1989年11月,国际布莱希特学术研讨会在新加坡歌德学院举行。我当时正在新加坡讲学,被大会顺手逮住并要求作重点报告。黄佐临先生则是专程从上海邀去的。这是我以一个通宵匆匆赶写出来的报告稿。我想以一个中国学人的眼光,清理一下布莱希特的戏剧哲学在近几十年间被衍伸、被反拨、乃至被部分扬弃的逻辑过程。布莱希特一旦被推入这一过程,他也就成了一种历史现象,唯其如此,他的历史贡献也就获得了应有的定位。这项工作据我所知还很少有人深入做过。近几十年间西方戏剧思潮频繁更迭、复杂多变,要探取其演变的主要逻辑线索就必须超越现象界而进入精神内核,而精神内核总是质朴而简约的。为了达到这一点,我的思考只以阿尔托、格洛托夫斯基、彼得·布鲁克、贝克特、理查·谢克纳这些最具有哲学思维水准的第一流戏剧大师与布莱希特的关系为重点,而不旁涉繁多。因为我相信,作为现象界的戏剧流派可以琳琅满目,而作为戏剧哲学的真正流变只以为数有限的星座为轨迹。深邃的内层总是比较冷清的。当然这样做也有一个无可奈何的原因:客旅异邦,连起码的一些参考书也没有带在身边。因此,这其实只是一个“印象派”的报告,是我多次从布莱希特的肩上看过去,看到他身后的总体景象所留下的一些感悟,自然是带有很大主观色彩的。报告稿已刊于歌德学院编印的会议文件中。包括黄佐临先生在内的各国专家都希望我能尽快将它公开发表,而我则希望能有时间充实修整一下。但可悲的是,拖延至今仍一字未改,而且险些把稿子也弄丢了。那就照原样先发一下吧,也好听听朋友们的意见。在此,我要特别感谢新加坡实践艺术学院的艺术总监、新加坡国家文化奖的获得者郭宝昆先生,是他几次三番催促我写出这个稿子,并在我作报告的前一天用一泻如注的英语向各国与会者作了热情洋溢的预告,使我在报告时不至于太惊慌失措,实际所讲的内容要比写在下面的文字多得多了。 In November 1989, the International Brecht Symposium was held at Goethe-Institut Singapore. I was teaching in Singapore at that time and I was caught by the General Assembly and asked for a key report. Mr. Huang Zuolin is a special trip from Shanghai invited. This is my report written out in a hurry overnight. I would like to use the eyes of a Chinese learner to clean up the logic of Brecht’s dramatic philosophy that has been extended, reversed, and even partially abandoned in recent decades. Once Brecht was pushed into this process, he also became a historical phenomenon. Only in this way, his historical contribution gained its due position. As far as I know, very few people have done this work in depth. In recent decades, the trend of western drama has been changing frequently and complicated. The main logical clue to explore its evolution must go beyond the phenomenal world and enter the spiritual kernel, which is always simple and simple. In order to achieve this, my thinking is based solely on the most philosophical first-class theatrical masters and Brecht with Artol, Grotowski, Peter Brooke, Beckett, and Richard Sechner The relationship is the focus, not the many others. Because I believe that the genre of theatrical scene as a phenomenal world can be richly endowed, and the true evolution as the philosophy of theater takes only a limited number of constellations as its tracks. Deep inside is always relatively deserted. Of course, there is a helpless way to do so: travelers alien, and even some of the reference books are not brought around. Therefore, this is actually just an “impressionist” report, which I read from Brecht’s shoulders on many occasions and saw some of the sentiments left behind by the overall picture behind him. Of course, it is naturally very subjective . The report has been published in the meeting document compiled by Goethe-Institut Experts from all countries, including Mr. Huang Zuo-lin, hope that I can make it public as soon as possible, and I hope to have time to enrich and refine it. Sadly, however, the delay is still unwritten, and almost the manuscript has also been lost. Then make the same first look, or listen to the views of friends. I would like to pay special tribute to the artistic director of the Singapore Institute of Practical Arts, Mr. Guo Baokun, the recipient of the Singapore National Culture Prize, for urging me to write this manuscript a few times in a row, The enthusiastic forenotice to all the participants in various countries made me not too alarmed at the time of the report, but the actual content was much more pronounced than the one written below.