Why theater is essential to democracy | Oskar Eustis

譯者: Lilian Chiu 審譯者: Yanyan Hong

Theater matters because democracy matters.

戲院很重要是因為民主很重要。

Theater is the essential art form of democracy,

戲院是民主的根本藝術形式，

and we know this because they were born in the same city.

我們知道這一點， 是因為它們在同一個城市誕生。

In the late 6th century BC,

在西元六世紀末期，

the idea of Western democracy was born.

西方民主的想法誕生了。

It was, of course,

當然，在那時，

a very partial and flawed democracy,

它只是個很不完全、 有瑕疵的民主，

but the idea that power should stem from the consent of the governed,

但，權力應該來自於 被治理者的同意，

that power should flow from below to above,

權力的流動方向應該是由下而上，

not the other way around,

而非由上而下，

was born in that decade.

此想法在那十年中誕生。

And in that same decade, somebody -- legend has it, somebody named Thespis --

在同樣那十年某個人—— 據傳說，他叫做狄斯比斯——

invented the idea of dialogue.

發明了關於對話的想法。

What does that mean, to invent dialogue?

發明對話，那是什麼意思？

Well, we know that the Festival of Dionysus gathered

嗯，我們知道，在戴歐尼修斯節，

the entire citizenry of Athens

雅典所有的市民

on the side of the Acropolis,

會聚集在雅典衛城旁，

and they would listen to music, they would watch dancing,

他們會聽音樂，他們會看舞蹈，

and they would have stories told as part of the Festival of Dionysus.

他們會說故事， 這都是戴歐尼修斯節的一部分。

And storytelling is much like what's happening right now:

說故事就很像現在的情境：

I'm standing up here,

我站在台上這裡，

the unitary authority,

我是單一的權威，

and I am talking to you.

我在對你們說話。

And you are sitting back, and you are receiving what I have to say.

你們只是坐著，接收我要說的內容。

And you may disagree with it, you may think I'm an insufferable fool,

你們可能會不同意我說的， 可能會認為我是個惱人的傻子，

you may be bored to death,

你們可能無聊到極點，

but that dialogue is mostly taking place inside your own head.

但那對話大部分都是 發生在你們自己的腦袋裡。

But what happens if, instead of me talking to you --

但，如果改一下， 不再是由我對你們說話——

and Thespis thought of this --

這是狄斯比斯想出來的——

I just shift 90 degrees to the left,

我只要向左轉九十度，

and I talk to another person onstage with me?

我對台上的另一個人說話，會如何？

Everything changes,

一切都改變了，

because at that moment, I'm not the possessor of truth;

因為在那時刻， 我就不是「真相擁有者」；

I'm a guy with an opinion.

我只是個有意見的人。

And I'm talking to somebody else.

我是在跟別人說話。

And you know what?

你們知道嗎？

That other person has an opinion too,

那個「別人」也有他自己的意見，

and it's drama, remember, conflict -- they disagree with me.

這是戲劇，記得要有衝突—— 他們不認同我說的。

There's a conflict between two points of view.

在兩種觀點之間有衝突存在。

And the thesis of that is that the truth can only emerge

而那麼做的論點在於， 唯一會有真相浮現的地方，

in the conflict of different points of view.

就是兩種不同觀點衝突的地方。

It's not the possession of any one person.

真相並非任何人所擁有的。

And if you believe in democracy, you have to believe that.

如果你相信民主，你就會相信這點。

If you don't believe that, you're an autocrat

如果你不相信這點，你就是獨裁者，

who is putting up with democracy.

只是在忍受民主。

But that's the basic thesis of democracy,

但那就是民主的基本論點，

that the conflict of different points of views leads to the truth.

不同觀點的衝突會導出真相。

What's the other thing that's happening?

另外，還會發生另一件事。

I'm not asking you to sit back and listen to me.

我並沒有請你們坐好聽我說。

I'm asking you to lean forward

我是在請你們向前傾，

and imagine my point of view --

想像我的觀點——

what this looks like and feels like to me as a character.

當我是個「角色」的時候， 看起來跟感覺起來就是這樣子的。

And then I'm asking you to switch your mind

接著我會請你們轉換一下頭腦，

and imagine what it feels like to the other person talking.

想像一下身為另一位 在說話的人，感覺是什麼。

I'm asking you to exercise empathy.

我是在請你們行使「同理心」。

And the idea that truth comes from the collision of different ideas

「真相來自不同想法的碰撞」 這個概念，

and the emotional muscle of empathy

以及同理心的情緒肌肉，

are the necessary tools for democratic citizenship.

都是民主公民權所必要的工具。

What else happens?

還會發生什麼？

The third thing really is you,

會發生的第三件事其實就是你，

is the community itself, is the audience.

是共同體本身，是觀眾。

And you know from personal experience that when you go to the movies,

你們從自己的個人經驗 都知道，去看電影時，

you walk into a movie theater, and if it's empty, you're delighted,

當走進電影戲院， 發現影廳中都沒人，你會很開心，

because nothing's going to be between you and the movie.

因為你和電影之間不會有任何阻礙。

You can spread out, put your legs over the top of the stadium seats,

你可以大方伸展開來， 把腳放到前排的椅子上，

eat your popcorn and just enjoy it.

吃你的爆米花，好好享受。

But if you walk into a live theater

但當你走入現場演出的戲院，

and you see that the theater is half full,

看到觀眾席已經半滿，

your heart sinks.

你的心會沉下來。

You're disappointed immediately,

你馬上會感到失望，

because whether you knew it or not,

因為不論你是否知道，

you were coming to that theater

你去到那間戲院，

to be part of an audience.

就是成為觀眾的一部分。

You were coming to have the collective experience

你是來取得集體經驗的，

of laughing together, crying together, holding your breath together

大家一起笑、一起哭、一起摒息，

to see what's going to happen next.

等著看接下來會發生什麼。

You may have walked into that theater as an individual consumer,

你走入那間戲院時， 或許只是一個個體的客人，

but if the theater does its job,

但如果戲院有做好它的工作，

you've walked out with a sense of yourself as part of a whole,

當你走出戲院時， 你會覺得你自己是整體的一部分，

as part of a community.

共同體的一部分，

That's built into the DNA of my art form.

內建在我藝術形式的 DNA 當中。

Twenty-five hundred years later, Joe Papp decided

2500 年後，約瑟夫帕普決定，

that the culture should belong to everybody in the United States of America,

文化應該屬於美國的每一個人，

and that it was his job to try to deliver on that promise.

而他的工作就是要實現這項承諾。

He created Free Shakespeare in the Park.

他創建了「公園中的 免費莎士比亞」戲院。

And Free Shakespeare in the Park is based on a very simple idea,

「公園中的免費莎士比亞」 根據很簡單的想法，

the idea that the best theater, the best art that we can produce,

這個想法就是：最好的戲院， 我們所能產出最好的藝術，

should go to everybody and belong to everybody,

應該要接觸到每個人， 應該屬於每個人，

and to this day,

而至今，

every summer night in Central Park,

在中央公園，每個夏日晚上，

2,000 people are lining up

會有 2000 人排隊，

to see the best theater we can provide for free.

要看我們能提供的最好的戲劇。

It's not a commercial transaction.

那不是商業交易。

In 1967, 13 years after he figured that out,

1967 年，在他想通了 這件事的 13 年後，

he figured out something else,

他又想通了另一件事，

which is that the democratic circle was not complete

那就是，只把經典給予人民，

by just giving the people the classics.

還不夠讓民主圓圈變完整。

We had to actually let the people create their own classics

我們得要真正讓人民 去創作他們自己的經典，

and take the stage.

站上舞台。

And so in 1967,

所以，在 1967 年，

Joe opened the Public Theater downtown on Astor Place,

喬瑟夫在阿斯托廣場鬧區 開了一間公眾劇院，

and the first show he ever produced was the world premiere of "Hair."

他所製作的第一場演出， 就是《毛髮》的首演。

That's the first thing he ever did that wasn't Shakespeare.

這也是他第一次做 不是莎士比亞的戲劇。

Clive Barnes in The Times said that it was as if Mr. Papp took a broom

《紐約時報》的克萊夫巴恩斯說， 那彷彿就是帕普拿了一支掃帚，

and swept up all the refuse from the East Village streets

把東村街道上的 所有拒絕，通通掃到

onto the stage at the Public.

公眾劇院的舞台上。

(Laughter)

（笑聲）

He didn't mean it complimentarily,

他並沒有讚美的意思，

but Joe put it up in the lobby, he was so proud of it.

但喬瑟夫把這篇報導 陳列在大廳，他感到好驕傲。

(Laughter) (Applause)

（笑聲）（掌聲）

And what the Public Theater did over the next years with amazing shows like

在接下來的幾年， 公眾劇院有許多出色的節目，

"For Colored Girls Who Have Considered Suicide / When the Rainbow Is Enuf,"

像是《給那些當彩虹出現， 就要考慮自殺的有色女孩》、

"A Chorus Line,"

《歌舞線上》，

and -- here's the most extraordinary example I can think of:

以及——這是我所能想出 最不凡的例子：

Larry Kramer's savage cry of rage about the AIDS crisis,

拉里克萊默出於愛滋病的憤怒 而發出野性吶喊的作品，

"The Normal Heart."

《血熱之心》。

Because when Joe produced that play in 1985,

因為當喬瑟夫在 1985 年 製作那齣劇作的時候，

there was more information about AIDS

在《紐約時報》上 法蘭克瑞奇的評論中，

in Frank Rich's review in the New York Times

關於愛滋病的資訊量比《紐約時報》

than the New York Times had published in the previous four years.

前四年所出版的所有資訊 加起來都還要多。

Larry was actually changing the dialogue about AIDS

拉里透過撰寫這部作品的方式，

來改變關於愛滋病的對話，

through writing this play,

and Joe was by producing it.

而喬瑟夫是製作人。

I was blessed to commission and work on Tony Kushner's "Angels in America,"

我很有福氣，受到委任做了 東尼庫許納的《天使在美國》，

and when doing that play and along with "Normal Heart,"

在做那齣戲和《血熱之心》的時候，

we could see that the culture was actually shifting,

我們可以看出，文化真的在轉變，

and it wasn't caused by the theater,

並不是由戲院所造成的，

but the theater was doing its part

但戲院有扮演好它的角色，

to change what it meant to be gay in the United States.

改變了在美國被認為很娘的定義。

And I'm incredibly proud of that.

對此我感到非常驕傲。

(Applause)

（掌聲）

When I took over Joe's old job at the Public in 2005,

2005 年，我接下了 喬瑟夫在公眾劇院的工作，

I realized one of the problems we had was a victim of our own success,

我了解到我們的問題之一， 其實是由我們自己的成功所造成，

which is: Shakespeare in the Park had been founded as a program for access,

就是：公園中的莎士比亞成立時 是要成為大家都可使用的計畫，

and it was now the hardest ticket to get in New York City.

而它現在是紐約市中最難取得的票。

People slept out for two nights to get those tickets.

大家要在門外過夜排隊 兩個晚上，才能買到票。

What was that doing?

那是怎麼回事？

That was eliminating 98 percent of the population

那會讓 98% 的人

from even considering going to it.

完全不考慮要去那裡了。

So we refounded the mobile unit

所以我們重新成立了一個行動組，

and took Shakespeare to prisons, to homeless shelters,

把莎士比亞帶到監獄、遊民收容所、

to community centers in all five boroughs

所有五個行政區，甚至紐澤西

and even in New Jersey and Westchester County.

和威斯特徹斯特郡的社區中心。

And that program proved something to us that we knew intuitively:

該計畫向我們證明了一件事， 和我們本來的直覺相符：

people's need for theater is as powerful as their desire for food

大家對於戲院的需求， 和他們對食物或飲水的慾望

or for drink.

一樣強大。

It's been an extraordinary success, and we've continued it.

這計畫一直非常成功， 我們還在持繼進行。

And then there was yet another barrier that we realized we weren't crossing,

接著，還有一個障礙， 我們一直都還沒跨越，

which is a barrier of participation.

那就是參與的障礙。

And the idea, we said, is:

我們說，這個想法是：

How can we turn theater from being a commodity, an object,

我們要如何將戲院 從一種商品、一個物體，

back into what it really is --

轉變回它真正的本質——

a set of relationships among people?

人之間的一組關係？

And under the guidance of the amazing Lear deBessonet,

在李爾戴本森奈特 很了不起的指導之下，

we started the Public Works program,

我們開始了「公眾作品」計畫，

which now every summer produces

現在，每年夏天，這個計畫

these immense Shakespearean musical pageants,

都會製作這些超棒的音樂盛會，

where Tony Award-winning actors and musicians

在盛會中，得過東尼獎的演員

are side by side with nannies and domestic workers

和音樂家會與褓姆、 國內的工人、退伍軍人、

and military veterans and recently incarcerated prisoners,

剛出獄的犯人、 業餘玩家，以及職業專家

amateurs and professionals,

肩並肩攜手合作，

performing together on the same stage.

一起同台演出。

And it's not just a great social program,

它不只是個很棒的社會計畫，

it's the best art that we do.

它是我們所能做出最棒的藝術。

And the thesis of it is that artistry is not something

它的論點是：藝術才能並不是

that is the possession of a few.

少數人所擁有的。

Artistry is inherent in being a human being.

身為人，天生就有藝術才能。

Some of us just get to spend a lot more of our lives practicing it.

只是我們當中有些人 花了更多時間在練習它。

And then occasionally --

然後，偶爾——

(Applause)

（掌聲）

you get a miracle like "Hamilton,"

就會出現奇蹟，像《漢密爾頓》，

Lin-Manuel's extraordinary retelling of the foundational story of this country

林曼努爾重新訴說這個國家 開國故事的不凡之作，

through the eyes of the only Founding Father who was a bastard immigrant orphan

透過開國先驅的視角來呈現， 而他是來自西印度群島的

from the West Indies.

私生子移民孤兒。

And what Lin was doing

林所做的，

is exactly what Shakespeare was doing.

就是莎士比亞所做的。

He was taking the voice of the people, the language of the people,

他將人民的聲音、人民的語言

elevating it into verse,

提升成為詩節，

and by doing so,

藉由這麼做，

ennobling the language

讓那語言變得更尊貴，

and ennobling the people who spoke the language.

也讓說那語言的人民變得更尊貴。

And by casting that show entirely with a cast of black and brown people,

全劇的卡司用的 全部都是黑色和褐色皮膚的人，

what Lin was saying to us,

林想要對我們說的是，

he was reviving in us

他要喚醒我們心中

our greatest aspirations for the United States,

美國最偉大的熱望，

our better angels of America,

我們更好的美國天使，

our sense of what this country could be,

我們對於這個國家 能夠成為什麼樣子的看法，

the inclusion that was at the heart of the American Dream.

位在美國夢核心位置的包容。

And it unleashed a wave of patriotism in me

它在我體內、我們觀眾體內，

釋放出一波愛國主義，

and in our audience,

the appetite for which is proving to be insatiable.

已經證明，對此的胃口 是不會被滿足的。

But there was another side to that, and it's where I want to end,

但還有另一個面向， 我想用這個面向來作結，

and it's the last story I want to talk about.

這是我想要談的最後一個故事。

Some of you may have heard that Vice President-elect Pence

在座有些人可能聽過 當選而尚未就任的副總統彭斯

came to see "Hamilton" in New York.

來紐約看《漢密爾頓》。

And when he came in, some of my fellow New Yorkers booed him.

當他進來時，一些紐約人 對他發出噓聲。

And beautifully, he said,

他說了句很棒的話：

"That's what freedom sounds like."

「那就是自由的聲音。」

And at the end of the show,

在節目的最後，

we read what I feel was a very respectful statement from the stage,

我們在舞台上讀了 我認為非常有敬意的聲明，

and Vice President-elect Pence listened to it,

而彭斯副總統聽了它，

but it sparked a certain amount of outrage, a tweetstorm,

但它點燃了某些怒火和推特風暴，

and also an internet boycott of "Hamilton"

還有針對《漢密爾頓》的 一項網路抵制活動，

from outraged people who had felt we had treated him with disrespect.

發動者是憤怒的人， 他們覺得我們不尊重他。

I looked at that boycott and I said, we're getting something wrong here.

我看著那抵制，我說， 我們有什麼地方出了差錯。

All of these people who have signed this boycott petition,

所有這些簽署了抵制請願的人，

they were never going to see "Hamilton" anyway.

反正他們永遠不會去看《漢密爾頓》。

It was never going to come to a city near them.

該劇永遠不會到 他們鄰近的城市演出。

If it could come, they couldn't afford a ticket,

就算有，他們也買不起票，

and if they could afford a ticket, they didn't have the connections

就算買得起票，他們也沒有人脈

to get that ticket.

可以取得票。

They weren't boycotting us;

他們不是在抵制我們；

we had boycotted them.

我們已經先抵制了他們。

And if you look at the red and blue electoral map of the United States,

如果你看看標上藍色 和紅色的美國選舉地圖，

and if I were to tell you,

如果我告訴你：

"Oh, the blue is what designates

「喔，藍色標記代表

all of the major nonprofit cultural institutions,"

所有主要的非營利文化機構。」

I'd be telling you the truth.

那我告訴你的是真相。

You'd believe me.

你會相信我。

We in the culture have done exactly what the economy,

在文化上，我們所做的事， 完全和在經濟上、

what the educational system, what technology has done,

教育體制上、科技上所做的一樣，

which is turn our back on a large part of the country.

那就是背棄了這個國家大部分的人。

So this idea of inclusion, it has to keep going.

所以，這個包容的概念 得要持續下去。

Next fall, we are sending out on tour

明年秋天，我們有一場巡迴演出，

a production of Lynn Nottage's brilliant, Pulitzer Prize-winning play "Sweat."

演出作品是讓林恩諾塔吉得了 普立茲獎的出色劇作《汗水》。

Years of research in Redding, Pennsylvania led her to write this play

她花了數年時間 在賓州的雷丁做研究，

about the deindustrialization of Pennsylvania:

寫下這齣關於賓州去工業化的劇作：

what happened when steel left,

如果鋼鐵工業外移會是怎樣的情況，

the rage that was unleashed,

被釋放出來的怒火，

the tensions that were unleashed,

被釋放出來的壓力，

the racism that was unleashed

被釋放出來的種族主義，

by the loss of jobs.

都會因失業而起。

We're taking that play and we're touring it

我們巡迴演出這齣劇的地點

to rural counties in Pennsylvania,

是較偏鄉的郡，在包括賓州、

Ohio, Michigan,

俄亥俄州、密西根州、

Minnesota and Wisconsin.

明尼蘇達州，和威斯康辛州。

We're partnering with community organizations there to try and make sure

我們和當地社區組織合作，

以確保我們不僅能觸及到 我們試圖觸及的族群，

not only that we reach the people that we're trying to reach,

but that we find ways to listen to them back

同時也能有方法 反過來傾聽他們的聲音，

and say, "The culture is here for you, too."

並說：「文化也到這裡來見你了。」

Because --

因為——

(Applause)

（掌聲）

we in the culture industry,

我們這些在文化產業的人，

we in the theater,

我們這些在戲院的人，

have no right to say that we don't know what our job is.

沒有權利說我們不知道 我們的職責是什麼。

It's in the DNA of our art form.

它內建在我們 藝術形式的 DNA 當中。

Our job "... is to hold up, as 'twere, a mirror to nature;

我們的職責是 「彷彿要舉起大自然的鏡子，

to show scorn her image,

讓輕蔑看見她的影像，

to show virtue her appearance,

讓美德看見她的外表，

and the very age its form and pressure."

讓這個時代看到它的形式和壓力。」

Our job is to try to hold up a vision to America

我們的職責是要支撐著美國的遠景，

that shows not only who all of us are individually,

這個遠景呈現的不只是 我們每個人各別的身份，

but that welds us back into the commonality that we need to be,

還有它將我們結合起來， 重新成為我們需要成為的共性，

the sense of unity,

一體的感受，

the sense of whole,

整體的感受，

the sense of who we are as a country.

我們身為一個國家的感受。

That's what the theater is supposed to do,

那是戲院應該要做的事，

and that's what we need to try to do as well as we can.

那是我們應該盡力而為 試著去做的事。

Thank you very much.

非常謝謝各位。

(Applause)

（掌聲）