Solo theater piece fascism is(n’t) dead: the illusion of inclusion

Bertolt Brecht was a German poet, playwright, and theatre director. He initially studied medicine and philosophy but he became interested in theatre in 1920s. Brecht believed that theatre shouldn't simply entertain audiences, but should also educate and inspire them to think critically about the world around them. In his book "The Modern Theatre is the Epic Theatre" he argued that theatre should expose underlying power structures of society (Brecht, 1930).

Some of Brecht's most famous works include Mother Courage and Her Children and The Caucasian Chalk Circle. While those plays had a significant impact on theatre evolution, the focus of this portfolio will rather be on Brecht as a theatre theorist.

Brecht died in 1956 in East Berlin. His legacy lives on in the many playwrights and directors who have been influenced by his work, such as Peter Brook and Augusto Boal. Epic theatre is often regarded as one of the starting points of postdramatic theatre, as described in "Postdramatic Theatre" (Lehmann, 1999).

This section will aim to introduce various aspects of Epic theatre through examining several contexts which influenced development of them.

Brecht lived and worked in the Weimar Republic, German state established after WW1. It was a period of political upheaval, marked by economic instability, political violence, and social unrest, followed by devasting WW2.

The interwar period saw the rise of fascist and authoritarian regimes across Europe, including Nazi Germany. These regimes sought to suppress political dissent and control the arts, by imprisoning artists and burning their works. At the same time, Europe has experienced the emergence of socialism and Marxism as opposing political forces.

Brecht was particularly influenced by ideas of Karl Marx, making him targeted by the Nazi party and forcing him into exile in 1933. Left-wing standpoints, therefore, became central to the Epic Theatre he developed. Brecht shared Marx's critique of capitalism and was deeply concerned about the inequalities it produced, as he revealed in "The Threepenny Novel" in 1939. His plays therefore often featured working-class characters (which wasn't prominent during that time, as theatre mostly portrayed higher class) and addressed issues such as poverty, exploitation, and social injustice, which brings us to another technique of Epic theatre, Representation of daily life, by emphasising the daily struggles of characters, particularly in the context of social class, as per Marx. Brecht believed that theatre shouldn't be means of escaping from the world, but a way of engaging with it more deeply.

Another aspect of Marx's philosophy that influenced Brecht was his emphasis on dialectics, particularly emphasized in his book "A Short Organum for the Theatre". Marx believed that history was shaped by the conflict between opposing forces, and that change occurred through the resolution of these contradictions. Brecht used dialectics by introducing contradictory characters(Rouse, 1984).

The aspect of Epic theatre that I choose for this performance is Didacticism(using theatre as a way to convey messages about features of society, politics or economy), which is heavily influenced by the political context of Brecht's work. While Didactic theatre originated in Antics and was heavily used in medieval times, Didacticticism as part of Epic theatre is underpinned by Marxist views, not seeing theatre as a moralistic or didactic medium but as tool for raising consciousness, mobilizing masses, and ultimately transforming society, as testified in Brecht's "The Messingkauf Dialogues" and "The Threepenny Lawsuit".

Brecht's Didacticicism, therefore, uses Epic theatre techniques to send the audience a message which would help them identify points where society fails morally, aiming to leave them with eagerness to change those aspects of society. The most prominent themes of Brech't didacticism were related to poverty, oppression and war. Didacticicism has been challenged by some prominent thinkers, such as in "Theater and Its Double" by Antonin Artaud, who argued that emotional response of the audience is more important than their intellectual engagement.

The dominant theatrical form at the start of the 20th century was realism, which aimed to create a faithful representation of higher-class characters on stage. Brecht saw this as a form of bourgeois entertainment that reinforced the status quo and encouraged audiences to passively accept reality.

Epic theatre aimed to break the illusion of realism using techniques such as split-role, montage, and the use of music to disrupt the audience's emotional engagement with the play and encourage them to think critically about issues presented.

He found his departure points in two prominent theatrical movements of that time:

a) Symbolism, which used metaphor and allegory to convey deeper meanings and spiritual truths.

b) Expressionism, aimed to convey the inner emotions and psychological states of characters through exaggerated performances.

Furthermore, Brecht was influenced by Defamiliarization by Viktor Shklovsky, a theory arguing that art should strive to make the familiar strange in order to challenge assumptions Brecht has grounded this in epic theatre in Verfremdungseffekt (alienation effect) - a sense of detachment between the audience and the action on stage, as described in "Understanding Brecht" (Benjamin, 1931). By using various techniques such as breaking the fourth wall and creating abrupt shifts in tone or style, Brecht aimed to prevent audiences from becoming too emotionally invested in characters and stories. Instead, he wanted them to constantly question and analyze what they were seeing. He argued that the audience shouldn't be surprised in any way, but that their understanding of the action/relations should be deepened. He, therefore, developed the following key techniques of Epic theatre:

1. Use of Plackards and Projections - signs, banners or other types of written information that help the audience understand the action. They can identify characters, locations, emotions, relationships, or what will happen in the future;

2. Characters speaking stage directions - instead of fully applying stage directions, characters can say them out loud, sparking audience's understanding of what does scene represent;

3. Narration - explaining the plot by narrator or chorus;

4. Epic structure - scenes often connected thematically rather than through a linear plot.

5. Historification - including historical and real-world documents into play.

While practically exploring Didactism, I had several approaches, which I included in my first performance for my theatre class:

1.) My performance was a set of confessions. This presented a problem: I didn't have a storyline: my performance simply portrayed characters struggling in society. The impact on my peers from the class wasn't what I wanted: they felt as if I only tried to portray the lives of the marginalized, rather than my initial goal of critiquing capitalism. To fully immerse Didactism in my play, I will first need to have crystal clear intention and message and then tailor my plot accordingly. I will also try to include characters who implement the system and emphasize functionalistic nature of our society.

2.) I used a technique called Cop in the Head combined with Brecht's contradictory character. I did it by using voice recordings in my play. So, when a character would say something, there would be his "cop", critiquing voice inside him played as a voice recording. Unfortunately, nobody in the class realized what I was trying to convey, and it was extremely difficult to perform. In spite of the time I spent creating those voice recordings, I realized that this doesn't fit in my performance.

3.) I used projections instead of plackards: However, my peers didn't get meaning of them, due to technical obstacles I didn't predict: waviness of curtains on the stage prevented them from being readable to my peers. I have therefore decided to alternate them with "traditional" placards.

My main intention is to critique neoliberal capitalism, as applied today in the systems of First World countries, due to its perpetuating injustice, inequality, and inhumanity. I want to expose the flawed systems that prioritize profit over human life. The main components of its structure I want to critique are:

1. Strict immigration laws, border enforcement and nationality-based discrimination: Living on the edge of "Western world" my whole life, I witnessed how cruel our structure is to those seeking asylum. This becomes particularly important in 2023, given the UK's new immigration law which permits authorities to "swiffly remove" refugees crossing the Chanel, regardless if they are in urgent need of protection/they are children.

2. Privatization and commodification of well-being; As per Marx, the worst possible commodification is the one regarding human's physiological needs. Given neoliberal free market rules, some countries have already erased regulations of prices of medications, resulting in prices of simple drugs skyrocketing.

3. Governmental support to organized religious institutions;

While our(First World governments) argue they don't have enough money to accommodate refugees, they still give billions in support to the Church and affiliated organizations, which, as per Marx, only reinforce the oppression of marginalized in society.

While I want to show how those components of the system destroy the lives of individuals, I don't want my audience to accuse characters implementing the rules of the system, such as policemen, in my play. Instead, I want to use a more alienating, approach that would distance the audience's negative emotions from those individuals, by encouraging them to view the events of the play as part of a larger political context. In summary, while I want my audience to feel empathy for individual victims of oppression, I also want them to remember that the neoliberal capitalist structure is the one enforcing this oppression. Ultimately, this would disrupt their passive acceptance of the status quo and encourage them to become active in fighting against such system, creating a desire for revolution in my audience.

Target audience for my performance will be consisting of:

1. Working class citizens of my city: one of main purposes of Brecht's theatre is reaching those traditionally excluded from the cultural mainstream, working class, and empowering them through it.

2. My peers/classmates: they will be able to question their own views and maybe bring some perspectives from my piece to their future journeys.

I realized that the most efficient way to critique the aspects of our system I listed is to structure my play into scenes that focus on each one of them. Therefore, my play will consist of following scenes:

1. Short introduction of the victim of neocolonialism, making it crystal clear why even refugees even need to migrate;

2. Scene featuring a refugee at the border;

3. Scene showcasing the commodification of hospital services;

4. Scene representing relationship between Goverment, Churh and society;

Brecht often used placards in his productions to provide contextual information and highlight important ideas, which were typically placed on the stage or carried by actors. For example, in play "The Good Person of Szechwan," Brecht used a series of placards to introduce the characters and set. The placards provided information about the characters' names, occupations, and relationships. As a result, Brecht established the context of the play quickly and efficiently, without relying on long exposition.

In my play, placards will establish scene's setting, as well as further context. For example, scene 4 placard will say "CHURH", but will also include symbols of Christianity, Islam and Judaism, to showcase that it's not a Church as a building but Church as a broader religious organisation, relevant to all major religions. A final placard will show the summarized message of the play, highlighting the Marxist critique of our society.

Brecht believed that music could emphasize social and political aspects of play, rather than just providing entertainment/emotional appeal. He believed that music could help create a contrast between the emotional response of the audience and the intellectual response that he hoped to achieve. For example, in play "The Threepenny Opera," Brecht used the song, "Mack the Knife," a catchy tune that contrasts with the violent and criminal behaviour of the character it describes. As a result, he highlighted the ways society often romanticizes criminal behavior, while simultaneously pointing out its negative consequences.

During my exploration, I knew I want to use a song that satirizes play's plot in global context - I want to make it crystal clear to my audience that the characters of my play are just a part of a broader system - a system that, as per Marx, we all support by not fighting against it. I wrote a song sung by character of borderguard, in transitions of scenes 2-3. However, my class didn't receive it well. They said the song was too long and too glamorous, almost as if I was trying to promote capitalism. I have therefore rewritten it, and instead of "I've got a Dream" used "Gansgta Paradise" as a backing track for it, and moved it to the end of my performance.

One of the key techniques of epic theatre, documentarism, will play significant role in my piece. Brecht used to include historical documents, news and other documentary materials in his plays in order to show demonstrate relevance of the plot to real-world events. (Willett, 1959) I decided to go with the same approach, by projecting news during my first two scenes: a 1996 interview with Madeleine Albright about US sanctions and more recent reports about brutality of Croatian borderguards. The first one will show how much authorities don't care about effects of their actions while the second one will present refugees' injuries as consequences of those actions.

Since the beginning of my research of Epic theatre, I was drawn by Brecht's idea of breaking down the traditional barrier between the stage and the audience, the barrier between the "real and unreal" worlds. As Brecht argued, theatre is best when it is immersive and interactive, rather than passive. Therefore, as a set designer, I have decided to set some scenes out of the stage, closer to the audience. This has allowed me to use the curtain as a "border" to the Western world. One of the main critiques my play addresses is the one addressing discrimination caused by borders - and the border between the stage and the audience is will be the perfect metaphor for that. Also, stage being raised from the floor will show how we as Westerners, unfortunately, see ourselves: better than the rest of the world, looking upon them from a raised place.

The next task I had was regarding the lighting and projections. As some scenes were taking place out of the range of the standard lighting of our stage, I had to adjust their positioning. So one of the front lights of the stage now actually had to be adjusted down("downlighting"). In addition, for the first scene, I will be using a floor lamp, which will create sense of intimacy with the audience: as if character is having a casual conversation with them.

As scene transitions when projections of videos are during the first scenes, now, the projections will be on the front curtain, rather than on the back ones. This will also be better as no placards will therefore interfere with the projections.

After the session, I had a talkback session as well as individual interviews with some members of the audience. One of the most interesting perspectives was "I didn't know that things as simple as carton can be so powerful in the performance - my attention was brought to action, not on details", which suggested that I managed to accomplish aims of technique. One member stated: "I didn't know these thing are happening, and I wouldn't be able to believe in them. Including real videos of news was slap in my face." This particularly testifeid that I managed to apply documentarism as well.

When it comes to the message of the play, most of them have received it well, with bit of oscillations: while some thought I wanted to promote anarchism, others got my point just right:" World seems perfect because we live in a bubble - this play showed how we all indirectly torture endangered people, and I will remember it whenever I say that life is perfect". One audience member said: "But this doesn't give a solution. It is only critiquing." However, I strongly believe neither me nor Brecht wanted to serve solution on the plate: we wanted to engage the audience and make them active developers of it. Finally, one observer commented: "I will use this play as my reminder of how grateful should I be for everything I have. Even though I ain't rich, I am rich not to have problems of citizenship", which means I managed to raise awareness about these problems. I feel proud, because it really seems I fulfilled my very first intention - to show that theatre is much more meaningful than just entertainment.