Page 130 [130]
OCR
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 symbolicrepresentative 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 ‘agitprop’, ‘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 +
