Sehen Sie die Startseite der deutschen Übersetzung dieses Websites

(3) The techniques used in the play

 <<     1     2     3     4     5     6     >>    

• Epic Theatre and the Verfremdungseffekt

• How the Verfremdungseffekt is used

• Humour and Symbolism

• My Opinion

In this section I will explore the techniques that Max Frisch used in Andorra, and then I will explain why he used them by explaining how they allowed him to effectively put across the main themes of the play.  There is much that is unusual in Andorra, because it is an example of epic theatre.

Epic Theatre

We are used to classical theatre, where there is a tension-filled plot that ends in a catharsis (a dramatic climax), and that has a closed construction (i.e. it has an obvious beginning, middle and end, and is divided up into three to five acts).  The audience become drawn into the plot, and is supposed to forget that they are in a theatre.

Epic theatre was invented by Bertolt Brecht.  As opposed to Aristotle's idea of traditional, classical theatre, the goal of epic theatre is to activate the audience into thinking about the important questions and ideas within the play so that he or she can form their own rational opinion for themselves after having been an active, critical observer.  A further concept related to this is the Verfremdungseffekt (distancing effect), a concept through which the audience are effectively distanced from the action so that they can think about it more instead of asking themselves what is going to happen next - as this is not so important in these sorts of plays. Because of this there is less tension in epic theatre, and many unusual techniques that aren't used in normal classical theatre - for instance there is often just a series of loosely related individual scenes, which often take place in an unrecognisable world.  There are no special effects - it is not meant to be believable.  We should not be able to identify with the characters, rather we should "keep our distance" from them; the writer does not want to create much sympathy for them.  The characters often speak directly to the audience.  It is not the end result of the play that is important, rather the process by which this end result is achieved (i.e. it is more important that the Andorrans cause Andri's death, and not exactly how he dies), and for this reason the conclusion is left open.  We are supposed to be able to see that the world, people and society are changeable (like Andri, who changes a lot), and must be changed (like the Andorrans, who should lose their prejudices).

How and why the Verfremdungseffekt is used

For example in Andorra, it was more important to Max Frisch that we thought about the themes of responsibility and images of people.  He wanted purely to create a dramatic situation where a character is mistaken for a Jew when he really wasn't one.  All the characters and events are subservient to this central idea.  For this reason there are no subplots and most minor characters (i.e. everybody except Andri, Barblin and perhaps The Teacher) have hardly any personality, because they have no need of it.  They are only there to further the plot, or to demonstrate examples of prejudice (for example The Carpenter forces Andri to work with money; The Landlord throws the stone that kills The Señora). Their personality is otherwise completely irrelevant to the plot, and it would only divert the audience's attention from what is important if these characters had a personality.  Their deeds contribute to the main plot because the influence Andri's fate.  We can see that they have hardly any personality because the majority haven't even got a name and are instead just portrayed as representatives of a job (e.g. The Landlord). Only certain traits are displayed; those that are relevant to the theme of the plot, such as the narrow-mindedness of The Doctor.  The play is also not about relationships between people - it is not a love story, rather it is to do with a specific topic.  It is a moral tale, and the moral is that we should not make an image of a person.

These techniques are also developed in the structure of the play.  Andorra is not divided up into scenes, rather in twelve "pictures" of variable length and structure.  These pictures are only ever concerned with the main plot.  For this reason the play has a loose structure, which is an example of epic theatre.  Between the pictures are Vordergrundszenen (foreground scenes), where one character stand in a so-called "witness box" and makes a so-called "confession" to an imaginary court (though all apart from The Priest claim to be innocent).  Yet it is not really an imaginary court, for the audience is the court, and the characters speak straight to the audience.

These "in-between" scenes are supposed to be taking place a long time after the action on the stage "took place" (i.e. a few weeks/months/years later), so we experience the story on two time-levels - the present (Andri and his fate) and the future (through the testimonies in the witness box).  In this way, we find out what is going to happen in the play, and so have a privileged insight into the consequences of the prejudices and the cowardice of the Andorrans: from the very beginning we can see how unfairly they treat Andri (since if we had believed that Andri really was a Jew, some people might think that the Andorrans had a justification).  The Vordergrundsszenen also break up the action and the tension.  That gives the audience time to reflect, and stops us from speculating on the ending.  For instance the two biggest shocks are given away right at the beginning - The Landlord says in his "confession" that Andri is really The Teacher's son, and it is repeatedly made clear that something bad happens to Andri.

Humour and Symbolism

Max Frisch also uses humour to make his point.  Anti-Semitism is not a funny subject, rather it is serious and macabre.  Nonetheless there are occasions in the play when we are almost made to laugh.  Both the prejudices, and the excuses, and the determination to find Jewish characteristics in Andri, of the Andorrans are stupid.  There us also the scene where The (nationalist) Doctor asks Andri to say AAAAndorra.  But in the background, we know that such events led to the extermination of several million.  We quickly stop laughing, and it becomes almost embarrassing that we were amused.  We hesitate, and think more about the play.

Another reason to use humour is that it would not be effective here to be realistic.  Because of the inhumanity we would end up watching fully horrified, and would not be able to think about it so well.  There are only hints of the Nazi period - such as in the Jew Show.

Symbolism ist also used in order to help us understand the play better using colours.  In the neighbouring country are The Blacks, whilst Andorra is described as "snow white".  At the beginning and end, Barblin whitewashes.  At first this is so that everything is white for Saint George's Day, but at the end (when she is mad) it is in order to try and make Andorra innocent once again.

My opinion

I think that these techniques are very innovative.  They may sound strange at first, but it is interesting to see how all these ideas come together to make a comprehensible and instructive play.  In the play, Andri's problems are made clear, whilst we are still able to understand the plot, and the difficult topics are treated with respect.  For this reason, the techniques are effective.  It is also important to remember the problems that would have occurred if Andorra were an example of classical theatre.

Yet there are also a few problems with the piece.  For example the characters are not completely believable - indeed everybody apart from Andri and The Teacher is (due to their lack of personality) a sort of caricature.  But even Andri does not always behave realistically - for example when he is told that he is not really a Jew, he doesn't believe The Priest.  We know that Andri has changed, but we could also have thought that he would have been relieved at this.

The other big problem with it is that theatre is supposed to entertain the public and not to lecture us.  When most people go to the theatre, they don't want to watch a morality play - they want to relax.  But Andorra is needless to say not just a purely educational exercise with no plot or tension.  The viewer can still be interested in the events on the stage.  In the first picture there is a bit of tension with expressions like „es hängt etwas in der Luft“ ("There is something in the air"), and The Priest's unprovoked remark to Barblin: „kein Mensch verfolgt euer Andri“ ("Nobody is persecuting your Andri"). We also do not know exactly what happens to Andri (though this is also a technique of epic theatre, as it is not what happens, rather how it happens that is important).  For these reasons we can find this play interesting, but because of the techniques used, it is just not possible to become engrossed in the course of the play.

Top

 <<     1     2     3     4     5     6     >>    

Copyright © 2001-2003 [David G Watkins]. All rights reserved.