Bertolt Brecht

What effect did the visit of Brecht's Berliner Ensemble to London in August and September 1956 have on the subsequent development of British theatre? Does Epic Theatre still still have an influence today?

Comments

[Louise Harrison]

Brecht’s visit to London in 1956 coincided with a period of increasing interest in politics and the way that the world was changing, and therefore as an overtly political writer and director Brecht was a very important influence on theatre at the time. However his impact was limited merely to the fact that he was very political, his plays were written in a way that deliberately evoked an emotional reaction in the audience and demanded some sort of response from those who saw his plays. The very fact that there is a “Brechtian Theatre” style shows what an impact he had and how different from other playwrights at the time he was. Socialist theatre that couldn’t help but make the audience ask questions of themselves, the playwright and most importantly their politicians was a fairly new phenomenon. For example the original staging of Mother Courage ends with Mother Courage, having lost everything because of war as well as her own greed, pulling her cart behind her trudging round and round in circles leaving the audience asking “will this ever end”.
Brecht’s determination to create a specific reaction from audiences led to him making changes after Mother Courage’s first performance as he felt that the audience was being too sympathetic towards Mother Courage’s character. The most memorable and important moment in Mother Courage is the silent scream before the corpse of Swiss Cheese is brought on when the stage directions tell us “it grows dark, it grows light again, Mother Courage is in the same position”. Here Mother Courage is literally immobilized by grief and as her character becomes increasing dehumanised Brecht is making the point that in war you can’t be human.
Brecht’s sets were often bare and the lighting was only ever white or steely blue, this was for two reasons, firstly because he used to stage his plays in streets with only street lamps or car headlights for lighting, but most importantly because his was a theatre of showing, a theatre without illusion, what has been described as “deliberate theatre”. Brecht’s theatre paved the way for playwright’s such as Athol Fugard to use similar techniques and styles during visits to Britain and his staging of The Island to send his political message and inform the west of the injustices of apartheid South Africa, Brecht’s impact therefore was clearly very significant and was and is still being felt.

[Vicki Carey]

When Bertolt Brecht's theatre company, 'The Berliners' first came to this country, the audience were in for a big suprise! 'Mother Courage' was first performed in German and even then it still mananged to impact on the audience through its use of lighting, minimalistic set, and dramatic musical intervals.
The previous twenty years of theatre had been dominated by an obsession with creating a realistic set with wonderful costumes and props alike. 'Mother Courage' in contrast had exactly the opposite aim, props were used as little as possible and intended only to be representational.
In this sense then, 'Mother Courage' served to prove that all these things wern't needed to make a good play and that (in Brecht's opinion) they detracted from the message the play was trying to get across.

Furthermore Brecht was the first playwright who actively challanged his audiences thought processes. He didnt want them to sit there numbly watching his play for entertainment purposes alone, he wanted them to have questions and reactions to what they had seen. To achieve this he added many touches that would constantly remind the audience that they were watching a play. Direct adresses to the audience, interuption of the action with ironic songs commenting on the action, and story boards at the beginning of each scene telling the audience what would happen to name but a few of these distancing techniques. Brecht did this in an attempt to create a critical consiousness within his audience.

Mother Courage herself was intended as a character who would provoke a strong reaction, Brecht wanted his audience to ask 'Why doen't she change?'. However it was the audience Brecht wanted to change as Mother Courage is, after all, a fictional character.

Brecht influenced British theatre by advocating that real political and social issues could be portrayed on stage to entertain and also to challange exisitng ideas. He opened the door for many young British writters to follow in his footsteps (to a certain extent) and write about things that mattered.

[Alison Parry]

Brecht’s new style of Dialectical theatre proved hugely influential on the British stage. For the first time, a dramatist had successfully attempted to engage with the audience, challenging them to think about the world and question their ideas. Perhaps one of the most crucial ways Brecht achieved this effect was to isolate the audience from the events on stage in order for them to make their own judgement. The Epic Scale of plays such as Mother Courage, which is set over twelve years, combined with the use of songs, music, narrators and projection to tell the audience what is going to happen, as well as basic scenery and lighting all serve to ‘alienate’ Brecht’s audiences. These elements served as constant reminders that the audience were watching a play and that they were simply spectators observing the action from a distance. This enables the audience to not get emotionally involved instead; they can look above the action on stage and make a conscious decision about what they see.
Ultimately, Brecht’s theatre paved the way for a whole range of new drama, which broke away from convention and where for the first time the dramatist felt able as Brecht said himself to do ‘whatever I want and neglect whatever I want’.

[hannah hassack]

Brecht appealed to an educated audience that would see beyond the apparent strength of Mother Courage, as she fights to keep her family alive in menial conditions during the thirty-year war. It has been asserted that Brecht's was "a theatre of contradictions" in that sophisticated audiences would laugh when others would expect to cry. The key example of these “contradictions” is the notion that although she appears courageous, Mother Courage is in fact a selfish, greedy and undiscerning character. Although initially our sympathy for Mother Courage is greater than our recognition of her flaws, cracks begin to show, throughout the play, that expose her for the weak and ignorant person she is.

In encouraging them to look beyond the lucid meaning of his plays, Brecht created his audience into “thinking human beings”. Ordinarily we would consider and take note of what is abnormal in a play, but for Brecht the normality’s stood out. This moved the audience to consider the “normality’s” of being human and ask why we are how we are. This notion of seeing beyond and above the basic feelings towards a play is known as Epic Theatre and with Mother Courage Brecht carries this off with style. Brecht demands critical consciousness from the audience when Mother Courage continues to carry her cart round and round the stage until the audience leaves. Why doesn’t she change her ways given that they have caused her to lose three children? Mother Courage learns nothing from her experiences of the thirty-year war; ignorantly continuing in her life of misplaced values and in this Brecht is exposing a basic, common human flaw.

The fact that Brecht puts a summary of events at the beginning of each scene means that the audience already knows what’s going to happen. For some this makes the play boring and unexciting, as we already know what to expect as each scene unravels. However for others this simply reinforces Brecht’s point that what happens in the play is necessary, destined to happen and nothing will be done to change it, just as nothing will be done to change Mother Courage and nothing will be done to change us.

[James Morris]

‘What effect did the visit of Brecht's Berliner Ensemble to London in August and September 1956 have on the subsequent development of British theatre? Does Epic Theatre still have an influence today?’

According to Professor Viv Gardner, the visit of Brecht had, ‘both directly and indirectly, an enormous impact … on a generation of directors and performers … hearing or knowing about Brecht’s works … it coincided with a period of increasing politicisation’. She states that ‘the theatre was ready for a change in dramaturgy’, and Brecht’s consequent introduction of the ‘didactic play’ certainly seems to have been catalytic in bringing about such a change. Brecht heralded a move of Theatre toward the discussion of what Bamber Gascoigne calls, in his Twentieth-Century Drama, ‘moral paradox’. Incorporating the instructive mode:

“Brecht states problems instead of offering solutions. Crying ‘Change the world, it needs it!’ he concentrates entirely on the world as it is – on why it should be changed, not how.”

It could be said that Brecht’s Ensemble brought about a sea change, moving the medium of the Play to the aspired and lofty realm of ‘social change’ rather than what might be termed empathetic entertainment. Central to Brecht’s particular means of communication was his implementation of ‘Alienation’. To quote the man himself:

“…the actor has to discard whatever means he has learned of persuading the audience to identify itself with the characters which he plays ... His way of speaking has to be free from ecclesiastical singsong and from all those cadences which lull the spectator so that the sense gets lost.”

A sense of corporate responsibility is pervasive in Brecht’s work. The lack of a suspension of reality within the visible tableau serves to reinforce his all-consuming ‘message’. In the context of British Theatre, one finds for example the Brechtian influence in the stage directions of John Osborne’s The Entertainer; the echoes of his minimalistic approach allowing for the effect of distanciation upon the audience.

Although Brecht’s postulated legacy or influence may have more to do with whether or not his apparently Marxist approach was the most aesthetic or commercial, it is undeniable that this approach brokered new means of thinking about Theatre in his time. Professor Gardner continues, “we have [today] all the sort of superficial Brechtian theatrical techniques at our hand but his politics is usually lost in most performances”, concluding that “what drove him was a sense that the world needed changing”. If not the world directly, then at least the world of and through Theatre was changed through Brecht and his Berliner Ensemble. In an ever-changing political spectrum, it seems that the only constant is narrative itself; and Brecht’s influence, in my opinion in his contribution to the focalisation narrative, and the demonstration of, by virtue of absence in his work, the ever-present need of human empathy.

[Alison Norden]

Brecht and the Berliner Ensemble are considered as the most influential theatre movement from the 1950s onwards, and provided a model that influences theatre today. The Ensemble influenced post-war theatre as Brecht established the notion of epic theatre in answer to how society should be morally taught. Instead of appealing to the audience’s sense of pathos he generated self reflection and analysis of the character’s actions. Brecht believed that through emotion the audience was not truly engaged with the play because they could leave without acknowledging the moral messages. He wanted to create a theatre in which the audience would identify with the negative issues in life and act upon them. Brecht began by employing historification whereby plays included historical events because he thought the audience would be more critical of a time that is distant from their own. A highly influential aspect of Brecht’s plays was setting as he attempted to show the reality of society and individuals, removing focus from the traditional sets to the characters and using episodes to encourage speculation.
The British Library Theatre Archive stores an interview with Renee Goddard who reflects on Brechtian Theatre. Renee Goddard saw the Berliner Ensemble production of ‘Mother Courage’ and comments on how the performance seemed more aggressive and confrontational with conflicting issues. It was a very positive experience for her. ‘Mother Courage’ takes a Marxist point of view, looking at the ills in society, and particularly as it would have been seen with the bourgeois dominated society and its focus on capitalisation. The play focuses upon business transactions relying upon war. Characters are satisfied by and involved in war for everything they can get. Mother Courage is described as a ‘hyaena of the battlefield’ and is described to have supped with the devil. Brecht is presenting what he felt was reality, an aspect of his world, and therefore expected his audience to analyse the arrogance and lack of change and compassion in the play, and then act upon this. In the first performance in London there were clearly mixed views at Eric Bentley notes a Chelsea girl saying ‘I was bored to death’, but in contrast he notes an awakening to reality which he saw in the play.
It is evident how Brechtian theatre had an impact on society as in Korea 1988 when the Olympic Games were held, Brecht’s works were performed to exhibit their political stability. The Ensemble opened up the West End for British Theatre and Devine and Tynan saw this modern, significant style of theatre as a success. Since Devine saw the success in exhibiting humanity he developed the Royal Court with similar techniques.
The ‘Good Person of Szechwan’ also demonstrates Brecht’s Marxist ethics as he creates a dual character with a split personality, and overall depicts how goodness only survives through evil. Szechwan is described as ‘nothing but one big muck-heap’, microcosmic of a society where people did not commit to good deeds. Again the audience can reflect on this and resolve issues. However, there were some negative receptions to Brechtian theatre such as Harold Hobson hoping that John Osborne would not adopt these techniques. Epic theatre was also seen as propagandistic, rallying people along in Marxist beliefs. Yet the epic theatre did influence playwrights such as John Osborne and John Arden as it was entertaining and addressed society, politics, and economy, and still influences playwrights to the present day.

[Kate Bullivant]

When the Brecht Berliner Ensemble visited London in 1956 they brought with them Brecht’s ideology of the proper methods and nature of theatre. And although this got a poor reception from British critics, many directors and writers adapted and incorporated Brecht’s ideas into their own work. Stage design afterwards changed dramatically and became more simplistic, several writers of the period attempted to include songs within their plays and it became fashionable for actors to have a ‘cooled down’ performance – all inspired by Brecht’s methods.

But Brecht’s methods all have a purpose to alienate the drama from the audience. In his plays he includes song, direct conversations with the audience, basic scenery and summaries of each scene before the action takes place in order to prevent the audience from getting too drawn into the action and too involved with the characters. As he thought this would infringe on whether the audience would think or not. As this view is taken on by several within the British Theatre it shows a shift from the priority of theatre is no longer to entertain, but instead to force thought. And perhaps, this also motivated a change in attitude toward theatre, where it became more intimidating and for the elite.

[Ellie Purkis]

Bertolt Brecht recognised the needs of a new drama, developing many different types of theatre from 1918 onwards, such as the 'Verfremdungseffekt' and 'Non-Aristotelian' theatre. However before 1956 Britain had yet to see the extent or power of his works, merely watching on the sidelines whilst he created a storm throughout the rest of Europe.

Whilst the potential of his plays was clear, the few performances of them in Britain were uninspiring, with even Kenneth Tynan describing the July 1955 performance of Mother Courage as a 'discourtesy to a masterpiece [that] borders on an insult.'

However Brecht's Berliner Ensemble's visit to London brought this play to life; staging it to its full potential and fully doing the script justice. Meanwhile the language barrier shifted the focus onto the set, lighting and music, intruiging the audience with their use of these meduims to convey the events, whilst inviting them to take a more active role in deceiphering and questionning the scenes.

Thus ultimately the visit of Brecht's Berliner Ensemble to Britain brought about an unprecedented interest in Brecht's masterpieces, deeming him a key influence on subsequent playwrights and theatre, not only with regard to scripts, but also in terms of set design and staging.

[Matt WIllis]

Brecht revolutionised a style of epic theatre which allowed him to demonstrate his ideology of theatre: being an experience of self reflection for an audience instead of being simply another form of perfunctory entertainment. In several stage directions in ‘The Good Woman of Setzuan’ he makes clear that several lines should be delivered to the audience and these are for reasons that differ from the likes of Shakespearean soliloquy. There is an alienating intent behind these monologues that serve to remind the audience that they are watching a play that intends to educate for the political and economic reasons put forward by these characters. The lack of focus given to the reality of the drama with characters acknowledging the audience in such a way, several actors playing several roles, the arrangement of the play into several self-serving ‘episodes’ which carry on after occasionally huge time lapses and the use of effects such as cyclorama to keep the audience constantly and obtrusively informed, gave the British public a theatre experience that they had never encountered before to such a degree.

Brecht desired the audience to feel the distance between themselves and the drama, encouraging them not to become too emotionally involved in the consequences of certain characters’ actions but to instead objectively look at the message being performed and allow themselves to be educated by it. The 1956 arrival of Brechtian theatre in Britain was at a time that permitted the style become popular and influential amongst other dramatists. The work of ‘angry young men’ such as Osborne started to take on a decidedly Brechtian style as it was a satisfactory medium to voice the political opinions of the younger generation. As the actions of political activists in the 1960s were becoming more and more commonplace, it meant that plays with true economic messages were becoming increasingly desirable for a generation whose personal voice and opinion were becoming gradually vocalised and expressed.

[Agnieszka Sikora]

British theatre ‘discovered’ Brecht’s company a few years after its foundation in 1949. Next to the the Comédie Française and its existentialist philosophy, Berliner Ensemble played an importantrole in the West End stage and in the global development of the British drama.
One of Brecht’s innovations that impressed London audiences in 1956 was the realism of his plays. Although Mother Courage is set in 17th century during the Thirty Years’ War, a comtemporary spectator could easily link past events with the post-war political situation.
By including (parallel)historical moments and figures in his plays, Brecht allows the audience to have a critical opinion towards reality. ’Historicism’ as a form of reflecting the reality was till 1956 an unknown technique in British playwriting.
Brecht’s Epic Theatre introduced another new element :a narration within a play. Each of the 12 scenes in Mother Courage is preceeded by a short narrative,informing the audience of possible changes that have taken place in between the scenes. Was that ‘distanciation’ another Brecht’s ‘trick’ not to let the spectator get too involved with the play ? On the other hand, the use of songs and direct addresses towards the audience, like the opening monologue of Wang in The Good Person, breakes the distance between the spectator and actors.
With the visit of the modern German theatre, British performers experienced a new vision of acting. For Brecht, the artists should work together (‘ensemble’) and therefore create stories by a common effort. We notice in Mother Courage that the characters do not exist individually but as an inseparable union.
Brecht introduced techniques that have revolutionized the conception of the theatre and since then we speak about ‘Brechtian model’.

[Melanie Woodhouse]

Brecht's 'Mother Courage' was unlike anything British theatre goers had experienced and it's impact was significant in that it gave the audience cause for thought and question of the events and characters in the play rather than simply telling a story.

Brecht intended for his characters to be unlikeable so that the audience did not sympathise with the sometimes terrible events that befell them. In this way it was possible for the audience to remain outside of the action on stage and so enabled an idea or a point to be evaluated on it's merits alone and not the feelings a viewer may have for the character. This is one of the main aspects of 'Epic Theatre' as designed by Brecht. In Mother Courage, for example, it is difficult to feel any sorrow for the hardships that the main character endures as she is self centred and brings upon herself most of the unhappiness she experiences through greed or stupidity.

Epic theatre was intended, by Brecht, to give the audience a chance to examine the aspects of the play and the society it represented more than to be involved emotionally with the characters themselves. This is the same in 'The Good Woman of Stezuan' as the constricts of the society and the views of the people forces Shen Te to take on a seperate persona in order to succeed.

Brecht wants the audience to leave the theatre discussing what they have just seen and to relate this to their own environment. In such a politically diversified time Brecht wrote these plays in hope that the population would consider the individual and his or her role in making society what it was and may be even causing a change of thought that would enable progression into a better way of being.

The idea of Epic theatre is still influential today as theatre audiences can be challenged by it and their views and beliefs brought into question by something they may see on stage. If nothing else at least discussion and thought are provoked by Brechts' plays and in this, his writing will continue to be an integral part of what constitutes interesting, intelligent theatre.

[Kate Fleming]

Brecht said that the 'essential part of Epic Theatre is that it appeals less to the spectator's feelings than to his reason.'His intension was to alienate the audience from dramatic illusion so as to discourage empathy with the characters on stage. The audience were to be encouraged to question what they were watching and to think about alternatives. The plays were to act as a catalyst for ideas for changes in society. Brecht's intension was for the theatre to become a political forum.

Epic Theatre is described by John Lennard and Mary Luckhurst as 'the most influential political genre since 1945'. Brecht's theatre has had a significant influence upon drama. He has encouraged writers to talk about contemporary issues and for theatre to no longer invest in preserving the status quo but in working as advocates for change exposing injustices and seeking to see political change.

[Sophie Barnard]

The visit of the Berliner Ensemble to the West End in 1956 introduced British playwrites to epic theatre and inspired 'new wave' dramatists in the art of social realism. The English Stage Company, being one of the first to put on a Brechtian play, championed the idea of the 'peoples theatre'. This was largely a political statement intent on highlighting the post war paralysis felt by the alienated youth in particular.

The Good Woman of Sezuan, staged in 1956, put the responsibility on the audience to question the current structure of society and resolve the problems faced in the production; namely whether altruism is possible in a corrupt world. Further, it struck interest from influential critics of the period. Harold Hobson, for example, became increasingly weary of Brechtian marxism, while Kenith Tynan relished the 'drift towards anarchism' seen in the 'new wave' productions

The act of alienating the audience in order to allow space for reflection, or verfremdungseffekt, was taken from Brechtian drama in order to enforce the spectators thought on relevant contemporary socio-political issues.

This deliberately controversial theatre was a fresh alternative to the superficial productions, such as the popular Hodgers and Hammerstein musicals.

The heightened interest in this controversial theatre not only influenced existing dramatists, but gave the opportunity to others to work in the industry. The theatre in education programme, for example, was launched shortly after these innovations. Even now, during the current climate of political turmoil, the ability to inspire an audience and make them reconsider their circumstances is, surely, important and a direct result of Brechtian theatre.

[stephen wischhusen]

I would be interested to know the basis of Louise Harrison@s assertion that Brecht's plays were staged in streets with only street lamps or car headlights for lighting.
Even his first play "Trommeln in der Nacht" was first given in a theatre - the Munich Kammerspiele company

[Emma Nolan]

It could be argued that it was the influence of foreign dramatists such as Brecht, Beckett and Ionesco, that ultimately provoked the change and development of British Theatre. The use of the absurd and the epic opened up new aspects and genres that subsequent British playwrights could utilize and expand upon. The work of Bertolt Brecht and the Berliner Ensemble in particular had a great effect, most notably through their influence on important British figures like John Osborne and Joan Littlewood, as Brechtian strands or characteristics are evident somewhere within their productions.

The significance of ‘epic theatre’ was that as well as having the aim of entertainment, Brecht wanted to engage his audiences in contemporary concerns, for example, the political. He was asking audiences to focus upon why things were happening rather than what – focusing upon the process of things. The Berliner Ensemble was used to realise Brecht’s theories – he didn’t just have to express his message through his text, instead he could do it through his performances, his actors, his set, music etc. Brecht had almost complete control and authority. He even produced his ‘Modelbuch’ which explained in detail how the productions were put on. Brecht uses something called ‘Verfremdung’ or alienation and presents the familiar to the audience in an unfamiliar manner – for example, the juxtaposition of war and death in Mother Courage with the musical interludes, poems and songs. Unfortunately, Brecht died just before the Ensemble was scheduled to perform in London; however, the performance went ahead. It was stressed that the performance itself had to be visually dialectic and have a focus upon the physical action – the play after all, is in German. Additionally, Brecht’s productions focused upon a ‘non-naturalistic’ set, making the actual performance far more prominent and important.

In terms of influence on British theatre, I would say that Brecht and epic theatre was very significant. Although there is no real British equivalent to Brecht, aspects of his genre are evident in a large proportion of subsequent works. For example, there is the musical juxtaposition in A Taste of Honey, the political and social critiques within Look Back in Anger and The Entertainer. These are no overt pieces of ‘epic’ theatre, but they undoubtedly include Brechtian elements. I would say that Brecht still has an influence today, for example, more modern plays will similarly revolve around social, political and cultural critiques and present things as the unfamiliar, etc; however, not in an overt ‘epic theatre’ way.

[Komedy Kollective Team]

Brechtian Theatre has an overwhelming importance today, in these times of war and political double-dealing, but theatre is freshest and most applicable, when it is progressive yet entertaining yet intelligent.

If theatre is to enrapture the multimedia age, minimal sets, and distancing the actors from the audience, aren't always necessary to portray key political ideas, and may, in a graphic era of movies and films, and You-Tube, for that matter, may be counterproductive, and won't help theatre to appeal to new audiences.

If theatre is to do more than "preach to the converted", it needs to both pay its respect to groundbreaking historical modus operandi, while keeping an eye on the future, i.e., mixing and matching past, present, and future, to create informative and entertaining spectacles of stage.

Komedy Kollective Team
http://www.komedykollective.com