The five day programme (28 May to 2 June 2011) planned by the Norwegian Embassy for myself and Wawan Sofwan went smoothly. We were able to meet all the people scheduled and have interesting and useful exchanges. To recap the meetings were with:
- Henrik Ibsen Museum meeting Bergljot Geist
- Centre for Ibsen Studies Oslo University
- Juni Dahr, Marianne Roland and the ministry of the foreign affairs
- Watching Hedda Gabler in Saterhytten Bygdoy
- Inger Buresund, Artistic and managing Director Ibsen International
- Visiting National Theater with Tove Bratten and Ba Clemesten
- Watch rehearsal and meet the artist in involved in production of A doll’s House directed by Dr. Anne Helgesen from the Institute for Theater Science, University of Oslo
- Lene Therese Teigen, the president of International Women’s Playwright Conference (WPI) 2012
Administrative, travel and accommodation arrangements were all smooth. The various Norwegian contacts and institutions were friendly as well as professional.
The program was a very interesting exposure to Ibsen in Norway as well as an entry to Norwegian society. Neither Wawan Sofyan nor I had been to Norway before.
I think the visit can be discussed from two angles: in relation to sources of inspiration and in relation to prospects for future cooperation.
INSPIRATIONS
Ibsen, literature and society
It did not take very long to become aware of the respect in which Ibsen is held in Norwegian society and the pride people have in his contribution to Norway and the world. Numerous impressions and examples reinforced this. One striking symbol was the string of 60 quotes from Ibsen’s works embedded as an artwork - Ibsen Sitat - in the footpath along the street from the Ibsen Museum to the Grand Café Museum. Of course, we couldn’t read these quotes in Norwegian, however such a thing clearly was a reflection of the place of Ibsen in society. This, I thought, was a very effective tactic to keep reminding people of who Ibsen was and what he had wrote.
This was further reinforced by the impressive character of the Ibsen Museum and, of course, here too we must pass along the Henrik Ibsen Gate. It was also possible to try to glimpse Ibsen’s daily life by touring through his home, which was also incorporated as part of the museum.
The concern to make available all the manifestations of the impact of Ibsen’s works was shown in the lively decoration of the toilet walls; wallpaper made up of various reviews of his works.
The program that brought Wawan and I to Norway is another example of Norwegian society’s emphasis making maximum cultural use of Ibsen’s contribution, as were the activities of all the institutions we met, funded by the public taxes.
This effort to make Ibsen’s work a genuine treasure for the society has been an important inspiration regarding the link between literature and society. The idea that literature can play a major role in social and cultural change is one of the things that motivates the Institut Ungu, which will be producing A DOLL’s HOUSE in Jakarta this year as well as organizing the public seminar around Ibsen. Indonesia also has international level writers. There is Pramoedya Ananta Toer, whose works have been published in many, many languages as well as dramatists like Rendra and poets like Chairil Anwar. Unfortunately, there are no Pramoedya, Rendra or Anwar museums; no international promotion of their works and so on. Actually, there is also no significant funding for modern theatre at all. Even after just a few days in Norway, however, the possibility of making a country’s literature a true treasure was underlined.
Inspiration for producing Ibsen
The visit also provided inspiration in relation to the process of producing and adapting Ibsen’s work. Clearly, the programs run in Norway help concentrate and foster many approaches. At the Centre for Ibsen Studies at Oslo University, we were able to have a very lively discussion with a range of people, including Ph D students from other countries, such as Bangaldesh, about how to adapt and produce Ibsen’s plays. The discussion also included Professor Frode Helland, Head of the research project “Ibsen Between Cultures” and the Bangladeshi theatre director Kamaluddin Nilu. A part of the discussion, about the need in Bangladesh to be sensitive about how to portray the position of children, emphasized the impact of context on the process of adaptation. It was another pointer to the need to have a critical attitude in reflecting on the impact of context – in our case of semi-developed 21st century urban Jakarta.
This adaptation, interpretive aspect also came out in our meeting with Dr. Anne Helgesen from the Institute of Theater Science, University of Oslo. Her interpretation was emphasizing the position of children as just play-things for the parents. I could see that she was presenting a very sharp and vivid picture of the play-unrealness of the Nora Helmer relationship. The contradiction between a woman who starts to act as a child because she is treated as a child plaything, while at the same time being an astute and hardworking provider for the family was well drawn. In a particularly vivid method, she used puppets to represent the children, emphasizing even more the whole issue of “play-thing”ness.
In our discussions, she emphasized that many male directors of A Doll’s House have a very negative interpretation of Nora as hopeless, willing to abandon her husband and even the children. They are unable to capture the contradictions of Nora’s situation. Her approach is similar to the one I have used in my translation and adaptation. The exchange with her was very useful and watching the rehearsal inspiring and useful for our efforts in Jakarta.
Watching Hedda Gabler at the Saterhytten Bygdoy was also interesting and thought provoking in relation adaptation issues. The performance we saw, with actors Juni Dhar and four others, was enjoyable to observe, despite out lack of Norwegian language. We had, of course, read the play already. What was interesting was its brevity. It was a one hour performance of a play, as with many of Ibsen’s, that could be for three hours. It clearly worked, aided through the artistic, innovative use of a house as the “stage”. The audience watched from inside the house, located in a forest, from very intimate quarters, able to see and respond to a blink or a wink of the actor’s eye. In Indonesia, we will also not be aiming for a three hour plus performance. The challenge will be how to shorten, adapt and creatively present our adaptation. As Juni Dahr emphasized in the discussions, it is very appropriate “to shorten the story as long as you capture the spirit of the story and its characters.”