Fifteen
million people's theatre
24th
Januray 2013
Fifteen
million people's theatre will be led by Attila Vidnyánszky if he adheres to his
word.
Boróka
Parászka's writing.
There
is a serious illness in every side of policy: sensationalizing by numbers,
arithmetic extension or narrowing of the nation. Keeping track of who is part
of the nation and who is not - is not feasible because it costs more than
millions. Strategic question: who is hungarian and who is not in Hungary
nowadays. This aspiration can be seen in Transylvania but can not be understood
and liveable. A politically narrow-minded prime minister or an under-educated
politician can afford a number of war but not a theatre director with cultural
performance. Not, because national culture, theatrical culture and
national-theatrical culture do not work this way. Limits are much more fluid,
possibilities are much wider. This would be enoug if a theatre would be the
leading theatre of Hungary which could represent hungarian culture for many
million people from middle-Eastern Europe. It would be important to pay
attention to Budapest from Bukarest and Bratislava. This a success which the
hungarian diplomacy has been unable to do for many years. Attractive idea that
Attila Vidnyánszky described earlier: every third performance in National
Theatre will be played countryside or beyond the borders. But we have to add
(from beyond the borders) neither the countryside nor the border is not
self-value. It is very insulting to be the part of the quote and become an
alibi. What does the 'cross-border' theatre want to see, want to let be seen
and how? Do they see where are the boundaries and connections of hungarian
theatre at all? These are the questions which are not answered by Attila
Vidnyánszky who talks about and refers to 'cross-border'.
The
theatre has been looking for the borders and border crossings in Transylvania.
They live on it. How could a fifteen million people's theatre deal with
Transylvanian Hungarian contemporary culture which does not forget - because
they must not - forget about many million Romanian people's culture. The
hungarian theatrical life is much more intertwined than it could be
disassembled or separated or closed into ghetto. Actors and directors are
coming and leaving. They rather come (here to Romania) than they go (there to
Hungary). The number of cultural and professional refugees is increasing.
Artists from Budapest are much more accessible and affordable than people from
Bucharest. There we are Hungarian theatre has to move to (by force) to Romania
and not a Romanian Hungarian person is entertained, brought to Budapest. This
is a kind of situation which Attila Vidnyánszky has to explain now. Why do they
flee, from who do they flee who flee. What does Attila Vidnyánszky do for
stopping this preventing the run-off and drop-out to create a new, viable
Middle-East European infrastructure?
What
Attila did until this time, his program, his ideas are not attractive and
credible. Attila Vidnyánszky was appointed ignoring the opinion of cross-border
profession. Despite the new director promised to change the program and enrich
the repertoire with rural and cross-border productions he went against them.
Well, no wonder that more and more people lined up behind Robert Alföldi: the
kind of contemorary culture which is mentioned by many people is strategically
important to keep hungarian theatre and it is close to the attitude of the
leaving director. We know other way is also possible not sure that it is worth
to mention.
In
the spirit of national unity the kind of cross-border knowledge is neglected.
It can be neglected. It is the logic of power. But they ought to account for
why at least culturally. To sign that Attila Vidnyánszky recognized the
resolutions, understood the arguements and he will form his strategy aware of
this. He opens but does not close. Just to avoid saying contradictions when he
explains his appointment as the success of cross-border acting.
If
everything continues as before, the distances are going to increase,conflicts
are going to deepen, the hungarian theatrical profession is going to be
separated internationally. (From outside this 'provincialisation' is very
striking and depressing.) Then there will be guest performances in Budapest
vainly, the National Theatre's production will travel vainly. There will be not
more than national 'navel watching'. 'Cross-borderity' will not be more than an
uncomfortable and annoying punch for us which the current director will exploit
and abuse.
And
if this continues further it also happens that 'otherwise rage coming'. An
alternative National Theatre outside the country can be a salvage to hungarian
culture. And they will do what here we could not do. Here where there is not
sufficient will, knowledge and professional honesty.
writer: Boróka Parászka
