Chinese Adaptations of Brecht

Appropriation and Intertextuality

Wei Zhang

• Publisher: Palgrave Macmillan
• Year: 2020
• Print ISBN:
  9783030377779
• eBook ISBN:
  9783030377786
• Topic: Literatur
• Subtopic: Asiatische Literaturkritik

This book examines the two-way impacts between Brecht and Chinese culture and drama/theatre, focusing on Chinese theatrical productions since the end of the Cultural Revolution all the way to the first decades of the twenty-first century. Wei Zhang considers how Brecht's plays have been adapted/appropriated by Chinese theatre artists to speak to the sociopolitical, economic, and cultural developments in China and how such endeavors reflect and result from dynamic interactions between Chinese philosophy, ethics, and aesthetics, especially as embodied in traditional xiqu and the Brechtian concepts of estrangement (Verfremdungseffekt) and political theatre. In examining these Brecht adaptations, Zhang offers an interdisciplinary study that contributes to the fields of comparative drama/theatre studies, intercultural studies, and performance studies.

© The Author(s) 2020

W. ZhangChinese Adaptations of BrechtChinese Literature and Culture in the Worldhttps://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-37778-6_1

Begin Abstract

1. Introduction

Wei Zhang¹

(1)

Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China

Wei Zhang

End Abstract

Bertolt Brecht (1898–1956), one of the most significant Western dramatists, presents a unique case for transcultural adaptation studies. His dramatic theory and works show a strong Chinese influence and have reciprocally exerted a strong influence on the aesthetics and theatre productions in China since the end of the Cultural Revolution (1966–1976). Many Chinese scholars consider Brecht as representing one of the “three great theatrical systems” in the world, the other two being Stanislavsky and Mei Lanfang.¹ This book examines how Brecht’s plays have been adapted and/or appropriated by Chinese theatre artists to speak to the sociopolitical, economic, and cultural developments in China since 1979 and how such endeavors reflect and result from dynamic interactions between Chinese philosophy, ethics, and aesthetics, especially as embodied in traditional xiqu and the Brechtian concepts of estrangement effect (Verfremdungseffekt) and political theatre.

My use of the term “adaptation” for the purpose of this study follows Julie Sanders who, in her book Adaptation and Appropriation (2006), defines adaptations as “reinterpretations of established texts in new generic contexts or perhaps with relocations of an ‘original’ or source text’s cultural and/or temporal setting, which may or may not involve a generic shift” (19). I see “adaptation” as a convoluted process shaped not only by the adapter’s personal motivation, concretized thoughts, and creative technique, but also by the political, cultural, economic, and aesthetic dynamics of the society in which the “adaptation” takes place. I consider Chinese adaptations of Brecht’s plays since the end of the 1970s as even more convoluted processes because they are transcultural, translingual, and transnational adaptations which present more challenges due to vast differences in dramatic traditions, theatre habits, among other factors. As indicated by Sanders, appropriation, a concept closely related to adaptation, occurs when the connections between the source text(s) and target text(s) are not explicitly signaled, whether the engagement is embedded (stand-alone reworking of the original) or sustained (closely mimicking the original in style, plotline, structure, etc.), and some works may be adaptations and appropriations at the same time (2–3, 26–41).

Another theory that informs this study is intertextuality, especially Gérard Genette’s notion of transtextuality (including issues of imitation, transformation, classification of types of discourse, along with the thematic, modal, generic, and formal categories and categorizations), paratextuality (including interviews, publicity announcements, reviews by critics, private letters, and other authorial and editorial discussions), and hypertextuality (relationships connecting a text [hypertext] to an earlier text [hypotext] upon which it is graphed) (Allen 97–111). Critical perspectives drawn from intertextuality, especially as expounded by Genette, helped me see Chinese adaptations of Brecht’s plays as “an extended intertextual engagement” (Hutcheon 8). In this book I focus on what is “transposed across different media and genres […] through different modes of engagement—narrating, performing, or interacting” (Hutcheon 10). Through the lens of intercultural theatre, as explained by Jacqueline Lo and Helen Gilbert in their 2002 article “Toward a Topography of Cross-Cultural Theatre Praxis,” I can examine both the cultural heterogeneity and the universal human nature that are embodied in Brecht’s plays and their Chinese adaptations. I can see them as “as a two-way flow” (Lo and Gilbert 44), both being considered as “cultural sources while the target culture is positioned along the continuum between them” (Lo and Gilbert 44).

I am also interested in feminist criticism, although feminist theory may not apply fully to Chinese adaptations of Brecht because I have not found instances and examples where Chinese theatre artists self-consciously apply feminist theory in their adaptation of Brecht’s plays. Despite so many social changes since the beginning of modern times in China in the early twentieth century, China remains largely a male-dominated patriarchal, hierarchical society. In the chapter on Chen Yong’s three huaju adaptations of Brecht’s plays from 1979 to 1998, however, I did draw from the feminist concept of the “male gaze” as theorized by Laura Mulvey to study Chen Yong’s portrayal of female characters. Mulvey discusses how, in the era of classical Hollywood cinema, women characters were positioned to be looked at by the male viewer voyeuristically and/or fetishistically. She posits that the only way to remedy the gender bias against women in filmmaking is to challenge it with an alternative feminist perspective (14–28), or “female gaze.” This concept helped me see and study a male German playwright’s gaze with regard to female characters through the lens of a Chinese female director’s gaze—and this in the context of what was happening in the socioeconomic and cultural life of China from the end of the 1970s to the late 1990s.

Although Brecht has been one of the most significant Western playwrights who have been influenced by classic Chinese culture and dramatic art and have in turn had an impactful influence on contemporary Chinese drama/theatre through transcultural adaptation and appropriation, scholarship published in English on this subject is relatively scarce. Productions of Brecht in contemporary China have not been that uncommon since the end of the Cultural Revolution. Since recent Brecht productions in China have not been fully examined yet in Chinese, English, or German, a comprehensive English-language examination of the staging of Brecht’s plays in contemporary China would help to fill this gap.

Renata Berg-Pan’s book Bertolt Brecht and China (1979) traces the influence of Chinese philosophy on Brecht during his early years’ “discovery of China,” Chinese influence in Brecht’s plays and verse, as well as Japanese and Chinese influence in the development of Brecht’s dramatic theories. There has been no book-length study of Brecht and China since Berg-Pan’s book published almost 40 years ago.

This book, based on my Ph.D. dissertation, is the first comprehensive study that covers the two-way impacts between Brecht and Chinese culture during the last four decades: on the one hand, the Chinese cultural elements that inspired and shaped Brecht’s dramatic works and literary creations; on the other hand, Brecht’s reception and influence in China through Chinese stage productions since the end of the Cultural Revolution all the way to the first decades of the twenty-first century. More specifically, this book attempts to address key questions posed by the staging of Brecht’s plays in the Chinese xiqu context; for example, whether Brecht’s social Gestus and performance techniques can be applied to the stylized xiqu performance, or whether performers can step away emotionally from their characters and demonstrate them with cool, witty, and skillful self-critique, as theorized and practiced by Brecht. How could an actor use xiqu’s presentational acting style to demonstrate Brechtian technique and dialectical thinking? These questions commanded special attention in my examination of xiqu adaptations of Brecht’s plays.

Due to political reasons, including war and revolution in recent Chinese history, the development of the avant-garde² in China has lagged behind the progress of the arts in the West as well as in other Asian countries. At the same time, the avant-garde tendencies that have existed in China have not been widely perceived by international audiences. Chinese theatre, overall, has been influenced by Western theatre since 1907,³ and Chinese huaju (Western-style theatre, spoken drama) has gradually become the theatrical mainstream in the years since then. Since the 1979 production of Life of Galileo , a number of Brecht’s plays have been presented to Chinese audiences by Chinese directors. In the meantime, many “little theatre”⁴ productions of plays by other Western playwrights, using a Brechtian style, have also appeared on the Chinese stage. However, not much research has focused on more recent Brechtian productions in China, especially Brechtian productions since the beginning of the twenty-first century.

My research will provide a good foundation and reference for further examination of the role of Brecht’s work on the international stage, exploring the uniqueness of epic theatre⁵ as a medium for social change.

1.1 Brecht and Chinese Philosophy

After discovering Chinese philosophy in the 1920s, Brecht engaged with it until the end of his life. Chinese philosophy infused Brecht’s thinking about the relationship between social systems and individual behavior as well as the characters and plots of his plays. Over the past 40 years Western and Chinese scholars have discussed the influence that different “schools” of Chinese philosophy have had on Brecht, including Mohism, Confucianism, and Daoism. According to Renata Berg-Pan, Brecht had access to these traditions mostly thanks to the German translations of Chinese philosophical works, such as Richard Wilhelm’s translations of Confucius in the early 1900s⁶ and Alfred Forke’s translation of the writings of Mozi (Mo Tzu) in the early 1920s (“Brecht and Chinese Philosophy” 307). Berg-Pan’s research summarizes the broader themes taken from Chinese philosophy in general that ...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Front Matter
• 1. Introduction
• 2. One Director, Three Takes: Chen Yong’s Reinterpretations of Life of Galileo, The Caucasian Chalk Circle, and The Threepenny Opera
• 3. Good Persons of Sichuan, Jiangnan, and Beijing: Brecht’s The Good Person of Szechwan and Chinese Xiqu Adaptations
• 4. Concentric Circles: Two Chuanju Reinterpretations of The Caucasian Chalk Circle as The Chalk Circle
• 5. Modernity, Chinese Culture, and Intertextuality: Bertolt Brecht’s Turandot and Wei Minglun’s Chuanju Play Chinese Princess Dulanduo
• 6. Brecht and Mao Zedong: Two Sides of “The Other Side” and Twice Removed Vision of “Snow”
• 7. Conclusion
• Back Matter