Bertolt Brecht response

Human trafficking is the displacement of people by force, fraud, or deception, with the aim of exploiting them. It is mostly known as a form of “modern slavery”, where people, especially women and children, are placed in wealthy countries in Western Europe, North America or Middle East. Victims are usually innocent people who were looking for jobs to support their families and were lured by adverts in their home countries who convinced that the work will be well-paid and the condition will be safe. The fate of the victims is unclear; they could be exchanged to other group of frauds as business, sent home after they fall ill, or become pregnant with an unwanted child.

This social issue is well appropriate to promote Bertolt Brecht theory of Epic theatre, because it touches several issues that are filled with controversies that the spectators are ought to think about. However, it would be extremely arduous to design this performance in a way that would discourage the audience to suppress their emotional attachment to the characters on stage, because the narrative would most likely evoke the spectator’s sentiments more than their critical thoughts on the concern. It is Brecht’s intention to eliminate the dramatical illusion, but to stimulate the performance to be more of a debate hall than a place of entertainment (Bertolt Brecht: Centenary Essays). While still providing entertainment, it should be strongly didactic and capable of provoking social change. Brecht wanted the spectators to identify the issue that is presented on stage with the characters on stage and become emotionally involved with them rather than being stirred to think about his own life.

The tool that Brecht used to encourage the audience to adopt a more critical attitude was a technique called the Verfremdungs-effekt ("alienation effect"), where it is used to remind the spectators that they are in a theatre watching a piece of reality (brandeis.edu). The alienation effect is preceded on stage with characters continuously explaining the situation, rather than letting the audience to see the emotion and the thoughts of the characters. It is the actors’ role to interrupt the spectator’s emotion to be aroused as they begin to attach their feelings with the character’s feeling, and awake them to stop and think critically.

The stage design of this performance should almost be empty, because any set changes can affect the view of the audience. Props are only used when they are necessary for telling the story, and if they are used, then the props themselves should be symbolic rather than real. There shouldn’t be a wall between the audience and the actors; therefore it should be considered opened to allow the audience to see the “piece of reality” in front of them. Lighting should be used in a way where it ensures the actors to be seen as if they are living in the same world as the audience. It should indicate the passage of time or change of scenes rather than create a mood or an atmosphere. So, the lighting director should abandon the idea of hiding the source of light to achieve a mysterious effect to draw attention and should inundate the state with ‘harsh white light’ to focus the full view of the audience reminding them that they are watching a play. The script should be written scenes that carry their own message and tell their own story. Dramatic irony should be well used with other well known stories like myths and legends to provoke the audience to enjoy hearing the stories they already know and teach the message at the same time (bbc.co.uk). It should be structured episodically with clear message plugged in, to emphasize the intention of the performance. The blockings should also be well considered where it shouldn’t be dome to amaze the views; it should be blocked to clarify the structure of the human relationship in the play and use everything on stage to make the audience to develop a more critical perspective on the issues that are presented (delamare-arts.com). The issue of human trafficking is perfect to exhibit Brecht’s theory, at the same time to spread awareness using his methods.
http://vietnameseworkersabroad.files.wordpress.com/2009/03/human-wrists1.jpg
http://www.adrants.com/images/human_traffiking_one.jpg

A Talk among Leisured People

A talk among leisured people is a short excerpt exhibiting the conversation among people with different perspectives. After reading the title, one might acknowledge the sense of the story as a talk among people who are on vacation or merely having a relaxed time. However, Tolstoy is actually indicating the wealthy people who are not obliged to work, but who are living in a lifestyle that is envied and convenient. Consequently, the intention of this story was written to challenge the leisured people. Because he was part of this “world”, he had a better understanding of how leisure people view life and are ignorant towards truth. He also criticizes them by writing how they are ruined by their luxury, their effeminacy, their riches and their pride; in the end, they are filled with boredom and regrets.

Tolstoy has a distinct style of manifesting the message in his writing so it wouldn’t be too difficult for normal people, the bourgeois, to understand while they are reading. Because not all people had the opportunity to receive full education, Tolstoy considered the fact of the circumstance and attempted to write effectively by arranging the themes, morals, motifs and symbols clearly. At the end of the first paragraph, the theme of the story is presented so the people would have a better idea of what they are reading. It says, “All confessed that they were living worldly lives concerned only for themselves and their families, none of them thinking about their neighbors, still less of God.” The notion of the story is the dissatisfaction of the wealthy not living a godly life but living with egotistic minds and attitudes. The moral of the story is placed at the end, “So it seems that none of us may live rightly: we may only talk about it.” Both theme and moral summarize the writing that wealthy people actually do realize the true meaning of life and are directed toward the satisfaction of loving each other and living for God. However, even if people came up with different ideas and opinions on how they should or should not take actions, excuses relating to families and traditions hinder as soon as it becomes realistic. So all they do is to talk about it.

There are seven different people who have participated in this conversation. The group is composed of people with different ages and genders, which demonstrated varied perspectives. The first person who opened the conversation was a dogmatic young man, who strongly believed that there should be changes in their lifestyles. He questioned the living of a leisured people and censured the ungodliness filled with transient amusements and satisfaction. He stated, “I don’t want to live in that old way! I will abandon the studies I have begun…I will renounce my property and go to the country and live among the poor. I will work with them, will learn to labor with my hands…by living with them in a brotherly way.” It may seem a little impulsive to abandon everything and start a new life, but he surely does understand the notion of Christianity of how people should love and support each other in a brotherly way.

The second person who comes into the picture is the father of the young man. This time, the differences of thoughts in ages exhibits in a very opposite way. The father discourages the idea of his son by incessantly reminding his son that he doesn’t understand life because he is too young and inexperienced. Also he states, “It’s hard enough to walk well on a beaten track, but it is harder still to lay out a new one.” He meant that it is a bit of a rush to start a new life when the present life is already complicated itself. Unlike his son, the father is being pragmatic and traditional to suppress his son’s quixotic and radical passion. Also, he advises that his son should acquire more knowledge and experience through education, and be independent to make his own decisions.

The third person seemed to be more neutralized obtaining both ideas of limitations and righteousness. He is censuring the ungodly lives of people and how their sins are sinking even more. The phrase, “get more and more sink in sins” contains emphasis with consonance, alliteration, repetition and personification to highlight the significance that their sins are more and more deteriorating and repelling from the conscience and will of Christianity. He also stated that he has often thought of changing his whole life without being bothered about his wife and children but to think about his soul. Personally, it seemed a bit ironic because the previous discussion involved how people are so egotistic and self-centered.

After the man’s statement, his wife attacked him with an opposite opinion that the man shouldn’t even think about abandoning the family for the sake of the future of the children and it’s a cowardly act of a father. In this perspective, it’s quite different from the old and the young, because women are so used to being dependent on men. When the other man agreed with the woman’s husband, his family members opposed with clear sinister motives to receive money from him. Finally, one of the visitors close the conversation by saying, “but as soon as it comes to practice it turns out that the children must not be upset and must be brought up not in godly fashion but in the old way.” And all they do is to talk about it. This combination of different opinions reflects on the mind sets of the people in the world viewing one thing with diverse backgrounds, characteristics and motives.

http://www.pinetreeweb.com/1920-wj1-old-&-young.jpg