CS EN

Faust/Feustel… or Whatever You Like

Reports
Author Barbora Stýblová
Return of Libor Vaculík to the National Theatre

Choreographer Libor Vaculík returned to the National Theatre after some time and his choreography had great expectations. Libor Vaculík belongs to the significant personalities in the context of Czech (and Czechoslovak) ballet. He has participated in growth and continual development of essential periods of many companies; the most important cooperation took place in the 1990s in the National Theatre, Prague Chamber Ballet or the State Opera Prague and he was very successful in project he collaborated in with director Jozef Bednárik. The period of musical choreographies and following projects Libor Vaculík created by himself from the very beginning inspirited him with certainty and confidence in directing-dramaturgic concepts. Cabaret was at the beginning of the announced offer for cooperation with the ballet in the National Theatre in the season 2009/2010. But negotiations about the copyright failed and the performance will not be staged. Libor Vaculík has chosen Faust from alternative dramaturgy. The myth of Faust in world literature The topic of the Faust myth provokes everybody, especially artists. The archetype of Faust has been formed for almost five hundred years in world literature and it has been made into many versions in various languages. At the same time, a folk story and a kind of contemporary morality has become a real myth that is still topical and even more up-to-date with growing and easily accessible information. The Story of Dr. Faustus foreshadows essential philosophical questions: how a person can find objective truth or study the universal order of everything during one's short life using one's own energy and do not rely on mediated information; how this person influences the others and how s/he perceives the others; how this person faces his/her privilege of relative immortality in the contrast with eternal perdition of his/her "really immortal" soul. There have been many versions of the legend of Faust in various situations but the theatermakers are usually inspired by two essential works: The Tragical History of Dr. Faustus by Ch. Marlowe and Faust by J. W. Goethe. Dramatic version by Libor Vaculík Libor Vaculík decided not to interpret any of the authors but he went for his own version. Recently, it has not been fashionable to interpret an author and a drama in the postmodern time, the authors often choose the easier way and they create their own versions of famous works. It is not a problem when we have a reason and a need to tell one's own point of view. Marlowe's version serves best for the purpose of ballet or non-verbal theatre – the authors often choose it for its clear plot and attractive images (the legendary Grotowski's version draws from Marlowe as well). Libor Vaculík being an experienced librettist and dramaturgist decided to build the plot in the way to avoid spectacularly less interesting and lengthy parts. He fundamentally deviated from the original because he wanted to simplify the story so there is only a sequence of images which do not bear any theme in the end. He was inspired by Faust as an archetype and he created his own version that has only the name of the work free of all Faust topics. The dramaturgic problem of the staging is a simple plot, excessive literariness, simplification of characters who try to exist on the stage without psychology, past and motivation. The plot of Vaculík's Faust is shifted in time, the beginning of the story is set in the 1930s in Germany and it ends with the division of Germany by the so-called Berlin Wall. The topic of holocaust is very serious, it is a 20th century tragedy – there is no doubt about it. But it serves as "visual space" of the staging where you can use effective Nazi uniforms, a huge swastika hangs over the rear part of the stage, impoverished Jews, rattling guns – everything is covered with smoke like the following period of Communism when Stalin with his sickles and hammers come instead of Hitler. Everything is only a visual show without any other connections and meanings. Music is a collage of various authors but music by D. Shostakovich and I. Stravinsky prevails; their music pieces are very strong and dramatic. Choreographer's lifelong collaborator, pianist and composer Petr Malásek took care of music dramaturgy. Music works like a base for images, it does not (logically) create any compact form and its main intention is to acoustically support visual parts of the staging; it mostly functions as a background despite its drama.

A simple outsider and clown instead of Faust

There is a huge difference between the character of Faust as an archetype and Vaculík's interpretation of this character. Faust (according to Marlowe) is a very intelligent and clever person who beats not only his contemporaries with his art of rhetoric very soon but he dazzles university professors and other scholars and he becomes the doctor of theology. Faust was not satisfied with his knowledge despite his talent and education. When he studied the Christian way of knowledge that did not probably provide him with answers to all his questions, he was forced to focus on black magic and search for the answers in this discipline. It is obsolete and aberrant to understand black magic as conjuring of elements or a devil because this was the case of any kind of heresy – disbelief in God's truth and effort to have one's own free opinion of the basis on scientific research had the mark of a misbeliever, i.e. a person who fights for black magic. Faust was a very curious and hard-working person who was not able to come to terms with the "truth" as it was interpreted by the church even at the cost of "God's disgrace". He believed he would be able to face and accept newly discovered possibilities with his education. On the contrary, Vaculík's "quasi" Feustel is some kind of an Anti-Titan. The common average. An unsuccessful artist (violinist) whose only wish is to hear clapping hands again and to be successful again. It is a character without reflection or transcendence. An example of already mentioned literariness without imagination and metaphors takes place in the very first scene of the staging when a clown with a violin steps on the stage and his short music contribution is appreciated by small and almost inaudible applause from loudspeakers. When Mentes appears (being a foreshadow of Mephistopheles), he hears Feuster's wish and the clown becomes a man in a golden tail coat who has a great applause after the first tones. Feustel (Jiří Kodym or Alexandre Katsapov) is happy and remains in this state for the whole staging because we cannot see any development despite the things he has been through. We only think that he will fall in love with Gretchen (a sexual intercourse) but the visit of a concentration camp, changes of regimes do not influence him, he does not show any emotions, he has his violin and beautiful play everyone appreciates. The authors say in the program brochure that "they try to offer new ideas of interpretation of this piece." But which ones? The character of Faust does not develop in the staging, it does not react to events or situations that directly influence his privacy. We do not know anything about his past, secret wishes (if he has others than playing violin and hear the applause) or feelings. Does he love his Gretchen or is he only a sleepy and mentally retarded violin player who has been given a magical talent for playing violin? Mephistopheles (Mentes)
We need to deal with the second main protagonist of the myth. It is naturally the character of Mephistopheles, a servant spirit who was sent from hell to fulfil Faust's wishes and orders. The etymology speaks about the origin of the name: "Mephistopheles. "Philes" is a lover – of what? The Greek word "met-histémi" literary means "to represent" or to move, change, reverse. Mephistopheles is a spirit which loves deformation, change and reversing. Mentes (Richard Kročil or Petr Zuska) is quite an active character, the shifter of the plot. He is impersonation of evil (whereas it is more complicated in other dramatic versions). He has the faces of Hitler and Stalin but it is not clear from dramaturgy if Mentes is Hitler or the character of Hitler is only an alternative theatre sign? Mentes "changes bodies", changes his appearance and portrays power and evil. However, we cannot find out anything about his motivations, he is only a character with several appearances and he shifts the plot in time. Gretchen (Zuzana Susová or Adéla Pollertová) is a Jewish girl Feustel falls in love with. She owns a little shop with her brother Walter (Tomáš Rychetský or Petr Strnad). She meets Feustel and falls in love with him. The girl does not care much about things at first but later she has to face mass persecution with other German Jews and she is later deported to a concentration camp. She meets Feustel who performs at a party for SS officers. They spent a night together and Gretchen becomes pregnant. The child is born but she is afraid that the Nazi would kill the baby so it is her who kills it. We can argue with this plot because I think that this character would try to save her baby in the way she is described. The murder of the newborn baby is not connected with the fact it is Feustel's child (Feustel being the representative of a Nazi regime who does not have any political opinion in the staging) or with the fact she would have qualms about her brother's death and therefore he is not a reminiscence of a character from Goethe's Margaret. The following events are even more unreadable.  Gretchen is accused of the murder of her child and imprisoned after her return from the concentration camp. Feustel visits her in the prison and they run away from the jail and the republic with the help of Mentes (who is dressed like a Jew with long hair who waves his huge red party ID and the gates of the prison open). Gretchen turns at the border and wants to return but he is shot. We do not know exactly why she changed her mind at the border but I believe she understood that the life with Feustel who is a figure with a violin would not be fulfilled. It is not possible to evaluate artistic and interpretation performances of dancers. I do not know anything about the characters of the staging because they are so flat that they do not allow development or portraying motivations. Vaculík's strength has always been portrayal of inner psychological fights of the characters (Psycho/Small Mr. Friedmann, Isadora etc), he was able to see their heart and provided sensitive interpreters with enough possibilities for portraying disorderliness and emotions.  The characters merge in this staging, they are unreadable as well as steps and group scenes do not provide the presence of a bigger dance duet or compact dance scenes. Nevertheless, I believe that it was beneficial for the dancers to try choreographic work and dance connections by Libor Vaculík and find about a different means of rehearsing than the "native" choreographers in the National Theatre apply. We cannot ignore the contribution of numerous group scenes who give the opportunity to many members of the company. We say that we have nothing to say. Viewers want entertainment, coloured pictures and no thinking.
The staging does not bring any questions and it does not try to answer anything. The final version in the context of the time may be more interesting for understanding contemporary position and role of theatre and ballet. Ballet had to find its place among dramatic arts in the Czech Republic and its position is not certain even nowadays. Now it looks for a form and idea what and how to say things instead of conquering. It is common in the time of a communication boom that people (authors) say "I want to say that I have nothing to say" in SMS, emails and unfortunately in theatre as well thousand times a day. The society is massaged by a medial image, TV and other media focus their presentation only on visual form. Theatre tries to maintain its position with many allurements when it chooses a well-known topic (often because of economic reasons) and it tries to serve it in a short-video way. We can deal with motives of a free choice, manipulation and puppet-like character or a story when we speak about classic Faust. The Faust problem now is a question if we serve Mephistopheles because we believe we will protect the others or are we able to identify Mephistopheles? What if his intentions seem to be innocent at the beginning? This is a current Faust topic but please read Ch. Marlowe and J. W. Goethe at first as inspiration for this contemplation.
Written from premieres on 5th and 6th December 2009.  Translation: Eliška Hulcová 

Témata článku

Reviews

DANCE

Diskuze

Přidat komentář