Customer Reviews

Brecht Sourcebook

5 star:		(1)
4 star:		(2)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

For me, like many in the "mainstream," my first taste of Brecht was "The Threepenny Opera." I was lucky enough to be in a theatre class taught by a very sharp and open-minded professor who allowed me to gain a better understanding of the work by writing (and "casting") a film script based on it, instead of the usual critical paper.

But the complexities of Brecht have remained difficult for me to crack, and I was delighted to find this Sourcebook. Martin and Bial, the editors, have compiled a powerful selection of criticism, including translations of a couple of Brecht's own essays.

Sartre's piece on looking beyond bourgeouis theatre found its mark for me and opened my eyes about conventions and assumptions. Kurt Weill on musical theatre provided me with new understanding on his intentions in parting ways with easy tradition.

But it was particularly the section on Brecht interpreted abroad that enlightened me to his enormous influence as a writer and director. Tadashi Uchino skillfully gets at how a theatrical culture as drastically different as Japan's can adopt and adapt external viewpoints to expand its own horizons; and editor Carol Martin brings great insight to Brecht's early revolutionary views on alienation in Chinese theatre as they relate to feminism.

I don't pretend to be an authority on Brecht after reading this sourcebook (though I did sleep at a Holiday Inn Express last night). But those looking to understand his work and his views better, particularly those who already have respect for his work and his lasting influence, will find the book quite useful.

This book brings together Brecht's aesthetic theories, the practice of his theories, and the various ways he has been intrepreted abroad. The essays are readable and are by Brecht, practitioners, and scholars.

I agree that part of the book is useful for newcomers: essays of Brechts own, and key papers in Brecht studies. But the third part can be improved upon. Here the criteria for selection take a nose dive: geological distribution becomes priority number 1 and the editors only strive to keep a balance regardless of the quality of the paper. Martin's essay is especially ill informed and hopelessly outdated. Why not use something by Antony Tatlow, the leading authority?

Readers should also be aware that the selection here seems to be limited to articles that appeared in past TDR. Translate: you will only get a partial view of the Brecht Studies through a North American lense. The third part just fails to balance this "prejudice" out.