I firmly believe that at times the drama of the past can open windows onto the world in which we live today. For example, when we watch one of Shakespeare’s great plays such as Julius Caesar or Richard the Second, we can view these as his interpretation of the historical events of the past, or see within the words and the actions on stage, parallels with today’s world. It is an indication of the greatness of the writing that we can sometimes be made to reflect on the events of today by writers and playwrights who have long since died but leave us with a rich legacy of their thinking.
This weekend Sara and myself, in the company of good friends attended a performance of Bertolt Brecht’s Life of Galileo at the Birmingham Repertory Theatre. Brecht was a German playwright born in Augsburg at the end of the 19th century and in 1933 fearing persecution he fled Nazi Germany and settled in the USA. But even there he was not free from fear and was accused of communist sympathies and lived under threat during the McCarthy witch hunt era. It was possibly these personal experiences of persecution and injustice that had the greatest influence upon his writing of profoundly political drama.
The play that we enjoyed yesterday evening was The Life of Galileo, written around the time of the outbreak of the second World war. The play tells the tale of the great Italian scientist’s explorations of astronomy, his discovery of four moons revolving around Jupiter and of sunspots on the moon, and in particular his observations that supported the theories of Copernicus that the sun was at the centre of a universe around which the other planets, including Earth revolved. This story of discovery would probably not have provided material of particular interest to Bertolt Brecht had it not been for the fact that in 1614, Galileo was accused of heresy by the church which upheld that God’s creation of the Earth placed it above all other celestial bodies as his chosen centre of the universe. In his use of scientific methods and the recording of his observations, Galileo had challenged the thinking of the day and more especially the authority of the church.
The play builds in tension through Galileo’s trial and imprisonment, though it has a reassuring ending as truth finally triumphs with the smuggling of his written theories from prison and their eventual publication. The message that we may take away from this is that whilst efforts are made to suppress ideas that may be perceived as uncomfortable, as was the case with the church in the 17th century, or the Nazis or McCarthy witch hunts in the twentieth, in the end it is likely that truth will prevail. But this is not the sole reason why I believe that such powerful drama may have resonance today.
Walking away from the theatre our thoughts inevitably turned to our personal responses to Brecht’s play. We all agreed that it had been a theatrical tour de force, but more especially that it had some clear messages with regards to our concerns for what we perceive as currently happening in education. During the play Galileo rails against the efforts of the church to limit his work and to control his teaching based upon what he saw as being new discoveries and developments in science. He makes clear his disgust with the fact that all he is expected to teach is a strictly controlled curriculum that he believes will limit learning and inhibit the critical faculties of his students. Brecht, through the words of his characters challenges the limitations being placed upon learning and questions the authority that can determine not only what should be taught but also how it might be applied.
Here we agreed, we could see parallels with some of the more worrying aspects of the education systems in many of our countries today. It seems that even now many teachers work within frameworks where the curriculum has been narrowed to a focus upon a limited number of politically determined subjects. In my own country as well as in others, the priorities given to the teaching of English, mathematics and science has resulted in increasingly limited opportunities for children to explore history, geography, art and music and to have their understanding of the world enriched by these subjects. Furthermore, even within the teaching of English, a focus upon the mechanics of grammar has often led to the marginalisation of literature and a devaluing of the beauty of poetry and drama.
I am not suggesting that the policy makers and politicians who determine school curricula are in any way intent upon establishing a form of totalitarian control upon the teaching of children, indeed I suspect that they believe their actions are for the benefit of the society they wish to create. Neither am I denying that the teaching of English grammar, mathematics and science should not form an important part of the rounded education of every child. But the very restricted idea that all children need the same curriculum diet seems quite preposterous and is one that is likely to result in many young people whose interests lie outside of these narrow confines opting out of educational opportunities.
It would appear that for many politicians education is seen only in utilitarian terms as simply preparing young people to become efficient contributors to the economy of countries as members of a workforce. Whilst I certainly sympathise with the notion that all children need to develop skills that will enable them to find employment and the security of being able to support their families in the future, I am much more comfortable with an agenda that regards education as a process of enrichment.
I am certainly grateful to those teachers who taught me to read and write, to be reasonably numerate and to have some fundamental understanding of physics, chemistry and biology. But I am equally indebted to those who encouraged me to think critically through the study of history, to gain an understanding and appreciation of culture, place and the interdependency of people and environments in geography and religious education, and to appreciate the interpretation of feelings, mood and relationships in art, music and drama.
Brecht was right to draw our attention to the dangers of limiting what we allow teachers to teach and students to learn. Progress in all of our societies has been achieved through liberal approaches to education and by innovative teachers who see a spark of interest in every child or student that they teach and then pursue this as a means of stimulating learning. I would like to propose that for many learners one evening at the theatre immersed in the works created by Brecht, Chekov, Ibsen, Shakespeare or any one of a whole host of great playwrights is more likely to have a positive influence upon the thinking and understanding of those individuals than an additional page of mathematics homework.
Maybe you disagree. Continue reading