COMMENTS on Handke's
ICH & DIE UNSCHULDIGEN/
I & THE NOT SO INNOCENT INNOCENTS
= PART I=
ALSO POSTED @:
http://handke-drama.blogspot.com/2016/01/comments-on-handkes-ich-und-die.html
BACKGROUND & REVIEWS
http://handke-drama.blogspot.com/2014/10/die-unschuldigen-ich-und-die-unbekannte.html
INDEX TO THE HANDKE DRAMA BLOG
http://handke-drama.blogspot.com/2010/05/index-page-for-this-and-all-other.html
It has been 40 years
since the Klaus Peymann TAT premiere
https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theater_am_Turm/
of PUBLIKUMSBESCHIMPFUNG
what I felt too queasy to call ABUSING and now prefer to call
PUBLIC INSULT
and ended up with
OFFENDING THE AUDIENCE
At the time
(but be my unqueasy guest)
http://www.handketrans.scriptmania.com
It was 1066 and the darkest of Merowingians were in power when I first heard and saw the Griffen Wunderkind at Princeton
https://plus.google.com/photos/106505819654688893791/albums/5640738175153983697
And then tried chatting him up
at a party
that Pannah Grady, Jakov Lind & I
gave for the Gruppe 47
at her splendid apartment at
the DAKOTA
http://tinyurl.com/jx64wz6
in Manhattan
in whose courtyard,
about 15 years later,
a boy from Georgia
yet another of this endless series of American madmen gunned down John Lennon.
Much water under and over the bridge,
lots of flotsam,
and Handke is one of the few real continuities in a life
http://artscritic.blogspot.com/2015/12/provisional-obituary-on-reaching-eighty.html
where I find myself chiefly
http://artscritic.blogspot.com/2015/09/talking-to-ghosts.html
And though the Wunderkind
would behave less than wondrously
on occasion and though his ability to laugh supernally is devoutly to be desired and who knows
what if the Tarahumaras
had something better to do than for their women to chase the men and the men to chase each others women while everyone indulged in an Agave concoction… Artistically the Wunderkind has proved a pretty steady WONDER
all along non-repetive developer, not too much to criticize there if one grants him his own sometimes most unusual terms in the very different tack that he has taken that has enlarged artistic means of communication in at least to me unanticipated or imagined terms.
And so now here we are in 1116
&
Via “commodius vicus of recirculation”
http://handke-drama.blogspot.com/2012/07/peter-handke-plays-in-english.html
a dozen great plays
later we are @:
http://www.burgtheater.at/Content.Node2/home/spielplan/event_detailansicht.at.php?eventid=964444796
and maybe it’s another great play
ICH UND DIE UNSCHULDIGEN AUF DER LANDSTRASSE
http://www.suhrkamp.de/buecher/die_unschuldigen_ich_und_die_unbekannte_am_rand_der_landstrasse-peter_handke_42472.pdf
{I & THE NOT SO INNOCENT INNOCENTS & UNKNOWN ON THE CONTRY ROAD}
as great and important as half a dozen of them. Yet experience tells me
e.g. LAKE CONSTANCE
http://handke-drama.blogspot.com/2012/01/how-handkes-ride-across-lake-constance.html
that only experiencing
these plays can tell…
Yet one matter I know for certain,
I, someone who has had the most extraordinary not only translating and production experiences with this guy’s work but well read as I used to be
READING EXPERIENCES where the activity of reading becomes of another
and unique and entirely unanticipated one with a half dozen of his great texts…
That is,without experiencing a performance you can’t tell…
But that
DRAMARTURGICALLY
I & THE NOT SO INNOCENT INNOCENTS & UNKNOWN ON THE CONTRY ROAD}
(making the “I”
that narrates & comments & creates the text on stage)
staging the
STAGE DIRECTIONS
(Making them an essential part of the performance)
Handke, not only stays true to his own first law of PLAY AS HAPPENIG
but enlarges the possibilities of what can be done in theater
and for performance art
hugely & perhaps forever after.
Thus I will be willing to cut him some slack if a few bits in the course of this demanding 20 k + text rub
me the wrong way.
===========================
=PART II=
I also preface these
COMMENTS ON PETER HANDKE’S
ICH UND DIE UNSCHULDIGEN AUF DER LANDSTRASSE
{I
& THE NOT SO INNOCENT INNOCENTS & UNKOWN ON THE CONTRY ROAD}
POSTED AT:
http://handke-drama.blogspot.com/2016/01/comments-on-handkes-ich-und-die.html
for background & reviews, etc. see:
http://handke-drama.blogspot.com/2014/10/die-unschuldigen-ich-und-die-unbekannte.html
with
=A=
HANDKE’S OWN COMMENT ON THE PLAY
where he states that the play’s
protagonist, the “I”, the narrator
commentator, activator who gets the whole thing going, is a cross between “Caliban
& Prospero, and a bit of a magician”
which might be one way to describe Handke
himself, though thinking of himself as
Caliban, although not entirely unjustified, would be a bit vain-glorious. But
most certainly Handke is one of the great magician of our time.
And that when he was writing the play he was
thinking of a country road leading south from his birth town Griffen, Austria
that in the play is now closed off, a private realm it has a guard, and the
INNOCENTS try to barge in and all kinds of altercations ensue. These INNOCENTS,
however, are innocent only in the sense that they “know not what they are doing”,
and Handke himself is not in a godly forgiving mood towards them. Handke
mentions that he is not interested solely in the continuing altercations, thus
there are several other figures who inter-act with the “I” (Handke does not
mention how multifaceted this “I” happens to be
vide Parts III + IV)
Two women, UNKNOWN & THE OTHER.
(Handke does not describe the nature f these
interactions – vide Parts III & IV- which are indeed dramatic!)
“Bei
dem Ort habe ich an Griffen gedacht, wo ich herkomme, an die Straße, die nach
Süden, in ein Dorf namens Ruden, führt. … Im Stück ist die Straße außer
Betrieb, ein Wächter sitzt dort, es ist sein Reich, keiner darf dort hinein.
Die Unschuldigen kommen daher, sind unschuldig, machen jedoch einen Haufen
Scheiß. Es sind nicht die alten Bösewichte, die alles absichtlich machen,
sondern sie wissen nicht, was sie tun, wie Jesus sagt: Herr, verzeih ihnen,
denn sie wissen nicht, was sie tun! Ich bin eher der Meinung: Herr, verzeih
ihnen nicht! Es gibt jedenfalls Konfrontationen der Figuren, ganz lustige,
scharfe und traumhafte, wie es meine Art ist. Dann geht es ordentlich los, aber
dann höre ich wieder auf, weil ich finde, es ist nicht interessant, nur draufzuschlagen.
… Der Held heißt Ich, er ist eine Mittelgestalt zwischen Caliban und Prospero,
ein Monstrum, ein Irrer, ein Tier und zugleich ein Zauberer. Es gibt auch zwei
Frauen in dem Stück, die Unbekannte und die Andere, diese ist ein bisschen wie
Lady Macbeth. Sie ist die Frau des Anführers der Unschuldigen, letzten Endes
schreit sie vor lauter Jammer, aber sie geht nicht zugrunde, sie geht nur weg.“
- See more at:
http://www.burgtheater.at/Content.Node2/home/spielplan/event_detailansicht.at.php?eventid=964444796#sthash.yRjitDEo.dpuf
&
=B=
A recent interview (where I translate the
quotes in yellow),
entirety of which interview is @:
Januar 25, 2016
APA: Herr
Handke, im Moment sieht man in den Medien immer wieder Menschenmengen, die über
die Landstraßen ziehen, eine Art neue Völkerwanderung. Auch Ihr Stück zeigt
Gruppen von wandernden Menschen. Flüchtlinge scheinen sie allerdings nicht.
[Handke mentions in response to the opening question
about refugees on the road that he has never treated actual day to day events
in his plays, moreover the play is two & a half years old, which is true
enough except perhaps (1) for the 1973
THEY ARE DYING OUT which, after all, aside the eternal conflicts, is a
kind of persiflage of the then 60/70s verbal New Left lingo and discussions
going on, but put into the mouths of a variety of anything but left discussants
business folk. Bob Kalfin whose Chelsea Theater had produced Handke’s My
Foot My Tutor & Self-Accusation as well as Kaspar 2 B.A.M but
not Ride Across Lake Constance
(Lincoln Center, Vivian Beaumont) turned down Dying
Out for being too
topical & it was not done until 1979 at the Yale Rep in New Haven. Moreover
(2), Handke, as most of you know, also became very much engaged publically in
defense of the exclusively attacked Serbians during the conflicts during the
disintegration of his favored unified 2nd Federation. However the greatplay
of his that these events inspired – VOYAGE BY DUGOUT: THE PLAY ABOUT THE FILM
ABOUT THE WAR is really a kind of Brechtian model that can be played in
response to the confusions that any war will elicit & in whose
representation one can accommodate a lot of these problematics if one wants to
in a form that leads to their re-appraisal;
that is, DUGOUT is scarcely dependent on the Yugoslav conflict that
triggered it, but plays an the fine knife’s edge of the kind of specific events
that are characteristic of a lot of wars. It remains entirely non-conclusionary.
Handke, as in this interview, frequently mentions that his work “merely grazes”
contemporary events, true too, up to a point: however, the Nazi past enters the
novel ACROSS & certainly plays a major role in that major drama STILL STORM
& in SORROW BEYOND DREAMS.
Not that a
great newspaper reader as Handke may still be is “out of it” in that respect.
Peter Handke:
Mein Stück habe ich ja schon vor zweieinhalb Jahren geschrieben und dann immer
weiter gearbeitet bis vor einem Jahr. Nein, meine Art ist, was vielleicht ein
Fehler ist, nicht Aktualität zu behandeln, sondern zu schauen, wo noch irgendwas Universelles
in der Welt verborgen ist, ein Geheimnis. Ich habe nie Aktuelles behandeln
können – im Gegensatz zu anderen Stückeschreibern. Es ist mehr ein präziser Tiefentraum vom Menschsein.
Aber natürlich, wenn dieser Traum nicht auch das Aktuelle zumindest streift und
zum Schwingen und zum Ondulieren bringt, hat es auch keinen Sinn. Das
Universelle für sich existiert ja nicht. (The piece is rather an attempt to delineate precisely a certain depth of
what it means to be human. But of course it makes no sense if this attempt
doesn’t at least graze the contemporary and gets it to swing and ondulate. The
universal does not exist by itself.) …)
APA: Wer sind
diese Unschuldigen, die in Ihrem Stück über die Straßen ziehen? Ist das ein
Ausschnitt der Gesellschaft, wie Sie sie heute wahrnehmen?
Handke: Das
kann ich nicht so generell sagen. Es sind natürlich kleine Porträts. Ich hab eigentlich das Stück
nur „Die Unschuldigen“ nennen wollen. Es sollte ein sehr polemisches Stück
werden, fast ein zorniges Stück. Aber zum Glück gab es dann schon Stücke mit
diesem Titel, und das hat mich dazu gebracht, viel epischer und viel weitherziger
zu träumen, als ich es mir vorgenommen habe. Indem ich das Ich hinzugefügt habe
und die Unbekannte, wurde es zu einem epischen Drama, wie es mir halt
entspricht. Es ist sehr widersprüchlich.
(I actually
wanted to call the piece “the innocents. It was going to be a highly polemical,
nearly enraged piece, but then there was already a play by that name, which prodded
me to dream in a far more big-hearted and epic manner than I had intended.
By adding the “I” & the UNKOWN it
became the kind of epic drama as is appropriate for me. The play is very
contradictory ” …)
APA: Diesen
Widerspruch internalisieren Sie auch in der Beobachterfigur. Sie spalten diese Figur auf in ein
dramatisches Ich und ein Erzähler-Ich. ( You split
the figture of the I into a dramatic and narrative I. A splt that one keeps
finding in the author Peter Handke) Eine Aufspaltung, die man ja
immer wieder auch beim Autor Peter Handke bemerkt.
Handke:
Natürlich, das ist mein Problem. Aber ich bin immer so größenwahnsinnig, dass ich denke: Mein Problem
ist nicht nur meines. Sonst würde ich ja nicht schreiben. (Of course. But I continue to be so grandiose as to think that my problem is
exclusively mine. Otherwie I would not write)
APA: Wieso
sehen Sie das als Problem? Es könnte ja auch ein Vorteil sein.
Handke: Ein Problem ist für mich ein
Vorteil. Ein Problem
ist das Fruchtbarste, das es gibt für den Menschen. (A problem is an advantage for me. It is the most fruitful of matters that
exist for human beings.”
Nein, nein,
ich bin einverstanden mit Ihnen, dass es ein Vorteil ist. Aber mit dem Vorteil
muss man auch etwas tun.
APA: „Die
Unschuldigen“ ziehen über die Landstraße. Wie unschuldig kann man denn heute überhaupt durch die Welt
gehen? (How is it even possible these
days to be innocent as one walks through the world)
Handke: Das
ist eine philosophische Frage. ()That is a philosophical question.)
APA: Anders
gefragt: Fühlen Sie sich mitschuldig am Zustand der Welt?
Handke:
Mitleidend eher. Aber ich
würde nicht sagen, dass ich mich mitschuldig fühle. Nein! Aber auch nicht
unschuldig. (I would not say that I
feel co-responsible now, nor do I regard myself as innocent. The INNOCENTS in
my piece aren’t innocent. They are actually the confidety, consciously
unconscious ones. I believe it is a mysterious piece It is a pure theater
piece. But these days it is also the theater’s problem that one has gotten away
from the pure theater pieces. For a time that was appropriate, that one said “anything
goes”. Meanwhile the stage has been reached where , because of the “anything
goes” actually “nothing goes” any more.” )
In meinem Stück sind die Unschuldigen ja nicht
unschuldig. Sie sind eigentlich die selbstbewusst Unbewussten. Ich glaube, es
ist ein geheimnisvolles Stück. Es ist ein pures Theaterstück, aber es ist heute
auch das Problem des Theaters, dass man weggegangen ist von den wirklich puren Stücken. Eine Zeit lang war das auch richtig so,
dass man gesagt hat: anything goes. Jetzt ist aber der Stand erreicht, wo durch
dieses „Es geht alles“ einfach nichts mehr geht.
APA: Ist das
auch ein Grund, warum Sie gesagt haben: Da vertraue ich mit Claus Peymann die
Uraufführung am besten jemandem an, der so viele Texte von mir zu Uraufführung
gebracht hat?
Handke: Das
ist wieder ein anderes Problem. (lacht)
APA: Ich kann
mir vorstellen, dass sich doch auch jede Menge junge Regisseure darum reißen
würden, ein Stück von Ihnen uraufzuführen.
Peter Handke:
Ja, das wäre mein Traum und mein Wunsch. Ich hätte mir halt gewünscht, dass
dieser oder jener Junge ab und zu meine Sachen in die Hand nimmt, in die Luft
wirft und schaut, was für Figuren im Raum entstehen.
APA: Die
Deutsche Erstaufführung macht Philipp Preuss am Residenztheater. Die wird mit
Sicherheit ganz anders aussehen als in Wien. Geht es Ihnen nach zehn
Peymann-Uraufführungen nicht schon so, dass Sie die Aufführung förmlich vor
sich sehen und ahnen, was kommt?
Handke:
(seufzt) Ahnen wäre ja schön! Ich bin ja absolut fürs Ahnen. Aber ahnen und vor
sich sehen, wie Sie es sagen, ist ein großer Unterschied! Ich würde vorziehen
zu ahnen. Einer meiner Lieblingssprüche ist: Lass Dich überraschen! Überrascht
mich! Oder: Der ist für eine Überraschung gut. Das ist meine Ethik.
APA: Ist Claus
Peymann für Sie nach wie vor für eine Überraschung gut?
Handke: Ich
hoffe! Ihr Wort in Gottes Ohr! Inschallah! Ich freue mich auf die Schauspieler.
Ich habe ja mit Theaterregisseuren nicht viel Erfahrung, aber Schauspieler als
Beruf ist mir sehr nahe. Zugleich fern und nahe. Das kann ich begreifen und
mitleben mit dem Beruf. Aber mit Theaterregisseuren eigentlich nicht so
unbedingt (lacht).
APA: Peymann
gilt doch als jemand, der Stücke genau liest, dramaturgisch arbeitet, geradezu
eine Verehrung für Autoren hat – sind das nicht Argumente, die Sie für ihn
einnehmen?
Handke: Er
macht das immer ein bisschen plakativ, die Verehrung. Verehrung darf ja nie
demonstrativ daherkommen.
APA: Seine
ostentative Verehrung Ihnen gegenüber ist Ihnen also unangenehm?
Handke: Unangenehm?
Unheimlich! (lacht) Nein, das Machen in der Kunst ist ja ein ernstes Spiel, wie
Goethe gesagt hat. Es muss ernst sein, und zugleich muss es Spiel sein. Das Geheimnis der großen
Schauspieler ist Ernst und Spiel in einem. (The secret of the
great actors is seriousness and playfulness in one. That is why I feel
immeasurebley closer to the great actors than to the dirctors)
Deswegen fühle ich mich den großen
Schauspielern unendlich näher als den Regisseuren. Aber wollen wir sehen. Ich
mache natürlich Zweckpessimismus, indem ich scheinheilig dann hoffe, dass es
vielleicht doch was wird.
http://www.unsertirol24.com/2016/01/25/peter-handke-ich-habe-nie-aktuelles-behandeln-knnen/
===========================
“The play’s the thing to catch the conscience of the King.”
=Part-III of IV=
of
COMMENTS
on Handke’s 2016
Ich & Die Unschuldigen/
The Not-So-Innocent Innocents & I
on the occasion of the
Klaus Peymann’ Burgtheater
Premiere
POSTED @:
http://handke-drama.blogspot.com/2016/01/comments-on-handkes-ich-und-die.html
http://handke-drama.blogspot.com/2016/01/comments-on-handkes-ich-und-die.html
BACKGROUND &
REVIEWS
http://handke-drama.blogspot.com/2014/10/die-unschuldigen-ich-und-die-unbekannte.html
http://handke-drama.blogspot.com/2014/10/die-unschuldigen-ich-und-die-unbekannte.html
INDEX
TO THE HANDKE DRAMA
BLOG
http://handke-drama.blogspot.com/2010/05/index-page-for-this-and-all-other.html
http://handke-drama.blogspot.com/2010/05/index-page-for-this-and-all-other.html
=III-A=
“The play’s the
thing to catch the conscience of the King.”
In late Spring 1973 I completed the translation of
Handke’s Quodlibet (As you like it), typed it out on the brand-new,
amazingly solid Swedish type-writer I had just bought in Savannah to replace
the one that had finally suffered irredeemable metal fatigue on the trip
halfway around the world. The Hellenic
Splendor made landfall in Savannah, Georgia and was welcomed at midnight up
the Savannah River by a DEA contingent that stormED aboard & ripped apart
the mixed foreign crew’s quarters & then I went shopping in Savannah & from Charleston, with its
amazing fullback fullblack stevedores (that unloaded in one day what it had
taken their starved Indian counterparts one week to stuff into the holds) sent
the translation off to Handke, complaining about the typewriter’s hard action
& not the problems I had had in creating a verbal collage that would
function as well as did his PROJECTION SCREEN of verbal hallucinations, to
catch the modern king, the audience’S CONSCIENCE.
What had meant to be a three month had turned into a great
six month’s trip on the Hellenic
Splendor, I had consumed two steamer trunk’s worth of reading material,
translated, aside Quodlibet, two volumes worth of Hans Magnus
Enzenberger’s essays, intelligent educational company, that I would presently
publish as editor at Continnuum Books, and if Continnuum’s publisher Werner
Linz had not turned out to be a shit; that is. yet another, though by no means
the worst of the “wrong people,” if he had been a real publisher I would have
never engaged in the adventure of Urizen Books.
Quodlibet, published in Lake Constance & Other Plays (Farrar,
Straus & Giroux) & in Collected Handke Plays Vol. I (Eyre
Methuen) is a fairly short text that features an expandable set of actors
playing the great whores of this world, CIA agents and the like who walk around
the (world) stage mouthing ambiguities. Indeed, the inner of the outer-world projection
screen that Quodlibet presents to the creative imagination of the audience
works on the principal of
auditory hallucination
and I needed entirely to re-invent this sound collage, the
closest to which Handke ever came to Joyce’s Finnegans Wake and what
with the then still recent Seymour Hersh revelation of the
My Lai massacre
I accommodated an allusion to this war crime in the ears
of a possible then American audience in the form of a young man’s utterance
“my best lay.”
Quodlibet had its premiere in Zurich and
was never played again for the reason that few if any in the audience could of
course empathize or identify with any of the characters on stage & I think
the only way that Quodlibet might be done successfully – that is, where
consciences are possibly tweaked, where agenbite bites inwit - would be for a
witty director doing it for an assembled audience of Pentagon and Langley war
criminal murderers, drone masters assasssins terrorizers. The witty Rummy could
have been persuaded perhaps, he would have appreciated the poetry of it, one of
two recent sec defs who were poets (Clinton’s Cohen, was a poet, too).
The scarcity of CIA agents & the like who have
defected and turned tables on mother and owned up to the horrible things they
have done (we read of drone assassins wearying of their task of decimating
wedding parties) may indicate that their like are far too inured, calloused to
respond either to a morally earnest
drama or one that avails itself of allusions, subtlety.
However, Quodlibet, shows us - in purest form - what
Handke the moralist playwright is about, in general, and not only in his
dramas, linguistically, as of his first plays Prophecy and Offending
the Audience: He’s a kind of activist Orwell, a disruptive Wittegenstein, a
would be Karl Kraus, a moralist of the language, potentially real pain in the
ass who disavows the standard ways of doing plays, most of the time, who does
not do the well-formed 120 minute one.
The plays of the first period
http://handke-drama.blogspot.com/2012/07/peter-handke-plays-in-english.html
from PROPHECY to their 1992 summa
THE HOUR WE KNEW NOTHING OF EACH OTHER
are characterized verbally active happenings.
Only one of them – the 1973 THEY ARE DYING OUT – has a story, although I took a
long hard gander at
THE RIDE ACROSS LAKE CONSTANCE
to see whether I might find a story secreted amongst its
verbal gymnastics, its Socratic querying that is modeled on Wittgenstein’s Philosophial
Investigations.
http://handke-drama.blogspot.com/2012/01/how-handkes-ride-across-lake-constance.html
but I didn’t find a story, although an arc of actions.
Handke’s means in these activist plays are:
a) Projection screens
b) Verbal direct address – OFFENDING
THE AUDIENCE
c) Allusion – aside Quodlibet, Cries
for Help, too, employs a species of this means.
d) The serial, Self Accusation, Prophecy, also in grammatical similar formations, Offending the Audience
e) Direct critique of language – Prophecy. Very much like Susan Sontag’s
attack on metaphor.
All these means are summarized in Handke’s second play
without words, but one of the greatest reading texts in the language,
THE HOUR WE KNEW NOTHING OF EACH OTHER
A play that cleans your clock by means of the forever
changing images, a form of aggressive mesmerization that, surprisingly,
unconsciously, more or leas obtrusively breaks down all kinds of defenses by
aesthetic means.
Handke’s dramatic endeavors, these happenings as I prefer
to understand them, during the first half of his career as a dramatist, afford few
occasions for identification and empathy. You cannot empathize with the four
speakers who enunciate OFFENDING THE AUDIENCE, the man and woman who speak
SELF-ACCUSATION is another matter, although what they self-accuse themselves of
is often funnee & ultimately over the top, thus relieving of undue guilt.
CRIES FOR HELP articulates the young audience’s own
neediness, and not in the accustomed pitying or condolence filled manner of the
Red Cross. I love that play.
The early Handke is his young generation’s
SURROGATE.
Fear, terror, aside a joy in verbal fun also prevail in Radio Play One
For a piece that discusses the translation of the early
pieces see:
http://www.handketrans.scriptmania.com/
To empathize and identify with KASPAR’S verbal education
& indoctrination, his tribulations is torturous and humiliating.
Handke at Princeton
1966
The wordless MY FOOT MY TUTOR’S
ritualized sado-masochism might have cured its author of
his sadism, if matters were that simple. Beautifully sinister with its ominous
sounds & Colors for Susan musical
accompaniment. Take a look at various photos to see how well this plays.
https://picasaweb.google.com/106505819654688893791/PERFDRAMA
RIDE ACROSS LAKE CONSTANCE offers the odd refracting moments for identification and
empathy in its discombobulating procedures: Dreaming, waking, questioning,
arguing, the TWINS grabbing for testicles, as so many young girls were starting
to do about that time that they could abandon their inhibitions. LAKE CONSTANCE
… everyone is looking for an identity, a center.
There is no story…. It is pure happening, that also cleans out
your clock, as a good analytic hour will as I would discover in time, these
happenings create different states of mind and being state of mind altering are
aesthetically freshening.
That leaves the outlier, the comparatively normal
THE ARE DYING OUT
http://handke-drama.blogspot.com/2011/09/they-are-dying-out.html
https://plus.google.com/photos/106505819654688893791/albums/5690247726536556065
which is in the Austrian Nestroy/ Raimund tradition.
See my pieces in reply to Thomas Oberender
&
Klaus Kaspberger
who approach these texts in a similar manner & with
whom I have no quarrel but who do not consider the “states of mind” except in
so far as they realize that several of these plays create catharses, although
they do not specify how & as I suspect only an analyist with knowledge of
neurology can what these texts create when they are played
“happenings”
a play of any kind is a happening of some
kind,
I just happen to think that work that abandons so much of
the usual folderol of plays is best approached in this manner.
--------------------
III-B=
COMMENTS ON THE
SECOND, POST-CRISIS, HALF OF HANDKE’S DRAMATIC OEUVRE:
1980 to 2016 & onward?
BACKGROUND & REVIEWS
http://handke-drama.blogspot.com/2014/10/die-unschuldigen-ich-und-die-unbekannte.html
http://handke-drama.blogspot.com/2014/10/die-unschuldigen-ich-und-die-unbekannte.html
For
starters let me post the Ibsenaward statement, it provides a good enough intro
to all of Handke & to the post 1980 dramatic scores, emphases mine.
“While Ibsen's dramas amount to a perfect cohesion of form, the
dramatist Handke’s touch is one of openness, of the open nature of the play as theatre itself. Yet
both artists have much in common, and perhaps this most centrally: their sense of discovery. The ability to be a sensor for
the fabric of society. Their remoteness from their own homelands and yet
ceaseless work on a possible concept of home and literature that is
commensurate to this concept. They are besotted with illusions. Music is both a vital element and a
means of knowledge at the same time. And perhaps the ability of both
artists also stems primarily from giving voice to structure: the origin lies in
their amazement at an observation within the volatile context of life, and they
suddenly make this living environment stage-worthy – making it an element of
language never before heard in theatre. How a human being perishes and how a
form of spiritual enlightenment is bestowed upon him, or when a people’s
partisan struggle leads not to liberation, but instead to tragedy – both
artists devised continually renewing narratives for such observations on the
stage well into old age; in doing so, their literary work in stagecraft was
always one step ahead, seemed visionary and proved their scenic imaginativeness.
By awarding the 2014 Ibsen Award to Peter Handke, this poetic wonder is honoured. This has led to work in formats that were hitherto barely considered possible, be it his “speech-plays” (“Sprechstücke”), his designs for a new “world theatre”, his completely silent pieces or his great monologue dramas. Peter Handke's theatrical world includes the beat and spirit of pop, as well as the lyrical tone of the dramatic poem that aims at the transformation of the listener. And yet dramatist Peter Handke is not an author born of the theatre – he was not an actor, playwright or director, but, as a storyteller, he is an author who simultaneously possesses a flair for destiny and the abstract form through which a power that threatens (or uplifts) mankind is brought to life. And so he was able to develop his own form of theatre – a fresh kind of presentation, artificially and directly confident at the same time.
If Ibsen was perhaps the most exemplary dramatist of the bourgeois period, which has not yet come to an end, then Peter Handke is certainly its most important epic theatrical poet. In all his plays he succeeds in making the reality of the theatre visible, and indeed as a reality that has no desire to produce illusions and does not emulate the world, but is rather a world in itself. And in this world, the dramatist Handke can create an entirely unique blend of magical theatre and thesis plays, family drama and tragedy, as Nestroy or Calderon once did. In his fifty years of writing, he has redefined dramatic literature more often, more surprisingly, and more radically than any other living poet. Yet his work is distinguished by an obvious continuity: the self-evident truths of the theatre, but also our linguistic conventions and power structures have never been a matter of course to him, rather they have been a subject of analysis.
In the process, he has created perhaps the most important epic literature of the theatre after Brecht: His speech-plays to the rhythm of the beat have led to new, allegorical forms of theatre, such as “Kaspar”, or moving tableaux vivants, such as “The Hour We Knew Nothing Of Each Other”, in which Peter Handke had hundreds of characters appear. A classically well-built piece about today’s capitalists, such as “They Are Dying Out”, accompanies modern world theatre plays, such as “Voyage by Dugout” or “The Art of Asking”. For decades, Peter Handke has explored a Slovenian-Carinthian family composition, and thus an autobiographical one, as only literature can succeed in restoring that peace the characters were robbed of in the story; this is dealt with in plays ranging from “Walk about the Villages” to “Preparations for Immortality” to his masterpiece, “Still Storm”.
By awarding the 2014 Ibsen Award to Peter Handke, this poetic wonder is honoured. This has led to work in formats that were hitherto barely considered possible, be it his “speech-plays” (“Sprechstücke”), his designs for a new “world theatre”, his completely silent pieces or his great monologue dramas. Peter Handke's theatrical world includes the beat and spirit of pop, as well as the lyrical tone of the dramatic poem that aims at the transformation of the listener. And yet dramatist Peter Handke is not an author born of the theatre – he was not an actor, playwright or director, but, as a storyteller, he is an author who simultaneously possesses a flair for destiny and the abstract form through which a power that threatens (or uplifts) mankind is brought to life. And so he was able to develop his own form of theatre – a fresh kind of presentation, artificially and directly confident at the same time.
If Ibsen was perhaps the most exemplary dramatist of the bourgeois period, which has not yet come to an end, then Peter Handke is certainly its most important epic theatrical poet. In all his plays he succeeds in making the reality of the theatre visible, and indeed as a reality that has no desire to produce illusions and does not emulate the world, but is rather a world in itself. And in this world, the dramatist Handke can create an entirely unique blend of magical theatre and thesis plays, family drama and tragedy, as Nestroy or Calderon once did. In his fifty years of writing, he has redefined dramatic literature more often, more surprisingly, and more radically than any other living poet. Yet his work is distinguished by an obvious continuity: the self-evident truths of the theatre, but also our linguistic conventions and power structures have never been a matter of course to him, rather they have been a subject of analysis.
In the process, he has created perhaps the most important epic literature of the theatre after Brecht: His speech-plays to the rhythm of the beat have led to new, allegorical forms of theatre, such as “Kaspar”, or moving tableaux vivants, such as “The Hour We Knew Nothing Of Each Other”, in which Peter Handke had hundreds of characters appear. A classically well-built piece about today’s capitalists, such as “They Are Dying Out”, accompanies modern world theatre plays, such as “Voyage by Dugout” or “The Art of Asking”. For decades, Peter Handke has explored a Slovenian-Carinthian family composition, and thus an autobiographical one, as only literature can succeed in restoring that peace the characters were robbed of in the story; this is dealt with in plays ranging from “Walk about the Villages” to “Preparations for Immortality” to his masterpiece, “Still Storm”.
=III-B=1
Handke’s second and quite different major period as
playwright ensues, well prepared, although without transitional play (unless
you regard the so activist as well as poetic HOUR WE KNEW NOTING OF EACH OTHER
that quotes no end of fables) with the early 80s WALK
ABOUT THE VILLAGES
whose translation at a decisive momet would be a major
event in my life
see also
for parts of my postscript to my
translation of Villages as well as comments on other Handke translations
and the forthcoming
“WALK ABOUT THE VILLAGES OR THE
SLOG FROM SALVATION TO DAMNATION:
From Godsend to Albatross
to skeleton!”
The play became my heart test, few
passed it! The fantasy figure “great fondness” fancied but a single sentence
“the hefty taxes”
And sealed her ultimate
consignment.
VILLAGES, great text that became a major event in my life
and for which Handke had prepared himself as you can see in his notations in
GESCHICHTE DES BLEISTIFS
History of the Pencil
L’HISTOIRE DE CRAYON
which does not exist in English – despite the fact that
Handke’s first volume of diary entries WEIGHT OF THE WORLD was a considerable
success in the U.S. and even in mass trade-paperback with Collier/McMillan.
=III-B=2=
The plays of this second period. Subsequent to VILLAGES
are:
THE ART OF ASKING
n Voyage to the Sonorous Land, or The Art of Asking, a cockeyed
optimist and a spoilsport lead a group of characters to the hinterland of their
imaginations, where they search not for the right answers but for the right
http://www.suhrkamp.de/theater_medien/das_spiel_vom_fragen_oder_die_reise_zum_sonoren_land-peter_handke_101160.html
The untranslated
Zuruestungen fuer die Unsterblichkeit
REHEARSAL/PREPARATIONS FOR IMMORTALITY
http://www.suhrkamp.de/buecher/zuruestungen_fuer_die_unsterblichkeit-peter_handke_40797.pdf
TRACES OF THE LOST
Which may have been translated for the Opera that Philip
Glass based on the the text
http://handke-drama.blogspot.com/2010/03/spuren-der-verirrten-premiere-at.html
VOYAGE BY DUGOUT
http://handke-drama.blogspot.com/2010/06/voyage-by-dugout-play-that-came-out-of.html
UNTIL THE DAY
SUBDAY BLUES
Untranslated as far as I know
LA CUISINE
In German & French
STILL STORM
THE BEAUTFUL DAYS OF ARANJUEZ
and the now premiering
I & THE COUNTRY ROAD
See
=IV=
For a detailed discussion
As of Mid-February!
Aside the half dozen major plays of Handke’s second,
post-crisis period
-VILLAGES, ASKING, IMMORTALITY, CANOE, STORM, COUNTRY
ROAD – there are some oddities, unusual ventures,
Only one of them is minor I think, SUBDAY BLUES
Which however plays
it appears in the various languages into which it has been translated. I
recall writing my enraged schizzohawk to see whether writing rage might produce
something interesting, it didn’t not in my case, aside penetrating atonality,
it certainly is as authentic as it gets! Handke’s piece, formalized, becomes
monotonous & I at least don’t see monotony being in any way productive
here, as it can be, repetitiousness can be, vide MY FOOT MY TUTOR. The angry blues singer is salvaged by a woman,
indeed a not unrealistic move.
I don’t want to repeat what I said about each of these
plays at the page devoted to them to which I link.
PARTS IV BY MID-FEBRUARY