Skip to main content

Shaustück and Lehrstück: Erwin Piscator and the Politics of Theatre

  • Chapter
The Politics of Theatre and Drama

Part of the book series: Insights ((ISI))

  • 87 Accesses

Abstract

It is logical to include in a book of this kind an essay on Erwin Piscator, and not merely because he was the author of a book with a similar title—The Political Theatre (1929)—which staked out for the first time the territory of ‘political drama’ as it has been understood and practised throughout the twentieth century. It is with the dramaturgical, directorial and technical work of Piscator in Germany, and with that of Meyerhold in Russia, that the specifically ‘modern’ forms of political drama first emerged. Here drama developed in close relation to social and political factors generally considered indispensable to the theory and practice of political theatre: a Marxist philosophy and a revolutionary Marxist movement; the immersion of theatre workers in materialist theory and proletarian cultural practice; the feasibility of a politicised working-class audience which such a theatre could hope to entertain, engage and urge towards further political consciousness.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 34.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes

  1. On Lenin’s definition of Communism as ‘Soviets plus electrification’, see H. Marcuse, Soviet Marxism (1958, Harmondsworth: Pelican, 1971).

    Google Scholar 

  2. E. Piscator, The Political Theatre (1929), ed. and trans. H. Rorrison (London: Eyre Methuen, 1980).

    Google Scholar 

  3. Brecht quoted in J. Willett, The Theatre of Erwin Piscator (London: Eyre Methuen, 1978) p. 191.

    Google Scholar 

  4. W. Benjamin, Understanding Brecht (1966), ed. and trans. S. Mitchell (London: New Left Books, 1977).

    Google Scholar 

  5. Interestingly the same incident, with a completely opposite interpretation in which the bombs are thrown by revolutionary anarchists, was employed as the apotheosis of an anarchist saint in Frank Harris’s novel The Bomb (1908). See G. Holdemess, ‘Anarchism and Fiction’, in The Rise of Socialist Fiction, 1880–1914, ed. H. Gustav Klaus (Brighton: Harvester, 1987) pp. 144–7.

    Google Scholar 

  6. The technical difficulties are described by Piscator’s stage manager Otto Richter, quoted in The Political Theatre, pp. 190–3. Martin Kane provides a detailed description of the production of Hoppla, taking Piscator’s theories at face value and recognising no theoretical difficulties, in M. Kane, ‘Erwin Piscator’s 1927 production of Hoppla, We’re Alive’, in D. Bradby, L. James and B. Sharratt (eds) Performance and Politics in Popular Theatre (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1980). See also M. Patterson, The Revolution in German Theatre, 1900–33 (London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1981) pp. 134–46, and C. W. Davies, Theatre for the People: the story of the Volksbühne (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1977).

    Google Scholar 

  7. For an account of the Brecht-Lukács controversy, see T. Eagleton, Walter Benjamin: Towards a Revolutionary Criticism (London: Verso, 1981) pp. 84–90.

    Google Scholar 

  8. See W. Gropius, The Theatre of the Bauhaus, trans. S. Wensinger (1961, London: Eyre Methuen, 1979). J. Styan relates the Bauhaus to other contemporary developments in the arts, in his Modem Drama in Theory and Practice, 3 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1981) pp. 136–9.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Meyerhold quoted in Willett, The Theatre of Erwin Piscator, p. 125. Edward Braun by contrast emphasises the parallels between Meyerhold, Brecht and Piscator in E. Braun, the Director and the Stage (London: Methuen, 1982) pp. 153–4.

    Google Scholar 

  10. W. Benjamin, Understanding Brecht, p. 89. But for an eloquent defence of the ‘revolutionary professional theatre’ see D. Edgar, The Second Time as Farce: Reflections on the Drama of Mean Times (London: Lawrence and Wishart, 1989) pp. 24–47.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Copyright information

© 1992 Editorial Board, Lumière (co-operative) Press

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Holderness, G. (1992). Shaustück and Lehrstück: Erwin Piscator and the Politics of Theatre. In: Holderness, G. (eds) The Politics of Theatre and Drama. Insights. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-21792-2_6

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics