2013年4月27日 星期六

小劇場裡的「真」


小劇場裡的「真」

大概是十數年前,筆者在藝穗會樓上的黑盒劇場看演出,表演者猶記得是一隊由澳洲來港,名叫 Sydney Front的前衛團體。甫入場,只見四個精神病患者模樣的演員,一排坐在入口處,他們前面有一條纒著有刺鐵網的欄杆。四個演員把入場的觀眾仔細打量,眼中露出飢渴的眼神,或是色迷迷的,舌頭舔著咀邊。那有刺鐵的欄杆徐徐升起,「戲」也開始上演了。數十名觀眾沒有座位,只是站著,或被表演帶動,在小劇場中流離、散合。相信沒幾人記得劇情,因為劇情並不重要,只不斷的給表演者壓迫著、嘲弄著、侵犯著……一個乳頭穿著鐵環、差不多全裸的女演員,在觀眾前把不同的夾、針、環「穿」到身上;一個全裸而把生殖器收藏在兩腿之間的男演員,由房間的一角「移動」到房間對角的另一端……突然間,全場熄燈,漆黑一片,筆者即時的反應是退到身後的牆邊,如果有人觸摸,立即會閃避,甚或找方法離開!
在去年「小劇場、大世界」的場刋上,筆者介紹了當年2006年帶《苦山行》到北京參演「中港台澳戲劇研討及展演會」(後被追認為「第一屆華文戲劇節」)的經驗。《苦山行》說的是關於香港慈善團體苗圃行動到廣東、湖南兩省山區扶貧助學的事跡:在「步行者篇」中,一個步行籌款的參與者慢慢變成了「取西經」的唐三藏。妖怪把他劫去,無論如何禁錮,他總用盡方法,在地上滾、在爬,甚或像毛蟲一樣的用蜷縮、伸直的前進方法,拚命要繼續上路。妖怪給感動了,把受傷的唐僧托起、舉高,在坦蕩的舞台上一個個的圓圈在走,直到一眾演員汗如兩下,不支倒地,他們變回了籌款的步行者。在「受惠者篇」中,山區媽媽給上學的兒子弄飯炒菜,一時北京人民藝術劇院小劇場中爐火熊熊、菜香四溢;那「兒子」,卻是一只布偶。


還有一個小小的例子。筆者的《四川組曲》中有一場大約十分鐘的 Black Out 戲(又要多謝藝穗會,因為只有他們的場地可以真正弄到伸手不見五指!),三場地震受災者被埋的「漆黑」場面的設計,是筆者想觀眾嘗嘗那不安和恐怖的滋味。在黑暗中時間太久人會產生幻象,在那十分鐘的黑暗之中,出現過三幅瞬息即過的「異象」,例如有角色從災場中拖出連綿不斷的小孩子的書包。不知道能否讓觀眾更有設身處地的受災感覺?


戲劇要給觀眾看到的,是 Man in Action,意思就是「演給你看,不是說給你聽」。劇本與小說不同,因為每每受到演出長度的限制。因此,劇本要呈現的,是角色作出決擇的時刻。亦因此,劇本必須有藝術加工。當然,高手如契訶夫的劇平淡如生活,不見斧鑿痕跡,要注意的是生活背後的暗湧。


戲劇最終的目的是求「真」,是意識的真、道理的真和人生處境的真。但劇場永遠都是「假」!所以,許多導演千方百計把劇場改裝,或調較觀演關係,目的不外乎引導觀眾的情緒,希望他們有真實的感覺。早前,聽說有一批從台灣來的表演者在小劇場上進行虐待和強暴,達到寬衣解帶、纖毫畢現的地步,但「暴行」始終不會發生,於是「」就打了折扣!

新域劇團、香港戲劇工程藝術總監   蔡錫昌

刋於2013年「小劇場、大世界」場刋

2013年4月24日 星期三

出任新域劇團藝術總監


出任新域劇團藝術總監                            蔡錫昌

劇團成立背景
新域劇團於1993創辦,是為當時沙田話劇團的姊妹團、沙田文藝協會的團體會員。成立新域的原因,是因為於八十年代後期,沙田話劇團在推行社區劇場當中衍生出「駐校藝人」(Artist-in-Residence) 的模式,發現戲劇教育的意義與可為性。本人作為沙田話劇團的藝術主任,遂向沙田文協母會建議成立職業劇團,當時的理據是,戲劇教育須要專業的、全力的發展,再不能以沙田話劇團一個業餘組織去幹一件專業性的工作。沙田文藝協會並無意職業化,新域劇團遂應運而生,掛名於文協之下,時為1993年。

三年後,新域正式駐冊成立非牟利有限公司,並邀請陳達文先生出任董事會主席。當時,沙田與新域兩團同以沙田排頭村小學舊址為基地,在營運上,新域實際上已把沙田話劇團在社區與學界的工作全部接辦下來,同時開始承辦區域市政總署(今天康樂及文化事務署的前身)的「學校戲劇培訓計劃」。新域亦在沙田以外地區,例如港島東、葵青及北區,「輸出」社區劇場的項目。由2000年開始,新域劇團遷離沙田,在茶果嶺四山公學舊址運作至今。董事會主席方面,亦經歷陳達文先生、殷巧兒女士、本人與現時馬國恆先生四人。

潘惠森與劇團的淵源與貢獻

潘惠森先生1988年學成回港,他的發展一直與本人的劇場有莫大的淵源。他成為新域的同事之前,首先於1989年受聘沙田話劇團,是該團的社區藝術幹事,後兼駐團編劇。沙田話劇團於1990年舉辦「暑期青少年劇場」,一直運作了十年,培養了不少人材。這項目,是潘惠森建議舉辦的。

潘惠森在新域的二十年經歷了四個時期:(1)1993年出任藝術主任,與經理茹國烈與本人聯合管理劇團,為期大約兩年。本人導演由他編寫的創團作《馬路英雄傳》。(2)1994年底劇團增聘李國威為駐團導演,本人退出劇團前線工作,潘惠森繼續出任藝術主任。(3)1996年劇團駐冊成為有限公司,潘惠森出任藝術總監。(4)由2006年李國威離團開始,潘惠森兼任編、導工作。在這二十年的光景當中,新域是他創作及演出的最主要平台,面世的劇本一共 25套,包括「昆蟲系列」5套、「珠三角系列」3套和「人間系列」3套。潘惠森對歷史、政治和經濟都有洞見,而且絕對掌握傳統劇場的編作方法。然而,更加燴炙人口的是他的「處境式非敍事劇場」,以都市小人物反映大社會,微言大義掩藏於插科打諢之中。尋找港式廣東話的語言特色是他的旨趣,他擅于以「非資訊性語言雜質」營造另類意韻,而多聲道的台詞處理,往往更為肖真。就以這壯闊洋灑的作品叢,潘惠森獲獎無數,矗立於香港劇壇。
從2006年開始,新域劇團主辦「劇場裡的卧虎藏龍計劃」,六年來邀約了六十多位編劇參予,催生了數十個原創劇本,而更有為數頗多的作品獲得延續性發展和正式公演的機會。

出任新域劇團藝術總監
潘惠森於去年八月中向劇團董事會請辭,十一月中離任。劇團董事會委派由主席馬國恆先生、方梓勳教授與本人組成的招募小組,積極尋找新的藝術總監。可惜經過半年來的公開招聘和個別接觸,劇團始終無法覓得理想人選。直至三月二十三日,當劇團面臨香港藝術發展局新一輪「兩年資助計劃」申請截止的前夕,本人經過審時度勢之後,毅然向董事會提出,出任劇團藝術總監,為期兩年,或直至招聘到合適總監人選為止。如眾周知,本人同時為香港戲劇工程藝術總監,兼任新域劇團藝術總監之事,得到兩團的董事會支持。
潘惠森在新域劇團的時期已爾,他是獨特而不能代替的。因此,新域不會試圖尋找另一個「潘惠森」。本人作為新域的創辦人,固然希望劇團的命脈不斷;作為新任藝術總監,則有責任領導劇團,堅守藝術原則,繼續為社會服務。具體而言,本人準備把「劇場裡的卧虎藏龍計劃」的平台更加發揚光大,同時亦會領導劇團從事及推廣,根據本人最新理念的「社區劇場」。


2013年4月20日 星期六

把最好的相授 —— 寫在《伊狄帕斯王》演出之前


把最好的相授 —— 寫在《伊狄帕斯王》演出之前

香港戲劇工程去年年底參加了北區「優秀學生選舉」的工作,為該獎項增設「戲劇淘寶獎」。決賽當天,所有的獎項都同時進行面試。筆者為了多一點了解北區學生的情況,也以觀察員身份,出席了高、初中兩組的環節,而留下深刻的印象。北區「優秀學生選舉」由北區青年協會主辦,已有七年的歷史,一向受全區中、小學歡迎,每校並派出尖子學生參加。據筆者觀察,他們對一些天文地理、社會時事、學習態度、人生目標等問題,一般都對答如流,情理兼備。至於戲劇知識方面,則顯得比較一般,進一步證明戲劇在北區學界仍未普及。目睹北區的學生如此優秀,筆者覺得特別鼓舞,亦增強了在北區服務的信心

香港戲劇工程作北區大會堂的「場地伙伴」已經一年,工作的總體方向是推行社區劇場與戲劇教育,除了最基本的演出之外,亦積極建立社區網絡、組織學生藝術大使、進行「北區發現計劃」等等。然而,演出的上座率是強差人意。最近收到一個意見,說選演一些比較深奧的經典劇目,如去年的《哈姆雷特》和今年的《伊狄帕斯王》,是否影響票房的原因?為此,筆者作以下的回應:

    1. 香港戲劇工程在第一個劇季中的劇目有「試水溫」的目的,因此,除了《哈姆雷特》之外,還有暑期青少年劇場的《彷彿在沙丘上跳舞》、具國際視野兼環保意識的《美國蝦》,和「冬季戲劇節」中幾個關於北區本地的劇目,包括有關「水貨客」的《上水、未水》。在這四個演出 / 項目之中,上座最好的是《哈姆雷特》。

    2.  至於原創劇目是否不會像經典那樣艱深?劇團對原創劇的要求是「來自生活、高於生活」。就以《上水、未水》為例,水貨客的題材在傳媒報章上已有鋪天蓋地的報導,輿論方面對他們亦頗有一面倒的負面傾向。水貨客事件其實絕不簡單,有深遠的社會、經濟、文化與政治的關係,是另一種的複雜和艱深。《上水、未水》提出發人深省的視點,證明原創劇同樣可以深邃。

    3. 至於「經典比較艱深」的論點,其實還包含了對票房的考慮,和對通俗娛樂劇目可以作為招徠的誤信。媚俗之作已日見充斥香港劇壇,這些演出會使學生以為戲劇只是爾爾,與電影電視相差無幾,對劇場長遠發展猶如殺雞取卵,不可能達到教化與提升的目的。票房數字只是衡量成績其中的一項元素,而影響票房的元素實在太多。如果只看數字,則行政考慮凌駕於藝術與教育的考慮之上,非有識之士所為。

    4. 香港戲劇工程的服務態度,是「把最好的相授」。經典是最好的,否則不會經得起時間的考驗而成為經典。原創也可以是好的,但須要符合「人文價」、「社會觀照」和「時代精神」三方面基本的要求。北區有質素很好的學生,但無論學生質素如何,為人師表者,沒理由不把最好的東西相授。

《伊狄帕斯王》是香港戲劇工程 2013至 2014劇季的首個劇目。選演這劇的原因,是因為此劇是西方戲劇的始祖、經典中的經典:論劇本,故事劇情已經十分圓熟,其「三一律」的手法堪為後世典範;論角色,伊狄帕斯王形象獨一無二,佛洛依德的「戀母情意結」也由他而生;論風格,「面具劇」在本港並不多見,亦會令使演者觀者,都察覺到身體語言的重要;論政經、歷史背景,希臘劇場提供了上佳的文化宣教的例子。最重要的一點,希臘悲劇所關注的是人生的意義與做人的尊嚴,這是放諸四海皆準的普世價值。希臘戲劇家明白「人皆有錯」的道理。於是,悲劇英雄在他企圖超越命運的行為中犯「錯」,而忍受了一般人不能忍受的巨大痛苦,從而知命。他勇於承擔的氣度,為觀眾,尤其是學生,提供了最好的典範。

所以,悲劇並非令人傷痛、賺人熱淚的的煽情劇,反而是最具積極性的。現代社會的例子中,譬如淘大花園的居民在「沙士」逆境中自強,都是沿出一理。這就是《伊狄帕斯王》的現代意識我們選演的原因。二千四百多年前雅典城全城的人,扶老攜幼的出席戴安尼色斯戲劇節,觀賞《伊狄帕斯王》參加比賽、奪魁。今天,香港戲劇工程希望北區的莘莘學子同樣受到這戲劇經典的薰陶!

(演期為2013年5月4及5日,北區大會堂)

2013年4月13日 星期六

寫於《哥本哈根》二度重演之前


寫於《哥本哈根》二度重演之前                         蔡錫昌

二十世紀上半葉量子力學突飛猛進的發展,導致人類發明了原子彈。雖然第二次世界大戰因此而結束,但日本的廣島、長崎生靈塗炭。《哥本哈根》的故事是以在當時核子競賽中兩名舉足輕重的科學家為中心:1932年諾貝爾物理獎得主 Werner Heisenberg 是希特拉發展原子彈的首腦人物,而他的恩師,猶太裔丹麥科學家1922年諾貝爾物理獎得主Niels Bohr,則要逃避納粹,最終協助美國完成原子彈計劃「曼克頓項目」。他們二人本來相交相得,直至1941年(當時丹麥已被佔領)Heisenberg 到哥本哈根造訪 Bohr,二人竟爾反目。究竟師徒二人當時有什麼對話而導致鬧翻?納粹德國研製核武不成與此又有何關係?陣陣疑團,都在《哥本哈根》一劇中得到解答。劇情巧妙的切入點,是由 Bohr, Heisenberg 與 Bohr的妻子 Margaret三人的鬼魂對質,「重組案情」,尋找事實的真相。可是,劇本本身超越所謂偵探驚悚格局,涵蓋面由科學、歷史以至人文、哲學,又充滿人情味。《哥本哈根》光茫四射地照耀著上世紀末西方劇壇,大西洋兩岸,甚至歐洲所頒發此劇的獎項反映了它的質素和高度。

《哥本哈根》於2010年作香港首演,由香港話劇團與眾劇團聯合製作、由筆者翻譯兼導演,演員方面有杜施聰、白耀燦和潘璧雲。這次重演的的卡士中,女角由陳桂芬擔崗。

由1945年8月6日廣島原爆到了六十餘年後的今天,朝鮮挾核武而張牙無爪,伊朗也蠢蠢欲動。在這時刻重演《哥本哈根》,別有一番意義!

(本劇將於2013年10月25至27日上演,地點西灣河文娛中心。

2013年4月11日 星期四

導演《凱撒大帝》有感


導演《凱撒大帝》有感                             蔡錫昌

誰是英雄?
1599年莎士比亞翁的創作進入巔峰,共有五套作品面世(見「背景資料」),當中有兩套歷史劇,一是關於英國內戰「玫瑰戰爭」的《亨利五世》,另外一套即《凱撒大帝》。《凱撒大帝》的重要性有兩點,一是莎翁四大悲劇之過渡。二是《凱撒大帝》所描繪的世代,完全屬於一個莎士比亞(及當時英國人)並不熟悉的政治體制---羅馬共和政體。因此,許多人常常覺得奇怪為什麼莎士比亞會撰寫《凱撒大帝》?有人認為當時依利莎白一世已是暮年而尚未立嗣,加上內戰平息不久,於是凱撒被刺的歷史事跡,可以為時人作為借鑒。究竟莎士比亞崇尚太平盛世,抑是強人政治,實有待史家考究、證實。不過,很明顯的是,莎翁在《凱》劇中以布魯士 (Brutus) 的道德抉擇為主要戲劇行動,歷史政治元素只是背景而已。

這樣一來,《凱撒大帝》便提供了一個很有玩味的課題 --- 誰是英雄?其實,劇中四名主角都各有破綻,譬如
(1) 凱撒(Caesar)
他天才橫溢、自大狂妄,是一位天生的領袖。倘若不是過度自信,不設個人保鏢,同時肯聽報信者 Artimedorus 的話,他不致被刺而死。

(2) 布魯士 (Brutus)
家族顯貴、備受尊重的正人君子、溫文內斂。為了防止暴政,他殺死凱撒這位於他有恩的好友,內心充滿予盾。他的失敗,是由他的固執與錯誤的判斷而導致。

(3) 卡西烏斯 (Cassius)
為人嚴厲、愛挑剔、過份克己。他說:「若是做人擔驚受怕,我寧可不要活著。我生來是個自由人,與凱撒一樣!」雖然他抗拒暴政表面上有一個堂皇的理由,但事實上他只是出自對凱撒的妒忌。

(4) 安東尼 (Anthony)
耽於酒色的機會主義者,天才演講家。他得凱撒的歡心的原因,大抵與他性格與年輕時的凱撒相似有關。謀殺凱撒的集團敗在他手上,可算是一個諷刺。

陰殺集團的成員都屬於當時羅馬元老院中的貴族保守派,他們除去凱撒的真正原因,不是為了偉大的政治宏圖;就算掛在布魯士口邊的「自由」,並不是解放奴隸或者改革成為民主,所以行刺只屬維護既得利益小圈子的行徑。為了這些原因,就更加使我們思考到政治人物的崛起、公眾輿論的營造、寡頭政治的害處,和甚至政治的險惡與國家管治等命題。

事實上,當時羅馬共和國的政治錯綜複雜,國家日漸強大的同時,權力鬥爭、朋黨結連無日無之。當時有一德高望重的政治家西瑟洛 (Cicero) ,在《凱》劇中只屬配角,可是藉著他的口,卻道出了可能是全劇最精警的話語:「這是個反常怪異的時世。人們都按照自己的意思解釋事物的一切,而事實上卻和這些事物本身的意義完全相反!」我們得問,歷史是否正在重複自己?世人究竟有沒有從歷史中汲取教訓?

第五個主角
劇中群眾扮演角色十分有趣,既為當權者所鄙視,但亦為其所利用。卡西加 (CASCA)雖是由市民選出的保民官,可是他極之厭惡人民。最初,凱撒為了討好群眾,不接受安東尼献冠為王的舉動,更打開衣衫,露出咽喉而表示任由群眾屠宰,令群眾大為鼓動。後來,凱撒被刺之後,安東尼搧動羅馬市民,藉其力量,迫使布魯士等人下台。羅馬市民最後變成暴民,誤殺詩人,既反映群眾力量的非理性和可怕,同時顯出政客的手段與咀面,譬如安東尼向群眾宣布,說凱撒遺囑中承諾留給每名羅馬市民75個銀幣,與今天政府「派糖」手段相同。

導演概念                               
(1)羅馬元老院的貴族、上層社會架構頗類似香港立法會;羅馬市民(包括奴隸)被視為蟻民、賤民。香港民生諸多疾苦。故此,在今年香港的大選年選演《凱撒大帝》一劇,有一定的意義

(2)劇本頭三幕與第四、五幕大異其趣,其戲劇行動把史實濃縮,集中寫陰謀集團成功遊說布魯士加入刺殺凱撒,以至事敗,落荒而逃的廿四小時。頗有劇力迫人之感,亦有今人電影風格。

(3)第四、五幕述說布魯士與卡西烏斯之間的恩怨情仇,和最後戰場上的遣將用兵的戰術。因客觀條件限制,應運用舞台風格加以表現,以補真實性的不足。

(4)現演出以第四、五幕精華率先交代,把結局暴露,然後集中演第一、二、三幕。中場休息之後,另加一場訴說港市民生活,名叫Dolce Vita. Dolce Vita(即「美好生活」) 命名的靈感來自費里尼同名電影 La Dolce Vita(露滴牡丹開),以一記者的眼光,反映關於60年代意大利上流社會之頹廢和失落。今港式 Dolce Vita,述說的是關於「地產覇權」、「貧富懸殊」、「就業困難」和「歷史人潮」等主題,沒有台詞,只有畫面,蓋因在莎翁劇本之後,不便狗尾續貂,反成貽笑大方。

(5)始終單靠動作、畫面和音樂作為演出手段,限制必然很大,然而在劇場的探索中必須有所「冒險」,方為藝術的本質。內容方面,雖然劇場無法救世,只希望試探民生疾苦之極端,繼用異想天開的方法應對。如果演出能代弱者發聲、能回顧歷史,使觀眾有所反省,便能實踐戲劇主體生命的目的。

(6)在《凱撒大帝》本屬古裝歷史宮闈劇。可是劇場並非從事學術研究,注重歷史真實,因此,創意代替寫實,才屬劇場風格。況且,如果服裝、佈景均有現代風格,更可突顯借古喻今的目的。

戲劇與社會
戲劇於社會有著不同的功能,譬如娛樂、教育、傳播、評論等。在一個多元的社會中戲劇的種類也應多元。觀乎本港劇場發展,近年明顯偏頗於娛樂消遣,這與政府演藝撥款的制度和劇團須要爭取市場,都不無關係。香港社會的步伐很快,而政、經時事往往比戲劇更加有戲劇性,遂衍生出「資訊娛樂」(Info-tainment) 的發展,更加迎合一般市民心態。今天本港議會及街頭示威、抗議頻仍,使用戲劇性的手法也已經斯空見慣。以上這些,只說明市民接觸到「戲劇」的機會多了,但仍然無助於市民對嚴肅劇場的明瞭,更說不上對它的欣賞。

嚴肅劇場的特性之一是社會批判性。戲劇有文字有影象,又能動觀眾以情,因此許多政權都忌憚它的威力。可是,嚴肅戲劇的創作須要沉澱、反思,更須要的是勇氣。亦有云偉大的作品會產生在歷史的時刻,或是在大是大非的社會議題面前,但如果戲劇的功能只是 "Preaching to the Converted" (向教徒宣教) ,或者成為某種的「主旋律」作品,那戲劇場的意義恐怕仍是有限的。嚴肅戲劇與劇場既然無法與時事或娛樂競賽(這並不等於嚴肅戲劇沒有娛樂性!),那何不慢工出細貨地創作,然後在「平常」的日子裡演出,希望培養出社會大眾和下一代的人文價值、獨立思想,可能這才是它發展的出路。這樣一來,問題就回到戲劇教育的根本之上了。

從上述的角度來看,是次《凱撒大帝》的搬演只屬「借古喻今」的性質,和向香港社會聊表關注的一個舉動。

(香港首演於2012年10月5日荃灣大會堂

2013年4月6日 星期六

發展弱勢社群的社群劇場本身就是一個弱勢社群



Some Case Studies of 20 Years of Hong Kong Community Theatre

“There are more and more ‘performing arts venues’ in Hong Kong – the many city halls, the Academy for Performing Arts, the Hong Kong Arts Centre, the Fringe Club, City Contemporary Theatre....Nevertheless, we still need people who are willing to perform outside these venues.” (Yu Sau, 1987)

The paragraph above is quoted from the preface of the book “Elections – A Negation” published by the People’s Theatre. It was 1987, an era full of life : the negotiation between China and Great Britain over the future of Hong Kong after 1997 had been completed and Hong Kong’s future was settled. The economy was running well. In the area of the performing arts, the Council for the Performing Arts and the Academy for the Performing Arts had been established. Especially with the former, the resources it made available had generated great impetus for growth in the local theatre. The establishment also grew – both the Urban Council and the Regional Council set up in 1986 also provided much financial resources for the construction of venues and the presentation of programmes. Even more important was the fact that the people of Hong Kong became concerned with various issues which they had never thought of – identity, the question of “root”, local culture and Chinese culture.

Promotional Community Theatre
With respect to the fostering of a local theatre culture, the author began in 1983 to promote a community theatre movement in Shatin. His inspiration came from three sources: firstly, his teacher Mr. Lee Woon Wah once spoke in an open forum the sense of mission of the Chinese theatre artists and this made a significant impact on him. Secondly, the Hong Kong Government commissioned Andrew Leigh, the Administrator of the Old Vic Theatre in England to write a development report on Hong Kong’s theatre. In the report, various issues concerning regional theatre and development of original works were discussed. Thirdly, in 1984, the author was involved in the writing and directing of  “ I Am Hong Kong” with the Chung Ying Theatre and the success of this original work and its touring format added to his confidence. So in October, 1985, the author formed the Shatin Theatre Company together with Cheung Ping Kuen and Cheung Yim Cheung, and called it a “community theatre.”

In a newspaper article, the author reflected on the first ten years of the Shatin Theatre Company. The idea then was to set up some kind of “seeding areas” for grass-root theatre as an alternative to the main stream establishment. The way it worked was to tour the production to where the audiences were with dramatic contents relevant to society. This experiment was shelved because of the amateur nature of the company and other limitations. Instead of touring, the company decided to engage full time professionals to do training in the high schools. However, it continued to organise the Shatin Drama Festival and theatre fair, which were still very much community oriented. ( Hardy Tsoi, 1996)

There was not a lot of theory – just a group of theatre enthusiasts seeking an alternative to the current theatre and such was the beginning of the community theatre  in Shatin. New development naturally attracted attention. Da Shan, a people’s theatre worker who had attended community theatre workshops had this to say,” The Shatin Theatre Company possessed all the conditions of a community theatre...with the exception of one, i.e. the organic operation, organization and development from the bottom up.” (Da Shan 1987). Da Shan’s criticism was based on visiting community artist, N. Owen’s description of the art form. According to Owen, Community Theatre can assume the following formats: “Firstly, to stage a ‘related’ play by a company from outside the community and the purpose is to provoke thought and discussion among the audience. Secondly, to stage an open-ended play that will allow the audience to finish so as to provide an opportunity for information and opinion exchange and discussion of what they had faced in the process. Thirdly, to help organize a community theatre group for the community. (Da Shan 1987) N. Owen also pointed out that “No matter what kind of community theatre, the most important feature is to allow the community to understand its own situation through theatre. The community will then seek to make changes for the better. The whole process must be based on its own understanding and needs. Therefore the characteristics of a community theatre are discussion, participation and self organization. (Da Shan 1987). Another point considered by Da Shan to be faulty is that the survival of a community theatre should not rely on the funding of government or it would lose its independence.

In actual fact, when the Shatin Theatre Company engaged a full time community arts officer to provide service to the schools, it had also chosen the newly established Shatin Town Hall as its performance base. In terms of the plays staged, although many of them were original works, the community flavour had diminished. However, the author’s faith in the community theatre had not been wavered. He felt that the “From Training to Performance” model as testified by drama training in schools and youth centres followed by the Shatin Drama Festival could be further developed providing more time and money were available. He recognized that it should be professionally run and developed, and professionalisation was the inevitable trend. As good as his words, he founded the full-time group, Prospects Theatre Company, which took over the community theatre work originally conducted by the Shatin Theatre Company in 1993. At the same time, with funding support from the Hong Kong Arts Development Council, Prospects was beginning to “export” “community theatre” programmes to other districts in Hong Kong. (1)

The exported format, which usually ran within a period not less than 6 months, had consolidated from the Shatin prototype with the following features:

1.  Schools and youth and centres in the district were the primary targets;
2.  Theatre training will be given;
3.  Related drama activities will be organized as a complement;
4.  Organising a contest for amateur theatre groups in the district;
5.  a script about the people and events related to the district will be written and  people in the district will be invitedto participate in the performance of the plays
6.  If necessary, before leaving the district, assistance will be provided in setting up theatre bodies in order to sustain theatre activities in the district.

Among the aforementioned features, the most remarkable would be number 5. A good example would be when as the Eastern District Community Theatre Programme was conducted, Prospect’s Paul Poon adapted the novel “The Sun Has Set”, which is about the district Saiwanho, by Shu Hong Shing into a play of the same title.

The model described above is directly related to an earlier field study visit in England by the author for a report after the visit. The author wrote:

“I went to Sussex, England in 1987 to observe the Community Theatre there. Famous playwright/director Ann Jellicoe was the founder of this type of community theatre and I was very much inspired. They operated in the following way: professional artists from the theatre company would take up residency in a town for half a year or up to one year. They would help the residents to organize various theatre activities such as training workshops, games, parade and carnivals, etc. At the same time, a playwright would do research with an aim to write a play about the town’s history. During my visit, I was able to catch such a play being performed. Platforms were set up inside a church at two ends. Only the elderly would be seated while the rest of the audience would mill around in promenade fashion. The characters in the play would come on the platform or appear right next to the audience. The actors were playing roles of their ancestors or historical figures of their town. It was obvious that the people loved and supported this kind of theatre and the local bars, restaurants and hotels were providing sponsorship to the professionals. In the evening of the performance, the church was crowded with people. Community theatre has become an important part of their life.”

The “Eastern District Community Theatre Development Programme” by the Prospects Theatre Company was somewhat modeled after what was written above except that, in Hong Kong, people generally did not have very high consciousness about their community or local culture. There were also so many alternatives for leisure activities that the outcome of the community theatre projects had been quite different. However, the viability of such a development had been proven. (Hardy Tsoi, 1966)

By 2002, the “tailor-made” scripting method devised by Prospects Theatre for communities had undergone changes. Under a programme named “Grasshopper Outreach Youth and Children’s Theatre”, an artist facilitator would take a group of young people enthusiastic about the theatre to visit different sectors in the district, e.g. home for the elderly, boys and girls’ dormitories, temporary housing estates, etc. Eager eyes towards new people and things, “Dialogues” would easily be struck up between the young participants with and the various groups of unique life experience. Thus, through observation, interviews, discussion, creating and rehearsing, a play about society as observed by young people’s eyes was produced. It then went on tour in other districts and served as an example for other districts in self-reflection, reviews and further dislogue.

Some Issues Revolving Around Promotional Community Theatre
If an overall review of the community theatre model developed by Shatin Theatre Company and the Prospects Theatre Company is taken, it can be seen that its prime purpose is for theatre promotion. When arts and culture are still not generally recognized by society, this had its value. This is a problem and a challenge. The major difficulty faced by this kind of community theatre is that of the huge size of the community – in terms of the physical area, the size of the populations and its diversity. Therefore, constant adjustment had had to be made in order that the “invisible communities” might be reached. Theatre groups’ reliance on government funding, on the other hand, had greatly affected their survival, the mode of operation and the scale of their plans and programmes. In actual fact, almost all arts organizations require government funding. In tapping resources from the district boards, the proactive programme “Community Theatre Scheme for the 18 Districts” formulated by the Hong Kong Arts Development Council only met lukewarm response from the boards. This not only a reflects the lack of enthusiasm and support for arts and culture by the district boards but also implies that there should be more lobbying and educational work to be done. Apart from that, theatre training in Hong Kong has been geared mainly to stage productions. But the know-how and commitment required of a community theatre worker are quite different. Therefore, human resources and quality control are areas of concern as well.

Community Theatre for Social Change
Apart from community theatre that promotes the art form, there is also community theatre for social change. It has the following features:

1.  Theatre is considered as a tool that would liberate the creativity, the body and soul of the human kind.
2.  It tends more to work with minority and underprivileged groups. As the participants have similar background, the impact is usually larger.
3.  The relationship between the theatre worker and participants is different from the ordinary theatre in that it is more equal. Participants are both spectators and creators.

The representative of community theatre for change is the People’s Theatre group led by Mr. Mok Chiu Yu. Their development might be divided into two stages – the People’s Theatre in the 1980s and that of the 1990s. Influenced by the American radical “Living Theatre”, the People’s Theatre took part in performances, publications, making music cassette tapes and movie making. They did not perform in the usual venues of established theatres. Instead, they performed in the streets and in university campuses. Mok explained the rationale behind such activities,” We merely want to do things that the mass media do not or cannot do. We hope to communicate and act as a catalyst for social changes.” (Mok Chiu Yu, 1997). As to the effectiveness of this theatre operation, Mok had his reservations. He said, “What is political drama any way? Although one starts out trying to communicate, the audience would only endorse what they already believe and thus, only the solidarity of those sharing the same belief will be reinforced.” (Mok Chiu Yu 1997).

In the 1990s, Mok Chiu Yu et al came to know people’s theatres in Asia and Brazil and he revised his thoughts on “people’s theatre”. He wrote,
“What is people’s theatre then? People’s theatre is a kind of cultural action. It is theatre of the people, for the people and by the people. The purpose of people’s theatre is to allow the people themselves to alleviate themselves from two kinds of poverty. The first is connected with the mental and cultural... People’s theatre has empowering effects and is a means for empowerment. It leads to the gain of confidence within the people themselves and it allows them to utilise all the different artistic media to voice themselves, to critique and analyse their living conditions and to do what they feel they need to do, to change the unequal and unjust circumstances. People’s theatre promotes the practice of grass-root democracy and the realization of grass-root democracy will necessarily change the unequal distribution of wealth in society.” (Mok Chiu Yu, 1997)

It therefore should not be a surprise to find subsequently Mok Chiu Yu working for the Arts with the Disabled Association Hong Kong and founding the Asian People’s Theatre Festival Society.

As speaking out for the underprivileged and encouraging them to voice out are the basic goals of people’s theatre, “Playback Theatre” introduced by Veronica Needa, an ex-member of Chung Ying Theatre, in 1996 to Mok became an additional tool for people’s theatre. Playback Theatre since has grown by leaps and bounds and many names like “Well Drama Club”, “Chosen Power”, “Live @Life”, Michelle Chung, Grad Leung etc. have formed the backbone of the movement. Many social workers and organisations also used the same techniques to assist their work and the clients whom they served include the mentallly handicapped, youth out of school, new immigrants, migrant workers and other underprivileged groups. There are other young adults who have been attracted by the unique appeals of Playback Theatre to be enthusiastically involved, e.g. the Living Stories group.

Some Reflections on Community Theatre for Social Change
Since the Renaissance, western civilization has propounded humanism. Until the advent of the post industrial, post modern eras when society is being overwhelmed by the personal computers, the status of the individual has scaled new heights as society has become even more divisive. The theatre, being displaced by films and television into a minority interest, has gradually lost its educational and cohesive powers. Its justification for existence is further affected by a world of dangerous and unpredictable changes. Thus, community theatre for social change can be likened to social workers, who are always actively searching for soils worth ploughing, which is  a rare and honourable act indeed. However, if we were to take the following considerations into account, it might help in the course of community theatre for social change:
1.  The community theatre for social change is suspect of “preaching to the converted”, as its audience are like-minded. However, the answer lies in the keyword “change” as this is what the theatre aspires. From this, we may be able to relate ourselves to great speeches by political figures at public spaces and rallies. Does Agit Prop have a place in Hong Kong?
2.  The ideal theatre should have depth, and before depth, focus. Maybe the focus or issues in community theatre for social change is superficially simple and easy to be identified. But as the Chinese saying goes, “You are not a fish. So how do you know the fish’s concern?”, for the theatre worker is to find the issue and offer the right remedy, there must be thorough investigation and research. It is easy to whip up sentimentalism in a theatre, but follow -up action is what matters.
3.  The idea of empowerment seems to be in contradiction with the “from bottom to top” ideal model of community theatre for social change. Alternatively, if the deprived minority groups have the self knowledge and ability to organize and reform, they do not really need the existence of the community theatre worker. Therefore, the role of latter is rather intriguing; it requires remarkable skills and sincerity and it has to be pursued with humility and should therefore be much respected.
4.  Finally, there is the question of technique and content. Take “Playback Theatre” for example. It can be used to bring about social change but is also for entertainment. Nowadays many young people like to sing in karaoke and play electronic games, finding satisfaction and gratification of “being in control”. Be it community theatre or people’s theatre, the question of balance between content and technique should be addressed. Such theatre can be simply and economically produced in different touring environment but there is no reason to banish this type of theatre from main houses so that they can be seen by a larger audience under more favourable conditions. Successful examples can be found in Joan Littlewood’s “Oh! What a Lovely War” and the Asian People’s Theatre Festival Society’s “Macau 123” in 1998. Both shows were entertaining and thought provoking.

From “Celebration” to “Rebellion”
Famous theatre scholar Professor Robert W. Corrigan once pointed out: “There has always been a continuing tension between rebellion and celebration in the arts. “(Corrigan, 1973) This is also an appropriate comment for the community theatre, which is both celebratory and rebellious. Looking at the experience of Hong Kong, in the short span of the last twenty years, we have experienced community theatre which evolved from political street theatre, to promotional community theatre, people’s theatre including Playback Theatre and even educational theatre in schools. There will be greater and diversified developments in the days ahead.

Talking about future developments, the two-year old theatre group “Ying Sheung Chuk Theatre Company” provides an interesting example. The group is made up of two persons adapting an integration of styles from the physical theatre, masks, poetry, folksongs, glove puppetry, Chinese martial arts and other forms traceable to Chinese folklore. They first performed in the elderly and youth centres, facilitated mask workshops and performed in the community centres. They are educational and community-based as well as touring. Their sources of funding come primarily from the workshops they organise and performances, supported by the Lesiure and Cultural Services Department. Around Chinese New Year this year, the Comapny organised at the Yuen Long Theatre a “Feast of the Supreme Lions”, which included the making of lions for the traditional lion dance, the lion dance itself and percussion workshops. Its promotion took on the form of a menu of a Chinese banquet and was quite outstanding. There were students from two primary schools, one high school and members from a youth centre joining the performance. The audience was also invited to take part. The one hour performance had a great atmosphere and participants were very motivated. It is indeed very meaningful to carry out community theatre activities basing on folklore and traditional festivals. However, it is obvious that, without government funding support, the number of performances that “Ying Sheung Chuk Theatre Company” could do and its impact are necessarily restricted.

Serving the underprivileged and the deprived groups – whether it is to bring theatre to people living in distant places or to awaken the oppressed, has always been the goal of the community theatre. From a macro point of view, giants like Shakespeare, Moliere, Ibsen, Shaw and Brecht were just doing the same thing. In Hong Kong, the total number of theatre goers amounts to somewhere between 40,000 and 50,000 (3). So even if performances are many, the social impact is not particularly high. Therefore, the theatre may be considered to be a minority which has to work hard for its survival. Take for an example in the Hong Kong Arts Centre forum on “Searching for Hong Kong’s Theatre: Revelations from Kuo Po Kun” on 9th February, one of the concerns with Hong Kong theatre raised was the over emphasis on theatricality and its lack of cultural depth. Owing to the goals and mode of operation of the community theatre, it  can definitely contribute much towards this end. Community Theatre in Hong Kong has a history of twenty years. Further formal research and study will be the way forward for this art form.

Notes:
1.  Since 1993, the Prospects Theatre Company had for four consecutive years received funding from the Hong Kong Arts Development Council to run “ Theatre Development Programme on Hong Kong Island East”, “Theatre Development Programme at Tusen Wan and Kwai Ching”, “Community Theatre Development Programme in Tuen Mun” and “Theatre Development Programme in Northern District, New Territories.” Apart from the above, Prospect Theatre Company has been repeatedly commissioned by the Leisure and Cultural Services Department to undertake various Cultural Ambassador Scheme and Artists in Residence Scheme.
2.  “The Grasshopper Outreach Youth and Children’s Theatre” is part of Prospects Theatre’s “ Insects’ Playground – Community Integrated Arts Programme”. The programme came under the Leisure and Cultural Services Department Cultural Ambassador Scheme 2002.
3.  Hardy Tsoi conducted surveys on theatre performances and audience in 1989, 1990 and 1991. Taking 1991 as an example, there were 82 Chinese theatre groups performing 173 plays in 764 performances. Total audience was 250,000. On average every person sees six performances and the number of theatre goers should be aound 40,000. Separately in a publication “Hong Kong’s Theatre Scene 360 Degrees” edited by Mr. Ting Yu (published by the Hong Kong section of the International Association of Theatre Critics, it was reported that in 1997/98, there were 178 plays with 1010 performances staged. There was a total of 310,000 number of viewers. Calculated on the same basis as before, there would be about 50,000 theatre goers.

References:
Yu Sau (1987) (Preface) [Elections – A Negation – Collected Plays of People’s Theatre] (page 6) Hong Kong People’s Association

Hardy Tsoi (1996) [Community Art and it Space for Survival] (Sing Tao Daily News) 27th March 1996

Da Shan (1987) [A Community Theatre in Hong Kong 1] in [Elections – A Negation – Collected Plays of People’s Theatre] (pages 155m 156)  Hong Kong People’s Association

Mok Chiu Yu (1997) [The Political Nature of Theatre and People’s Theatre] in [Hong Kong Theatre – Recordings of Seminars on Theatre 1997] (pages 116, 118) Hong Kong , Hong Kong Section of International Association of Theatre Critics.

Corrigan, Robert W. (1973) “The Theatre in Search of A Fix (pg 348) USA: Dell Publishing Co. Inc. 


(此為莫昭如主辦社區劇場研討會之主題演講英譯本。譯者不詳。中文本在另一刋物登出時改名為:《發展弱勢社群的社區劇場本身就是弱勢社群》。)










2013年4月5日 星期五

問題依舊,出路不同


曹禺戲劇節研討會

問題依舊,出路不同                                     蔡錫昌

經典作品之所以能成為經典,是因為經典作品中的普世性題材,經得起時間的考驗,歷久常新。應該說的是,經典作品的生命力,乃在於內容主旨,而並非外在風格。然而,因為時代意識形態的改變,客觀環境的不同,當藝術家搬演戲劇經典作品的時候,往往會考慮採用一些新手法,好讓今天的觀眾更容易接受經典作品。說到底,現代藝術家不是歷史學家,他只能以現在的眼光去演譯經典,而並非進行歷史考證。亦為了這個「藝術牌照」,經典作品得以歷久不衰,以不同的姿態出現在觀眾眼前。

曹禺三部曲的《雷雨》、《日出》和《原野》到今天依然是充滿著生命力的作品,因為他們描寫、鞭撻的社會人心的醜惡依然存在,甚或因為客觀環境變異而醜惡顯得「基因變異」。以《雷雨》一劇為例,北京導演王曉鷹,在曹禺的同意下,曾把魯大海一角從演出本中刪掉。社會階級鬥爭減弱所換來的效果,是更加專注家庭倫理的扭曲關係,人性的醜惡也更為暴露了。當年香港演藝學院戲劇學院院長蔣維國博士以劇場風格處理,全劇的演員都坐在佈景兩側,增加了劇場的間離感,目的,不外乎希望多用批叛眼光來檢視劇情。因為一些經典作品的篇幅比較長,難以全本照演;以莎士比亞為例,他五幕的劇本除非經過刪減,否則今天的觀眾均無法把戲看完!可是,出自對原著的尊重,這些修改只是刪剪而沒有增加,於是並沒有把原著歪曲。至於一些改編作品,演出內容與原著大異其趣。那只能算是由原著啟發的一種創作而已。以下談到的「新手法」,可沒有離開曹禺原著主旨的意圖。

《雷雨》實在是一個太出名的劇本,大家對它都耳熟能詳。一些對《雷雨》的批評,是它太過「佳構」。基於以上兩點,現代導演(或後現代)可以把《雷雨》解構重組,於是,透過種種不同的手法,譬如重複劇情、倒敘、獨白、視象蒙太奇等等,佳構變為解構劇,或許對於劇中某些角色或者情節而言,會有更透徹的解讀。舉例來說,傳統的周樸園是個外表道貌岸然、內裡蠻橫專制的資本家,是個徹頭徹尾的大壞蛋。可是,他對侍萍當年的一片真心、今天的一點懷念難道不可以為他「挽回」一些分數?如果加重了他的深情,就會同時加強了他的薄倖。為周樸園說項,這樣也有點兒好像為《威尼斯商人》的Shylock翻案的味道了。

《雷雨》一劇其實也可以用性別研究的角度詮釋。由這樣角度的詮釋自然會導致結構上的「手術」和風格上的適應。一套現代版的《雷雨》,絕對可以影射現今社會上那些常常在報紙娛樂版出現,擁有三妻四妾的名人、富豪,使他們成為被批評、嘲笑的對像。這方面,一些電視節目如《頭條新聞》和《香港亂嗡》其實已經是先例可援了。

無論在內容上或意象上,《日出》一劇更容易接受風格化的處理。在強烈的光暗對比、漫畫化的角色造型、天堂與地獄式的貧富懸殊、善與惡的角力之中,存在著一個遊離於正邪之間的陳白露。她的犬儒和冷嘲熱諷,相對著方達生的書獃子式的呢喃,引致強烈而可笑的對比。時代變了,價值觀也隨之而變;在這個笑貧不笑娼的社會,陳白露自有她一套應付這個變態社會的對策。早上太陽出來了,她雖然有過一瞬間輕生之念,但最終,她決定重新整裝上路,繼續與這醜惡的世界周旋!

《原野》是三部曲之中更圓熟和最具藝術野心的一部。一方面情節嚴守三一律,而另一方面,寫實的第一、二幕是心理戲劇,而在第三幕的黑森林,作者卻採取表現主義風格,以影、音的效果刻劃出主角的主觀感受。為了手刃仇人後代,主角仇虎耽誤了逃生的機會。結果,黃金鋪的地方去不了,黑林子卻成為他葬身之所。於是,「黃金地」、「黑林子」是劇本層出不窮而又相輔相成的意像,是醜惡的現實與美滿生活的願景之間的競爭。本劇可以考慮不用實景;焦家的場景如果在金碧滿目的場景中進行,是一個不錯的對照,好像在說:「美滿已是現狀,仇恨已是回憶」一樣。再者,場景如果隨時可以變調,改為詭秘黑色森林的意像,又或者兩種主調各佔一部份,隨著場景氣氛而或多或少變化,那麼,整齣劇的設計都以表現主義手法包裝,與文本的意圖配合了。達致如此場景流動地變換的,可有不同的方法,譬如燈光很重要,投射器材也是。可能比較具革命性的,其實是需要一個能夠虛懷若谷,同時裝載任何意像的空台。

以上是一些概念性的構思,從戲劇結構、當代性社會思維和劇場美學三方面,為曹禺先生的三部曲提供一些現代劇場的可能性。希望拋磚引玉,請大家參考、指正!


15.10 2010

2013年4月4日 星期四

17 Quotable Quotes


Everything in nature is lyrical in its ideal essence, tragic in its fate and comic in its existence.                                George Santayana

The winds of acclamation and dissent pass, but if the relationships and techniques respond to our own inner values, to our mythologies and superstitions, then they are able to oppose resistance, to come into contact with the outside and to escape isolation.           Eugenio Barba (Artistic Director, Odin Teatret)

If we, citizens, do not support our artists, then we sacrifice our imagination on the altar of reality and we end up believing in nothing and having worthless dreams.
                                                                                  Yann Martel (From Author's Notes, Life of Pi)



Sir Thomas More: I think that when statesmen forsake their own private conscience for the sake of their public duties, they lead their country by a short route to chaos. ……我相信, 當政治家為咗執行公務而離棄佢地個人嘅道德……佢地會將國家引導到紛亂嘅路途上面。


Sir Thomas More: Why not be a teacher? You'd be a fine teacher; perhaps a great one. 點解唔做一名教師呢?你可以成為一個好好嘅教師, 甚至一個偉大嘅教師
Richard Rich: If I was, who would know it? 就算我成為一個偉大嘅教師, 又會有邊個知道?
Sir Thomas More: You; your pupils; your friends; God. Not a bad public, that.
你自己, 你嘅學生, 你嘅朋友, 上帝D觀眾唔差吖……,
_________________________
Sir Thomas More: Why Richard, it profits a man nothing to give his soul for the whole world... but for Wales? 威爾殊? , Richard, 為咗整個世界而出賣靈魂本來已經得唔到好處….. 但係只係為咗威爾殊  !
                             ________________________

                                                           From  Robert Bolt's A Man For All Seasons



People are often unreasonable and self-centered. Forgive them anyway.
If you are kind, people may accuse you of ulterior motives. Be kind anyway.
If you are honest, people may cheat you. Be honest anyway.
If you find happiness, people may be jealous. Be happy anyway.
The good you do today may be forgotten tomorrow. Do good. Give the world the best you have and it may never be enough. Give your best anyway.
For you see, in the end, it is between you and God. It was never between you and them anyway.
                                                                     Mother Teresa of Calcutta 
                                                                                                                                  

如果我們不是追求原創,何必要來搞藝術?
如果我們不學古今的經典,我們怎麼知道自己的是原創?
如果我們不站在巨人的肩膀上,怎麼可能看得遠?
如果我們不想超越,何必要攀登?
如果我們沒有紀律、沒有決心、沒有奉獻,
我們怎可以想象“藝術是人類自由的終極自由空間
                                                                                              
Without the urge for originality, what's the point of artistic pursuits?
Without learning from the classics, how do we know we are original?
 Without emulating the achievements of great men, how do we envision the future?
Without the desire to transcend, why do we need to scale heights?
Without discipline, determination and devotion, how do we imagine that "art offers the space of ultimate freedom in the pursuit of human liberty?"
                                                                                     郭寶崑 Kuo Pao Kun



「當上帝看見凡人不自量力企圖創作,他就笑了!」

                                                                                    取自米蘭、昆德拉接受「耶路撒冷獎」致詞


Romeo     If I profane with my unworthiest hand
                This holy shrine, the gentler sin is this;
                My lips, two blushing pilgrims, ready stand
                To smooth that rough touch with a tender kiss.

Juliet         Good pilgrim, you do wrong your hand too much,
                 Which mannerly devotion shows in this.
                 For saints have hands that pilgrims' hands do touch,
                 And palm to palm is holy palmers' kiss. 

                                                                              Shakespeare's Romeo and Juliet Act I Sc. 5 l. 92-99


悲劇是關於偉大狀況與想法的劇場,這是一種探索永恆人性需求與疑惑的劇場,有著崇高動力的劇場。

                                                           希臘阿提斯劇院創辦人  特爾左布勒斯

                                                                           

How long 
Do works endure? As long 
As they are not completed.
Since as long as they demand effort
They do not decay.
                                                                                                               Bertolt Brecht


The actors
Change into singers. They have a new attitude
As they address themselves to the audience, still
Characters in the play but now also undisguisedly
Accomplices of the playwright.
                                                                                                              Bertolt Brecht


A carnival is not a revolution.
After the carnival, after the removal of the masks,
you are precisely who you were before. After
the tragedy, you are not certain who you are.
                                                                         Howard Barker


你若是鳥
僅僅是隻鳥
迎風而起
率性而飛
眼睜睜
俯視人間
這一片混沌
飛越泥沼
於煩惱之上
了無目的
自在而消遙
                                                                          高行健


戲劇是「澄明的眼睛,一雙冷眼,冷靜觀照這大千世界的眾生相」。 
                                                                           高行健  


If Chaplin were to play Napoleon, he wouldn't even look like him; he would show objectively and critically how Napoleon would behave in the various situations the author might put him in.

                                                                          Bertolt Brecht  


I abhor dramatic schools that indulge in reflections and introspections to evoke the right emotion. The mere fact that a student must be mentally operated upon is sufficient proof that he should give up acting.   

                                                                         Charlie Chaplin 


好景龜年惜落英,聽歌新譜早忘兵;
排雲獨手前賢志,砥礪河山孰有成。

                                                                                                              南海十三郎 












《四季人》的二類半劇場


《四季人》的二類半劇場                                      
1982年,由筆者翻譯及導演的英國名劇A Man For All Seasons,稱之為《四季人》,在香港中文大學新落成的邵逸夫堂上演,是為此劇中文版的首演。在二十六年後的今天,筆者有緣把《四季人》介紹給新一代的觀眾,實在是一件榮幸和有意義的事。當年的演出由袁報華飾演主角湯馬士爵士,馮祿德飾演卡維爾,白耀燦飾演普通人,人選一時無兩,而演出風格是英國十六世紀的歷史劇。
時光荏苒,筆者的藝術認知亦有所不同,以下段落是這次重排《四季人》的一些美學考慮。
根據當代戲劇大師,丹麥奧汀劇場藝術總監巴爾巴(Eugenio Barba) 的分析,劇場可分成三類:第一類是蓬勃但藝術性卻暮氣沉沉的商業及政府資助劇團,第二類是導演中心、視演員如傀儡的前衛劇場,第三類劇場則為觀眾提供具有內在生命力的訊息,以喚起觀者的集體潛意識為目的。巴爾巴師承「貧窮劇場」創辦人告羅多斯基(Grotowski),藝術概念與乃師一脈相承,對演員而言,要求的並非依書直說,按劇本照演什麼名角哈姆雷特或者娜拉,而是要演員以本身價值觀與角色印證,甚或自己進行創作,不作編劇家的「奴隸」。「第三類劇場」對創作者的挑戰,就是由主觀出發,創作出能被接受的客觀意象劇場。英國學者James Roose –Evans認為當演員個人真理與經驗落差—即演員/角色的合併體—呈現的時候,觀眾得窺生命較深層的剖析。筆者曾於前年遠赴丹麥參與由巴爾巴主持的奧汀劇場十天的工作坊,遍賞該團名劇(差不多每晚均有演出)。奧汀劇場的演員大多追隨巴爾巴大半生,演出效果對筆者而言,雖然有文化及語言的差異,但仍覺得極具魅力。
由「第三類劇場」而來的啟發,並不僅在於演員的創意和發揮,事實上,對於作為負責「二度詮釋」的導演,也有不少的釋放。隨著近世優秀劇本的難求,編創劇場的興起和上述實驗性導演的出現,現代劇場大有「導演主導」的趨向。然而,經典劇依然是「主流劇場」(筆者不想沿用巴爾巴商業或資助劇場的界定)的中流砥柱,而導演的創意,在這類劇場當中,仍可大施拳腳。筆者認為,舞台上的「歷史」都是想像中的歷史,而這個「想像」,就是根據創作者(包括導演)的文化背景、理性與情感的取向,以及詮釋角度而定。所以,每當演繹一部名著或經典作品之時,導演就好像與之「對話」,借古喻今也好,借題發揮也好,這就是他的「藝術牌照」,而外在的或視覺上的歷史考據已不重要!
《四季人》原著寫於1960年,作者Robert Bolt原屬左翼份子,所以,他沿用了當年仍是方興未艾的布萊希特「間離劇場」風格,以配合文以載道的題材,實在是順理成章的。「間離劇場」風格在《四季人》一劇中,主要是透過一個飾演不同角色的「普通人」來體現;此角色以庸俗的眼光和市民趣味的插科打諢,直接與觀眾溝通,也賺取他們的歡心。在編者的設計中,觀眾對普通人的接受或認同是屬於一種收編,在戲劇的語言來說,普通人和觀眾就成為聖人(即Sir Thomas More)的襯托,而觀眾(或某些觀眾)會因此而開始進行反思。
當筆者選演《四季人》的時候,希望向參演者和觀眾提出一個問題,那就是:「今天的香港會如何看待像湯馬士摩亞的這樣一個偉人?」劇中的名句「Every man has his price」放諸四海皆準,但見怪不怪的香港人是否會嗤之以鼻?再者,高官政治「秀」和Infotainment充斥香港社會,甚麼聖人是否只是另一場熱鬧?好像翻閱「八卦雜誌」上富貴派對的潮人男女,一頁尚未過去,一切影像都經已模糊了?基於上述的考慮,在筆者2008年版本的《四季人》中,將會出現一個「形上劇場」,以戲「包」戲:一群2008年的香港中外潮人男女,說著五種語言,參加一個富貴派對,《四季人》的故事變成了他們的噱頭、玩意。對號入座大可不必,但如果這演繹能夠喚起觀眾某些集體記憶,也是不枉的!
上文提到「第三類劇場」可以引導觀眾得窺生命較深刻的剖析,其所達到的效果,如戲劇大師布魯克(Peter Brook)所言,一種奇蹟似的優美時刻,深深地感動觀眾,全劇院會鴉雀無聲;劇場再也不是無關痛癢的娛樂,劇場可以影響生活和生命。筆者深信這個境界,乃是所有劇場的最終目的。以《四季人》原著情理並茂及其思想與藝術深度,堪稱是一代經典,而以觀眾的慧悟和情操,現在「二類半劇場」式的一些後現代劇場手法,也許只是聊備一格而已!

《四季人演出於2008年12月香港大會堂劇院