Brechtian/Feminist Pla Ywrighting: the Appropriation and Expropriation of Form
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
BRECHTIAN/FEMINIST PLA YWRIGHTING: THE APPROPRIATION AND EXPROPRIATION OF FORM By MERRYNJOHNS A thesis submitted in fulfilment of the requirements for the Degree of Master of Arts (Honours) School of Theatre and Film Studies University of New South Wales February 1995 CERTIRCATE OF ORIGINALITY I hereby declare that this submission is my own work and that, to the best of my knowledge and belief, it contains no material previously published or written by another person nor material which to a substantial extent has been accepted for the award of any other degree or diploma of a university or other institute of higher learning, except where due acknowledgement is made in the text_ (Sig TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 11 INTRODUCTION CHAPTER ONE: Appropriating Brecht: The Possibilities of a Feminist Gestus 14-30 CHAPTER TWO: Historicism, Histrionics, and Herstory: Reconstructing the Female Historical Subject 31-54 CHAPTER THREE: Mimesis, Myth, and Truth: Deconstructing the Oedipal Narrative 55-71 CHAPTER FOUR: The Dialectics of Emotions: Conflating the Brechtian and the Feminist 72-91 CHAPTER FIVE: Breaking Frames: Pornography, Psychoanalysis, and Narrativity 92-120 CHAPTER SIX: Performing Bodies, Multiple Signs: The Pleasure of the (Feminist) Text 121-143 CONCLUSION 144-148 BIBLIOGRAPHY 149-161 ERRATA p.6, footnote: for "Silva" read "Silvia" p.8, 1.27: for "de Lauretis" read "De Lauretis" p.21, 1.19: for "steretypical" read "stereotypical" p.22, 1.3: for "inscribe" read "ascribe"; 1.6 delete "through" p.23, 1.1: for "feminisng" read "feminising"; 1.2: for "involed" read "involved" p.24, 1.2: for "indicates" read "indicate" p.29, I. 12: for "her her" read "her" p.32, 1.22: for "Histrionic" read "Histrionics" p.34, 1.2: for "obscure" read "obscures" p.36, 1.22: for "of' read "to" p.37, 1.21: for "uderscores" read "underscores" p.41, 1.6: for "the the" read "the" p.56, I. 4: for "fulfill" read "fulfil"; 1.16: for "os" read "is"; "is" read "it" p.57, 1.4: for "delusory" read "illusory"; 1.15: for "prediliction" read "predilection" p.61, 1.5: for "hygeine" read "hygiene"; 1.28: for "oppresion" read "oppression" p.64, 1.3: for "performs" read "performing"; 1.19: for "assimlation" read "assimilation" p.65, 1.5: for "comopetitive" read "competitive"; "and" read "an" p.66, 1.12: for "overwheening" read "overweening" p.68, 1.15: for "assiting" read "assisting" p. 70, 1.19: for "psychserniotic" read "psychosemiotic" p. 75, 1.1: for "oppsed" read "opposed" p.81, 1.7: for "recrinination" read "recrimination" p.88, 1.21: for "fulfills" read "fulfils" p.89, 1.25: for "frought" read "fraught" p. 97, 1.15: for "harnesses" read "harnessed" p.122, 1.16: for "dialecticalism" read "dialecticism"; 1.18: for "vaildates" read ''validates" p.129, 1.3: for "appears is" read "appears there is" p.135, 1.25: for "virtuoisty" read ''virtuosity" p.146, 1.24: for "as case of' read "as a case of' p.147, 1.18: for "acknowledges" read "acknowledge"; for "dealt which" read "dealt with which" ABSTRACT In the context of recent dramatic theory which seeks intertextual readings of critical inquiry and questions the politics of appropriation, this thesis will examine the purpose and results of an intertextual reading of Brechtian and Feminist theory and praxis. Drawing on current feminist academic debate, and influenced by theories of postmodernism and psychosemiotics, the validity of the Brechtian/Feminist theory/praxis will be assessed from two different perspectives: as a critical tool for reading a work of dramatic literature and as a practical tool, a dramaturgical guideline, for writing dramatic literature. To do this, a number of fairly recent plays by feminist playwrights have been selected to illustrate four main points: how the writer may have been influenced by a Brechtian approach to form; how they may have deviated from this approach to form; how they have transformed Brechtian notions in the process; and to what extent this process of appropriation/expropriation has helped the articulation of their feminist concerns. Chapter One demonstrates this process by focusing on gestus as a means of accessing the representation of women. Chapter Two focuses on Brecht's notion of historicism and the recovery of 'herstory' in feminist plays dealing with female historical subjects. Chapter Three examines the notion of mimesis as a restrictive theatrical form and how an appropriation of myth, in the light of Brecht'sfabel and Lehrstucke, may be useful to the feminist playwright. Chapter Four looks at Brecht's antipathy towards catharsis/emotion, but will find that feminist plays may use emotion to assist the feminist dialectic. Chapter Five focuses on the female subject and the role of the spectator by analysing plays about framing systems involved in pornography and psychoanalysis. Chapter Six turns to notions of the female body as it may inhabit, control, or produce the theatrical space, causing a conflation of body and text. The major conclusions reached are that appropriation of Brecht by feminist playwrights interested in radical/political theatrical form has incurred a transformation of forms which has helped give voice to the feminist theatrical practice and may have revived or re-radicalised Brechtian theory in the process. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I should like to thank my supervisor Dr. Margaret Williams of the School of Theatre and Film Studies, UNSW, for her constant guidance, advice and support, and Dr. Jim Davis, who provided additional consultation. * * * Thanks, also, to my family who were supportive, thoughtful, and patient during the time it took to complete the work. I INTRODUCTION "(T)he master's tools will never dismantle the master's house." Amlre Lorde1 In her introduction to Acting Out, Lynda Hart considers the means and methods of a feminist theatre practice, and in doing so she suggests that "(i)t is time perhaps to rethink Audre Lorde's mantra for feminist praxis" since "(t)echnology and ideology change the function of tools, which in any case have no inherent instrumental function. "2 The following discussion will demonstrate the ways in which feminist ideology can be brought to bear upon Brechtian dramaturgy, and even alter the nature and function of the epic dramaturgical 'tools' as they were developed by Brecht, to suit the purposes of feminist theatrical praxis. This process may be seen as a 'feminising' of the Brechtian aesthetic which is incurred through appropriation, but which itself incurs, as its by product, through an immediate expropriation, the evolution of new forms. The term 'feminising' will not be used to suggest biologically determined approaches to aesthetics, but rather to emphasise the re-en/gendering of what has been interpreted as a largely 'masculine' domain. Contemporary male playwrights have, of course, also appropriated/expropriated Brechtian aesthetics to their own purposes. In this discussion, 'feminising' is a term which should be used with some flexibility, and perhaps even irony, suggesting that Brechtian form is open to interpretation and transformation, a suitable lens through which notions of "feminine" and "masculine" may be viewed as other than "natural". The notion of appropriation as a form of possession or ownership of aesthetic means to arrive at certain ends, of transformation as alteration of certain elements and means, and of expropriation as a purgation of unsuitable elements, will be considered. It will be argued that, with some alterations, the master's tools may be implemented to dismantle the 'master's house' of theatrical representation, effectively 1 See Hart, Lynda, Introduction to Acting Out, (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1993), p.11 2 Ibid. 2 altering the ways in which women are represented on stage. In particular, the architectonics of dramatic form and structure, and the ways in which the feminist playwright approaches the aesthetics of form, will be the main concern, since it is here that the possibilities of de/re-construction are most apparent. To what extent the altered 'tools' may construct a new "house" on the site of theatrical representation will also be considered. For the purpose of introducing this topic of research and analysis, certain critical issues need clarification. While this dissertation will not provide an in-depth analysis of Brecht' s dramatic theory and practice or an exhaustive critique of either, it will take key principles of both in order to provide a framework for discussion and shed light on the more prevalent aspects of Brechtian dramaturgy in some contemporary feminist drama. The 'post-Brechtian' work of Eliz.abeth Wright and Patrice Pavis provide departure points for notions of a post-Brechtian theory and practice by feminist dramatists and critics. Wright' s notion of discussing the work of Brecht in the light of postmodern, post Brechtian theories does much to inform feminist evaluations of Brecht's work and its usefulness to the feminist dramatic practitioner. Implicit in her re-presentation of Brecht is already the notion of an "elsewhere" practice outside of the dramatic canon. Pavis' reconsideration and clarification of Brecht's notion of Gestus in relation to semiotics, stage language and languages of the body provides a crucial reference point for those feminists concerned with the useful appropriation of Brechtian theory. However, Pavis suggests a holistic or dialectical appreciation of critical appropriation: It would be highly dangerous, moreover, to isolate a concept for the sole purpose of clarifying it only in the context of written works of theory, without verifying what use Brecht makes of it in his writings or productions, and without comparing it dialectically with other notions of his system. 3 Critical discussion of Brechtian theory can lead to a misuse of terms connected with Brecht's epic theatre, therefore the concepts isolated for discussion below will remain close to Brecht' s own definitions of their nature and function, taking into account that all 3 Pavis, Patrice, Languages of the Stage (New York: Performing Arts Journal Publications, 1982), p.39 3 of these concepts were intended to operate both in concert and contradiction with each other, that is to say, dialectically.