The "Way" of Suzuki

Author(s): Masakuni Kitazawa

Source: TDR (1988-), Vol. 37, No. 4 (Winter, 1993), pp. 10-12
Published by: The MIT Press
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1146287 .
Accessed: 18/06/2014 19:15

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

The MIT Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to TDR (1988-).

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 188.72.126.181 on Wed, 18 Jun 2014 19:15:32 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 Etc.
Io Letters,
In Shaliko's
case,thegrant moneywasnotso inconsequential as itap-
pearstobe forTDR. On itsown,theNEA funds maynothavehadgreat
butas we know,publicmoneyis thepump-primer
effect, forprivate and
corporategrants,and thelosssnowballed.Shalikocanceled several
impor-
tantprojects,
limpedalongto produce a fewsmaller onesthathadlimited
livesdueto inadequate andfinally
budgets, diedearlierthisyearaftertwo
decadesofprovocative andexcitingproduction.Tiredoffighting forthe
rightandmeansto do histheatre, Shapirohasleftforthemountains of
New Mexico.Thoughthishasbeena long-standing plan for hisretire-
ment, I cannotdismissthenotionthatdespair overcame
finally Leo'sdrive
to makeart.I wonder whatmight havehappened iffiveyearsago,some-
one at theNEA hadhadthecourageto say,thisman'sartis dangerous
andstimulating, andit deservesourattentionandsupport. We mustall
hope that is
TDR stronger thanShalikoandcontinues to tweakthenoses
of thecomplacent andnarrow-minded. Let'salsohopethattheideaof
publiclysupported artregains
thepositiveplacein ournationalconscious-
nesswhichis appropriate fora greatnationwitha diverse andendlessly
culture.
self-reinventing
-Richard
E. Kramer
NewYork

The "Way"ofSuzuki

TotheEditor:

I enjoyedreading "CollaborationandCultural Clashing:AnneBogart

andTadashiSuzuki'sSaratoga InternationalTheatreInstitute" byEelke
Lampein TDR 37,I (TI37). Ifherdescription oftheperformances is cor-
rect,AnneBogart'sOrestes seemsto meveryunderstandable in theway
thatit surpassesdifferences
ofcultures andI feellikegoingto Saratoga
Springs to witnesstheperformance.I think thatBogart's dramaturgy and
method belongtowhatI callthepost-Grotowski tradition.
Itsthought and
system standon a postmodern principlethatcollective relations,
including
theindividual freedomsofperformers suchas innerself-realization,anda
graspof the total
structure
of discourses narrative,
(linguistic bodilyaction,
soundandvoice,colorandlight, etc.)canalonecreatea genuine perfor-
mance.
In contrastto theunconditional praiseof Bogart'sperformance, Ms.
is
Lampe veryreserved in herevaluation ofSuzuki'sperformance ofhis
Dionysus anddoesnothideherconfusion abouttheircollaboration to cre-
ate new theatre.There was, she says,"an [...] unspokentension
simmer[ing] beneath thehappysurface ofpioneerspirit: thetension be-
tween[their] commongoalsandclashing cultures."She alsosays,com-
menting on Suzuki's
bilingualDionysus:"[he]deliberatelyclashes Western
classicswitha Japaneseartistic
sensibilitythatis informed bytraditional

This content downloaded from 188.72.126.181 on Wed, 18 Jun 2014 19:15:32 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 Letters,Etc. 11

Japanesetheatre aesthetics, and furthermore juxtaposesAmericanandJapa-

nese idiosyncracieswithina performance." And on Suzuki's training
method:"The extremedevotionthatSuzukidemandsfromhis actors,the
militaristicdiscipline,the sacrifice of a privatelifewhen one is working
withhimin Toga-mura, all pointtoJapanesecultural characteristics."
Ms. Lampe is quite rightin thesecommentsexceptforone point:Is
Suzuki'sperformance derivedfroma "Japanese artistic thatis in-
sensibility
formedby traditional Japanese theatre aesthetics"? Further, does Suzuki's
trainingmethodreallydemonstrate "Japanese culturalcharacteristics"? I do
not thinkso. Rather,thoserepresented by Suzuki'stheatre are entirely his
own and notbasedon traditional Japanesecultureand theatre. Ifsomeone
choosesto callthis"Japanese tradition" becausesimilarpatterns can be ob-
servedin manyotherareasoftoday's Japan, I dare to say thatwhat theyare
observing is a pseudo-tradition formed by therapidmodernization sincethe
Meiji period."Suzuki'sDionysus," Ms. Lampe says,"hitme in the guts
froma pointofstillness." Certainly, thestillness is an important characteris-
tic ofJapanesetraditional theatre and culturalexpression. But thequestion
is whatkindof stillness it is. For instance,the stillness of thenoh playis
derivedfroma theatrical and aesthetical recognitionthatactorsin plays
mustbe thevehicleof beingsof theotherworldor at leastmediators be-
tweenthatand thisworldeven thoughtheirbodies are livingones. Al-
thoughtheirgestures and movements arepatterned, theyactspontaneously
and freelyto concentrate on innervoices deliveredby Gods, Goddesses,
andspirits.
However,stillness in Suzuki'stheatre is not thesamething.It is a still-
ness thatis externally enforcedto imposesadisticself-oppression on the
performers by a director or a theatrical dictator. Actors become self-moving
puppetswithoutpuppeteers. They don an expressionless maskof compli-
ance. In contrast, how vividthefeatures and feelings thatdanceacrossthe
facesof theBunrakupuppets.How humantheyare!
We can observesuch culturalcharacteristics not onlyin contemporary
Japanese artistic contexts but also in many other areas ofJapaneselife.
Peoplewho belongto organizations arecompelledto acceptthissametype
of self-oppression forcedby theirsuperiorsto be loyalto theirorganiza-
tions.Theyare requiredto demonstrate "extremedevotion,themilitaristic
discipline,the sacrificeof a private life" towards theirsuperiors, thosewho
represent thewill to powerof theorganizations. It seemsto me thatsuch
characteristics are theresidueof themilitarism or fascism whichguidedJa-
pan downthepathofdestruction in thepast.
The truetradition ofJapanis verydifferent. Zeami,one of thefounders
of noh in the 14thcentury, said an actormustbe a flower.But mostim-
portantly "he mustrecognizetheflowerhiddenin hisbodyandmind.It is
a flowerbecauseit is hidden.Ifit is nothidden,it wouldnotbe a flower"
(Fuhshi-kaden, tome7, a paraphrase of the original).Whatdoes it meanto
be a flowerforan actor?It is an acquisitionof an awarenessthathe may
independently becomea universal beingat thatcrossroadof body,mind,
self,and other.It is he who mustaskhimself if,in theprocessofa play,he
hasbecomea floweror not.No one else can tellhimthis.Contrary to the
generalunderstanding of theJapanesefeudalera,therewas a strongindi-
vidualism. So-calledfeudalloyaltywas not a faithfulness of thesubjectsto
thelordsbutto the"samurai-way" (bushi-dou). A samuraialwayshad to ask
himselfwhether hisdeedsandwordswereappropriate to "theWay."
Of courseMr. Suzuki and his sympathizers are freeto pursuetheir
"Way." This method when translatedinto performancereveals that
Suzuki'sstyleand formexistonlyin themindof himself and thefollowers

This content downloaded from 188.72.126.181 on Wed, 18 Jun 2014 19:15:32 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
I2 Etc.
Letters,
and notin thetheatrical But I thinkthatthetrueactivity
reality. of theatre
towardsthe postmodern will be groundedin a totaland freerelationship
betweenall individuals
participatingin theproductionofa performance.

-MasakuniKitazawa
Tokyo,
Japan
Zeami
1961[c. 1401-o3] Fuhshi-kaden.
Edition
oftheNihonKotenBungaku
Taiki65,341-
Shoten.
98,Iwanami

Outside-Insider
Inside-Outsider,

To the
Editor.
East maybe East and West maybe West,but theyhave met,and the
meetingin thepostcolonialsituationhas generated and is stillgenerating
tremendousheat, particularly around the fiercelydebated concept of
"interculturalism." In PhilipLutgendorf's reviewof IndianTheatre, Tradi-
tionsofPerformance (editedby FarleyP. Richmond,DariusL. Swann,and
Phillip B. Zarilli; Universityof Hawaii Press, 199O) and Rustom
Bharucha'sTheatre and theWorld(first publishedin India by Mancharin
1990,and thenin the UnitedStatesby SouthAsia Publications, 1990) in
yourjournal(TDR 36, 4 [TI36]), theheatreachesan unprecedented level
ofpeevishpersonalattack.
Mr. Lutgendorf mayhave his own reasonsto overlookthe outrageous
factual errorsof thebook on IndianTheatreeditedbyRichmondet al., er-
rorselaborately listedby AnandaLal in his reviewof the book in The
Statesman, Calcutta(18 August1991).The atrociousmistakes in translitera-
tionof Indiannames,in translation of Indianwordslike bidai(farewell,not
knowledge),hilariousconfusionbetweena dead actor-director Ajitesh
Bandopadhyay and a dead theatre scholarAshutoshBhattacharya, muddled
geography (placingMaharashtra in "central"Indiaand includingthe state
of Manipurin "easternAssam"),providing funnyetymologies (Jatra),and
wrongstatements like Marathiand Bengaliplaysare hardlytranslated to
otherIndianlanguages(fiveMarathiplaysarebeingproducedat regular in-
tervalsin Calcuttain Bengalitranslation or adaptationsincelate '8os, two
wereproducedin the '70s), objectionable mistakes
aboutthesocialorigin
of "GroupTheatre"actorsand viewersin WestBengal,all thesemakeus
wonderwhy thisopus was made a textbookat the StateUniversity of
New York.A real"outsider" is expectedto be morecarefulin his or her
look at our "inside."
I also wonderwhy the "Parsi"originof RustomBharuchashouldin-
duce Mr. Lutgendorf to brandhiman "Inside-Outsider" in sucha queru-
lous manner.I can assureMr. Lutgendorfthatthereare quite a few
insidersof Hindu and Moslemoriginin India (someof themmighthave

This content downloaded from 188.72.126.181 on Wed, 18 Jun 2014 19:15:32 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions