Stage Patterns of World Views

by Milo Lazin

The world which takes shape and acquires depth on the stage is not completely cut off from the reality in which we live: it functions, as noted by Michel Foucault, in heterotopies, that is to say in kinds of places brought into existence in which all other cultural moments are represented, contested and inverted. Theatrical representation thus produces, in a limited time and space, an imaginative reordering of the world at once necessary for its inhabitancy and for the attempt to transform it. (D. Plassard in Mise en scne: 77) The director thus has a possibility to create an original work but only in an already emerging Weltanschauung. This could be a new and individual vision, but only within an existing Weltbild. Directing has been, since its 'ascension'1 in the mid seventies of the nineteenth century, a work of an individual's vision through a collaborative effort. (B. Picon-Vallin in L're: 31) Although directing expresses a space of cultural identity, it goes beyond the confines of national cultures. By inscribing itself in the here and now, it is necessarily inspired by an other, a vision of the future, a utopian reality. Whence a number of restraints of stage patterns as views of the world within the space of the European theatrical tradition, which I here analyze as part of my doctoral studies.2

Mythological Pattern
The ascension of directing coincides with the unification of the Germany (which then form the largest country in Europe, save Russia), as well as its
1 We owe this lucky term (in French avnement) to Bernard Dort (54). 2 Universit de Sorbonne Nouvelle Paris 3, Marie-Christine Autant-Mathieu, mentor.

industrialization and dechristinization (in particular the protestant regions).3 Historical and national consciousnesses replace religious ones. However, in the realm of the spiritual, they give the collective unconscious, tailored by the long reign of The Church (Protestand and Catholic), no more than a new coat of paint. Thus the new, 'national consciousness' searches, in the words of Wagner himself, a myth older than Christianity (Symons: 299), a myth true for all time (idem: 298), a different (and 'genuine!') semblance of eternity. Identity and national cultures, which impose themselves as the cultural and political bearings in the last quarter of the nineteenth century, need to invent their 'prehistoric' roots. At Bayreuth, Wagner enthrones the myth of Germanic rebirth, believing that that which used to exist as a reality of two peoples (the ancient Greeks and the Teutonics), in their 'golden ages' prior to history, and which in time turned into a pure idealism, could return in the future as a true reality, after the end of history (history thus appearing as a prolongation of a perverted state). (Jeremi-Molnar: 88) The historicism of the Meininger (who take to the stage at the same time) is no more than a new attempt to research and designate permanence: durability of historic time as myth, a continuance of time conceived as cyclical. Later, Piscator and Brecht will try to elaborate a whole system of novel transcendental explications of real experience of being, in order to surpass it. The death of religion allows the birth of ideology. Men replace the vanishing image of the City of God with the new image of the ideal society. [] Social metaphysics substitute religious ones, visions of earthly ideals those of a celestial beyond. (Todd: 193) In our time Zadek, Marthaler, Castorf, Pollesch deconstruct, with an on-stage cynicism specific to each, the mythology of mass culture (the populist form which came to replace religious beliefs and ideologies). Aside from the explanations of the world provided us by German theater in the last two centuries, most important is the language of directing established by expressionist directors, but built upon the logic of myth. It is not enough to say that the expressionist scene rejects the realist illusion; it strives to dematerialize itself to less
3 Dechristinazation begins in Germany after the national unity achieved by Prussia in 1870-1871. (Todd: 249-251)

limit itself, and it submits all exteriority to the empire of interiority. (Ivernel in Corvin: 317) Already with Leopold Jessner, expressionist directors raise the spectacle of figuration to abstraction by passing through outrageously contorted perspectives. They are aided by the use of the magic of light and shadow []. Henceforth, the aesthetic of the image is gradually replaced by a dynamic of space and rhythm, (ibid.)4 all in the attempt to (re)create a new theatric ritual (present still today in the performances of Pina Bausch, Sasha Waltz, but also Jan Fabre...). The expressionist tradition is continued and deepened starting with Fritz Kortner, through Peter Stein, Klaus Michael Grber, Alexander Lang, Mathias Langhoff, to Thomas Ostermeier and Michael Thalheimer. They construct an entire system of means of expression targeting the spatial and iconographic stimulation of the stage and movement (often borrowing some aspects of the gestalt theory), accepted over time as the language of directing.5 A specific style of acting was built upon these modes of theatric expression. It is well described by Ivernel when he speaks of the acting of the great expressionist actors who take on the meta-identity of heros engaged in what can be called the eccentric path. P. Kornfeld gives an outline of the task at hand in a famous text where he opposes the 'spiritual' man to the 'psychological' man, or else, 'the soul' to 'character.' The expressionist actor has a strategy of uncovering, as opposed to Stanislavskian 'reliving'; the uncovering of a higher truth. (ibid.) The mythological pattern of directing rejects the realist interpretation by offering the hero a 'mythical' characterization in order to enter into a symbolic communication with the world. (Ottaviani in Blay: 542) The dramatis personae of this pattern is, to use a Nietzschean term from Stanko Lasi, of an abstract identity (pure myth) in eternal reiteration. (119) And the theatric act that it produces aspires to transform itself into a 'mythical moment.'

4 Ibid. The first fruits of this manner of use of space are found already in the duke Georg II von Meiningen, for example in his preference for diagonal movement and obliquely constructed, asymmetrical sets. (Osborne: 39) 5 The disciples of this German school of directing can be found outside of German theater: Patrice Chreau and Jean-Pierre Vincent (in their phase up until the seventies), the Slovenian veteran Mile Korun, and the Quebec directors Robert Lepage and Wajdi Mouawad...

Theological Pattern
Psychological acting comes from another protestant cultural model, this time from Nordic countries. At the heart of the protestant message [] we find a fundamental contradiction between earthly and metaphysical goals. In this world, the Reformation proposes and achieves the democratization of the religious consciousness. In the metaphysical realm, it proclaims servitude and inequality of men. (Todd: 96) [] At the metaphysical heart of the Reformation we find a consciousness corroded by the presence of evil in the soul of men, a honed version of Satan within their lives, and a renewed interest in the concept of eternal damnation. [] The fall is not seen as part of ancient history, but as a major event, a part of daily life. Having ascertained human damnation, Luther establishes the conditions of his salvation, meaning the redemption of his fault and his way towards eternal life. Two premises are fundamental. The first is that man cannot on his own insure his own salvation, that is, without the aide (the will, the grace) of God. The second is that not all men will be saved. (98) An entire dramatic tradition is carried through this field of beliefs. Individually ingrained, it could not disappear even from a 'dechristianized' culture. Scandinavian theater almost always turns the spotlight on the isolated individual or the individual willfully removed from his milieu, either to exalt the power of genius or to draw sympathy for his ridiculous or tragic destiny. It is the theater of a calling, which should be considered sacred, and individual engagement of an absolute value. (Gravier in Corvin: 743) But without guarantees of salvation! For the Theological Pattern, historic and political context is incidental. The action appears to be possible always and anywhere. The staged event is abolished through itself, for it is nothing more than an occasion for announcing to the individual his 'destiny;' His own confrontation with the story of his life, something which has already taken place, and continues to take place, but outside and in spite of the incident to which we are privy. To the individual made divine yet deconsecrated, only the 'story of his own life' remains, a false biblical parable, a forced acknowledgment of the chasm of eternal nothingness. On the other hand, and at the same time, this theater secretes a morality, but a morality fiercely individual, that

flaunts its strong man, and reserves its admonishments for the mobbish majority, shapeless, ignorant, often thoughtless but always cruel. (ibid.) For due to the ruin of biblical exile, as he sees his life, the individual is unable to free himself of the evil within. He then throws it back onto others, onto the masses that surround him, which he sees as stifling, or indeed completely suffocating, his 'deified individuality.' Conceived by the oeuvre of Ibsen and Strindberg (who also had a hand in producing plays!), the 'theological' reading of the world deeply influenced Scandinavian directing. In particular so the Swedes: Bergman of course, but before him Per Lindberg (Banham: 589), the strindbergian Olof Molander (idem: 686), Alf Sjberg (idem: 895), and today Lars Norn who is moving more and more into directing, and not just of his own plays.6 Theological reading also influenced global theater by offering the on stage formula for a key phenomenon of Western civilization of the century past the individual. The acting developed on Scandinavian stages, introverted in appearance (as an unavoidable contemplation of the ephemeral made palpable and visible), will be enriched in the theater of certain foreign directors (e.g. Branko Gavella and Hugo Klajn, giant figures of Yugoslav theater of the first half of the twentieth century) by adding aspects of the Freudian tradition. It will also significantly reshape the theater, actors' formation, and (above all!) American cinema (which will come back to influence theater world-wide). The spread of the theological stage formula outside the geographic region of Scandinavia was partly assured by the success of film directors, such as Dreyer, Sjstrm, and of course Bergman (who also worked in theater!). It should be noted that the importance of Scandinavian theater comes not simply from several large figures of drama, directing or filmmaking, nor from the international influence of their works, but rather largely from the theatric tradition of these countries. In so far as very few nation states existed in Europe at the beginning of the nineteenth century (a continent dominated by empires or else crumbling into tiny kingdoms), the Scandinavian countries were the ideal place for experimentation with a national theater program, given that they already had production structures funded by
6 Norn is currently the director of the Folkteatern in Gotheburg. See Lars Norn (2007) Alternatives thtrales, Bruxelles, No. 94-95.

their royal houses (with the exception of Norway, which achieves independence in 1814).7

Behavioral Pattern
The impact of Ibsen on English and American theatres has been [] decisive, notes the The Oxford Companion to the Theatre. (Hartnoll: 459) In this third branch of protestant culture, the Scandinavian stage image of the world gains in pragmatism what it loses in mysticism. The world is seen and interpreted from the point of view of the individual, but without the fatalism that pervades the theological pattern. As if the gaze stopped at the visible. Introverted acting, a Bergmanian figure often immobile and silent, is replaced here by action (evil no longer provokes contemplation but reaction). Behavior is at the center of interest of British and American directing. We can see the behavioral pattern in everything from the plasticity of stage imaging by Henry Irving or the realism of David Belasco, through the psychological directing of The Group Theatre (Brockett: 499-502), to the concise expression of a Peter Brook, the transparence of acting in search of anthropological archetypes of Deborah Warner (Mitter: 257-262), the capacity for phantasmagoric analysis of Simon McBurney and his Thtre de complicit (idem: 247-252), the malleability and transparence of behavior from Declan Donnellan (Delgado: 145164)... Martha Graham, Alwin Nikolais, Merce Cunningham, along with the Off-Off-Broadway of the sixties (Living, Joseph Chaikin's Open Theatre, Charles Ludlam and John Vaccaro's The Play-House of the Ridiculous [Bottoms]) confront the theater world and global public opinion with the body (by dramatizing or ridiculing it). With his 'performative turn,' Richard Schechner attempts to illuminate the stale base of daily behavior in order to destroy the dichotomy between the represented and the lived. The theater of Robert Wilson is based on the deconstruction of behavior (in movement
7 For Gravier's writings on the history of scandinavian theater see in: Dumur: 963-993 and Corvin: 743-745.

and posture of the body), its dissection (opposition between movement and immobility), and its spacio-temporal distancing (by slowing down the movement, which allows the recognition of its 'purity' outside its everyday context) all with the goal of better grasping the body and to understand its functioning. (Maurin) Within 'realistic' situations, whether stylized or abstracted, by the simple presence of the actor, an allegory builds, the earthly equivalent to the biblical fable. The world is shown sensuously familiar, accessible. The theaters of Britain and America offered the performative elements to one of twentieth century's revolutions, mass culture, as well as its most powerful industry film. Just like the Reformation allowed access to civilization to all believers, wresting it from the spiritual monopoly of the ecclesiastical elite, and opening the door for the construction of social memory, independent of mythical or religious memory (Todd: 95), the moving image opened a new era of rules of global behavior, the content of which could be contributed by various cultures. By offering up the rules of the game to cinema (those of British cabaret to silent films, through Chaplin for example, or 'psychological acting' to speaking movies, at first through the wave of Swedish immigration to Hollywood in the form of actors Greta Garbo, Lars Hanson, Ingrid Bergman, the directors Sjstrm, Mauritz Stiller [Katz: 1332], and later through Elia Kazan and Lee Strasberg's The Actors Studio), theater participated in the process of its own social marginalization.

IconoLogic Pattern
The image incarnates the truth, because the truth is incarnated in the image. This semantic reversal is decisive for the West, since from this it will draw its entire philosophical and political concept of creating the visual. [] In the name of Incarnation, Christian thinkers developed, on the one hand, the philosophy of the gaze, whereby the icon is the visual manifestation of the invisible; and on the other hand, a political strategy of persuasion and visual submission. (M.-J. Mondzain in Blay: 381) This explanation of iconographic dogma that has marked the world

of Orthodox Christianity after the Byzantine appropriation of the icon [] at the Second Council of Nicaea in 787 (ibid.), could be a useful point of departure to refute one of the biggest fallacies of the Stanislavskian tradition (one of so many!): the reducing of Constantin Sergeyevich's style of directing to 'realism,' and from there to 'psychological theater.' Even a passing glance at his 'repertoire8' suggests a varying style and aesthetic: from Shakespeare, Molire, Goldoni, through Ibsen and Andreev (the staging of The Life of Man, which Stanislavsky defines as grotesque (737), at a time when he was almost exclusively interested in works of an abstract nature [371]), to Hamsun (The Drama of Life, in which he claims that everything is unreal [357]), Hauptmann, Maeterlinck (The Blue Bird, which he describes as a fairy-tale [377]), to which we should add some ten operas toward the end of his career. Further, in acting too, realism is but a means of expression in a given epoch, taking into account the current climate in audiences; - it has no creative or aesthetic essence. (Glii: 224) The visible for Stanislavsky is secondary to 'interior truth.' Its task on the stage is to unveil the truth of emotions, [] the truth of inner creative enthusiasm which surges forward in its effort to find expression. (Stanislavsky: 354) The concept of expression in Stanislavsky, perhaps never formulated concisely because part of his cultural heritage, was iconographic. Constantin Sergeyevich conceives of the 'stage action,' the base of his system of creative mood (276), as the incarnation of the inexpressible. His relationship with the icon being replicated in everything visible on stage and in life, he establishes himself as the iconographer of the stage and inaugurates the iconoLogic reading of the world. Even Stanislavsky's terminology (headache-inducing to any translator9) is not rational, but essentially sensual, and in the end mystical and thus untranslatable. The numerous disciples of Stanislavsky, especially those who lead
8 See Fiches techniques des spectacles du Thtre artistique de Moscou 1898-1917, in Amiard-Chevrel, pp. 323332. 9 See the transcript of the conversation between the translators of Analysis-Action by Maria Knebel, herself a disciple of Stanislavsky, and Anatoly Vasiliev who was himself Knebel's student. (Knebel: 295-313)

the aesthetic debate with his theater, share his general sentiments towards the world. In Meyerholdian biomechanics, body movement acquires an iconic status: its concrete aspect dematerializes, while the source of its aesthetization is mystical, and comes from within (as opposed to the relation to the body of New York avant-garde of the sixties, which sees it from the outside, as a means of perceptual shock to the audience). The aesthetic of the biomechanical body movement has the same quality as Stanislavskian 'little physical actions,' it is merely a front for the 'movement within' of the 'soul itself.' The anti-Stanislavskian 'theatralization,'10 Tairov's structural realism (Rudnitski: 194-197), Vakhtangov's fantastical realism (idem: 52-55), the stylizations of life11 of Zavadsky (Banham:1097-1098), of Tovstonogov (idem: 1000 1001) and his disciple Lev Dodin (Lichtenfels in Delgado: 69-85) invite, through a iconography and a carefully constructed spacio-temporal rhythm, the discovery of an 'non-existant reality,' an epiphany of the real, of the dreamed (whether the fabric of it is ideological, phantasmagorical or lyrical). The equanimity, even the sangfroid of Anatoly Efros (Banham: 303-304), just like Lyubimov's carefully orchestrated miseen-scne (idem: 600), weave a network of metaphors that contradict both the visibly represented and the socially accepted real.12 The scenery of this type of theater is not realistic (Stanislavsky already abandoned it by The Drama of Life, The Life of Man, The Blue Bird... [AmiardChevrel, illustrations: 67-77] ). Instead he designs the structure of the action, and evokes its quality (Meyerhold's constructivism, stylized fragments of David Brodsky, Lev Dodin's set designer...). The real, according to this view of the world, has escaped (which is brought up by the majority of Russian playwrights from Chekhov to Yevgeni Grishkovets and Vassily Sigarev).
10 A term that fanned the flames and also clouded the aesthetic debate between the practitioners of Soviet theater in the twenties, but allowed separate theatrical movements [] to influence one another. (Markov in Rudnitski: 190) 11 The term is Lunacharsky's. (Rudnitski: 190) 12 This iconoLogic pattern also structures the world of Belgrade directors, the psychological analytic of Boro Drakovi, the meticulousness of action-metaphor of Dejan Mija (Corvin: 555-556), as well as the flamboyant expressionism of the Poles Swinarski (Corvin: 804) and Jarocki, the Lithuanians Nekrosius (Mitter: 227 231) and Korunovas (Vasinauskait)...

10

Grotowski and Kantor, each in his style and specific formal approach, try to design the iconography of an 'inner truth' by awaking common memorial threads. The iconoLogic pattern presupposes that 'truth' is attainable through an emotional awakening, where the emotion is viewed as a transcendental force. We are, as used to say Nicolai Evreinov, in a theater of states of the soul, (and adds in a footnote of the French edition the Russian term tatr Nastronii, and the German term Stimmungstheater [vrenoff, 1947: 315]) and its directing ought to be principally the orchestration of mood, as an outline of the beyond. The actor acquires, as the medium for emotion, a near saintly status.

Histrionic Pattern
Starting with Max Reinhardt, in theaters occupying the space between Prague and Milan, and between Vienna and Bitola, a different kind of domination of the actor over the directors' theater is established and maintained. Reinhardt left us with some stagings, but not a style; he left us actors, but not a troupe; performances, but no theater. (H. Ihering in Senker: 123) A large majority of directors of the cultural space left behind by the Austro-Hungarian empire share a similar destiny. Reinhardt's theater is cut off from the events of the world, it is no more than a small portion of history of global theater, never touching the real, nor being touched by it. It does not illuminate us, and offers nothing but oblivion. (Senker: 131) We are speaking of a theatre of the spectacle that does not take on the function of representing or transforming the real. (idem: 140) A third source notes that with [Reinhardt], the reclaiming of theater happens with machinery, through lighting, through anything serving to tear away the spectacle from the real, and allowing it to link up with its dream-like, ludic dimension, becoming a world which creates its own forms. (J.-L. Besson in Lre: 50) We could assume a link between Reinhardts enchantment through play, which causes his incorrigible eclecticism (Senker: 121), and the Viennese Volksstcken tradition, well established in the first half of the nineteenth century, most

11

notably by Ferdinand Raimund and Johan Nestroy, but the origins of which are older yet. (Hanswurst [Rischbieter: 190-199; Banham: 431]) In the nineteenth century, the style of acting in the newly formed theaters of the countries of the south Slavs was based on a similar type of performances of merry plays with songs and shooting (the English equivalent of which would be 'low comedy' [Harrison: 59]), romantically embellished with a populist view of 'local customs.' (Lazin 2006: 231-232) At the same time, in northern Italy, the tradition of commedia dell arte is extended (it too carrying the marks of local customs, from the time of Goldoni). In all these countries where 'national theater' is born under (AustroHungarian) occupation, the director's profession is established late. When established, it is faced with an already set style of acting, a characterization, a typology of roles and practices dyed in the wool, a spirit of mockery as an escape from given reality. To the venerated actor of south-east Europe (especially of Slavic countries) the real appears eternally hostile, 'transplanted,' just like the foreign system of theater production in which he is constrained by the 'task of national enlightenment and popular education.' The stage thus becomes the place for carnivalesque trickery against the real that has become distorted by a whole series of politically imposed 'isms' ('nationalism,' then 'liberalism,' then 'communism,' then again 'nationalism,' then 'capitalism'...). The represented real is always either a sham (because imposed by the state), or at best, (theatrically) invented, and is replaced by the virtuosity of acting. The directors response to this 'unchained playfulness' is twofold: an attempt to tame it through different forms of 'absolutism' (Reinhardt himself, the Yugoslavs Gavella [Corvin: 361-362.] and Klajn), or else to incorporate the iconoclastic, playful spirit within the directors style (again Reinhardt, as a synthesis of the two responses, but also Strehler, Ronconi, Romeo Castellucci and Pippo Delbono, Kreja, Dimiter Gotscheff [Sucher: 237-238], Tams Ascher, rpd Schilling, Romanians David Esrig [idem: 166] and his disciple Silviu Purcarete [A.S. Dundjerovi in Delgado: 87-102], Josef Nadj, the Bosnian Mladen Materi, and his friend, the filmmaker Emir Kusturica, Croats Boidar Violi and Branko Brezovec,

12

Slovenians and Yugoslavs Bojan Stupica13 and Duan Jovanovi, Serbs Mata Miloevi [Corvin: 557 and my own teacher Ljubomir Draki). As opposed to the previous ones, the Histrionic Pattern cannot be transferred out of the territory where it was engendered or from the acting style which conditions it. (It is hard to find traces of its influence outside its dominant region. An exception would be the Hollywood opus of Ernst Lubitsch, who began his career in Berlin as an actor for Reinhardt. [Katz: 852] This 'Lubitsch touch' represents an almost ideal accomplishment of the pattern in question, perhaps because it was created outside of its natural context and in a closed-off environment.) Nevertheless, the individual achievements of directors (as in the case of Reinhardt) remain for the most part stylistically eclectic and often incomplete.14 Confronted with almost insurmountable difficulties in the practicing of their art and the coordination of an organization within hostile production environment, Mitteleuropa's directors had to build an entire craft: a system of animation starting with the administration of theaters (often composed of ideologues or official intellectuals), to the members of the acting troupe, all the way to the technical crew and the set builders.15

Pattern Shaping
Each pattern can be assigned to a geographic area (Germany for the Mythological Pattern, Scandinavia for the Theological Pattern, Russia for the Symbolic Pattern, Great Britain and the United States for the Behavioral Pattern, and the cultural space of Austria-Hungary for the Game Pattern). However, such assignments are only valid for the origin of each pattern. For their shaping and their influence, very different factors come into play.
13 To whom we owe the following definition: directing is an instrument to play with the emotions of the viewer, his curious spirit, and the unrest of his philosophy. (cited in Lazi: 146) 14 Also noted by Josip Lei in the chapter Stylistic heterogeneity of Yugoslav directing between the two World wars in History of Modern Yugoslav Directing (1860-1941), (114). See also Lazin (2005), chapter The Herbarium of Incomplete Destinies. (Herbarij neostvarenih sudbina [118 121]) 15 Senker attributes this ability to Reinhardt. (123)

13

First of all, the political factor: without the power and cultural expansion of Bismarckian Germany one could scarcely imagine the popularity and the influence of the Wagnerian program and Meininger European tours; the pull of the first communist state and the artistic whirl in twenties Moscow have undoubtedly reinforced the interest in Stanislavsky's teachings; the Off-Off-Broadway revolt was sparked by United States power, a force that at the same time gave the movement a large audience. The second factor is even more basic: the formation of the systems of production, financed by various levels of government through their cultural politics,16 in which, as of the last decade of the nineteenth century, the director is given the role of the leading artistic executor.17 These systems of production, which are but two in Europe and United States,18 were created for a specific audience: the educated, urban crowds, the 'middle class,' for the majority-elected body in Western democracies, or else the ruling 'working masses' of 'popular democracies.' The high regard that the director's profession enjoys comes from the official role in the formation of social representations of the world, but also the criticism and questioning thereof. Thus a high number of practitioners of the art of directing participated in the formation of national cultures. However, from the very beginning of his ascension (a just appellation
16 On a large scale, first in Germany and the Soviet Union right after the end of World War I. 17 Otto Brahm was named the director of the Deutsches Theater in 1894. Andr Antoine the codirector of Second Thtre Franais (Odon) two years later, in order to effectively run the theater from 1906. The practice of placing directors previously established on small, independent stages as the artistic directors of national theater establishments will thereafter be copied in many countries throughout Europe. 18 One is a system of representative institutions, the other of individual initiative. Their respective coverage follows a line that starts at the northern British isles, then moves across the northern and eastern part of France to the north of Italy. East of this 'theater border' the dominant institutions are repertory theaters, with permanent artistic troupes, crews and administrators (whether on a contract of determined or indeterminate length); on the other side (including the Americas), the dominant unit of production is a temporary troupe, created around the director for the occasion of the production by himself, the producer or the institution, and dissolved after the last performance. The social status of these two different units differs. In the 'German' system, theaters are seen and function as a collective for public service (on a municipal, regional or national level). In the Franco-British system, the theater is no more than a place for performance (its staff being limited to the crew and administration); theatric production is not assigned to an institution but an individual (most often the director). In France for example, the National Drama Centers (CDN) are production institutions subsidized by public resources which are given to one person, almost without exception, the director; he then runs the theater in which he is the only artist with a permanent contract, and he surrounds himself with actors of his choice for each production separately, and for a duration of his choosing. The units of production in representative institutions are run through a collective spirit, whereas those of the individual initiative stay in the service of one person, the only one responsible for the communal spirit of the troupe and the 'task' before the audience. East of the described line, private theater has played a negligible role in the last hundred and forty years; to the west of the line, it dominated until World War II (Paris) or still remains influential today (London, New York).

14

of Delgado and Rebellato in referring to the analysis of Bradby et Williams [2-23]), the director is a figure shaped in the forges of European nationalism and internationalism. (6) On the one hand a figure of national culture, but at the same time a person who travels, and is formed from the get go on a territory larger than his country of origin, nurtured by the works of his foreign brothers, themselves in search of who they are. (B. Picon-Vallin in Lre:31) This mobility of directors is the third factor contributing to the passing on of patterns of directing. It would be hard to find an artistic profession whose members crossed borders in the course of their work during the twentieth century as that of theater directors.19 While he is the stage creator of social representations (on a local, national or any other level), the director at the same time calls into question those same representations, because his point of departure towards the 'reality of the world' is first of all utopian. (idem: 32) Such international exchange of stage utopias is reinforced by tours20 and, since the end of World War II, by international festivals.21 The history of contemporary directing is then a European history. (idem: 31)

Grammar of Directing
For this reason, one can speak of a Euro-American culture of
19 Craig at the Moscow Art Theater; Russian theatre post revolution immigration all over the world, from Riga to Buenos Aires and from Sofia to Hollywood; Reinhardts splitting of his artistic time between Vienna, Salzburg and Berlin; Jouvet in South America, Copeau in the North, his nephew Michel Saint-Denis between Paris, London, Strasburg, New York as well as Stratford-on-Avon; Chreau was Strehlers disciple at the Piccolo Teatro, only to gain world fame at Bayrouth; Benno Besson, Brecht's Swiss born disciple, works at the Berliner Ensemble, as much as in France, Finland, Bulgaria, and will finish his career in Geneva; Bergman in Germany; Andrei Serban at the New York La Mama Troup, as opposed to Bob Wilson who found his home base in German houses, not his native America; Matthias Langhoff from Berlin to Paris, Rennes, Lausanne; Ciulli at Mlheim; Barba in Danmark, Grotowski in Italy; Paolo Magelli, born in Italy, but directing in Romania, countries of former Yugoslavia, France and Germany. And that is without mentioning the foreigners who shaped Yugoslav direction: Andreev and Rakitin in Belgrade, Arnost Grund in Zagreb and Rudolf Inemann and Frantiek Lier in Ljubljana... 20 The idea itself of directing conquers Europe thanks a great deal to the 'mega-tour' of Herzoglich-Meiningensche Hoftheater, which, as a touring company between 1874 and 1890, gave 2591 performances of more than 80 pieces (W. Beck in Brauneck: 637) in all major cities of the German Reich (including Strasbourg in 1884 and 1887, Metz in 1884, at the time German cities), and in the Austro-Hungarian empire (Vienna, Graz, Prague, Bratislava, Budapest, Trieste), but also Belgium, Denmark, Great Britain, Netherlands, Russia (St.Petersburg, Moscow, Odessa, Kiev, Warsaw), Sweden and Switzerland. (Osborne: 54-86, 175-179) 21 See Les festivals en question (1984), in Thtre en Europe. Paris: Editions BEBA, No. 3, pp. 11-76. See also European Festival Research Project: www.ifacca.org/publications/2007/08/27/european-festival-research-project.

15

directing. The patterns we have analyzed here are its formative elements. This cultural space of directing allows for a rich and lasting aesthetic dialogue, conducted, of course, through culturally established stage codes. Which confirms that directing is principally a cultural expression. Thus the modes of expression of directing are also first of all, cultural. Each pattern contributed to the others its own main mode of expression: the mythological directing of space; the iconLogic directing of the actor; the histrionic directing of playing; the behavioral directing of the body; the theological directing of the action within. In this way, these five patterns constitute the grammar of the art of directing. Translated from French: Edvard Djordjevi

16

BIBLIOGRAPHIE

Lre de la mise en scne. (2005). Thtre Aujourdhui, n 10, SCEREN-CNDP. Mises en Scne du monde. (2005). Besanon: Les Solitaires Intempestifs. Amiard-Chevrel, C. (1979). Le Thtre artistique de Moscou (1898-1917). Paris: CNRS. Bablet, D. (1975). Esthtique gnrale du decor de thtre, de 1870 1914. Paris: Editions du Centre national de la recherche scientifique. Banham, M. (Ed.), (1992). The Cambridge Guide to Theatre, New York: Cambridge University Press. Batui, N. (1983). Gavella. Zagreb: Grafiki zavod Hrvatske. Biet, C. and C. Triau (2006). Quest-ce que le thtre ?, Paris: Gallimard. Blay, M. (Ed.), (2006). Dictionnaire des concepts philosophiques. Paris: Larousse CNRS Editions. Bottoms, S. J. (2004). Playing Underground, A critical History of the 1960s Off-Off-Broadway Movement. The University of Michigan Press. Bradby, D. and D. Williams (Eds.), (1988). Directors Theatre. Houndmills and London: Macmillan. Brauneck, M. and G. Schneilin (Eds.), (2001). Theaterlexikon. Reinbek bei Hamburg: Rowohlt Taschenbuch Verlag. Brocket, O. G. and R. R. Findlay (Eds.), (1973). Century of Inovation, History of European and American Theatre and Drama Since 1870, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall Inc. Corvin, M. (Ed.), (1991). Dictionnaire encyclopdique du thtre. Paris: Bordas. Delgado, M. M. and D. Rebellato (Eds.), (2010). Contemporary European Theatre Directors, London and New York: Routledge. Dort, B. (1971). Thtre rel. Paris: ditions du Seuil. Dumur, G. (Ed.), (1965). Histoire des spectacles. Paris: Gallimard. Drrschmidt, A. und B. Engelhardt, (Eds.), (2003). Werk-Stck, Regisseure im Portrt, Arbeitsbuch. Berlin: Theater der Zeit. vrenoff, N. (1947). Histoire du thtre russe. Paris: Editions du Chne. Glii, B. (1964). Pozorite, Beograd: Zavod za izdavanje udbenika Socijalistike republike Srbije. Hartnoll, P. (Ed.), (1970). The Oxford Companion to the Theatre. London: Oxford University Press. Harrison, M. (1998). The Language of Theatre. New York: Routledge.

17

Jeremi-Molnar, D. (2007). Rihard Vagner: konstruktor istinske realnosti. Beograd: Fabrika knjige. Katz, E. (1998). The Film Encyclopedia, New York: HarperPerennial. Knebel, M. (2006). LAnalyse-Action. Arles: Actes sud / Papiers ; Lyon: Ecole nationale suprieure des arts et techniques du thtre. Lazin M. (2005). Nova drama Nova reija?, In: S. Anelkovi and R. Vojvodi (Eds.), Dramski tekst danas u Bosni i Hercegovini, Hrvatskoj i Srbiji i Crnoj Gori: mogunosti dramaturkih itanja (pp. 112-121). Podgorica: Univerzitet Crne Gore-Cetinje, Crnogorsko narodno pozorite ; Paris: Universit Paris IV-Sorbonne. - quoi tient le succs de Biljana Srbljanovi. (2006). In: S. Andjelkovi and P.-L. Thomas (Eds.), Le thtre daujourdhui en Bosnie-Herzgovine, Croatie, Serbie et au Montngro, Nationalisme et autisme (pp. 217-243). Paris: Revue des tudes slaves, Institut d'tudes slaves, Tome LXXVII, fascicule 1-2. Lasi, S. (2000). Autobiografski zapisi. Zagreb: Globus. Lazi, R. (1996). Jugoslovenska dramska reija 1918-1991. Beograd: GEA ; Novi Sad: Akademija umetnosti. Lehmann, H.-T. (2002). Le Thtre postdramatique, Paris: LArche. Lei, J. (1986). Istorija jugoslavenske moderne reije (1861-1941), Novi Sad: Sterijino pozorje, Dnevnik, Novi Sad. Macay, D. (2000). Chritical Theory, London: Penguin books. Maurin, F. (1998). Robert Wilson, le temps pour voir, lespace pour couter. Arles: Actes sud ; Paris: Acadmie exprimentale des thtres. Miller, J. (1986). Subsequent Performances. London: Faber and Faber. Mitter, S. and M. Shevtsova, (Eds.), (2008). Fifty Key Theatre Directors. London and New York: Routledge. Osborne, J. (2006). The Meiningen Court Theatre, 1866-1890. Cambridge, New York, New Rochelle, Melbourne, Sidney: Cambridge University Press. Pavis, P. (1987). Dictionnaire du theater. Paris: Messidor/ditions sociales. - (2007). La mise en scne contemporaine, Origines, tendances, perspectives, Paris: Armand Colin. Rischbieter, H. und J. Berg. (1987). Welttheater. Braunschweig: Westermann. Roubine, J.-J. (1980). Thtre et mise en scne. 1880-1980. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France. Rudnitski, K. (2000). Thtre russe et sovitique 1905-1935, Avant-garde et tradition. Paris: Thames & Hadson SARL. Rhle, G. (2007). Theater in Deutschland, 1887-1945. Frankfurt am Main: Fischer Verlag. Senker, B. (1984). Redateljsko kazalite. Zagreb: CEKADE.

18

Stanislavsky, K. (2004). My Life in Art. Honolulu, Hawaii: University Press of the Pacific. Sucher, C. B. (Ed.), (1999). Theaterlexikon. Autoren, Regisseure, Schauspieler, Dramaturgen, Bhnenbildner, Kritiker. Minhen: Deutscher Taschenbuch Verlag. Symons, A. (1986). The Ideas of Richard Wagner. In: E. Bentley (Ed.), The Theory of the Modern Stage. New York: Penguin books. Todd, E. (1990). L'Invention de l'Europe. Paris: Le Seuil. Vasinauskait, R. (Ed.), (2003). Le thtre dOskaras Korunovas. Presses universitaires de Caen, Centre rgional des Lettres de Basse-Normandie. Veinstein, A (1955). La mise en scne thtrale et sa condition esthtique. Paris: Flammarion. Wickham, G. (1999). A History of the Theatre. London: Phaidon Press Limited.