Postmodernity And Brecht In Contemporary Theatre Film Studies Essay

This essay will demonstrate the postmodern theory and how playwright, Bertolt Brecht has influenced postmodernity with contemporary theatre. I shall analyze how Brecht’s styles and techniques have influenced postmodern theatre and the comparisons he had with Aristotle. By doing this, I shall discuss Frederic Jameson, Jean Baudrillard and Jean-Francois Lyotard’s respective ideologies. References are evident from the sources from the bibliography.

What is postmodernism?

Postmodernism is a broad phrase that is realistic to various cultural texts like beliefs, skill and writing amongst others (Bertens, 1995: p.63). It is mainly a response to the exact anticipated belief, idea and determination in clarifying realism. In other words, it stops from an acknowledgement which realism is not basically represented in people’s beliefs but alternatively, it is very creative as the belief attempts to appreciate its individual certainty and subjective realism. Postmodernism is extremely uncertain of reasons that argue to be acceptable for every nation, practices and civilizations (Rosenau, 1992: p.113), (Sarlak, 2010: p.32). It alternatively involves every individual’s comparative realities. To identify postmodernism, analysis is significant and realism simply explains people’s understanding of what humanity represents to them independently. Postmodernism furthermore trusts actual encounter upon conceptualizing cultures which understands that people’s aftermath encounter will unavoidably be comparative and imperfect before general and definite (Sarlak, 2010: p.32). Postmodernism additionally rejects several basic reality beliefs and it requires the logical enthusiasm and methodical reality that will describe entirely for everyone with a supposed contemporary representative approach. The postmodern contradiction view is that it should understand that the individual beliefs are still not past searching when identifying every belief below the disbelief analysis (Sarlak, 2010: p.32). There are three key theorists of postmodernism and they are Frederic Jameson, Jean Baudrillard and Jean-Francois Lyotard. Jameson is very judgmental of the contemporary past circumstances as he believes postmodernism has changed it into a sequences of meaningless conventions of what he calls, ‘pastiche’ that can then be used up and produced (Buchanan, 2006: p.95). He conflicts this postmodern situation with the modernist circumstances which was discontinued. Postmodernism has absorbed an advantage of several differences of culture and realism. Jameson explains that postmodernism has extended to a huge opening of culture’s area of interest massively and traditionally in regards to the creative sophistication of realism. Jameson defines his concept of ‘pastiche’ as a postmodern parody without any political problems (Buchanan, 2006: p.95). According to Jameson, parody was changed by ‘pastiche’ in the postmodern stage of development. In his own words he said, “Pastiche is, like parody, the imitation of a peculiar or unique, idiosyncratic style, the wearing of a linguistic mask, speech in a dead language. But it is a neutral practice of such mimicry, without any of parody’s ulterior motives, amputated of the satiric impulse, devoid of laughter.” (Hill and Fenner, 2010: p.82) People have failed to link to the olden times that changes the directions into a sequence of techniques and discontinued categories like ‘Simulacra’ and ‘Simulations’. ‘Simulacra’ and ‘Simulations’ is coined by another postmodern theorist, Jean Baudrillard. Baudrillard is allied with the concept of what is generally known as ‘The loss of the real’. This is an interpretation which in modern life, the general stimulus of fantasy from television, film and advertising has directed to a failure difference of depth and surface, illusion and reality and imagine and real (Bishop, 2009: p.32-35, p.95). The outcome is a culture of ‘hyper realism’ that differentiates the connections is wearing down. Jean-Francois Lyotard also contributed a lot to postmodernism. The term ‘postmodernism’ was employed in the 1930s but its present style and views can be assumed to have started with Lyotard (Barry, 2002: p.86). Lyotard believes he should get rid of the discontinued task of modernism, that of the enlightenment ideology (Gabrielle and Ilcan, 2004: p.77).

Contrast with Enlightenment Ideology

Its characteristic engages with the theory of which style is understandable (Marshall, 2004: p.50). Differences of opinions work as interpretations of beliefs but they do not have a meaning past that at all. Modern cultures look to the theory which people continuously direct to their own suggestions and developed it. In postmodernism, there are just influential people (Klages, 2006: p.169). There is no constant reality. There are only faces with no seriousness. This is carefully associated by means of what Baudrillard advices in his theories with reference to simulacra as there are no fundamentals and just duplicates.

Get Help With Your Essay

If you need assistance with writing your essay, our professional essay writing service is here to help!
Find out more about our Essay Writing Service

Contrast with Modernism

Modernism on the other hand, is a general appealing actions of the twentieth century and it relates to a group of moral, diplomatic and theoretical beliefs that give the foundation for the modernism artistic view (Zafirovski, 2011: p.265). However, postmodernism gives out comparable appeals with modernism as they eliminate limits of high and low cultural styles. They point out that ‘pastiche’ changes theatrically in its view in direction of these styles and developments. Modernism shows people’s partial disintegration as a little dreadful although postmodernism never weep this position but observes it instead. One of the majority important arguments of postmodernism and modernism is the matter for the entirety and shared quality. Postmodernists have forbidden these objectives as ‘Meta-narratives’ despite the fact that modernists tried to catch the entirety and shared quality in certain point (Strinati, 1995: p.215).

Semiological Factors

Structuralism advancing to post-structuralism has also had certain control on postmodernism (Taylor and Winquist, 2001: p.265). One of the post-structuralist’s focal influences theories is that every importance is a subtext (Strinati, 1995: p.116). Therefore, people are left with reality collected of interpretation methods. Moves in semiotics have resulted in a bigger ‘intertextuality’ impression which applies to the clues certainly having to do with each other. The content is interpreted in connection to different content and that is why a stylistic series suggestion is taken to accept on the content. Baudrillard gives the term ‘simulacrum’ that is a certain significance in semiotics perspective which gives from a usual one that is a duplicate of another duplicate that has been so immoral in its regards to the unique that cannot be a duplicate anymore (Klages, 2006: p.169), (Sandlin and McLaren, 2010: p.45). The simulacrum rests on its own as a duplicate lacking a representation and it is not a difficulty of repetition and ‘pastiche’ anymore. On the other hand, simulation is the creation by representations of common sense without foundation and actuality which is called, ‘Hyper-realism’ (Baudrillard and Poster, 2001: p.149). Baudrillard has established more on the simulation view as he disputes that the simulation judgment had gone beyond allegations to a main common reality to the idea where such simulacra amounts to represent realism itself (Baudrillard and Poster, 2001: p.181). However, pastiche consists of the disintegration and creation of common procedures as it explains the neutral reference of primary creative ways in postmodernism production.

Technological Factors

According to Jameson, the area under this discussion turns out to be further incomplete as it deals with a society inside the one that discovers the conclusion of the notable history in the postmodern period (Jameson, 1998: p.73).

Postmodernism and Theatre

Traditional theatre is represented by the importance identifying within the story and the devotion to Aristotle’s theatrical theory concept (Styan, 1965: P.60). Hegelian ideology has furthermore categorized into contemporary theatre alongside the person’s actions at the theatre lead (Chemers, 2010: P.42). Aristotle’s art representation is additionally engaged in the naturalism pinnacles as convinced by the Darwinian rule of contemporary drama performance. Drama practices include approaches like dancing, singing, stage blocking and symbolic speaking that required theatrical aim progresses. Raymond Williams commented the calamity achievement in contemporary theatre where the isolated person’s difficulty in a favourably developed sphere is emphasized (Williams, 2006: P.10). He highlighted how theatre principles are distinguished by its audience’s suitability and it’s interactions to certain principle values. He emphasized how theatrical styles are argued as characterizations over which playwrights, audience and actors correspond to encounter. Therefore, the production could be continued. Postmodern theatre is motivated to appear on artistic and past perspectives for communications to express itself alongside the common closure style (Nash, 1996: P.153). A similar representative is seen in various cultural types. Postmodern theatre views separate past and artistic cultures as an infinite motion basis. Theatrical approaches depictions and new features are reserved since various perspectives. Postmodern theatre acquires technique choices and general development with the style confinement failure (Wallis and Shepherd, 2004: P.139). This is considered in many methods in performance. Additional significant postmodern theatre approach is the inter-text where different versions are employed to describe on one another (Wallis and Shepherd, 2004: P.159). However, postmodern theatre is differentiated by agreeing and conflicting with the parallel modernist failed concept of Aristotle and Hegelian ideology judgements. While performing, actors wait for their cues and when they come in front of an audience besides learning their lines. Modernism and its features are not only seen in how messy the story is (Wallis and Shepherd, 2004: P.91). Actors also go across various portrayals and presentation aspects in the exact time and space while they are in their characters. Actors and their characters supports from one another because when actors are in their characters concurrently, they are in distinct worlds because they anticipates their cues but are not basically featured in the performance deliberately, substantially and instantly, although in actual reality, they are there. Postmodern theatre is furthermore distinguished from the modern theatre with the type of styles (Wallis and Shepherd, 2004: P.52-P.60). The industry separation, media beliefs and modernization influences drama performances (Wallis and Shepherd, 2004: P.60). This innovative theatre performance standard needs a distinct opinion from the audience but in postmodern theatre; Aristotle’s liberating idea revives radical unimportance. Artistic knowledge also develops entirely relating to the meaning-making development (Kershaw, 1999: P.12). Postmodern audience is furthermore appealed to go past this meaning-making development like how postmodern theatre is obligated to go past discussion advancements in demonstrating ideology into routine and back to ideology for it to be capable to articulate itself. Postmodern theatre compels the audience to continually assume an important attitude in observing. Meaning-making and communication invention in postmodern theatre is never a basic individual connection awareness form. Postmodern performances are then demonstrated with habitual interruptions in the audience’s rational development with a careful attitude regarding communication partiality.

Brechtian Aesthetics, Language and Post-Modernity

Bertolt Brecht was perhaps a highly symbolic individual in dramatic artistics during the last century. His analysis of Aristotle’s extended recognized example and his later investigation and invention of the alienation effect or the distancing effect as people sometimes call it as well as his innovative style of theatre called, the ‘Epic Theatre’ has modernized the style to dramatic custom and many statuses when it comes to creative talents. It has turned out to be idolized in its personal claim during the course of the sphere (Banham, 2000: p.261). Jameson shortens the alienation effect as ‘The V-Effect’ as it is originally known in German as ‘Verfremdungseffekt’ (Jameson, 2000: p.11, p.85). Jameson has specified certain elements in the alienation effect as it is most importantly implied as an inner experience where the creative show gets the audience into understanding the sphere in odd traditions. The methodical element of the alienation effect is situated in the show presentation and its dramatization where the engagements of items and the positioning of performers are structured to dismay what the audience looks forward to in the theatre. Another element of the alienation effect and imaginably the highly alienating is carried out across the effort to separate the audience from the drama by ‘shutting down’ and ‘turning down’ support and compassion (Jameson, 2000: p.39). The reason for this is because it is aimed to make a vital gap so that the audience is capable to imagine throughout the show presentation in order for them to take action once it finishes. For Jameson, the doubt around the objective of denying and disagreeing the affecting link includes a different stage of alienation to Brecht’s work (Jameson, 2000: p.52). The reviewers along with the audience are incapable of making their minds up of the alienation effect objective and they are so alienated from their knowledge theory protection. So here situates with the instructive carries across of the alienation effect that is primary to what Brecht called the, ‘instructive theatre’ (Willett and Brecht, 1964: p.71). The instructive theatre is when the audience is stimulated of finding for additional communications of understanding, explanation, criticisms, narratives and further critically to make the sphere once again. That is why it pours out of the previous constitutions of the alienation effect which is possible as the instructive revelation that has people’s requirement is beyond the past. Everything is not normal, destined, fixed or emotional characteristically in direction of a permanent conclusion in particular when every practical characteristic of people’s lives makes the stage up for their individual’s show presentations which have to do with organizations providing educations that are variable. The particular character appears on or after following the disguise of the independence as soon as the sphere is formed oddly to people such as the demonstration of theatre that is made by the moving of sets on stage. It was looked as constant some time ago as it is recently established as curtailed, fragmentary, hypothetical and crucial. To run through and sum up, alienation is another word for ‘estrangement’ and Brecht said, “Estrangement means to historicize, that is, consider people and incidents as historically conditioned and transitory.” (Ewen, 1967: p.222) That means the audience will not see the characters on stage anymore as they are not stimulus, unchangeable and vulnerable in bringing above to their outcome. The radical objectives of Brechtian alienation that puts across around instructive theatre must be compared with the acceptance of a ‘natural’ past that permits no other course of action and in that way introduces the forthcoming events as a present unlikelihood. Instructive theatre separates the daily petrified and insensible reality (Willett and Brecht, 1964: p.71). The practicality of Brecht’s alienating effect holds people to the instructive characteristic of performance that has the realistic outcome of separating that philosophical explanation of the modern public realism. For Brecht, the alienating work characteristic is exactly its proposal to the idea which the sphere could be otherwise (Jameson, 2000: p.39). When it comes to alienation, people carry on and finish a helpful ancient story through uncovering the likelihood of revitalizing, restructuring and modernizing the sphere (Philosophy of Education Society, 2002: p.186). Splitting the times that have gone by across extracts is one example and that is why it is unsuccessful when it never found the impression for the influence of the likely undevelopment in the constant contemporary. Jameson has ran through the checking development amount which consists of dividing the times that have gone by in that modern performances are designed simultaneously from elements of the previous performances where the entire surface objective of an era outwardly further than history and alteration as it gives in to an initial logical unstructured one prior to succeeding at a genuine modern and common united modernization reestablishment (Buchanan, 2006: p.42). The importance is on the modern drive unclassified and unconfined by the alienation effect which is articulated in the artistic influence of extracting, dividing, classifying and transplanting the frightened and fixed sphere. However, Brecht’s disputes and people’s importance have collapsed further down the analysis by famous postmodern cultural critics and mass media philosophers with the information time of life start and its influential issues on the topic of how about they corresponds. Culture and civilization can decide the Brechtian artistics and visuals importance by supporting the contemporary interpretation and the social and literary creation styles. The dramatic artistics and visuals main rule was credited to Aristotle in the middle of others up to Brecht and it is particularly in Brecht’s poetics (Bennett, 1997: p.24), (Suvin, 1984: p.115). Aristotle had a very particular introduction for popular theatre that consists of the three unities of time, action and place (Brockmann, 2010: p.295). Aristotle thought that theatre ought to keep a life experience in its substance for the audience to recognize by means of it and remain stimulated by way of it afterwards. He also wanted this idea to have a successively feeling to the changed pardoning of catharsis. Brecht appeared during the 1920s and as he grew up, he established his artistic and visual in the course of the 1930s that opposed a lot of Aristotle’s extended recognized unities (Thomson and Sacks, 2006: p.209, p.212). Brecht alternatively chose to look theatre over as a modern type and not a changeable knowledge beyond catharsis but instead to some degree is increasingly crucial to work the audience into reacting by moving themselves away after the performance to imagine and believe rather than feeling. Brecht advised that the mental state of disappointment and understanding represented as difficulties to an important manifestation while Aristotle disputed that a central character must be an understanding character who has power over an unfortunate error with the purpose of bearing for them (Shaffer, 1992: p.123), (Hiltunen, 2002: p.46). Furthermore, Brecht reflects on the public procedures and understanding despite the fact that Aristotle asserts that the play’s central point is a particular character’s hamartia (Shaffer, 1992: p.120-p.121). Brecht supports his alienation effect as a method that upsets the audience by way of an ostensibly surprising and odd action and image whereas Aristotle highlights the poetic continuity categorization. Brecht’s aim and objective is to have the audience vitally separate themselves from the play and estimate the public and shared perspective. He also wanted them to achieve in addition of an extra demand to action than a passionate liberation. Culture and art was very influenced by the scientific developments in interaction very remarkably with the television and the knowledge era over the last four decades. Cultural critics have asked issues of how reality was represented in the simulation era as these skills and scientific developments turned out to be more and more dominant. Jean Baudrillard was one of the many theorists who believed that a move in the realistic realism style had followed. This claim has been introduced even though it is not clearly to a standard and natural Brechtian artistics and visuals significant analysis that disputes that the representation is a traditionally represented clue and it is itself an Aristotle contradiction idea which explains that a representation is an unchangeable reality. Reality is additionally a variable unit and it is needful on certain elements which are only observed highly by the media with Baudrillard along with his contemporaries (Baudrillard and Poster, 2001: p.149). The reality’s ‘pastiche’ is no longer an indication and it is made aware by its clear difference of the formation and the initial analogue. The interpretation in the knowledge era is not so evident in an affiliation anymore if it is to find Aristotle’s concept of people’s facts or Brecht’s concept of public fact while theatre in Brecht’s time and period was evidently defined as an expression means for the factual. Baudrillard also thought that representation does not happen to be present anymore and it also does not influence an allusive characteristic anymore as that is all people have to behave (Pawlett, 2007: p.87). This contradicts Brecht’s artistic and visual ideas that are centred on confronting public realism as the result of the characteristic imaginable of representations made on stage. Brecht could not have quite estimated these theatrical variations in the manner that people have to do with reality. The postmodern condition uniqueness and distinctiveness is important to this argument after it advances itself through the scientific era beginning. Certain concepts and suggestions have claimed the postmodern condition artistic and visual unique and distinctiveness but there are several that constantly reverberate which consist of analysis and critique as an aesthetics search and the philosophy analysis. On the other hand, analysis and critique is an ideology that generally links with grammatologist (Taylor and Winquist, 2003: p.164). Jean-Francois Lyotard also disputes that culture was additionally unified by political hegemony (Strand and Le Hir, 2000: p.149). Brecht’s artistic and visual is clearly established on a distinct set of beliefs. His epic theatre and alienating effect theory are entirely embedded with Marxism and this not just a political basis but it is one of the majority generalizing theories of contemporary Western concept (Reis, 1993: p.136). The Marxist artistic and visual is very consolidated and it is political and diplomatic as it is against the market as an important aspect in people’s works. This aim and objective is similar to Brecht’s aim and objective as it has to do with basic transformation which brings a technique down and replaces it with a pristine conceptual and philosophical theory and traditions. The alienating effect supports this theory by establishing a theatre type which carries out the surprises to reduce the vital distance that is centred on the theory of the reality in an understandable point and focus in mental reality (Jameson, 2000: p.84). The philosophy, aesthetics, analysis and critique tradition and presentation dispute this idea to distancing and not engaging to support a different purpose and theme which additionally continues critical hegemonic probabilities such as fascism. The connection, purpose and theme mix altogether and as the result of that, it eliminates their double reality which confuses the view but it eventually directs an extra gentle and genuine judgment (Jameson, 2000: p.21). On the other hand, it is not necessary to entirely ignore Brecht’s theories as they support importance contemporarily in spite of the basic move in the purpose and theme connection, interpretation, philosophical and moral basis. There are also some tactics and approaches for Brecht’s theatre which really appear to suit very suitably in the postmodern condition and its artistics method (Wright, 1989: p.135). Brecht’s leftover utilization can be clearly linked to the suitable movements of the scientific era and the market culture and civilization even if it is used with the focused of essential distancing. The point that Brecht employs a dramatic plan that breaks itself for the alienation effect can presently be recontextualized to fulfil the postmodern artistic range (New Observations Publications Incorporated, 1985: p.47). If the alienation effect is secluded, it could clearly be accredited to Brechtian techniques. The artistic could clearly be disputed as postmodern even if his dramatic techniques are centred on theories with reference to entirety but unfortunately Brecht’s dramatic custom would turn out to be very contradictory if this were the issue (Trussler and Barker, 2002: p.326). It would also not stimulate public engagement anymore but only satisfy a culture and civilization which are driven for strong media and reducing the characterless. Dramatic performances in media should be reconsidered with television and digital media on the internet as the main source of interaction in the postmodern age. The creativities determining the amount rupture, the reality investigation and the theme loss could appear to reduce Brecht and every theatre conventions. However, this is just the start of the era and by way of it occurs in every basic and principle; the theories are predominant and forceful just as similar as Brechtian theatre. Maybe a further explained contemporary media outcome result will appear from the sense of modification and the remnants of it will be capable for directing the theatre role as well as Brecht’s theatre in the future.

Fantasy

Brecht views performers as a suitable representation because they market and promote an invented dignity set to the audience that feels an emotional blast causing a demonstrative climax but however, the audience has previously felt the utmost demonstrative finish at the end of the performance. This involves the recollection which follows by the certain plot outcome. The audience has no alternative but to avoid the fast diminishing recollection of their theatrical stimulation and revert to the small actual representation which looks out for them beyond the theatre inside. This is Brecht’s critical style of Aristotle’s catharsis. Brecht also wanted the audience to see the characters as part of a bigger issue rather than revolving around the specific difficulty (Heinen and Weber, 2010: p.13). His alienation effect ideology was made to stop the audience from understanding the characters on stage and it would make his aim and objective realistic. In his own words, Brecht said, “Estrangement means to historicize, that is, consider people and incidents as historically conditioned and transitory. The spectator will no longer see the characters on stage as unalterable, uninfluenceable, helplessly delivered over to their fate. He will see that his man is such and such, because circumstances are such. And circumstances are such, because man is such. But he in turn is conceivable not only as he is now, but also as he might be– that is, otherwise– and the same holds true for circumstances. Hence, the spectator obtains a new attitude in the theatre. He will be received in the theatre as the great ‘transformer,’ who can intervene in the natural processes and the social processes, and who no longer accepts the world but masters it.” (Ewen, 1967: p.222) Aristotelian theatre has understood the well designed theatrical production, advanced character occurrence and delay of doubt. Brecht created ‘Epic Theatre’ which consist the plot viewed in a sporadic manner as there is very insufficient cause and effect of the character progress and scene sequences is collective (Benjamin, 2003: p.6). On the other hand, the alienation effect identifies with explanation, impartiality, neutrality and it gets around feelings. Brecht attempted to succeed distancing in so many ways as he made the action representative, cruel and complete. The action for Brecht is direct which lacks the conclusion as every scene sequence is conclude inside it and it is dramatically understood to stop the misconception feeling (Jones, 1987: p.105). So as a result in Brecht’s ‘Epic Theatre’ adaptation, Brecht not only aimed to aggravate the audience into changing culture by reconsidering mutual theory. He also wanted the audience to see the characters in the theatre performance as part of a bigger and further essential unity. He used his ‘Alienation Effect’ ideology to that influence. For Brecht, the difference of theatre and existence and the performer and observer is unclear and constricted which makes it easier for the theatre production conclusion to be left in charge of every audience participant (Reis, 1993: p.136). Furthermore, the audience is left in sensitive condition height at the theatre production conclusion in Brecht’s catharsis style. The audience have to furthermore do something in opposition to the public issue which was introduced to them for finishing the demonstrative purification (Barranger, 2006: p.123). The move from realism to hyper-realism happens when the representation interpretation succumbs to simulation. The simulation scene is a distancing exterior that permits for no theatre production representation of comparison and the entire sphere it provides and characterizes. The essential world, it’s very infinity and hugeness is nothing more than the simulation of these importances that is a simulacrum which present a limitation approach as it controls and restrains the spaceless understanding and the partial procedure sphere from a Brecht’s point of view. The distancing fades away into closeness and existence turns out to be a simplicity and simultaneity condition. People might still come across something similar to Lyotard’s theory of ‘passibility’ (Crockett, 2001: p.49). Lyotard expresses this conflict as an effort to change modernity to move complication and purpose by transcribing beyond the theories of its telos (Holmes, 1997: p.175). He suggests a concept he called, ‘Working Through’ as opposed to modernity’s guided creation which is a free theatre performance as opposed to tactical theatre performance (Malpas, 2003: p.119). Brecht and Lyotard had one thing in common. Both of them agreed that the appeal to avoid the control of a complete method pushed in direction of its individual beliefs and ahead of it whilst being in different realms in numerous concerns. In Lyotard’s own words, he said, “Being prepared to receive what thought is not prepared to think is what deserves the name of thinking.” (Williams, Crome and Lyotard, 2006: p.277) Nevertheless, modernist works are limited and separate units for every free theatre performance in them that is just what the conventional culture organization empathizes (Murphy, 1999: p.30). The innovative modernity that is existent to this problem was overcome by political and diplomatic historical past. However, postmodernity is encountered with these circumstances and will then take the separate exit (Frascina, 1992: p.97). If the culture work is surely a commodity then it may also confess on it because the commodity as the instinctively copy argument forces the commodity out. Postmodernist culture will end its individual limits and turn out to be comparable by means of normal commodified existence in an ironic explanation on the modern work whose constant arguments and changes in any circumstances understand no recognized limits which are not continuously doing wrong (Bell and Le May, 1993: p.175), (Eagleton, 1986: p.141). If every work of art can be corrected by the decision direction, then it is boldly better to anticipate this outcome rather than reluctantly enduring it which by this time is a commodity that can keep from commodification. Postmodernist culture will give a downgraded respond to certain selectivity by fixing itself in the ground if the elevated modernist work was established in the concept (Harris and Frascina, 1992: p.97), (Eagleton, 1986: p.141). However, Brecht has commented this theory as a beginning after the ‘bad new things’ instead of a beginning after the ‘good old