Theatre Design & Technology - Spring 1980 - 22

and its people.---J.M.B.] Achim Freyer constructed two rooms
for the exhibit, one growing out of his design for Bernhard's
Kant, the other devoted to Heinrich von Kleist. The Kant room
is white, the "Monument to Kleist," previously exhibited in the
lobby of the Staatstheater Stuttgart during a production of Oas
KcHhchen von Heilbronn , is black.
The form of the exhibition, these configurations, was not
dreamed up by the West German organizers as a provocative
alternative to the conventional presentation of models, renderings, and photographs, but grew naturally out of the ongoing
work of the participating designers. In West Germany today,
many designers tend not to create settings for plays, based on
the demands of the script, director, and actors, but instead
built, or find RcIume (spaces) based on their personal encounter with the script. The rooms built for the Quadrennial
exhibition represent the extension of this approach to the
arena of a design exhibition. In discussing this trend in West
German design, Fiebelkorn speaks of the "emancipation" of
the designer, though here the emancipation is of a much different sort than that described earlier by Dieckmann in West
Germany. Fiebelkorn writes:
The precondition for the form of this exhibition is the
emancipation of the scenic composer. That is to say, the
designers have more and more transformed themselves
into self-assertive counterparts to the directors. In their
working process, the artists do not produce stage designs as such, but instead place their Raume and scenery in relation to the corresponding event.'3
In East Germany, the designer has been emancipated from
his role as decorator, making it possible for him to play a
stronger role in determining the total stage composition of actors and scenery. In West Germany, the designer has been
emancipated from his subordinate role to the director (and author). Now his images, ideas, and inspirations are presented
in less altered form, less restrained by the practical demands
usually made by the director and actors. The design interpretation may now stand as one reaction to the text, while the
work of the director with the actors may present an alternative
view. Not surprisingly, the emancipation of the stage designer
has led to a more collective approach to production in the
East, while it has generated more individual, sometimes egoistic roles for designers and directors in West Germany.
Certainly not all designers in the Federal Republic fit this
description. Fiebelkorn makes it clear in his essay that the
focus of the exhibition is, of necessity, limited and not representative of all design in West Germany. Nevertheless, the exhibited work correctly suggests the strong, growing tendency
among West German designers to emphasize the "art" in
their work. Rudi Seitz writes in the catalog that the young designers have "now defined the stage space as an artspace. "14 Several designers are active as artists outside the
theatre-Achim Freyer exhibited a Raume at the Documenta
Exhibition in Kassel in 1977, and Erich Wonder this season
put together a performance entitled "Rosebud" in Dusseldorf.
For many, designing is only one part of their work as artists.
Freyer said recently, "I don't want to make theatre or to paint.
I want to make art, and I'm not afraid of that word."'5
The roots of these new art-oriented, spatial designs lie both
in a general reaction against the spare, cool, rational design
ideas of Brecht, and in a tendency by younger designers to
look to the world of contemporary American art for stimulation. Anyone familiar with contemporary American art can see
several influences at work in the West German exhibition: Edward Kienholz, George Segal, Duane Hanson, environmental
sculpture, Art Performances, just to list a few. But perhaps the
most significant influence from the arts, and certainly the most
difficult to pin down, is that of the German artist Joseph
Beuys. Virtually unknown in the US, Beuys' work, especially
his Aktions (a variant of Happenings and Art Performance),

have attracted wide attention in Europe and led to Beuys'
standing as the most prominent postwar German artist. In
homage to Beuys, photographs of several of his Aktions were
displayed in Prague.
The West German exhibit was both the most daring and the
most difficult to comprehend of all the contributions to this
year's Quadrennial. Part of the difficulty in understanding lies
in the very German focus of the exhibit. The configurations
were based exclusively on German source material, such as
the work of Kleist, Holderlin, Bernhard, texts not widely known
even to well-read Germans, not to mention the Japanese or
American viewer of the exhibition. The catalog contained excellent commentary that would have aided the viewer in understanding what he was seeing, but it was only published in
German. The inaccessibility of the exhibition to the international visitor is indicative, I think, of the problems West German audiences have had with some of the productions documented. Not all theatregoers have warmed to these new
designs and production approaches. As Fiebelkorn points out,
the emancipation of the designer presumes the emancipation
of the audience as well. There is a real danger that productions of this sort become "elitist events for specialists and the
initiated," and the production "meets with confusion and misunderstanding on the part of the audience."'6
With that said, I must quickly emphasize that Jan Fiebelkorn and Helmut Grosser deserve great credit for facing the
problem head on of how to exhibit the work of designers when
the conventional forms used for documenting design are no
longer accepted by the leading designers. Many may rightly
wonder whether other national exhibits actually represented
the new developments in design in the last four years, but
there is no question that the West German exhibit showed
clearly and theatrically the new directions and the immense
freedom in West German design. Whether you agree or disagree with the results, the adventurous spirit and vision of
these designers is impressive.

Notes
1. Friedrich Dieckmann, "Zur EinfOhrung," in 80hnenbildner der
Deutschen Demokratischen Repubtik. Arbeiten aus den Jahren 19711977. edited by Friedrich Dieckmann in conjunction with the Sektion
DDR der Internationalen Organisation der BOhnenbildner und Theatertechniker (OISTIl, Berlin (East), 1978, p.8. [NOTE: All translations
are by the author.)
2. Ibid., p.9
3. Ibid.
4. Quoting from an official Quadrennial communication: "According
to the PQ Statute, only designs which have been implemented and are
documented either by photos, slides, or other records of a performance will be accepted." [Prof. Riddell has evidence for his assertion
concerning the seeming non-production of King 8amba and Medea;
specifically, comments in the GDR Catalog for the exhibit, and from a
review of the PQ in a Frankfurt newspaper. It is a matter that needs
c1arification.--J.M.B.)
5. Dieckmann, "Zur EinfOhrung," p. 12.
6. Ibid., p. 13.
7. Friedrich Dieckmann, "Zum Geleit," from the GDR handbill "IV.
Prager Quadriennale: Beitrag der Deutschen Demokratischen Republik," distributed at the Prague Quadrennial, 1979.
8. Dieckmann, "Zur EinfOhrung," p. 15.
9. Jan Fiebelkorn, "Konzept und Entstehung des Beitrages der Bundesrepublik Deutschland zur Prager Quadriennale 1979," in
Konfigurationen. Einbticke in das Theatergeschehen der 8undesrepubtik Deufschland 1976-1979, edited by the Deutsche Theatertechnische Gesellschaft, e.V., Hamburg, 1979, p.5.
10. Ibid.
11. Konfigurationen, p.32.
12. Ibid. p. 37.
13. Fiebelkorn, "Konzept und Entstehung, p. 5.
14. Rudi Seitz, "Anmerkung," handbill distributed by the Federal Republic of Germany at the Prague Quadrennial, 1979.
15. Interview with Achim Freyer, Kadettenweg 53, Berlin (West), 19
December 1978.
16. Fiebelkorn, "Konzept und Entstehung," p. 6.0

Richard Riddell teaches in the department of drama at the University of California, San Diego.

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of Theatre Design & Technology - Spring 1980