A little bit over-dramatic…

So in The Guest Worker Question in Post War Germany, Rita Chin focuses a lot on Aras Ören, a Turkish migrant to West Germany who created almost an entirely new category of writing through his literature. Obviously there were lots of other things that she spoke about but…I don’t know, this kind of caught my eye. I guess what’s interesting about it is the idea of an artist as a transnational actor and commentator, in a few ways.

Transnational Actor

‘Ören initially came to the Federal Republic during the early 1960s as part of a Turkish theatre troupe, which had been invited for an extended series of performances at the Frankfurt New Theatre…Influenced by Bertolt Brecht’s consciousness-raising theatre and conception of art as a tool for Marxist critique, he and several friends established a collective with the intention of performing plays for guest workers.’ Rita Chin, The Guest Worker Question in Post War Germany, p. 69.

So Ören was literally a transnational actor.

What’s interesting about this is the way that dramatic theories moved across borders, and reached Ören in Turkey. But not just dramatic theory – political theory as well. Brecht, after all, is known for his connection to Marxism, and creating a performance style that aims at instigating socio-political action. Ören’s approach to making theatre is therefore inherently transnational.

And that idea is not limited to Ören – the field of drama theory is rife with transnationalism. Consider, for example, Frantic Assembly, one of the most important companies in theatrical education in the UK at the moment. Their work draws on such diverse influences as Augusto Boal (from Brazil), Jerzy Grotowski (Poland), and Jaques LeCoq (France). This example is not stand alone – theatre companies across the globe draw on transnational connections to make their work, and I don’t think it’s particularly big leap from there to suggest that in drawing on global ideas, artists are very important transnational actors.

Transnational Commentator

‘By directing Was will Niyazi to a German language readership, Ören had expanded the public’s consciousness of the migrant community, and initiated a collective rethinking of how this community was being represented in the public sphere.’ Rita Chin, The Guest Worker Question in Post War Germany, p. 80.

Of course, the continuation from that is the potential for artists to act as Transnational commentators. However, I think that is far less universal – artists essentially have to act transnationally, but that doesn’t meant that they have to talk about it.

Going back to the previous example, Frantic Assembly may have global influences, but the work that they make is essentially British. I would argue that they don’t act as commentators on any sort of transnational processes. Certainly, there are companies that do, but I think that this draws out an important point.

In the last seminar, I was thinking a lot about what makes a transnational historian, and we came to the conclusion that fundamentally it’s the intention – you have to want to be transnational to actually be transnational. I think this is a perfect example of that. Just because theatre companies are inherently transnational actors does not mean that they are necessarily concerned with transnationalism. They can be passive transnational actors, being effected by transnationalism without necessarily even being aware of that, and without addressing it in their work. The distinction between passive and active transnational actors is important because  it can help us to understand how transnational actors perceive themselves and position themselves within a transnational landscape.