“Mother Courage and Her Children” was quite an interesting way to spend an afternoon. The play was wonderful, but the fact that it was the hottest day yet, in an outdoor theatre, and we had to stand the entire show, made the play’s intense subject matter feel even more intense. While it was hot and uncomfortable at times, being a groundling at Shakespeare’s Globe was a very special and unique experience that I will cherish.
In terms of the content of the show, the play follows a woman known as Mother Courage and her three children during the 30 Years’ War in central Europe. Mother Courage makes a living selling wartime supplies out of a canteen wagon, and she enlists her children to help her with her endeavors. Throughout the course of the show all three children get involved with the war in different ways and die. The show is a commentary on the tragedy and horror of war, and the social and political systems that create it.
In Brecht’s writing he liked to use the alienation effect. This is the attempt to distance the audience from a state of pure catharsis, and instead make them examine the work through a critical lens that gets them thinking about the larger themes of the piece. Mother Courage definitely succeeded in having this effect on me. At first I thought that the play did make me achieve a state of catharsis, but after further examining my feelings on the play, it did have more of a cerebral effect than an emotional one on me.
I believe that the key thing that Brecht does in this play specifically to achieve this effect is making Mother Courage an incredibly complex character. If Brecht wanted the viewer to simply feel the tragedies of war in an emotional way, he would’ve made Mother Courage an innocent actor in the world of the story. The audience would’ve watched horrible things happen to a loving mother and felt horrible for her. This isn’t the case though, Mother Courage has many flaws. One of these flaws is the fact that she uses the system that the audience is meant to despise for her own advantage. She views war as potential for business. While her part is small, she is contributing to the war, and that same war ends up killing her children. She also sometimes looks out for her own personal gain over other peoples. For example, when Swiss Cheese is being sentenced to death, she doesn’t immediately offer all the money she has to let him free. This financial decision could’ve been the difference between life and death for her son. These flaws are what make the story cerebral. It makes the viewer question how someone could act that way towards their own children, and asks the viewer whether they could get to that place themselves. While she does have flaws, in the end the audience does empathize with her situation and feel bad for her.
Another thing that this production in particular did to break the audience out of the story was having a lot of audience interaction. This choice was very intentional, and it made it so the audience never forgot that they were watching a play. Everytime that I would start to forget the theatricality of the piece, the actors would come out and talk directly to the audience. This choice made me examine the metatheatricality of it all, which kept my mind from being sucked entirely into the story.
Overall, it was a great production with wonderful performances. Michelle Terry was an absolute powerhouse, and the production made me excited to see “A Midsummer Night’s Dream” at the Globe later this trip.
Cheers,
Thatcher
Theatre in London U of A 