Ideas and the Theatre; Can we have ideas in the Theatre?

The program will be impossible to express ideas in the theater. The series of ideas and the theatre the actual views and voices you will hear playwrights Garvie dial and Tennessee Williams drama critic Brooks Atkinson social anthropologist Solon Kimbo. You will also hear author scholars Eric Bentley Malcolm Boyd Martin and Edmund fuller and a summary by the consultant for ideas and the theatre. Dr. David W. Thompson professor in theater arts at the University of Minnesota. Those who make this series possible. The University of Minnesota radio station KUNM in cooperation with the National Association of educational broadcasters under a grant from the Educational Television and Radio Center. And now here is the producer of this series. Q Well AMS critic at large Philip Goldman. Ideas and the theater. It's not a bad title but does it mean

anything. Is it even possible to have ideas in the theater. And if it is art ideas dull and even dangerous. Who wants to go to the theater for a message anyway. I picked up some of this pessimistic approach from some of the people that I interviewed for this series I think the people in the theater too particularly playwrights. For example when I interviewed Gore of a doll He's the author of the very successful Broadway comedy visit to a small planet mist of a dollar told me in relation to ideas in the theater. I don't think the theater intellectually is worth a hill of beans in any country and never has been. With the possible exception of the Greek Theater where they where Socrates students wrote plays and those of smaller and more homogenous society people come to the theatre in a mood I suppose to be entertained. And the best one can do

what. But it sure as you know my plays actually are very bitter social pills and playwriting is just a sugar coating which a friend of ours once said how clever of the public to lick off the sugar coating and reject the pill. That was playwright Garvey da Pulitzer Prize winning playwright Tennessee Williams put it this way Mr. WILLIAMS. I think they're writing out of desperate need to communicate what they feel and what they have experienced. I think it's rather difficult to write this explicitly aside from the fact that he wants to write certain things. Yeah I'm not a political writer. I don't do social problems because that was playwright Tennessee Williams.

Both Gore Vidal and Tennessee Williams reflect a fairly popular quote artistic concept unquote in viewing the idea in the theater either as to when a lecturer and in person or a message. Both qualities which evidently the drama can do without in their opinion. But there's a conflict here and I pose this fundamental issue between ideas or a message on the one hand versus the very form an essence of the theatre on the other. To the New York Times drama critic Brooks Atkinson. As I recorded in one of the quieter offices of The New York Times you'll still hear some of the times presses in the background. Here is the dean of America's drama critics. Mr. Brooks Atkinson you have to have an organized piece of work in which that message is part of the characters. It has to be organic. I don't know what you mean exactly by playwrights

thinking that people don't want messages I would just like to point out that the basis of the nature of the theater originally was and still is I believe religious and moral. It's always been fascinating to me that this element in the drama exists century after century are most of the Pharaohs given over. And I'm not a for which the fact is given over to entertainment and diversion of one kind or another. Which has gone nowhere is religious and serious and I feel a sense of morality your vision doesn't have to apologize for it which is a main stream of the drama. That was Brooks Atkinson drama critic for The New York Times. In relating ideas in the theatre to morality and religion. A relationship which seems quite logical. Mr. Atkinson poses another problem.

How might organized religion view with the theatre today. I ask this question of Reverend Malcolm Boyd a regular contributor to magazines such as scholastic in the Christian Century and author of several books including the recent crisis in communication. Reverend Wright is perhaps our nation's leading critic of the popular arts in terms of the traditional Christian values. As recorded at the Union Theological Seminary in New York City here is Reverend Malcolm Boyd. What is so important about the artistic and dramatic statements is that frankly they are really speaking to the condition of life as we know it today. And I feel the church has got to listen. Sure this involvement and then then go on and speak the Gospel to the situation. Well following from that would it then be fair assumption on my part to say that writers such as TS Eliot and Graham Greene would

be doing the best job. It's very difficult to generalize here because in the potting shed I was quite disappointed I rather resented Green's preaching. And I hate to say that because as an ordained clergyman I preach. Of course everybody preaches I think the great question for communications today is what is a message to get to what you don't agree. Well a trumpet solo was a message. It cries and you can't cry. Frank Sinatra has a message everybody's got a message. But if you are a Hollywood star or knowledge communist card or if you're a clergyman or somebody with an obvious message and you're dandified up in some way and it's like you're wearing a message. People will tune you out because they can take it much more palatable in another form and particularly entertainment. That was author critique Reverend Malcolm Boyd. I presented his view to author critique Edmund fuller and fuller writes for The American Scholar

in the Saturday Review. And is the author of critique of Western morale. George Bernard Shaw and other books on both ideas and the theater. I asked Mr. Fuller if he didn't think Reverend Boyd was a bit extreme in his view that every presentation had a message. Certainly a non message play might be possible. Edmund fuller replied No Mr go by I don't believe that it is possible to have such a thing as a play or any kind of creative work of fiction that does not have a message implicit in it. I would put it this way. A play or a novel may not have a thesis. In the conscious deliberate sense but it cannot help having a premise or a point of view which governs the approach of the author to his people and to all aspects of his materials. And one of the chief functions of the critic I think is to explore and uncover the

essential premise that lies behind a work of art and the very act of uncovering that premise amounts to in effect the discovery of a message of some sort implicit in the material. That was author scholar Edmund Fuller. We'll hear more from him later in this program. In a certain respect the further views of Edmund fuller present a kind of final word on the place of ideas in the theater. But at first I felt the need to further test the concept that everything has a message for this I turn to writer educator Martin has to walk and film critic for a progressive magazine. Certainly one wouldn't view with a motion picture world as a realm of ideas. Mr Dawkins replied of that pipe in fact every film has an idea. Everything makes propaganda. Every film has a niceish even if that message is not propaganda. My fame is no more than one in favor of romance the happy

ending or one in favor of sheer superficial melodrama or a vertical mobility as demonstrated by marrying the boss or the boss's son or the voice's daughter or whatever these things on an otherwise what we're talking about really are the qualities of the themes that are dealt with in the two areas. There has been a decline of. Victor I won't say controversy in the theater because this is a very poor word to use about anything today. Controversy being used to describe a very superficial kind of I would call it artificially engendered excitement. But a certain vigor has been lost in this and this has many origins which have been discussed at great length as you know the last great vigorous period of the theatre of fear of social

protest of the Depression era and just afterward into the 40s. This is ideologically all hat today for for very many reasons it's not only for the one that it is suspect. Martin has to work and poses a new challenge here. What about the playwright who may have a special social political view to present. Is this kind of idea now outlawed in the theater. Or is the social political theme simply not theatrical. Eric Bentley professor of dramatic literature at Columbia University and author of appropriately enough a book entitled The playwright as thinker. Plus many other books in this area. I think Eric Bentley may be the most outspoken and effective advocate of ideas and I think that or. I asked him of certain ideas out of place in the theater. Here is the way Eric Bentley sees it.

Discusses the same ideas is worth discussing anywhere else it doesn't discuss them better or worse discusses them a little differently. It does what we call dramatizing them which to some people may make them better to other people and they make them seem a little out of a little voter. Not many play discussion of ideas but I suppose that one example of one that is Bernard Shaw's play Don Juan and how the whole evening is spent and talk about life in general which I think is under the heading ideas. This is a talent that some playwrights in the field don't have. That was Eric Bentley. I think one can safely say that not too many people write ideas the way Bernard Shaw did and so perhaps this kind of expression of ideas is not really a major problem. Earlier Oliver Martin did work and also implied that many of our playwrights today particularly the aspiring ones are avoiding some ideas because they wish to play it safe.

I asked Eric Bentley what he thought of the creative artist who would avoid ideas to play it safe. Mr. Bentley's reply. Well I think that anybody who in a country especially as America feels it's necessary to place a bet to go shoot himself or go to Russia or any other trying to think of some violent remark to make I think it should be quite violent because although certainly we've had McCarthyism the last didn't when in every sense of the word. And those who couldn't stay the course you know those who couldn't fight it through. I don't think you are worthy of our respect. There's no credit to dangerous behavior if it's not dangerous. That is the tradition of American radicalism and social play is to take dangerous positions and to pay the price. If you stick your neck out you expect something to happen. I think that there's an awful lot of sheer timidity that to my mind is a much worse feature of the contemporary scene than McCarthyism.

That was Eric Bentley author critic and scholar of the theater for a different view of the same problem I turn to when I was already in a different field. So Lynn Kimball is a professor of education at the Teachers College of Columbia University and one of the nation's leading social anthropologists. Here's the way an anthropologist views the reticence of playwrights to handle ideas today. Dr. Solon Kimball. It seems to me that one of the functions of art through the ages and among all people. Has been that the artist has been particularly sensitive. To the real symbols of our society. It would seem however that in this modern age there are certain kinds of confusions that arise out of the fact that we are in a period of great change. But there are

dislocations intentions and that the artist himself may be in a position that unable to grasp the horror of war which was much more easily accomplished when society was much less complex. That the part which he portrays can be a distortion. Of the whole even though it may be a true portrayal of the tiny part with which he is dealing with this it seems to me as one of the things which might be characteristic of Tennessee Williams. Then there is also the problem. That the nature. Of a modern industrial society and the process of change from an agrarian world is one in which undoubtedly our new culture has not yet committed.

All of us to the kind of internalized acceptance of the basic values. Which was much more easily accomplished in a period such as that of the Middle Ages or in certain other epics of life. That was social anthropologist Solon Campbell. His analysis suggests a broad complex and sensitive view of ideas in the theater. If the idea in the theatre is not just the social political theme. I would be Shavian type discussion or an obvious message. What is it. Author scholar Edwin fuller suggests that it's a view of life. A vision of man. He sees three major traditions here. Listen closely I believe this may be the best answer to the issue or heritage of ideas in the theater. How has

man been seen by our artists. Mr. Edmund Fuller. Throughout the great body of Western culture men has been seen or tacitly understood to be a created being with an actual or potential personal relationship of some kind to his Creator. Man has been seen as inherently imperfect yet with immense possibilities for redemption or for reconciliation with his Creator. On one hand he is not able to perfect himself through his own works. And the theme of tragedy from the Greeks and the Hebrews on down frequently has been man's fault through pride in attempting to perfect himself by his own works. On the other hand unlike many modern works he has never in this great tradition deterministically fixed in any one absolute state or condition. And I believe that sufficiently deep reading will substantiate this even within the concept of faith in Greek

tragedy. In short in this tradition man is not portrayed as either good or bad but as both good and bad. Man is seen as inhabiting an orderly universe. His fundamental laws are seen as commands of a creator and not just social contracts between himself and his fellows. They are seen rather as fixed obligations to his God. So in other words men seen within this vast varied but basically consistent tradition is individual responsible guilty redeemable. This is the first Western traditional vision of man then what are the others Mr Fuller. I would say that the late 19th century in the early 20th century brought forth a kind of novel or drama which I would call the literate you're an and an in capital letters. It was a view of man which thought it had liberated itself from the

superstition of God. Now in this view has seen as possessing any or all of the following attributes. Biologically accidental. Self-sufficient inherently good. Ever progressing self perfectible morally answerable only to his social contracts. Seen as inhabiting a Molly neutral universe created by random forces. Now man as seen in that image in its consequences walks through a great many modern plays and a great many modern novels. However that went along with coupé ism in the 20s every day in every way I'm getting better and better and so on and so forth. And the last 25 years have not been kind to that view we've seen Belson we've seen book involved have seen the hideous specter of Hitler and Stalin ism and so on down the line. Now there for the US a mystical Christian people drive by and environs. Yes exactly so now that

optimistic concept of self generating and ever progressing man has become disillusioned and given way to despair. Now on the part of some in the disillusionment they returned to the traditional view of man. But in other cases an ugly and sinister image emerged which is the reverse actually of that optimistic confident. Self-sufficient view of man and it is this image which I'd like to define for a moment which I think dominates the stage and fiction to a very considerable extent today though it doesn't doesn't completely shut out the other views. But today we have the view of man not only as an eye or as a biological accident but as an ironic. Biological accident and seen as inadequate aimless meaningless isolated inherently evil thwarted self corrupting Marly answerable to no one clasped in the grip of determinisms economic or biological. He is seen as inhabiting

a hostile universe which is the creation of irrational or possibly malignant forces and the themes of such novelists and playwrights if I may borrow some words from Lewis Carroll their themes are ambition and distraction. If occasion and derision and men seen in this view its collective irresponsible Molly neuter and beyond help as compared to my previous citation of the great tradition of men and seen as individual responsible guilty and redeemable. That was author scholar Edmund Fuller. I wrote about Mr. Fuller here. Don't let his objective tone and excellent scholarship fool you when he refers to a vision of man. He is referring to mans values. Man's actions are man's problems. Man's conflicts man's most basic hope and despair. I point this out because some may think that a vision of man is only artistic or religious or even a vases. On the contrary

the visions of manna sent forth here by Adam and fuller are the most real and thorough kinds of comments on life. Here then is what may be the major role of the idea in the theater. If this is so one question remains to be asked. How can we have a more meaningful theatre of ideas. I asked this of Martin Dworken. No we're talking about whether there is a climate. And this is very important a climate if you like that makes possible the emergence of new ideas and new talent. And I don't mean a very artificially created climate such as one might say could be created by a foundation or by a group or some trickle operating society that would get a great big and grave Charter which would say that we are dedicated to the fostering of new

ideas in the theater. How to Forster a new idea is one of the most amazing difficult paradoxical amorphous things that anyone can can on the tape. And probably the best way to Forster a good new idea is to one fight constantly not simply make speeches but fight constantly for a free rostrum a free theater a free press. Fight about it because your very fighting about it of course engender the freedom. And then at the same time encourage. Whatever does come along I don't own society and almost when I was to put this is sort of an absolute. The best way to encourage anything is to pay the money at the box office give the several middle men the necessary profits

but encourage the marketability the commercial ality if you like of what is worth Wow. That was Martin has to walk on one of the many critics and scholars of the theater that you have heard and will hear in this series. And now for a summary of today's program. Here is the consultant for ideas in the theatre. Dr David Thompson professor in the theatre arts at the University of Minnesota. Dr. Thompson Tennessee Williams and Garvey dog the two playwrights we heard at the beginning of this program did not seem to show an excessive interest in the relationship between ideas in the theater. A playwright tends to be concerned after all with ideas only in so far as they're acted out in his plays. His method as book second son said is to make ideas part of the characters or as Eric Bentley put it to treat ideas by dramatizing them. Exactly how this is done by current playwrights will be discussed in following

programs. Meanwhile this first program did go on to establish some important basic premises for the later discussions. All of the critics and scholars agreed that theatre inescapably deals with ideas they agreed that every play is based upon an idea about the human situation. A point of view towards human experience. Edmund Fuller's description of three of these major points of view or visions of men should prove useful in future discussions of plays. The first and oldest tradition sees ennobled man acting mainly in relationship to an awesome but orderly universe. The second dating from the nineteenth century ignores the wider scene of the universe and focuses upon rational man acting his roles in society. The third most recent in origin plays down both the cosmic scene and man's socio political roles

in order to scrutinize with great intensity the more or less private gestures of despairing man's psyche. These three ideas of Mr. Fuller's seem to clarify what the other speakers were saying. The view of a noble man relates to what Mr. Atkinson called the most basic form of the theatre that which is religious and moral and serious. If you are a rational man lay behind Martin and walk ins and Mr. Bentley's protesting the decline of vigor and sheer timidity in the social drama of today. The view of despairing men helps explain Dr Solon Campbell's observation that a play by a psychological dramatist such as Tennessee Williams may be a true portrayal of the tiny part with which he is dealing but still be a distortion of the whole human situation. All of these are ideas in the theatre today. Interesting examples of all

three traditions are likely to appear among the plays and playwrights such as Bernard Shaw Arthur Miller TS Eliot Tennessee Williams Graham Greene John we and others who will be considered in this series of programs undoubtedly new ideas not mentioned this first time will also emerge with the many different points of view speaking out here. The series is like that free rostrum which Mr Dworkin said that there itself should be if it is to foster new ideas. You have just heard a summary of today's program by Professor David W. Thompson consultant for ideas and the theatre next week we will hear a discussion of the question. Is the modern theatre a reflection of the influence upon our society. Participants will include drama critics Brooks Atkinson Richard Watts Jr. Jones Allison nurse and George Friedly. Writers Garvey da Tennessee Williams and Thyra Samter Winslow actor directors

serial retired anthropologist Solon Kimball. And philosopher Kenneth Burke. Once again your commentator will be the producer of the series. Q whens critic at large Philip Gill ideas in the theatre is produced by the University of Minnesota radio station KUNM under a grant from the Educational Television and Radio Center. This series is distributed by the National Association of educational broadcasters. This is the n 80 B Radio Network.