Plain Talk
By
Mursi Saad El-Din
What is a national theatre? Is it a theatre that reflects the national character of people or is it simply a theatre financed by the government? This is a question that tends to emerge when the problem of theatre is discussed.
Exploring the theatrical sphere, one discovers three kinds of so-called national theatre. The first began in Europe as far back as the 18th century when the Comédie Française was created. At the same time a series of state theatres started in Scandinavia, which led some historians to claim that it was royalty that initiated theatres in Europe.
The Comédie Française was established in 1680 and developed to have a lasting influence on the development of French theatre, arts and letters. Now, 300 years on, it no longer focuses on the presentation of Racine and Molière, but also on writers from England, America and even China. It is true that when the troupe tours other countries, its constant repertoire consists of the French classics. I remember the time when the Comédie Française had had almost an annual season at the old Opera House. But I also remember attending a performance in its Paris headquarters of an Egyptian play, with the Egyptian star Samiha Ayoub.
But the Comédie Française is not the only French national theatre. In fact, there are four in Paris and one in Strasbourg. Perhaps one can call them state theatres since they receive finance form the state. In a way this is similar to state theatre in Egypt, which on a close examination, one realises, was modelled on its French counterpart. The National Theatre is our own Comédie Française, as it were. Until recently it was devoted to world classics, often from Britain and France, with Brecht appearing at one point -- a time during which the state's political orientation was sympathetic.
So much for the first category. The second category's theatres were founded on notions of nationalism and national identity. The first such theatre that springs to mind is the Irish Abbey. The Abbey was established by WB Yeats and Lady Gregory in 1898 and was devoted to fostering Irish drama. In 1903 it became the Irish National Theatre and presented verse plays by Yeats and the work of such nationalist writers such as Sean O'Casey. It is a well known fact that the audiences would see an Irish play and then go out in demonstrations against the British.
Within this group we can include the theatre in Germany where, due to its federal system, there isn't a single institution, but rather a network of state-funded theatres. Prior to the unification of Germany, East Berlin could claim Brecht's Berliner Ensemble, while West Berlin had the Schaubuture; Bavaria had its own national theatre in Muni, the Kammerspiele, a typical court theatre which I had the pleasure of visiting. There is another kind of national theatre in this second group, the kind to be found in the former Soviet Union and East European countries. The Soviet Union has the Bolshoi, which can be regarded as a national theatre. In fact it started as a state theatre in the mansion of a certain count, Ubrontsor. Then it developed over the years and in 1825 became devoted to opera and ballet. Being such a reflection of Russian national identity it was kept intact during the 1917 Revolution. After the fall of the Soviet Union, the Bolshoi is still the symbol of Russian art.
Such is the power of a national theatre, which goes beyond political orientation, triumphing over history in a continued display of cultural and human resilience.
Since the fall of communism in the former communist states, nationalism and theatre have often been linked. Theatre today is a vehicle of national identity. In one interesting if not altogether just statement of this case, "You might as well have had guardsmen marching on and off the stage."
The injustice of the statement may be striking but not when you consider it in the context of the view that culture and art are the genuine security apparatuses of a society or ethnicity; and it is through culture and art that people wage their greatest battles.
The truth, of course, is that there is as much variety in the national orientation as in any other. And whether or not it's a viable proposition, in any of its incarnations, national theatre remains in the eye of the beholder.
