|
The Belorussian Theater And Drama
V. SEDURO
Published by the Research Program on the USSR, New York, 1955, 517 Pages
Vladimir Seduro is the author of several works devoted to Belorussian literature, drama, music and the theater. His publications, in which rich and interesting factual material is subjected to a scholarly analysis, are a valuable contribution to the study of Belorussian culture. The author has succeeded in gathering and making a creative study of abundant data on the history of the Belorussian theater in his systematic and comprehensive work, which illustrates in great detail this very important sphere of Belorussian cultural life. Seduro's book on the history of the Belorussian theater merits particular attention because it is the first work, free from the tendenciousness characteristic of all Soviet critics on theatrical problems, devoted to a long neglected field of study. Unsystematized and casual data on the theatrical past of Belorussia are to be found in histories of the Russian and Polish theaters. The author of the first work in which the Belorussian theater was treated as an independent field was the outstanding playwright and actor Francisak Alachnovic, who in 1924 published The Belorussian Theater in Vilna. The works of other writers who tried to continue the research begun by Alachnovic were destroyed during the rout of Belorussian cultural forces in the 1930's in Soviet Belorussia.
In his book Seduro discusses chronologically all the principal stages and sectors of Belorussian drama. The geneological line of the Belorussian theater originated in the remote Middle Ages. After a thousand-year gap in cultural progress at the beginning of our era, when the glory of the arts of ancient Greece was left far behind, a new art, springing mainly from the Church, developed painfully and slowly on the half-destroyed and often inadequately evaluated remnants of Greek culture. The conflict between the austere dogmatism of church art and the requirements of the natural instincts of the people brought to life original compromise-art forms such as school and church drama, mystery plays, and the puppet theater of Bethlehem, characteristic of ancient Belorussia. Seduro begins his book with an analysis of these origins. A number of textual extracts from school repertories and the Bethlehem puppet theater help the reader to acquaint himself more concretely with this interesting page in the story of ancient Belorussian popular drama, whose unquestionable moral and educational role ensured it an appropriate place in the history of the Belorussian national theater.
The author concludes the first part of his book on the pre-Soviet period of this history with a review of theatrical developments in the XIX century and the Nasa Niva period.
The following three parts which contain the principal thesis of Seduro's work, discuss the history of the establishment and development of the first and second Belorussian State Theaters and of the touring theater of U. Halubok. A number of famous names and a gallery of picturesque personalities and outstanding representatives of the Belorussian drama appear before the reader. A brief period between 1920 and 1928, the period of the renaissance of the Belorussian theater—when the totalitarian regime had as yet been unable to confine the development of creative thought within a strait jacket, as it later did—was lich in the brilliant achievements of actors and playwrights alike. However, this strong upsurge of Belorussian culture with its national liberation content which was characteristic of the best dramatic works of that period, met with severe Party criticism and provoked a systematic extermination of original histrionic Belorussian art. Nearly all the successful plays of the 1920's disappeared from the repertories of the theater. Those of J. Mirovic, J. Kupala, Sasalevic, Hramyka, and Alachnovic, were vetoed by the Party and their staging was prohibited. Many playwrights perished in concentration camps accused of being "enemies of the People," "reactionaries," "esthetes," "formalists," or "cosmopolites". However even during this dark period, a number of outstanding Belorussian actors, producers and playwrights, under the constant threat of persecution for all sorts of deviationism, continued their work and selflessly created the young Belorussian theater. On the basis of historical data and certain original documents, Seduro reconstructs the complicated picture of the progressive metamorphosis of this theater, and acquaints the reader with various trends of theatrical esthetics and with its representatives.
The interesting selection of photographs which illustrate the text introduces the reader to the outstanding leaders of the theater and gives a graphic idea of individual scenes from certain plays and of stage decor. Those interested in a more detailed study of certain aspects of the Belorussian theater will also find useful the bibliographical index which contains an extensive list of plays as well as of reference books. A subject index and an index of names are provided at the end of the book.
***
Seduro's work is very rich in factual material and portrays vividly the main features of the Belorussian theater and its history. However, the picture offered to the reader is to a certain degree eclectic, for it fails to stress adequately those elements of originality and independence which are the real stylistic cornerstone of the Belorussian national theater. Instead of treating it as a genuine Belorussian phenomenon, the writer seeks the roots of the Belorussian theater in the creative practices of other theaters in general and of the MKhAT (Moscow Academic Art Theater) in particular. There is no doubt that the powerful personality of K. Stanislavsky played an enormous part in the development of the drama and exercised a beneficial influence upon the creative expression of many theaters; nevertheless it is impossible to consider the Belorussian theater as an "integral part of the flesh and blood" of the Moscow Academic Art Theater, as Suren Chacaturau, stage manager of the second Belorussian State Theater, asserted. His letter is quoted by Seduro in his book (p. 264) without comment. Seduro similarly characterizes the style of the first Belorussian State Theater as an application of the creative experience of the Russian and other European theaters, thus accentuating the eclectic character of his book.
He thus unwittingly gives the impression that the self-sacrificing efforts of the chief representives of Belorussian theatrical art—playwrights, producers and actors—did not create that element of originality and independence which would warrant considering the Belorussian theater as a Belorussian national phenomenon. Meanwhile the rich material used by the author in his monograph provides an opportunity for realizing more clearly the meaning of national style as the leading principle in the creative work of the Belorussian theater, the principle which the main exponents of theatrical art incorporated courageously in their work as the heritage of distinguished bards of the Belorussian renaissance movement.
As has already been pointed out, Seduro's book is not restricted exclusively to the history of professional Belorussian drama, but also includes the distant theatrical past of Belorussia within its framework of research. This certainly contributes to the amplitude and logic of the study.
In some cases the author neglects to mention the names of artists who made direct contributions to the active work of the Belorussian theater. For instance, he does not mention those composers who achieved considerable success in the preparation of the musical scores of the shows staged by the first Belorussian State Theater, and in his chapter on the "Work of the Theater under German Occupation" he fails to mention Hajane Tusmalava, the stage manager, who distinguished herself during that extremely difficult period for the theater.
Seduro's assertion that the music of theater shows served as the basis for operas and was only progressively separated from the latter and transformed into genuine opera music, (page 76), seems to be an inexcusable oversimplification. The development of the staging of Belorussian opera took considerably longer and was more complex. The writer's analysis of the quality of performances by individual actors is also occasionally understated. For instance, he writes that the outstanding actor Utadzimierski frequently had to combine psychological and realistic roles, and did this with considerable success during his acting career (page 78). By proclaiming the actor "universally" gifted, the critic certainly simplifies his own task, but this attitude does not help the reader to understand the creative personality of the actor.
Despite certain shortcomings in this vast and profound work, it represents a great event in Belorussian cultural life. Through this book, written in English, Belorussian art has for the first time become accessible to West European and American scholars who, like others interested in the history of culture of the Belorussian people, will find in this work a fruitful source of knowledge. This is the principal merit of Seduro's efforts, which is his great contribution to Belorussian culture.
A. Karpovic
Спасылкі:
1 Nicholas Vakar, "The Name White Russia," The American Slavic and East European Review, October, 1949, Vol. VIII.
2 N. Vakar, "Soviet Nationality Policy: The Case History of Belorussia," Problems of Communism, Washington, 1954, No. 5.
3 Brokhaus and Efron, Glavny Entsyklopedicheskii Slovar (Main Encyclopedic Dictionary), St. Petersburg, 1890—1894, Vol. 4/1, p. XIII.
4 See Table of the Bolshaya Sovetskaya Entsiklopedia (Large Soviet Encyclopedia) on demographic distribution in various parts of Belorussia, 1927, Vol. 5, p. 353.
5 Backauscyna (Fatherland), Munich, March 25, 1953. 138
6 E. Kanchar, Belomsskii Vopros (The Belorussian Question), Petrograd, 1919, p. 96.
7 Knoryn, Zametki k istorii diktatury proletariate, v Belorussii (Notes on the history of the dictatorship of the proletariat in Belorussia), Minsk, 1934, p. 12—13.
8 Knoryn, op. cit., p. 22.
9 J. Najdziuk, Bielams Ucora i Siannia (Belorussia Yesterday and Today), Minsk, 1944, p. 163.
10 Knoryn, op. cit., p. 28.
11 Knoryn, op. cit., p. 29,
12 Knoryn, op. cit., p. 33.
13 Backavscyna, No. 10—11, 1953.
