No CrossRef data available.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 15 January 2009
ALL LEFT-WING cultural practitioners and theoreticians have, at one time or another, been accused of Stalinism. Indeed, in many cases, this charge has to be taken on board, particularly after the collapse of existing state socialism. During the first few decades of this century most cultural activities, schools, and theories in many ways defined themselves within the context of existing or imaginary and utopian marxisms.
1. This is a view that Martin Esslin has been voicing for years in all his works on Brecht. For Esslin, reassessing Brecht mainly involves ‘rescuing (him) from those rather obtuse orthodoxies that proclaimed the excellence of this theatre as a palpable proof that Stalinisttype communism worked’, as he stated in his review of Thomson, Peter and Sacks, Glendyr, The Cambridge Companion to Brecht, in Plays International, 07 1994Google Scholar.
2. See Butler, Judith, Gender Trouble: Feminsim and the Subversion of Identity (Routledge, 1990)Google Scholar.
3. For an account of Benjamin's relationship with Brecht, see Wolin, Richard, Walter Benjamin: an Aesthetic of Redemption (University of California Press, 1994), p. 139–54Google Scholar.
4. Wright, Elizabeth, Postmodern Brecht: a Re-Presentation (Routledge, 1989)Google Scholar.
5. See Fuegi, John, The Lives and Lies of Bertolt Brecht (Harper Collins, 1994), p. 148Google Scholar.
6. See Diamond, Elin, ‘Brechtian Theory/Feminist Theory: Toward a Gestic Feminist Criticism’, The Drama Review, XXXII, No. 1 (1988), p. 82–91CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
7. See Wright, Elizabeth, ‘The Good Person of Szechwan: Discourse of a Masquerade’, in Thomson, Peter and Sacks, Glendyr, eds., The Cambridge Companion to Brecht (Cambridge University Press, 1994), p. 117–28CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
8. See Campioni, Mia and Gross, Elizabeth, ‘Love's Labour's Lost: Marxism and Feminism’, in Gunew, Sneja, ed., A Reader in Feminist Knowledge (Routledge), p. 336–97Google Scholar.
9. Elin Diamond, op. cit. See also Smith, Iris, ‘Brecht and the Mothers of Epic Theatre’, Theatre Journal, XLIII, No. 4 (12 1991), p. 491–505CrossRefGoogle Scholar, and Lennox, Sara, ‘Women in Brecht's Work’, New German Critique, XIV (Spring 1978), p. 83–96CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
10. Elin Diamond, op. cit., p. 90.
11. Ibid.
12. John Fuegi, op. cit., p. 126.
13. Dolan, Jill, ‘Personal, Political, Polemical: Approaches to Politics and Theatre’, in Holderness, Graham, ed., The Politics of Theatre and Drama (Macmillan, 1992), p. 44–65, 50CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
14. Weber, Carl, ‘AC/TC – Currents of Theatrical Exchange’, in Performing Arts Journal, Nos. 33–34 (1989), p. 11–21Google Scholar.
15. Peter Thomson, ‘Brecht's Lives’, in The Cambridge Companion to Brecht, op. cit., p. 22–39.
16. See Fuegi, op. cit., p. 621.