I made a post from pieces, excerpts from books and articles. When you put together the puzzles of text and video, I hope that you will feel the atmosphere of the theater, or rather one very interesting performance, that's what I wanted to express in my post:
During Brecht's lifetime, his relations with the Soviet theater were, to put it mildly, not particularly successful. The main reasons were the official theater's ideological rejection of Brecht's artistic searches, as well as the paradoxical nature of Brecht's figure, which rather irritated the authorities. Mutual hostility was mutual. On the one hand, in the 1920s and 1950s, Brecht's plays were almost never staged by domestic theaters. On the other hand, the acquaintance of the German playwright himself with Soviet theatrical practice more than once plunged him into despondency.
Brecht found himself in the Soviet chalk circle. It was only at the turn of the 1950s and 1960s, after his death, that rare productions of his plays appeared. Among the first and most significant should be mentioned: "Dreams of Simone Machar" in the Moscow Theater. M. Yermolova directed by Anatoly Efros (1959); "Mother Courage and her children" at the Moscow Academic Theater. Vl. Mayakovsky (staged by Maxim Strauch) (1960); “The Good Man from Sezuan” at the Leningrad Academic Theater. Pushkin (1962, director - Rafail Suslovich); “The Career of Arturo Ui” at the Leningrad Bolshoi Drama Theatre. Gorky (1963, directed by Erwin Axer).
However, these and some other productions of the thaw by Brecht pale before the significance of one educational student performance. In 1963, young Vakhtangov students, third (!) year students of the Theater School named after B.V. Shchukin, presented the fruit of their six-month work - the play "The Good Man from Sezuan" staged by the course teacher Yuri Lyubimov.
His success was stunning. In the last year of the thaw, in a small hall of the Shchukin school on Stary Arbat (later it was played on other stages in Moscow), the performance was watched by I. Ehrenburg, K. Simonov, A. Voznesensky, E. Yevtushenko, B. Okudzhava, B. Akhmadulina, V. Aksenov, Yu. Trifonov, A. Galich, O. Efremov, M. Plisetskaya, R. Shchedrin... It would seem that the next student production was perceived by the Moscow public not only as a theatrical breakthrough, but also as a kind of public manifesto , a banner that promised a change of time. It is very symptomatic that a year later, on April 23, 1964, Liubovskiy's "The Good Man from Sezuan" will open a new theater - the Taganka Theater, in which it is still being performed.
(Excerpt from an article on Brecht's work.)
Moscow is an amazing city - everyone there knows everything from rumors. Rumor has it that some interesting performance is being prepared. And since everyone is bored, and diplomats too, if something interesting, then there will be a scandal. As my late friend Erdman said, “if there is no scandal around the theater, then this is not a theater.” So in that sense he was a prophet to me. And so it was. Well, it's boring, and everyone wants to come, see, and they know that if it's interesting, then it will be closed. Therefore, the performance could not start for a long time, the audience burst into the hall. These diplomats sat on the floor in the aisle, a fireman ran in, a pale director, rector of the school, said that "he will not allow it, because the hall may collapse." In the hall, where there are two hundred and forty people, about four hundred sit - in general, there was a complete scandal. I stood with a lantern - the electrics there were very bad, and I myself stood and led the lantern. Brecht's portrait was highlighted in the right places. And I kept driving this lantern and shouting:
For God's sake, let the performance continue, what are you doing, because the performance will be closed, no one will see it! Why are you stomping, don't you understand where you live, you idiots!
Still, I calmed them down. But, of course, everything was recorded and reported. Well, they closed after that.
An excerpt from the book by Yuri Lyubimov "Stories of an old talker"
"The Good Man from Szechuan" Bertolt Brecht (German: Der gute Mensch von Sezuan) 1940
Brief summary of the play (for those who do not know what it is at all)))
The main city of the province of Sichuan, which summarizes all the places on the globe and any time in which a person exploits a person - this is the place and time of the play.
Prologue. For two thousand years now, the cry has not stopped: it cannot go on like this! No one in this world is able to be kind! And the worried gods decided: the world can remain as it is if there are enough people capable of living a life worthy of a person. And to test this, the three most prominent gods descend to earth. Perhaps the water carrier Wang, who was the first to meet them and treat them with water (by the way, he is the only one in Sichuan who knows that they are gods), is a worthy person? But his mug, the gods noticed, had a double bottom. A good water carrier is a scammer! The simplest test of the first virtue - hospitality - upsets them: in none of the rich houses: neither at Mr. Fo's, nor at Mr. Chen's, nor at the widow Su's - Wang can find accommodation for them. There is only one thing left: to turn to the prostitute Shen De, after all, she cannot refuse anyone. And the gods spend the night with the only kind person, and in the morning, saying goodbye, they leave Shen De an order to remain as kind, as well as a good payment for the night: after all, how to be kind when everything is so expensive!
I. The gods left Shen De a thousand silver dollars, and with them she bought herself a small tobacco shop. But how many people in need of help are close to those who are lucky: the former owner of the shop and the former owners of Shen De - husband and wife, her lame brother and pregnant daughter-in-law, nephew and niece, old grandfather and boy - and everyone needs a roof over their heads and food. “Salvation is a small boat / Immediately goes to the bottom. / After all, there are too many drowning / Greedily grabbed the sides.
And here the carpenter demands a hundred silver dollars, which the former mistress did not pay him for the shelves, and the landlady needs recommendations and a guarantee for the not very respectable Shen De. “My cousin will vouch for me,” she says. “And he will pay for the shelves.”
II. And the next morning, Shoi Da, Shen De's cousin, appears in the tobacco shop. Resolutely chasing away unlucky relatives, skillfully forcing the carpenter to take only twenty silver dollars, Prudently making friends with the policeman, he settles the affairs of his too-kind cousin.
III. And in the evening in the city park, Shen De meets an unemployed pilot Song. A pilot without a plane, a mail pilot without mail. What should he do in the world, even if he read all the books about flying in a Beijing school, even if he knows how to land an airplane on the ground, as if it were his own ass? He is like a crane with a broken wing, and there is nothing for him to do on earth. The rope is at the ready, and there are as many trees in the park as you like. But Shen De does not let him hang himself. To live without hope is to do evil. Hopeless is the song of a water carrier selling water in the rain: “Thunder rumbles and it rains, / Well, I sell water, / But water is not for sale / And it is not drunk in any. / I shout: “Buy water!” / But no one buys. / In my pocket for this water / Nothing gets in! / Buy some water, dogs!”
Yi Shen De buys a mug of water for her beloved Yang Song.
Vladimir Vysotsky and Zinaida Slavina in the play "The Good Man from Sezuan". 1978
IV. Returning after a night spent with his beloved, Shen De sees the morning city for the first time, cheerful and giving fun. People are kind today. The old carpet merchants from the shop across the street lend dear Shen De two hundred silver dollars, enough to pay off the landlady for six months. Nothing is difficult for a person who loves and hopes. And when Song's mother, Ms. Yang, tells that for a huge amount of five hundred silver dollars, her son was promised a place, she happily gives her the money received from the old people. But where to get another three hundred? There is only one way out - to turn to Shoi Da. Yes, he is too cruel and cunning. But a pilot must fly!
Sideshows. Shen De enters, holding the mask and costume of Shoi Da, and sings “The Song of the Helplessness of Gods and Good People”: “The good people in our country / They cannot remain kind. / To get a spoon to a cup, / You need cruelty. / The good ones are helpless, and the gods are powerless. / Why don't the gods say there, on the ether, / What time to give all kind and good / The opportunity to live in a good, kind world?
V. Clever and prudent Shoy Da, whose eyes are not blinded by love, sees deceit. Yang Sun is not afraid of cruelty and meanness: let the place promised to him be someone else's, and the pilot who will be fired from him has a large family, let Shen De part with the shop, except for which she has nothing, and the old people will lose their two hundred dollars and lose their housing , just to get your way. Such a one cannot be trusted, and Shoy Da seeks support in a rich barber who is ready to marry Shen De. But the mind is powerless where love is at work, and Shen De leaves with Sun: “I want to leave with the one I love, / I don’t want to think about whether it’s good. / I don't want to know if he loves me. / I want to leave with the one I love.”
VI. A small cheap restaurant in the suburbs is preparing for the wedding of Yang Sun and Shen De. Bride in wedding dress, groom in tuxedo. But the ceremony still does not start, and the bonza looks at his watch - the groom and his mother are waiting for Shoi Da, who should bring three hundred silver dollars. Yang Song sings "Song of Saint Never's Day": "On this day, evil is taken by the throat, / On this day, all the poor are lucky, / Both the master and the laborer / Walk together to the tavern / On Saint Never's day / The skinny one drinks at the fat one at a party . / We can no longer wait. / That's why they should give us, / People of hard work, / Saint Never Day, / Saint Never Day, / Day when we will rest.
“He will never come again,” Ms. Yang says. Three are sitting and two of them are looking at the door.
VII. Shen De's meager possessions are on a cart near the tobacco shop - the shop had to be sold in order to repay the debt to the old people. The barber Shu Fu is ready to help: he will give his barracks for the poor, whom Shen De helps (you can’t keep goods there anyway - it’s too damp), and write out a check. And Shen De is happy: she felt in herself a future son - a pilot, "a new conqueror / Inaccessible mountains and unknown regions!" But how to protect him from the cruelty of this world? She sees the carpenter's little son, who is looking for food in the garbage can, and swears that she will not rest until she saves her son, at least him alone. It's time to be your cousin again.
Mr. Shoi Da announces to the audience that his cousin will not leave them without help in the future, but from now on, the distribution of food without reciprocal services stops, and in the houses of Mr. Shu Fu there will be one who agrees to work for Shen De.
VIII. The tobacco factory that Shoi Da set up in the barracks is staffed by men, women and children. The overseer - and cruel - here is Yang Sun: he is not at all sad about the change of fate and shows that he is ready for anything for the interests of the company. But where is Shen De? Where is the good man? Where is the one who many months ago on a rainy day in a moment of joy bought a mug of water from a water carrier? Where is she and her unborn child that she told the water carrier about? And Sun would also like to know this: if his ex-fiancee was pregnant, then he, as the father of the child, can apply for the position of the owner. And here, by the way, in the knot of her dress. Has not the cruel cousin killed the unfortunate woman? The police come to the house. Mr. Shoi Da is facing trial.
X. In the courtroom, Shen De's friends (Wang the water carrier, old couple, grandfather and niece) and Shoi Da's partners (Mr. Shu Fu and the landlady) are waiting for the hearing to begin. At the sight of the judges entering the hall, Shoi Da faints - these are the gods. The gods are by no means omniscient: under the mask and costume of Shoi Da, they do not recognize Shen De. And only when, unable to withstand the accusations of the good and the intercession of the evil, Shoi Da takes off his mask and tears off his clothes, the gods see with horror that their mission has failed: their good man and the evil and callous Shoi Da are one person. It is not possible in this world to be kind to others and at the same time to yourself, you cannot save others and not destroy yourself, you cannot make everyone happy and yourself with everyone together! But the gods have no time to understand such complexities. Is it possible to refuse the commandments? No never! Recognize that the world must be changed? How? By whom? No, everything is okay. And they reassure people: “Shen De did not die, she was only hidden. There is a good man among you." And to Shen De’s desperate cry: “But I need a cousin,” they hastily answer: “But not too often!” And while Shen De stretches out his hands to them in despair, they, smiling and nodding, disappear above.
Epilogue. The final monologue of the actor in front of the public: “Oh, my venerable public! The end is unimportant. This I know. / In our hands, the most beautiful fairy tale suddenly received a bitter denouement. / The curtain is lowered, and we stand in embarrassment - we have not found the issues of resolution. / So what's the deal? We are not looking for benefits, / So, there must be some right way out? / You can’t imagine for money - what! Another hero? What if the world is different? / Maybe other gods are needed here? Or no gods at all? I am silent in anxiety. / So help us! Correct the trouble - and direct your thought and mind here. / Try to find good for good - good ways. / Bad ending - discarded in advance. / He must, must, must be good!”
T. A. Voznesenskaya retold.
FROM THE HISTORY OF THE PERFORMANCE
Premiere: April 23, 1964
A play-parable in 2 acts
director Yuri Lyubimov
From the "Kind Man ..." everything was wrong
Tales of the old trepachWhen the students sang "Sheep Song":
Sheep march in a row
The drums are beating
and the second zong especially:
The authorities are on their way...
There is a body on the road.
"Eh! Yes, this is the people!”
I edited these two zongs, they are different for Brecht. The audience began to stamp their feet and yell: “Repeat! Repeat! Repeat!" - and so for about five minutes, I thought the school would fall apart.
I frightened everyone, and I was the first to frighten Yuzovsky - he was one of the translators of the "Kind Man ...". At one time, he was worked out strongly - like a cosmopolitan: he was expelled from work ... And he spoke about this very figuratively: “The telephone died first,” - no one called.
And then he was so frightened that he pressed me into a corner, all pale, shaking: “You don’t understand anything, you are a crazy person, you know what they will do to you - you can’t even imagine! If you do not remove these zongs, then at least remove my name from the poster so that it is not visible that this is my translation! ... ”It made a very strong impression on me: a man older than me, very respected - and such fear. Shostakovich was just as frightened by the authorities - he was mortally afraid of them.
And Zahava was just extremely upset. He was afraid that this was anti-Soviet, that the school would now be closed. And he did not like it ... Although it is strange. After all, before that, I showed the pulpit a passage for forty minutes, and the pulpit clapped, which happens not so often. So they felt something. But when I showed everything, the reaction was - to close the performance.
Then the studies began inside the school and it was decided: “to close the performance as anti-people, formalistic” - signed by Zakhava. But, thank God, a good review appeared in The Week - and I was waiting for it to come out. Zakhava called the newspaper and said that the school did not accept this performance and that the review should be removed. But he called late, the printing was already going on. And at this time, a long study session began, I was called.
But they warned me that the printing was already underway, and they said:
Can you take the time?
I speak:
How can I pull?
Well, as long as they print. Take a look at the whole thing there.
I think Natella Lordkipanidze worked there. Then there was a break to smoke, and they brought me a hot issue of the newspaper. And when the meeting began, I began to read. They pulled me up: “You are being worked on, and you are reading something.”
Excuse me, - and let the “Week” go through the hands of those working on it. Then they started talking again:
Now you are reading, you need to study, not read.
In short, the newspaper came to Zahava, in a circle. He says:
What are you reading there? What's there? And someone says:
Yes, here they praise him, they say that it is interesting, wonderful. It turns out that we are not right in the elaboration ...
It was the room where the party bureau gathered at the school, some kind of class. There were about fifteen or twenty people present. But they, the poor, came because they could not be refused. Even someone from the theater was. The highest ranks were there: Tolchanov, and Zakhava, and Cecilia (Mansurova). Zakhava was against, Tolchanov supported Zakhava:
We went through it.
And I said:
That's it! You passed by, and therefore stuck in the swamp of your realism.
Yes, this is not realism, but simply a monkey's work.
After all, it turned out that the performance was shown to the public, as is customary, and Moscow is Moscow - where they learned it is not clear, but, as always happens, you can’t keep it. They broke the doors, sat on the floor. Twice as many people crowded into this small hall at the Shchukin school than there were places, and they were afraid that the school would collapse.
I remember the first time I was amazed when they called us all together - there was also Ruben Nikolayevich - to close Sovremennik. And all the "Naked King" sorted out: who is the naked king, and who is the prime minister - this was under Khrushchev. And before that they figured out that they closed the meeting, because they could not understand - if Khrushchev is the naked king, then who is the prime minister? So Brezhnev? Associative nonsense brought them to the point that they were frightened and covered up this meeting, the judgment seat of Sovremennik. But they wanted to close the theater with our hands so that we would condemn.
And I had the same thing - the first study was at the department. My colleagues didn't want to release "Kind Man..." and didn't want to count it to the students as a graduation performance. And only then did the favorable press appear, and the workers of the Stankolit and Borets factories, the intelligentsia, scientists, and musicians were invited to the performance - and they supported me very much. They were counting on strangling me with the hands of the workers, but they liked “Kind Man ...”, there were a lot of song-zongs, the guys performed them very well, the workers clapped and congratulated those who wanted to close the performance, they said: “Thank you, a very good performance!” - and they somehow faded. And at this time, a good article by Konstantin Simonov appeared in Pravda.
Here. Well, I fought back a lot. So who has what fate. And my fate is this: all the time I fought back.
And yet, I believe that at that time Brecht was not truly completed, because the students did not realize, that is, they simply did as I said. After all, this performance was driven by me with a crutch, because my ligaments were torn. And then, there were gangsters on my course, literally, who wrote denunciations against me - to tell the truth - that I did not teach them according to the Stanislavsky system. Because I beat the rhythm with a crutch - I tore my ligaments and walked with it.
They built a new Arbat. I was pushed by a dump truck, and I rolled into a pothole and tore the ligaments in my leg. And so I walked on crutches to rehearse. And every time I thought: “Come on, they ... I’ll spit, and I won’t go to this filthy School anymore!” Here's the truth. This is the truth. The rest is heavily embellished.
Before that, as a teacher, I staged small excerpts with different students. With Andrei Mironov, I staged "Schweik" - Lukash the Lieutenant, where he is drunk, he and Schweik have a debate. Even then I had a theory: it is necessary to make an excerpt for a student - for fifteen minutes - so that he can show himself, so that he can be hired. Therefore, it should be fun and interesting.
And this was the legend of the school - he was accepted into all theaters with this passage, except for Vakhtangov. I was even surprised, I say to Ruben Nikolaevich:
Why, Ruben Nikolayevich, did you not accept him? - but he somehow answered evasively.
Just as I did an excerpt from Chekhov with Volkov, with Okhlupin - now famous artists. Why do I remember, because here, too, they began to study me at the department, that Chekhov should not be staged like that. I staged a story about a doctor who comes to a patient - he sees only whims - and a child dies at his house.
I even did one act of Turbine Days there. I made two or three excerpts from Fear and Confusion. ..". After "Kind Man ..." I no longer taught.
I read the translation of Yuzovsky and Ionova in a magazine. And it seemed to me very interesting, difficult and strange, because I knew little about Brecht. I just didn't know much.
For Moscow, this was an unusual dramaturgy. Brecht was staged very little, and Moscow did not know him well. I had not seen the "Berliner Ensemble" and was completely free from influence. This means that he did it intuitively, freely, without the pressure of Brecht's traditions. I read, of course, about him, his works, all his instructions. But anyway, it's good that I didn't see a single performance. Later I saw "Arthur Ui", and "Galilee", and "Coriolanus", "Mother" in Brechtian style, then, "Purchase of Copper" - this is such a debatable performance. Very interesting. I even wanted to put it.
And because I didn't see anything of Brecht, I was clean and it turned out to be such a Russian version of Brecht. The performance was the way my intuition and my instinct told me. I was free, I did not imitate anyone. I think that after all, I brought them a new drama at the school: I mean Brecht. Because it seemed to me that the very construction of Brecht's dramaturgy, the principles of his theater - certainly a political theater - would somehow force students to see the world around them more and find themselves in it, and find their attitude to what they see. Because without it you can't play Brecht. Then, I still managed to break the canon in the sense that usually the diploma will be passed in the fourth year, and I convinced them to allow my students to pass the diploma in the third year. It was very difficult to do, I needed to convince the department. They allowed me to show a fragment for thirty or forty minutes, and if this fragment satisfies them, they will allow me to make a diploma.
And now they give it quite calmly even to my students, Sabinin already puts graduation performances one by one, and they are all professors, associate professors. And I was some kind of ordinary teacher, I received a ruble per hour. They took as drivers - I even thought of earning by teaching - three rubles per hour. And when I was offered Taganka after this “Good ...”, I said with a smile: But in general, you offer me three hundred rubles, and I jokingly earn six hundred rubles in cinema, and on television, and on radio, and you say this: here’s your salary will be three hundred rubles, ”I immediately came into conflict with superiors. I presented them with thirteen points for the restructuring of the old theater.
Moscow is an amazing city - everyone there knows everything from rumors. Rumor has it that some interesting performance is being prepared. And since everyone is bored, and diplomats too, if something interesting, then there will be a scandal. As my late friend Erdman said, “if there is no scandal around the theater, then this is not a theater.” So in that sense he was a prophet to me. And so it was. Well, it's boring, and everyone wants to come, see, and they know that if it's interesting, then it will be closed. Therefore, the performance could not start for a long time, the audience burst into the hall. These diplomats sat on the floor in the aisle, a fireman ran in, a pale director, the rector of the school, said that “he would not allow it, because the hall might collapse. In the hall, where there are two hundred and forty people, about four hundred sit - in general, there was a complete scandal. I stood with a lantern - the electrics there were very bad, and I myself stood and led the lantern. Brecht's portrait was highlighted in the right places. And I kept driving this lantern and shouting:
For God's sake, let the performance continue, what are you doing, because the performance will be closed, no one will see it! Why are you stomping, don't you understand where you live, you idiots!
Still, I calmed them down. But, of course, everything was recorded and reported. Well, they closed after that.
They saved the honor of the uniform. It ended badly, because the rector Zakhava came and began to correct the performance. The students did not listen to him. Then he called me. I had a conditional tree of planks there. He said:
With such a tree, the performance will not work. If you do not make the tree more realistic, I cannot allow it.
I speak:
I ask you to suggest me how to do it. He says:
Well, at least these strips, seal the trunk with cardboard. We don't have money, I understand. Draw the bark of the tree.
And can I let ants down the trunk?
He got mad and says:
Get out of my office.
So I fought. But the young students still listened to me. Well, some went to complain about me, about the department, that I was destroying the traditions of Russian realism, and so on and so forth.
It was interesting to me, because I set new tasks for myself all the time. It seemed to me that sometimes Brecht was too didactic and boring. Let's suppose that the scene of the factory is staged by me almost patomimically. There is a minimum of text. And with Brecht, it's a huge text scene. I re-edited the play a little, cut it down a lot. I made one zong on the text of Tsvetaeva, her love poems:
Yesterday I looked into your eyes
Equalized with the Chinese power,
At once, both hands unclenched,
Life fell like a rusty penny...
And the rest were all Brechtian, although I took several other songs, not for this play.
There were almost no scenery, they later remained the same, I took them from the school to the theater when Taganka was formed. There were two tables at which students studied - from the audience - there was no money, we made the scenery ourselves: I, along with the students.
But there was still a portrait of Brecht on the right - the artist Boris Blank painted very well. And he himself is very similar to Brecht - just like they are twins with Brecht. Then, when the portrait became old, he tried several times to repaint it, but all the time it turned out badly. And we kept this portrait all the time: it was sewn up, darned, tinted. And so he lived all 30 years. All the new ones that Blank tried to make did not work out - fate.
I studied a lot of plasticity, rhythm, and it seemed to the students that this was to the detriment of Stanislavsky's psychological school. Unfortunately, Stanislavsky's system in school curricula was very narrow, he himself was much broader, and reducing the system to only a psychological school greatly impoverishes the craft, lowers the level of skill.
Discovering Brecht's dramaturgy, I also looked for new methods of working with students - I staged a graduation performance in my third year so that they could meet with the audience and play for a whole year. And they actually spent the whole year learning how to talk to the public. Because Brecht without a dialogue with the viewer, in my opinion, is not possible. This, in general, helped in many ways the development of the entire theater, because at that time these were new methods for the school and for students.
A new form of plasticity, the ability to conduct a dialogue with the audience, the ability to go out to the viewer ... The complete absence of the fourth wall. But there's nothing particularly new here. Now everyone understands the famous Brechtian effect of alienation in their own way. Whole volumes have been written about him. When you are, as it were, from the outside ... Out of character.
In Diderot's Paradox of the Actor, in a sense, the same idea, but only in Brecht it is still equipped with a very strongly political coloring, the position of the artist in society. The “paradox about the actor” boils down to a dual, or something, stay, dual sensations of the actor, his duality on stage. And Brecht still has a moment when the position of an actor outside the image, as a citizen, his attitude to reality, to the world, is very important to him. And he finds it possible that the actor at this time, as it were, leaves the character and leaves it aside.
Lord, as soon as you start to remember, a whole chain of associations immediately follows. Boris Vasilyich Shchukin, my teacher, died with the book "The Paradox of the Actor". When his son came to him in the morning, he lay dead with Diderot's open book. In connection with this, I also remembered a book that I read as a young man: "The Actress" - by the Goncourt brothers. There is a very good observation there: when she stands in front of a deceased loved one, a person she loves, she experiences deep grief, and at the same time she catches herself on a terrible thought: “Remember, this is how such things should be played on stage.” This is a very interesting observation. I started studying to be an actor and then I often caught myself doing the same.
Working with students, I always showed a lot, I always looked for expressiveness in mise-en-scene. And he developed exactly the drawing, both psychological and external. I followed the expressiveness of the body very much. And all the time he taught them not to be afraid to go from the outer to the inner. And often the right mise-en-scene then gave them a true inner life. Although, of course, they had a tendency to do the opposite: to go from the inside to the outside? This is the main commandment of the school: to feel, to feel the life of the human spirit inside. But I also believe that the main thing is the life of the human spirit, only it is necessary to find a theatrical form so that this life of the human spirit can freely manifest itself and have an impeccable form of expression. Otherwise, it turns the actor into an amateur. He cannot express his feelings, he does not have enough means: no diction, no voice, no plasticity, no sense of being in space. I think that even now an actor is taught very poorly to understand the director's intention. All the main conflicts between the actor and the director stem from the fact that the actor has little interest in the whole idea. But the director is also obliged to make a general explication of his idea. And we know the brilliant explications of Meyerhold, Stanislavsky, Vakhtangov.
Maybe I am reaching a paradox, but I believe that any famous performance in the history of the theater can be very accurately described how it is made, how it is decided: lighting, scenography, plasticity. I can tell you some performances that made a strong impression on me. I remember all the mise-en-scenes, I remember the interpretation of the roles, the plasticity of the same Olivier in Othello. Just like we all remember Chaplin's plasticity, his cane, bowler hat, gait.
There were Chaplin competitions, where Chaplin himself took eighth place.
I mean, I love this theatre. And that's why I reach, perhaps, to the limit when I say that I don't see much difference in the work of a choreographer and in the work of a director. Only a good choreographer is listened to, and dramatic artists have endless discussions with the director. This is, is it
fashionable, I don't understand. They unquestioningly give themselves up in television, on radio, in cinema. But that's where they can finally take their souls, argue, discuss, talk all the time about collective creativity and so on - this is in the theater. So they take revenge. It's like in the wonderful film "Orchestra Rehearsal" by Fellini, all the time there is a struggle between the conductor and the orchestra. The orchestra is constantly provoking the conductor, testing his strength, and the conductor is looking for and trying to put the orchestra in its place, testing the level of the orchestra. This is such a mutual examination of each other. This is what always happens when an actor and director meet - this is what happens, the game. But up to a certain limit. Because someone has to take the conductor's baton and start conducting.
"Good man ..." had a huge resonance. And they all pulled. Poets and writers came. We managed to play “The Good Man…”, despite the prohibition of the department, and in the House of Cinema, in the House of Writers, with physicists in Dubna. They played five times at the Vakhtangov Theatre. We were allowed because the performance was such a success, besides my classmate and old friend from school; Even at the Second Moscow Art Theater, Isai Spektor was the commercial director of the theater, a practical person, and the Vakhtangov Theater was on tour at that time. And they broke down the doors. And they sent me to play an away performance, although there was another performer in it. And I did not see how these performances went on the Vakhtangov stage. I came to the last, in my opinion. And only then they told me that Mikoyan was there and said the phrase: “Oh! This is not an educational performance, it is not a student performance. It will be a theatre, and a very peculiar one.” So you see, the member of the Politburo figured it out.
For the first time in my life, I very precisely formulated my thirteen points to the Department of Culture, what I need in order to create a theater. I understood that the old theater would grind me down, turn me into minced meat - there would be nothing left. I'll wallow in the squabbles of the old troupe. I understood that everything had to be done all over again, starting from scratch. And so I gave them these points, And they thought for a long time whether to approve me or not to approve.
I brought students from this course with me ... Even two scammers who wrote about me that I was destroying the Stanislavsky system. And not because I'm so noble. I just didn't want to bring in two artists again and waste time. The students were very different. It was not an idyll that a teacher and good students rehearse in rapture.
How did I put "Good man ..."? - I literally hammered rhythm with a crutch, because I tore the ligaments in my leg, and could not run to show, and I worked with a crutch. It was very difficult to get an understanding of the form. The students felt that something was wrong, that is, they were not taught the way I worked with them.
Having received permission to take the "Kind Man ..." and ten people from the course to the theater, I realized what I needed. I removed all the old repertoire, leaving only Priestley one play, because she more or less made collections, although I did not like the performance.
We could not play “Kind Man ...” every day, although he did a full house. And so I immediately launched two works - first the unsuccessful "Hero of Our Time", then I realized that he was not helping me - and immediately launched "Anti-Worlds" and "Ten Days ...".
At that time I was fond of Andrei Voznesensky, his poems, and began to make Anti-Worlds as a poetic performance, which then went on for a very long time. And then I was pleased with the audience of Moscow. Firstly, many people told me that a spectator would not come to Taganka - he did. He came to the "Good ...", he came to the "Fallen. ..", he came to "Ten days ...", he came to "Antimira". And so I bought time. The Soviet authorities always give a year at least ... once they appointed, they left alone for a year. They just had such rhythms of life that let them work for a couple of years, and then we'll see. And I somehow turned around very quickly. In a year I passed the thresholds and received a repertoire: “Good ...”, “Ten days ...”, “Anti-worlds”, after a long struggle “Fallen. ..” remained in the repertoire - already four performances, And on
I could rely on them. True, I did not think that they would start working on me so quickly. Already "Ten days ..." the authorities accepted so ... although the revolution, the fifth or tenth, but with displeasure. But they were nevertheless discarded by success - like a revolutionary theme and such a success. Well, the press… Pravda scolded, but, in general, approved. And only then they began, scolding the “Master”, saying: “How could the person who staged “Ten Days ...” - and so it was with me all the time - how could this person who staged this and that, stage this mess?" - "House ...", suppose, or Mayakovsky and so on.
R. S. You see, my son, those rulers still gave dad a year to promote, and Tsar Boris changes his prime ministers four times in one year!
Without date.
When everything was ready and it was possible to appoint a premiere, it somehow coincided that Lenin's birthday, and the next one - Shakespeare's birthday, our day ... And I began to proclaim that only thanks to the 20th Congress such a theater could appear. And before the XX Congress - no. And when they began to forget the 20th Congress, I found myself without a lifeline and began to sink.
But he didn't drown completely. And I agree with how Peter Leonidovich Kapitsa explained it: “I was very worried about your fate, Yuri Petrovich, until I realized that you were Kuzkin. And when I realized that you are still Kuzkin to some extent, I stopped worrying.
They had a golden wedding, and there was such a very elitist audience, scientists, academics, and everyone said something so solemn - a golden wedding, Anna Alekseevna sat with Pyotr Leonidovich, and I brought a golden poster "The Master and Margarita" - in the same place A poster was made by chapters, and I gave a comment about Pyotr Leonidovich for each chapter.
I also needed to make some kind of speech, and I said that it was not surprising that I was Kuzkin, but that Pyotr Leonidovich had to be Kuzkin in this country in order to survive, it was amazing. Anna Alekseevna was very offended:
How can you, Yuri Petrovich, call Pyotr Leonidovich Kuzkin?
And suddenly Pyotr Leonidovich got up and said:
Be quiet, rat (He always called her that.) Yes, Yuri Petrovich, you are right, I am also Kuzkin.
P. S. Kuzkin is the hero of a wonderful story by B. Mozhaev, something like a seamstress in the Russian style.
Bertolt Brecht
Good man from Sichuan
Parabolic play
In collaboration with R. Berlau and M. Steffin
Translation by E. Ionova and Y. Yuzovsky
Poems translated by Boris Slutsky
CHARACTERS
Van is a water carrier.
Three gods.
Yang Song is an unemployed pilot.
Ms. Yang is his mother.
Widow Shin.
Family of eight.
Carpenter Ling To.
Mi Ju's landlady.
Police officer.
Carpet merchant.
His wife.
Old prostitute.
Barber Shu Fu.
Waiter.
Unemployed.
Passers-by in the prologue.
Location: the semi-Europeanized capital of Sichuan.
Sichuan province, which summarized all the places on the globe where
Man exploits man, now he does not belong to such places.
A street in the main city of Sichuan. Evening. The water carrier Wang is introduced to the public.
Van. I am a local water carrier - I sell water in the capital of Sichuan. Hard craft! If there is not enough water, you have to go far for it. And if there is a lot of it, earnings are small. In general, there is great poverty in our province. Everyone says that if anyone else is able to help us, it's the gods. And now imagine my joy when a cattle dealer I know - he travels a lot - told me that several of our most prominent gods are already on their way and can be expected in Sichuan any hour. Heaven is said to be greatly disturbed by the multitude of complaints that come to it. This is the third day I have been waiting here at the city gates, especially in the evening, in order to be the first to greet guests. I won't be able to do it later. They will be surrounded by high-ranking gentlemen, then try to get through to them. How would you know them? They probably won't show up together. Most likely one at a time, so as not to draw too much attention to yourself. These don't look like gods, they're coming home from work. (Looks attentively at the workers passing by.) Their shoulders are bent from the weights they carry. And this one? What kind of god is he - fingers in ink. At most an employee of a cement plant. Even those two gentlemen...
Two men pass by.
And those, in my opinion, are not gods. They have a cruel expression on their faces, like people who are used to beating, and the gods do not need this. And there are three! As if it's something else. Well-fed, not the slightest sign of any occupation, shoes in the dust, which means they came from afar. They are they! O wise ones, have me! (Falls down.)
The first god (joyfully). Are we waiting here?
Van (gives them a drink). A long time ago. But only I knew about your arrival.
First god. We need an overnight stay. Do you know where we can settle down?
Van. Where? Everywhere! The whole city is at your disposal, O wise ones! Where would you like?
The gods look at each other meaningfully.
First god. At least in the nearest house, my son! Let's try in the nearest time!
Van. It only embarrasses me that I will incur the wrath of those in power if I give special preference to one of them.
First god. That is why we order you: start with the nearest!
Van. Mr. Fo lives there! Wait a minute. (Running up to the house and knocking on the door.)
The door opens, but Van is seen to be refused.
(Returns timidly.) What a failure! Mr. Fo, unfortunately, is not at home, and the servants do not dare to do anything without his order, the owner is very strict! Well, he will be furious when he finds out who was not accepted in his house, right?
Gods (smiling). Undoubtedly.
Van. One more minute! The house next door belongs to Su's widow. She will be overjoyed. (Runs towards the house, but apparently gets rejected again.) I'll do better opposite. The widow says that she has only one small room, and that one is not in order. Now I will turn to Mr. Chen.
Second god. A small room is enough for us. Say we'll take it.
Van. Even if it's not tidy, even if it's full of spiders?
Second god. Trivia! Where there are spiders, there are few flies.
The third god (friendly, Vanu). Go to Mr. Chen or somewhere else, my son, spiders, I confess, I do not like it.
Van again knocks on a door, and they let him in.
Van (returning to the gods). Mr. Chen is in despair, his house is full of relatives, and he does not dare to appear before your eyes, wise ones. Between us, I think there are bad people among them, and he does not want you to see them. He fears your wrath. That's the whole point.
Third God. Are we that scary?
Van. Only for bad people, right? It is known that the inhabitants of the province of Kwan have been suffering from floods for decades - God's punishment!
Second god. Here's how? Why?
Van. Yes, because they are all atheists.
Second god. Nonsense! Just because they didn't fix the dam.
First god. Shh! (Vanu). Do you still hope, my son?
Van. How can you even ask such a thing? It is worth passing one more house, and I will find accommodation for you. Everyone licks his fingers in anticipation that he will receive you. Unfortunate coincidence, you know? I'm running! (Walks away slowly and stops hesitantly in the middle of the street.)
Second god. What did I say?
Third God. Still, I think it's just a coincidence.
Second god. Chance in Shun, Chance in Kwan and Chance in Sichuan. There is no more fear of God on earth - this is the truth that you are afraid to face. Admit that our mission failed!
First god. We may yet come across a kind person. Any minute. We must not retreat immediately.
Third God. The decree said: the world can remain as it is if there are enough people worthy of the title of man. The water carrier himself is such a person, unless I am deceived. (Goes up to Wang, who is still scurrying in hesitation.)
Second god. He is being deceived. When the water carrier gave us a drink from his mug, I noticed something. Here is the mug. (Shows it to the first god.)
First god. Double bottom.
Second god. Scammer!
First god. Okay, he's out. Well, what is it if one is rotten? We will meet those who are able to live a decent human life. We must find! For two millennia the cry has not stopped, it cannot go on like this! No one in this world is able to be kind! We must finally point to people who can follow our commandments.
"Kind Man from Sichuan"(translation option: "The Good Man of Sezuan", German Der gute Mensch von Sezuan) is a parabolic play by Bertolt Brecht, completed in 1941 in Finland, one of the most striking embodiments of his theory of epic theater.
History of creation
The idea for the play, originally called "The Goods of Love" ("Die Ware Liebe"), dates back to 1930; the sketch, to which Brecht returned in early 1939 in Denmark, contained five scenes. In May of the same year, already in the Swedish Liding, the first version of the play was completed; however, two months later, its radical processing began. On June 11, 1940, Brecht wrote in his diary: "For the umpteenth time, together with Greta, word by word, I am revising the text of The Good Man from Sichuan" - only in April 1941, already in Finland, he stated that the play finished . Initially conceived as a domestic drama, the play eventually took the form of a dramatic legend.
The first production of The Good Man from Sichuan was staged by Leonhard Stäckel in Zurich and premiered on February 4, 1943. In the homeland of the playwright, in Germany, the play was first staged in 1952 by Harry Drop Letter in Frankfurt am Main.
In Russian, “The Good Man from Sichuan” was first published in 1957 in the journal “Foreign Literature” translated by E. Ionova and Y. Yuzovsky, the poems were translated by Boris Slutsky.
Characters
Van - water carrier
three gods
Shen Te
Shui Ta
Yang Sun - unemployed pilot
Ms Yang is his mother
Widow Shin
family of eight
Carpenter Ling To
Homeowner Mi Ju
Police officer
carpet merchant
His wife
Old prostitute
Barber Shu Fu
Bonze
Waiter
Unemployed
Passers-by in the prologue
Plot
The gods who have descended to earth are unsuccessfully looking for a kind person. In the main city of Sichuan province, with the help of Wang's water carrier, they try to find accommodation for the night, but they are refused everywhere - only the prostitute Shen Te agrees to give them shelter.
To make it easier for the girl to remain kind, the gods, leaving Shen Te's house, give her some money - with this money she buys a small tobacco shop.
But people unceremoniously take advantage of Shen Te's kindness: the more good she does, the more trouble she brings on herself. Things are going very badly - in order to save her shop from ruin, Shen Te, who cannot say "no", dresses in men's clothes and introduces herself as her cousin - Mr. Shui Ta, tough and unsentimental. He is not kind, he refuses to everyone who turns to him for help, but, unlike Shen Te, things are going well with the "brother".
Forced callousness burdens Shen Te - having corrected things, she "returns", and gets acquainted with the unemployed pilot Yang Sun, who is ready to hang himself out of desperation. Shen Te saves a pilot from a noose and falls in love with him; Inspired by love, she, as before, refuses to help anyone. However, Yang Sun uses her kindness as a weakness. He needs five hundred silver dollars to get a pilot's job in Beijing, that kind of money can't even be earned from selling a shop, and Shen Te, in order to accumulate the required amount, turns into the hard-hearted Shui Ta again. Yang Sun, in a conversation with his “brother,” speaks contemptuously about Shen Te, whom, as it turns out, he does not intend to take with him to Beijing, and Shui Ta refuses to sell the shop, as required by the pilot.
Disappointed in her beloved, Shen Te decides to marry a wealthy citizen Shu Fu, who is ready to do charity work for her sake, but, having taken off Shui Ta's costume, she loses the ability to refuse, and Yang Sun easily convinces the girl to become his wife.
However, just before the wedding, Yang Sun learns that Shen Te cannot sell the shop: it is partially mortgaged for $ 200, long given to the pilot. Yang Sun counts on Shui Ta's help, sends for him, and in anticipation of his "brother" postpones the marriage. Shui Ta does not come, and the guests invited to the wedding, having drunk all the wine, disperse.
Shen Te, in order to pay off the debt, has to sell the shop that served her as a home - no husband, no shop, no shelter. And Shui Ta reappears: having accepted material assistance from Shu Fu, which Shen Te refused, he forces numerous freeloaders to work for Shen Te and eventually opens a small tobacco factory. In the end, Yang Sun also gets a job at this rapidly flourishing factory and, as an educated person, quickly makes a career.
Half a year passes, the absence of Shen Te disturbs both the neighbors and Mr. Shu Fu; Yang Sun tries to blackmail Shui Ta into taking over the factory, and failing to get his way, brings the police to Shui Ta's house. Upon discovering Shen Te's clothes in the house, the police officer accuses Shui Ta of killing her cousin. The gods will judge him. Shen Te reveals her secret to the gods, asks her to tell her how to live on, but the gods, pleased that they have found their good man, fly away on a pink cloud without giving an answer.
B. Brecht worked on the play-parabola about a kind person for a total of twelve years. The original idea dates back to 1930 - at that time the play was to be called "Commodity Love" ("Die Ware Liebe" - in German this combination is ambiguous, it can also be understood by ear as "True Love"). In 1939 in Denmark, Brecht returned to an old draft of five scenes. In May 1939, the first version was completed in Liding (Sweden). Two months later, in July, Brecht began to remake the first scene, followed by a radical revision of the text of the entire play. A year later, the playwright returned to her, hoping to complete the work in April 1940. But on June 11, he wrote in his diary: “For the umpteenth time, together with Greta, word for word, I am revising the text of The Good Man from Sichuan.” In August, Brecht begins to question the central spring of his drama: whether he has shown clearly enough "how easy it is for a girl to be kind, and how difficult it is for her to be evil." Six months later, the last verses were written, which were included in the text of the play: "Song of the Smoke", "Song of the Eighth Elephant", "Tercet of the Gods Flying Away on a Cloud". Yet Brecht did not consider the work completed. “You cannot be sure that a play is ready until you try it in the theater,” he remarked. Finally, in April 1941, Brecht, already in Finland, stated that the play was completed.
According to Brecht, he got the impetus to write the play after reading a newspaper article.
For the most part, Brecht retained the plot originally conceived, but objectified the water carrier's story, turning his explanations into a fabulous dramatic action. Thus, the play, originally conceived as an everyday drama, acquired the form of a dramatic legend, a fantastic parabolic play. Brecht dramatized the anecdotal incident in Sichuan, presenting it as if from the point of view of the water carrier Wang. For the correct perception of the parabola, the viewer must acquire this naive-poetic point of view.
The first production took place on February 4, 1943 in Zurich (Switzerland). The director is Leonhard Steckel, the artist is Theo Otto. Some time later, the play was staged by another Swiss theater in Basel, premiered on March 10, 1944. Director - Leonhard Steckel, artist - Eduard Gunzinger, composer - Frue. The role of Shen De was played by Friedl Wald. Only more than eight years later, the history of the German “Kind Man” began with a performance in Frankfurt am Main (premiered on November 16, 1952). The performance was staged by the director Harry Bukvitsa as a dramatic fairy tale, the artist is the same Theo Otto, who participated in the creation of the Zurich performance. Otto set up several high red poles on the stage, on which wicker square mats glided, they limited the various stages. Solveig Thomas played the role of Shen De with success, Otto Rouwel played Van, Arno Assmann played Jan Sun, and Ernswalter Mitulski played the barber. Theatrical criticism, noting the artistic integrity of the performance and the peculiar interpretation of a number of roles, in particular Wang the philosopher and the sinister comic barber, recognized the Frankfurt performance as one of the most significant theatrical events in the post-war years.
The most famous performances of other theaters in West Germany:
Wuppertal, 1955. Directed by Franz Reichert, art by Hanna Jordan. Cast: Shen De - Sigrid Marquard, Vana - Horst Tappert. The gods and the barber in this performance were wearing masks.
Schleswig, 1955 - a performance patronized, oddly enough, by the Evangelical Academy. Director - Horst Gnekov, artist - Rudolf Soyka. In the role of Shen De - Ilzelore Mene.
Hannover, 1955. Directed by Kurt Erhardt, art by Ernst Rufer. In the role of Shen De - Marilena von Bethmann. In the last performance, critics noted the well-known eclectic design (a combination of a conditional bamboo panorama with a naturalistic drainpipe where the water carrier Wang sleeps) and the non-Brechtian performance of Bethman, who was so naturally imbued with the gentle kindness of Shen De that she could not go over to the severity of her cousin.
An event in the theatrical life of Germany was the sensational production of "The Good Man" in the Munich Kammerspiele Theater, the premiere took place on June 30, 1955. The director of the play is Hans Schweikart (critic V. Kiyaulein wrote angrily in "Munichener Merkur" that Schweikart was so touched by what was happening on the stage, that sometimes he forgot to move the action further), the artists - Caspar Neher, whose design combined lyricism and naked convention (in the depths of the stage - the roofs of houses, over which stylized clouds floated - and a cloud carrying the gods, descending from the grate on open to the viewer thick ropes), and Lieselotte Erler (costumes). The role of Shen De was played by Ernie Wilhelmi, Yang Suna - Arno Assmann (who played the same role in Frankfurt), Yang Sun's mother - the famous actress Teresa Rize, one of the best performers of the role of Mother Courage, Wana - at that time already seventy-year-old Paul Bildt (it was one of the last and best roles of a major German actor who died in 1957). The production was advised by Brecht (see Abendzeitung report of April 3, 1955), who arrived in Munich with Helena Weigel. A controversy broke out in the press around the performance: Munchener Merkur condemned the "propaganda" nature of Brecht's dramaturgy and the production of "Kammerspiele", other newspapers refuted this biased point of view, noted the high poetic nature of the parabolic play, the penetrating play of Ernie Wilhelmy ("Frankfurter Allgemeine", 5 June) and the work of the director and artist (Bayerisches Yolksecho, 8 July).
The first production in the GDR was the performance of the Volkstheater in Rostock (April 1956), staged by Brecht's student Benno Besson in the ascetic design of Willy Schroeder, with Käthe Reichel as Shen De. Critics noted that as Shoi Da she was somewhat grotesque, reminiscent of Chaplin, but she played the girl with amazing cordiality (“Deutsche Kommentare”, Stuttgart, 1956, May 26). Her success was explained not only by the fact that she had gone through the Brechtian school of acting, but also by the deep lyricism of her performance (Nazionalzeitung, Basel, June 8). The Berlin Ensemble staged The Good Man after Brecht's death. The director is Benno Besson, the artist is Karl von Appen, with the participation of the same Kethe Reichel. In this performance (premiered on September 5, 1957), the social essence of the drama was emphasized - for example, in the picture of a tobacco factory, the entire stage was taken away by a high prison bar. The play in Leipzig (1957-1958, directed by Arthur Jopp, designed by Bernhard Schroeder, in the role of Shen De - Gisela Morgen) was designed in the style of a conventional theater and enjoyed considerable success. From 1956 to 1962 the play was staged in ten theaters in the GDR.
The Good Man also has a great stage history outside of Germany. Three years before the Frankfurt production, there was a performance staged by American students at the Kerneji College of Fine Arts in Pittsburgh (1949, translated by E. Bentley, directed by Lawrence Kappa). It was followed by student productions at the universities of Minnesota and Illinois. The New York performance at the Phoenix Theater (1957, artist - Theo Otto) with Uta Hagen in the title role gained great fame (according to the critic, she "caught the poster character of the role and only after the disappearance of the gods gave vent to feelings"). In the scenery of the same Theo Otto, the play was staged in London in 1956. Directed by George Devine. Shen De is played by Peggy Ashcroft. Brilliant - according to the unanimous assessment of progressive criticism - was the performance of Milan's Piccolo Teatro. Premiere in February 1958. The director is the famous George Strehler, the artist is Luciano Domiani. The lead actress is Valentina Fortunata, and Van is played by Moretti. In this performance, the stage was almost completely empty, only some hints of a house or a tree replaced the scenery, and the gods descending on a cloud were dressed in bright silk clothes, like theater generals, with long white beards (see G. Singer's review in " Frankfurter Allgemeine, February 28, 1958).
In France, The Good Man was first shown by the Hakameri Theater from Tel Aviv (Israel) in Hebrew (1957–1958), which toured Paris. Later, in 1960, the National People's Theater (TIP) staged the play in Paris. The premiere took place in December. Translated by Genevieve Cerro and Jeanne Stern.
Directed by André Steiger under the direction of Jean Vilar, art by André Ackar. Performers - Michel Nadal (Shen De) Maurice Garel (Yang Sun), Gilles Léger (Van), This performance became a milestone in the history of one of the best theaters in France. In the program released by the theatre, each scene was accompanied by a moral. For example, to scene VIII: "Why not rise above others if they bend their backs?" or to scene X, the last one: "If the world is not fair, the only thing that is fair is to change it." The press unanimously noted the significance of the play and performance. The critic of the newspaper Lettres francaises of December 1, 1960 wrote: “... Andre Steiger, with all possible care, revealed to the viewer the true meaning of the play and managed to find means of expression that were as close as possible to those that Brecht considered the best for performing his dramaturgy. Steiger did this with deep understanding, trying not to copy, not to imitate, not to mechanically apply ready-made recipes, but to find the very spirit of Brechtian aesthetics. Jean-Albert Cartier wrote in the Beaux-Arts of January 20, 1961: “André Ackar kept the sets and costumes in wonderful brown. His share in the success of the performance is great.
As one of the last vivid stage incarnations of The Good Man, one should mention the performance staged on the stage of the Institute for the Study of Theater Arts at New York University (premiere - March 10, 1963) under the direction of Gert Weimann, who was formerly an assistant to such masters of the German theater, like G. Gründgens and B. Barlog. Cast with success were: Shen De - Diana Bart and Natalie Ross, Vana - David Frank and Eric Tavares, Yang Suna - Bill Berger and Frank Savino.
In the countries of people's democracy (Budapest, Warsaw, Belgrade, Ljubljana), the play "The Good Man" was played by numerous theater groups.
The most significant of the Soviet productions of "The Good Man" was the performance of the Leningrad Academic Theater. Pushkin. Premiere - June 1962, Russian text by Y. Yuzovsky and E. Ionova, verses translated by E. Etkind. Director - R. Suslevich, artist - S. Yunovich. The role of Shen De was played by N. Mamaeva, who, according to the unanimous opinion of the reviewers, found an accurate, concise picture of her role and with great naturalness moved from the kind Shen De to the cruel Shoi Da. N. Pesochinskaya in the article “Two People from Sichuan” noted: “All the stage behavior of N. Mamaeva is based on the fact that the actress consistently poses question after question to the viewer, forcing them to think deeply about their solution ... The magnificent plasticity, the accurate and economical selection of stage performances are striking. funds. The details in Mamaeva's game (when we have before us the affectionate Shen De, and when the resolute and arrogant Shoi Da) nowhere obscure the typical, the main thing. The feeling of life's truth never betrays the artist ”(“ Leningradskaya Pravda ”, 1962, August 21). The director and actress found an interesting solution for performing songs. Artists G. Kolosov (Shu Fu), E. Karyakina (Mi Ju's landlady), V. Tarenkov (Wang), A. Volgin (Yang Sun), E. Medvedeva (Ms. Yang Sun), V. Kovel (widow Shin), V. Yantsat, K. Adashevsky, G. Solovyov (gods), Y. Svirin (carpenter Ling To),
The work of the director and artist was noted as an achievement of Soviet theatrical culture. “The play “The Good Man from Sichuan,” wrote R. Benyash, “has its own consistency and integrity. She was especially evident in the guise of the performance. S. Yunovich's talented scenery delights with its organic correspondence to the nature of the work and the strict nobility of the idea. There is nothing superfluous on the stage. Mats and simple unplaned boards. Economical, but mood-accurate color. A lonely bare tree, a fragment of a cloud against a muted background. Accurately calibrated symmetry, creating a sense of unbiased truth. And now a strangely uninhabited, unkind world appears on the scene, where a person who is eager to do good is forced to buy this right with the evil he has done. One of Brecht's most tragic paradoxes" (Izvestia, 1962, October 3).
In the Academic Theater of Russian Drama of the Latvian SSR. Jan Rainisa (Riga) The Good Man was staged by director P. Peterson in 1960. Noting a number of the performance's merits, critics pointed to its authors' desire for external effects that were contraindicated for Brecht. Songs were not interpreted in a Brechtian way: “... the performer of the role of the groom put into the song the feeling of a desperate, lost person. He clenched his fists, rolled his pupils, threw himself on the ground, his groans came from the very depths of his soul, he seemed to demand that the audience sympathize with him, because he failed to rob Shen De and her well-wishers. All this is a sharp divergence from Brecht ... ”(A. Latsis, B. Reich, Soviet Theater and Brecht’s Heritage. -“ Literature and Life ”, 1960, September 25).
In 1963, the play was staged in Moscow by the Theater School. B.V. Schukina. Director - Y. Lyubimov. The performance is a great success. It combined a thoughtful and respectful attitude to Brecht's stage principles with Vakhtangov's tradition of bright semi-improvisational spectacle. True, in some cases - for example, in the interpretation of the role of the barber Shu Fu, this spectacularity was reflected in external effects that were not correlated with the concept of the play as a whole.
Konstantin Simonov in the article “Inspiration of Youth” (“Pravda”, 1963, December 8) wrote: “... a young team of graduates of the theater school, under the guidance of Yuri Lyubimov, who staged this performance, created a performance high, poetic, talented in acting and superbly rhythmic, made in in this sense, in the best traditions of the Vakhtangovites.
