You can't choose your fans

Directors, actors, critics - all scratch their heads about what a playwright's intentions may be. The truth is, however, that there isn't a single truth. An author may know exactly how s/he intends a play to be received, but once it is out there in the world, interpretation is up for grabs.

For example, it's hard to imagine that Ibsen would have been thrilled to learn that Hitler was a devotee of Peer Gynt. Yet Hitler's Private Library, Timothy W Ryback's new study which uses the dictator's books as entry points to discuss his career, reveals that he was indeed a major fan of Ibsen's verse epic. This unwieldy masterpiece has long been the most problematic of Ibsen's plays for directors and translators. Now, as if there weren't already enough difficulties surrounding it, we have to wonder what makes it so very appealing to fascists.

Hitler became acquainted with the play when making a name for himself in right-wing politics. An early mentor was the writer Dietrich Eckart, who spotted the spuming Austrian's potential as a speaker and encouraged his progress in proto-Nazi Berlin. Eckart had also translated a successful production of Peer Gynt, pouring contempt on the established German version of the play, which was by a Jewish author. He identified strongly with the wandering hero, hungry for fame (he took it as a portent that he was conceived just as Ibsen began writing the play: 'for me this fact holds a transcendent epiphany').

What did Hitler see in Peer Gynt? And what does this tell us about interpretation? Some thoughts after the click:

Eckart gave Hitler a copy of his translation, and took him to see the play, which made a lasting impression (he also had four separate recordings of Grieg's incidental music to the play). Ryback doesn't really explain what attracted him to Gynt, though we might see connections with Peer the touchy fabulist and overweening chancer. Peer begins the play wanting to stop people laughing at him - he's hurt, angry, deceitful. Mid-point in the drama, he's an overweening power-magnet, owning everything he sees, but he ends limping back to his origins, to the Norwegian hearth song he's refused to hear for so long.

If Eckart and Hitler saw something magnificent in the hero's self-making, it's hardly an unambiguous portrait - we're more likely to view Gynt as inhabiting a dream, on the run from his own defensive self. On the other hand, the fact that the play can attract fervent admiration from such dubious quarters might point to its problematic nature. (Hitler also thought Shakespeare's vengeful Jew, in The Merchant of Venice, a more telling stage character than Lessing's enlightened rabbi in Nathan the Wise; again, his advocacy might serve as a warning to directors who try to create a sympathetic Shylock. Maybe he's just a nasty piece of work in a pretty nasty play?)

Critics are often told they have misinterpreted, misunderstood, missed the boat or the point. Perhaps. But the figure of Hitler-the-fanboy reminds us that no author or stage artist can control interpretation of their work: audiences take what they need from a work of art. And what they take may be terrifyingly partial or boneheaded; they may even find greater richness and subtlety than the work deserves. I don't know that I'd want to see an Adolf-friendly production of Peer Gynt, but I guess I'm pleased that the play stradles the ambiguous territory that makes it a possibility.

January 18, 2009 10:54 PM | | Comments (0) |

Leave a comment

Blogroll

About this Entry

This page contains a single entry by Performance Monkey published on January 18, 2009 10:54 PM.

Nothing to lose but self-respect was the previous entry in this blog.

Practical criticism: speak the speech is the next entry in this blog.

Find recent content on the main index or look in the archives to find all content.

AJ Ads


AJ Blogs

AJBlogCentral | rss

culture
About Last Night
Terry Teachout on the arts in New York City
Artful Manager
Andrew Taylor on the business of arts & culture
blog riley
rock culture approximately
critical difference
Laura Collins-Hughes on arts, culture and coverage
Dewey21C
Richard Kessler on arts education
diacritical
Douglas McLennan's blog
Dog Days
Dalouge Smith advocates for the Arts
Flyover
Art from the American Outback
Life's a Pitch
For immediate release: the arts are marketable
Mind the Gap
No genre is the new genre
Performance Monkey
David Jays on theatre and dance
Plain English
Paul Levy measures the Angles
Real Clear Arts
Judith H. Dobrzynski on Culture
Rockwell Matters
John Rockwell on the arts
Straight Up |
Jan Herman - arts, media & culture with 'tude

dance
Foot in Mouth
Apollinaire Scherr talks about dance
Seeing Things
Tobi Tobias on dance et al...

jazz
Jazz Beyond Jazz
Howard Mandel's freelance Urban Improvisation
ListenGood
Focus on New Orleans. Jazz and Other Sounds
Rifftides
Doug Ramsey on Jazz and other matters...

media
Out There
Jeff Weinstein's Cultural Mixology
Serious Popcorn
Martha Bayles on Film...

classical music
Creative Destruction
Fresh ideas on building arts communities
The Future of Classical Music?
Greg Sandow performs a book-in-progress
On the Record
Exploring Orchestras w/ Henry Fogel
Overflow
Harvey Sachs on music, and various digressions
PianoMorphosis
Bruce Brubaker on all things Piano
PostClassic
Kyle Gann on music after the fact
Sandow
Greg Sandow on the future of Classical Music
Slipped Disc
Norman Lebrecht on Shifting Sound Worlds

publishing
book/daddy
Jerome Weeks on Books
Quick Study
Scott McLemee on books, ideas & trash-culture ephemera

theatre
Drama Queen
Wendy Rosenfield: covering drama, onstage and off
lies like truth
Chloe Veltman on how culture will save the world

visual
Aesthetic Grounds
Public Art, Public Space
Another Bouncing Ball
Regina Hackett takes her Art To Go
Artopia
John Perreault's art diary
CultureGrrl
Lee Rosenbaum's Cultural Commentary
Modern Art Notes
Tyler Green's modern & contemporary art blog
Creative Commons License
This weblog is licensed under a Creative Commons License.