Guy Yedwab

Strangeness In Epic Theatre

Brecht, in his essays “The Modern Theatre Is An Epic Theatre” and “Alienation In Chinese

Acting” explores an alternative form of theater which he calls 'epic theatre' or theatre containing

alienation. However, within the latter essay is embodied a contradiction which needs exploration before

the product Brecht was aiming at can be understood. On the one hand, one passage reads that “the

artist's object is to appear strange and even surprising to the audience.” (92) On the other hand, another

passage reads that “the alienation effect does not in any way demand an unnatural way of acting.” (95).

The questions this raises are: Does Brecht favor a natural or an unnatural approach to acting? Does this

necessarily constitute a contradiction?

In Brecht's essay on “Alienation In Chinese Acting,” Brecht outlines how an actor should

approach Epic Theater. On page 92, the passage argues that “the artist's object is to appear strange and

even surprising to the audience. He achieves this by looking strangely at himself and at his work.” The

passage on 93 compares an alienated actor to the Chinese actor, who “often strikes the Western actor as

cold.” By using 'cold,' the word 'strange' repeatedly, Brecht seems to be implying that the alienation

effect appears very strange. His examples often contain the absurd. The passage in the essay “The

Modern Theater is the Epic Theater” cites the example of “the glutton [who] stuffs himself to death,”

(36), which is provocative “because hunger is the rule.” (36). By deliberately pursuing the opposite of

the cultural reality as it is known to be, the passage seems to play upon the absurdity and unreality of

the situation. An example of alienated acting he puts forward in “Alienation In Chinese Acting” is that

of the actor portraying a cloud. The passage states “he will occasionally look at the audience as if to

say, isn't it just like that?” (92). To have a self-aware cloud played by a human seems to be absurd, but

to the passage it seems to fit alienated theater exactly.

By the passage on 95, however, the text seems to have reversed positions. The second

paragraph on 95 reads “The alienation effect does not in any way demand an unnatural way of
stylization.” (95). The passage continues to say that “when the actor checks the truth of his

performance...he...can be corrected by a comparison with reality.” (95). In grounding the actor in

reality, the passage implies that it is reality and not alternate reality which the actor must always

respect, which agrees with his example of the actor representing the cloud, who “will occasionally look

at the audience as if to say, isn't it just like that?” (92). In the essay “The Modern Theater Is An Epic

Theater,” the chart on 37 includes an element which seems to indicate a realistic representation. The

chart calls for a “picture of the world” (37). This does not seem to be an unrealistic picture of the

world, or a picture of another world, but rather a removed observation of the world as it is. The passage

on 97 seems to indicate that alienated epic theater will have a more realistic view of the world than the

traditional theater. The passage attacks the old system, the bourgeois theater, saying, “The environment

is remarkably unimportant, it is a variable quantity and something remarkably inhuman.” (97). His

response is an epic theater, which would portray the opposite, theater which takes into account the

differences of people in history. The attack on the old system as being “remarkably inhuman” and his

call for a system which, we can imply, would strike him as being more human seems to indicate that

true humanity is what Brecht would aim for.

On the one hand, the passages indicate that Brecht wants a style of theater which is strange

and alienated from the audience. On the other hand, Brecht says in a very clear terms that he does not

want anything unnatural. Assuming that the contradiction cannot be resolved, the essay must lean more

towards one of the two sentiments. If one view is to be considered closer to the heart of the text, then it

would most likely be the passage's deliberate assertion that “the alienation effect does not in any way

demand an unnatural way of stylization.” (95). The evidence already examined does begin to add

weight to this claim, but as there is evidence on both sides, that evidence alone can't prove the case.

However, Brecht's attacks on the 'illusions' of current theater seem to show that the essay would take

the stance that alienation does not aim to be strange. In the passage where he praises Chinese actors, the

passage reads “He only needs a minimum of illusion.” (94). The passage, taken in conjunction with the
passage in “The Modern Theatre Is The Epic Theatre” which reads “Whatever is intended to produce

hypnosis, is likely to induce sordid intoxication, or creates fog, has got to be given up” (38) seems to

indicate that what Brecht is pursuing in his form of theater is a theater which presents the truth without

hiding it in strangeness, illusion, or hypnosis.

On the other hand, a more encompassing view of the text is to investigate whether these two

statements form a contradiction at all. Specifically, whether the language Brecht uses in the two

passages allows for an interpretation which is not contradictory. The passage on page 92 which argues

that “the artist's object is to appear strange and even surprising to the audience. He achieves this by

looking strangely at himself and at his work” can be read as endorsing an Epic Theater which is

unrealistic. The sentence's meaning, however, hangs around the term 'strange.' Merriam-Webster's

dictionary does define 'strange' as being 'not natural,' but it can also mean 'distant' or it can mean

'unaccustomed.' This is supported by the passage on the next page which states that Chinese acting

“often strikes the Western actor as cold.” Note that in both passages, the terms 'strange' and 'cold' are

put in reference to their observer: Western audiences as Western actors. In essence, Brecht's alienated

acting does not necessarily have to be unnatural, but it has to be different from the already established

pattern of acting. Therefore, Brecht is still able to write in the passage on 95 that the alienation effect

does not in any way demand an unnatural way of stylization” and in his argument on page 95 he can

still hold “when the actor checks the truth of his performance...he...can be corrected by a comparison

with reality.” (95). The 'strangeness' does not come from unreality, but rather, it is because the Western

actor “does all he can to bring his spectator into the closest proximity to the events and the characters

he has to portray” (93), whereas the Chinese theatre “rejects all representation of feelings.” (93).

Because it is different, it is 'strange' or 'cold.' And although it can have a “certain unreality, irrationality,

and lack of seriousness,” as the passage describing Mahagonny reads on page 36, he still notes that

“pleasure grows in proportion to the degree of unreality,” (36) and it is that pleasure which the passages

indicate that Brecht wants to slowly work away from.