11. Learning by Making and Doing: Solo Project - Part 2 - Puzzlements and Practical Questions

As the exploration and experiment went on, there was a puzzlement recurring in my mind: Brecht’s idea of turning spectators into actors/producers to learn about dialectical thinking through experience from action is very insightful and valuable, considering especially that the dialectical dimension seems to be something often missing in contemporary applied theatre practices (be it pedagogical, therapeutic, or communal). Nevertheless, the actual examples from Brecht’s experiments from 1926 to 1933 appeared to be quite “primitive” or “simplistic”** from the perspective of participatory or interactive theatre nowadays concerning facilitation of experiential process, even after reading Roswitha Mueller’s analysis of the design of these learning plays (104-116). Also, as discovered through the class exercise, we saw that just by making the spectator/participant act (e.g., read) cannot ensure a better understanding or awareness, and this implied that more subtle facilitation may be required. Furthermore, these learning plays (Lehrstück) that Brecht developed also appeared at times quite “directive”** and hence seem not as dialectical as his later Schaustück in the form of epic theatre (like The Good Woman of Setzuan, Mother Courage, etc.), dramaturgically speaking.

Considering all these, my question was: For this experimental project, can I, or should I, find a way to incorporate certain knowledge/strategies from contemporary applied theatres in this project while trying to make it a dialectical process, on which Brecht emphasized and which these contemporary practices commonly do not pay attention to and/or fail to achieve? However, even if I take reference to some principles and strategies from contemporary applied theatre practices for creating a better participation and experiential process, how can I create a dialectical experience and encourage dialectical thinking if contemporary applied theatre practices still have not paid much attention to this aspect, although they may have more sophisticated techniques to facilitate experiential processes? If, as Mueller points out, “Brecht emphasised that epic techniques are the basis for the Lehrstück but that many of the projected goals of the 'new drama' can be realised to their full extent only within the context of a Lehrstück” (104), then can Brecht’s other plays in his epic theatre experiments offer some references for this aspect?

Practically, I had specifically also to pay attention to the following questions:

1)    How to make use of the space?

2)    How to use props/objects (and their materiality) to create entrances into the drama?

3)    How to make use of the mediatizing devices?

4)    How to manage the very short duration time (ideally around 10 mins)?

5)    Besides masks, how to create enough distance and containment?

6)  How to keep the pacing and timing with sufficient control while allowing the participants to have rooms to explore actively?

At last, I decided to experiment incorporating some elements of Process Drama from Drama-in-Education and Sociodrama from Moreno for the construction of the experiential process, in the direction of Brecht’s learning play for a dialectical theatre. This implies that I still need to pay special attention to the dialectics in the playbuilding or dramaturgy.

---------------

**P.S.: additional remarks after further reading:

Later when I came across a paper written by Andrzej Wirth, I was convinced that, to be fair to Brecht's actual experiments and his original designs of these learning plays, we should pay attention to the fact that "the Lehrstück are libretti and can be interpreted only in relation to the vocal, musical, and choregraphic performance: The music and the orientation toward particular target groups make the Lehrstücke applied texts, explainable simply in terms of performance practice. The originally envisioned target groups of the Lehrstück (for example, the workers' choruses of the Weimar Republic) belong to the past. What is learned from a Lehrstück (as "thesis" or experience) depends upon the composition of the actual target group" (113) and "[o]nly when one interprets the Lehrstück as thesis pieces, ignoring they are libretti, that they do these short pieces seem obsolete and to a certain extent compromised by the collapse of the ideology inscribed in them." (118)

This angle provides a "third way" going beyond understanding the Lehrstück "in terms of content or form: as political appeals or as formal exercises in the art of the dialectic (see Steinweg 1972)" (113), and this third way helps to see the value of Brecht's Lehrstück: "The abstract dramaturgy the Lehrstück anticipates the later, fully developed theory of Verfremdung and uses much sharper alienation effects than those of the large parable pieces. Verfremdungseffekte in the Lehrstück refer not only to the Gestus of the singing and the music composed for the text. They also concern movements, which are not presented as action but as the report of action that has already taken place. Further, Verfremdung is achieved through role exchange. The composition is based on the montage of diverse elements: chorus, quoted dialogue, quoted movements and situations, aria-like solo numbers, commentaries, and so on. The diversity and flexibility of these loosely assembled elements is a distinguishing feature of this novel module-dramaturgy." (114) Therefore, from this angle, Brecht's actual Lehrstück may appear "primitive", "simplistic" or "directive" if they are read as written text only, because his design according to his dialectical dramaturgy puts the text in contradiction to the other theatrical elements for the dialectical effects.

Wirth also pointed out that in Brecht's time, his actual experiments had made considerable compromises to as well as utilizations of the socio-political-cultural conditions in that historical context: "The way the Lehrstück was performed during Brecht's lifetime stood in contradiction to the radicality of its theory, which emphasizes a sharp contrast between the Schaustück [a play for the benefit of the audience] and the Lehrstück [for the benefit of the players]. The radical core of Brecht's theory is the idea of an autarkic (self-sufficient) metatheatre, a utopian objective accompanied by a utopian ideology. Brecht's amateur players, members of the workers' choruses of the Weimar Republic, were formed by a culture which, through the liturgy of Protestantism (church singing) and the bourgeois "house music," partly dissolved the contradiction between the professional and nonprofessional. Thus the musicians and the singers in the choruses were at that time adepts for whom this was not a principal occupation. But they understood enough about their hobby to be effective collaboratively. One must also remember the large number of small school brass bands that existed then. The instrumentation in The Measures Taken refers to these resources in the society at that period----Hanns Eisler's use of traditional forms, ecclesiastical modes, and brass players strong enough to assert themselves against the chorus." (116)

However, even with these understandings, for my creative project at hand and my context, I still need to think about the questions listed above, because 1) I have not enough knowledge and support regarding music as Brecht designed his Lehrstück, and 2) the target participants and socio-political-cultural context of this project are very different from Brecht's.

Reference:

Mueller, Roswitha “Learning for a new society: the Lehrstück” The Cambridge Companion to Brecht: Second Edition. Thomson, Peter and Sacks, Glendyr (eds.) Cambridge; New York, 2006. 101-117.

Steinweg, Reiner "Das Lehrstück, Brechts Theorie einer politisch-ästhetischen Erziehung" Stuttgart: Metzler Verlag, 1972.

Wirth, Andrzej. "The Lehrstück as performance." TDR/The Drama Review 43.4 (1999): 113-121.