19,99 €
Mehr erfahren.
- Herausgeber: ibidem
- Kategorie: Poesie und Drama
- Serie: Studies in World Literature
- Sprache: Englisch
- Veröffentlichungsjahr: 2016
Nadia Anwar presents a compelling reading framework for the study and analysis of selected post-independence Nigerian dramas, using the conceptual parameters of metatheatre, a theatrical strategy which foregrounds the process of play-making by breaking the dramatic illusion. She argues that distancing, as a function of metatheatre, creates a balanced theatrical experience and environment in terms of the emotive and cognitive levels of reception of a particular performance. Anwar's book is the first in-depth study of the concept of metatheatre with reference to Nigerian drama including Wole Soyinka's Death and the King's Horseman (1975) and King Baabu (2002), Ola Rotimi's Kurunmi (1971) and Hopes of the Living Dead (1988), Femi Osofisan's The Chattering and the Song (1977) and Women of Owu (2006), Esiaba Irobi's Hangmen Also Die (1989), and Stella 'Dia Oyedepo's A Play That Was Never to Be (1998). The perspectives of Bertolt Brecht (1936), Thomas J. Scheff (1963), and other theoreticians of dramatic distancing and metatheatre are used in the analyses and, where required, challenged through appropriate contextual and theoretical adjustments. The book is the first attempt to illustrate how Brechtian approach to the display and generation of emotions can be revised through Scheff's model of emotional balance.
Das E-Book können Sie in Legimi-Apps oder einer beliebigen App lesen, die das folgende Format unterstützen:
Seitenzahl: 978
Ähnliche
ibidemPress, Stuttgart
Table of Contents
Acknowledgements
Thestudy presented in this book was developed and completed during my PhD at TheUniversity of Northampton. I am highly indebted to my supervisors Dr Victor Ukaegbu and ProfessorJanet Wilson,whoseinvaluableintellectual contribution madeit possiblefor meto put this book into its final form.
This book has seen thelight of theday dueto thehelpandexpertiseof myeditorJanet Wilson,whosecareful and constructivesupport, continualencouragement and illuminating criticismenabled meto develop andexpand upon my ideas. I am truly indebted to thehard work shehas put in to materializemy dreams. I wish toexpress my sinceregratitudeto Dr Chris Ringrosewho read this book in typescript and offered mestimulating suggestions and useful feedback.
I am grateful to Dr Stella Oydepo for agreeing to answer my questions regarding her dramaturgy and sharing her views with me. Her helpful and forthcoming responses to my queries andencouragement arehighly appreciated.
I wouldalso liketoextend my loving gratitudeto my family, in particular my father, father- and mother-in-law, and siblings for their constantencouragement and support both financially andemotionally. No words willever besufficient toencompass my appreciation for my family’s selfless lovefor me. And finally, I shall liketo thank my husband, Mustafa Nazir Ahmad, for his love, persistent support and understanding whichenabled metocompletesuccessfullywhat seemed to bea never-ending venture. I wouldalso liketo add that if still alivemy mother would havebeen very proud of meand I oweevery success of my lifeto her loveand faith in my abilities.
Many other peoplecontributedemotionallyas well as intellectuallyin materializing theproject Istarted around fiveyears ago. Thejourney from an idea to PhD to monograph is repletewith many challenging and complex phases but thelove, help andencouragement of my family and friends shielded meagainst all odds.
I also acknowledgemy gratitudeto all thosecolleagues, academics and, scholars who critiqued, challenged, and questioned my research and so ultimately helped mein refining this work.
In theend I would liketo dedicatethis book to all thosewho believein love, peaceand harmony.
Nadia Anwar
Lahore,8 May 2016
Preliminaries
Thestudy carried out in this book is important to mefor two main reasons. Firstly it is an attempt to challengetheway in which postcolonial writing has thus far been circumscribed to limited locales, leaving out thehugeoutput of significant writers from Africa; and secondly, itengages critically with thefact that in someparts of theworld, including SouthEast Asiaand particularly Pakistan, non-western literary plays and academic writingabout them get less attention dueto thepredominanceof westerneducational systems in place. As a result, African literatures in general havebeen sidelined from mainstream academia in countries of theEast. My study is not only an attempt to bring to theforelesser known yet major voices of world literature, but also to tacklethepaucity of theoretical frameworks which could facilitatecontextually appropriateanalyses ofless well researched areas of Africanliterature, in particularNigerian drama. In order to do so I usetheexisting theoretical lensesdeveloped bytwentieth-centuryGermandramatist andtheatrepractitioner Bertolt Brecht(1898–1956)and American social psychologist Thomas J. Scheff(b. 1929)as a starting point from which I moveon to develop a new, reliableand relevant framework for thereading of dramatic literaturefrom Nigeria.
In this study I look into theconcept of metatheatre, a well known but highly contested theatrical situation, and its distancing function, by taking into account theperformancepractices of post-independenceNigerian drama from thefirst to thethird generation of Nigerian playwrights.In order to deal with theproblem of generational categorization,I haveselected playwrights according to specific phases in timeduring whichtheir literarytalentsweremorepronounced andthey addressedpressing issues of that specific phasein political history.Current Nigerian drama can beappropriately grouped intothreecategoriesaccording tohistorical political and social contexts, namely thefirst(pre-independence), thesecond(post-independence), and thethirdgeneration (military), implying “thethematic and stylistic preoccupation of a group of writers responding to a distinct circumstance, partaking in thesamenarrative, consciously or unconsciously gravitating towards a unifying body of discourse” (Egya 2011, 50). But, following Harry Garuba’s analysis of generational categorization in “TheUnbearableLightness of Being” (2011),itis also worthpointingout thata specific literary period cannot berestricted to a singlethemeand stylebecauseof modern African literature’s association with “extra-literary context”.
In theexamination of theselected texts, I havekept thetheoretical focus on Brecht’s principles of dramatic distancing,and on theoptimum distancing paradigm put forward by Scheff. Both models inform thetheatrical, illusive, and fictional natureof metatheatrical performances that help in creating a balancebetween under- and over-distanced dramatic situations. I usenotions of metatheatrical illusion, theBrechtian concept ofestrangement or alienation, and thephenomenon of distancing interchangeably becausethey all tend to distanceactors/performers and audiences/readers from anemotionally affectivetheatricalenvironment.However, it should bekept in mind whilereadingthis book that theterm ‘alienation’,when used to connotea distancing,in no way attempts to challengeor critiquean individual’s mastery over her or his surroundingsor feelings, as do somemoreformal andexistential approaches towards alienation, which, according to Jaeggi (2014) seeit as characterized by deficient relationships, indifference, and powerlessness.In fact, itempowers thetheatrical spaceby offering possibilities ofemotional balance.
This book particularly focuses on how metatheatricalelements can help in achieving a balanced stateof audiencereception by affecting theviewers on both cognitiveandemotional levels. In thetextualanalysis I will look into thespecific instances and varying degrees of metatheatrical illusion and intohowthat illusion is balanced and optimized in accordancewith theshifting structural patterns within thetexts. I havefocusedon thefluctuating levels of distancing created by metatheatricaltechniques,noting their development from themetaphysical and spiritual plays of thefirst generation playwrights to thehighly political and socialist plays of thesecond and thethird generation, post-independencedramatists. This study also investigates why metatheatrical distancing is particularly relevant in thework of threegenerations of post-independenceNigerian theatre; and so includes playwrights WoleSoyinka (1934), Ola Rotimi (1938–2000), Femi Osofisan (1946), Stella Oyedepo (1949), andEsiaba Irobi (1960–2010). In addition, theanalysis of theselected texts will show thosetheatrical featureseach generation of playwright shared and thosethat distinguish them and how their perspectives transformed over thecourseof their careers.
Given that it is impossibleto incorporateall thedramatic literaturewritten in therecognized national and regional languages of Nigeria; that theworks of very few authors who writein their indigenous languagehaveto datebeen translated intoEnglish; and that theliterary output of all threegenerationsof playwrights continues today, I havemadea careful selection of playwrights to best reflect thethreegenerations. Thedramatists selected belong to theNigerian cultural groups of theYoruba and Igbo, both of which havea rich cultural history of performanceand areknown for their artistic contribution to Nigerian theatre. Althoughanother major group, theHausa, and many otherethnic and cultural groups such as theEfik, Ijaw, Tiv, and Ogoni, also display rich performancetraditions, I havenotexamined their works,becausethey aremostly produced in their indigenous languages and areless well documented than theYoruba and Igbo literatures.
Sincethrough thecourseofhistory Nigerian drama hasexperienced many crucial political, social, and cultural moments, it is less important to investigatethechangeintheoeuvreofeach dramatist than thetransformationsin thewiderenvironment that has greatly affected all post-independenceplaywrights.Inthecaseof thefirst and second generations,I havecurtailed my selection to two plays fromeach playwright, onefrom anearlierphaseof their careerandonethatis comparatively recent,so that theevolution of their styles can also beexamined. Fromthethird generation playwrights,I haveselected oneplayeach byEsiabaIrobi and Stella Oyedepo in order to highlight theirexperimentationwith dramaticformin coveringa widerangeofeveryday issues. Finally, I havecategorized them according totheextent to which they makeuseof thosemetatheatricalelementsthat arethefocus of this book. Thetransformation in thethemes, which appearin their plays through metatheatrical techniques, occurs on threedistinct levels; from onegeneration to another, from oneplaywright to another belonging to thesamegeneration, and from theearlier work to thelater work of a singleplaywright.
This book is aimed at students, teachers, and scholars ofEnglish Literature,especially postcolonial drama and theatre. It aims to provideanessential introduction to a subject that is both under-researched and academicallyenabling.Theapplication of theframework used in this study also allows meto makenew theoretical insights and theanalysis of theplay-texts aims to facilitatea critical reading andevaluation of them in thelight ofemerging trends and theoretical tropes in drama studies.
Note: To avoid potential inconsistencies in presentation, no diacritic signs or accent marks areused with non-English (especially Yoruba and Igbo) words, names, and titles in this book, whether in themain text, footnotes or bibliography.
Chapter 1Distancing through Metatheatre
Theculturally rich theatrical traditions of Nigeria haveproduced a number of outstanding dramatists who haveenriched thefield of dramatic literature. Their plays areanexcellentexampleof how imaginativematerial from thepast can beadapted according to theperformanceaesthetics and social and political realities ofspecific sites informed bythegeo-cultural setting of theAfrican continent. Becauseof this significant aesthetico-political connection,Nigerian drama has previously been studied under thepolitically motivated distancing model presented by BertoltBrecht;[1]buttherehas hitherto been no attempt togobeyond theseobvious yet rigidassociations between politically motivated Brechtian dramatic practices and aesthetically appealing Nigerian performancetraditions andtocreatea synthesis between twoextremes of dramatic reception—onewhich rests on cognition and another which involvesemotions. In this study, thecrucial theoretical strand is provided by Thomas J. Scheff’s seminal work on theroleand levels ofemotional reception in dramatic situations which, although they involvethedetachment necessitated by Brechtian principles, alsoembracethecathartic pleasurederived fromemotional attachment to a performance.
Scheff’s theory focuses on thecreation of such scenes/situations in drama which need to first “touch upon therepressedemotions that aresharedby most members of theaudience”, at thesametimeallowing themsufficientfreedom not tobeoverwhelmed by these(Scheff 2001, 155). Similarly, Brecht’s distancing, according toEriksson, is “realized by detachment from uncriticalempathy, not fromemotion” as generally assumed (2009, 48). Thecurrent studydemonstrateshow criticalempathy can beaimed for and achieved throughtheemployment of illusion-breaking or metatheatricaltechniques which produceand modulatethedegrees of dramatic distancing in theplaysselected for analysis.Although apparently opposedto Scheff’s cathartic model, Brecht’s theory is both thefoundation and driving forcebehind it in terms of interdependenceof distancing and illusion,andtheir varying levels.Thedegreeof illusion depends on how much a playwright desires his or her audienceto detachfrom or attach themselvestotheperformance.In both Brecht’sand Scheff’s works, thecreation of a dramatic illusion is oriented towards theachievement of degrees of transformation in actor-audience’s perception about reality and potentialcapacity to reflect and act upon that reality.Whereas for Brecht theexperienceofemotional catharsis leads to complacency in theaudience, Scheff considers thesameas a means to regainemotionalequilibrium.Theinteresting combination oftheseinterdisciplinary models of distancing andthen ofreading them through thelensof metatheatrical illusionaddressboththeplaywright’scall for intellectual activity andtheemphasis onemotional attachment.In thecontext of Nigerian drama, thecombined model derived from thedistancing practices of Brecht and Scheffis very relevant as it foregrounds thesocio-political and cognitivedimensions of texts and their impact on audiences(through theBrechtianmodel)and theemotional and aesthetic aspects(through theScheffian balancingmodel).
Thecurrent chapter consists of threesections. In Section A,thecritical framework of this study, derived fromBertolt Brecht’s groundbreakingexperimentation in theatrical artsand Thomas J. Scheff’s psychologicalexcavations into thesocial dynamics of theconcept of distancing, is discussed.Section Binterrogatestheconceptual relation between dramatic distancing and metatheatreand providesevidenceof how thelatter seeks toestrange, alienate, or distanceaudiences.Section C givesan overview ofexisting critical perspectives on post-independenceNigerian drama. It investigatescurrent critical analyses and readings of Nigerian drama thateitherseek to promotecognitiveoremotional aspects of audiencereception ortooverlook themanifestation of different dramatic forms which can strikea possiblebalancein terms ofemotions.
A. Distancing: A Dramatic Imperative
Theconcept of distancing has beenused in various fields of art, social sciences, and literature. Distanceentails separation. This separation can bemanifested and happen at different levels inthetemporal or spatial, and personal orpublic domains. Thedistanced or separated subjectfrom its immediatecontext and circumstances or/and viceversa, can thereforebeaffected historically and individuallyas well as affectingthepsychological andemotional states of mind of theother separated subjects in thepoliticaland social milieus. Studies of theconcept of distancingappearin interrelated and divergent fields such as drama, theatre, social psychology, psychotherapy, philosophy and thearts in general. In his influential book on dramaeducation, Stig A.Eriksson traces themeaning of distancefrom theLatindistantia(standing apart), and considers itequivalent to lexical items such as “separation, distance, remoteness, difference, [and] diversity” (2009,35).However, in whatever context it is used, it refers to thevarying levels of detachment of theseparated subject from his or her immediateor remoteenvironment or theatrical space, depending on how and for what purposethis distanceisenforced and created toelicit certain outcomes.
In his seminal work,Edward Bulloughenvisages distancein psychical terms,referring to thedistancethat “lie[s] betweenour own self and its affections”, whereby theaffections can alludeto “sensation, perception,emotional stateor idea[s]”. This does not mean that “therelation between theself and theobject is broken to theextent of becoming ‘impersonal’” (1912, 89–90).Timothy J. Reissexplains that this impersonal state, as discussed by Bullough, allows theaudienceto identify with thecharactersemotionally, but “another part of themind [watches] theaction unfold moredispassionately [intellectually], as though from adistance” (1971, 5).Emotions in this particular statedo not affect theaudiencein a directly personal manner, but neither do they disappear. This leads to theanalysis of theemotional impact on readers and audiences andoftheextent to which thefictionality of works of art,especially drama, can shapeaudiences’post-performanceviews of themselves, their communities and their social and cultural institutions. Distancechanges our reception habits towards both theunfolding theatricalevent and thecharacters playing their parts in it. By altering our relationship with thecharacters, distancerenders thelatter fictitious(Bullough, 1912, 92). Not onlythat, but thevariableand unfixed natureof thedramatic action changesthevery levels and degrees of distanceby which itseffect is produced.Someof theNigerian playwrights whoseplays areanalyzed in this bookexemplify this trend by using framing devices and doubled performativesituations; thesewill bediscussed in thenext chapter.
As an inevitableelement in theworks of art, distancebringsmultidimensionalaesthetic objectivity. Fromthepoint of view ofan artist’sobjectivetreatment of his orher own artwork, it can refer to theamount ofobjectivityavailabletorecipients. An artist can onlybeeffectiveartistically if heor sheis detached from “theexperiencequa personal”. This objectivity is both perceptual/individualistic and contextual/situational. Within theseparameters Bullough contextualizes distancing as a critical andemotional facility that helps readers, theatregoers andeveryoneengaging orencountering art in thedevelopment of their “aesthetic consciousness” (Bullough 1912, 90).Thechannelling ofemotions—what Descartes terms thetransformation of rawemotions into ‘joieintellectuelle’[2]—thereforedepends on theinnateability to colour sensations with our individual perceptualand physicalproclivities.
As an acknowledged literary, psychic, and socialreality, distanceis characterized by flexibility and contextual adaptability andcannotexist without differentiating levelswithin any dramatic formula.A pieceof performanceor a dramaticenactment attains its meaning in theaudience’s perception through certain strategies of dramatic distancing which a playwright or director applies in order to manipulateideas, opinions, images,andinformation.Although this manipulationenablesa playwright or director toexercisevarying levels of authority over his orher audience, or instigatesuggestions in terms of controlling its levels of involvement and interest in theperformance, audiencemembersalsolearn to adjust accordingly by relating to thoselevels with their individual abilityto perceivethings.
Subsequently, theexperienceof performanceis ascertained through theintermingling of personal and collectivevalues and theireffects on thelevel of response, all of which lead to different forms and levels of distancing that aresupposed to bringaboutan aestheticallyenriched and practically useful dramaticexperience. According to Bullough “[t]heidea of achieving an aesthetic consciousness relies on thevariability of Distance”, where“Distance[decreases]without its disappearance”. Heenvisions distancein relation tothesubject/object paradigm with greater or lesser degree. For him, distancecan changeboth according to the“distancing-power of theindividual”anddue“to thecharacter of theobject”;[3]whereby theformer can possibly lead an individual toemotional collapsein an under-distanced situation(as onecanexpect throughEsiaba Irobi’s and Stella Oyedepo’s violence-ridden stageinHangmen Also DieandA Play That WasNever To Be)and thelatter can suggest thefailureof a pieceof art in an over-distanced situation or viceversa(Bullough, 1912, 94). Thus, thecreation of a balanced dramaticexperiencewhich is neitheremotionally overwhelming nor intellectually overpowering can compelaudiences and participants into action without losing its aesthetic andemotional appeal.
With respect to theextent to whichaworkof artsuch as a play can achievedistancing and manipulatethelevel of an individual’s catharticexperience, theperception of astateof balanced distancerelies ontheaudience’s ability tocontinuallyreadjust its gazeaccording tothelevels ofitsperception of dramatic illusion.This is best demonstrated in theanalysis of WoleSoyinka’sDeath and theKing’s Horsemenin which theaudiencehas to constantly adjust tothemaking and breaking of dramatic illusion becauseof theduality of action and behaviour displayed byElesin’s actions towards his community.Sincean audienceis required to separateitself from theimmediacy of theperformance, theseparation from theon-stageactionsis,according to Reiss,
theatricalonly when theplay does, in fact,manipulatethem. Theintellectual reaction […] is always—or nearly so—removed from thestageaction, whiletheaffectiveis bound to this action, so that by appealing at will toeach separately or to both at once, thestageactivity will reduceor increasethedistance. As theaction on stagemay bemoreor less realistic, forexample, so theaudiencemay bemoreor less awareof its being beforean illusion. In short, thedistancemay fluctuate.(1971, 6)
What isimportant, however,for a playwright or an artist, is toexercisecaution in selecting thethemes,becausesomeallusions or strategies which bring aesthetic pleasurecan considerably decreasethedistanceordegreeof illusion. This implies that basically distanceis subject-orientated as its averagelevels fluctuatefrom oneperson to another or from onetypeof audienceto another; for instance, thelevel of distancea Nigerian audienceexperiences in watching a Nigerian play would bedifferent from that of a western audience. Logically, it can beassumed that whileeach generation of Nigerian audienceswillexperiencedifferent levels of distancing(what Bullough terms as ‘ability’ or ‘habitual’[4]measures of distancing; 1912, 94),becauseof theeffects of changing political, social, and cultural realities, an artist or playwright will also achievedifferent reception levels of distancing from his orher audience.
In theNigerian context, distancingcan beviewed at different levels in dramatic performances. It caneither bethematic, structural or linguistic, influencing its observers simultaneously on spiritual, psychological, political and social levels. However, thesevarious levels rely commonly on traditional performanceforms and techniques and cultural resources, used by dramatists according totheir individual inclination. From theprecolonial, oral-based Alarinjo theatreand Hubert Ogunde’s folk-operas[5]to westernized performances of BiyiBandele-Thomas andEsiabaIrobi’s radicalexperiments, cultural traditions haveremained a vital determinant in cataloguing thediversity of Nigerian outlook on lifewithin a singletheatrical space. This study reveals that theexploration of theillusiveor fictivenatureof drama by Nigerian dramatists is an outcomeof their culturally ritualistic past, with anemphasis on theatricality and total performancecombiningelementsof music, singing, dancing, comedy, satireand parody. It will bediscussedlater,especially through WoleSoyinka’sKing Baabu,how sensually rich, comic, and parodied performances can affect thelevels of distancing betweenon-stageactions andtheaudience. In order to createa balancebetween theselevels, Nigerian playwrights resort toboth indigenous and western illusion-breakingtechniques which appeal to theaesthetic/emotional and cognitive/rationalconstituents of their audiences’psyche. They need littleartificiality to draw audiences’ attention to theartificeof theatrethrough half-curtains, conspicuous stagelighting or placard displaysas inBrechtian theatre; they haveindigenous material at their disposal to adapt and play with.
An important study of thelevels of distancing was carried out in 1999 by Joanna Kot with regard to Russian plays.Sheconnectedthevariablelevels of dramatic distancing with thereception and responsefeatures ineachplay and their potential for achieving distances thatestrangetheaudience.Adopting a notion similar to Bullough’sawarenessof changinglevels of distance, Kot’s studynot only demonstrates theincrease(distanced state) and decrease(emotivestate) in distancein a dramatic performance, but also highlights theoccasions when a certain balanceis achieved between thetwoextremes. Her analysis of theplaysreveals the“straightforward anddirect connection between the‘size’of thedistancing and a canonical genre, as sanctioned by tradition and recipientexpectations”,and theway itis disrupted. Fluctuation in distance, what Kot describes as “shifting distance”,continuously “draw[s] in andpush[es] away therecipient”, thus challenging his or hergenreexpectations(Kot 1999, 1–2).Sincetheaestheticexperienceis approached by a recipient through fixed cultural and social mental scripts, any intrusiveor surprising treatment in terms of genreor dramatic material distances himorher from theperformance. Thisexperiencewill, as a consequence, disrupt and dislocateaudiences’ habits or ways of seeing things, thus allowing them to reframetheir schematic frames from section to section and between rising and falling dramatic actions.With referencetoNigerian drama, thecomparison in themodulating levels of distancingtovarying cultural or artistic conventions, norms, andexpectationswill bemadein theanalysis of thedifferent plays to follow. Whileit might bedifficult to locateand subsequently isolatethepoints of referencethrough which distancecan bemeasured ineach audience, thevariables will changenot only ineach generation but also from onedramatist to another. Although theconditions that createthesevariables will benoted in this study, it is beyondits currentscopeto measuretheimpact of distancing in specific audiencegroups.
Inhis discussion and analysis of “modernist” or “realist”texts, David Hayman makesa relevant comparison between thetechniques of distancing andthemechanism of a camera shutter.Heasserts that such texts, liketheoperation of a camera shutter whichcreates avariation in thelens aperture, modify and imposedistancein different degrees. Hisexamplefrom James Joyce’s novel,Portrait of theArtist as a Young Man(1916),[6]reveals thesignificanceof the“moments when character and reader lower their guards, [and]exposethemselves to intenseemotion”. According to Hayman, at thislevel of maximum involvement, “something intervenes to dampen and distance, to modify at somelevel thegiven position” (1978, 34). Thereaders andaudiences of theselected Nigerian plays may also feelthesamevariation in distancing in terms of their shiftingemotional positionality within a specific performanceformula. Thisexperiencecan beboth palliativeand disruptive. Kot attributes thedifficulty in reading modern plays to this “constantly shifting distance, [which] undercut[s] therecipient’sexpectations and make[s] him feel lost, uncertain and sometimes irritated”(1999, 9). However, shestronglyasserts that this difficulty can beovercomeandthrough a careful balancebetweendistancing andemotivenesssuccessful audienceresponsecan beachieved. This idea is further developedbelow in thediscussionofBrecht and Thomas J. Scheff, both of whom proposecognitiveandemotivedirections in playwriting and production through their distancing models.
It has been mentionedpreviously thatdistancing is not specific to any particular genreof art orliterature. It applies to theaudienceand performers of drama, massentertainment, novels, poetry, or any literary genrewhich deals with writer/reader, performer/spectator, or director/actor binariesandeven to thosehybrid constructions that work independent of determined generic rules. Similarly, many devices for creating distancing areused interchangeably and unreservedly bywriters of all literary, performanceand artisticgenres. Thesedevices work both ways; they caneither under-distanceor over-distancetherecipients depending on thecontext, demand, and impact of a literary work or performancein a given situation.Theformulaic and structuralpresenceof distancing techniques can beseen in various traditional and non-traditional literary tropes.
As a distancing tool in stagecraft, Brecht created A-effector distancing in his theatrethrough means such as opera, music, and chorus, and stageconventions likefullyexposed lighting, placards, stagesigns, minimal set pieces,and at timesthroughwhitehalf curtains.In fact,hefurther developedErwin Piscator’sepic theatreconventions,whichhadinvolved mechanized sets, scaffold stage, and cinematic projections,to suggest that audiences werewatching fiction or artificerather than reality.[7]Whereas Piscator merged therealmsofstageand audiencethrough revolutionary architectural means, Brecht preferred to foreground this division by making useof various distancing devices and strategies pertaining to thestyleof actingandtheurgency ofthethemes, and by manipulating thegeneralreception tendencies of his audiences. Also, by subverting Wagnerian operatic traditions, Brecht incorporated ballads and songs as independent structural devices of theplot in order to distancetheaudiencefrom thecharacters. Wagner’sGesamtkunstwerkaimed at “casting a spell over [thespectators], and stifling any disturbingelement that might lead to reflection” (Carlson 1993, 384); whileBrecht sought to raisetheaudiences’critical abilities by jolting them out of completeimmersionin theperformance.
Thelist of traditionalartisticdistancingfeaturesincludesirony, paradox, juxtapositions, symbolic representations, comic interludes, masking and chorus, among many others. In addition, distortion and foregrounding of linguisticelements, as well as theuseof parody and caricature, arealsoregarded as distancingelements.Nigerian playwrights makeextensiveuseof thesedevices in order to break and fluctuatereceptionlevelsof dramatic illusionoftheir audiences.David Hayman points out a significant momentary identification of the“implied reader”in modernist texts (novels) and suggests that anextra measureof distanceis imposed by such techniquesas humor, irony, symbolism, and allegory. However, heregards irony as oneof themost potent tools through which distancecan beachieved becauseof its quality of “generating a doublevision of themoment of thetext”(Hayman 1978, 33)—a phenomenonwhich is termed “discrepant awareness” byEvans in his discussion of Shakespeare’s plays(Evans quoted in Scheff 2001, 162). Irony,and other devices that Haymantalks about,draw attentionto thediscrepant natureof any text or performancein various forms, creating a conflict in perception that does not allow for coordination between different levelsofperformancereceptionbyaudiencesand performers. Femi Osofisan’sperformance-within-the-play techniqueinTheChattering and theSongis a goodexampleofsuch disjunction. Thisdiscrepancyforces therecipients to distinguish between what is shown and what is actually proposed.Sincemetatheatrical devices famous for their illusion-breaking function areimbued with this quality, they canalsobecategorized as distancing devices.
Someof thenon-traditional distancing devices that Joanna Kotenumerates in her discussion of Russian modernist plays deal with thedeconstruction oftraditional dramatic formulae. Thiscaninvolvediscarding theconventionalexposition and denouement, juxtaposing thecomic andserious,enhancing thefictitiousness of theplay through absurdistelements orby “creating a deictic orientation toward an offstagethere, rather thanthemoreusualeternal present” (Kot 1999, 12). Thelast of thesetechniquescomes within theparameters of intertextuality or interhistoricity—also afrequently-used techniquein thecontext of Nigerian drama. Reminiscent ofJulia Kristeva’spostmodern“mosaic of quotations”or“permutation of texts”paradigm, intertextuality allows inter-subjectiveadaptation and transformation of texts byencouraging doublereading of thepoetic language. Following Bakhtin’s idea ofthenovel as a siteof contesting voices, Kristeva acknowledges theinterdependentnatureof all texts characterized by “a plural productivity in which multiplevoices—textual, socio-historical and ideological—coexist and communicate” (Lara-Rallo 2009, 92). Intertextualityemerges,then,as oneof themostproductivemetadramatic strategies for theobjectiveor distanced reading and subsequent treatment of history and cultural pre-texts. Thepast text/s perform/s on thepresent textual siteboth as an absent presenceand present absence, thusencouraging a doublereading of thewholeperformanceprocess.
Elements of surprise,exceptionality, and suspensecan also beused as distancing strategies with regard to a literary pieceof work, performanceor any devised performancesituation. Whileexplicating thesignificanceof distancing in tragedy, Bullough declares that“what creates distanceis theinclusion ofexceptionalsituations,exceptional characters,exceptional destinies and conduct” (1912, 103).“Exceptionality”might also betrueof theclassical drama that supportstheAristotelian aesthetics of theatre; however, when swathed in devices such as comedy, farce, and allegoric representation,exceptionality can havea very well defined purposein modern drama in general and Nigerian drama in particular. In this respect, a writer/playwright ordirector attempts to reveal commonalities of real lifein an atypical manner so that therecipient can first distancehim-orherself from theevents unfolding on thestageand then assess thegap between both structures (theoriginal and thedistorted).Theatypicality of any performanceprovides a theoretical basefrom which to assess thekinds of outcomelikely to beachieved in a theatrical situation. It relies heavily on thenotion of distancingeitherasa means to disrupt, invert or subverttheillusion of reality or tooffer a dual or fresh perspectiveofevents, characters and formal techniques in order to bring about dramatic disruption.
To a greatextent, distancing devices depend on belief systems and thedegreeof an audience’s allegianceto a particular idea or notion. Forexample, although not directly related to thefield of drama, Thomas J. Scheff’sstudy of theroleof distancing inemotions[8]with respect to certain beliefs and practices inherent in ritualsemphasizes how thesepractices help in“regulating theemotional distanceamong their participants” (2001, 135). According to theScheffian model, themain dimensions of distancing that makeit a variablephenomenonconsist of binary oppositions such aspresent versus past time, fiction or fantasy versus reality, rapid review versus detailed recollection and positiveversus negativeemotions(106). In thesecontrastivecategories, thefirstelement ofeach set helps to distancean audiencefrom theemotional make-up of a performance, whilethesecondelement diminishes thedistanceand maximizesemotional identification. Although conceived and practised in psychotherapeutic contexts, thesecategories play a significant rolein dramatic situations and byextension in theanalysis of dramatic texts. Moreover, as Scheff further notes, theelements such as physical distancefrom theevent, musical cueing, useof masks, flashbacks, comic interludes, and reported and stylized speech also affect thelevels of distancing(136–140). Thesuccess of distancing techniques depends on how and to whatextent they areincorporatedintoand developed within a play.
Although thepresenceof thechoices mentioned by Scheff with regard to thebalancing of distanceareseen and subsequently analyzed in theselected plays, it is beyond thescopeand purposeof this study to traceall types of distancing techniqueand to assess their rolewithineach generic category. Therefore,I shall focus particularly on distancing that is manifested atinter- and intra-textual and structural levels, creating possibilities ofaffectingan audience’s reception of a performance.
1.1 Bertolt Brecht and Distancing
An influential playwright and theatrepractitioner of thetwentiethcentury, BertoltBrecht (1898–1956) developed theconcept ofepic theatrewhich aimed at social and political changein pre-World War II Germany.Heavily based on Marxist principles and co-conceived with thePiscatorian aesthetics that represented theatreas a political laboratory, his theatrecreated a new inventory for playwrights, directors, and actors in terms of technique, styleand stagecraft.[9]It is important hereto notethatBrechtwas not thefirst to conceivethenotion and model of alienationfor his theatre. Many prominentpolitical, social and literary influences helped him develop his dramatic formula. Thepost-World War I cultural milieudemandeda greaterchallengetoauthority by questioning undemocratic social structures,and in this contextBrecht was motivated to study Karl Marx’s (1818–1883)Das Capital.Hisengagement with theCommunist Manifesto led him to set up his learning-plays,Lehrstücke, along thelines of thePiscatorian aesthetics of political theatrewhich had a purely utilitarian purpose. However, Brechtian theatresoon reverted from this agit-prop stanceto thepropagation of a dialectical vision which resulted in Brecht’s later masterpieces such asGalileo(1938) andMother Courage(1939).
Brecht also shared many of his theatrical postulates with Frank Wedekind (1864–1918), anesteemed German playwright and artist. LikeBrecht, Wedekindshowed contempt for bourgeois society and achieved hisestrangingeffects through short, loosely connected scenes, melodrama, and slapstick humour. Brecht’searly works,such asBaal(published 1918, produced1923),also show signs of Georg Buchner’s (1813–1837) dramatic techniques,especially with regard toAristotelian theatreknown foritsgradual plot development, andepic theatrein whicheach sceneas an individual unit stands on its own. With regard to non-conformist principles,Expressionism[10]also seems to haveinfluenced Brecht in developing his principles ofestrangement. Yet, being subjectively inclined, themovement placedemphasis on thedistortion of reality to createintenseemotionaleffects on its recipients; Brecht, by contrast,envisaged alienation or detachment in non-empathetic terms—anestranging characteristic aiming to curbemotional involvement.
According to Walter Benjamin, Brecht presented a non-Aristotelian dramaturgy becauseherealized that“theconventional, Aristotelian theatrewith itsempathy,catharsisand non-participation was disturbing thecritical faculty of theaudience” (1969, 28–29; Banerjee1977, 176).However, as RubyCohn rightly argues, Brecht’s “opposition ofEpic Theatreto Aristotelian Theatrewas a matter ofemphasis rather than an absolutepolarity” (1969, 44). In fact, Brecht did not reject ‘theexisting’, nor did hetry to createa completely new theatrical topos,but sought to put “old things together in new ways”withtheaimof “[addressing] himself to theconventions and traditions by which society views theworld” (Hornby 1986, 24).Whilesubverting theidea ofempathy and catharsis, Brecht achieved thisemphasis by trying to promotetheatrical distancing not only in terms of audience-performancerelationship but also in relation to an actor’semotional distancefrom thecharacter heis supposed to perform. Theactors, according to his distancing paradigm, whileremaining detached from their characters invitecriticism of them by performing socialgests.[11]This notion is as much applicableto an actor as to any member of an audience, aiming to “[teach him/her] a certain quitepractical attitude” and raising his or her capacity “of thinking and of reasoning, of making judgementseven in thetheatre” (Brecht 1974, 72, 78–79). In this respect, thetheatrebecomes not only a placewherepolitical and social issues arereported but also a learningexperiencein whichemotions arechannelled through andmoderated bycritical thinking.
Brecht’s theory ofestrangement iscrucialto his notion ofepic theatre,which seeks to turn both theaudienceandspectators of a particular performanceinto third-person observers. However, this does notentail a completebreach between thestageevent and its audience;rather, as Kot indicates, Brechtaimsfor “intellectual identification” (1999, 8), which insteadof playing with the“audience’s hearts”, should portray thefigures on thestageas “coldly, classically and objectively”as possible(Brecht 1974, 15). Thus Brechtianepic theatreaimsto appeal less to thefeelings than to theaudience’s intellect, for only in that way cana balanced distanced position beachieved.Expressing his concerns about theproduction of his playsBaalandDickicht, Brecht claimed that he“kept [his] distanceandensured that therealization of [his] (poetical and philosophical)effects remains within bounds [while] the‘splendid isolation’ [ofthespectators] is left intact” (9). SincetheBrechtian formula ofepic theatrealso hinges on pleasure,[12]this isolation does not fail to appreciatetheimportanceof aesthetics whichrefer tothesensory-emotional values inherent in a pieceof performance. Theacceptability of pleasure,however,depends on thecognitivecapacity of any work of art(Suvin 1967, 56–57). For thesamereason, later in his dramatic career, Brecht preferred theterm ‘dialectical’ to ‘epic’asmanifesting thetruespirit of his theatre.
What issometimesoverlooked is that Brecht’s theatrical art was not just a cold and objectiverendering ofevents and a distanced political laboratory, but “a catalyst to social action and cultural making, a making thatextends beyond theauditorium as theaudienceleave”(Franks and Jones n.d., 12). Thus, themedium of theatreshould betaken asa three-edged tool serving toeducate, provideaesthetic pleasure, andgeneratepolitical argument and action(3).In support of this view, Brecht termed hisThreepenny Operaa report on lifein which any member of theaudiencenot only sees what heor shewishes to but also what questions thesewishes. This is what hecalls “complex seeing”; that is, “to think abovethestream than to think in thestream” (Brecht 1974, 43–44). This process is moreof a discovery of one’s cognitivepotential,rather thanareliancesolelyon one’semotional reservoir. Since“emotional involvement in thepolitical message” (Kot 1999, 8)cannot bedenied, an audienceshould,simultaneously, beenabled to “assemble,experiment and abstract”from thechanging circumstances on thestage(Brecht 1974, 60). In this respect, John J. Whiteobserves that after the1930s, Brecht’sepic theatresought to acknowledgetheroleof both feelings andthecognitivecapacity of theaudience(2004, 2006–9). Thecurrentstudy of contemporary Nigerian dramaalso focuseson thepotential capacity of theplays toengageaudiences both critically andemotionally.In his famous retort “Much AdoAboutBrecht”, Ola Rotimi counteractswidespread assumptions that forcetogether politically motivated rational capacities of Nigerian audiences with Brechtian principles promoting intellectual detachment.Whileexplicating theimportanceof bothemotions and intellect in African traditional performances, in which theroots of modern Nigerian drama arefound,Ola RotimifindsBrecht’sepic theatreto bedeficient in its appeal toemotions(Rotimi 1990, 255).Although thedegrees ofemotionalevocativeness may vary in both types of theatre(Brechtian and African), an overview of Brecht’s dramaturgy shows thatit is anerrorto considerepic theatreas completely failing to produceanemotionalenvironment.This discussion is, however, irrelevant in thecontext of this study.
It is important to mentionthat in Nigerian drama therelevanceof Brechtian drama is limited to its conceptual framework.Any connection between theBrechtian theory ofestrangement and theroleof distancingin Nigerian theatreis in fact coincidental—just as it iserroneous to assumethat Brecht’s theory of distancing derived directly from other dramatic traditions such as Russian and ChinesePeking Opera.Besides, Brechtian aesthetics alsochanged from hisearly to later plays—his principles gained maturity and becameless rigid in terms of his takeon theroleofemotions, whilehis oeuvremoved from traditional to moreexperimental dramatic structures, such as thetransformation weseebetweenBaal(written 1918, produced 1923) andMr Puntila and his Man Matti(written 1940, produced 1948).Theideological stress on socio-political theories which heintroduced intohis plays according to thedemands ofthecontext,also wavered with time. Conscious of the“faulty and time-bound character”of thesetheories, (asareNigerian playwrights)“heopened them for discussion” by approaching them “undogmatically”(Mueller 1994, 90).
Whilethis studymakesa partial and selectiveuseof Brecht’s theory ofestrangement,Brechtianideasaretransposed hereas a constituent featureof a metathe
