Advertisement

“The ‘Asiatic’ Model”: The Brechtian Art of Refunctioning of Japanese (Asian) Theatre

  • Min Tian
Chapter
Part of the Palgrave Studies in Theatre and Performance History book series (PSTPH)

Abstract

Bertolt Brecht’s practical approach to Japanese theatre, which necessitates the refunctioning of it by displacing it from its historical, cultural as well as aesthetic contexts was consistent with his general approach to classical traditions. Brecht treated classical traditions as raw material, and what interested him was the usability and adaptability (displaceability) of the traditions concerned, not their essential differences and differentiations. In determining the transportability and usability of Japanese theatre, a foreign dramatic art, Brecht consciously chose to disregard its historical, cultural, and ethnic peculiarities. The Brechtian art of refunctioning prescribes and legitimizes the copyist’s right and freedom of using (or abusing) the material to the benefit of the copyist’s work (practical and theoretical). The act of abuse or sacrilege against the material, however, does not sanctify the afterlife of the material with its true identity, but displaces it and thereby deprives it of its true identity. The material may live on, but is forced to live the life, and to mirror the identity, of the copyist’s work.

Bibliography

  1. Alter, Maria P. 1968. Bertolt Brecht and the Noh Drama. Modern Drama 11 (2): 122–131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bloch, Ernst. 1991. Heritage of Our Times. Translated by Neville and Stephen Plaice. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  3. Brecht, Bertolt. 1964. Brecht on Theatre: The Development of an Aesthetic. Edited and translated by John Willett. New York: Hill and Wang.Google Scholar
  4. ———. 1985. Collected Plays, vol. 6, pt. 1. Edited by John Willett and Ralph Manheim and translated by John Willett. London: Methuen.Google Scholar
  5. ———. 1992. Werke: Große Kommentierte Berliner und Frankfurter Ausgabe, edited by Werner Hecht et al., vol. 21. Berlin und Weimar and Frankfurt am Main: Aufbau and Suhrkamp.Google Scholar
  6. ———. 1993. Werke: Große Kommentierte Berliner und Frankfurter Ausgabe, edited by Werner Hecht et al., vol. 22, in 2 pts. Berlin und Weimar and Frankfurt am Main: Aufbau and Suhrkamp.Google Scholar
  7. ———. 2000. Écrits sur le Théâtre. Edited by Jean-Marie Valentin et al. Paris: Gallimard.Google Scholar
  8. Calandra, Denis. 1974. Karl Valentin and Bertolt Brecht. The Drama Review 18 (1): 86–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Engel, Fritz. 1930. Japanisches Gastspiel: Theater des Westens. Berliner Tageblatt und Handels-Zeitung (Abend-Ausgabe), October 4, 3.Google Scholar
  10. Hauptmann, Elisabeth. 1976. Wie kam es zum “Jasager” und zum “Neinsager”? In Brechts Modell der Lehrstücke: Zeugnisse, Diskussion, Erfahrungen, ed. Reiner Steinweg, 214–17. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.Google Scholar
  11. ———. 1977. Julia ohne Romeo: Geschichten, Stücke, Aufsätze, Erinnerungen. Berlin: Aufbau.Google Scholar
  12. Ihering, Herbert. 1930. Im Theater des Westens: Japanisches Theater. Berliner Börsen-Courier (Abend-Ausgabe), October 4, 2.Google Scholar
  13. Pemsel, Klaus. 1981. Karl Valentin im Umfeld der Münchner Volkssängerbühnen und Varietés. Munich: Wilhelm Unverhau.Google Scholar
  14. Rohara, W.K. 1930. Japanisches Theater. Vossische Zeitung, October 3, n.p.Google Scholar
  15. Schumacher, Ernst. 1955. Die Dramatischen Versuche Bertolt Brechts 1918–1933. Berlin: Rütten & Loening.Google Scholar
  16. Schwimmer, Helmut. 1977. Karl Valentin. München: R. Oldenbourg.Google Scholar
  17. Tatlow, Antony. 1977. The Mask of Evil. Bern: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
  18. Tian, Min. 1997. ‘Alienation-Effect’ for Whom? Brecht’s (Mis)Interpretation of the Classical Chinese Theatre. Asian Theatre Journal 14 (2): 200–222.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. ———. 2012. Mei Lanfang and the Twentieth-Century International Stage: Chinese Theatre Placed and Displaced. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  20. Waley, Arthur. 1921. The Nō Plays of Japan. London: George Allen and Unwin.Google Scholar
  21. ———. 1922. The Nō Plays of Japan. New York: Alfred A. Knopf.Google Scholar
  22. Wekwerth, Manfred. 2009. Mut zum Genuss: ein Brecht-Handbuch für Spieler, Zuschauer, Mitstreiter und Streiter. Berlin: Kai Homilius.Google Scholar
  23. Weltmann, Lutz. 1930. Japanisches Theater: Gastspiel im Theater des Westens. Berliner Volkszeitung, October 5, 2.Google Scholar
  24. Wirth, Andrzej. 1971. Brecht and the Asiatic Model: The Secularization of Magical Rites. Literature East and West 15 (4): 601–15.Google Scholar
  25. Zeami, Motokiyo. 1942. Seami Juroku Bushu. Seami’s Sixteen Treatises (Continued). Translated by Shidehara Michitarô and Wilfrid Whitehouse. Monumenta Nipponica 5 (2): 466–500.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. ———. 1960. La tradition secrète du Nô. Translated by René Sieffert. Paris: Gallimard.Google Scholar
  27. ———. 1984. On the Art of the Nō Drama: The Major Treatises of Zeami. Translated by Thomas Rimer and Yamazaki Masakazu. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Min Tian
    • 1
  1. 1.University of IowaIowa CityUSA

Personalised recommendations