On directing by Clurman Harold 1901-1980

Author:Clurman, Harold, 1901-1980 [Clurman, Harold, 1901-1980]
Language: eng
Format: epub
Tags: Theater
ISBN: 0684826224
Publisher: New York : Collier Books ; London : Collier Macmillan
Published: 1974-06-14T19:00:00+00:00

Sitting at the back of the auditorium at a Washington per-formance of Heartbreak House, I was delighted to hear a spec-tator whisper to his neighbor, "Shaw certainly wrote wonder-ful gags." Why "delighted," why not dismayed? Shaw a gagwriter: blasphemy! But I was delighted because the spon-taneous remark in ordinary American meant that the personwho had made it was glad to be attending a "laugh show."

Everyone nowadays refers glibly to Shavian wit. But in re-lation to Heartbreak House—not well known because infre-quently performed—there is a tendency to become solemn.Shaw himself is largely responsible for this, first, because hecalled his play a Fantasia in the Russian Manner on EnglishThemes, and, second, because in his Preface he cited Chek-hov's plays as models.

In directing the play the first thing I told the actors was

* Published in the Souvenir Program sold in the theatre a few days after theopening.

24O ON DIRECTING

that both the phrase "Russian manner" and the name Chek-hov were to be disregarded in connection with HeartbreakHouse: they were altogether misleading. True, the nameHeartbreak House signifies in Shaw's words "cultured, lei-sured Europe before the [First World] War" and Chekhov'splays deal with the educated middle class of the late nine-teenth century. It is also true that in Russia Chekhov's plays—despite their melancholy—are construed as comedies, butthere most of the resemblance between Heartbreak Houseand Chekhov ends.

The only other parallel between the work of the two play-wrights is that Chekhov's world was destroyed by the Revo-lution of 1917 and the folk in Heartbreak House drifted intothe First World War and if not destroyed were terriblyshaken. Also the emphasis in this Shaw play—as in those ofChekhov—is not on the plot but on character and atmos-phere.

What makes Heartbreak House utterly different fromChekhov is its unique style. Shaw's play is extravagant, full ofcapering humor which verges on the farcical. One of the char-acters refers to the environment he finds himself in as "acrazy house" in which one's mind "might as well be a foot-ball." The fact that this "crazy house" is also a truth house—a sort of distorting mirror which exaggerates the features ofthe people who enter it gives the play its human and socialrelevance but it does not distract from the topsy-turvy funthat my Washington playgoer enjoyed so much.

Years ago when there was still some resistance to Shaw—aswe all know the greatest playwrights of our time encounteredresistance as they came on the scene—certain critics com-plained that Shaw's characters were not people but puppets.There is no need to deny this. Shaw's characters are puppets-unnatural only in the sense that they reveal the truth aboutthemselves more directly, more pointedly, more eloquently,more wittily than people in life are able to.

The director's task then was to combine the "fun" aspect of

HEARTBREAK HOUSE 241

the play—its arch frivolousness—with its basic intent. The set-ting had not only to disclose a place but make a comment-smilingly suggestive of the author's mood. The clothes hadto be costumes. The characterizations had to be tipped fromrealism to a kind of gay picturesqueness. Gravity had to beavoided, except as fleeting reminders that we were still deal-ing with a truth about life—our lives.

Download

Copyright Disclaimer:
This site does not store any files on its server. We only index and link to content provided by other sites. Please contact the content providers to delete copyright contents if any and email us, we'll remove relevant links or contents immediately.