The Caucasian Chalk Circle (Paperback)

~ (Author)

Editorial Reviews

Review

A play consisting of a prologue and five scenes by Bertolt Brecht, first produced in English in 1948 and in German as Der kaukasische Kreidekreis in 1949. The work is based on the German writer Klabund's play Der Kreidekreis (1924), itself a translation and adaptation of a Chinese play from the Yuan dynasty (1206-1368). Brecht's play is set within the context of a dispute over land claimed by two communes in the Soviet Union after World War II. The main action of the play consists of a parable that is performed to celebrate the decision in the dispute. The parable, set during a feudal insurrection in the 13th century, concerns the struggle of two women over the custody of a child. The dispute between the governor's wife, who abandoned the child, and the young servant who saved the child and cared for him is settled by an eccentric judge who places the child in a chalk circle and declares that whichever woman can pull him from the circle will be granted custody. When the servant, not wanting to harm the child, lets the governor's wife have him, she is awarded the child, having demonstrated greater love than the natural mother. -- The Merriam-Webster Encyclopedia of Literature

Product Description

Writing in exile in the USA during the Second World War, Brecht borrowed from an ancient Chinese story-echoed in the Judgement of Solomon-in which two women both claim the same child. Brecht's subversion of this tale provides a parable which seems to say that resources should go to those in whose hands they will be most productive. Thanks to the rascally judge, Azdak, one of Brecht's most vivid creations, this story, at least, has a happy outcome. The child is entrusted to the peasant Grusha, who has loved it and nurtured it.

Originally intended for Broadway, this translation by James and Tania Stern (with verse translation by W. H. Auden) has been thoroughly revised, and the volume includes a full introduction and commentary by John Willett and Ralph Manheim.

--This text refers to an alternate Paperback edition.

See all Editorial Reviews

Product Details

• Paperback: 144 pages
• Publisher: Arcade Publishing; 1st Arcade pbk. ed edition (August 1, 1994)
• Language: English
• ISBN-10: 1559702532
• ISBN-13: 978-1559702539
• Product Dimensions: 8.2 x 5.4 x 0.4 inches
• Shipping Weight: 7.2 ounces (View shipping rates and policies)
• Average Customer Review: 4.2 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (4 customer reviews)
• Amazon.com Sales Rank: #846,668 in Books (See Bestsellers in Books)

  Popular in this category: (What's this?)

  #28 in

  Books > Literature & Fiction > Authors, A-Z > ( B ) > Brecht, Bertolt

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

9 of 10 people found the following review helpful:

4.0 out of 5 stars "Almost" an age of justice, March 17, 2005

By	A.J. (Maryland) - See all my reviews (TOP 500 REVIEWER)

This review is from: The Caucasian Chalk Circle (Paperback)

Brecht's "The Caucasian Chalk Circle," written in self-imposed exile towards the end of World War II, is a story within a play, in which a bard, or singer, interrupts a group of Caucasian farmers arguing over ownership of land that has been ravaged by Nazi tanks and entertains them with a relevant tale of yore. In a city called Grusinia, the Governor is executed in a coup and his wife flees for her life, abandoning their baby son Michael, who is picked up by a humble kitchen maid named Grusha. Having recently betrothed herself to a soldier named Simon who is away on duty, she sets out on a cross-country journey with the infant to get help from her brother, a farmer in a distant village.

Lavrenti, her brother, suggests she get married immediately to avoid suspicion that the baby is hers out of wedlock, and the most available candidate is a local wretched peasant. After living with this man for a couple of years, Grusha is apprehended by soldiers who have come to take young Michael, the sole heir of the deposed Governor's estate, back to Grusinia. The case of Michael's custody, contested by the Governor's wife against Grusha, is brought to trial, where the judge, a drunk named Azdak whose unofficial appointment to this position is a farce, decrees that the boy will be placed inside a circle drawn with chalk on the courtroom floor, and that the woman who is able to pull him out of the circle is the real mother. (Study the judge's exact words when you read this.)

Although the story is of medieval Chinese origin, Brecht's play is a sort of refashioning of the Biblical anecdote about Solomon and expands the idea by supplying a whole backstory to the women's argument. Solomon's judgment is accepted because his wisdom is universally considered to be impeccable, but what of a man like Azdak who functions on whim more than on wisdom? The ending is subtly brilliant in the sense that the outcome of the contest is subject to semantic debate (whether you think the judgment is fair or logical or contradictory depends on how closely you read the judge's words), but also in the question of irony or sincerity in the suggestion that true justice will be conferred by nature rather than by man.

1 of 1 people found the following review helpful:

4.0 out of 5 stars A PARABLE ON PROPERTY, June 15, 2007

By	Alfred Johnson (boston, ma) - See all my reviews (REAL NAME)

This review is from: The Caucasian Chalk Circle (Paperback)

One of the master communist playwright Bertolt Brecht's strengths as an artist was the ability to set up a moral dilemma and work it out to a conclusion, not always a satisfactory one, by play's end. This is unusual in a seemingly orthodox follower of the old Stalinist' socialist realist' cultural program. This work nevertheless permitted Brecht to address an age-old question about the nature of property ownership, extending it from its natural and historic setting in land and chattels to the question of personal human ownership.

The question posed here is whether a child abandoned by its natural mother then found and raised by another women should go to the former or that latter. Nice dilemma, right? But Brecht, as seem in Mother Courage and other parables, is not above cutting right to the bone on moral questions. What makes this work a cut above some of Brecht's more didactic plays is the way that he weaves the parable about the odd resolution of an ancient Chinese property dispute and places that `wisdom' in context of a then current dispute between two Soviet-era communes.

In the ancient dispute the judge who is called upon to render judgment, using the circle as a medium to resolve the dispute, seems to be Solomonic but is really a buffoon. This is pure Brechtian irony. This says as much about Brecht attitude toward property as it does about the old time Chinese justice system. The question of property rights as presented by Brecht and their value as a societal glue is also something the reader or viewer of this play should think about as well.

24 of 50 people found the following review helpful:

4.0 out of 5 stars Brechts Question: Not a Red Herring

, September 5, 1996

By A Customer

It's popular now-a-days to call communism "out of touch" and socialism "out of style." Brecht's question, then: Who should own anything? Should possession be nine-tenths of the law? Or should the laws of ownership remain an open-ended affair? -- could be called a foregone conclusion.

Woe to the foregone conclusion, then. Its trial date is ever on the way.

Laughably, the Helms-Burton bill, recently signed into law by Pres. Bill Clinton, is a giggle back to Brecht's discussion. And a silly one. One should think that were the United States to be in the business of giving back land "once stolen," that the Navajo, Sioux, Chippewa, et. al. would be first in line.

Not so!

Apparently, Cuba's land belongs not to its current owners, but to its capitalists of 40 years hence. Oh, silliness. Oh, amusement.

So ask Brecht's question, then, not as a socialist, a communist or a red. Ask it as a human being. To whom does anything belong? What is belonging? What is ownership? Who owns anything? When - and why - does ownership occasionally turn on its own head?