Reading through The Empty Space I am struck by how frequently the concept of death arises. Death and the “Deadly Theatre” are a common refrain throughout the book. It has been four or so years since last reading it amidst the chaos of graduate school, so perhaps I did not read it close enough. Sure I remember the general ideas but the book is so subtle and precise in a freely unfolding sort of way that I just did not remember.
In comments to this discussion Alison wonders how bad the theatre scene really is in the United States. For it does seem that the line ‘Theatre is dead’ comes up with such a frequency that either it is true or everyone here is insane. While I will in no way answer definitively the latter, the former issue I do think can be addressed rather directly. The book is divided into four sections, The Deadly Theatre, The Holy Theatre, The Rough Theatre and The Immediate Theatre. A common misperception, and one I believe leads to the ‘theatre is dead’ line is the belief that these four “Theatre’s” are physical institutions. That theses names are proper nouns describing distinct places or organizations. In fact nothing could be further from the truth.
Right from the start Brook says that while they might sometimes exist in a literal way they will often also mix “within one single moment, the four of them, Holy, Rough, Immediate and Deadly.” This metaphoric usage of the terms is how they get applied through his writing. Discussing the Holy Theatre he jumps from Ancient Greece to post-War Germany showing instances of the Holy Theatre arising out of the ashes. The manner in which he describes the Deadly Theatre ‘always lurking’ in the shadows of the soul clearly indicates the more metaphoric conception is closest to the truth of the situation. The calcified and static nature of the deadly theatre is not fixed. But it does have great power of inertia. It is a constant struggle to remain free of the deadly, to free the artistic soul from the confines of rote cliched action.
Martin Heidegger wrote extensively about ontology. About how our Being, our Self, is the sum of our actions in the world. Being. That fundamental question of philosophy, “what am ‘I’?” was asked deeply and authentically. The answer was to re-conceive the self not as a ‘Thing’ but as a complex of actions. From a noun to a verb, or more precisely a gerund. This laid the foundation of Existentialism among other things. It was the first time in human thought that the self was seen as more than a mere object or an object that thinks. Action. Praxis. This was previously seen as secondary to the ‘thingness’ of being. Through his work, Heidegger transformed how we understand our Self at the very core essence of our Being.
In this same way we must learn to look at the ‘Death of Theatre’ and the Deadly Theatre, not as some objective fact, but as a way of acting. A way of Being. There is no way to stop the Deadly Theatre. It can not be eliminated once and for all with a powerful stroke of the pen. Rather it is an impulse that always already exists within the potential of any work or any artists. It is not bad in any moral sense. It is however, a mode of being that each one of us must choose for ourselves whether or not we desire to inhabit. It is a choice. And as artists we must look into our Self and see if that mode of being is truly an Authentic mode of action for us.
Perhaps reducing theatre to be the same as every other aspect of consumer culture is an authentic means of resisting the deadly. Perhaps product placement on stages and brief commercial interludes will help to bring about the final destruction of the deadly. But I doubt it. No action is isolated. The energies that we set in motion with our acts continue long after we have forgotten them. Their workings may become more and more subtle as time goes on, but they are still there moving forever down stream.
Perhaps the deadly is nothing more than the inertia of the unawakened soul. It is Humanity before language, when we lacked anything definitive to separate us from other primates. The inertia of millennia against the short span of human linguistic consciousness. For it is a very short time that we have existed able to conceive abstractly of our own Being. The matrix of understanding that language affords us is novel within the grand scheme of the history of our planet.
The lure of the deadly is that it is simple. It is quite easy to rest upon the inertia of geologic time rather than to support ones Self. This is why the simple entertainments of television are so popular. It is easy and reassuring to sit idle and have reductionist ideas spoon fed to you. It is something quite different to have your entire way of being in the world set in sharp relief from your authentic soul. To struggle against the deadly is a life’s work. And we fail all the time. Like the Bodhisatva’s vow, though it be unattainable we strive to attain it. Because this work is impossible. If you think it is possible you get worn out through frustration. But embracing the danger of impossibility, that is liberation. The very acceptance of powerlessness is the path to the greatest power of all. Authentic freedom in action.
The summer has only begun and already next fall begins to take shape. I had a wonderful meeting with a director this afternoon about a show in November. A one man piece filled with madness and delirium. It is a difficult and appropriately challenging text. While it may be possible for the deadly to creep in, it looks to be quite a vital and exciting work. While this work naturally brings out a thrilling authentic response, it is always difficult to do that with shows for money. The simple entertainments and events that serve to pay rent but do not fill the soul can easily cause one to fall into a ‘deadly’ mindset. It is finding the same fulfillment in these works that is a true challenge.
