Bertolt Brecht’s concept of his “alienation effect” was designed to stop audiences at plays from becoming completely emotionally absorbed in a play. Instead of losing themselves in the story, Brecht wanted the viewers to remain aware that they were watching a performance. He didn’t want the audiences to enjoy his stories, he wanted them to think critically about the political and social issues being presented. On Saturday we saw The Globe’s production of Mother Courage and Her Children, which I think succeeds in using Brecht’s alienation tactics. But at the same time, it also allows more modern moments of emotional connection. As a huge fan of Brecht I found this balance ultimately strengthened the play’s message about war and survival!
One of the clearest ways the Globe production creates alienation is through its staging and performance style. The actors often addressed us in the audience directly, breaking the fourth wall and reminding us that the events on stage are constructed. The addition of songs are also used in a distinctly Brechtian way! Instead of deepening emotion like in a musical, the songs were loud and sometimes jarring, interrupting dramatic tension and forcing the audience to reflect on the meaning of what had just happened. For example, after tragic events, the music can feel unsettling or ironic, preventing the audience from becoming fully swept up in sympathy. (except at the very end that was so beautiful.)
The production also uses visible theatricality to distance viewers from the characters. At the Globe props and stage mechanics like the “dead bodies” rolling away were often intentionally obvious. This openness draws attention to the performance itself rather than creating a realistic illusion. By keeping the audience aware of the actors and staging, the production makes viewers analyze every decision.
Another important distancing technique is the portrayal of Mother Courage herself. Although she is a sympathetic character in many ways, we were repeatedly confronted with her moral contradictions. She profits from war even as it destroys her children. Rather than presenting her as a tragic hero in the traditional sense, the production encourages viewers to question her actions and the social system that shapes them. This created a lot of emotional tension: I felt so so bad for her losses, but I also recognized her complicity in the cycle of violence and profit that caused them.
However, the Globe’s production did not completely prevent emotional immersion. Some scenes, especially those involving the deaths of the children, were deeply moving. The audience can still feel grief and compassion. In fact, I think this emotional engagement may make the political message more powerful. If the production were entirely detached in true Brecht-style, viewers might not fully understand the human cost of war. The emotional moments gave such a good weight to the critical analysis Brecht wanted audiences to question.
Because of this balance, I did not think at all that the play was less successful at conveying its message. Instead, the combination of emotion and alienation makes the production more effective. The audience is emotionally affected by the suffering on stage, but they are also encouraged to step back and ask why that suffering occurs. Brecht’s goal was never to get rid of emotion completely; he wanted the emotions to lead to thought and social awareness instead of entertainment. The Globe’s production achieves this by making viewers both feel for Mother Courage and critically examine the world that produces her tragedy.
I absolutely loved The Globe’s Mother Courage and found that rather than weakening the play’s message, the balance between emotion and distance ultimately deepened its impact!
Theatre in London U of A 