LIFE OF GALILEO

ELEMENTS OF EPIC THEATRE IN BRECHT’S “LIFE OF GALILEO”.

Life of Galileo is Bertolt Brecht’s chronicle play revolving around the 17th century scientist Galileo
Galilei. Brecht was influenced by the unconventional lines of French poets – Villon, Rimbaud, and
Verlaine. Brecht was a follower of German “expressionism”.

In 1930, Brecht had started publishing his writings in periodical form called Versuche (Experiment). He
evolved the concept of “epic theatre”, which was his opposition to Aristotle’s idea of Tragedy. As far as
epical, his ideas of Tragedy were more Platonic. Aristotle’s Poetics defines Tragedy as an “imitation of an
action- through pity and fear-effecting the proper purgation of these emotions”. In Munich, he was
greatly influenced by the music-hall comedian Karl Valentin’s concept of theatre audiences, beer-
drinking and cigar smoking. Brecht conceptualized and transformed the stage radically into “epic
smoking theatre”. The Jungle of the Cities was his debut “epic theatre”. In his opinion, the traditional or
Aristotelian drama encouraged writing of plays that offered comforting but false notions to the
audience. His epic theatre was intended to stimulate the audience for societal changes. It was designed
to make the audiences judge and assess events on the stage and not to be unquestionably acceptable.
This objective was of course a product of Brecht’s sympathy with Marxist ideologies.

In Life of Galileo, Brecht alludes to the century that started with Shakespeare and ended with Issac
Newton, as he finds in that time, the basis of his own ideas of scientific humanism “of all the days”.
Brecht’s called scenes self-contained ‘episodes’ that are staunchly against the conventional illusionary
theatres. Althusser, a French Marxist philosopher, considers Brecht as a revolutionary Marxist
playwright. Life of Galileo uses historical background to deal with contemporary issues. Through this
play, Brecht offered to the German intellectuals a method of surviving in a country where the
government exercised despotic power, Hitler. His plays had traditional morality ironically stood on its
head to force the audiences to ponder over social issues, and the plays are deliberately open-ended,
encouraging them to draw individual conclusions.

The first instance of the “epic theatre” was a production of Piscator in 1924, where, in addition to actors,
he made the use of placards and stills. Piscator called this technique a new age realism- narrative
realism. Brecht believed that social reality demanded thought, a reverse of the traditional view that
thought demanded reality. Brecht’s epic theatre uses slides, film projections, simultaneous scenes, and
tableaux. In addition, epic theatre demanded the actors to play their roles externally, by using choric
commentary, through narrators, songs and other interruptive devices, to make the audience pause and
analyse. “Epic Theatre” is structurally a narrative sequence without the superimposition of Aristotelian
unities of time, place and action. He believed that the Catharsis through fear and pity led to a “calm of
mind, all passion spent”, opposite to the technique of critical response. Even though he tried very hard
to not create it as a tragedy, many believe it to be one.
“Andrea: Unhappy is the land that breeds no hero/Galileo: Unhappy is the land that needs a hero.”

Brecht never romanticises Galileo’s character or make him a martyr of science. Galileo in the play is a
great man with many frailties. He is nothing like the tragic hero; he is what modern and post-modern
critics call a Brechtian Anti-hero. Galileo is a sceptical rationalist; in fifteen scenes, it depicts more than
thirty years of Galileo’s life in a dispassionate, non-dramatic way, conforming to Brecht’s epic theatre.
The natural climax, Galileo’s recantation, takes place off-stage. After the recantation, he frankly admits
to fear of physical pain-he turns into a resigned old man, given to material comfort. Brecht manages to
introduce a social slant: street singers chant a ballad, giving the planetary movement a Marxist
interpretation. Unlike Aristotle’s Hamartia, Brecht’s are follies and weaknesses. This is a play of the
conflicts between the respective struggle for the attainment of truth and the commanding ideas of the
ruling class.

According to Brecht, Galileo is, “the pallid intellectualized idealist” – “a powerful physicist with a
tummy” – “earthly, a great teacher”. The idealist in Galileo co-existed with his weaker self. He is a
realistic figure with a sense of humour. He is neither heroic nor tragic, because neither he stands by his
works nor sacrifices for a new age; a deliberate attempt to decentralize the attention of the audiences.
Often this human Galileo is relatable to certain against Brecht’s techniques of “Alienation”. The play is a
psalm to reason and also the need to be sceptical. Bertolt Brecht writes the play when in exile, and just
as Galileo was living in a dynamic age, the world was facing negative effects of science- the Atomic
effect- the world wars-the horrors of Hiroshima.

There were three versions of the play-the first was for the working classes, so that they can resist
Hitler’s Fascism. He praises Galileo, for his book the ‘Discorsi’, whereas in the English version, he
condemns Galileo and calls the act of completing the ‘Discorsi’ as sheer cowardice. Then in the American
version, Brecht considers the act of recantation of Galileo as an ‘original sin’ and brings under quotation
the responsibility of the scientist. The ‘hero’ of this work, says Walter Benjamin, is not Galileo but the
people.

No denial of the fact that the play is episodic covering the journey of a forty-six-year-old Galileo till the
death of him as a prisoner of inquisition. Anti-sentimentality of Brecht, though shocking was common in
twenties Germany. Dissecting the play and the central character, it is very individualistic for a reader to
conclude it as a tragedy in its real sense. Galileo lives through the time, despite all the obstacles and
with his gluttony, greed, and sensuality, to emerge as someone who ushers in the ‘new age’ though he
warned his pupil while passing Germany “with the truth under your coat”. The ambiguity of the play and
the character compels to Brechtian “epic theatre” and maintains the dichotomy whether a tragedy or a
play of allegory, hero or anti-hero?

ANALYSIS OF “LIFE OF GALILEO”

Life of Galileo is one of Brecht’s finest works that takes the audience through a journey full of surprises
and allows them to enjoy a very prodigious epic theatre experience. The play unfolds and the audience
is immediately given a surprise by having Galileo appear in a very de-familiar way, which is very different
from what the audience was anticipating, hence leaving various questions in the minds of the audience
members. One such question is the portrayal of Galileo’s imagery to be a clever man, with tactful
approach to handling situations regarding his efforts in trying to prove Copernicus’s new theory – in this
scene the fact that the audience thought of him to be this great man is being challenged as he is being
introduced in a humanized way. Scene 7 reveals how he, despite all odds, faces rejection with dignity
and how he portrays his shrewd side as he responds to questions thrown at him in a very subtle, clever
and adequate way – at times getting furious, again justifying his humanism.

Scene 7 opens and Galileo is shown entering the ball that has been hosted in his glory and rectitude. He
is received with applause by a small group of ladies and gentlemen as he enters with his daughter
Virginia and her fiancé, Ludovico. The audience at this point is made to get all geared up for what is to
follow this welcome and they are left to be curious as to how his theory will be judged and looked upon.
Galileo and Ludovico then continue to converse over Virginia’s beauty and the way the father tells her
daughter that she has to look beautiful and presentable as to how else will he be able to convince the
jury. Here the audience is given an insight to the factual happening at that time, known as woman-izing.
here one of the folded layers of Galileo and Virginia’s relationship is uncovered as the audience can now
join the dots as to why throughout the scene, her involvement with her father has been vague and
confusing. This is further proven when Inquisitor questions her about her father’s work she appears
rather clueless.

The scene begins and the audience is de-familiar with Ludovico and Virginia’s relationship as they are
taken by surprise when it is revealed that the two of them are in love and are engaged to each other.
The audience is also made to get curious and anxious about Galileo’s cleverness as up until this very
moment, the audience is under the impression that Ludovico is Galileo’s student and he is inspired his
student’s work and idea of the telescope. This is further proved to the audience that he was a shrewd
man and he really did not like his student when Ludovico says that the original coloured casing would
have looked better. For a student and a potential love interest of his daughter, Ludovico’s remark made
earlier, now has played it’s part in letting the audience know by surprise that Galileo was not just good
at Astronomy but also knew what he wanted and how. However, some members of the audience may
get a positive image of him as he succumbed to the love of his daughter and accepted him, keeping
aside his differences of having plagiarised Ludovico’s idea and allowing him to be in a romantic
relationship with his daughter. Where the audience will see this point to be positive, they are also taken
by surprise and are shook because earlier there were zero mentions of Ludovico and Virginia being
together.

Then comes the moment where Virginia comes running towards his father to let him know that because
of his name being attached to hers, she was given extra favours by being treated first at the hair dresser
even though there were four women present before her, where the audience gets an insight to her
character that leaves the audience to be able to draw comparison between the father and his daughter
as to how his only aim is to have this theory proven and she was amused and taken by surprise by this
treatment, revealing her interest in worldly matters. This however, is applicable in today’s time too and
has been appropriate since perhaps the beginning of time that the one with name and fame is given
extra advantages of being someone well known. However, this could have also led the audience to feel
that regardless of the church not accepting and coming to terms with the cosmogony, there are locals
and civilians who support his ideology and are decent enough to allow Virginia get her hair done first,
because had they been against him, the people at hair dresser would have thrashed Virginia and would
have called her out as this would have been one apt representation of natural human behaviour.

Galileo then starts to explain it to the secretaries that they should play tactfully in the sense that they
should deal with situations and people basing it on their nature and behaviour. This allows the audience
to come to terms with the fact that he indeed knew what he was doing and saying and they are able to
put the puzzle pieces of this particular imagery of Galileo when earlier he calls the meeting a “circus”,
then too he did that on purpose. The secretary then continues to talk about as to how he can make
small moves because he is not as intelligent as Galileo nor does he earn that much. The audience can
easily at this point draw comparison between the rich and the poor and they will also feel pitiful towards
the secretaries as they portray themselves to be less fortunate as Galileo.

The poem serves the purpose of letting the audience know about the plague situation that has led to
fading of youth – meaning that it has cost lives of many young youthful people and it is a humanitarian
loss. This however to some extent can be considered to be de-familiar that at a ball party organised to
glorify and look at the cosmogony closely why would they discuss plague. Barberini calls Galileo
ingenious when he gives him the ship-shore ideology- this again proves it to the audience and makes
them feel more curious towards the scientist as he again makes it vivid that he knows what he is talking
about and to whom. He deals with people the way they are to be dealt with, again putting forward his
intellectual capabilities. Barberini then passes a remark that the study of stars sticks to one like itch,
meaning if you get yourself into it once, it is hard for you to not think about it anddit also meant that
Barberini too had some knowledge about astronomy and indirectly taunts Galileo that he isn’t the only
smart person present there. This conversation leaves the audience to get excited about what is to
happen next as to whether or not these men from the church allow him to go on with his study as this
was one witty, intelligent and full of ups and downs conversation. It appears to the audience to be a
verbal match – a tiff. Barberini then suggests that this might be the reason as to why mathematics was
not able to justify the system was because God had not given that much power to mathematics. Here at
this point, the audience is able to make sense of the remark that was passed over maths as a subject
when Galileo has requested for an increase in the pay – 500 scudi. Galileo is shown defending himself
again which helps the audience witness that he is indeed confused and is being careful about the
situation allowing the audience to yet again believe that he is clever as he is able to present himself
persuasively in front of two men. This also led the audience to realise that he was extremely passionate
about his work and was not ready to give up at any time, making the audience feel enthusiastic and
keeping them engaged that this is not the end yet and he will keep on trying till he succeeds.

In the next comparatively simple moment, Bellarmin says that the Holy church is not entitled to
interpret the workings of the astronomy but the Bible. He continues that the church has decided that
Copernicus’s theory is heretical. He then goes on saying that Galileo will have to keep his work in hiding
otherwise he will have to face the consequences. The audience at this point is able to sense the
importance of the church clergy as it denies Galileo’s reasoning saying that they are old and poorly
defended. However, the audience, considering Galileo’s shrewd approach earlier, sensed that he is just
dealing with the situation the way he is because he just wants to get done with this conversation and he
knows what he is doing.

Barberini then takes Galileo by his hand and the spectators can somewhat at this point sense that a big
show is about to go down as the intensity levels rise. In this scene, Galileo is questioned – he defends
tactfully that result in a snowball effect of him being considered a man who is careful with his words and
knows exactly what he is saying. Barberini literally talks about the lamb mask which is of huge
significance in the church world while addressing Galileo and in a way taunts him by saying that
figuratively; he too has a mask on, which subtly suffices to the argument that Galileo’s tactful approach
led others to talk to him the same way, which further answers the questions in the minds of the
audience that he was shrewd but other character had the tinge of being shrewd to them too.

Barberini then takes Galileo by his hand and the spectators can somewhat at this point sense that a big
show is about to go down as the intensity levels rise. In this scene, Galileo is questioned – he defends
tactfully that result in a snowball effect of him being considered a man who is careful with his words and
knows exactly what he is saying. Barberini literally talks about the lamb mask which is of huge
significance in the church world while addressing Galileo and in a way taunts him by saying that
figuratively; he too has a mask on, which subtly suffices to the argument that Galileo’s tactful approach
led others to talk to him the same way, which further answers the questions in the minds of the
audience that he was shrewd but other character had the tinge of being shrewd to them too.

There are various themes being discussed in the scene with one of them being tradition vs. progress.
The audience of today will ponder upon the fact that how people at that time used to be so adamant on
whatever teachings the church provided the people with. However, the audience at that time, did not
feel de-familiar with the way church was dealing with Galileo as religion had its own respective
importance that was looked down upon if questioned.

The way Brecht has put forward the political propaganda in this scene has made it an important one in
the course of the play. All in all, this particular scene, relationships are being looked upon in much more
depth – father daughter, church Galileo, Ludovico Galileo to name a few. The church’s beliefs of not
being in favour of this cosmogony, affected Galileo’s life in such a way that regardless of rejection, he
was able to make it out alive through the chaotic turmoil that led him to eventually become a great one
and also led the audience to realise that he was a clever man but was a human being as his responses
and the fact that he was clever proves the humanised factor. The order in which these incidents occur
are plotted this particular way because Brecht wanted to humanise the dogmatism and led the
protagonist of the play, Galileo himself so that the audience could get a deeper understanding of the
alienated and de familiarized technique, that occurs throughout the play so that they could get a better
understanding of the play. His idea of staging allowed the audience to realise the importance of each
and every character and happenings of the play.
 Epic Theatre:-
"Epic Theatre" is an extremely artistic affair hardly thinkable without artists of virtuosity, imagination,
humor and fellow feeling". As a theatrical movement Epic theatre arises in the 20thcentury from the
theories and practices of a number of theatre practitioners who responded to the practical climate of
the time through the creation of a new practical theatre. Thus Epic theatre was a political theatre which
raises the contemporary political issues. Bertolt says that "Art is not a mirror held up to reality but a
hammer with which to shape it. "Erwin piscator first coined the term Epic theatre to encourage the
playwrights to address issues related to the contemporary society or the contemporary according to
Bertolt "The Epic theatre is chiefly interested in the attitude which people adopt towards one another,
wherever they are socio historically significant.It works out scenes where people adopt attitudes of such
a sort that the social laws under which they are acting spring into sight.The concern of the Epic theatre is
thus eminently practical".It can be said that it is a kind of didactic drama, and this form is quite different
from the Aristotelian concept of drama or the traditional "dramatic theatre". The main purpose or aim
of Epic theatre is to make audience aware about the ongoing circumstances of the time.This movement
does not aim at keeping the audience under any illusion but to see them the real world and make
judgement on them.Thus the characteristics of Epic theatre are .The Alienation
effect,didacticism,historification, narration.gestus,fragmentary costume or props,use of song,direct
address to the audience, open white lightning and loosely connected scenes.

Is Galileo considered a “hero” or “anti-hero”?

Galileo Galilei, the central character of Brecht’s play, is known as one of the most famous scientists of
all the times. He was one of the first to study in depth the universe and is known as the Father of
Modern Science. I consider a “hero” a person noted for his acts of courage or noble purpose, especially
one who has risked or sacrificed his/her life for the advantages of the human society. Galileo is shown as
a “hero” on the first nine scenes of the play, for his courage to stand up the church and also for his
passion and enthusiasm towards his aims. On the other hand, on the following scenes he is exposed
with some characteristics of an “antihero” for his irreverence towards the church showing no respects
whatsoever towards it's privileged leaders and also for his coolness towards his daughter Virginia.
Nevertheless, should Galileo be considered a “hero” or “anti-hero” for his actions?

One of the most important characteristics that make Galileo a “hero” is his great determination and self-
confidence in proving and demonstrating his ideas. He dedicated almost his entire life proving that his
discoveries about the universe were right. Although, he knew that it would cost him a lot, he did not
gave up the discoveries that he made. This is shown when he says: “The sum of the angles in a triangle
cannot be varied to suit the Vatican’s convenience.”

Galileo is presented as a brave and courageous person who, in order to fulfill his aims went against the
authority of the churches. Galileo had a great courage shown by the fact that he was not afraid to put up
with the opposition. While the Italian church, scientists and the whole population of that time still held
their believes strongly on the Ptolemaic system (which placed the earth in the center of the universe),
Galileo explored and found out that the Copernican system of heliocentricism was the real one. The
church did not accept his findings because they would look very stupid and according to them it is better
to be wrong than to question what they called it the “Gods creation.” They blindly believed that the
earth was in the center of the universe and changing this would mean that people would no longer be in
the center of god’s eyes.The courage he showed to have had grew weaker when the Inquisition forced
him to recant publicly his support of Copernicus. He gets arrested and recants his theories, an act this
that shows some negative qualities because he refuses to sacrifice himself for the sake of scientific truth.
Andrea furious when he finds out claims: “Unhappy is the land, that has no heroes.” Andrea feels
betrayed by this renounce of Galileo who in this scene has a sound change in appearance, giving the
impression of having an indecisive and weak character.

Galileo is shown as a sensible and reasonable person because he understands that knowledge and
particularly scientific discoveries take always time to be accepted. On one of the dialogues Galileo had
with the Little Monk, where he blames the church on spending money on wars and not on the well being
of the peasant and therefore showing no respect and fairness for these poor and unfortunate people.
He says that “otherwise they could live in plenty” and “develop the virtues of happiness and prosperity.”
This noble character he shows towards the society, is sometimes counteracted by some weaknesses of
his like the fact that he himself wasn’t very sensible when he took the idea of the telescope from a
Dutch scientist. Although, this was a smart and cunning way to earn money he is shown as a dishonest
person behaving very hideously for stealing credit for other's discoveries.

In his personal relations with others, Galileo is shown affectionate and sympathetic towards both
Andrea and Mrs. Sarti. However, he alienates and doesn’t give any attention to his daughter, Virginia
treating her (from the start of the play) in a very careless way. When Virginia asks him if she “can have a
look” at the telescope, Galileo answers in a very unkind way saying “What for? It’s not a toy,” leaving
Virginia without words. Here, he behaves in a very unfair and biased way towards Virginia because while
he got Andrea out of the bed to show him his discoveries, he treats his daughter in very humiliating and
cold manner by making it clear to her that he things she is not a clever person. Also, on the third scene
Virginia tries to comfort her father who is worried “weather the court will have” him or not, by telling
him “Of course they’ll have you, Father, with your new stars and all that.” Galileo to this affectionate
and caring encouragement answers in a very revolting and unpleasantly cold manner saying to her “Run
along to your mass.” These acts show how unfair and unpleasantly cold he was to his daughter showing
no attention and kindness whatsoever towards her.Here, Galileo is shown very selfcentered and
irrational because his request is very absurd in that circumstance.

He is presented as a very passionate and dedicated person who spent almost his entire life proving that
his ideas about the universe were right. He had a great desire for scientific research, a thing that makes
him even more a ‘hero’ . His enthusiasm towards science is also shown on the conversation he has with
the Little Monk who suggests to Galileo that “the truth will get through without” their help and Galileo
responds “the only truth that gets though will be what we force through” and he later concludes “And
the worst thing is that what I know I have to tell people, like a lover, like a drunken, like a traitor,” even
knowing that “it is an absolute vice and leads to disaster.”At last, Galileo says “I enjoy doing my stuff”
showing once more his great satisfaction and determination towards the scientific research.

Galileo has the ability to communicate and explain the most complex ideas with clarity and precision,
things these that makes him a very comprehensive teacher. He is shown as a patient teacher and
especially with Andrea to whom he teaches and explains all his discoveries in great details. He is also an
enthusiastic teacher and this is shown when he praises Andrea for his comprehension saying “Very well”
and also giving Andrea good advices like “you must learn to think cautiously.” He was a great influence
to Andrea and this is shown when Andrea quotes Galileo’s doctrine “Someone who doesn’t know the
truth is just thick-headed. But someone who does knows it and calls it a lie is a crook.”

He lives the discovering of these scientific researches in a very optimistic and joyful way saying: “A new
time has begun, a time it’s a pleasure to live in.” He understands however that knowledge takes always
time to be accepted and this is shown when he says “I believe in Humanity, which means to say I believe
in human reason. Here, Galileo shows his faith inhuman reason. Both of these show him as a combatant
of truth and progressivism.

In conclusion it can be said that in my opinion Galileo Galilei has shown qualities, merits, talent and
contributions that make him a real “hero.” His outstanding abilities, his great courage, his faith in
universal truth, his comprehension and reasoning of some complex ideas, his great social concerns of
the time and his fighting for the progress in science make Galileo with no doubts a heroic character. His
feeble points and weaknesses of his personality, which all humans have, are for the most part minor
taking into account his merits. He has remained for the last four centuries as a great hero, which
symbolizes that the conviction and confidence towards the truth is stronger than any obstacle.