Brecht, Acting

Brecht, Acting - What follows represents an attempt to...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–7. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Background image of page 2
Background image of page 3

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Background image of page 4
Background image of page 5

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Background image of page 6
Background image of page 7
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: What follows represents an attempt to describe a technique of acting which was applied in certain theatres (I) with a view to taking the incidents por— trayed and alienating them from the spectator. The aim of this technique, known as the alienation effect, was to make the spectator adopt an attitude of inquiry and criticism in his approach to the incident. The means were artistic. The first condition for the A—effect’s application to this end is that stage and auditorium must be purged of everything ‘magical’ and that no ‘hyp— notic tensions’ should be set up. This ruled out any attempt to make the stage convey the flavour of a particular place (a room at evening, a road in the autumn), or to create atmosphere by relaxing the tempo of the conversa~ tion. The audience was not ‘worked up’ by a display of temperament or ‘swept away’ by acting with tautened muscles; in short, no attempt was made to put it in a trance and give it the illusion of watching an ordinary unrehearsed event. As will be seen presently, the audience’s tendency to plunge into such illusions has to be checked by specific artistic means (3). The first condition for the achievement of the A-effect is that the actor must invest what he has to show with a definite gest of showing. It is of course necessary to drop the assumption that there is a fourth wall cutting the audience off from the stage and the consequent illusion that the stage action is taking place in reality and without an audience. That being so, it is possible for the actor in principle to address the audience direct. It is well known that contact between audience and stage is normally made on the basis of empathy. Conventional actors devote their efforts so exclusively to bringing about this psychological operation that they may be said to see it as the principal aim of their art (5). Our introductory remarks will already have made it clear that the technique which produces an A— effect is the exact opposite of that which aims at empathy. The actor applying it is bound not to try to bring about the empathy operation. ' Yet in his efforts to reproduce particular characters and show their behaviour he need not renounce the means of empathy entirely. He uses these means just as any normal person with no particular acting talent would use them if he wanted to portray someone else, i.e. show how he behaves. This showing of other people’s behaviour happens time and again in ordinary life (witnesses of an accident demonstrating to newcomers how the victim behaved, a facetious person imitating a friend’s walk, etc.), with- 136 “Marianna ecque of v SHORT DESCRIPTION OF A NEW TECHNIQUE 0F ACTING out those involved making the least effort to subject their spectators to an illusion. At the same time they do feel their way into their characters’ skins with a view to acquiring their characteristics. As has already been said, the actor too will make use of this psychological operation. But whereas the usual practice in acting is to execute it during the actual performance, in the hope of stimulating the spectator into a similar operation, he will achieve it only at an earlier stage, at some time during rehearsals. To safeguard against an unduly ‘impulsive’, frictionless and uncritical creation of characters and incidents, more reading rehearsals can be held than usual. The actor should refrain from living himself into the part prematurely in any way, and should go on functioning as long as possible as a reader (which does not mean a reader—aloud). An important step is memorizing one’s first impressions. When reading his part the actor’s attitude should be one of a man who is astounded and contradicts. Not only the occurrence of the incidents, as he reads about them,‘ but the conduct of the man he is playing, as he experi- ences it, must be weighed up by him and their peculiarities understood; none can be taken as given, as something that ‘was bound to turn out that way’, that was ‘only to be expected from a character like that’. Before memorizing the words he must memorize what he felt astounded at and Where he felt impelled to contradict. For these are dynamic forces that he must preserve in creating his performance. When he appears on the stage, besides what he actually is doing he will at all essential points discover, specify, imply what he is not doing; that is to say he will act in such a way that the alternative emerges as clearly as possible, that his acting allows the other possibilities to be inferred and only represents one out of the possible variants. He will say for instance ‘You’ll pay for that’, and not say ‘I forgive you’. He detests his children; it is not‘the case that he loves them. He moves down stage left and not up stage right. Whatever he doesn’t do must be contained and conserved in what he does. In this way every sentence and every gesture signifies a decision; the character remains under observation and is tested. The technical term for this procedure is ‘fixing the “not . . . but” ’. The actor does not allow himself to become completely transformed on the stage into the character he is portraying. He is not Lear, Harpagon, Schweik; he shows them. He reproduces their remarks as authentically as he can; he puts forward their way of behaving to the best of his abilities and knowledge of men; but he never tries to persuade himself (and thereby others) that this amounts to a complete transformation. Actors will know I37 A25me 2 2:: BE E3398 \E @308on on ENE :35me mi; BRECHT 0N THEATRE: 1938—1947 what it means if I say that a typical kind of acting without this complete transformation takes place when a producer or colleague shows one how to play a particular passage. It is not his own part, so he is not completely transformed; he underlines the technical aspect and retains the attitude of someone just making suggestions. . Once the idea of total transformation is abandoned the actor speaks his part not as if he were improvising it himself but like a quotation (7). At the same time he obviously has to render all the quotation’s overtones, the remark’s full human and concrete shape; similarly the gesture he makes must have the full substance of a human gesture even though it now represents a copy. . Given this absence of total transformation in the acting there are three aids which may help to alienate the actions and remarks of the characters being portrayed: I. Transposition into the third person. 2. Transposition into the past. 3. Speaking the stage directions out loud. Using the third person and the past tense allows the actor to adopt'the right attitude of detachment. In addition he will look for stage directions and remarks that comment on his lines, and speak them aloud at rehearsal (‘He stood up and exclaimed angrily, not having eaten: . . .’, or ‘He had never been told so before, and didn’t know if it was. true or not’, or. ‘He smiled, and said with forced nonchalance: . . .’). Speaking the stage direc- tions out loud in the third person results in a clash between two tones. of voice, alienating the second of them, the text proper. This style of acting is further alienated by taking place on the stage after having already been outlined and announced in words. Transposing it into the past gives the speaker a standpoint from which he can look back at his sentence. The sentence too is thereby alienated without the speaker adopting an unreal point of View; unlike the spectator, he has read the play right through and is better placed to judge the sentence in accordance with the ending, With its consequences, than the former, who knows less and 15 more of a stranger to the sentence. ' ‘ This composite process leads to an alienation of the text in the rehearsals which generally persists in the performance too (9). The directness of the relationship with the audience allows and indeed forces the actual'speech delivery to be varied in accordance with the greater or smaller significance attaching to the sentencesTake the case of witnesses addressmg a court. The underlinings, the characters’ insistence on their remarks, must be 138 SHORT DESCRIPTION OF A NEW TECHNIQUE OF ACTING developed as a piece of effective virtuosity. If the actor turns to the audience it must be a whole—hearted turn rather than the asides and soliloquizing technique of the old—fashioned theatre. To get the full A~elfect from the poetic medium the actor should start at rehearsal by paraphrasing the verse’s content in vulgar prose, possibly accompanying this by the gestures designed for the verse. A daring and beautiful handling of verbal media will alienate the text. (Prose can be alienated by translation into the actor’s native dialect.) Gesture will be dealt with below, but it can at once be said that every- thing to do with the emotions has to be externalized; that is to say, it must be developed into a gesture. The actor has to find a sensibly perceptible outward expression for his character’s emotions, preferably some action that gives away what is going on inside him. The emotion in question must be brought out, must lose all its restrictions so that it can be treated on a big scale. Special elegance, power and grace of gesture bring about the A—effect. A masterly use of gesture can be seen in Chinese acting. The Chinese actor achieves the A—eifect by being seen to observe his own movements. Whatever the actor offers in the way of gesture, verse structure, etc., must be finished and bear the hallmarks of something rehearsed and rounded—off. The impression to be given is one of ease, which is at the same time one of difficulties overcome. The actor must make it possible for the audience to take his own art, his mastery of technique, lightly too. He puts an incident before the spectator with perfection and as he thinks it really happened or might have happened. He does not conceal the fact that he has rehearsed it, any more than an acrobat conceals his training,kand he emphasizes that it is his own (actor’s) account, View, version of the incident. Because he doesn’t identify himself with him he can pick a definite attitude to adopt towards the character whom he portrays, can show what he thinks of him and invite the spectator, who is likewise not asked to identify himself, to criticize the character portrayed. The attitude which he adopts is a socially critical one. In his exposition of the incidents and in his characterization of the person he tries to bring out those features which come within society’s sphere. In this way his performance becomes a discussion (about social conditions) with the audience he is addressing. He prompts the spectator‘to justify or abolish these conditions according to what class he belongs to (13). The object of the A—effect is to alienate the social gest underlying every incident. By social gest is meant the mimetic and gestural expression of the social relationships prevailing between people of a given period (14). I39 BREGHT 0N THEATRE: 1933~1947 It helps to formulate the incident for society, and to put it across in such a way that society is given the key, if titles are thought up for the scenes. These titles must have a historical quality. This brings us to a crucial technical device: historicization. The actor must play the incidents as historical ones. Historical incidents are unique, transitory incidents associated with particular periods. The con— duct of the persons involved in them is not fixed and ‘universally human’; it includes elements that have been or may be overtaken by the course of history, and is subject to criticism from the immediately following period’s point of view. The conduct of those born before us is alienated1 from us by an incessant evolution. It is up to the actor to treat present—day events and modes of behaviour .with the same detachment as the historian adopts with regard to those of the past. He must alienate these characters and incidents from us. Characters and incidents from ordinary life, from our immediate sur- roundings, being familiar, strike us as more or less natural. Alienating them helps to make them seem remarkable ,to us. Science has carefully developed a technique of getting irritated with the everyday, “self—evident’, universally accepted occurrence, and there is no reason why this infinitely useful atti- tude should not be taken over by art (r7). It is an attitude which arose in science as a result of the growth in human productive powers. In art the same motive applies. As for the emotions, the experimental use of the A-effect in the epic theatre’s German productions indicated that this way of acting too can stimulate them, though possibly a different class of emotion is involved from those of the orthodox theatre (18). A critical attitude on the audience’s part is a thoroughly artistic one (19). Nor does the actual practice of the A-elfect seem anything like so unnatural as its description. Of course it is a way of acting that has nothing to do with stylization as commonly practised. The main advantage of the epic theatre with its A—effect, intended purely to show the world in such a way that it becomes manageable, is precisely its quality of being natural and earthly, its humour and its renunciation of all the mystical elements that have stuck to the orthodox theatre from the old days. 1 Entfremdet. 140 SHORT DESCRIPTION OF A NEW TECHNIQUE OF ACTING Appendix [selected notes] I. Edward [I after Marlowe (Munich Kammerspiele). Trommeln in der Nae/2t (Deutsches Theater, Berlin). The Threepenny Opera (Theater am Schifibarterdamni, Berlin). Die Pioniere von Inga/stadt (Theater am Schiffbauerdamm). Aufitieg and Fall der Stadt Mahogonny, opera (Aufricht’s Kurfiir- stendammtheater, Berlin). Mann ist Mann (Staatstheater, Berlin). Die Mormohme (Grosses Schauspielhaus, Berlin). The Adventures of the Good Soldier Sehwez'k (Piscator’s Theater am Nollendorfplatz, Berlin). Die Platt/eb‘pfi und die S pitzho’pje (Riddersalen, Copenhagen). Sefiom Corror’s Rifles (Copenhagen, Paris). Pure/1t und Elend des Dritten Reithes (Paris). 3. fig. such mechanical means as very brilliant illumination of the stage (since a half—lit stage plus a completely darkened auditorium makes the spectator less level-headed by preventing him from observing his neighbour and in turn hiding him from his neighbour’s eyes) and also making virible the sources of light. MAKING VISIBLE THE SOURCES OF LIGHT There is a point in showing the lighting apparatus openly, as it is one of the means of preventing an unwanted element of illusion; it scarcely disturbs the necessary concentration. If we light the actors and their performance in such a way that the lights themselves are within the spectator’s field of vision we destroy part of his illusion of being present at a spontaneous, transitory, authentic, unrehearsed event. He sees that arrangements have been made to show something; something is being repeated here under special conditions, for instance in a very brilliant light. Displaying the actual lights is meant to be a counter to the old— fashioned theatre’s efforts to hide them. No one would expect the 1ight~ ing to be hidden at a sporting event, a boxing match for instance. What- ever the points of difference between the modern theatre’s presentations and those of a sporting promoter, they do not include the same conceal— ment of the sources of light as the old theatre found necessary. (Brecht: ‘Der Biihnenbau des epischen Theaters’) 5. Cf. these remarks by Poul Reumert, the best—known Danish actor: I41 BREOHT ON THEATRE: 1983~1947 ‘. . . If I feel I am dying, and if I really feel it, then so does everybodg else; if I act as though I had a dagger in my hand, and am entirely filled by the one idea of killing the child, then everybody shudders. . . . The whole business is a matter of mental activity being communicated by emotions, or the other way round if you prefer it: a feeling so strong as to be an obsession, which is translated into thoughts. If it comes off it is the most infectious thing in the world; anything external is then a matter of complete indifference. . . .’ And Rapaport, ‘The Work of the Actor’, Theater Workshop, October 1936: i ‘. . . On the stage the actor is surrounded entirely by fictions. . . . The actor must be able to regard all this as though it were true, as though he were convinced that all that surrounds him on the stage is a living reality and, along with himself, he must convince the audience as well. This is the central feature of our method of work on the part. . . . Take any object, a cap for example; lay it on the table or on the floor and try to regard it as though it were a rat; make believe that it is a rat, and not a cap. . . . Picture what sort of a rat it is; what size, colour? . . . We thus commit ourselves to believe quite naively that the object before us is something other than it is and, at the same time, learn to compel the audience to believe. . . .’ This might be thought to be a course of instruction for conjurers, but in fact it is a course of acting, supposedly according to Stanis- lavsky’s method. One wonders if a technique that equips an actor to make the audience see rats Where there aren’t any can really be all that suitable for disseminating the truth. Given enough alcohol it doesn’t take acting to persuade almost anybody that he is seeing rats: pink ones. QUOTATION Standing in a free and direct relationship to it, the actor allows his character to speak and move; he presents a report. He does not have to make us forget that the text isn’t spontaneous, but has been memorized, is a fixed quantity; the fact doesn’t matter, as we anyway assume that the report is not about himself but about others. His attitude would be the same if he were simply speaking from his own memory. [. . .] The epic actor has to accumulate far more material than has been the case till now. What he has to represent is no longer himself as king, himself as scholar, himself as gravedigger, etc., but just kings, scholars, gravediggers, which means that he has to look around him in the world of reality. Again, he has to learn how to imitate: something that is dis- 142 I3. 14. I7. SHORT DESCRIPTION OF A NEW TECHNIQUE 0F ACTING couraged in modern acting on the ground that it destroys his individu- ality. . The theatre can create the corresponding A—effect in the performance in a number of ways. The Munich production of Edward [I for the first time had titles preceding the scenes, announcing the contents. The Berlin production of The Threepenny Opera had the titles of the songs projected while they were sung. The Berlin production of Mann {st Mann had the actors’ figures projected on big screens during the action. Another thing that makes for freedom in the actor’s relationship with his audience is that he does not treat it as an undifferentiated mass. He doesn’t boil it down to a shapeless dumpling in the stockpot of the emotions. He does not address himself to everybody alike; he allows the existing divisions within the audience to continue, in fact he widens them. He has friends and enemies in the audience; he is friendly to the one group and hostile to the other. He takes sides, not necessarily with his character but if not with it then against it. (At least, that is his basic attitude, though it too must be variable and change according to what the character may say at different stages. There may, hoWever, also be points at which everything is in the balance and the actor must withhold judgment, though this again must be expressly shown in his acting.)‘ If King Lear (in Act I, scene I) tears up a map when he divides his king— dom between his daughters, then the act of division is alienated. Not only does it draw our attention to his kingdom, but by treating the king— dom so plainly as his own private property he throws some light on the basis of the feudal idea of the family. In Julius Caesar the tyrant’s murder by Brutus is alienated if during one of his monologues accusing Caesar of tyrannical motives he himself maltreats a slave waiting on him. Weigel as Maria Stuart suddenly took the crucifix hanging round her neck and used it coquettishly as a fan, to give herself air. (See too Brecht: ‘Ubungsstiicke fiir Schauspieler’ in V ersuelze II, p. 107.) THE A-EFFECT AS A PROCEDURE IN EVERYDAY LIFE The achievement of the A—etfect constitutes something utterly ordinary, recurrent; it is just a widely—practised way of drawing one’s own or someone else’s attention to a thing, and it can be seen in educa— tion as also in business conferences of one sort or another. The A-effect consists in turning the object of which one is to be made aware, to which one’s attention is to be drawn, from something ordinary, familiar, immediately accessible, into something peculiar, striking and un— expected. What is obvious is in a certain sense made incomprehensible, I43 BREOHT 0N THEATRE: 1933—1947 but this is only in order that it may then be made all the easier to com- prehend. Before familiarity can turn into awareness the familiar must be stripped of its inconspicuousness; we must give up assuming that the object in question needs no explanation. However frequently recurrent, modest, vulgar it may be it will now be labelled as something unusual. A common use of the A—effect is when someone says: ‘Have you ever really looked carefully at your watch?’ The questioner knows that I’ve looked at it often enough, and now his question deprives me of the sight which I’ve grown used to and which accordingly has nothing more to say to me. I used to look at it to see the time, and now when he asks me in this importunate way I realize that I have given up seeing the watch itself with an astonished eye; and it is in many ways an astonishing piece of machinery. Similarly it is an alienation effect of the simplest sort if a business discussion starts ofi" with the sentence: ‘Have you ever thought what happens to the waste from your factory which is pumped into the river twenty-four hours a day?’ This waste wasn’t just swept down the river unobserved; it was carefully channelled into the river; men and machines have worked on it; the river has changed colour, the waste has flowed away most conspicuously, but just as waste. It was superfluous to the process of manufacture, and now it is to become material for manufacture; our eye turns to it with interest. The asking of the question has alienated it, and intentionally so. The very simplest sentences that apply in the A—eifect are those with ‘Not . . . But’: (He didn’t ‘say ‘come in’ but ‘keep moving’. He was not pleased but amazed). They include an expectation which is justified by experience but, in the event, disappointed. One might have thought that . . . but one oughtn’t to have thought it. There was not just one possibility but two; both are introduced, then the second one is alienated, then the first as well. To see one’s mother as a man’s wife one needs an A—effect; this is provided, for instance, when one acquires a stepfather. If one sees one’s teacher hounded by the bailiffs an A—eifect occurs: one is jerked out of a relationship in which the teacher seems big into one where he seems small. An alienation of the motor—car takes place if after driving a modern car for a long while we drive an old model T Ford. Suddenly we hear explosions once more; the motor works on the principle of explosion. We start feeling amazed that such a vehicle, indeed any vehicle not drawn by animal—power, can move; in short, we understand cars, by looking at them as something strange, new, as a triumph of engineering and to that extent something unnatural. Nature, which certainly embraces the motor-car, is suddenly imbued with an element 144 18. SHORT DESCRIPTION OF A NEW TECHNIQUE 0F ACTING of unnaturalness, and from now on this is an indelible part of the concept of nature. The expression ‘in fact’ can likewise certify or alienate. (He wasn’t in fact at home; he said he would be, but we didn’t believe him and had a look; or again, we didn’t think it possible for him not to be at home but it was a fact.) The term ‘actually’ is just as conducive to alienatiori (‘I don’tactually agree’.) Similarly the Eskimo definition ‘A car is a wing— less aircraft that crawls along the ground’ is a way of alienating the car In a sense the alienation effect itself has been alienated by the above explanation; we have taken a common, recurrent, universally—practised operation and tried to draw attention to it by illuminating its pecu— liarity. But we have achieved the effect only with those people who have ‘. . truly‘( in fact’) grasped that it does ‘not’ result from every representa- , . non but from certain ones: only ‘actually’ is it familiar. ABOUT RATIONAL AND EMOTIONAL POINTS OF VIEW The rejection of empathy is not the result of a rejection of the emotions, nor does it lead to such. The crude aesthetic thesis that emotions can only be stimulated by means of empathy is wrong. None the less a non—aristotelian dramaturgy has to apply a cautious criticism to the emotions which it aims at and incorporates. Certain artistic tendencies like the provocative behaviour of Futurists and ’Dadaists and the icrng—up of music point to a crisis of the emotions. Already in the closmg years of the Weimar Republic the post—war German drama took a decisively rationalistic turn. Fascism’s grotesque emphasizing of the emotions, together perhaps with the no less important threat to the rational element in Marxist aesthetics, led us to lay particular stress on the rational. Nevertheless there are many contemporary works of art where one can speak of a decline in emotional effectiveness due to their isolation from reason, or its revival thanks to a stronger rationalist message. This will surprise no one who has not got a completely con— ventional idea of the emotions. The emotions always have a quite definite class basis; the form they take at any time is historical, restricted and limited in specific ways The emotions are in no sense universally human and timeless. I The linking of particular emotions with particular interests is not unduly difficult so long as one simply looks for the interests correspond- ing to the emotional effects of works of art. Anyone can see the colonial adventures of the Second Empire looming behind Delacroix’s paintings and Rimbaud’s ‘Bateau Ivre’. I45 BRECBT ON THEATRE: 1938—1947 SHORT DESCRIPTION OF A NEW TECHNIQUE OF ACTING and if we commonly use the term ‘arts’ for enterprises that improve If one compares the ‘Bateau Ivre’ say, with Kipling’s ‘Ballad of people’s lives why should art proper remain aloof from arts of this sort? East and West’, one can see the difference between French mid— nineteenth century colonialism and British colonialism at the beginning of the twentieth. It is less easy to explain the effect that such poems have on ourselves, as Marx already noticed. Apparently emotions accompanying social progress will long survive in the human mind as emotions linked with interests, and in the case of works of art will do so more strongly than might have been expected, given that in the mean- time contrary interests will have made themselves felt. Every step f0r~ ward means the end of the previous step forward, because that is where it starts and goes on from. At the same time it makes use of this previous step, which in a sense survives in men’s consciousness as a step forward, just as it survives in its effects in real life. This involves a most interesting type of generalization, a continual process of abstrac- tion. Whenever the works of art handed down to us allow us to share the emotions of other men, of men of a bygone period, different social classes, etc., we have to conclude that we are partaking in interests which really were universally human. These men now dead represented the interests of classes that gave a lead to progress. It is a very different matter when Fascism today conjures up on the grandest scale emotions which for most of the people who succumb to them are not determined by interest. [‘Kurze Beschreibung einer neuen Technik der Schauspielkunst, die einen Verfremdungseffekt hervorbringt’, from Versuche 11, 1951, less notes 2, 4, 6, IO, 11, 15, I6 and part of 7] SOTE: Written, according to a prefatory note, in 1940 but not published at the time. The concluding notes here omitted are often repetitious (including pas— sages from ‘Alienation Effects in Chinese Acting’). The essay on ‘Stage design in the epic theatre’ quoted in Note 3 has not been found in Brecht’s papers and is only known from this one reference. The list of plays in Note I includes two that are not by Brecht, and evidently gives those productions that seemed important to him at the time; it omits several of his plays and gets the name of Die Rundlec’ipfe mid die S pitzkiipfe wrong. It is interesting to compare it with a diary note of 30 January 1941: ‘Six [sic] completed plays which have not been produced in a theatre. Johanna Furcht und Elend, Galileo, Courage, Puntila. ’ Six plays performed: Baal, Edward, Mann ist Mann, Threepenny Opera Die Rundkopfe und die Spitzkopfe, Die Mutter. , Omitted because uncongenial: Trommeln, Dickicht. \ Neither list is anything like complete, and the differences between the two maykgive some idea of Brecht’s ruthless and ever—changing judgment of his own nor . The ‘practice scenes for actors’ referred to at the end of Note 14. are new scenes to go with Hamlet, Romeo and Juliet, etc., showing the characters in a slightly different light; they are published in Versuehe 11. One was performed in the George Tabori/ Lotte Lenya programme Brecht on Brecht. There is an unpub- ilSl’lCd note by Brecht (Archive I 54/ 56) outlining what again seems to be the programme for an actors’ course, where these are included: Repertoire of the School 1. Bible scene 2. Shakespeare studies (a) Hamlet (b) Romeo and Juliet 3. Opening and first scene of AUS NIGHTS WIRD NIGHTS [unfinished play by Brecht] 4. A dog went into the kitchen , 5. DIE MUTTER, scene 5 3 19. IS THE CRITICAL ATTITUDE AN INARTISTIC ONE? An old tradition leads people to treat a critical attitude as a pre— dominantly negative one. Many see the difference between the scientific and artistic attitudes as lying precisely in their attitude to criticism. People cannot conceive of contradiction and detachment as being part of artistic appreciation. Of course such appreciation normally includes a higher level, which appreciates critically, but the criticism here only applies to matters of technique; it is quite a different matter from being required to observe not a representationof the world but the world itself in a critical, contradictory, detached manner. To introduce this critical attitude into art, the negative element which it doubtless includes must be shown from its positive side: this criticism of the world is active, practical, positive. Criticizing the course of a river means improving it, correcting it. Criticism of society is ultimately revolution; there you have criticism taken to its logical conclusion and playing an active part. A critical attitude of this type is an operative factor of productivity; it is deeply enjoyable as such, 146 I47 ...
View Full Document

{[ snackBarMessage ]}

Page1 / 7

Brecht, Acting - What follows represents an attempt to...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 7. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online