" Warum Warum " Peter Brook in MoscowOn a scene of the CTR of a name of Mejerholda there have passed tours of performance of the world famous director and the theorist of theatre Peter Brook " Warum Warum " — they closed festival " Stanislavsky`s Season ". The NOVEL DOLZHANSKY regrets for those spectators who has got acquainted for the first time with Brook`s creativity this evening.
if someone has wanted to draw a schematic picture of the device capital " the theatrical public " to it followed embody a hall of the CTR of a name of Mejerholda at performance " Warum Warum ". In the CTR of a spectator amphitheatre the well-known critics, the professorate, the selected directors and actors of the academic theatres sat. Round them concentric circles &mdash extensively dispersed; critics are easier or younger, the actors of small theatres educated and safe theatre-goers. On a very narrow balcony, having stuck round a handrail from three sides of the hall, sat badly provided (so as it is accepted to think, even more educated) theatre-goers, behind their backs, having extended necks and having stood with awesomeness, students crowded. It is important that the theatrical community gathered for performances in a pure kind — now such almost does not happen, after all it is necessary to appear only to smack of important event as necessarily there are idle gapers or secular little fools.
Peter Brook — absolutely an empty phrase 4 gapers and little fools. And the indisputable, largest authority 4 all who does not concern theatre exclusively as by the way not dull to spend vecherok. The great director and the teacher, the original thinker, the author of performances on whom it is possible to study history of theatre of second half of last century, — " Hamlet " " Marat/ the Garden " " the Dream in summer night " " a Mahabharata " " the Cherry garden ". Brook for a long time already do not look — to it listen, honouring its ANY1 gesture for revelation. And if on a scene there was on a broader scale nothing or there was simply a chair, but such chair about which it would be known that it was chosen by Brook and then the same hall, probably, would gather, and after performance many would whisper each other: it so is simple, but so is deep and so is wise that to me the meaning of the life has simply opened.
this time the scene was not empty, and still " Warum Warum " (that is " Y, Y? " on - nemetski) — product of rather modest worthiness. On a scene — one actress and one musician with the strange musical instrument similar to an UFO, it is called " hang " — looks as something ancient and traditional, and AAM it is thought up only ten BWD in Switzerland. Knowing people SPK that on it (thanks to cunnings of a design) it is almost impossible to play " Incorrectly " or it is false. But Franchesko Anelo taking from hanga mysterious booming sounds, seems simply the virtuoso.
certainly, the ATTN arrests to itself not only the strange tool, but also actress Miriam Goldshmit — the Swiss of the African origin, the tiny woman effectively hiding the respectable age by a shock of a curly hair, surprising mobility and vivacity of a sight. Representation lasting less hour is similar to an entertaining lesson 4 beginning actors. The composition is made of fragments of TXTs of great theatrical thinkers of the last century — Arto, Mejerholda, Krega, Charles Djullena, and also Shakespeare`s several plays. However, they so are small cut and so are fractionally grouped by Peter Brook and its co-author the Mary - Elen Esten, what EVN to experts is not allowed to follow all assembly seams.
Having chosen 4 itself an image of the tempted, acute and strict priestess of a theatrical cult and managing a red scarf, a chair and a mobile wooden frame, Miriam Goldshmit offers the spectator some kind of a popular review of aphoristic thoughts on the nature of theatre and the amusing sketches ridiculing ordinary cliches of theatrical techniques. So, in one of them it shows the actress, which distance to represent a fright B4 a bear and now she tries to find out the task from the director who is a bear, — ostensibly it will help to represent fear more truthfully. The action fragmentariness meanwhile leads to that wisdom look significant banalities and are immediately 4gotten, and all comic epizodiki — the urged inserts. And how much convince itself that behind the unostentatious action very similar for independent WRK of the actress, something is covered really considerable, the belief is not born.
Connected with Peter Brook long history creative and personal relations, Miriam Goldshmit, probably, knows and someone else feels the outstanding director better, than. He as the educated spectators know, aspires for a long time to laconicism of theatrical statements, having discouraged in " the big forms " and aspiring to clear theatre of all superfluous, alluvial, vain and bourgeois. But the small this performance which much is going on tour on the world, is most of all similar to family business, is delicate monetizirujushchee a name of the director. That he feels and a leah is at it the answer to a question " Y? " on performance you will not guess, and to ask there is no possibility: this year to it it was executed 87 and it does not go by tour any more.