Seite 145 [145]
GEORGY TOVSTONOGOV: THE GOVERNMENT INSPECTOR, 1973
kind of fear: fear pervading the 1970s in Hungary. It could make them hope
that representatives of the present regime (so those of the Kadar regime)
would be inevitably summoned sooner or later.”"!
As a crucial characteristic of the mise-en-scéne, duality (of the layers
mentioned before and also evident in the style of acting) involuntarily initiated
the mechanism of “doublespeak” and largely contributed to the reputation of
the production. Critics pointed out “the accurate reconstruction of the text,
the careful realization of stage directions, the psychological orientation and
the historic sets and costumes”.” Mentioned as praiseworthy features of
faithfulness to the author, these attributes kept the production within the
limits of realist-naturalist staging, while others freed it and obscured the
clarity of performance style by means of circus, burlesque, tragedy, etc.””
The mise-en-scéne used distinct forms: its realism was colored by “the
uproarious nature of avant-garde-revolutionary theatre”. It combined
Gogol with the early tradition of Soviet theatre but “translated both into the
language of contemporary performance”.”” Specifically Meyerhold’s initiatives
and his 1926 stage version of the play inspired Tovstonogov’s staging to such
an extent that it almost paid homage to the great predecessor liquidated
by Stalin’s regime. In spite of its smart pluralism’ the production did not
701 Some moments had intriguing overtones, such as the Mayor’s fantasizing about becoming
a general or even a generalissimo (think of Stalin’s title!), and the word was “echoing on the
walls of the house, generating such hallucinations that froze our blood”. Matrai-Betegh:
A revizor, 11.
Major: A revizor, 13.
Tamas Koltai described this duality as “deep psychological grotesque”, pointing out that
“the scene in the carriage cut into half, which imitates shaking so well, has a dramaturgical
function: caressing Khlestakov, the officials reveal their relationship to him. [...] However,
other moments reject naturalism. When the officials come to Khlestakov, one by one, to bribe
him, they do not say their internal reflections quietly ‘aside’ as usual, but as a continuation
of their previous sentence, with the same tone and volume, into Khlestakov’s eyes. It is a
psychological feat (in addition to using the dialogue technique of the theatre of the absurd):
it is no longer the meaning of words that matters, but their situational value.” Koltai:
Tovsztonogov és A revizor, 11. — Tovstonogov said that realist-naturalist foundations are
needed because “everyday life gives a boost to the imagination. It is not the individual facts
that are expressed in the play that matter here, but the process of life itself. [...] Tovstonogov
thinks that in order to fight against stereotypes and the banality of the first conception, the
director has to direct his imagination, without the formal solutions of the dramatic text, not
to the future, to the performance to be directed, but to the past, to the life represented by
the playwright. He has to identify with the author’s sense of life. Going back to the past can
give a certain psychological impulse, a boost to the imagination.” Saad: A revizor probain, 4.
Major: A revizor, 13.
75 Ungvari: Theaterbrief, 11.
76 Cf. “The mayor’s wife and daughter dance a grotesque and silly ballet at the moments of
joy. [...] Shpyokin [the postmaster] was given a red nose and a long, hardened white bow,
as if he were a clown escaping from a circus. The three bobbies are both puppets and
pantomime players.” Bernáth: A revizor, 2. — Tovstonogov “also prefers burlesque humor,
which is, of course, often justified by Gogol’s text. In a state of confusion and haste, the
mayor puts the box on his head instead of the shako, [and] the magistrate’s feet are shaking
702
70:
a
«143 +