Page 74 [74]
OCR
SHORT INTRODUCTION TO BONDIAN THEORY AND THE DRAMA EVENT The analysis of this quote is support by understanding that Bond does not deconstruct the story, he does not step out of it but remains in the narrative, only aiming to “destabilise [the] rigid linearity””° of the logic of the social fiction present in it. In the quote above Bond says that the presentation of incidents needs to move from the individual to the social sphere — from the psychological to the socio-historical — because this opens new dimensions in relation to causes and consequence of the events. This happens by connecting components of the event with other events in the story and making elements of the wider social arena, the era we live in, recognisable in the story. Bond’s central aim is to understand the event, which is made possible by presenting constructors, rather than victims of situations. Seeing events in context, as they are built up from individual actions by those affected by it makes it possible for the audience to map who and what are responsible for the unfolding incident. Bond’s emphasis on ‘biological frisson’ refers to his position that understanding an event is not solely an intellectual feat, the presentation needs to affect the audience on a felt level. Bond is trying to move out of the dichotomy between reason and emotion which he considers false.*4° The question of rational understanding relates to one of the biggest differences between him and Brecht, who uses the V-effect to step out of the emotionally engaging story and get the actors to comment on it rationally. I discuss this aspect of his work in the next section. One of Bond’s ways of creating biological frisson is by creating extreme situations in his plays referred to above. By driving the situations to their limits he captures the audience’s imagination and then opens gaps by putting extreme choices before the characters on stage, and also those watching the actors, who engage with the situation through their imagination. The process of reaching these ultimate moments is also presented in his plays as his dramaturgy is built on a series of DEs. Bond claims that “in the extreme situation the self is returned to the core self to be confronted by the human imperative. [...] We are confronted with our radical innocence”.”* Bond uses the term Radical Innocence which is the human imperative to be at home in the world and the need for justice. This need for justice is confronted by society’s ways of corrupting this need, and this is how the ‘human paradox’ can be dramatized. The unresolvable contradiction between wanting justice but having to accept unjust narratives to be able to be part of the cultures we live in needs to be highlighted in contextualised situations within a story to create a DE. I have offered a short introduction to Bond’s theory of DE, but Bond is primarily a dramatist and the most important question is of how to create DEs in practice. Besides his theory there are dramatic devices he defines that 245 Bond: The Cap, xi. 246 Bond: Letters, vol.1, 99. 247 Bond: Freedom and Drama, 213. +73»
