Bertolt Brecht’s ‘The Caucasian Chalk Circle’ As A Marxist Play

Table of Contents

Marxist Thoughts

Marxism and the Caucasian Chalk Circle

In conclusion

Bertolt Brecht’s importance is widely acknowledged. His birth in 1898 in Bavaria was a turning point in literary and theatrical history. He introduced a new form of theatre, the ‘epic’. He wanted to make a revolution and introduce epic theatre, among other radical transformations. This was to help bring about the Marxist Revolution. He hated Hitler’s dramaturgy, which was centered on Marxism. In the 1930s, his plays in Germany were banned. He believes that war is bad for everyone. He did not believe in joining a political party to be able to make a Marxist contribution.

Brecht’s lifetime can be divided into 3 distinct phases. His forced exile in Germany during Hitler’s rule is the defining factor. He lived in Germany 1898-1933, was forced into exile 1933-1947, and then returned to Europe 1947. Since his early literary career he has been an enemy to the established bourgeoisie. Brecht’s works and life are influenced by Marxism. In the years following World War II, when Brecht returned to Germany, he found himself a Marxist. He wrote that he only “understood my philosophic position” after reading Marx’s Kapital and Lenin State and Revolution. Brecht’s Marxist views were shaped by his many Marxist friends, particularly Karl Korsch. He attended all of Korsch’s classes and discussion group. He spent approximately fifteen years as an exile out of fear and to combat Nazi tactics.

Marxist IdeasMarxism refers to a system of economics that Karl Marx developed. This system examines capitalism’s effect on productivity, labor and economic growth, without class. For equality to be achieved, the government may control different resources as well as their means of producing. It is the opposite of capitalism. In communism everyone is a part owner and all shares are owned collectively. Marx believed capitalism led to an unfair inequality between capitalists who profit from the labor of workers and their employers. This exploitation leads to workers seeing their work as little more than a way of surviving. ‘As a dramatist/philosopher of historical consciousness, Brecht somehow always falls between the cracks of theatre and philosophy, of Marx and the Frankfurt School…’.

Brecht’s earliest works such as Baal and Drums in the Night were critiques of the bourgeoisie. Marxism helped Brecht develop a clear sense of ideas and a critical sensibility that allowed him to criticize bourgeoisie society. His works clearly demonstrated his dissatisfaction and desire to change the bourgeoisie. His choice of theatre, and the experiments he made with it, was his primary means to express his revolt. He used songs, dances and lights as well as instruments. He used radical methods. Brecht was unconquerable when it came to his portrayal of the real society. His plays were actual data that the audience could use. His “epic theatre”, which aimed to introduce a different way of thinking, gave the audience a place to think and reach conclusions.

Marxism is The Caucasian Chalk CircleBrecht presents his views on class, property and injustice in this famous 1944 play, with a variety of characters, from materialistic courtiers and nobles to lowly servants. It tells the story of the struggle between a high-born woman who deserts her child and a servant girl who cares for it. This play is based on a Chinese drama and questions the idea of blood ties. This play is a work he wrote while in exile. This postmodern drama is a mix of Chinese oral tradition and historical events. He wanted the theatre a perfect blend of intellectualism and entertainment. It should encourage people to analyze and think, leading to a change in society. He tried to accomplish this by using his art in narration. The most striking part of his work is the endings. They are abrupt and strange, which helps to convey the message. Also, he believed that the episodic nature of a play breaks its flow. He used the dialectical materialist in his play. Dialectical materialism is a philosophical philosophy based on Karl Marx’s and Friedrich Engels’ teachings. Both Marx and Engels believed that materialism was the idea that material reality is objective, free of spirit and mind. They understood materialism to be the opposite of idealism.

Marxism rejects supernatural forces as a source of structure and shape for human life. The struggle for production and distribution becomes the history of mankind. Marx was against capitalism and its exploitation of workers. He wanted a more fair society. Grusha as well as the other workers and farmers are shown to be a victim of such exploitation in the drama. The elite, that is. The Governor’s wife and he are doing nothing for the society. The scene in which the Governor’s daughter worries about her son, Michael only because of the inheritance. She does not consider any emotional connection. This shows how upper-class people are more inclined to materialistic things such as expensive dresses. She was so self-centered that she forgot about her child. The ruling elite appears to be self-centered and concerned only with material gain. Kazbeki’s plot to execute his brother is a clear example of this. He craves power and blinded by blood relationships. Grusha was the one who tried her best to protect the child despite no relation with him. This cost her all of the relationships she had and the character that people regarded her as. She tried to protect him during the two-year mercenary period.

Brecht’s description is based off his theory of evil upper-classes and good lower-classes. Grusha is a good person because of her class. Brechtian works are social dramas, not individual plays. He shows incompatibility of individual desires with socio-economic conditions when he speaks about characters. The external circumstances, i.e. The socio-economic situation determines their fate and behavior.

The play within a show was a background to the debates that farmers had about how best to use their land in the post-World War II era. This play attacked Nazi ideology. For a new world to exist, rules will have to change. Grusha’s role represents the working classes who have to pay without receiving anything in return, as the child did not even belong to them. She is the real proletariat figure who does not get anything for producing. Brecht pointed out that Azdak didn’t want to give her any justice. Instead, she just wanted to continue to produce, or pay more. Brecht’s portrayal of Lavrenti shows him as spineless and unhumanized. His wife owns the land. Brecht shows that despite his Marxist beliefs, Simon accepts her and their new family is a constructed unit. Azdak’s judgement allowed the child into the hands of people who truly loved him. Grusha. She divorced him and married the man who was ill. According to Marxist economic and justice ideas, old traditions are condemned and rejected with the transformation of a fair and just society. Marx argues that those willing to sacrifice can make the world a better place. You can achieve qualitative changes by making small quantitative adjustments. Azdak, in this play, became the medium. Ludovica supported the idea of redistributing resources by choosing a stableman to replace the lady. His choice of justice resembled Marxist principles that turn the tables on selfish landlords and poor peasants.

ConclusionBertold Brecht tried to transform his writing by using Marxist techniques. In the prologue, Brecht also presented a utopian vision for a socialist world. Chaos and chaos are prevalent in this play. Brecht wanted to express that chaos, while sometimes destructive, can also be regenerative. Brecht adopted the theory rationalism in order to make this play a true expression of Marxist beliefs.