemble to mount a production of the Danish original, shown at
the Edinburgh Festival(1984), some questions were raised about
respect for an artist's wishes and intentions.
But, since the Berliner Ensembloe also brought to Edinburgh
its unusually innovative, even surreal, staging of _Scenes from
Faust_(partly inspired by Geothe's own interest in the _Ur-
Faust_) it appeared that examination of earlier texts by means of
staged performances might throw new light on the more famous
versions. During the Edinburgh Festival engagement, the co-
directors of _Galileo Galilei_ (the title of the Danish
_Fassung_) Manfred Wekwerth and Joachim Tenschert, discussed the
rationale behind both productions:

TENSCHERT: This production can be seen as an opposite model from
that which Brecht himself started right before his death in 1956,
the "California _Fassung_." His lifelong friend, Erich Engel,
produced it in 1957. That production brought to life the
Renaissance world in which the play is actually set. In its
theatrical and historical form, it was much more true to the
world of the Renaissance than this production. This production
has, of course, an immemse wooden semi-circle. It is supposed to
represent the circle of the world....We wanted to bring it as
close to the audience as possible, so that the Ensemble has a
kind of discourse with the spectators on the great theme of
Galileo Galilei.
Every five years or so, you must restudy the play, or look at
the reasons why you are performing the work and see how relevant
they are to the public today. Today's motives could be quite
different from those of Brecht's day.

QUESTION: Why does this version drop Brecht's Scene 14? And what
is the reference to Mrs. Sarti and the plague in Scene 6. My
memory might be wrong, but I don't believe this appeared in the
English version.

TENSCHERT: Let's take the Sarti reference first. Scene 6--the
plague scene in the Danish version--is a decisive scene. In the
second version in California, with Charles Laughton, Brecht re-
thought and reworked the play. He had vivid impressions of
Hiroshima. He totally revised the whole concept of the play, so
the plague scene as such was to a large extent removed. The play
was written during the course of the bombing of Hiroshima, and
this was important to the second version. The second, the
California, version is harder and more critical. It showed,
after this experience, what science could do to mankind. In the
first version, the purpose of the plague scene appeared to be
Brecht's presenting Galileo in a more positive light, so that he
becomes a sort of modest hero.
There are two main differences between the Danish and the
American versions, and these two are decisive. They are the
plague scene and the interpretation of the figure of Galileo in
the final scene. In the American version, Galileo's self-
incrimination--as a betrayer, as one who recanted--is so total
and radical that the audience cannot but accept that as the final
judgment on him.
The Danish version allows the audience to make a decision
about how one is to understand the figure of Galileo, his
problems, and why he reached this tactical compromise. In the
English translation, you have Brecht's Preface. Among these
notes, you find that Brecht offers a didactic approach to the
play which neither praises nor condemns Galileo. In 1957 and
again in 1972, the Berliner Ensemble produced _The Life of
Galileo_(_Das Leben des Galilei_). It was decided that this
particular current production would give the audience the right
to make a choice. It could involve the audience much more.

QUESTION: What reaction have you had from the public?

TENSCHERT: One must understand that to "activate" an audience has
nothing to do with applause or acceptance, with showing
appreciation. What one means is whether the audience comes to
accept the message of the play, which is the message for the
1980s. In short, the message oin the 1950s production of the
American version is that Galileo can be seen as someone who
betrays his profession. He should not be accepted among the
ranks of that profession.
Our public understands very actively what the play's message
can mean. The prime purpose of the Berliner Ensemble is to
perform for the Berlin public, in the German Democractic
Republic. Even so, this message is quite pointed for anyone else
as well. It can be seen in the scene between Galileo and the
little monk, who says that reason will find its own way to the
masses. But Galileo does not agree with that. No. We must be
the ones who force reason to be accepted, because reason is only
as strong as those who are reasoning.
In Florence, when Galileo is trying to get the court to look
through the telescope to see that the moons are revolving around
Jupiter, no one is interested, but he has to be strong enough to
make them actually look.

QUESTION: What is the symbolism of dressing Galileo in modern
clothing? (He was costumed like Albert Einstein.) Does this mean
he is a contemporary figure as well as a Renaissance man?

TENSCHERT: I believe we have broken with pure Renaissance costume
through understanding modern intentions. Ekkehard Schall (who
plays Galileo) studies the rather sloppy way physicist dress
nowadays. In 1965, we presented _In the Matter of J.Robert
Oppenheimer_ by Heinar Kipphardt, so we had some ideas.
Galileo's sweater, for example, we see in lots of photos of
Albert Einstein.
With all of its facets--decor, costumes, acting--the theatre
must rediscover the play again and again, so that it doesn't stay
in the Renaissance but transcends the limitations of period. All
aspects of theatrical design and methods must be used to create
that bridge. It is to activate your mind.

QUESTION: You said that after five years, one has to examine the
play again. This production has been in your repertory for about
that. Isn't it time to take it out?

TENSCHERT: Not quite. I don't mean just to examine the play, but
its relevance--in a five year span--to the era, the epoch, to
what things are relevant to what time. The 1957 production is
not relevant to 1984. That's the philosophical aspect.
Then there is the practical theatre aspect. You have to
come to terms with practical realities. If you can perform in an
amphitheatre for 60,000 people, as they did in Athens, then a few
performances will serve them for the whole year. But in Berlin,
we can only cater to 700 or so each performance, so we have to
have a much longer time to keep the production running, because
people will still be interested. We don't purposely keep
productions on longer, if we notice that genuine interest is
waning....

QUESTION: Is there a link between your current ambigious
interpretation of _Galileo_ and Brecht's ambigious attitude
toward _Mutter Courage_?

WEKWERTH: There are certainly more options open to Galileo than
there are to Mother Courage. He was condemned, in the American
production, for having betrayed his profession. In this
production, the attitude that I think should come across is that
the public should criticize very strongly his recantation but
nevertheless accept--if not admire--his sly nature, in the way he
actually manages to smuggle out his remaining work, although on
constant guard for fear of discovery.

TENCHERT: There is certainly a connection between these plays.
The difference is in the attitudes of the central characters. In
_Mother Courage_, Brecht shows that Mother CCourage has learnt
nothig from her terrible experiences. She goes on, at the end of
the play, still thinking she can sell her wares. Whereas Galileo
has learnt the nature of compromise and how to handle the world
in a certain respect. That's the difference.

QUESTION: When Brecht was interrogated in Washington, this
slyness you spoke of appeared very well. He answered so
beautifully that he was congratulated. Would that have
influenced his development of Galileo? Is there a connection
between Brecht the person and Galileo the character? (Brecht was
questioned by HUAC on 30 October 1947, leaving for Paris the next
afternoon. _The Life of Galileo_ had opened 31 July in Los
Angeles, followed on 7 December by a Broadway premiere).

WEKWERTH: It took Brecht 15 minutes to remember his
birthday(before the committee). But this is a dangerous
conclusion to reach. In the method of thought, there will be a
connection. Brecht was a great admirer of Socrates, of Bacon, of
Hegel, with theiir way of questioning, their methods of thought.
That is certainly behind the plays. But as far as actual
personal characteristics and feelings are concerned, Brecht
usually kept well out of his plays.

QUESTION: Didn't Brecht compromise, like Galileo, over his play
_Lukullus_?

WEKWERTH: A distinction may be drawn between Galileo and the
Church, between him and the authorities. Brecht was trying to
attack them for holding on to the Ptolemaic System, whereas in
_Das Verhor des Lukullus_, he attacked people for plain
stupidity..._Lukullus_ (an opera with Paul Dessau, premiered on
17 March 1951 in East Berlin) was improved, due to the arguments
surrounding it. This proved to be very valuable in the
construction of the final scene. (Reworked and retitled as _Die
Verurteilung des Lukullus_, the opera had a second East Berlin
premiere on 12 October 1951.)
Galileo had the title of "The Disputer," who is eager to
argue all the time. The point of that dispute or discussion,
should be activated, and that occurs during the play. Brecht
loved a good argument. That's the point of the play.

QUESTION: What value do Brecht's model-books have for the
Berliner Ensemble now?

TENSCHERT: Not that we should do the plays that way, but to
provoke thought, to start from there. Of course, Brecht did make
all these specifications, but again we have to interpret them.
Brecht's models of sets and his photographs of productions, which
he specifically wanted repeated, should be taken as helpful hints
for production. The production you see here in Edinburg is in
fact visually opposed to the production of 1956. It is at the
opposite end of the scale, if you like. It is at the opposite
end of the scale, if you like. We've already discussed, in
reference to the scenery, that the one in 1956 was set in the
Renaissance, whereas this one of course has more relevance for
today in itd costumes.

QUESTION: What other authors from Western Europe are included in
the Berliner Ensemble's repetory?

WEKWERTH: Many. Peter Weiss's _The trial_, for instance. And we
are presenting here _Scenes from Faust_. A certain attitude
develops toward the great German classics, those writers like
Goethe Schiller. When you have them non-stop in school, it just
creates an aversion to them, rather than a great love. Of course
the trouble with the great classic writers, like Shakespeare, is
that they are regarded as being almost wholly untouchable.
This experience we came up against in London at the National
Theatre, when we co-directed _Coriolanus_, under Sir Laurence
Olivier. I have the greatest respect and admiration for him. He
is one of the greatest actors of all time. Nevertheless, I had
to dispute with him about a particular scene in _Coriolanus_(V,
3). According to Olivier, Coriolanus's mother, at the end of a
speech, wants him to come back with her, and Coriolanus is filled
with emotion. That was the center of the dispute. I said,
"Larry, she did not say 'Come back' at all. She said, 'Go
away!'"...In the end, he had to acknowledge that she doesn't say
that at all. He laughed about it and said, "Yes, we have got too
used to Shakespeare."
And, for us, it is exactly the same with _Faust_. From the
time of the German princes, when Goethe wrote _Fause_ to the time
of the German republics, the attitude has always been that Faust
is a great man looking for the truth. But the fact that he is
five times a murderer is overlooked. So Brecht worked on the
_Ur-Faust_...From the _Faust_ original and from Geothe's writings
about Faust, it is clear that Faust is by no means an ideal
figure and should not be regarded as such. Rather, he is a dark
and controversial figure, with many character conflicts. Critics
and others who deal with Geothe all the time have been rather
angry about our visual aspect of the play....
But ever since Brecht actually examined the character of
Faust as a criminal, more and more people have taken up this idea
of representing him in a rather stark light, pointing out the
defects in his character....Our production is directed by Horst
Sagert, who is also a painter and designer. (Seigert not only
staged but created both the wildly imaginative sets and costumes
as well, including angels and devils with white and black
feathery wings.) The concept is that we should see on stage what
Faust actually sees--spirits and mythical figures. What Fause
sees, we should see too, so we can understand him.
The most important step in this production is to show Faust
really as Goethe was, surrounded by all the myths and
preconceptions in his society. Faust actually was looking for
the truth, and the only real credit for Faust is that he is brave
enough to try and search for it. But he first has to break
through all the myths of society before he can come anywhere near
it. That is what is represented on stage.
You should understand that in this production you will be
seeing a prologue before the actual _Faust Scenes_ begin. The
purpose of this prologue is to demonstrate this stranglehold of
myths which surrounded Geothe in his time__and, of course, Faust
as well. This production extracts from other works of Geothe,
written at the same time as the _Scenes from Faust_, primarily
_Prometheus_ (but also _Satyros_, _Pandora_, and Klopstock's _Der
Messias_.) _Prometheus_ demonstrates man's attempt to compete
with the gods--for fire--paralleling Faust's search for truth.
Many have criticized this as not being typical of Berliner
Ensemble productions. Everything is not immediately intelligible
or understandable, but, of course, there are many things in this
life which are also not immediately intelligible either.
Nevertheless, the more you concentrate on the subject, the more
you are able to find the deeper meaning of it.

Translated by Tim Cross.
Transcribed by Teodor Zareba.
Recorded and Edited by Glenn Loney.



 
To the best of our knowledge, the text on this page may be freely reproduced and distributed.
If you have any questions about this, please check out our Copyright Policy.

 

totse.com certificate signatures
 
 
About | Advertise | Bad Ideas | Community | Contact Us | Copyright Policy | Drugs | Ego | Erotica
FAQ | Fringe | Link to totse.com | Search | Society | Submissions | Technology
Hot Topics
Neutral English Accent
ah le francais...
Most amount of languages someone can learn
what language do you like to hear?
On a certain annoyance of speaking English..
GPP is bad grammar
Les Verbes Rares Francais! Aidez-moi!
Words that piss you Off
 
Sponsored Links
 
Ads presented by the
AdBrite Ad Network

 

TSHIRT HELL T-SHIRTS