УДК: 792(091)+165.742

DOI: 10.35852/2588-0144-2026-1-189-208

EDN: YENDIX

Full text (PDF): Download

Victor I. Tkachev

Applicant of the Department of History of Foreign Theatre
Russian Institute of Theatre Arts (GITIS)
Moscow, Russia
E-mail: t. v.i26@yandex.ru

The Crisis of Humanism in the World Theatre: from Muller to Brecht

Abstract

In dialogue with the traditions of the postmodern canon, the article examines the problem of the collapse of humanistic ideals within the contemporary theatre context. The canonical narrative of Heiner Muller’s continuity with Bertolt Brecht and of postmodern theatre with epic theatre is subjected to a radical revision. Based on the works, writings, and analysis of Bertolt Brecht’s creative principles, the author asserts the essential connection between theatre practice and the universal ideals of humanism. The “tragic amoralism” that passed to Müller via Nietzsche — a key component of contemporary theatre discourse in both theory and practice — comes under criticism. The author reveals that the phenomena under study are not accidental but programmatic in nature: in its main theoretical premises, Brecht’s entire theatrical-philosophical worldview is in direct dissonance with the poetics of Muller, who has been proclaimed his disciple. The article relies on Mikhail Bakhtin’s proposition that all texts of world literature engage in an uninterrupted dialogue with one another — counter to the currently prevailing positivist view of the autonomy of authors from each other and the autonomy of cultural traditions.

Keywords

Bertolt Brecht, Heiner Muller, epic theatre, postmodernism, postdrama, dehumanization in theatre.

For citation

Tkachev V. I. The Crisis of Humanism in the World Theatre: from Muller to Brecht. Theatre. Fine Arts. Cinema. Music. 2026, no. 1, pp. 189–208.

DOI: 10.35852/2588-0144-2026-1-189-208

EDN: YENDIX

References

  1. Bremer K. Chronologie, Schichtung, Korrektur: Heiner Müllers Nachlass als Herausforderung seines eigenen Werkverständnisses. Editio. 2024, vol. 38, no. 1. pp. 213–226.
  2. Kolyazin V. F. Dramaturgicheskaja poetika Heinera Mullera — mezhdu realizmom i postmodernizmom (etudy) [The Dramaturgical Poetics of Heiner Müller — Between Realism and Postmodernism (Studies)]. In: Germania. XX vek. Modernizm. Avangard. Postmodernizm [Germany. The 20th Century. Modernism. Avant-garde. Postmodernism]. Ed.-comp. V. F. Kolyazin. Moscow: ROSSPEN, 2008, pp. 461–480.
  3. Klessinger H. Postdramatik. Transformationen des epischen Theaters bei Peter Hacks, Heiner Müller, Elfriede Jelinek und Ronald Goetz. Berlin; Boston: Walter de Gruyter, 2015. 292 S. DOI: 10.1515/9783110365672.
  4. Taylor J. History in Fragments: The Brechtian Qualities of Müller’s Late Dramaturgy. In: The Cultural Politics of Heiner Müller. Ed. by Dan Friedman. Cambridge: Cambridge Scholars Publishing, 2007, pp. 91–105.
  5. Bechtel R. Hamletmachine and Allegorical History. In: The Cultural Politics of Heiner Müller, ed. by Dan Friedman. Cambridge: Cambridge Scholars Publishing, 2007, pp. 50–60.
  6. Barnett D. Heiner Müller as the End of Brechtian Dramaturgy: Müller on Brecht in Two Lesser-Known Fragments. Theatre Research International. 2002, vol. 27, iss. 1, pp. 49–57. DOI: 10.1017/S0307883302001050.
  7. Seibel N. E. Fiktsionalnost dramaturgii Heinera Mullera: formy i funktsii [Fictionality of Heiner Müller’s Drama: Forms and Functions]. Nauchnyi dialog [Scientific Dialogue]. 2019, no. 12, pp. 173–186. DOI: 10.24224/2227-1295-2019-12-173-186.
  8. Barnett D. Literature versus Theatre: Textual Problems and Theatrical Realization in the Later Plays of Heiner Müller. Bern: Peter Lang, 1998. 289 p.
  9. Barnett D. Resisting the Revolution: Heiner Müller’s Hamlet/Machine at the Deutsches Theater, Berlin, March 1990. Theatre Research International. 2006, vol. 31, iss. 2, pp. 188–200. DOI: 10.1017/S0307883306002124.
  10. Gomes M. R. ‘In the Fearful Armour’: Shakespeare, Heiner Müller and the Wall. In: Shakespeare and Conflict. A European Perspective, ed. by Dente C., Soncini S. London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2013, pp. 145–156. DOI: 10.1057/9781137311344_12.
  11. The Cultural Politics of Heiner Müller. Ed. by Dan Friedman. Cambridge: Cambridge Scholars Publishing, 2007. 145 p.
  12. Meuser M. Schwarzer Karneval — Heiner Müllers Poetik des Grotesken. Berlin: De Gruyter, 2019. 488 S.
  13. Weber R. Dramatische Antipoden Peter Hacks, Heiner Müller und die DDR. Berlin: Rosa Luxemburg-Stiftung, 2014. 60 S.
  14. Adorno T. Negativnaja dialektika [Negative Dialectics]. Transl. by E.L. Petrenko. Moscow: Nauchnyy mir, 2003. 374 p.
  15. Davydov Y. Estetika nigilizma [Aesthetics of Nihilism]. Moscow: Iskusstvo, 1975. 271 p.
  16. Adorno T. W. Negative Dialectics. Transl. by E. D. Ashton. New York: Continuum, 1983. 406 p.
  17. Raddatz F.-M. Dämonen unterm roten Stern: zu Geschichtsphilosophie und Ästhetik Heiner Müllers. Stuttgart: Metzler, 1991. 214 S.
  18. Der Demetriusplan oder wie sich Heiner Müller den Brechtthron erschlich. Berlin: Theater der Zeit, 2010. 240 S.
  19. Kolyazin V. F. Mezh dvukh mirov: Rozhdenie dukha svobody [Between Two Worlds: The Birth of the Spirit of Freedom]. In: Müller H. Proza, dramy, esse, dialogi [Prose, Dramas, Essays, Dialogues]. Moscow: ROSSPEN, 2012, pp. 7–30.
  20. Kolyazin V. F. “Moj” Heiner Muller [“My” Heiner Müller]. In: Rossija — Germania: literaturnye vstrechi (posle 1945 goda) [Russia — Germany: Literary Encounters (after 1945)]. Moscow: IMLI RAN, 2022, pp. 613–648.
  21. Shumakher E. Zhizn Brekhta [The Life of Brecht]. Moscow: Raduga, 1988. 352 p.

Received: 29.10.2025

Revised: 10.02.2026

Accepted: 14.02.2026