Page 119 [119]
OCR
ENDRE MARTON: THE DEATH OF MARAT, 1966 of previous years. Even if actors did not use alienation effects,°°* their limited movements, gestures and the subtlety of building their characters lessened the passion of acting severely. Gyorgy Kalman was sitting in a bathtub all the time, forced to be almost immobile, and was “interpreting incendiary thoughts [...] without gestures, relying only on the nuances of his voice and face”.°% This was the consequence of the character’s heroic portrayal, similarly to the fact that Kalman’s Marat was not felt to be played by an inmate, so “he was preaching from his tub as a perfectly realistic prophet”.°°° Imre Sinkovits underscored de Sade’s “measured attitude, distinguished skepticism and cool temperament” as well, but “his excitement, his hidden, sick glow"""" and “the lunacy of obsession”°°® could also be felt, reaching their emotional peak in the moments of his voluntary flagellation. Sinkovits and Kalman “could certainly not become a Kossuth Prize winner and an Artist of Excellence regardless of this production"." It was only Hédi Varadi that the critics highlighted in addition to them, saying that she showed “a thousand colors in spite of simplicity”,°” and passion was overshadowed by somnambulism and depression in her portrayal of Charlotte Corday. Reviewers agreed that, with her colleagues, “she had succeeded in an acting technique that interlaced the spectators’ feelings and thoughts, avoiding the wrong extremes of naturalistic overcharacterization and illustration confined to cold signals”.°”! 564 A reviewer (erroneously) recognized “the persistent use of Verfremdungseffekte” in the production, claiming that “this much-debated dramaturgical method had prevailed in Hungarian theatre for the first time with such strictness and consistency”. Mihalyi: A kegyetlenség szinhäzätöl, 617. Molnär G.: Marat-Sade, 7. Doromby: Szinhäzi krönika, 271. — Judit Szäntö argued that the play did not really provide the opportunity of double characterization in Marat’s case. Yet Kälmän could fuse two characters: Marat and the patient who played him, but this was not the goal. “The miracle of his performance lies in the way he resolves the contradiction in his role; he ‘brings himself to a second life’ mentioned above [i.e. to a life independent from de Sade], and becomes the symbol of immortal revolution within the framework of the grotesque tragicomedy of 56: a 56 a Charenton.” Kalman conveyed a clear process of ideas: “he was a man who could be defeated and an idea which is invincible”. Sz. Szanté: Marat és De Sade, 6. Matrai-Betegh: Jean Paul Marat, 9. Szombathelyi: Marat haldla, 2. Gábor: Színházi figyelő, 236. Geszti: Charentoni színjáték, 8. Dersi: Marat győzelme, 7. 56 S 56 œ 56 © 570 571 + 117 +
