An Investigation Into Artaud’s Theory In Comparison With Naturalism

An investigation into Artaud's theory in comparison with Naturalism

[演劇メモ] 2004/11/26 13:00

Modern spectators, who are prone to take naturalism for standard form of theatre, might be astonished that the period in which plays were performed in naturalism manner is less than one and half centuries, and in the other period most of the elements which could be seen on stage – not only stage set and prop, but also acting style – tended to be more like mimic or symbolical representation than real. Without doubt, theatre is on the decline in these days. Some comments of Joanna Laurens, a British young playwright, might arouse resonance among the people who concern about the future of theatre.

I don't want the same experience from both television and theatre. … For as long as we dare put only naturalism on our stages, writers will only dare write naturalistic plays – and British theatre will remain as poor as it is.¹

The word "British" in the comments can be replaced by a number of other countries. This sort of scepticism in the effectiveness of naturalism has existed since the very beginning of its progress, and one of the eminent practitioners who tried to move away from naturalism was Artaud. It might be worth while to re-evaluate the nature of naturalism and the effectiveness of it, and also to consider Artaud's theory as an alternative principle of theatre. Thus, this essay will investigate in the progress and the significance of naturalism in theatre in brief, and then analyse the theory of Artaud.

The history and theory of Naturalism

Neo-classicism and the theory of three-unity had been dominant in European theatre for some two hundred years until 1830, the year in which Victor Hugo put his Hernani on stage. The premier of Hernani, which was filled with both applaud of Hugo's supporter and booing of opponent, is now celebrated as a first triumph of romanticism. On a parallel with romantic movement, the 19th century theatre had tendencies of verisimilitude and picturesque in form, although they were demanded in order to achieve more striking spectacularly effect. Although these tendencies should be clearly differentiated from the aim of naturalism – to depict environment of character as underlying cause of drama and social problems –, these could be considered as a historical background which gave birth to naturalism.²

自然災害について

　

昨年の暮れにインド洋沿岸の国々で津波によって２０万人あまりの人々が命を失いました。昨年、日本も台風や地震で被害を受けました。自然災害について考えてみましょう。

地球は平静でじっとしているわけではありません。我々は地球内外から自然の脅威の被害を受けやすいです。地球の表面は固形ですが、内部は溶けた核からできていて、いつどこで地震が起きてもおかしくない状態なのです。

自然の危険がいつ襲うか分かりません。一般に「自然惨事」だと述べられても、地震、雷、台風、洪水、火災、津波などが異なった強烈さを持ち、異なった形で生活にダメージを与えます。これらすべての惨事に共通なのは短時間にしてその地域が住民とともに荒廃することです。最も重要なのは人間がこれらの危険のいずれとも戦う、あるいはこれらを妨げる力を持っていないということです。