Do3 - Brand

[french frank]

At 9.30pm next week - 16 October.

Gerard Murphy in the part of Brand and Morven Christie as Agnes: "Henrik Ibsen's study of a religious zealot who refuses to compromise, leading him to risk catastrophe for himself and his family. Faced with possible tragedy for his loved ones, will he persist with his absolutism?"

[aeolium]

I saw a staged performance of this play back in the 80s - it was unbelievably harsh and gloomy. I've always admired Gerard Murphy on both screen and radio, so I'll look forward to hearing this. They could also have had The Enemy Of The People as one of their 'conviction' plays, though I think they are wary of producing this play today because of the extreme nature of some of Dr Stockmann's views.

I'm afraid I can't be bothered to catch up with St Joan - I had to study this play at school and it put me off it for life

[french frank]

They could also have had The Enemy Of The People as one of their 'conviction' plays, though I think they are wary of producing this play today because of the extreme nature of some of Dr Stockmann's views.

Probably why the Do3 version of 2008 set the play in Belfast!

[aeolium]

Please don't remind me of that awful production, ff Why didn't Martin Lynch write his own play rather than messing about with Ibsen's?

Actually, it wasn't just the BBC that was bothered about the content of Ibsen's play - Arthur Miller's 1950s translation also edited out some of Stockmann's fiercest comments. I'd be surprised if an unexpurgated version were performed anywhere these days.

[aeolium]

Did anyone else hear last Sunday's production? I thought that while it was a brave endeavour to broadcast one of Ibsen's more uncompromising and demanding works, this production fell short, not least in conveying the poetic wildness of the play. Part of the problem was the decision to use Michael Meyer's prose translation for a verse-drama. We have had a few verse-dramas on R3 this year, but I think Brand really cries out for a verse rather than a prose rendering - otherwise we are left with rather flat language and the dour progress of a near-fanatical puritanism. The poetry also is an accompaniment to the wild landscape in which the play is set.

As to the performance of the cast, the play is so dominated by the title character that it partly stands and falls by his performance. I didn't think Gerard Murphy quite convinced in this role; he lacked the formidable and unflinching harshness which the role demands (after all, this is someone who as a priest refuses to give his mother blessing on her deathbed, and sacrifices both wife and child). The Mayor incidentally is surely a forerunner of that other hidebound bureaucrat Peter Stockmann in The Enemy of the People.

I'm not sure whether Ibsen had anyone as a model for Brand - Kierkegaard has been mentioned, though perhaps something of Schopenhauer also with his emphasis on the will. The closest Brand-like figure of modern times may have been R S Thomas, also a fiercely uncompromising priest.

Here is an e-text verse translation of Brand, done in the late C19, and with an interesting introduction to the work. Although it is not that easy to read, I think it gives a better sense of the grandeur and ambition of Ibsen's creation than Meyer's prosaic rendering.

I am going to listen again to see whether I missed some of the better aspects of the production. But well done to R3 for broadcasting it anyway.

[french frank]

I don't know the play well, but will leave the verse translation until after I've listened to avoid getting the same impression as you of the prose text. If I had to describe what R3 should be about, I'd say it was to be allowed to attempt and fall short. This educates in all sorts of ways. Of course, two hours isn't for those with the alleged 'short attention spans' ...

[Russ]

Sorry; I wasn't informed, educated or entertained. In fact, I was bored. This was deadly dour. Maybe my encounter with it at school didn't help! What a tiresome play.

Russ

[french frank]

The thing that came home to me was the constant 'possibility' of poetry, even though it was in a prose translation. This isn't Hedda Gabler, The Wild Duck or John Gabriel Borkman (nor, indeed, The Seagull, The Cherry Orchard or The Three Sisters, since I put (later) Ibsen and Chekhov in a similar category of dramatist). It seems to be rooted in something otherwordly - like Peer Gynt, another play written in verse.

I wonder what the difference is between 'conviction' and 'fanaticism'? Brand is a fanatic ('All or nothing') and not really one who arouses any sort of sympathy or admiration: he doesn't live in the real world. I can't quite put my finger on it, but the play has something of the grotesqueness of Nordic literature (more obvious in PG).

I wasn't bored and thought Gerard Murphy's performance held up quite well, but have no benchmark performance to compare it with. I'm inclined to give it another listen to see what other thoughts occur, since I confess I can't come up with much after a single hearing

[aeolium]

like Peer Gynt, another play written in verse.

Yes, that comparison had struck me once or twice when listening to it - almost the obverse of Peer Gynt, who is something of a free spirit unlike Brand who is driven by the sense of his calling. But both end up as exiles from their communities. Ibsen, though, stated that Peer Gynt (the play) bore no resemblance to Brand.

I saw quite an impressive (though depressing) performance a long time ago though I can't remember who the actor was. I think the role would have suited someone like Paul Schofield or John Wood.

I have never heard or seen a performance using a verse translation. It seems to me it would improve the flow of the work and prevent it from getting bogged down, as seemed to happen from time to time in this production.

It's undoubtedly a tough listen, but imo it's good to have a play that takes us into a different way of thinking about the world, rather than one which appears superficially closer to our own way of thinking ('relevant').

[Stanley Stewart]

You've certainly put my memory buds to the test, aeolium, as to whom you saw in the role of Brand. I certainly would have travelled far to see Paul Scofield in the title part as I have vivid memories of his John Gabriel Borkman at the RNT, circa 1995 with Vanessa Redgrave and Eileen Atkins and, sadly, Michael Bryant in his last stage appearance. Indeed, in 1978 this great character actor also played Brand at the RNT where the wide open space of the Olivier stage provided a suitable setting for Norwegian Fiord and a bleak landscape for Act 3.

However, my first memory of this complex play was in 1959 at the Lyric Opera House, Hammersmith during my first year of full-time residence in London, although I already knew the old theatre well during visits to the capital, starting with my stint of National Service in the early 50s. It was always a good base to see 'theatre' in an age when there was no NT or RSC.

The radio production in 'the two hours traffic of our stage' fell flat for me and, although always grateful for Drama on 3 - long may it thrive and have the right to fail - it also requires an actor capable of 'high definition performance' - as well as a physical setting with a sense of space for the narrative to evolve. Brought together, the heightened tension of the avalanche provides an overwhelming experience.

Patrick McGoohan played Brand at Hammersmith and his volatile temperament became legendary; on Sunday afternoon my curiosity got the better of me and I decided to refresh my memory of the production and, indeed, several memorable visits throughout the 50s. All this was several decades before the theatre was renovated with its frontage re-sited to the High Street, instead of being tucked away in a side street. My first visit was in 1953 - best seats little more than a few bob - for a John Gielgud season, as director and actor in three productions; "The Way of the World", "Venice Preserv'd" and "Richard II" (Paul Scofield); and a company of luminaries which included Pamela Brown, Eileen Herlie, Eric Porter, Margaret Rutherford (a delicious Lady Wishfort) and Herbert Lomas. I digress, excuse me!

In thinking about the 1959 production of "Brand", I found the information I was seeking in Michael Meyer's memoirs, "Not Prince Hamlet" (Secker & Warburg, 1989) - VERY pricey now, on Amazon, although they also advertise paperback copies 'as new' or 'used' at attractive prices. Meyer devotes a chapter to his translation of "Brand" with a background history as to how theatre director, Casper Wrede, together with impresario James Lawrie, took a huge risk and booked the Lyric, Hammersmith, for a five-month season; Meyer was also invited to translate Strindberg's "Creditors" and Michael Elliott - just starting out - would direct "Brand" which hadn't been professionally seen in Britain, except for a solitary Sunday-night performance in 1912, presumably in Wm Archer's Victorian translation. Meyer was uneasy as Ibsen had written it as early as 1865, to be read, not acted, and in intricately rhymed verse; the first performance in 1885 had lasted for six and a half hours! He was also aware that he couldn't translate such a powerful but intractable text and rhymed verse in English is death to any staged dialogue, except comedy. He had five weeks for his translation, cutting as he went. He began by putting it into prose - "dreadful" - and then opted for blank verse which proved to be turgid.

Casting around, he thought of TS Eliot's "The Family Reunion" and the form he had used of a free verse, bordering on parody, which permitted a fluency to move between comedy and high tragedy. TS Eliot proscribed that the audience should not be conscious that they were listening to poetry. Meyer completed a draft of each act per week and, line by line, went through it with Michael Elliott, he with the translation on his knee as Meyer read Ibsen's text.

Meanwhile, the season opened with Buchner's, "Danton's Death", Patrick Wymark (Danton) and Patrick McGoohan (St Just). Initially, he rejected the role of Brand and it was offered to John Neville and Ian Bannen but McGoohan relented and accepted the role. Wrede followed with Mai Zetterling in 'Creditors' but unseasonal weather also hit the box office with little local support. Brand also had the advantage of Richard Negri as designer and the key role of lighting designer was given to a young stage manager, Richard Pilbrow, as his first commission. He quickly established his reputation among the best in the West End and this was also matched by an ambitious sound scheme with storms at sea through to the avalanche. Later, the RNT created a huge sense of space but, somehow, it also worked against the compressed intensity of the effects and lighting at Hammersmith which I still remember.

The opening night at the Lyric was an actor's nightmare - no such things as Previews in 1959 - but, fortunately, the Press Night wasn't held until the second performance. The production was timed for two and a half hours but delays and technical setbacks ensured that the final curtain didn't fall until 1.30am! The following day was used for technical adjustments and there was no time for a full dress rehearsal, including cuts. Elliott was convinced that the evening would be a failure. He wrote:

"...Then came the fifth act. Ibsen was a master of the final act, but he never wrote a greater one than in Brand.
When the villagers who have followed Brand up the mountain turn on him and stone him, McGoohan suddenly
unleashed all his terrifying power, and from then until the final moments, when the gipsy Gerd fires her rifle at
the supposed hawk and brings down the avalanche on them, the audience was gripped as seldom happens in a
theatre. Michael had devised a marvellously simple yet effective method of suggesting the avalanche. The
rifle-shot evoked a distant boom, the pale sun behind the gauze began slowly to contract and distend like a
human heart, the darkness and the roar intensified until, following Brand's cry: 'If not by Will, how shall Man be
redeemed?', there was sudden silence, the invisible ghost of Agnes replied: 'He is the God of Love', the avalanche
descended with redoubled force and the curtain descended with it. The audience roared and cheered; never have
I ever heard a reception to equal that.'

Over the 50s, I'd rate this production and McGoohan's performance; Wolfit's Lear and Tamburlaine; and Michael
Redgrave in "Winter Journey" (aka "The Country Wife") amongst the most electric acting I've ever seen in a theatre.
Astonishing and wonderful memories for me.

[french frank]

Thanks, Stanley, particularly for the comments about Meyer's translation. But another not hugely impressed listener to Sunday's version?

I think this must be a very difficult play to bring off, and like you and aeolium I'm grateful for Do3's attempt.

[aeolium]

Many thanks for those memories, Stanley. Michael Elliott seems to have been an inspirational director.

As to your comment about 'rhymed verse in English is death to any staged dialogue', do you think that also holds for a radio production?

Incidentally, the production with Patrick McGoohan that you recall seems to have been made into a filmed version and is on DVD:

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Brand-DVD-Patrick-McGoohan/dp/B00009WVYP/ref=sr_1_1?s=dvd&ie=UTF8&qid=1319040033&sr=1-1

[Stanley Stewart]

Thank you, ff . Fast-forward a decade from the 59 Theatre Company at Hammersmith when Caspar Wrede, Michael Elliott (following periods at the Old Vic and RSC,( including a magical "As You Like It with Vanessa Redgrave as Rosalind) and Braham Murray, all joined forces at Manchester to establish Theatre 69. Gradually, the company took over the newly built Royal Exchange Theatre and became one of the best "rep" theatres in the country. Michael Elliott died in 1984, at 53 years of age. Braham Murray in his autobiography, 'The Worst It Can Be Is A Disaster', (methuen drama, 2007), wrote, in tribute; " Michael combined technical mastery with brilliant visual sense, together with the ability to penetrate to the heart of the most resistant text, and the gift of extracting the best from everyone he worked with." A rare accolade, I can still visualise the closed community in the Norwegian fjords and the sense of vastness in the open space of the last act on a tiny stage.

The text may have been edited for D on 3 and I felt that the play, like any of Eugene O'Neill's marathon works, needs time to build a feeling of gradual accumulative power. I always feel, in the first half-hour of, say, "Mourning Becomes Electra" or "Long Day's Journey Into Night" that it will, indeed, become interminable but the early longueurs are soon replaced by a feeling of timelessness as the narrative takes over. The magic of the theatre.

Delighted to hear about the DVD, aeolium. There will be room on my Christmas wishlist for this - just!

[Mandryka]

I didn't listen to the production (for reasons partly outlined below), but a few points need to be made.

In An Enemy Of The People, Ibsen deliberately undermines Thomas Stockmann by making him a bit of a fool as well as a wise man: the fact that he ends up - largely out of frustration - declaring that 'the majority is always wrong' reflects the temperament of the man who has painted himself into a corner. We AREN'T MEANT to agree with his extreme views and we AREN'T MEANT to admire him.

Ibsen wrote Brand as a 'chamber play - ie, a play to be read rather than performed. I recall reading a splendid verse translation once (by David Rudkin, perhaps?) and don't feel the need to see it in the theatre: the television version of the McGoohan/Elliott production is serviceable but doesn't do the play justice; and Brand does - in performance - come across as a deeply unsympathetic character. The best English version of Peer Gynt is that of Christopher Fry.

Finally, Michael Bryant was still treading the NT's boards in 1999, which is when I saw him in Gorky's Summerfolk; he may even have been in things after that. He died in 2002, I believe.

[aeolium]

In An Enemy Of The People, Ibsen deliberately undermines Thomas Stockmann by making him a bit of a fool as well as a wise man: the fact that he ends up - largely out of frustration - declaring that 'the majority is always wrong' reflects the temperament of the man who has painted himself into a corner. We AREN'T MEANT to agree with his extreme views and we AREN'T MEANT to admire him.

I'm not sure I agree with that. Everything we know about Ibsen's own opinions, and the circumstances leading up to the writing of An Enemy of the People suggests that Ibsen had a lot of sympathy for the strong views expressed by Dr Stockmann, even if he may have exaggerated them for effect. The loathing of party and majority opinion which Dr Stockmann expresses in the play were sentiments shared by Ibsen - Liberalism he considered to be the enemy of freedom.

A number of circumstances may well have conspired to prompt Ibsen to write a play in which these views are given a powerful spokesman. His own play Ghosts had been given a bad reception by the press in 1881. Some real-life incidents reported to Ibsen - an anecdote about a spa doctor who had been persecuted by his fellow-townsmen for reporting a local case of cholera, and an incident in which a chemist called Thaulow was prevented at a public meeting from reading his indictment of the management of the Christiana Steam Kitchens - provided the kernel of the plot for An Enemy. And the central character, Dr Stockmann, may in personality at least have been drawn from Ibsen's great friend Bjørnstjerne Bjørnson. In the play, several of Ibsen's bêtes noires, a mayor, a newpaper editor, a (drunken) journalist and a newspaper printer are made the butt of Dr Stockmann's scorn as they turn against him (and I don't think it can possibly be argued that we are supposed to admire or sympathise with any of these characters).

Dr Stockmann's views in the play are extreme, and would have been so even at the time it was first performed, but I don't think they are presented like that to make him appear a fool but to rile the critics and the audience that had turned on his earlier play.