評論
打印
Books and Arts; Book Review;Bulgakov and Stalin on stage；
即便沒有審查制度，斯大林的統(tǒng)治之下，藝術(shù)也會走向超現(xiàn)實主義。不然還有什么方式，可以表達(dá)其統(tǒng)治的反復(fù)無常，以及其人不可理解的殘酷程度和日益增強的偏執(zhí)呢？倫敦最近的兩部新劇，恰好以超現(xiàn)實的幻想曲，讓斯大林和小說家米哈?布爾加科夫走到了一起。兩者中任一方面都值得玩味，如果你能，也可以兼顧雙方。
The new version of “The Master and Margarita” by Complicite, a British company justly renowned for its daring theatre, is set to tour Europe after a short, triumphant run at the Barbican. The unwieldy zaniness of Bulgakov's great novel—whose action involves the devil and his retinue visiting Stalin's Moscow, the blighted affair of the eponymous characters, and the master's novel about Pontius Pilate and Jesus—somehow hasn't deterred stage adaptations. In this one, Simon McBurney, Complicite's director, doubles down: rather than trying to simplify, he mashes up the stories, echoing and embellishing them in multimedia. There are projections, sound loops, puppetry and nudity: a painfully emaciated Christ; a flying, nude Margarita.
以大膽的舞臺著稱的英國Complicite公司推出了新版《大師與瑪格麗特》，在巴比肯的短暫上演大獲成功，計劃接下來去歐洲巡演。布爾加科夫這本偉大的小說帶有一種不受支配的癲狂：魔鬼極其隨從造訪斯大林的莫斯科，同名人物的事跡以及大師所著關(guān)于比拉多和耶穌的故事。但這些都沒有阻礙舞臺劇本的改寫。Complicite公司的總監(jiān)Simon McBurney認(rèn)為，不應(yīng)當(dāng)簡化原著，而是把整個故事融為一體，并通過多媒體手段加以呼應(yīng)和裝飾。電腦投影，環(huán)繞音響，木偶人像和大膽裸露都得以應(yīng)用。瘦骨嶙峋的耶穌痛苦地受難，還有赤身裸體懸在空中的瑪格麗特。
The result is a dark carnival of theatrical effects, which is demanding, sometimes overwhelming, only occasionally misfiring. Like readers of the book, some members of the audience may yearn for more of the comic demons, in particular the giant, lecherous cat. But the overall impact highlights the novel's underlying themes: the hypocrisy of many but compassion of some; the way craven people get the callous rulers they deserve, yet now and then rise to a nobility that deserves better.
這一切的結(jié)果便是各種舞臺特效在黑暗中的狂歡。全場氣氛被跳動起來，有時甚至無法抵抗，只有某些時刻會顯得過火。和原著的讀者一樣，現(xiàn)場的一些觀眾可能也會渴望看到更多動畫制作的怪物，尤其是那只巨大的充滿色情意味的貓。但總體效果還是突出了小說暗藏的主題：多數(shù)人的偽善和少數(shù)人的悲憫；懦弱的民眾服從暴君是自食其果，雖然不時的那點高尚，似乎值得更好的統(tǒng)治。
“Collaborators”, a coruscating new play at the National Theatre, imagines a relationship between Stalin and Bulgakov himself. Directed by Sir Nicholas Hytner and written by John Hodge, previously best known as the screenwriter for “Shallow Grave” and “Trainspotting”, the production will soon transfer to the National's main Olivier stage after opening at the smaller Cottesloe. Bulgakov (Alex Jennings) is coerced to write a play about the dictator's early years to celebrate his 60th birthday. In return, along with his life and his wife's, he is promised the un-banning of his subversive drama about Molière—grotesque, masked scenes from which intrude on the main story, as do comically appalling passages from the Stalin tribute.
在國家劇院上演的《合作者們》也是一部引人注意的新劇，假想了斯大林與布爾加科夫之間的故事。導(dǎo)演是Nicholas Hytner，編劇是John Hodge，之前憑借《淺墳》和《猜火車》為人所知。這部新劇在Cottesloe開演之后，很快會轉(zhuǎn)至更大的國家奧利弗主劇院演出。劇中布爾加科夫（Alex Jennings飾）被迫寫一部關(guān)于獨裁者早年經(jīng)歷的劇本，以慶祝他的60歲誕辰。回報就是他得到允諾，他關(guān)于莫里哀的反動劇作不會被禁演。于是這個劇作中的奇怪晦澀的場景會不時插入到為斯大林獻(xiàn)禮的劇作中，傳達(dá)出既滑稽又恐怖的信息。
That, in the event, is written by Stalin, who summons Bulgakov to secret meetings. The actual Bulgakov did write a never-performed play about Stalin's youth; Stalin telephoned and took an interest in him, though there is no record that they met. Simon Russell Beale (pictured above) is a chillingly hilarious Stalin; substituting a West Country burr for the original Georgian accent, he is cunning and charming, manipulative, menacing and intellectually insecure. While Stalin hammers out the script, Bulgakov, struggling with his compromises and conscience, is obliged do his collaborator's paperwork, which slides from steel-factory targets, to grain allocations, to death quotas.
這一段在劇中，是由斯大林所寫，他召見布爾加科夫密見。現(xiàn)實中布爾加科夫的確寫過一部關(guān)于斯大林青年時期經(jīng)歷的劇本，但從未被搬上舞臺。斯大林和他通過電話并表示過贊賞，但并沒有他們會面的記錄。Simon Russell Beale（如圖）扮演了一個冷酷卻又惹人發(fā)笑的斯大林，用西方粗喉音代替了他原來的喬治亞時期的口音。他世故圓滑，富于魅力，控制欲強，具有威懾力同時又反復(fù)無常。在劇中，當(dāng)斯大林敲定劇本臺詞時，布爾加科夫在妥協(xié)和良知之間搖擺掙扎，但不得不完成這一合作的劇本，內(nèi)容涉及煉鋼廠目標(biāo)，谷物分配，甚至死刑名額。
Both productions explore the relationship between tyranny and creativity: the artistic kind, but also the humbler urge to create private love and lives in crushing times. “The Master and Margarita” proclaims that “manuscripts don't burn”. “Collaborators” is less sure of art's resilience: “the monster always wins”, Stalin insists. “Collaborators” hints at the structural similarities between writing and governing. Both are lonely work, requiring the imposition of an arbitrary order on unseen, notional individuals—only, in the case of the tyrant, the people are real.
兩部新劇都探討了集權(quán)統(tǒng)治和藝術(shù)創(chuàng)造之間的關(guān)系：在集權(quán)壓制的時代，關(guān)于個人情愛和生活的藝術(shù)創(chuàng)作的動力極其微弱。《大師與瑪格麗特》宣稱“手稿不可被真正焚毀”。《合作者們》則并未如此確定藝術(shù)的自我恢復(fù)能力，畢竟“怪物們總是勝利”，這是劇中斯大林堅持的臺詞。這兩部作品都算是脫離現(xiàn)實，涉及到對那些未見的個體施加強制命令，只有在暴君統(tǒng)治之下，居中的人民才活在真實當(dāng)中。
