| Brecht's V-Effect in his own words |
Original typescript signed – Definition of the “Verfremdungseffekt”
1955 ◇ 17,5 x 20,9 cm ◇ one page on one leaf
Original typescript in German signed by Bertolt Brecht, 22 lines on one leaf. One typewritten correction. Slight traces of folds, and a few parts shadowed.
Published in Brecht's correspondence (GBA, Briefe 3).
Important definition by Brecht of his famous Verfremdungseffekt, the theatrical distancing or “alienation” he coined and popularized, for audiences to reach an intellectual level of understanding of theater, instead of being trapped in an illusory narrative world. The playwright sets out the political and aesthetic mission of these dramatic effects for French audiences. A rare theoretical writing in private hands, the majority of his papers being at the Akademie der Künste in Berlin (Bertolt-Brecht-Archiv).
On the occasion of his last visit in Paris, Brecht sent this Verfremdung manifes to theater journalist Henry Magnan. The text reflects France's renewed interest in his revolutionary approach: “From June 20 to 24, 1955, the Berliner Ensemble performed The Caucasian Chalk Circle as part of the 2nd International Festival of Dramatic Arts in Paris; Brecht took part despite health problems. Audience interest surpassed the first 1954 Parisian performance. Every performance was sold out. Its political references were sometimes problematic to critics but the staging was unanimously acclaimed.” (Noah Willumsen, Brecht: Interviews 1926-1956, 2023).
The text was published with an interview Brecht gave to Magnan for the French paper Le Monde (“Déclarations de M. Bertolt Brecht”, June 25, 1955). However, a part of this typed statement was cut against Brecht's wishes, whose “only demand (oh what a man!) was that we transcribe the letter exactly”, the article ironically states. The French translation had even completely changed the meaning of the second sentence, deleting the negation present in our original version: “Actually, it is always alienation effects when in art the illusion that one is facing nature itself is [not] maintained”. Probably an unintentional omission, that nonetheless reversed the very definition of his theatrical project based on Verfremdung.
Like the socialist Shaw before him, Brecht openly wanted to change the minds of his audience. In other words, make people think about the old and established ways, and instead of acceptance, aim for novelty. What was most radical about Brecht's work was that his politics did not just shape the content of his theatre but its form, as well. This is the great paradox of Brechtian theater, whose famous effects are, in fact, quite old:
“Alienation effects have been known in theater and other artforms for a long time […] Thus, on the stage, the represented world is already alienated by conventions of verse or by a very personal style or by the abrupt change from verse to prose, or seriousness to comedy. I myself use alienation effects (including the old ones mentioned above) to make human society appear as not so natural (“Of course, my dear, that's nature”), i.e. self-evident and indisputable. For a long time now, science has treated “forces of nature” (such as great plagues, meteorological horrors, the night, etc.) as stemming from nature, but by no means natural. Art is still powerless in the face of human nature and thus in the face of social catastrophes of both an individual and general nature (such as the lust for power, love, war, etc.). It behaves defaitistically towards human nature. In some theoretical works, I have tried to prove we need a technique of alienation in the art of theater and why we need it – not necessarily my techniques, by the way”. His non-realist innovations, which borrowed eclectically from Asian, Elizabethan, and Expressionist theatre, also represent a return to classical tradition.
As evidenced by the transcription errors and cuts in Brecht's original text, “Attempts to appropriate Brecht's new vocabulary was not immediately successful with French critics: deadlines and a certain journalistic omniscience often stood in the way of cautious conceptual work. In conversation with Magnan, however, the efforts Brecht made during his last trip to Paris to make his concepts accessible and understandable become visible behind the cliché of his image as a secretive poet. Not only did he grant his critic [Magnan] an interview; he also sent a letter after the conversation [this typed text]” (Noah Willumsen).
Famously praised by Roland Barthes, the “V-effect” had a great influence in both theater and film, including Arthur Miller's The Crucible, connecting the Salem trials with McCarthyism using the Brechtian technique of historicization.
Jean-Luc Godard's cinematographic aesthetic also owes much from his theatrical effects.
Building a new society through theatrical techniques – this is the lesson of Bertolt Brecht's theoretical testimony, written for the press a year before his death: “The Brecht we encounter here, in his interviews, is familiar, though practically unknown: savvy and skeptical in his use of media, transnational in his interventions, evasive, yet indelible. Over the course of his career, he slowly transformed the interview from a vehicle for commentary into a modern form of oral literature. Scholars have often overlooked its new possibilities […] Since Brecht's death, the interview has become an essential part of the author's profession; his role in this development should not be forgotten” (Norman Roessler).
Provenance: Archives of Henry Magnan, poet, journalist (Le Monde, Combat, Les Cahiers du Cinéma, Les Lettres françaises). Author of an encyclopedia article about Brecht (Larousse mensuel, 1956).
Add to my virtual collection 
