Heiner Müller's Democratic Theater

Analyzes not just Müller's texts but also the theatrical events that emerged from them, showing that from the beginning of his career Müller tried to create democracy both within and outside the theater.



The East German playwright Heiner Müller (1929-1995) is one of the most influential European dramatists and theater directors since Brecht. While critical literature on Müller often discusses the politics of his works, analysis tends to stop at the level of the text, neglecting the theatrical events that emerge from it and the audiences for which it was written and performed. Situating his study within Müller's interests in democracy and audience activity,Michael Wood addresses these gaps in scholarship, making an original contribution to the understanding of Müller's work as playwright and director.
In 1985, Müller spoke of the importance of a "democratic" theater: one thatconfronts theatergoers with densely contradictory material that they must interpret for themselves, reflecting the complexity of material reality and encouraging them to question their participation in political life. Wood's studyshows that Müller sought to do this in his combined 1988 production of Der Lohndrücker, Der Horatier, and Wolokolamsker Chaussee IV: Kentauren, staged at a time when questions of democracy were at the forefront of East German consciousness. It also demonstrates that from the beginning of his career Müller tried to make theater that would create a form of democracy both within and outside the theater.

Michael Wood is a British Academy Postdoctoral Fellow at the University of Edinburgh, where he received his PhD in 2014.

Wood's conclusion is that M. had a radical concept of democracy in mind that could not be reconciled with either the SED system or the Western, liberal understanding of democracy, and that this concept remained stable until the author's death. A democratic theater, he argues, is one that arises from dissent and by way of conflicts provokes different reactions from the audience. Here Wood shows the difference between M. and Brecht, for M.'s conception of a democratic theater from which a democratic audience emerges is merely a utopian wish, a striving for the impossible, which is the proper task of art. Wood's study is recommended as a good introduction to M.'s theatrical theory and practice. --- Michael Wood's timely new study of Heiner Müller offers an incisive view into the work of East Germany's most famous dramaturge. --- [G]lean[s] valuable critical insight from meticulous archival work. . . . Like Müller says of his own theatrical practice, 'Es wird ein Prozeß vorgeführt, nicht ein Resultat abgeliefert,' . . . Wood's scholarship . . . makes its notable contribution to Müller studies, in which 'a process is shown rather than a result delivered. --- Wood's investigation usefully foregrounds Müller's interest in democratic processes in which he wanted his audiences to be actively involved. --- [C]ompelling and well-executed . . . . Wood's study succeeds admirably in fulfilling [its] goals . . . . Indeed, it is especially notable for successfully juggling the empirical and the theoretical aspects of audience response. . . . [T]hrough this excellent work, we glimpse a positive vision of the 'democratic socialism' in Müller's oeuvre that outlives the circumstances of its conception. --- [V]ery clearly structured and written . . . . [M]akes a clear case for Müller's understanding of reception as a democratic force. --- Michael Wood's monograph provides an excellent investigation of Heiner Mueller's pursuit of effective political theater. . . . By directing readers' attention to the social basis of human character and shifting boundaries of collective experience and action, Wood's monograph proves particularly timely as it reminds readers that the production and reception of art can and should have social and political consequences. --- [O]ffers new perspectives and compelling arguments on Müller's work and its social-historical position. The book will therefore be of interest and critical value to scholars of Heiner Müller, German theater, the GDR, and divided Germany. While the extensive archival research alone provides a wealth of new materials, . . . Wood's rigorous interdisciplinarity and his careful work at the intersection of drama and theater studies also make the book important for scholars in cultural and theater studies more broadly. --- Wood . . . reconstructs several important earlier productions of Lohndrücker and Horatier by other directors, using them as foils to demonstrate the importance and impact of Müller's artistic choices in 1988. . . . [The author's assiduous archival sleuthing] represents exemplary dramaturgical scholarship, a valuable body of reliable background information assembled to preserve and illuminate an ephemeral theatre event whose enduring scholarly interest [he] makes clear.