Dramaturgy in Shakespeare and Brecht

Abstract

That Elizabethan plays, and particularly Shakespeare's history plays, had a great influence on "epic" drama is by now a commonplace of Brecht criticism; but no one seems to have worked out exactly how close the two dramaturgies are. This essay, therefore, aims to do three things. First, to interpret the dramaturgical theories and practice of Brecht, noting that his ideas changed towards the end of his career and that there was sometimes a gap between his theory and practice. Second, to suggest parallel theories or practices in the Elizabethan drama. And, finally, to reverse the normal process of historical criticism, and, instead of assessing the influence of Shakespeare on Brecht, to investigate whether the clear statements of intention by Brecht, when he uses certain devices, may not occasionally throw new light on Shakespeare's use of similar devices—light normally obscured for us by our predominately classical-realist training. There is a tendency in Shakespearian criticism, I think, to treat Elizabethan departures from realism solely as conventions, that is, as an agreed-on, accepted simplification of reality, a dramatic shorthand. But may they not sometimes be deliberate ruptures of the dramatic illusion as in Brecht—intended to prevent our application of everyday attitudes, our too easy sympathies, our tendency to abstract and unify into familiar patterns? At least, there can be no harm in trying such an approach. We shall thus be following T. S. Eliot's advice: using the new genius to re-interpret the old tradition. Moreover, it seems to me that several of the most recent critics and producers of Shakespeare are already moving in this direction—though, as far as I know, their tendency has not so far been associated with the influence of Brecht.