Lukacs and Brecht

Lukacs
and Brecht
Wednesday, 5 August 2020 9:12 AM
• This sec(on looks at the major ideas put forth by the Hungarian Marxist cri(c Georg
Lukács surrounding socialist realism and how it differs from the views of the German
drama(st/theorist Bertolt Brecht, who is regarded as Lukács' opponent in their views
on realism.
Georg Lukács
• Lukács, the first major Marxist cri(c, regarded literary works to be reflec(ons of an
unfolding system. A realist work must reveal the underlying paKern of contradic(ons in
a social order.
• His view is Marxist in its insistence on the material and historical nature of the
structure of society.
• Lukács’ use of the term ‘reflec(on’ is characteris(c of his work as a whole. That is, the
novel reflects reality, not by depic(ng its mere surface appearance, but by giving us ‘a
truer, more complete, more vivid and more dynamic reflec(on of reality’. To ‘reflect’ is
‘to frame a mental structure’ transposed into words. People ordinarily possess a
reflec(on of reality. However, a novel can help the reader to receive a more concrete
comprehension of reality, which goes beyond a merely common-sense understanding
of things. Nevertheless, the reader is always aware that the work is not itself reality but
rather ‘a special form of reflec(ng reality’.
• Lukács’ view of reflec(on undermines the views of naturalism and modernism. A

randomly presented sequence of images may be interpreted either as an objec&ve and
impar(al reflec(on of reality (as Émile Zola and the other supporters of ‘naturalism’
say) or as a purely subjec&ve impression of reality (as James Joyce and Virginia Woolf
seem to show). Lukács rejects such merely ‘photographic’ representa(on. Instead, for
him, a truly realis(c work gives us a sense of the ‘ar(s(c necessity’ of the images
presented; they possess an ‘intensive totality’ which corresponds to the ‘extensive
totality’ of the world itself. Reality is not a mechanical collision of fragments, but
possesses an ‘order’, which the novelist portrays in a formal whole.
• In a series of brilliant works, especially The Historical Novel (1937) and Studies in
European Realism (1950), Lukács extends his theory, and in The Meaning of
Contemporary Realism (1957) he advances the Communist aKack on modernism. He
refuses to deny Joyce the status of a true ar(st, but asks us to reject his view of history,
and especially his ‘sta(c’ (fixed/unchanging) view of events. According to Lukács, this
failure to consider human existence as part of a dynamic historical environment infects
the whole of contemporary modernism, as reflected in the works of writers such as
Franz Kafa, Samuel BeckeK and William Faulkner (modernist writers). These writers,
he argues, are preoccupied with formal experiment – with montage (the technique of
selec(ng, edi(ng, and piecing together separate sec(ons to form a con(nuous whole),
inner monologues, the technique of ‘stream of consciousness’ (a literary style in which
a character's thoughts, feelings, and reac(ons are depicted in a con(nuous flow), the
use of reportage, diaries, etc. All this formalis(c mastery is the result of a narrow
concern for subjec(ve impressions, a concern which itself stems from the advanced
individualism of late capitalism. This 'aKenua(on of actuality' (reduc(on of reality) is
contrasted to the dynamic and developmental view of society to be found in the great
nineteenth-century novelists and in their successors like Thomas Mann, who, though
not ‘socialist’, achieve a genuinely ‘Cri(cal Realism’.
• Lukács seems unable to perceive that in rendering the impoverished and alienated
existence of modern subjects some modern writers achieve a kind of realism, or at any
rate develop new literary forms and techniques which ar(culate modern reality. Lukács
refused to recognize the literary possibili(es of modernist wri(ngs. During his brief stay
in Berlin during the early 1930s, he found himself aKacking the use of modernist
techniques of montage and reportage in the work of fellow writers, including the
outstanding drama(st Bertolt Brecht.
Bertolt Brecht
• Bertolt Brecht opposed Socialist Realism. His best-known theatrical device, the
alienation effect (Verfremdungseffekt), was related to the Russian Formalists’ concept
of ‘defamiliarization’. He called his theory of realism ‘anti- Aristotelian'. Aristotle
emphasized the universality and unity of the tragic action, and the identification of
audience and hero in empathy which produces a ‘catharsis’ of emotions. Brecht
rejected the entire tradition of ‘Aristotelian’ theatre. The dramatist should avoid a
smoothly interconnected plot and any sense of universality. The facts of social injustice
needed to be presented as if they were shockingly unnatural and totally surprising.
• To avoid lulling the audience into a state of passive acceptance, the illusion of reality
must be shattered by the use of the alienation effect. The actors must not lose
themselves in their roles or seek to promote a purely empathic audience identification.
They must present a role to the audience as both recognizable and unfamiliar, so that a
process of critical assessment can be set in motion. This is not to say that actors should
avoid the use of emotion, but only the resort to empathy. One might contrast this with
the Stanislavskian (Konstantin Stanislavski was a Russian theatre practitioner) ‘method
acting’, which encourages total identification of actor and role.
• The use of gesture is an important way of externalizing a character’s emotions. Gesture

or action is studied and rehearsed as a device for conveying in a striking way the
specific social meaning of a role. The gestures of a Marlon Brando or a James Dean are
personal and idiosyncratic, while a ‘Brechtian’ actor (for example Peter Lorre or Jack
Nicholson) performs rather like a clown or mimic, using diagrammatic gestures which
indicate rather than reveal. In any case, Brecht’s plays, in which the ‘heroes’ are so
often ordinary, tough and unscrupulous, do not encourage the cult of personality.
Mother Courage, Asdak and Sweik are dynamic social beings, but have no focused
‘inner’ life because the foregrounding of a character’s inner life allows its social
meaning to evaporate.
• Brecht rejected the kind of formal unity admired by Lukács.
a. First, Brecht’s ‘epic’ theatre, unlike Aristotle’s tragic theatre (unity of time, place
and action) is composed of loosely linked episodes of the kind to be found in
Shakespeare’s history plays and eighteenth-century picaresque novels. There are
no artificial constraints of time and place, and no ‘well-made’ plots. Contemporary
inspiration came from the cinema (Charlie Chaplin, Buster Keaton, Eisenstein) and
modernist fiction (Joyce and John Dos Passos).
b. Second, Brecht believed that to capture reality the writer must be willing to make
use of formal devices, old and new: ‘We shall take care not to ascribe realism to a
par(cular historical form of novel belonging to a par(cular period, Balzac’s or
Tolstoy’s, for instance, so as to set up purely formal and literary criteria of realism.’
He considered Lukács’ desire to enshrine a par(cular literary form as the only true
model for realism to be dangerous. Brecht would have been the first to admit that,
if his own ‘aliena(on effect’ were to become a formula for realism, it would cease
to be effec(ve. If we copy other realists’ methods, we cease to be realists
ourselves: ‘Methods wear out, s(muli fail. New problems loom up and demand
new techniques. Reality alters; to represent it the means of representa(on must
alter too.’ These remarks express clearly Brecht’s experimental view of aesthe(cs.
• Brecht's search for new ways of shaking audiences out of their complacent passivity
into active engagement was motivated by a dedicated political commitment to
unmasking every new disguise used by the capitalist system.

Lukacs and Brecht

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Lukacs and Brecht

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Lukacs and Brecht

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Lukacs

• Lukács’ view of reﬂec(on undermines the views of naturalism and modernism. A

• The use of gesture is an important way of externalizing a character’s emotions. Gesture

• Brecht rejected the kind of formal unity admired by Lukács.

You might also like