Page 130 [130]
FROM IDOL DESTRUCTION TO IDOLATRY
STAGING
According to the concept of the “theological stage” (Jacques Derrida), Gyurké
referred to theatre as “pulpit”,“* and Endre Marton concentrated on “finding
an exceptional style for this exceptional work, which faithfully adheres to
the intent and the content”. Therefore, Marton did not join the wave of
political theatre originating from 1920s German experiments, and gaining
momentum in the fifties and sixties: even though some staging techniques
(such as the projections) seem similar, the difference in viewpoints is more
defining. Neither did he follow the structure of state socialist ceremonies:
he did not apply the well-worn methods of 1%t of May or 7 of November
processions and commemorations, “the human pyramids, the symbolic¬
representative figures, the gymnastics of the cult of the proletariat”.**° Instead,
using the contemporary aesthetics of pulpit-theatre,* he turned the function
modes of Piscator-inspired attempts upside down, so that “signs, images and
choreography all place thought in the foreground”, creating a “political stage
with clear thoughts but bare dynamics, focused on the text”, a theatre almost
free of tradition.®” It did not aim at evoking a primary effect — since Marton
considered his goal to be “interpreting and evoking the Lenin problem in the
brain of the man living near the end of the 20'* century” —
he tried for an unusual degree of simplicity, which the reviewers considered
an important step (even in a larger context).°** With no constructed set or
period costume, erasing the possibility of creating illusion, he focused on the
, meaning that
©8 The word appears in the text written for the playbill by Gyurkó.
Gách: Együtt éljük át, 4.
Molnár Gál: Rendelkezőpróba, 220.
Péter Molnár Gál mentions a guest performance at the Opera House in Budapest in the
early 1960s as the main influence. It was a performance of Julien Berthaud’s company, which
presented a program of masterpieces of French poetry and prose, “composed together and
choreographed, with permanent movement, determining the concert-like style of Hungarian
literary stages for a decade or so. Marton developed Berthaud’s choreographed oratorical
style in this production.” Ibid., 215.
Almási: A demokrácia gyakorlása, 42.
Gách: Együtt éljük át, 5.
The reviewer of Magyar Nemzet considered this simplicity "magic". "Vocals came out of
prose, choirs were born without choruses, flowing movements from standing or barely
62:
e
63
S
63
e
63:
Ss
63:
o
634
moving groups and dramatic dialogues without conversation. Endless colors came out of
black and white attire, black and white images, film stills, slides, backgrounds and scenery.”
(M.B.B.: Fejezetek Leninrél, 5.) Péter Molnar Gal considered Marton’s puritanism as “an
achievement in theatre arts. Going beyond a single production, it is a triumph in theatre
autonomy as well.” (Molnar Gal: Rendelkezépréba, 220.) Miklés Almási stated that the
mise-en-scéne was “pioneering” and “after so many great productions Marton broke into the
international forefront with this seemingly ‘anniversary’ production. Among today’s ‘agit¬
prop’, ‘street’ and all kinds of political theatres, in which the text plays only a secondary role
and the spectacle of agitation is the primary”, he got ahead of alternative theatremakers.
(Almási: Vitak a kéznapisaggal, 1329.)
«128 +