Seite 115 [115]
ENDRE MARTON: THE DEATH OF MARAT, 1966
"to stand for Marat as well as for acting for a collective”.*** This was attributed
to the director’s achievement:** to the portrayal of the two protagonists, on
the one hand, and to that of the crowd, on the other.*?’
Certainly, Marton destroyed conventions with casting itself," but it was
considered more important that the Hungarian Marat and de Sade were
“completely novel figures” as György Kálmán and Imre Sinkovits "were playing
a drama much different" from the one in the plays productions abroad."
György Kálmáns Marat did not seem insane, i.e. he did not seem like Marat
played by a patient with a paranoid psychosis, and since Imre Sinkovits’s
de Sade also seemed healthy, the spectator “forgot about the spectacle built
into the spectacle at times”, and had the impression that “the real Marat
was arguing with the real Marquis De Sade”.**? While in most Western
productions Marat was said to be played as an “evil toad” or a “bloodthirsty
and individualistic revolutionary”, the staging at the National Theatre was
praised for making the tribune’s not always convincing truth far-reaching and
showing “Marat the hero” with a crystal clear interpretation.*” In an interview,
Kalman mentioned the surprise of his performance, how a madman could be
“so sublime, so pure and shining like a holy image”,°* but this portrayal was
essentially the director’s invention. It was Marton’s mise-en-scéne that made
Marat victorious in the ideological duel of the protagonists, and when on 4"
April and 7 November the regime was raising heroic monuments all over
Hungary that ended up in the Memento Park in Budapest or in junk shops after
1989, Marton’s mise-en-scéne made Kalman raise a statue for Marat, “the pure
535 Varga: Marat halála, 2.
5% For example, by Ernst Schumacher, a German theatre historian and critic, visiting Budapest
and having been interviewed as a personal acquaintance of Peter Weiss and one of the most
thorough critics of his works. He said that Marton made it clear that “there was only one
solution for the individual: [...] to be a revolutionary by all means.” (zs.i): A budapesti előadás
nyilvánvalóvá tette, 2.
Cf. “The nurses crush the rebellion at Coulmier’s order, but the stage image, resembling
David’s heroic paintings, indicates that people can be killed, but the idea of revolution
cannot be defeated. [...] As a result of staging, de Sade’s guidance is diminishing until he
becomes a spectator, not a director of his play. [Marton was right] to remove the grotesque
traits from the portrayal of the great revolutionary. Marat sits in his bathtub with a statue¬
like stiffness, which gradually almost transforms into the pedestal of the memorial of the
great man." Mihályi: A kegyetlenség szinhazatdl, 617.
Cf. “We are used to Sinkovits’s playing stronger, more robust and healthier heroes, and
Kalman’s playing the more differentiated, intellectual and morbid characters. Marton is now
casting the other way round, giving both of our great actors the opportunity to play one of
the best performances of their lives.” Zsugan: Az egyetlen választás, 2.
Sz. Szántó: Marat és De Sade, 5.
Kéry: , Tanuljatok látni", 8.
Sz. Szántó: Marat és De Sade, 5.
Dersi: Marat győzelme, 7.
Sas: Tisztázni az ember rendeltetését, 6.
a
537
538
53
©
540
54
BE
542
543
e 113"