Consciousness, Literature and the Arts
Archive
Volume 7 Number 2, August 2006
___________________________________________________________________
Meyer-Dinkgräfe,
Daniel, Theatre and Consciousness: Explanatory Scope and Future Potential.
230 pages. Bristol, UK, Portland, OR, USA: Intellect, 2005; ISBN
1-84150-130-1
Reviewed by
American
University of Sharjah
In
Theatre and Consciousness: Explanatory Scope and Future Potential, Daniel
Meyer-Dinkgräfe explains the link between higher states of consciousness and
key aspects of theatre, ranging from the creative process, the actor’s
involvement, aesthetics, and audience reception. Divided into seven chapters, the book analyzes the relation
of theatre to consciousness not only to enhance our understanding of theatre but
also to reveal how theatre serves as a vehicle for developing higher states of
consciousness, known as moksha in Indian philosophy.
As an explanatory basis for his analysis, Meyer-Dinkgräfe draws upon the
Natyashastra, the Indian philosophical treatise that deals with theatre
aesthetics, which he then situates within the context of consciousness studies,
a thriving interdisciplinary field that includes philosophy, neuroscience,
psychology, physics and biology and increasingly focuses on the phenomenology of
first-person experience. In his
introduction, Meyer-Dinkgräfe points out that theatre consists of two areas
related to consciousness, production and reception, which involve the follow
eight aspects of theatre: dramatist, play, director, actors, designers,
spectators, venue and theatrical experience.
These aspects in relation to consciousness entail a wide range of
questions about theatre that Meyer-Dinkgräfe attempts to answer, focusing
especially on how theatre affects the spectator and why spectators react the way
they do. Theatre and
Consciousness thus demonstrates that a comprehensive answer to the key
questions on theatre would have to address not only recent developments in
consciousness studies but also the Natyashastra, which he approaches
through the novel Eastern perspective on consciousness studies known as Vedic
Science developed by Maharishi Mahesh Yogi.
This
highly informative, well organized and lucid book promises to be not only as an
indispensable text for theatre studies but also an enjoyable read for the
general public. Meyer-Dinkgräfe presents Indian aesthetics through Vedic
Science with the disclaimer that he does not have the final answers to all the
questions relating to theatre, but rather provides an outlook on theatre to be
taken up in an ongoing debate. Although personally convinced of his own
argument, Meyer-Dinkgräfe invites further theoretical response and empirical
research.
In
the first chapter, “Consciousness, Inspiration and the Creative Process,”
Meyer-Dinkgräfe begins by investigating the nature of inspiration and the
creative process, which has also been investigated by the philosopher Ken
Wilber. Like Wilber, Meyer-Dinkgräfe
connects the reality of inspiration and the creative process to altered states
of consciousness (ASC), specifically in this case from the perspective of Vedic
Science. He examines the experience
of playwrights such Alan Ayckbourn, Christopher Hampton and David Mamet, as well
as of the composer Johannes Brahms, the Romantic poet William Wordsworth, and
the novelist Franz Kafka . The
inspirational experiences of these artists across different genres reveal common
characteristics associated with altered states of consciousness, which suggest
that these states transcend the notion of a constructed self defined by
contextualists as the sole basis of human identity. In response to critiques
against inspirational experience, Meyer-Dinkgräfe provides ample counter
evidence from modern psychology, including they theories of Freud and Jung, as
well as from writers such as John H. Clark, who identifies various faculties
involved in mystical experience. These
faculties include knowledge, unity, eternity, light, body sense, joy and
freedom. From the perspective of
Vedic Science, he also provides two tables, one describing the increasingly
subtle levels of mind, which range from sense, desire, mind, intellect, feeling,
ego and pure consciousness, and one describing the increasingly subtle states of
consciousness, which range from waking, dreaming, sleep, pure consciousness,
cosmic consciousness, refined cosmic consciousness, and unity consciousness,
with each of the latter being associated with different modes of perception.
Focusing in this chapter mainly on the dramatist, Meyer-Dinkgräfe argues
that an artist’s creative inspiration is not a fantasy, but rather mirrors the
process of cosmic creation on the level of the individual’s experience of pure
consciousness.
The
fact that a dramatist engages pure consciousness through creative inspiration
suggests that this experience would naturally be reflected in the characters.
In chapter two, “Consciousness Reflected in Drama,” Meyer-Dinkgräfe
differentiates two aspects of consciousness in dramatic characters, the possible
states of consciousness and the development of consciousness throughout the
play. As outlined in chapter one,
the states of consciousness include waking, dream, sleep and altered or higher
states, while the development of consciousness extends from waking to pure
consciousness and beyond, as defined in Vedic Science.
The author presents a detailed analysis of the different states of
consciousness and their development in the context of specific plays, notably
Shakespeare’s The Tempest and Hamlet. In analyzing Shakespeare from a Vedic Science
perspective, he also draws upon Patanjali’s Yoga Sutras and the Bhagavad-Gita.
For example, in The Tempest, Prospero’s development hinges on
his use of magic, which he finally abandons.
His magical skills parallel the powers or siddhis described in
Patanjali’s Yoga Sutras, and the fact that he abandons them allows for
two interpretations of his state of development: either he does not achieve
enlightenment or moksha at the end of the play, given that he does not
attain all the siddhis mentioned by Patanjali, or the siddhis that
he does gain symbolize all of them and therefore he does gain moksha
through having abandoned them at the end of the play. Similarly, Hamlet finally “accepts divine providence as the
guiding principle of (his) life” (52), and thus like Arjuna in the Bhagavad-Gita
restores cosmic order. Unlike
Arjuna, however, whose spiritual development was guided by Lord Krishna, Hamlet
dies at the end in retribution for his mistakes.
Having
found that characters usually undergo a change of consciousness, chapter three,
“Consciousness and Acting,” turns to the question of whether or not actors
should become emotionally involved with the sentiments of the roles they play.
Theories discussed in the light of Vedic Science include those of Diderot,
Pinciano, de Salas, Stanislavsky, Meyerhold, Brecht, Strasberg, Block, Barba,
Mnouchkine, Grotowski and Artaud. Meyer-Dinkgräfe
argues throughout this chapter that drama theorists and performers need to
develop a performative means to “ensure that the performer is enabled to
experience higher states of consciousness during performance” (91).
While the Natyashastra discusses yogic techniques that condition
the mind and body to function at higher states of consciousness, other
traditions in Western theatre may offer similar techniques, but as yet these are
hypothetical and need to be tested empirically. The author, however, suggests that it may be advisable to
follow the Indian philosophical and aesthetic tradition, namely Vedic Science,
which has the advantage of an enlightened spiritual master who can supply a
methodological approach already proven to be effective.
In
chapter four, “Indian Theatre Aesthetics,” Meyer-Dinkgräfe critically
explores Indian aesthetics as presented by the Natyashastra in light of
Vedic Science. He focuses
specifically on how Indian theatre aesthetics has influenced Artaud, Grotowski,
Barba and Brook’s drama theories and practice, and to what extent performance
in the West influenced by the Natyashastra has enhanced the development
of higher consciousness in actors and audience.
The chapter begins with a review of the main principles of Indian
aesthetics, including the theory of rasa or aesthetic rapture.
He says that “The spiritual aspect of the meaning of rasa is
emphasised in Shankara’s commentary of the Upanishadic use of the term: ‘Rasa
is here used to mean such bliss as is innate in oneself and manifests itself (.
. .) even in the absence of external aids to happiness.
It emphasises that the bliss is non-material, i.e. intrinsic, spiritual,
or subjective’” (95; Rhagavan, 1988). Meyer-Dinkgräfe
concludes that the Natyashastra describes how fully developed actors can
perform to create rasa in the spectator, and also shows that several
modern theatre artists have already taken inspiration from this treatise and
from Indian philosophy in general.
To
elaborate on how rasa takes effect, chapter five, “Reception and
Audiences,” deals with empirical spectators, not “reader-response-based
hypothetical constructs” (5), and focuses specifically on the impact of
scenography and the senses of sight, sound and smell. In the section on sound, Meyer-Dinkgräfe briefly discusses
Vedic language theory. He concludes
the chapter with an analysis of two performances: The Labyrinth, also
known as Ariadne’s Thread, and Reverie II, a video installation
project of Anna and Corrina Bonshek. Of
the latter he says, “It is a groundbreaking work of art, pioneering
theory-informed art practice that takes seriously the enormous potential of art
in changing human consciousness for the better” (149).
In
the penultimate chapter, “Concepts of Theatre Studies,” Meyer-Dinkgräfe
addresses the prominent issue of the language of theatre, focusing on Artaud as
well as Brook in the context of Vedic Science.
Given that theatre is often said to have its source in ritual, he
analyzes how ritual is understood in Vedic Science and asserts that theatre in
tune with Indian aesthetics is understandable in terms of Vedic ritual, known as
yagya, a practice for attaining higher consciousness.
The chapter also deals with postmodernism and argues that the search for
translumination, language of nature, presence and total theatre represents a
search for an experience of higher states, and that the postmodern concept of
the decentered self in Lacan also points in this direction.
Meyer-Dinkgräfe says that “in cosmic consciousness, pure consciousness
is independent of the sensory impressions, witnessing mental and physical
activity. All the more expressed levels of the mind, i.e. ego,
intuition and feeling, intellect, mind, desire, and senses, are fully developed,
and thus fully able to express whatever is latently available on the level of
pure consciousness. There is,
therefore, no longer a split between pure consciousness (self in Lacan)
and (symbolic) expressions of it in conscious discourse, behaviour and culture.
Pure consciousness, which contains in seed form, as it were, all forms of
expression, can express itself fully without mediation, representation or
translation” (170-71; original emphasis).
In
the closing chapter, “Vedic Science and Materialism: Comments on Demastes’
Staging Consciousness,” Meyer-Dinkgräfe shows how Demastes’ approach to
theatre is similar to his. Damastes,
however, takes a materialist, bottom-up approach, while Meyer-Dinkgräfe takes a
mysterious, top-down approach to the link between theatre and consciousness.
The book concludes with an appendix on Maharishi Mahesh Yogi and Vedic
Science, and a second appendix on Vedic Science and Creation.
Overall, Meyer-Dinkgräfe’s Theatre and Consciousness promises
to become a definitive text of the relation between theatre and higher states,
demonstrating that one of the key purposes of theatre is to help the spectator
access the pure consciousness event described in consciousness studies by
theorists such as Robert K. C. Forman and Jonathan Shear.