As a Marxist and dialectical materialist, Bertolt Brecht believed that the theatre was a forum to explore political ideas. In a direct challenge to the Aristotelian approach, which holds that a play should cause catharsis in the spectator, Brecht’s 1920s postmodernist Epic Theatre proposed that a play should not cause the spectator to identify emotionally with the characters or action before them, but rather provoke rational self-reflection and a critical view of the action on stage. He believed that the experience of climactic catharsis in the audience led to complacency, which is why he invented alienating effects so that the spectator could emotionally disengage from the unfolding of the event. Emotional engagement led the audience to pity the characters on stage and fear for the characters' lives, but, Brecht felt, did not move them to social action.
Brecht developed tropes that challenged the use of time and space in the theatre to undermine naturalism and 20th-century realism. First and foremost, he reimagined acting. He believed that the actor should not be in an immersive experience in their roles but should always be at a distance from them so that at any given moment they could comment on their situation. This is in contrast to famed Russian acting teacher Constantin Stanislavski’s “System” acting or American teacher Lee Strasberg’s “Method” acting, which require the actor to lose themselves entirely in their character.
Brechtian theatre reminds the spectator that they watch plays to observe human conduct. And although his theatre hopes to lead the goers to action once they go back into the world, Brecht believed that above all else, the theatre should be a place of superfluous fun, pleasure and entertainment.
—Carmen Aguirre
Reprinted from OSF’s 2018 Illuminations, a 64-page guide to the season’s plays. Members at the Donor level and above and teachers who bring school groups to OSF receive a free copy of Illuminations.