• Home
  • About
    • Performance Monkey
    • David Jays
    • Contact
  • Other AJBlogs
  • ArtsJournal

Performance Monkey

David Jays on theatre and dance

You can’t choose your fans

January 18, 2009 by David Jays Leave a Comment

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.

Filed Under: Uncategorized

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

David Jays

I am a writer and critic on performance, books and film and currently write for, among others, the Sunday Times and the Guardian. I edit Dance Gazette, the magazine of the Royal Academy of Dance. I’m also a lifelong Londoner: it’s the perfect city for connecting to art forms that both look back and spring forward. [Read More]

Performance Monkey

This is what theatre and dance audiences do: we sit in the dark, watching performances. And then, if it seems worth it, we think about what we've seen, and how it made us feel. The blog should be a conversation, so please comment on the posts and add your thoughts. You know what I've always … [Read More...]

@mrdavidjays

Tweets by @mrdavidjays

Archives

Recent Comments

  • Veronica Horwell on Hamilton | Lockdown Theatre Club 17: “Know what you mean about the underpowered pre-17late90s shoulder: a bottle slope approach to body outline — the Hamilton coats…” Jul 8, 13:41
  • Sarah Lenton on Hamilton | Lockdown Theatre Club 17: “Blimey. A tour de force! Hugely enjoyable. Slight demur on whether a period raised fist would have produced a scrunched…” Jul 7, 21:44
  • william osborne on Hamilton | Lockdown Theatre Club 17: “An article that analyzes the serious problems with “Hamilton” by Ed Morales, a journalist and lecturer at Columbia University’s Center…” Jul 7, 20:20
  • william osborne on Hamilton | Lockdown Theatre Club 17: “Indeed, in the late 18th century people learned that properly toned-down attire was important for slave owners proclaiming democracy. And…” Jul 7, 19:28
  • David Jays on Bringing Up Baby | Lockdown Theatre Club 16: “Hello Ana, and thanks so much for this. Joining in is, I hope, easy: we all find the film on…” Jul 3, 16:02
January 2009
M T W T F S S
 1234
567891011
12131415161718
19202122232425
262728293031  
« Dec   Feb »

An ArtsJournal Blog

Recent Posts

  • Hamilton | Lockdown Theatre Club 17
  • Bringing Up Baby | Lockdown Theatre Club 16
  • The Go-Between | Lockdown Theatre Club 14
  • Girlhood | Lockdown Theatre Club 13
  • All That Jazz | Lockdown Theatre Club 12

Copyright © 2025 · Magazine Pro Theme on Genesis Framework · WordPress · Log in