Page 157 [157]
IMRE KERÉNYI: KING JOHN, 1984
armored knights."" Representing the satirical as well as the tragic, the mise¬
en-scéne multiplied Dürrenmatts "bilingualism","" i.e. the "play of changing
colors”, in which “everything ‘proved to be something else"," and increased
the (fairly significant) retuning of the figures of the two protagonists, John and
the Bastard. The outcome of the story of a king “using immoral tactics””° but
“still being amenable, bendable”’ and Philip Faulconbridge, siding with him,
following only the morality of common sense and believing in the possibility
of change, was death and total disillusionment. These made the realization,
stemming from the “doublespeak” of the production (i.e. the reference to the
spectators’ own situation), even more unbearable: the loss of ideals for any kind
of betterment of the state and the social order.’”*' Consequently, Imre Kerényi’s
King John, “this shameful tale of history”’’ became a poignantly amusing
denial of the possibility of any reforms in the 1980s (said to be a second period
of reform in Hungary), in short, dismay at the feasibility of socialism.’
756 Cf. “Power is grinding all who come to power. The throne is seen first as an ultimate desire
by all, but when they sit on it (or when they are already sitting on it), they realize that this
throne is a place of execution. And this is how it goes round and round; every new king goes
through this process." Takács: A hatalom körforgása, 4.
Cf. Miklós Almási: Példabeszédek a túlélés trükkjeiről. Dürrenmatt János királya a Várszín¬
házban, Népszabadság, Vol. 42, No. 275, 23" November, 1984, 7.
(bogácsi): Két vizsgaelőadás. János király, Magyar Nemzet, Vol. 46, No. 269, 159 November,
1983, 3. — Cf. also “The family reunion [proves to be] a diplomatic negotiation or vice versa, if
you like. The wedding lunch is, in fact, a funeral feast over a city. The sulking of the spanked
ends in a violent maneuver, in a military revenge.” Ibid.
Mészáros: A korszerűtlen ésszerűség, 7.
760 Judit Csáki: Dürrenmatt: János király, Kritika, 23:3 (1985), 41.
761 Cf. “There is no cynicism and betrayal, no wickedness that is enough to enforce rationality
in the face of power.” Gyürgy: Fejezet a zsarnoksägrél, 8. — In this regard, the scene of the
murder of Arthur Plantagenet, on the one hand, and that of the bastard’s withdrawal, on
the other hand, are crucial. In the former scene, the Bastard is howling while lifting up
the child’s body, wrapped in a black shroud, “as a proof of the cynical cruelty of the world”.
(Tamás Koltai: Reálpolitika, avagy a személyiség esélyei, Híd 50:8 (1986), 921.) In the latter
scene, the Bastard is crying and sinking to the ground, when he is forced to admit that "the
chariot of fate is pulled by stupidity and chance". The emotional power of both scenes is
enhanced by the same moving melodies. Ihe demonstration of a victim returns ten months
later in a similar way, at the end of Kerényis mise-en-scéne of Stephen the King.
György: Fejezet a zsarnokságról, 9.
763 Cf. the reviews of Népszava and Új Tükör, full of overtones. “The Bastard, the chance-child
of the great King Richard the Lionheart [...] hopes that after all the horrors, something good
is born, that rationality prevails over wild anarchy, and common sense stops the great meat
grinder of history. But the result is a Pembroke. [I.e. a sly murderer.] Bad things will get even
worse and Somebodies will be replaced by Nobodies.” Takacs: ,Egy Pembroke az eredmény!”,
6. (My italics — A.K.K.) — “Philip Faulconbridge (later Sir Richard Plantagenet) [...] is just
a snooty loudmouth in Shakespeare. [...] Diirrenmatt’s Bastard is a kind of hero with naive
dedication. He is an illegitimate child of a king, but in fact, a true child of the folk, who wants
to put the wolves on the right track, with the innocence of a lamb, thought to be finesse. He
fails, of course.” Tamas Koltai: Üjranézé. János király, Várszínház, 1988. november 7. 93.
előadás, Képes 7, Vol. 3, No. 48, 264 November, 1988, 45. (My italics — Á.K.K.)
75
S
75:
œ
759
762
«15 +