SEEP Vol.2 No.2 June 1982

NEWSNOTES on

SoviET and EAsT EuROPEAN DRAMA and THEATRE Volume 2, Number 2 June, 1982

EDITOR'S NOTE

Dear readers, it appears that we are slowly coming of age. Our area of interest is increasing its activities and is extending its sphere of influence as can be seen from the items of considerable importance to our field in this issue. Also significant is the fact that we are now receiving more material from you than we can possible publish without turning NEWSNOTES into a journal. Therefore, please be patient if some of your items do not appear in this issue. I shall try to place them in the October issue. Also, please continue sending your news items and articles but be certain to compose them in publishable format.

I shall be at Moscow State University all summer. For this reason I shall, unfortunately, be unable to reply to your requests, inquiries and submissions until I return in September. Have a productive and satisfying summer.

L. H.

NEWSNOTES is a publication of the Institute for Contemporary Eastern European Drama and Theatre under the auspices of the Center for Advanced Study in Theatre Arts with support from the National Endowment for the Humanities and the Graduate School and the Department of Foreign Languages and Literatures of George Mason University. The Institute Office is Room 80 I, City University Graduate Center 33 West 42nd Street, New York, NY 10036. All subscription requests (no charge) and submissions should be addressed to the Editor of NEWSNOTES: Leo Hecht, Department of Foreign Languages and Literatures, George Mason University, Fairfax, VA 22030.

THE 1982 HUMANITIES INSTITUTE ON CONTEMPORARY EASTERN EUROPEAN DRAMA AND THEATRE

The following is the program of studies which the twenty participants will have to fulfill:

The Institute will run for a period of six weeks from June 13 to July 24. Its program will consist of morning and afternoon seminars, lectures and workshops intended to provide the necessary tools for incorporating Eastern European and Soviet dramatic literature and theatre into college and univers ity curricula.

Two morning seminars a week each will be devoted to the study of contemporary Polish and Soviet drama and to a comparative analysis of the two so that common features can be developed and unique problems isolated. Afternoon sessions will include lecture discussions on the special nature of theatre in Poland and the Soviet Union in relation to the distinctive cultural traditions of these countries. Topics to be covered will include the following:

I. Historical, critical and social roots, and their development. 2. The role of the government. 3. The role of dramatic critics and criticism, and of the literary

advisor. 4. Bureaucratic, administrative and financial organization of the

theatre. 5. Audience composition, psychology and sociology of audience

response. 6. Position of the playwright. 7. Types of plays, selection of theatre repertory. 8. Comparison with Western approaches to drama and theatre. 9. Textual analysis and interpretation of plays and productions.

I 0. Range and variety of theatres (dramatic, children's, puppet, etc.)

Special emphasis will be placed on showing concretely how a dramatic text comes to life in the Polish and Soviet theatres and how the practices and traditions of Eastern European theatre shape the dramaturgy of these countries.

Weekly afternoon sessions wi II be devoted to the study of resource materials: dramatic texts, production photographs, films, video tapes and slides of productions, theatre programs, theoretical and critical literature, and materials of a historical, political, social and cultural nature. Particular attention will be given to the problems of making resource mater ials available. This will include a study of existing translation resources, bibliographies, and library and archive holdings. Special lectures on Eastern European art, history and culture will serve to place the study of contemporary Polish and Soviet drama within a broad cultural and historical context. In addition there will be lecture-discussions on both the theoretical and practical problems of play translation.

Two afternoon sessions a week will be devoted to curriculum planning. Particular emphasis will be placed on the specific problems of integrating Polish and Soviet drama into courses and seminars in theatre history, Slavic languages and literatures, comparative literature, social science area studies, and interdisciplinary programs. Each participant will prepare a course of study and a syllabus to be implemented at their home institution.

2

STAFF:

Institute Director: Alma H. Law Humanities Institute, Room 80 I, Graduate Center, City University of New York, 33 West 42nd Street, New York, NY I 0036 (212) 790-4249 or 4464; (914) 723-54 10

Coordinator: Stanley A. Waren Vice President and Provost; Professor of Theatre; Director, Center for Advanced Study in Theatre Arts, Graduate Center, City University of New York, 33 West 42nd Street, New York, NY I 0036 (212) 790-4464

Graduate Assistants: Maria Mollinado and Mark Waren Humanities Institute, Room 80 I, Graduate Center, City University of New York, 33 West 42nd Street, New York, NY I 0036 (212) 790-4249 or 4464; (2 12) 988-6523

CORE FACULTY:

William Kuhlke Professor, of Theatre/Slavic and Soviet Area, Theatre Department, University of Kansas, Lawrence, KA 66045 (913) 864-3534 or 3981

Boles law T aborski 66 Esmond Road, London WR I JF, England

Kazimierz Braun Artistic Director and General Manager, Teatre Wspolczesny, Wroclaw, Poland.

Although the daily Institute sessions are open only to participants in the Institute, there will be some evening showings of Polish and Soviet films as well as other special programs to which the public will be invited. Anyone interested in being notified of these events should call the Institute (212) 790-4249 so that they can be placed on the mailing list for announcements.

In conjunction with the Institute, there will also be an exhibition of Soviet and Polish Theatre Posters at the Graduate Center on 42nd Street. The exhibition of I 00 posters is an expansion of the very-popular exhibition held two years ago in conjunction with the first Institute on Contemporary Eastern European Drama and Theatre. It is being organized by the Center for Advanced Study in Theatre Arts with joint funding by the City University Graduate School and the National Endowment for the Humanities. The exhibition will run from June 29 to August 30. There will be an opening reception on June 29 from 5:00 to 7:00p.m. to which readers of the NEWSNOTES are invited. Wine and cheese will be served.

PLANNING CONFERENCE "PROBLEMS IN TRANSLATION OF EAST EUROPEAN DRAMA"

Spencer Golub, University of Virginia, who attended the conference was kind enough to send us this preliminary report. Additional information on this rather important event will be published in our next issue:

A three-day planning conference was held at the University of Virginia April 1-3 to explore the theme "Problems in Translation," and the possibility of

3

initiating a Summer Translation Workshop, explained in detail below. The conference, sponsored by the Center for Russian and East European Studies at the University under the directorship of Professor John Garrard, was chaired by Alma Law of the Center for Advanced Study in Theatre Arts (CASTA), CUNY Graduate Center. Those attending included: Professors Spencer Golub, University of Virginia; Michael Heim, UCLA; Bela Kiralyfalvi, Wichita State University, William Kuhlke, University of Kansas; Ms. Edith Markson, New York City; Ms. Vita Ognjenovich, Visiting Professor at UCLA and Director, National Theatre, Belgrade Yugoslavia. Attending for one day as special guests were Ruzica Popovitch, Senior Reference Librarian-Yugoslav Area Specialist, Library of Congress, and Veno Tauter, Yugoslav poet and drama critic and Visiting Professor, University of Maryland.

The main objectives of the conference included:

I) the planning of a workshop for the training of translators which would lead to new and revised translations of contemporary East European drama. It was decided that East European drama is meant to include plays from the Soviet Union, Poland, Czechoslovakia, Yugoslavia, Hungary, Rumania, Bulgaria and East Germany. "Contemporary" refers to not only new but newly discovered twentieth century dramatists on the order of Bulgakov, Shvarts, Erdman and the Polish writers of the 1920's. Reworking of previously translated plays would occur only in cases when the existing translations have distorted the meanings of the originals. It was decided that no distinction would be made between emigre and non-emigre plays in the proposed program. This workshop is tentatively scheduled to be held at the University of Virginia during the summer of 1984 under the University's Center for Russian and East European Studies.

2) the reproduction and disseminat ion of the translations produced by the proposed summer workshop to theatres and universities nationwide to serve as teaching and production aids. The idea for this planning conference grew out of the widely felt need to develop a program for training translators capable of producing translations that are not only readable but playable in the theatre.

3) the development of a program for the publication of these translations.

4) the development of a program for the exchange of American and Soviet translators to help ready plays earmarked for productions at specific theatres in each country. The feasibility of extending the exchange to include other East European countries, specifically Yugoslavia, was also discussed.

5) a direct play summary exchange between American and Soviet theatres which would lead to greater awareness of play availability and suitability for particular theatres/producing organizations.

The committee discussed in detail the various problems facing translators in producing translations that are "born in the theatre" and thus stage worthy. Testimony was given by translators, directors and teachers on this topic from which a tenative model for the proposed summer translators workshop was derived. Said workshop would include group seminars and individual tutorial work in the areas of "theory of translation," review of existing translations, translation exercise work, translation of full-length plays and critiques, all of which would be

4

offered in tandem with a small resident acting company who could test the stage legs of the work in its parts and in completed form. The workshop would be open to undergraduate and graduate students, college and university faculty, theatre directors and translators who are native speakers of English and proficient in at least one East European langauge, having a demonstrable interest (but not necessarily expertise) in theatre and an ear for spoken English. Funding is currently being sought for this project.

Immediate plans were made for the publication of two Soviet and two Polish plays, 250-500 copies each under the auspices of CAST A at the CUNY Graduate Center. William Kuhlke, Chairman, Bela Kiralyfalvi and Robert Findlay, University of Kansas have been named to a committee which will solicit Russian and Polish play titles from which four will be selected for publication. This is intended as the first step in producing a series of publications of previously unpublished East European plays under the direction of Alma Law, CASTA-CUNY.

Bela Kiralyfalvi was selected to explore the possibility of establishing an East European Theatre and Drama Special Interest Group under the auspices of the American Theatre Association in a further attempt to coordinate and focus the activities of those teachers, artists and scholars working in the area.

SHORT NOTES

Lyudmila Petrushevskaya's two one-act comedies, LOVE and COME INTO THE KITCHEN, translated from the Russian by Alma H. Law and directed by Sharon Carnicke, had their English-language premieres Apri I 25-28 at the Eccentric Circles Theatre in New York as part of a festival of plays written and directed by women. LOVE also marked the U.S. stage debut of Albert Makhtsier, star of stage, screen and TV in his native Russia. Makhtsier, who performed in productions of Shakespeare, West Side Story, and in the film Slave of Love, emigrated to the U.S. in 1976.

***

Out-of-print and rare books on the performing arts in Russia/USSR in Russian. Catalogues sent free-of-charge. Send all inquiries to Russica Book & Art Shop, Inc., 799 Broadway, New York, New York 10003, Telephone (212) 473-7486.

***

The second, revised edition of The USSR Today: Facts and Interpretations, by Leo Hecht, has just been published. It contains new chapters on "Belles Lettres" and the "Performing Arts." For information, contact Scholasticus Publishing, P .0. Box 2727, Springfield, Virginia 22152.

***

January 28-31, 1982, Bela Kiralyfalvi directed Never Part From Your Loved Ones at the Wichita State University Theatre. This play by Aleksandr Volodin, and translated by Alma Law, was performed in the round by a cast of 28 and ably backed by a staff of choreographers, costumers and setting and lighting

5

directors. The reviews in the local press were excellent. This is a highly theatrical play, both humorous and poignant, and to be strongly recommended for university theatre groups.

*** Important request: Many of us have been asked to recommend recent

American plays to our East European colleagues. Too often we rely on spur-of­the-moment responses. May we suggest that our readers help to remedy the situation by sending us resumes of new plays they feel to be appropriate. What we have in mind is a short plot summary, an indication of style and setting, and if possible brief excerpts from pretinent reviews--in one page of single-spaced text. Please send your resumes to Alma Law, Humanities Institute, Room 80 I, 33 West 42nd Street, New York, NY 10036. At the same time we urge you to write to the Institute if you wish to obtain copies of the summaries to take with you on your travels or send to directors and dramaturgs. In future issues we will list the summaries available for dissemination.

*** Sam Elkind, of San Francisco State University, recently returned from a

trip to Australia. He tells us that there is a great deal of interest in Polish theatre there, especially in Melbourne. In a theatre called The Anthill, he saw a "wildly imaginative" production of the Madman and the Nun. He also met Roger Pulverse, who translates his own scripts from the Polish, when he is not writing Japanese novels.

REPORT FROM KANSAS

Bill Kuhlke, International Theatre Studies Center, The University of Kansas, was kind enough to send us a report of activities for the past year of this most active university in the field of Soviet and Polish theatre and drama:

In the summer of 1981, Dr. Kuhlke taught a special outreach course in contemporary Russian drama and theatre at the Regent's Center in Kansas City. It was highly successful and will be offered again.

In the fall semester of 1981 Bob Findlay offered a special seminar in Grotowski on the university campus - the second time he has offered the course. Since it has generated an excellent reputation, it wi II surely have to become a regularly scheduled course. In addition, Professor Findlay directed The Madman and the Nun by Stanislaw Witkiewicz, in the manner of the Polish Laboratory Theatre. The reviews were outstanding. During the same season, one of the Ph. D. candidates, Kenn Wessel, directed Evening Light by Alexei Arbuzov. It also received glowing reviews.

In the spring of 1982, Zbigniew Cynkutis of the Pol ish Laboratory Theatre spent the entire semester teaching acting and directing using the techniques developed by the Laboratorium. (He is a marvellous teacher and Dr. Kuhlke is doing his best to raise the money to keep him for the coming academic year.) Cynkutis will be available for residencies next year. If anyone is interested in contacting him about such a possibility, they may write him in core of University

6

Theatre, University of Kansas, Lawrence, Kansas 66045. A short biography will be sent to you upon request.

In March, Dr. Findlay presented a paper on the Polish Laboratory Theatre and interviewed Cynkutis as the keynote event at the Mid-America Theatre Conference. Bill Kuhlke chaired a panel on Russian Theatre which included papers on the Alexandrinsky production of the Seagull, the directors Evreinov and Okhlopkov, and the actor-teacher Michael Chekhov.

THE RUMANIAN NATIONAL THEATRE AND RADU BEUGAN

We are happy to have received the following article from Dr. Allan Lewis, about a geographic area which until now, has been neglected by us. Dr. Lewis is drama critic for the New Haven Register and a Lecturer at the New School:

With Liviu Ciulei running the Tyrone Guthrie Theatre in Minneapolis and Andrei Serban in New York providing new insights into Chekhov and Euripides, Romanian directors have taken center stage. Romania seems hardly the country that comes to mind in referring to leadership in contemporary art. One thinks of Eugene lonesco the playwright, but he lives in Paris and writes in French; then of course, the mighty composer George Enescu whose centennial was v igorously celebrated this past year but mostly in Romania. We may add Brancusi in sculpture but he too, like lonesco and many others, emigrated to France. Serban and Ciulei would most likely not be known past the borders of their native country if they had stayed at home and it does not look as if they intend to return. But theatre is a national passion in Romania, and Bucharest prides itself on being, even though under grey Communist discipline, the Paris of the East.

The country of 22 m i llion inhabitants consisting mostly of small peasant farms, is deep in economic chaos. It possesses a low standard of living, watches nervously the massed Red Army on its northern border and boasts of one of the finest theatres in the world. In the heart of Bucharest, nestling between the high­rise luxury International Hotel and the American Embassy, rests a stately brick complex that houses the National Theatre. The largest building, the opera house, burned down three years ago. Yet despite the poverty of the country and the uncertainty of the international situation, the building was fully restored and reopened this year.

The theatre's present glory is largely the work of one man, Radu Beligan, teacher of Serban, associate of Ciulei and the artisitc director and administrator of the National Theatre. He is also the country's finest actor. It is a situation similar to that when Laurence Olivier headed the National Theatre in England except that Beligan is also a master tactician and administrator.

He has become a national hero known in every corner of the country for his film and television work. When I told the taxi driver to take me to 8eligan's office in the rear of the theatre he looked at me in utter amazement.

"You know Radu Beligan?" he asked.

"Yes," I replied.

7

"A great artist," he said, "I saw him in 'Romulus the Great'. Never forget it."

The Duerrenmatt play has been running for years, a tribute to Beligan's superb performance. As the last Emperor of Rome he displayed a mastery of clowning while preserving the tragic implications of the end of a civilization. As anti-Caesar, he was the conquered victim, able to convey a lofty nobility and yet a willingness to end what no longer deserved to exist.

His major problem has been to avoid the monotony of the required socialist realism. He has skillfully offered plays of the Western world as well as the required classics. Shakespeare is always present. Emphasis is on technical production, for the Romanians are masters of set design and construction techniques.

Among contemporary Romanians who have advanced their careers through Beligan's encouragement are Caragaile ("The Ordeal"), Marin Sorescu ("Mother­hood") and Teodor Mazilu ("The Sleepy Adventure").

lonesco is presented in his native country quite often and the works of Pirandello and Giraudoux are also favorites. From the United States have come the work of Arthur Miller and Edward Albee. Radu Beligan played George in "Who's Afraid of Virginia Wolf."

The drama school attached to the National Theatre is the source of a continuously changing corps of actors and directors. Beligan is long overdue for a visit to the United States. He has been here several times as President of the International Institute of Theatre but is still waiting for an invitation from the Kennedy Center or Joseph Papp for an extended stay in residence. It might be a good idea for Ciulei to have him in Minneapolis. The two Romanians might write theatre history.

THE MOSCOW SEASON

Alan Smith, our "resident scholar" in Moscow, was kind enough to send us the following article on the Moscow theatre today:

At the outset, one must admit that the title of this article is something of a misnomer, if by the word "season" we mean the period of theatrical activity which takes place from September through June upon the stages of Broadway or London's West End with its multifarious and ever changing programme of hits, sensations and flops . Essentially, each season has its own intrinsic character, defined by the nature of the works presented that particular year, and thus differing from its predecesors and successors. Admittedly, there are long-running successes such as Chorus Line, Evita, - or to include works of lesser merit, but greater longevity, The Mousetrap in London or The F antasticks in New York -which somehow are part of the season, yet also stand outside it. It is difficult to talk of a season, however, with that concept of change, searching, and constant innovation when one comes to view the Moscow theatre scene. Here the pace of change is much less fevered; indeed, it is even leisurely. How can one really talk of a season, when the Moscow Art Theatre still regularly performs Maeterlink's The Blue Bird in its original staging by Stanislavsky, dating back to 1908; when the

8

Vakhtangov Theatre opens each season and continues to stage throughout it Princess Turandot, as envisaged by Vakhtangov in 1922? Nor are these merely isolated exceptions, retained out of reverence for their legendary creators. If one examines the repertoires of other theatres, one finds there, as the staple fare, popular favorites regularly staged, and all of considerable vintage. At MXAT, the plays of Gel'man, which I shall mention again, have been running since the early seventies. At the Mayakovsky Theatre, The Flight has been running since 1978 and Lady Macbeth of Mtsensk began its life even earlier. At Efros's theatre on Malaya Bronnaya, Othello has been in the repertoire since 1976, Zhenit'ba (The Wedding) since 1975. Even Lyubimov's Theatre of Drama and Comedy on the Taganka which is still the most dynamic and exciting of the Moscow Theatres has a repertoire which in part dates back to its inception in 1964 with Good Woman of Sezuan, Ten Days That Shook the World, and T artuffe in 1968.

Sometimes plays do open and close with the rapidity one associates with western productions, but rather than this being the result of lack of popular appeal, the closure is often effected on the grounds of political unsuitability -as occurred with the Georgian Rustaveli Theatre's production of Shatrov's Blue Horses on Red Grass which was withdrawn from the repertoire during a Moscow tour, after only one performance. Another play by Shatrov Tak my pobedim (Thus We Will Win) had a slightly different fate. Originally scheduled by MXAT under the title of Ja vam zaveshchaju (I Bequeath to You) as a production commemorating Lenin's birth, it emerged unheralded some two years later after innumerable squabbles with Egorov the head of the Institute of Marxism Leninism over its thematics.

As a result of these complexities, peculiar to the Soviet theatre, my remarks will concern not the events of one theatrical season, but the changes that have been going on for a number of years on the Moscow stage.

But before attempting to identify a number of these changes and tendencies, I would like to again refer to the Taganka theatre and comment upon its affairs, both in the way of a progress report on the activities of Moscow's most enterprising theatre and upon a situation which seems to me symptomatic of the general state of Soviet theatre.

I earlier mentioned the datedness of its repertoire. This is a general feature of the Soviet repertory system in which plays are presented several times a month for a great number of years, thus presenting the theatre with the problems of keeping the performance fresh and holding the play together over an enormous time period. In some cases they have been successful, e.g., Ten Days That Shook the World, which relies on a lot of visual devices and directorial ingenuity; on the other hand, T artuffe looks jaded and tired. The theatre has not extended its repertoire very rapidly of late. Their best three plays, in my opinion The Dawns Here are Quiet, Master and Margarita and House on the Embankment date back to 1973, 1976 and 1979 respectively. This last season saw only two new plays introduced: Nadezhdy malen'kij orkestrik (The Little Orchestra of Hope) directed by a young actor Artsybashev, Three Sisters in a novel new interpretation by Pogrebnichko with Lyubimov providing the finishing touches. He himself is in conflict with the authorities over the play Volodya a montage tribute to Vysotskij, the outstanding actor of the company who died some two years ago. Rumors abound of his threat to resign from the theatre, tired as he is of the constant

9

bickering with the authorities. From time to time stories emerge of the production being allowed twice a year - on the anniversaries of Vysotskij's birth and death, then it is rumored to be once a month. But at present the fate of the play remains unclear. There is also the opinion that as well as being involved in a political conflict, Lyubimov f inds himself in the midst of an artistic crisis and that his clash with the authorities is something of a sublimation of it. There is much to be said for the theory that each new theatre which appears has an organic life of a limited duration; it may well be that the period has now elapsed for the Taganka, that the theatre has said what it had to say. At present, the only reports of fresh additions to the repertoire involve rehearsals of Starshij syn (The Elder Son) by Vampilov and plans to stage Pushkin's Boris Godunov. One other interesting addition is the reappearance of Vasil'ev's production of The First Version of Vassa Zheleznova by Gor'kij, a play which had enormous success when first staged at the Stanislavskij Theatre some two years ago. Whatever the outcome in the Taganka's particular case, the situation is typical of a general dissatisfaction throughout the theatre world: a feeling of stagnation. One hears talk of the need for revitalization; the need for the creation of new companies and the abolishing of established ones grown top-heavy with established and underemployed actors; greater interchange between theatres of both actors and directors. Change in this direction has so far been very slight.

To return to the tendencies and themes that can be traced in current productions, one can identify them as follows: I) The reappearance of "production" plays, mirroring problems of efficiency, honesty, corruption, etc. 2) The emergence of playwrights of the younger generation with more intimate thematics: love, interpersonal relationships within the fami ly, often the breakdown of established, longstanding relationships. 3) Upswing in the interest in pure theatre: conventionalized, stylized theatricalism - along with this goes a search for new genres.

The first tendency is said to have begun with the staging by Anatolij Efros of Dvoretskij's Chelovek so Storony (The Man from the Outside), which incidentally was restaged in a new version last year. The fall of Khrushchev ushered in the development of a new approach and attitudes to work along with the phenomenon known as the Nauchno - technicheskaja revoljutsia, (the scientific-technicological revolution). Great emphasis was placed on the rationalization of the work process, the scientific approach, analysis of plans , programs, functions, etc. Dvoretskij's work reflects the problems encountered in this approach. His hero, Cheshkov, is a new man of sorts: a skilled manager of a foundry, which he leaves seeking a new challenge when he has made a success of it. Despite the opposition from his local Party committee, he is grudgingly granted a trial period at another enterprise. Here, he sets about its reorganization, armed with honesty, self assurance and faith in the rational, analytical approach. With a complete lack of sentimentality, he rides roughshod over the feelings and sensibilities of his subordinates, oblivious to the effect he has upon both them and their private lives , with the result that the majority of them abandon him in disagreement with his methods. Despite an official reprimand from the Party, he pursues hs own course, and at the play's conclusion, his methods are begining to yield positive results.

The picture Dvoretskij presents is an ambiguous one. He admits honestly that problems exist: "A capitalist would have got rid of such inefficient workers

10

long _ago;" "our system covers up losses and inefficiency, instead of exposing them;" " Lies have become the norm for us." These are some of the criticisms Cheskov levels. Yet at the same time, this hero is far "from the usual embodiment of all possible virtues, and one is not made to feel that one's sympathies should rest entirely with him. The author attempts a fairly complex, balanced portrait. Cheskov is efficient, it's true, but he is ruthless and heartless in pursuit of his ends and in his personal life proves as fallible as the next man, conducting an affair with a colleague, who initially was very antagonistic, while still married to another woman. At the play's conclusion this situation seems about to be regulated with the convenient demise of his wife. While one feels some sympathy for those who oppose him, the inefficiency for which they are directly responsible can no longer be tolerated.

This play prepared the way for the appearance of a series of plays on a similar industrial theme by an ex-journalist and factory worker, Aleksandr Gel'man. Since the early seventies he has produced a series of four plays, all of which have been staged by MXAT. He has taken as a basis the industrial proess and used it to reflect relevant moral problems, criticizing inefficiency, cover-ups and falsification, exploring them to a degree hitherto both unthinkable and impermissible. In all of his plays, the hero comes to a realization of the reprehensibility of what is going on around him and stages a protest, even a revolt, which meets with varying degrees of success in his attempts to right the wrong. Usually, the revo lt briefly shatters bureaucratic complacency, before the forces of reaction regroup, and after extensive debate and reorganizat ion, though it may seem that justice will be served, one is left with the equally possible outcome, that events will return to their previous course. (Three of these plays were discussed previously in Newsnotes October, 1981 , Vol . I, Number 3.)

Gel'man's work is a fusion of polemics and drama and it is interesting to note the changes in scale, form and staging since his debut. From A Party Meeting which is little more than a dramatized debate set around the ubiquitous green baize table, we move to We, the Undersigned where the action takes place on a train, ingeniously reconstructed on the stage by V. Leventai'.Though this again is a localized setting, there is a much greater sense of movement, as the intrigue and twists of the plot are accompanied by a series of comings and goings between the various compartments. Characters, too, are better drawn and the ostensible lackey, Lenja, is an engaging psychological study. In Feed Back events open up to their widest extent, involving many aspects of industrial and Party life. It is also furnished with the most elaborate set: a pyramid of bureaucrats' desks, disappearing into the distance, interconnected by passage ways, jangling telephones, and electronic news screens; a paradigm for the whole society.

Perhaps influenced by the second tendency I mentioned earlier, the interest in the crisis in family relations, GePman's latest play reverses his trend to wider and wider scope and the interest in industr ial interaction to examine the breakdown in a marriage as the result of the falsity and insincerity engendered by a lifetime spent in the environment so graphically depicted in the earlier plays. We encounter Andrej Golubev and his wife, Natasha, at a critical point in their marriage. She has decided to leave him, after discovering that he is responsible for an accident on a construction site that has maimed their only son. She berates him for his overriding ambition, subservience and lack of pr inciple or pride. He , in turn, blames her for his becoming what he is; "one cannot be a boss and a human

II

being at the same time", he complains. At a critical point, when he could have abandoned such a way of life, she did not support him. They are both responsible for their son's incapacitation; she always wanted greater and greater material rewards. Desperate at the realization that she is really leaving him, he vows that he will reform, resign and give up his reponsibilities, but when she puts him to the test, he is unable to relinquish his hold on power and the privileges it has brought him.

The production was only permitted after the overcoming of considerable political opposition and a personal viewing by Demichev, the Minister of Culture. It is interesting that such a gloomy view of Soviet domestic life should be allowed. It seems to be an attempt by the authorities to show that they are aware of such problems and are attempting to deal with them.

One cannot overemphasize the influence of Vampilov in the development of the second tendency - a more sombre, not to say starkly realistic investigation into human personal relationships. His plays Last Summer in Chulimsk, Duck Hunting, Provincial Anecdotes and now Starshij syn in rehearsal at the Taganka were a revelation to many, despite the fact that the moods and insights they reflect and the problems they pose have slight ly lost their immediacy and sense of urgency. Nevertheless, in the wake of the merciless dissection of his hero Zi lov in Duck Hunting, a man who is utterly cynical and at odds with himself rather than society, there has appeared a series of works - both staged and unstaged - which take as their topics the conflict between the generations - officially pronounced non-existant earlier: the impasse reached in marriage, disillusionment with established values, and the joylessness of domestic life.

First among these playwrights is Lyudmila Petrushevskaya. Although many of the fifteen or so plays she has written have been produced in amateur theatres throughout the country, so far, only her Music Lessons and Love have been produced in professional theatres in Moscow, with two others in rehearsal. Her work is largely plotless, mainly character studies, such as the portraits in Music Lessons. In this play, a family of middle class pretension tries to make a good match for their son. They are horrified when he takes up with a cheap gold-digger and they steer him to the meek and rather innocent daughter of their working class neighbors. The son, however, proves to be a moral monster, treating both girls and his family with utter contempt. He is determined not to be caught in a marriage trap, but merely to have a good time. Love describes how the partners in what seems largely a marriage of conveniencerue their precipitous decision, only to be drawn together again by the foul-mouthed assault of the bride's mother. Two other plays, Cinzano and Smirnova's Birthday, form a diptych affording a depressing glimpse into the personal lives of a group of men and women as each hold separate drinking parties and get progressively drunk. In Cinzano, the men think of nothing but where the next rouble for drink is coming from. In Smirnova's Birthday, the women, abandoned by a succession of feckless men, discuss their love lives, abortion, children and personal relationships which seem like musical chairs.

This tendency has even influenced Aleksei Arbuzov, a long established writer of popular sentimental dramas. In Cruel Games, Arbuzov oversimplifies and tends to blame youth's cynicism on the absence of a good home life. At the Lenin Komsomol Theatre, Mark Zakharov takes the opportunity to put

12

contemporary youth on stage with all its bitterness, disengagement and lack of purpose. It is a shocking picture. The influence can also be seen in the productions directed by Anatoli Vasil'ev, who caused a sensation two years ago with his First Version of Vassa Zheleznova, which is currently being re-staged at the Taganka. His production of Slavkin's play, The Grown-up Daughter of a Young Man, a picture of two generations, is still in the repertoire of the Stanislavsky Theatre and continues to play to packed houses. The father, Berns, is a talented engineer who has not succeeded in life, having been expelled from the university for his love of jazz and fashionable clothes back in the fifties, and for his general non-conformity. At an all-night party, he exchanges reminiscences and recriminations with two former classmates, one now living in obscurity and middle-class provincialism in Chelyabinsk, the other now the dean of their former university. The other line of the plot involves the revolt of Bern's daughter, Ella, named after Ella Fitzgerald. She despises the older generation and its value, and is living a bohemian life. Despite a scene of reconcil iation at the end between parents and children, Vasil'ev make it obvious that the same fate awaits the younger generation as befell their parents. Highlights of the production are a first rate ensemble and a very naturalistic set showing the interior of an apartment with the TV tuned to a live program and a kitchen where a meal is prepared and eaten with long pauses. Also engaging is the rather elaborate fifties style dancing which the characters tackle with great seriousness to Glenn Miller's Chatanooga Choo Choo.

One last play in this vein is The Old House written and directed by Aleksandr Kazantsev, at the New Drama Theatre. The somewhat predictable, though nevertheless touching theme of the destruction of young love is set in a former aristocratic mansion, once famous for a visit by Lev Tolstoj,and long since given over to communal apartments and the ravages of time and neglect. Here, two families pursue their unhappiness in their own way and together unite at the urgings of an incorrigible busybody to crush the chance of happiness of their respective son and daughter. Years later, the two meet, and although they have outwardly made successful lives for themselves: she is a distinguished actress, he a scientist, it is obvious they are emotional victims of their parents' narrowminded prudery, suspicion and social conformity.

As the third tendency, I mentioned a return to pure theatricality, to play, enjoyment and the sheer delight in the theatrical process. It is perhaps inevitable that in a theatre as socially committed and as closely and eagerly scrutinized for social comment as the Soviet theatre is, the opposing tendency should from time to time resurface.

It is to be found in a nostalgic and at times extremely effective compilation of Chekhov's early stories, adapted and directed by M. Levitin and set in the evocative surroundings of the old Hermitage Gardens, on whose grounds the Miniatu·re Theatre actually stands. Though not without its digs at contemporary reality, such as the hilarious scene in which a sumptuous meal is lovingly described to an initially apathetic listener - raising some bitter laughter in view of Moscow's perennial food shortages; or the cast's longing to visit that magic city Paris, which they chorus throughout the play, and which still remains for most an unrealizable dream, the play is essentially a jovial and at times sentimental romp in farcical style centering on the figure of a well-known XIXth century impressario, his attempts to make a go of the theatre and the scandals surrounding

13

them.

The Stanislavskij Theatre, seeking to make the headlines again after the great success of Grown Up Daughter, Cyrano de Bergerac and Yassa Zheleznova, invited the director Birman to stage a lesser known play by Carlo Gozzi, previously staged only once in Italy, The Happy Beggars. The director chose to set this familiar tale of an eastern potentate who disguises himself as a beggar to discover the corruption of his officials in a pseudo Italian setting, and he bedecks the production with glamorous, ornate costumes and colorful bunting. He also attempts to revive the commedia del arte style, employing music song and dance, buffonade and even clown numbers borrowed from the circus. Despite a broad, slapstick approach and the bustle and vigour of the performers, the performance never manages to establish sufficient pace, and the devices of stylized over acting, elaborate gestures and choral punctuation of the action pall very soon in the proceedings. As a result the show never gets above the level of an average Christmas show for children. Its length has since been cut, but one doubts that this will alter the outcome much at all.

It is, however, pleasing to be able to report that the MXAT's production of Tartuffe is a resounding success for Anatolij Efros, after a succession of undistinguished productions at his own theatre on Malaja Bronna.ja.

Here there are no allusions to contemporary problems nor f ists in the pocket, merely the unadulterated pleasure of a great p lay, performed by first class professionals with great verve, bravura, and superb comic timing. The success is due in large measure to the elegant, sardonic presence of Ljubshin as Tartuffe. His irresistibility for womenfolk is forcefully demonstrated from the outset in his devastatingly successful assault on Dorina, when he divests her of her bodice like a magician, then piously rebukes her to cover her nakedness with his handkerchief; then again in his dogged pursuit of Elmira whom he is forever groping and who finally yields when trapped in the confines of the prompter's box. He is ably partnered here by A. Vertinskaja as Orgon's wife, whose puzzled bemusement over his conduct slowly changes into righteous indignation, deliciously flavoured with her barely concealed delight at being able to indulge in such naughtiness. As Orgon, A. Kaljagin is dazzling: a roly poly, balding dynamo, lightning fast on his feet, one moment a fearsome pater familias, holding his family in an iron grip, the next , reduced to squirming discomfort under the table on the discovery of his "friend's" disloyalty, and finally , a blubbering booby seeking consolation like an offended child, his bald head gleaming against the bosom of his amply endowed spouse.

Linked with this revival of theatricality is a search for new forms. One of the shows causing most excitment in Moscow is the Lenin Komsomol Theatre's production of Junona and Avos' based on a poem by Andrej Voznesenskij with music by Aleksandr Rybnikov. Its rather sketchy and underdeveloped book tells of the tribulations and demise of Nicolaj Rezanov, a minor nobleman,who was beset with a passion to explore Russian America. Having received the requisite permission from the Tsar he set out with the two ships of the play's title, equipped at his own expense. His travels lead him to California, where he established relations with the Spanish colonial powers and married the daughter of the Governor of San Francisco. Returning to Russia to seek ratification of the marriage, he died undramatically of cold en route. Conchita remains faithful to

14

him for 35 years, refusing to believe in his death and ultimately retiring to a convent.

The libretto is without a clear narrative line, chosing isolated, important moments, but never really developing any of the incidents at length. Thus the scene of Conchita and Rezanov's wedding is simultaneously both a celebration and a farewell. Such compression of events tends to lead to confusion, and indeed, at times it is difficult to follow the action. Misnamed by The New York Times, the work is termed in the program to be a modern, not a rock opera and is essentially a fusion of religious, liturgical music, folk themes, Russian romances and modern synthesizer effects; with only two up-beat numbers the composer has not really tried to reproduce a work in the Western manner, but instead bring to the attention of Russian youth in a new and vital form the rich historical musical culture from the past.

If the work has potential it is not realized by either M. Zaxarov as director, or Vasil'ev, of Bol'shoj fame, as choreographer. There seems to be little idea of how to present a musical number. When it is choreographed, we are are offered painfully cliched and dated movements and the material is rushed through in a perfunctory, almost apologetic manner. The set is no real help, a heavily raked stage with boxes suggesting hatches providing lighting from below which inhibits rather than encourages athletic movement. Most numbers are merely presented statically with great preoccupation on the actors' part with microphones and pop­star stance. At the end the directors seem to give up. The final number, a hymn of praise to the couple's love and Rezanov's attempts to unite the two countries America and Russia - the show's underlying theme, and musically one of the most attractive numbers - is simply sung by the whole cast while sitting on the apron, all it lacks is the bouncing ball. To be fair, one has to admit that the public loves it, but to the foreign eye its novelty is cheap. However, the music is genuinely interesting, and its effects often depend on sensational uses of laser, lighting and dry ice effects. Musicals, it seems, are still foreign to the Russian theatrical experience.

In summary, one has to say that despite some interesting developments, theatre is in a transitional stage, and there is a sense of crisis with no really new directorial talents being given their head or significant departures in new directions. In Moscow, that is. In fact, the most engaging theatre is taking place elsewhere- in Tbilisi, but that is another story ••••

IS

Dept . of Foreign Langs & Lits George Mason University Fairfax, Virginia 22030

Non-Profit Organization US Postage Paid

Fairfax, Virginia Permit No. 1532