An analyse of Peter Brook’s directorial vision and theory based on The Mahabharata and The Conference of the Bird.
After the Second World War in 1945, it instantly became known that countries, such as Britain, would encourage immigration in the process of reforming the British economy. For this reason, Western countries have become a multicultural society. Born in London, Peter Stephen Paul Brook, who studied at Westminster (IMDb, 2016) grew within a western culture of limitations yet had immense interest in earthly and natural creativity. This essay will analyse what directorial practices and theories Peter Brook’s has used in the ‘process, production, and performance’, (V&A, 2016) for his stage play version of (The Mahabharata 2005) in order to identify how an ancient Indian poem had been deconstructed, translated and adapted for a Western audience, at the end of the twentieth century. Subsequently, I will be discussing Peter Brook’s production of (The Conference of the Bird, 2013) in the same way to identify Brook’s vision to establish the initial intention of the creative process, of which he guided his team towards. I will explore and analyse all aspects of Brooks’ directorial vision, research and theory based on the two performances stated, David Williams’ ‘Peter Brook and the Mahabharata critical perspectives’, (Williams, 1991) and Peter Brook’s very own ‘The Shifting Point’. (Brook, 1989)
Peter Brook’s is a man of excellence. At the age of just twenty, he set out on his venture to direct films. Greeted by a ‘big time’ producer of his time, ‘Brook’s had been offered seven years of work and an opportunity to direct a film afterwards.’ (Brook, 1989, p. 9) His directorial methods were visible from the minute he set himself a challenge. Directors often allow for their actors to have a read through of a text without any interference, however, Brook’s instantly became intrigued with this part of the process and quickly started making requests of his actors, who appeared to be slightly startled. Brook’s clearly was not familiar with such a setting as the actors did not appear to be as disciplined as actors of theatre. In summary, Brook’s discovered the potential to begin exploring performative development at such an early stage of pre-production. Based on David Williams edition of Peter Brook and The Mahabharata, it is clear that Brook’s individual process of developing a meaning for his productions are influenced by ‘certain structural and thematic qualities’ of which you will find in the works of Grotowski’s Taoist-based via negativa, and Jung’s process of individuation. (Williams, 1991, p. 6) From this, I have gained the understanding that with such influences, Brook’s unique process of development is not to use a particular technique, but rather to allow the technique to come to life itself. As Gloria Steinem states; “the first problem for all of us, men and women, is not to learn but to unlearn”. (Steinem, 2016) This particular mindset allows for an individual such as Brook’s to identify a multitude of endless ideas.
Despite this, Peter Brook’s has not yet and will not set anything in stone during the process, production, and performance of his creations. Unlike directors such as Stanislavsky, who implied “that a character can be built up like a wall until one day the last brick is laid and the character is complete”, (Brook, 1989, p. 7) Peter Brook’s methods are completely ‘opposite’. Brook’s considers “the process [to] consist not of two stages but of two phases. First: preparation. Second: birth.” (Brook, 1989, p. 7) To summarise, Brook’s will continually make suggestions for character development, for example, he would tell, “the actor [to] take off his shoes and put them on again as he read.” (Brook, 1989, p. 10) The purpose of this process was to later demolish everything he would consider invaluable at such a later stage of pre-production. Peter Brook’s works closely and collaboratively with all members of his team to ensure the highest potential of innovation. The reason for this is simply because as a director Peter Brook strives for understanding and knowledge throughout his career to better grasp why his work matters, whom it influences, and whom it reaches. Without questioning why his work matters, he will never be on the path of identifying why his work exists in the first place.
Historically, theatre in the West has since its invention been exploring texts in desperation to recreate its own adaptation of any given story. Shakespeare is a clear example of this, as the work of ‘Romeo and Juliet’ (Shakespeare, 2000) was inspired by “a poem by Arthur Brooke called The Tragicall Historye of Romeus and Juliet, written in 1562.” (Canadian Shakespeare’s, 2016) International texts often provide theatre practitioners and directors with the groundwork of knowledge and understanding of our civilisation. As an Englishman attempting to construct a performance based on the cultural findings of Indians, Brook’s decided not to portray the structure of the story in its actual form, nor did he adapt the story directly for the western audience. Unlike conventional directors, Peter Brook’s does not adapt the play in his own vision, but rather in the vision of the universe. Brook’s adaptation of The Mahabharata is different from any other religious or cultural play. Brook deliberately approached this piece and conveyed it as an idea of all humanity, rather than a finding of only the Indians.
Furthermore, “can certain elements of theatre language pass directly between cultures without being filtered through the channels of any single culture’s shared linguistic codes? Could the simple relationship of, for example, a sound and a movement be charged with a ‘poetic density’ touching a chord in anybody and everybody, generating one of those moments at which, in Arthur Koestler’s words, ‘eternity looks humankind? – (Williams, 1991, p. 4) Often when an international play is performed to western audiences, the audience will have the opportunity to admire the performance, but not fully understand and appreciate what is being performed, as there may be complications around language, etc. ‘When Brook’s first saw a demonstration of Kathakali, he heard a word that was completely new to him – “The Mahabharata”. (Brook, 1989, p. 160) Since this day Brook’s and Jean-Claude Carriere both decided to bring one of the greatest works of humanity to the attention of the western audience. Jean-Claude worked on the text. Initially, nines hour worth of text was given to the actors, however, Jean-Claude stated that he will ‘unfold’ as he continues throughout the rehearsal process. Brook’s then took this piece of text and translated it to the best of his ability. Fortunately, Brook’s has an interesting theory of techniques to get the result he is navigating towards. The beauty of his work is essential to hope for the outcome of which is meant to be.
To illustrate, researchers believe “that members of the human family – hominids – and African apes once had a common ancestor”, which is believed to be the ‘origins of the human race’. (BBC, 2016) For this purpose, Brook’s as part of a ‘three-month journey of experimental work’ travelled with his team of ‘thirty people’ such as ‘actors, technicians, and auxiliaries’ across Africa. Through such surroundings, this enabled the whole team to feel connected to their natural state. Africa is one of the purest and most natural continents of the world. The differing surroundings of the western society may have an attractive vision of life, but Africa retains the ability to provide an individual with an exploration of oneself and quality of life without such unnatural distractions. This is what “Brook has called a state of ‘innocence’ – a state of un-wholeness and natural creativity, present in childhood but lost in the passage of adulthood”. In brief, a child’s mind is far more open to the world of exploration than the western population muted by a system, who are unable to reach such potential of ‘creativity and individuality’. (Williams, 1991, p. 6-7)
As explained by Peter Brook’s, “we are telling a story which, on the one hand, is universal, but, on the other, would never have existed without India. To tell this story, we had to avoid allowing the suggestion of India to be so strong as to inhibit human identification to too great an extent, which at the same time telling it as a story with its roots in the earth of India”. (Brook, 1989, p. 43-44) This play may have been taken from India as a piece of its culture, history, and way of life but it was produced for the western audiences in an attempt to display a piece of text that had been created by the human race. In addition to westernising the performance, as many western directors do, nor preserving it in its original form, which may unfortunately never be fully understood or appreciated. Upon Brooks’ visit to India, his welcoming was so heartwarming that the people of India offered such piece of work to him free of charge, as they also believe that the work does not belong to one particular nation but rather to the universe. To support my findings, it is clear the decision to have a cast from multicultural backgrounds was intended to demonstrate this very point of no man owning the story. However, Brook’s incorporated Indian clothing and decor to demonstrate that the story originated from the Indians.
The objective of The Conference of the Birds is to venture areas of which theatre purposely suppresses itself, in order to captivate audiences in what could easily censor our creative minds. Diminished for the ambition of money, power, and greed. Peter Brook’s “worked on free improvisation in front of all sorts of audiences with one simple aim – to understand more fully the links that exist between the truth of a form and the quality of what an audience receives”. (Brook, 1989, p. 152) It is important for an individual to signal to the universe hope and positivity in order to explore the unknown. Brook’s believes that “this comes when we try to work on something which challenges our understanding, forcing us to see beyond our personal universe”. (Brook, 1989, p. 154) In order to fully explore the effects of The Conference of the Birds, Brook’s “performed short fragments […] in the African bush, in the suburbs of Paris, with the Chicanos in California, with Indians in Minnesota and on the street corners of Brooklyn” just to separate ‘for several months’, but reunite years later, “to bring all of these different elements together within the same performance”. (Brook, 1989, p. 154)
While this is the case, the creative process of both productions are completely identical, however, the difference is evident in the productions itself. Peter Brook’s used The Mahabharata and explored the theory of the text itself, and later produced a presentation in its naturalist form. “In The Conference of the Birds as in many other myths and traditions, the visible world is presented as illusion, as shadow thrown upon the surface which is the earth”. (Brook, 1989, p. 155) The Conference of the Birds consists of exploration of space and social misconceptions, based on the locations of where it was originally discovered. It is simply an exploration of reality that humans are blinded by.
The ability of directors to imitate the findings of humanity in their work remains uncertain due to cultural limitations, particularly in the West. Exploration evidently provides Peter Brook’s the willingness to explore differing theories of creative development. Once Brook is able to interact with the universe, the creative development will gravitate into place. However, whilst ideas gravitate into place, Brook is then in the position to establish the inherent creative abilities to demonstrate the true form of the performance, by removing unnecessary elements. It can be concluded that Peter Brook does not follow a specified technique of practice but rather allows for the opportunity to present itself.
Bibliography
Williams, D. (1991) Peter Brook and the Mahabharata critical perspectives. London: Routledge.
Brook, P. (1989) The Shifting Point: Forty Years of Theatrical Exploration, 1946-87. London: Methuen Drama.
IMDb (1990 – 2016) Peter Brook. Available at: http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0111656/ (Accessed: 10 December 2015).
V&A (2016) Making Theatre: Process, Production, and Performance. Available at: http://www.vam.ac.uk/whatson/event/2153/making-theatre-process-production-and-performance-3418/ (Acessed: 14 December 2015)
The Mahabharata (2005) Directed by P. Brook and J-C Carriere. [DVD]. London: British Film Institute.
The Conference of the Bird (2013) Video. Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=81TbPVd7Fmc (Accessed: 22 December 2015).
Steinem, G. (2001-2016) ‘Gloria Steinem Quotes’, Brainy Quote, 2015. Available at: http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/g/gloria_steinem.html (Accessed: 10 December 2015).
Shakespeare, W. (2000) Romeo and Juliet. London: Wordsworth Editions.
Canadian Shakespeare’s (2016) Arthur Brooke Biography. Available at: http://www.canadianshakespeares.ca/folio/Sources/romeusandjuliet.pdf (Accessed: 13th December 2015)
BBC (2016) Origins of the human race. Available at: http://www.bbc.co.uk/worldservice/specials/1624_story_of_africa/page92.shtml (Accessed 15 December 2015)