NEWSNOTES

on
SoviET ond EAsT EuROPEAN DRAMA n THEATRE
Volume 5, Number 1 February, 1985
IMPORT ANT t.SSA< FROM TI-E EDITOR
With this issue we commence our fifth year of publication. Please continue sending
your announcements, reviews and short articles to us. Inevitably, there have been a
few mailing errors. Therefore, if for any reason you have not received the previous
issue (Volume 4, Number 3), please do let me know.
If you have not already done so, please remember t o send in your contribution
towards mailing and handling costs for academic year 1984-85. We would like to
keep you on the list of subscribers. As you know, this nominal fee does not cover
word processing and publication costs.
I am still searching for someone who would be interested in becoming the
editor of the I'EWSNOTES and transfering it to another institution. Please do let
me know if you are at all interested.
Please be sure to read the IMPORT ANT NOTICE on the last page.
f\EWSNOTES 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, Graduate Center, City University of New York 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 801, City University Graduate Center, 33 West 42nd
Street, New York, NY 10036. All subscription requests and submissions should be
addressed to the Editor of f'EWSNOTES: Leo Hecht, Department of Foreign
Languages and Literatures, George Mason Universit y, Fairfax, VA 22030.
(Proofreading Editor: Prof. Rhonda Blait, Hampshire College Theatre, Amherst,
MA 01002.)
1
BIBUOGRAPHY
Stanislaw I. Witkiewicz, Beelzebub Sonata: Plays, Essays Document, edited
and translated by Daniel Gerould and Jadwiga Kosicka, has been published by
Performing Arts Journal Publications, 325 Spring St., New York 10013. Cloth
$14.95; paper $6.95.
The Performing Arts Journal often published items of great interest to our
readership, including translated plays and articles. For example, here are some
items contained in back issues: Vol. II, No. 1 contains an article by Daniel Gerould
on "Vasilii Aksyonov, Contemporary Russian Playwright," and Aksionov's play Your
Murderer. Vol. 3, No. 3 contains Valerii Briusov's play The Wayfarer. Vol. VI, No. 1
contains Leonid Andreyev's play Requiem. Vol. VI, No. 2 contains Janusz
Glowacki's play Journey to Gdansk. A recent issue of the journal No. 22 (March,
1984), contains an article, "Nikolay Evreinov's Inspector General" and a translation
of that play, both by Laurence Senelick.
Laurence Senelick, Dramatization of Gogol's Dead Souls, has been issued by
Broadway Play Publishers, 249 W. 29th St., New York, NY 10001.
Published in the USSR:
Iusif Iuzovskii. About the Theatre and Drama. 2 volumes. Moscow:
Iskusst vo, 1982-83.
Zinovii Papernyi. In Violation of All Rules: Chekhov's Plays and Vaudevilles.
Moscow: Iskusstvo, 1982.
Soviet One-Act Plays. Moscow: Iskusstvo, 1982.
I. V. Sepman (ed.). Moral Problems of Cinematography of the 70s.
Leningrad: Ministry of Culture of the RSFSR, 1983.
L. Pogozheva. From the Diary of a Film Critic. Moscow: Iskusstvo, 1978.
V. Nemirovich-Danchenko. 0 tvorchestve aktera. Moscow: Iskusstvo, 1982.
Igor Vasilkov. Iskusstvo kino-populiarizatsii. Moskva: Iskusstvo, 1982.
I. Lisakovskii. Realizm kak sistema - Problemy tvorcheskogo metoda v
kinoiskusstve. Moscow: lskusstvo, 1982.
V. Murman. Khudozhestvennyi mir filma. Moscow: Iskusstvo, 1984.
The following is the text of an advertisement from VAAP publication:
Galina Schcheglova
LEONID LEONOV THE DRAMATIST
Moscow, Soversky Pisatel, 1984, 192 pp.
Merits:
The book:
A well-researched textological and ideological analysis into the
works and aesthetic views of Leonov and into his artistic world as a
whole.
Galina Shcheglova studies the plays of Leonid Leonov, an
outstanding Soviet writer and Lenin Prize winner, who has been
writing for more than 50 years.
Looking at Leonov's plays from the point of view of their genre
characteristics, the author succeeds in identifying the specific
2
The author:
features of the writer's style and world outlook and also in
establishing some general trends in Soviet dramatic art.
Leonov's literary career is analysed in the light of the evolution of
genres. The 1920's was a time when he turned to satire, with its
extensive use of ironic implications, artistic exaggeration and
hyperbole, the grotesque, and symbolic forms of typification.
Shcheglova compares the plays Untilovsk, A Provincial Story and
especially The Taming of Badadoshkin with Mayakovsky's satirical
comedies The Bedbug and The Bathhouse. In the 1930's the writer's
insight into psychological and social contradictions deepened and
the internal and external conflicts in his plays became sharper (The
Wolf, The Polovchansk Gardens, The Ordinary Man). --
The Second World War made the writer turn to tragedy as the form
capable of conveying the global conflicts and the drama of the age
(The Invasion).
The comparison of Leonov and Dostoyevsky is interesting and
fruitful. According to Shcheglova, neither of the writers gives a
step-by-step account of the drama of their hero, but both depict
the climatic points of his life, exploring his mind at moments of
the most intense emotion.
Lenonov's plays, in Shcheglova's opinion, are similar to the plays of
Maxim Gorky in the attention given to the moral and psychological
conflicts within people's minds during the revolutionary formation
of a new world and in the problems they raise.
Galina Shcheglova (b. 1931), critic and Doctor of Philology, is also
the author of The Sources of Leonov's Dramatic Works published in
1977.
Recently published Soviet plays in the USSR include:
Aleksandr Khmelik. A vse-taki ana vertitsia i1i umanoid v nebe mchitsia. A
farce in two acts. Published in No. 1, 1984, of Sovietskii Teatr, in Russian
Aleksandr Galin. Retro. 2 acts. Published in Soviet Theatre '83/4, (in English
translation). The same issue also contains an interview with Edvard Radzinskii
about his play Theatre of the Time of Nero and Seneca; and short discussions of
three one-act plays: Love, by Liudmilla Ptrushevskaia, Two Poodles by Semion
Zlotnikov, and A Cat on the Radiator, by Anna Rodionova. The cover of this issue
depicts Radzinskii in front of Lunin posters.
Russian/Soviet Studies by Steven A. Grant, revised by Bradford P. Johnson and
Mark H. Teeter, has just been published by the Smithsonian Institution Press, P .0.
Box 1579, Washington, D.C. 20013. It has 432 pages and cost $29.95-cloth or $15.00
paper. In this revised guide entries on U.S. Government agencies have been entirely
rewritten to reflect administrative and legislative changes. In addition, coverage
of the National Archives and Library of Congress Manuscript Division has been
restructured and lengthened. Also, sections on data banks and collections of Films,
maps, and music and other sound recordings have been substantially augmented.
SPECIAL REPORT
During the past several weeks I have been recetvmg extremely disturbing
reports on Kazimierz Braun. Apparently he is not permitted to work in Poland and
desparately wants to go abroad to direct. If there is anyone among the
I'EWSNOTES readership who could help him and at the same time increase the
prestige of an American university or stage by having him, please do contact the
Polish authorities or write him a letter of invitation which he might use to come to
the West. This would truly be a worthwhile cause.
L.H.
SOME RECENT CONFERENCES
Southern Conference on Slavic Studies, Richmond, VA, October 11-13, 1984.
Panel: East European Drama and Theatre;
Chair: Leo Hecht, George Mason University
Papers: "The Concept of Freedom in Mrozek's Dramas," Alan
Kreizenbeck, University of Denver;
"Innokenty Annenskii's Famira Kifared," Anne Netick,
The College of William and Mary;
"Rozewicz and Apocalyptic Drama in the West," Addison Bross,
Lehigh University;
"The Russian Penchant for Theatricality in Iunona i Avos,"
Joseph Troncale, University of Richmond.
National Convention, American Association for the Advancement of Slavic Studies,
New York, NY, November 1-4, 1984.
Panel: Soviet Culture After Brezhnev: Music, Film and Theatre
Chair: Alma H. Law, Center for Advanced Study of Theatre Arts
Papers: "Music in the Post-Brezhnev Period" Harlow Robinson, SUNY,
Albany;
"Soviet Films of the 1980s" Leo Hecht, George Mason
University;
"Soviet Theatre after Brezhnev" Alma H. Law, City University
of New York Graduate Center.
Discussant: Colette Shulman, School of International Affairs, Columbia
University.
National Conference of the American Association of Teachers of Slavic and East
European Languages, Washington, DC, December 27-29, 1984.
Panel: Soviet and East European Cinema
Chair: Vance Kepley, Jr., University of Wisconsin-Madison
Papers: "Myth and Demystification in Soviet Cinema" Anna Lawton,
Purdue University;
"Motion and Emotion in Eisenstein's Strike" Herb Eagle,
University of Michigan;
"Images of Women in Moscow Doesn't Believe in Tears" Dodona
Kiziria, Indiana University;
"Eldar Riazanov's Garage" Ludmila Pruner, Vanderbilt
University.
Discussant: Valerie Z. Nollan, Oberlin College.
Panel: Stanislavskii and the Moscow Art Theatre
Chair: Leo Hecht, George Mason University
Papers: "Stanislavskii and His Method - A Program on Slides" Directors
of the Stanislavskii Seminars;
4
"Stanislavskii as a Theorist of Theatre Performance" Burnet M.
Hobgood, University of Illinois-Urbana;
"The Meeting of Stanislavskii and Meyerhold in 1938 and Its
Importance for the Russian Stage" Alexander Gershkovich,
Harvard University;
"The Moscow Art Theatre Today" Alma H. Law, City University
of New York Graduate Center.
RUSSIAN LANGUAGE PERFORMANCES
Alexey Kovalev and Jo-Anna Vladimirskaya have recently established
residence in the Washington, D.C. area. Working collaboratively, they have
combined their talents to develop a series of performancces in the Russian language
which they are interested in presenting at American colleges and universities.
Alexey Kovalev directs and provides the musical accompaniment on guitar and
keyboard.
The following programs are currently available for presentation:
1. MY SACRED CALLING
A Poetic Biography of Marina Tsvetaeva
2. ANNA - MUSE OF ALL RUSSIA
A Poetic Biography of Anna Akhmatova
3. An Evening of Russian Music
Program A. LOVE SONGS OF OLD RUSSIA
Program B. CONTEMPORARY RUSSIAN BALLADS
Interested parties may contact Alexey Kovalev at 336 North George Mason Drive,
Arlington, Virginia, 22203. Telephone: (703) 243-1376.
ALEXEY KOVALEV graduated with honors from the Moscow Stanislavsky
Theatre School. He has played roles in both the classical and modern repertoire,
from Hamlet to comedy. Mr. Kovalev played the lead in the acclaimed Soviet
production "My Poor Marat", and received a special award for his role in "An
Accident from the Work of an Investigation." He opened the first "Pocket Theatre"
in Moscow where he presented plays on modern subjects in contemporary absurdist
forms. He received the Best Director Award for his production of "The Television
Interferences." A gifted musician, Mr. Kovalev has written the words and music for
many productions.
Mr. Kovalev came to the United States in 1981 and made his English-language
acting debut in New York City as Salieri in Pushkin's "Mozart and Salieri". In 1983
he directed the New York City Actors Corner production of "My Poor Marat".
Together with his wife, Jo-anna Vladimirskaya, he is currently working on an
English-language version of "Letters to an Unknown Lady" and a new production of
"The Possessed".
JO-ANNA VLADIMIRSKAYA graduated from the Leningrad Institute of
Theatre, Drama, Music and Cinematography. She was invited to perform at the
Moscow Stanislavsky Theatre making her debut as Medea, for which she received a
special award at the Moscow Theatre Festival. Miss Vladimirskaya has performed
more than thirty leading roles on the stage including both contemporary and
classical repertoire. She appeared in the films "Madcaps" and "One More Time
About Love" and her musical talents have been featured in several performances.
Jo-Anna was a master of ceremonies for television specials on Central TV in the
Soviet Union where she also had her own poetry-reading show. She has appeared in
leading roles in four television films.
Miss Vladimirskaya came to the United States with her husband, Alexey
Kovalev in 1981. Her English language acting debut was in the role of Mozart for
the 150th Anniversary Production of Pushkin"s "Mozart and Salieri" in New York
City.
(Note: I had the priviledge of seeing them perform. It was an extremely enjoyable
learning experience).
REVIEW
The following is a review of the original production of The Nest of the Wood
Grouse, written by Peter Wynne who is the drama critic of The Record. We thank
both the author and The Record, where this review first appeared, for permission to
reprint.
THE NEST OF THE WOOD GROUSE: Comedy by Victor Rozov, translated
from the Russian by Susan Layton. With Dennis Boutsikaris, Phoebe Cates,
Julie Cohen, Ricky Paull Goldin, Mary Beth Hurt, Anne Jackson, Eli Wallach,
and others. Directed by Joseph Papp, Scenery by Loren Sherman. Costumes
by Theoni Aldredge. Lighting by Arden Fingerhut. At the New York
Shakespeare Festival's Public/Newman Theater, 425 Lafayeete St. (212) 598-
7150.
If the current heat wave has led to a case of premature summer blahs,
then a visit to the Public Theater and Victor Rozov's "The Nest of the Wood
Grouse" just might be the cure.
The Soviet dramatist's family comedy, which opened last night, is a
delightfully old-fashioned piece that's currently in repertory at Moscow's
Satire Theater. And its American premiere, staged by New York Shakespeare
Festival artistic director Joseph Papp, is one of the most lavish productions
seen at the Public Theatre in years--lavishness that ranges from a stunning
two-room set and handsome costumes to casting that includes Anne Jackson,
Eli Wallach, and Mary Beth Hurt.
A plot synopsis of the play would probably be more lengthy than
revealing. There are nearly as many plots and themes as there are characters
in the play, and that number runs to 14.
Conflicts between the generations and between husband and wife,
censorship that applies to the masses but not privileged apparatchiks, the
caviar, cognac, and coffee that only a few can enjoy--all these things are
Rozov's targets, but basically, the play centers on the chaos caused by a
bureaucrat, Stephen Sudakov (Wallach), who is so wrapped up in his work and
the wheeling and dealing that makes up everyday Soviet life that he has no
time for his family.
The title, "The Nest of the Wood Grouse," refers to the fact that during
mating season, the males of that species get so wrapped up in courtship that
they're easy prey. They're oblivious to their surroundings.
6
The wheeling-dealing Sudakov, married to the long-suffering Natalya
Gavrilovna (Jackson), is the perfect wood gourse: He has, for example, made
a protege and son-in- law of the cynical, ambitious Georgy Yasyunin (Dennis
Boutsikaris). Georgy, or Yegor, as he's usually called, has married Sudakov's
daughter, Iskra (Hurt), as the first big step up the apparatchik ladder. But
now Yegor has eyes for pretty young Ariadna Koromyslova (Phoebe Cates),
the daughter of a higher-ranking functionary at the Foreign Ministry than his
father-in-law.
Barbs in callous bureaucrats are central to this quintessentially Soviet
comedy. Sudakov is a basically decent sort, but he'll do favors for anyone who
can do favors for him. He fawns over foreign visitors--it's part of his job, he
says--and coldly discusses with Yegor the ruin of a colleague whose son has
committed suicide. The real issue, of course, is whether he or Yegor will
succeed their disgraced comrade, whose inability to "manage" a son casts
supposedly permanent doubt on his ability to manage a ministry department.
Some of the humor is lost on Americans unfamiliar with Soviet life, but
the important thing to remember is that the play, though sometimes sad, is
laced with humor. Rozov casts devilishly satiric light on class privilege in a
purportedly classless society.
The playwright had been invited to last night's premiere, but was denied
permission to come to the United States by American officials. At
intermission last night, Papp said that he had spoken to Rozov by phone
earlier in the day and that the playwright's main concern was whether
American audiences were getting the comedy. There were laughs last night,
to be sure, but as word gets around that "The Nest of the Wood Grouse" is a
comedy, there should be plenty more.
MINI-REVIEW
We were again indebted to The Record for permtss10n to reprint a short
review, also written by Peter Wynne, which appeared in that newspaper in late
September, 1984, on the first off-Broadway production of Radzinsky's play.
Edvard Radzi nsky's "Theatre in the Time of Nero and Seneca" at the
Jean Cocteau Repertory, is a stinging indictment of intellectuals who have
tolerated terror tactics by regimes whose goals were ideologically "correct."
Of course, when a Soviet author writes a play like this he must be less
than candid. Radzinsky has set the action in the time of the Roman emperor
Nero and made it chiefly a dialogue between Nero (Craig Smith) and the Stoic
philosopher Seneca (Harris Berlinsky).
It's a matter of history that when Nero was 12 or 13, Seneca became his
tutor and that a few years later, when the youth became emperor, he
showered gifts on the philosopher. But the favor Seneca enjoyed was not
sufficient to save his life when he was implicated in a comspiracy against
Nero, who then was 27.
In the play, the flamboyant Nero, who now claims godly powers,
confronts the softspoken Seneca with the evidence against him. He orders the
death of the friend and teacher who had helped him avoid censure for crimes
committed early in his reign, such as murdering his stepbrother, Britannicus,
whom he feared as a rival to imperial throne.
7
The play is fascinating and well performed, and the production, directed
by Eve Adamson with costumes by Christopher Martin and a single setting by
him and Giles Hogya, is one of the best the 13-year-old company has mounted.
The Cocteau Rep works at the Bouwerie Lane Theatre, 330 Bowery, at
Second Street. For further information, call (212) 677-0060.
A LETTER FROM CAUFORNIA
We are always happy to receive letters and comments from the readers which
share experiences and insights. This letter which was written to N::WSNOTES by
Professor Robert Cohen who chairs the Drama Department at the University of
California, Irvine, is one of the very best and most informative which we have
received. I am grateful to Or. Cohen for it:
We have been active at UC Irvine in developing some Eastern European
theatre ties, most notably, I suppose, by our having recently (1983) engaged Jerzy
Grotowski as a member of our faculty; Professor Grotowski heads our Focused
Research Program in Objective Drama, for which we have created an entire facility
on the UCI campus. The Program explores the morphemes of ancient ritual
performance which are still practiced in various parts of the world. The program is
funded by several grants, both internal and external to the University (the Ford
Foundation is a major and has already enrolled, in addition to the UCI
students, participants from Yale and New York Universities. The program is now
planned to continue at least through 1990, and we expect it to make a major
contribution to the understanding and pedagogy of performance.
Also, we are hosting, this spring, a two week residency by the fine Hungarian
actor, Andras Marton, and his Finnish-Hungarian wife, Maija-Liisa Marton. The
Martens will present the Ferenc Karinthy play, Steinway Grand, in both Hungarian
and English, on the UCI campus. The Martens will also lead a series of public
workshops on Eastern European theatre and film.
In conjunction with the Program in Russian, the UCI Drama department has
also co-sponsored lecture-discussions with several leading Soviet playwrights,
including Victor Rozov and Mikail Shatrov, and will soon be inviting Shatrov for a
longer stay at the UCI Russi an Institute. And many of the UCI faculty in Drama
have recently engaged in exchanges or research in Eastern Europe, including David
McDonald (the USSR), Keith Fowler Olga Maynard (Bulgaria, the GDR)
and myself (Hungary, the USSR).
I saw the Kantor production of Wielepole, Wielepole, in Los Angeles, but as I
have no Polist1, I cannot review it for you. It certainly seemechimpressive, and got
an immediate standing ovation from the filled auditorium, however, despite the
fact that Kantor was - so I was told - very displeased at the performance that
night.
I am doubly sorry not to be able to provide you with reviews of the remarkable
productions of Hamlet and the Bulgakov Master and Margarita, directed by Tamas
Asher, and produced by the outstanding Cskiky Gergely Szinhas of Kaposvar,
Hungary, which I saw in Budapest this past summer. The Kaposvar theatre is widely
regarded as the most brilliant avant-garde company in Hungary, and I found both
productions quite wonderful. The Bulgakov play featured extensive nudity, a first
for the Hungarian stage I was told, and the acting was very powerful. The Hamlet
was a controversial production, in part owing to a new translation, and it was
simply staged; I found it electrifying, particularly in the relationship between a
8
suave, calculating Claudius and an empty-headed, whorish Gertrude. But lacking
Hungarian, I am regrettably unable to give your readers anything but a glimpse of
what these productions had to offer; perhaps you might solicit a review from a
qualified observer.
In a similar vein, I would be interested if any of your readers had seen, and
would be able to review (or even share comments with me a b o u ~ the Leningrad
Lensovet Theatre production of Cat On A Hot Tin Roof which I saw in the Fall of
1983. I would most like to know how the production was received by the Russian
audience. It seemed to me very faithfully presented, although not at all in the
standard American fashion (the Mississippi delta had apparently become a range in
the Caucasus - snowy peaks dominated the backdrop!). Big Daddy - Bolshoi-Pa -
was dressed in worker's levis, and both Brick and Maggie were about as unheroic as
could be imagined. Surprising, the acting seemed quite bombastic; all center stage,
full front, with magnificent voices and diction but little in the way of interaction or
"living the life of the characters." Stanislavski, thou shouldst be living at this
hour! Also, I was told by my very charming young intourist guide, who just
"happened" to be sitting next to me (I had not even told her I was getting tickets to
that production), that the Russians had no idea that Williams - whom they claimed
to know well - was a homosexual, or had written revealing memoires, or could have
intended any drift of a homosexual implication in the relationship between Brick
and Skipper. I would greatly appreciate being directed to any elucidation of these
matters by someone who knows the Russian theatre better than I do.
POP MUSIC IN Tf-E USSR
The following was taken from news reports in the Washington Post:
Soviet pop groups should sing about morality adn communist ideals, not
the decadent "dirt" that is the main theme of Western pop music, readers of a
youth newspaper say. New pop groups in the Soviet Union are "the epitome of
tastelessness," failing to provide examples of morality and ideological
correctness, a letter to Komsomolskaya Pravda said in its weekend edition
published Saturday. The letters were written in response to an earlier article
in the newspaper complaining about the bad taste of contemporary groups and
their inability to perform well on stage.
Worse still are groups that emulate Western trends in singing and
behavior, some of the writers said. One letter described Western pop music as
"wild wailing."
"This in fact is nothing but the forceful propaganda of an ideology which
is alien to us, to a way of life which is alien to us," a reader from the Siberian
city of Novosibirsk said.
Some young Soviets spend huge sums buying U.S. albums on the black
market. The letters followed an attack on American teen idol Michael
Jackson last month in the official Sovyetskaya Kultura newspaper. The
article said Jackson mesmerized Americans, preventing them from thinking
about problems like serious racial violence in the United States, and said he
had sold out his race by allowing the white establishment to profit from his
singing.
One mother from the Ukrainian city of Khabarovsk wrote to say she was
shocked that her 16-year-old son was being corrupted by songs like "Sweet
9
Life" by a group called Primus. In the song, a young man goes out on the town
and ends up the next morning in bed with a woman he does not know. "I want
to know who is in charge of the activities of these groups, how they make
their recordings and what right they have to dish up this dirt in the guise of
musical works," the mother said.
One reader submitted the lyrics of a song he recently heard performed in
a local park as an example of the silliness of the new pop groups:
A hippo doesn't have a waist.
It can't dance either
A giraffe has a long neck.
Too long to kiss.
The walrus has prickly whiskers.
And he often goes about barefoot.
The letter warned that such songs are played to easily influenced young
audiences and could affect the general Soviet culture and morals.
RESEAROi ON SOVIET FJLM
Val Golovskoy, Queens College, has completed his work on a very important
decade of Soviet film. It will be published by Ardis in May, 1985. What follows is a
synopsis of the book, and also a sample segment of it - a report of Ryazanov's
speech (translated by Steven Hill):
Motion Picture in the USSR, 1972-1982, by Val S.
Golovskoy, as told to John E. Rimberg, with the
assistance of Steven P. Hill. 251 pages.
Who runs the Soviet film industry, and how? What happens to a film at
various stages of its development--at the studio, in the government front office
(Goskino), in the Communist Party's Central Committee? How does film censorship
operate? What are the film distribution channels used in the USSR?
These and many other questions are answered in a new book by a former
Soviet film critic and graduate of the Moscow Film Institute, written together with
an American sociologist and an American film-theatre historian.
The principal author is Val S. Golovskoy, who until 1981 was a writer-editor on
two leading Soviet film magazines, Sovetski Ekran and Iskusstvo Kino, and who
wrote or translated numerous articles and books on Russian, Polish, and world
cinema. Golovskoy left the USSR two and a half years ago and is now doing
research here for the Ph.D. at the University of Michigan. Also contributing to the
book are Prof. Johr E. Rimberg, sociologist from Pembroke State University (N.C.),
author of two previous books, The Soviet Film Industry (Praeger, 1955) and Motion
Picture in the Soviet Union, 1918-1952 (Arno, 1973), and Prof. Steven P. Hill, Slavic
linguist from the University of Illinois (Champaign-Urbana), author of many articles
and reviews on film and theatre history in Russia and Eastern Europe.
Motion Picture in the USSR, 1972-1982 is less a "scholarly book" than it is an
eye-opening inside story taken directly from Golovskoy's fifteen years of work in
the heart of the Soviet film Industry and in the film press. It is a previously untold
story about many new developments that have appeared in Soviet motion pictures
over the last decade, including a strong element of "commercialism" influenced by
Hollywood itself.
10
The book is diverse in its presentation of material. Together with a detailed.
account of audience research conducted in the USSR, it also includes Prof.
Rimberg's question-and-answer interview with Golovskoy. There is rich material of
sociological interest, and from everyday life, in the chapter entitled "A Week in the
Life of a Movie-Magazine Editor." One hundred brief descriptions ("portraits") of
Soviet film critics, journalists, and editors constitute a very valuable reference
section of the book, and provide a collective sociological portrait of the people who
implement Commmnist Party policy and who decide whether a film gets a good or a
bad rating in the USSR. The reference section of the book also includes English
translations of a number of rare documents that were brought out of the USSR by
Golovskoy. These are previously unpublished stenographic reports of some
backstage meetings, conveying the words of some acrimonious debates between
film-makers and government/party officials, the sort of dispute that is rarely, if
ever, made public. The book also includes a foreword, an afterword, a concluding
theoretical chapter, and indices of names and titles mentioned in the text.
Film for a long time has been considered one of the most important forms of
propaganda for Communist Party ideology in the USSR. And an analysis of the
techniques of this propaganda machine, with the results that they achieve (or fail to
achieve), is offered to the Western reader by this new book, Motion Picture in the
USSR, 1972-1982.
STENOGRAPHIC REPORT OF DIRECTOR ELDAR RYAZANOV'S SPEECH
AT THE PLENARY SESSION OF THE FILM-MAKERS UNION OF THE USSR,
MOSCOW, DECEMBER 2, 1980
I do not like to speak in public. I do it extremely seldom because every speech
usually brings unpleasant consequences and increases the number of enemies.
Today I prepared my speech carefully. My main concern is not to hurt anybody.
On my way here, I did not think about what to say but rather about what
should not be said. We are all like icebergs - which, as you know, are nine-tenths
under water
We say that there are all sorts of films. But it is wortbwhile to speak a bit
about the creators of films. Because of television, as you know, and because of the
wide availability of shows, the criterion of quality and high art in creative
production has dropped sharply. In nineteenth-century Russia, democratic
literature was always the conscience of the nation. When I think about the course
of events which I read and watch, I understand that we are still a long way from a
conscience here. I would like to remind you that the people see all, know all,
remember all. Conscience and concern for the people must be the main criterion.
That has not been said here, but it needs to be!
The deaths of Vladimir Vysotski and Vasili Shukshin have shown very clearly
who had power over men's minds in our country. Vysotski received no awards--as an
actor he wasn't the best; there are more significant actors-but in his songs (some
have been released but others have not, through no fault of his!), he never lied. He
was honest. He lived without sparing himself. He worked himself to death
The criterion for an artist is the impact on other people; an artistic life is
dedicated to the people. Not in words, but in deeds
And here is one more thing: it's impossible to live from one official campaign
to the next. There is only one concern--the state of the people's soul, their health,
their stomach, their garb. And if all this does not inspire an artist, what kind of
11
artist is he, anyway? He is simply making a living! Not everyone can be a genuine
artist, who ignores the transitory to focus on the basic interests of the people. The
transitory and the permanent seldom coincide. Interests of the moment change
frequently but an artist should not be a weathervane. He should not keep up with
every fad. The basic interests of the people change slowly; these constitute the
genuine life of the nation. A real artist senses the difference between fads and
basics.
To me it seems very important that somebody working in art be a complete
person. Unfortunately, not many of us can boast of that. It is very difficult.
The criterion of a master, an artist, a man of art has been substantially lowered and
diluted by a great number of hacks and opportunists.
Speaking of opportunists, we are accustomed to think that an opportunist
always desires to please the big bosses, to do a picture or a book which appeals to
the leadership. That is an oversimplified conception. There are, for example,
foreign travel opportunists, who make films which appeal to the international
festival audiences. Sometimes there is also a dissident sort of opportunism, when
Aesopian language is used for conveying strange hints; this is done not out of
conviction but merely because by doing so they can rake in the money. Sometimes
there -is also a pseudo-people's opportunism; they counterfeit themselves to
resemble "democrats" but in fact they don't care about people.
Strange things happen here when opportunism becomes an everyday
occurrence--when a person becomes so accustomed to lying that falsehood becomes
the essence. I am not indulging in an expose; rather, I am trying to analyze certain
aspects of our spiritual life. This analysis is sometimes overlooked by professional
critics who are not interested in certain aspects of our spiritual life but this is basic
to our art.
Also, we have very many pseudo-patriotic films. They cause enormous harm
because such films frighten the audience. People no longer understand the
difference between mere phrases and actual deeds, between pride and arrogance,
between true patriotism and pretense. There is nothing more destructive to the
human psyche than the poison poured into consciousness by pseudo-patriotic films,
art, literature. We deceive the audience frequently. We pour into them the poison
of falsehood instead of saying what may be bitter but is still the truth.
In his book, Peter Brook divided the theatre into living and dead; the same is
also true for cinema. So it was, and will be, eternally--in Pushkin's time, in our
days, and a hundred years from now. Unquestionably among artists there will be
those who are alive and those who are dead. And it's strange; sometimes, in our
country,.it is the dead artists who receive rewards and travel to foreign festivals,
while in actual fact their pictures do not interest anyone
I want to say a few words about corrections. I could write an entire book
about the corrections which I have had occasion to make in my films. I fear that in
our country no publishing-house would distribute such a book, and I wouldn't care to
send the manuscript to a foreign country, so I will not write this book. With the
passage of time, however, I understood that corrections are not a bad thing. When
experience, know-how, and mastery develop, corrections can be turned to benefit
the picture.
In my picture "Look Out for Cars!" (1963) Papanov and Mironov play a scene
at the country house. Papanov originally addressed his son-in-law, acted by
Mironov, as follows:
12
Who are you, anyway? An ordinary swindler!
But Pm a retired lieutenant-colonel!
Later, we made a correction.* Now Papanov spoke as follows:
You're an ordinary swindler, but you know who I am ?
Because he gives commands all the time, like "Silence!" and" Tenshun!", and his
daughter has one line--"Dad, your barracks jokes are out of place"--the audience
guesses that he's some sort of general or even a marshal. Those who insist on
corrections need to do some heavy thinking beforehand!
In connection with that film, I was also advised that it would be better for the
hero not to steal the car from the swindler but rather for the hero to inform the
auto-theft squad so that the police would confiscate the car. Everything would end
more or less the same, and it would be even more amusing that way
I shall not speak again today about the aims of satire, since I've written and
spoken in public about it frequently; we all know that satire is necessary. From
words I moved to deeds, and together with writer Emil Braginski I wrote the script
and directed the film "Garage." What happened then is an incredibly interesting
story: If it hadn't been for Yevgeny Gabrilovich elder statesman among writers,
who defended "Garage" such a picture would not exist today.
By the way, I have received 3,000 letters, of which five were negative. I
understand that the majority of people who write an author send praise, but there
have been 3,000 letters! Let's be outspoken about this: who among our film
directors has ever received such a number of letters about his picture, especially
when the picture is not showing in 50 percent of the country? I get letters with
requests:
Do something so that "Garage" will be shown in our area
From Kharkov they write:
We traveled to Belgorod, which is in Russia, and the picture plays there
but here in the Ukraine it is not playing.
I have no complaints about the labs printing too few copies of "Garage" since
there is plenty of money in our country; but the copies just lie there, and the film is
not distributed. The local authorities evidently don't want it, and are afraid to
distribute it. What's happening, anyway? Are we Russians more spiritually healthy,
while the Ukrainians are less so and will be ruined by this picture's influence?... I
do not know why some are permitted to see it, while others are not. I believed we
have a unified society--a socialist system everywhere. But it's not only "Garage"!
In the Ukraine, plays by Rozov, by Roshchin, and by me are not performed. Once I
deigned to jest, saying that in the Ukraine our plays are staged only in Odessa and
Sevastopol because those are officially called the "hero-cities"! Immediately, the
Central Committee received a batch of denunciations!
Insofar as I am a satirist, I say things that are unpleasant, but somebody has to
do that. I know that we have very much that is good, and thank heavens for it. And
*When I was urged to correct this dialog, the warning was:
You'll have to take out the part about the lieutenant-colonel, since the Main
Political Administration of the Ministry of Defense of the USSR won't let it
through anyway. The Army, you know, is a sacred matter. Don't do it! (Val
Golovskoy).
i3
I do believe that! That is wonderful! But now I want to talk of something else,
about which no one speaks.
Half the lab run of prints of "Garage" is dormant and brings in no profit,
although it could. Not only financial profit, I think, but also ideological profit. I've
been to a film theater, and observed that the audience applauds ten or twelve times
during the picture. I am not singing my own praises. I attribute that audience
reaction to the fact that the people are perpetually longing for honesty, for truth,
for real communication. We smooth over a lot of things. We make pictures that
resemble truth but are not truthful

MROZEK AND FREEDOM: EVOLUTION TO A HIGJ--IER AWAREI'55
Americans, as a society and as individuals, constantly examine, question, and
re-define their interpersonal relationships, their interactions with the legal system,
and their interpretations of moral and spiritual dictates. Many of the dilemas
which are caused by or are answered through this process center on defining the
proper limits of personal choice. Answers that are reached have often played an
important part in shaping our country's history and policy; they certainly have been
paramount in determining our social milieu. Can I decide not to pay taxes on tea;
can I decide to own slaves; can I decide not to fight; can I decide to have an
abortion are examples of personal choices which have had an impact on the
movement and fabric of American life.
What is assumed before the examination-resolution process even begins is that
the individual has the ability, but more important, the right to choose. It is a given
tenet in American society that the decisions reached through personal or public
debate over the possibilities inherent in any situation will result in the evolution of
society and mankind, that through the selection of the action which seems most
fitting and proper, we will be able to rid ourselves of meaningless restrictions and
outmoded concepts of behavior. Wihout the right of choice, the mind becomes
mired in lethargy, with trivialities to occupy its potential and little to capture its
interest. Americans believe that dictated solutions are substitutes for a natural
process; that they not only restrict the body, but ensnare the human spirit as well.
Having said this, we must now look at freedom of choice from a different
perspective, through the eyes of someone who has only rarely had the opportunity
to experience it. Doing so will allow us to examine more closely the activity which
we consider so basic that we no longer consider it at all. The results of such a
biopsy will clarify our situation as members of a "free" society, and provide insights
into the commonality that we share with members of other societies less "free"
than our own.
The works of Polish playwright Slawomir Mrozek provide this fresh
perspective. Although he has experimented with various theatrical genres
throughout his over thirty years as a dramatist, the thematic thrust of his work has
remined constant. From political parable, to absurdist comedy, to realistic
melodrama, to a mixture of all three, Mrozek has continually explored the
definition, and the consequences of what we mean when we use the word "freedom".
He was a political cartoonist before becoming a playwright, a background that
is apparent in his useof caricature and in the manner in which the physical-visual
context of his plays supports their ideational content. Mrozek's earliest dramas
were written for Bim Bam, a collection of artists founded in 1953. Association with
Bim Bam strengthened Mrozek's visual sense, as they as a group had a fascination
with poetic image and little interest in words, but also sharpened his political
14
sensibility, as many of their works were conceived as thinly veiled social criticism.
Most of Mrozek's Bim Bam plays can be labeled as absurdist for a variety of
reasons. They combine vaudeville humor with simple but evocative imagery,
contain illogical situations carried to logical ends, and employ convoluted language
spoken by characters who lack psychological dimension. The plays are most often
political fables, mixing social analysis with malicious slapstick, indebted to Ionesco
(The Martyrdom of Peter Ohey has a tiger instead of a rhinocerus) and Beckett (in
The Party three men arrive at a supposed celebration, only to discover no one else
has shown up). But while Mrozek's technique may have been modern and essentially
foreign, his content continued in the Polish tradition established by earlier writers
such as Mickiewicz, Krasinki, and Witkacy who, although they are nationalistic and
mystic, established freedom as the primary topic of Polish dramatic literature.
There is a progression in Mrozek's thoughts on freedom, a developing
sophistication and subtlety. His early works are closely aligned with his
predecessor's passion for linking personal and national liberation. This is best
exhibited in The Police, in which the fanatically loyal undercover Sergeant allows
himself to be jailed as an insurgent so that the government can keep its police force
occupied. But he undergoes a transformation while incarcerated and becomes an
actual revolutionary. His playending cry of "Long Live Freedom" resonates through
centuries of Polish drama. In The Police, freedom clearly means freedom from
something-namely political and social repression. In. Out at Sea, however, the
definition of freedom is not so easy to discover. The character "Thin" speaks:
Freedom--means nothing at all. It is only true freedom that means
anything. Why? Because it is true, and therefore, better. In which
case, where are we to search for true freedom? Let us think logically.
If true freedom is not the same thing as ordinary freedom, where are we
to find this freedom? The answer is simple: true freedom exists only in
the place where there is no ordinary freedom.
It appears that Mrozek is playing verbal games in this speech, but the game, in fact,
accurately describes not only reality for the play's characters, but for the play's
Polish audience as well. Thin, trapped on a liferaft with Fat and Medium, is being
forced to choose between dying of starvation or offering himself up as a food
source, so that the other two may cannibalize him and live. Thin does have free
choice, but either choice will result in his death. Mrozek is carefully pointing out,
perhaps reminding his audience, that freedom is not an absolute, but a relative
term, its meaning dependent on the context in which it is used. This idea would not
be lost on an audience in a country where one may walk the streets to certain
destinations during certain hours of the day, where one has the freedom to vote
for one slate of candidates, where one has the freedom to speak . of certain
things. True freedom exists where ordinary - Soviet - freedom does not, but true
freedom also exists where the choices are true alternatives, not arbitrary illusions
designed to keep the powerful powerful regardless of the choice that is made.
In Tango, written in 1968, Mrozek more fully explores the relationship
between freedom and power. In the earlier parable Strip-Tease he had shown that
complaince or resistance to force resulted in the same posture-submission-with no
more honor or glory to the resister than to the complier. In Tango, power is the
decisive factor and perhaps the only solution to the ideological battle between
traditional values and so-called "free" thought; and so while power does restore
order, both the old guard and the revolutionaries have to sacrifice freedom to
remain free. Power is depicted as an obvious but unsatisfying solution, a false deus
ex machina, neatly symbolized by the dance that ends the play, a "revolutionary"
1';
tango performed by the partners power and old guard over and around the dead body
of the most radical of the traditionalists. Power, it seems, will allow free
expression as long as it enjoys what is being expressed. Everyone remains "free"
but from now on, their choices will be arbitrarily, if not whimsically limited. In
both Strip-Tease and Tango, power has no content; it simply is. Free of intellectual
or emotional connotations, the control it exerts over the characters in the two
plays is all the more frightening for its impenetrability. Power is personified in
Tango (in Strip-Tease it is two large disembodied hands that push the human
characters around the set) but the character lacks human qualities simply because
he always acts out of his own best interest. He is audience in a country where one
may walk the streets to certain destinations during certain hours of the day,
where one has the freedom to vote for one slate of candidates, where one has
the freedom to speak of certain things. True freedom exists where ordinary -
Soviet freedom does not, but true freedom also exists where the choices are true
alternatives, not arbitrary illusions designed to keep the powerful powerful
regardless of the choice that is made.
In Tango, written in 1968, Mrozek more fully explores the relationship
between freedom and power. In the earlier parable Strip-Tease he had shown that
complaince or resistance to force resulted in the same posture-submissionwith no
more honor or glory to the resister than to the complier. In Tango, power is the
decisive factor and perhaps the only solution to the ideological battle between
traditional values and so-called "free" thought; and so while power does restore
order, both the old guard and the revolutionaries have to sacrifice freedom to
remain free. Power is depicted as an obvious but unsatisfying solution, a false deus
ex machina, neatly symbolized by the dance that ends the play, a "revolutionary"
tango performed by the partners power and old guard over and around the dead body
of the most radical of the traditionalists. Power, it seems, will allow free
expression as long as it enjoys what is being expressed. Everyone remains "free"
but from now on, their choices will be arbitrarily, if not whimsically limited. In
both Strip-Tease and Tango, power has no content; it simply is. Free of intellectual
or emotional connotations, the control it exerts over the characters in the two
plays is all the more frightening for its impenetrability. Power is personified in
Tango (in Strip-Tease it is two large disembodied hands that push the human
characters around the set) but the character lacks human qualities simply because
he always acts out of his own best interest. He is free, but without responsibility to
his fellow human beings. The result of free power is enslavement for others, a neat
analogy for certain governments and a warning to those who might too easily give
over some of their own areas of choice to a higher power, no matter how benign it
may appear.
By 1974 Mrozek had transcended nationalistic political concerns totally and
was focused on the universal implications of his ordinary - true freedom
distinction. By the time he writes Emmigres he seems to have already said all he
has to say about power restricting freedom and in this work focuses on the possible
realization of true freedom. The play presents two characters (AA and XX) who
have escaped the "ordinary" freedom of their restrictive homeland to live in a
"truely" free nation. But both characters come to realize that they are actually
less free than they were previously, for they have become slaves to the very things
that they thought would liberate them- money for one, artistic expression for the
other. They discover that they have carried their prisons with them, that they have
traded external, general oppression for its internal, individual counterpart. Mrozek
goes a step further than in Out At Sea, for now freedom is not determined by an
outside force or power, but by the individual's ability to recognize the guises that
16
the force or power may take. By presenting an outside force that is at worst
neutral Mrozek shows that freedom is an attitude as much as a condition. The
characters in Emigres assumed that freedom was external, or at least that once
external freedom was achieved, true freedom would be sure to follow. But now
they find that they must rid themselves of what they thought would bring freedom
to actually achieve that state. Mrozek provides a profoundly depressing answer as
to what is left after their dreams--which were also their enslavers--are gone. XX
tears up all of his hoarded money and escapes the enormity of his action by falling
into a deep sleep. The more sensitive AA destroys his manuscript and also goes to
bed. But instead of sleeping, he begins to cry, a sound that grows louder and louder
and the final curtain descends. If they are to be truly free, XX and AA can no
longer live for something--they must simply live, an existence that Mrozek does not
depict, butthat his characters, at least at play's end, seem incapable of
confronting. Their response--escape and fear--demonstrate Mrozek's point, that a
life of true freedom is one of uncertainty, changing values and tenuous
melationships with people, objects, and ideas. It is not secure, not safe, not for
everyone, and certainly not the idealized existence that has fueled Polish literature
and thougt for the last two hundred years. Mrozek is reminding us of the duality in
existence, that a dark and a bright side exist to our most cherished concepts. It
seems certain that he belives freedom to be good, just as he also believes that
absolutes, "true" anything, to be destructive. The Golden Mean is operative here a
clear-headed rejection of the idealistic extravagance of a people too long without
one of life's basic necessities. In Emigres Mrozek presents traditional Polish
dramatic topics, but is also firmly a man of the twentieth century, reminding us
that all things are relative.
The physical settings and accouterments in Mrozek's plays reinforce his
intellectual concepts. Most of his dramas use only one set, that of a single room.
The small liferaft surrounded by a limitless empty ocean is the single room in Out
At Sea, and serves as an appropriate metaphor for the entrapment and isolation
that the more literal single room locale conveys in Mrozek's other works. His sets
are cells, a reality which many of his characters recognize and at some point in the
play's action, confront. Most of Mrozek's characters, particularly in his early plays,
would like to escape; some, however, resign themselves to their environment; and a
few, particularly in the later works, are glad for the room's security. But only
rarely, most notably in The Police, do characters break through the walls that so
literally represent their physical, mental, and spiritual confinement.
The room metaphor is a popular one with many of Mrozek's contemporaries,
particularly Harold Pinter. His rooms are havens of warmth and safety, which are
invaded by personified forces from "the outside" who bring peril and possible
destruction to the room's inhabitants. Mrozek's action is more self-contained--no
one need enter to set his plays in motion, possibly because his "outside" is not so
neatly delineated, but instead represents potential. The "outside" for Mrozek is a
concept which terrifies some characters and exhilarates others, but in all cases
represents action which the characters must take-it is not action which is taken on
them.
Mrozek's "physicalization of the trapped" extends even to his character's
costumes. The playwright uses clothes to remind the audience of the rigidity
inherent in societies and individuals. Tango provides the best example of Mrozek's
ability to create visual metaphor. Stomil, an artist who belives in totally free
expression, is clad for most of the play in a pair of pajamas whose fly is perpetually
down. His son, Arthur, who wants to re-establish the old order of ules nud
17
priorities, dresses in a dark suit, white shirt, and tie. When Arthur's philosophy
finally prevails, he demands that his family take part in an old fashioned wedding
ceremony. Stomil and the other relatives don the traditional garments--including
girdles and bustles for the women. But the clothes pinch and squeeze and "don't
allow one to breathe." Clearly the manner in which the clothes restrict the body is
analogous to the manner in which Arthur's new order restricts the mind and spirit.
Restrictive clothing also appears in Emigres when XX proudly shows off his
purchase of an expensive pair of shoes, even though they are too tight and will ruin
his feet. The shoes represent XX's freedom, for in this new country he can make
enough money to purchase whatever he wants, even objects associated with persons
of a higher social station. But the shoes bring no pleasure, they are a burden rather
than an enjoyment, a tangible representation of XX's predicament in his quest for
true freedom.
Clothing also symbolizes social position, as many of Mrozek's characters see
garments or their trappings as concrete proof ofposition and its accompaning
security. The Sergeant in The Police wants gold braid sewn on his underwear so
that he can still be in uniform a little when he is working undercover. The
Ambassador in the play of the same name (Mrozek's most recently translated work)
frets because he has lost a cufflink and therefore will not be able to properly
represent his government--in fact, he will not be a true ambassador if he is
cufflinkless. Like the Sargeant, he will be out of uniform and therefore without
identity.
When the ambassador is stripped of his "uniform" and its accompaning
pretense--his home country is taken over by his host country, his wife leaves him
and he is isolated from all contact with the outside world because he gives assylum
to a potential defector--he is able to discover the man underneath all those layers.
When he re-discovers his true nature, he re-discovers honor. As the turn of events
frees him from the obligations of his position, he finds the courage to die for his
beliefs. Part of his emergence occurs because he takes responsibility for another
human being, namely the dissident he decides to protect. Mrozek's latest comment
on freedom seems to be that it is attainable if it is not centered on the self, but is
focused outward, toward others. Egoist freedom will possibly destoy XX and AA--
selfless freedom redeems the ambassador.
Mrozek himself is an emigre, having lived outside of Poland for many years.
The resultant distancing from his homeland has given him some objectivity
regarding his country's passions and problems. He is able to see that political
freedom, while essential, is not a magic solution to a nation's problems, for free
choice brings with it its own set of predicaments. In Emigres and The Ambassador
r o ~ e k has shown how true freednm can be attained and what should be done with
it. Mrozek's answer to the paradox of free choice transcends both his inherited and
his chosen literary tradition, placing him in the company of writers who believe
that the first question that should be answered when making a choice is how will
this or that solution best serve my fellow human beings. True freedom may entail
giving up freedom, but it is a consciously willed surrender for a higher good.
Mrozek's true freedom suggests an ideal Christian/Communist society, one which
would probably not survive very long in today's world. But then the Poles, as
Mrozek would be the first to point out have always fantasized perfect conditions as
a means of coping with and subverting the sins and excesses that so often
victimized (and victimizes) their very real world.
Alan Kreizenbeck
18
University of Denver
GODOTFEST IN BELGRADE
As most European countries, Yugoslavia enjoys a rich theater life that is
mainly run within a network of almost one hundred repertory theaters, with
permanent ensembles and generous municipal and state subsidies that often cover
up to 80% of the budget. The multiethnic character of the country and its federal
system are reflected in the existence of several, equally developed theater centrs.
Within the past decade two trends became noticable in the Yugoslav theater: a
growing popularity of contemporary domestic plays that often deal with the most
sensitive social and political issues in an open, critical and sometimes satirical
manner; and the emergence of many independent theater groups that are being
formed by those theater professionals who grew dissatisfied with the rep system,
institutional production practices and own civil servant status. Thus, permanent
employment - still a dream of the acting profession in this country - is increasingly
seen in Yugoslavia as a restriction or at least as a position that lacks excitiment
and curbs experimentation.
Most independent companies, however, struggle with public subsidies that are
practically pre-marked for the existing institutional theaters, which themselves
hardly can cope with the 60% annual inflation, even with subsidies. The completion
of the rep companies and independent groups, for both public funds and audiences,
has become the main conflict in the Yugoslav theater life. Both kinds of theater
attempt to win the spectators by turning the stage in a forum for public debate
rather than entertainment or strictly artistic pursuits. Theater dares to approach
issues and present views that are often conspicuously absent from politics and the
press.
One of the most daring and successful of independent groups is KPGT, a
company whose name is an acronym, derived from the first letters of the word
theater in four Yugoslav languages (Kazliste, Pozoriste, Gledalisce, Tea tar). Thus,
the very name of the company declares its Yugoslav orientation: it brings together
professionals from all parts of the country and regularly appears in all Yugoslav
cities. KPGT successfully toured Australia in 1980 and the United States in 1982,
bringing Dusan Jovanovic's plays The Liberation of Skopje and Karamazovs to the
World Theater Festival in Denver and to the audiences in Chicago, Los Angeles,
Washington and New York.
The main force behind KPGT is Ljubisa Ristic, a director of rich personal
style, equally interested in staging foreign classics and the new works of his
Yugoslav peers. For several years Ristic has been trying too prove that in
Yugoslavia quality theater can be commercial theater - to the extent that it can
attract enough viewers to pay decent professional wages, strictly from the box
office income.
This past summer KPGT run in Belgrade a three-months long season under the
name GODOTFEST, as an homage to S. Becket and with several productions
developed around the Godot theme. Ristic himself directed Waiting for Godot, with
several roles cast with women. The production played down the metaphysical
aspects of the play and resulted in a moving, melancholy work that focussed on the
frailty of human relationships. Nada Kokotovic, Ristic's steady collaborator, who in
the 1970's worked with G. Balanchine, created a "choreodrama," using the same
Becket play. A yound director, Suada Kapic, working with teenagers and some
professionals, came up with a work called Who is Godot?, probing the insecurity add
dilemmas of Yugoslav youth in the post-Tito period. Later on, Ristic revived
. 19
Ljubinko i Desanka, a 1960's farce by the most popular Serbian playwright
Aleksander Popovic, turning it in an ironic commentary on the current economic
crisis that plagues the country.
From early July until cold October evenings, Belgrade audiences swarmed a
secluded courtyard in the Knez Mihailova, the principal downtown shopping street,
closed to car traffic. There, among abandoned warehouses and old apartment
buildings, with bleachers set among few old tries, theater assumed a strange
surrealistic-naturalistic quality. Besides new productions, guest appearances of
other independent groups from Belgrade, Zagreb and Ljubljana, jazz and classical
music concerts and film screenings were presented. Some productions were
simultanously presented in an old near-by brewery that is a home of the Nova
osecajnost (New Sensibility) theatre group.
Godotfest was run as a joint effort of KPGT, some other groups and two
independant filmmakers collectives that have their offices next to the courtyard.
An unprecedented publicity, unconventional ads on the local radio stations and spots
on the TV Belgrade quickly estabished the courtyard in Knez Mihailova street as the
main gathering point of Belgrade, that during the summer months virtually becomes
a cultural desert, since most cultural institutions, rep theaters included, close for
long vacations.
The impact of the Godofest should perhaps be assessed more from a political
than from an aesthetic viewpoint. Godofest pioneered a new concept of
selfreliance and selfhelp at the time when all established cultural institutions in the
country protest the inadequate level of public funding that cannot catch up with
inflation. Instead of demanding subsidies and more subsidies, Godotfest run the
entire operation on the box-office income: several new productions, some out-of-
town appearances, hundreds of performances and programs, often three or four a
day, in two spaces. Godotfest leased two Apple PCs from private owners and
introducted computerized ticket sales in the country. Some two hundred people,
established actors and some students of the Faculty of Dramatic Arts, were
working without guaranteed pay, with bills and wages settled at the end of each
month in accordance to the box office intake. Initial scepticism of the press,
theater professionals and many viewers was proven groundless.
The established repertory theaters are now scared: Godotfest's risky
practices exposed their own wastefulness, excess of administrative staff and low
productivity. The long-lasting policy of awarding subsidies to the built-in costs of
the institution, regardless of its output and quality, has been discredited. At the
time when Yugoslavia's economy struggles to assert market principles in order to
overcome the present crisis, Godotfest set a strong example. Economic and
political ramification of the Godotfest achievement should be clearer in the near
future. At the moment, KPGT prepares three new productions in an emptied store
next to the courtyard and plays host to the Source Theater Co. from Washington,
,D.C., that was its presenter in the American capital two years ago. Using the
emerging network of independant groups, KPGT was able to schedule a four weeks-
long tour for the Source production of the Glass Menagerie, again without
subsidies. The quality of KPGT's productions set this company in the very center of
the Yugoslav theater life; Ristic's business and organizational practices test the
Yugoslav concept of "selfmanagement" outside of the instituionalized culture - in a
cooperative venture that provides artistic freedom, relies on the audience support
and takes into account the pressing economic circumstances in the country.
Dragan Klaic
. . ' 20
(Dragan Klaic teaches history of theater and drama at the University of Arts in
Belgrade, where he also works as a drama critic. This academic year he is Visiting
Associate Professor at the University of New Mexico, Albuquerque.)
CALL FOR PAPERS
I shall be chairing a panel entitled "Stanislavsky and the Moscow Art Theatre"
at the annual National Convention of the American Association of Teachers of
Slavic aoo East European Languages (AATSEEL) which will take place in Chicago,
December 27-30, 1985. I would gratefully welcome proposals for papers to be read
on this panel. Papers may concern themselves with Stanislavsky as a director,
writer or actor, his theories, and his biography. There may also be papers not
concerned with Stanislavsky, but with the Moscow Art Theatre, its history,
productions, and persons connected with it. In other words, the topic is quite
flexible. Please let me know as soon as you can in case you are interested in
submitting a short proposal for a paper.
Leo Hecht
IMPORT ANT NOTICE
This summer we shall be writing a proposal for funding I'EWSNOTES. It will
be of extreme importance to submit, along with this proposal, letters of support for
the continuation of this periodical. I therefore request that, if you feel that the
publication serves a unique and useful J:Urpose, you take a few minutes and write a
letter of support which we may use to back up the proposal. Many thanks.
21
Department of Foreign
Languages and Literatures
George Mason University
Fairfax, VA 22030
Non- Profit Organization
US Postage Paid
Fairfax, Virginia
Permit No . 1532