Bertolt Brecht wanted his works to revolutionize the bourgeois values ​​of theater and generate social and political change. As an influential playwright, he developed the firm impression that theater should give us; “think about power and how our society operates and it does so with a clear purpose: to bring about change.” His fundamental philosophies have undeniably changed the theatrical landscape forever, while his work continues to attract political criticism across the world; contemporary theater owes a lot to his methods. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on “Why Violent Video Games Should Not Be Banned”? Get an original essay “Bertolt Brecht is without doubt the most important and influential playwright of the twentieth century in the world” (Bowen, 2006). As a writer, director, playwright and theater theorist, Brecht's impact on European theater was unparalleled in the 20th century. Highly regarded as a poet for his rich use of German, his main artistic goal was to create theater completely opposed to Stanislavski's naturalist approach; Bretch was against catharsis. By the late 1920s it had become clear to Brecht that this would require not only a new type of dramatic writing, but also the destruction of the bourgeois theatrical system. Bretch was strongly influenced by Büchner and Frank Wedekind during his early plays, for example "Drums in the Night", revealing the amplified emotions of expressionist theater. However, it also revealed his gradual transition towards greater disengagement, clearly apparent in his later works. The cognitive disruptions triggered by all of Brecht's techniques serve to "alter the viewer's habitual way of thinking about how things happen." By exposing the contradictions inherent in capitalist society, a play could allow the viewer to imagine ways to transform the world into a better place to live. By rebelling against bourgeois values, the protagonists of these early plays anticipate the Marxist critique that Brecht was to articulate more coherently in later plays. In an attempt to combat what he saw as a corrupt capitalist society, he implemented his own style of theater; Epic Theater, which fully absorbed the audience and sparked their engagement. His desire was “to draw attention to the malfeasance in German society and to spark a revolution” (Bertolt Bretch, 2019). While naturalistic theater was at its peak and acted as a reflection of society, Bretch chose to use it as an engine for change. Additionally, he was attracted to the idea of ​​"consciously telling a story rather than realistically embodying the events of a narrative" (Gordon, 2017), promoting an attitude of curiosity as opposed to empathic response to forms expressionists and naturalists dictated by the story. /dominated Germany at that time. The structure of Epic Theater is powerful because it forces the audience to apply critique to the world after leaving the performance. “Man Equals Man,” written and produced by the Bretch Collective, was Bretch’s first experience with his new theatrical style. The play is set loosely in British colonial India and is a parable of the "malleability of the human self" revealing the way in which a resilient social hierarchy - in this context, the military - controls and shapes individuals to ensure that They are useful for life. civilization. Conversely, seen from a Marxist perspective, the play could be interpretedas a symbol of how a worker can choose to abandon aspects of their personal identity to transform themselves into a “comrade” in a revolutionary society of equals. The play exposes identity as something easily corrupted and fragile, but also raises questions among today's audiences; Does “free will” exist? Or are human beings simply victims of social construction? In order to progress as a writer, I believe it is necessary to take into account the political perspective and Bretchme's epic theatrical style would generate deeper work, in turn sparking greater debate within the public , on the political issues of the time. “Mother Courage and Her Children” was written by Bretch while he was in self-exile in Sweden, on the eve of World War II. It is notable for Bretch's theatrical innovation and political intent, depicting the Thirty Years' War in Europe, as audiences follow the Imperial and Swedish armies through the battle between Protestants and Catholics. The piece aims to challenge the viewer's assumptions about an assortment of social customs; motherhood, war, business and morality, instead of frankly stating these themes. It inspires the audience to step away from their comfortable position and re-evaluate the world. Bretch made it clear that he wanted to show it; “war, which is a continuation of business by other means, makes human virtues fatal to those who possess them” (Jones, 1986), making the public conclude that war is also an inevitable event that is simply part of human existence, devouring life; a “timeless abstraction” (Jones, 1986). In my opinion, this is one of Bretch's most impactful pieces because it places us directly in the judgment of a woman whose actions "inhabit a universe defined by war" (Kushner, 2009), making choices undoubtedly disastrous, of which she is always afraid. looking weak. As the audience watches her feel more and more alone, she becomes dehumanized; monstrous, telling us how undeniably harmful the effects of war on humanity are. Didacticism lies in the flaws of the characters' choices and how they affected their lives and their worth. Additionally, Mother Courage's actions force the audience to ask, "How much is life really worth?" To what extent am I like Mother Courage? What would I change or do differently?'. His choice of setting the play during the Thirty Years' War (1618-1648) – a diverse historical situation but analogous to that of 1939 – prompted the viewer to reflect in historical terms on "the material conditions which had precipitated the war which was on the verge of engulfing Europe. » (Gordon, 2017); historicization. For a modern-day audience, I think this play is an eye-opener about the trauma of war in the 1900s and serves as a reminder to prevent further conflict. Alternatively, it allows contemporary practitioners to produce the spectacle and fully express their personal views on modern warfare. The “Lehrstücke”; a radical and experimental form of modernist theater, was developed by Bretch and his collaborators. Its fundamental principle was to explore all the learning possibilities that would arise from acting, role playing and the adoption of attitudes; minimize the divide between performer and spectator. Having realized that a new form of theater could not be established by simply burlesqueing the conventions of bourgeois theater, he wrote a series of short plays in the 1930s; “The one who said yes/The one who said no”, “The measures taken” and “The exception", all this is part of a new type of proletarian theater. The pieces manifest three fundamental aesthetic principles: verfremdungseffekt, historicization; deliberately situating the action of a play in the past in order to draw parallels with contemporary events and gestures; gesture or movement used by the actor that captures a moment or attitude rather than delving into emotion and reminding the viewer of the conscious artistry of the work's construction, openly indicating Bretch's point of view. Augusto Boal; theater practitioner, theater theorist and political activist promoted the Brechtian form of Lehrstücke in his own internationally acclaimed "Theater of the Oppressed", with its techniques of "forum theatre" and "invisible theatre" to accentuate strong social change, contributing to the emergence of the “Theater for Development” movement. Although Boal truly praises Bretch's techniques, he tries to surpass them; “The division between actor and spectator is still in place. The actor or director is always in a position to tell a story to a passive audience, even if the story reflects what the director believes to be reality. This means that there is always only one way of thinking allowed. “Speech is power” (Robinson, 2016). Additionally, it leaves me wondering if Bretch's methods are still relevant today in contemporary theater and still inspire contemporary practitioners, or if it is simply a glimpse of past theatrical endeavors. The defamiliarization effect, often misinterpreted as an "alienation effect", is a technique used to enable audiences to become "conscious critical observers" (Shakespeares, 2014), prompting them to participate in self- rational reflection and a critical vision of the action on stage; “they must not sit and feel, but sit and think” (Hub, 2014), triggering their curiosity that Bretch hopes for. The use of verfremdungseffekt in contemporary theater creates a greater sense of detachment for the audience, particularly through its choice of narration which would typically tell the audience about events before they actually happen, theorizing the role that the art could play a role in undermining dominant worldviews and its consequences. potential role in creating a social revolution. Bretch believed that this led the public to believe that there were "no universal values, that life is fleeting, that the world can be changed" (Battle, 2012). This writing technique is effective because, since the audience is aware of the action taking place, it ensures that they do not become too involved in the storyline, as a sudden event will not stun them, thus sequentially means he will not develop an emotional connection with the characters. I believe this is a powerful technique to use in my own writing, as the contrasting structure of the very standard naturalistic performance generates more depth in the narrative, in turn stimulating the audience, providing them with a more exciting, because it doesn't. expect the fourth wall to be broken. The lack of attachment to the spectacle makes them aware of the possible injustice and inequalities within society, forcing them to make deliberate change. “Roundheads and Peakheads”; one of these propaganda pieces presents Hitler's theory of inferior and superior races, in Germany at the time. Likewise, with his poetry, Bretch continues to use evocative language and endures the process of making the reader think and question, through his use of rhetoric. while writing. His style and diction are consistent, idiomatic and often very close to theordinary speech, as well as its diverse choice of literary forms; stories, lyrical meditations, maxims, satires and sonnets. He was strongly influenced by Frank Wedekind and was a true admirer of his poetry and technique; combining various modes of theater, in order to place the spectator in an uncomfortable position. Bretch's love poems are a memorable and necessary reminder of his inner sensitive artist, among his collection of dark and almost cynical pieces. In his lyrics, individualism and "anarchic dynamism", as well as his representation of political and social values; generally stimulating the focused subject of the poem, it all contributes to making them so irresistibly powerful and distinctive. Bretch was having difficulties with society at the time; with his strong awareness of human self-effacement and his deep bitterness at the way humanity was being manipulated, led him to realize that "only the theory of inevitable social progress offered him a real alternative to nihilistic despair" . As an atheist, who believed not in truth, but in probability, he saw communism as the most likely means of anti-fascism and social justice, leading him to write a "poetic attack on revisionism” (H, 1961); “Don’t follow the right path without us, without us it’s the worst of all.” His use of repetition; “without us” is very dark and enigmatic, forcing readers to wonder; “without whom? », creating a feeling of pessimism, or even isolation. From another perspective, the phrase could be interpreted as very controlling and ruling, through the use of the strong command word; “don’t,” leaving them with almost no choice; no freedom. However, Bretch's work was undesirable in the eyes of communist critics, and in the Soviet Union his mockery of capitalist civilization demanded relevance. I have not yet explored poetry as part of my own writing practices, but I nevertheless intend to do so and aim to experiment with Bretch's style of poetic writing in a way very thorough. Poetry really fascinates me; the idea of ​​rhyme and rhythm interests me, as well as classical techniques such as repetition and rhetorical writing, both of which Bretch used extensively. I want to write poems that stimulate, not necessarily huge social change, but just change opinion on a smaller scale and make people more aware of some political chaos, for example modern issues like Brexit or global warming, which, I hope would benefit. generations to come and help educate them about the world in which we live. “The Good Person of Szechwan” was written to demonstrate Brecht's opposition to the National Socialist and Fascist movements. As a non-Aristotle piece, Bretch's techniques; monologues, direct speeches, poetic sayings and alliterations are all common throughout this work, characterizing it as a classic and eminent Brechtian piece. At the end of scene 1, Shen Te said to himself: "The small lifeboat is quickly being sent down, too many men are too greedy, clinging to it as they drown." This poetic speech generates sympathy within the audience, as does Bretch's use of alliterative language; “little lifeboat”, “sent quickly”, “many men”, give it an impression of gentleness, especially with the whistling sounds, but also a rhythmic rhythm, because the audience pities it. Furthermore, the repetition of the adverb “also” excessively exaggerates “eagerly”; an intense, selfish desire for wealth or power, but which also intensifies the number of men, giving the public a greater perception.