Theatre for the Dead

  • Oxana Timofeeva European University at St.-Petersburg
Keywords: Antonin Artaud, art, Boris Groys, phármakon, Tadeusz Kantor


This article refers to the famous question of the politicization versus aestheticization of art, recently discussed by Boris Groys in terms of usefulness and uselessness, or “design” and “art proper,” and, by criticizing Croys’ dualist approach, shows that in the biopolitical framework of contemporary ideology, the usefulness and uselessness pass into each other and thus create a circle within which any art is presented as individual or social therapy, or a sort of phármakon that is both poison and cure.

In search for another conception of art, the article addresses to some radical avant­garde conceptions of theatre, such as Artaud’s Theatre of Cruelty and Tadeusz Kantor’s Theatre of Death, and, reflecting through the ways of recombining elements and principles of what Alain Badiou characterized as a “leftist threat” for the theatre, demonstrates a rational political kernel of their destructive force.

Author Biography

Oxana Timofeeva, European University at St.-Petersburg

Candidate of Sciences in Philosophy, Senior Lecturer
European University at St Petersburg, Department of Political Science and Sociology 
Gagarinskaya ul., d. 6/1A, Saint Petersburg, Russia 191187


Artaud, Antonin (1958). The Theatre and Its Double. New York: Grove Press.

Badiou, Alain (2015). In Praise of Theatre (With Nicolas Truong). Cambridge: Polity Press.

Badiou, Alain (2008). “Rhapsody for the Theatre: A Short Philosophical Treatise.” Theatre Survey 49.2: 187–238.

Benjamin, Walter (2002). “The Work of Art in the Age of Its Technological Reproducibility.” In Selected Writings, Vol. 3: 1935–1938, 101–33. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Benjamin, Walter (2006). “On the Concept of History.” In Selected Writings, Vol. 4: 1938– 1940, 389–411. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Brecht, Bertold (1964). “The Modern Theatre is the Epic Theatre” [1930]. In Brecht on Theatre, 33–42. London: Methuen.

Chapman, Graham and John Cleese (2014). “Confuse­a­Cat” [1969]. Monty Python. Series 1, episode 5. BBC Television.

Craig, Edward Gordon (1978). Gordon Craig on Movement and Dance. London: Dance Books.

Craig, Edward Gordon (2008). On the Art of the Theatre. London: Routledge.

Debord, Guy (1977). “The Society of the Spectacle” [1967]. Trans. Fredy Perlman and Jon Supak, Black & Red. Marxists Internet Archive. rence/archive/debord/society.htm.

Derrida, Jacques (1981). “Plato’s Pharmacy.” In Disseminations, 61–172. Chicago: Uni- versity of Chicago Press.

Feltham, Oliver (2006). “An explosive genealogy: theatre, philosophy and the art of presentation.” Cosmos and History: The Journal of Natural and Social Philosophy 2.1– 2: 226–40.

Freud, Sigmund (1976). “The Uncanny.” New Literary History 7.3: 619–45. Flusser, Vilém (2013). Post-History. Trans. R. M. Novaes. Minneapolis: Univocal Publishing.

Groys, Boris (2014). “On Art Activism.” e-flux 56.6. http://www.e­­ art­activism.

Juntunen, Jacob (2012). “Presenting Death: Uncanny Performing Objects in Taduesz Kantor’s Dead Class.” Puppetry International 31 (Spring/Summer): 14–18.

Kantor, Tadeusz (1990). A Journey through Other Spaces: Essays And Manifestos, 1944– 1990. Ed. and trans. Michal Kobialka. Berkley: University of California Press.

Kleist, Heinrich von and Thomas G. Neumiller (1972). “On the Marionette Theatre.” The Drama Review 163 (The “Puppet” Issue): 22–26.

Mallarmé, Stéphane (2007). Divagations. Trans. Barbara Johnson. Cambridge, MA: Har- vard University Press.

Mauss, Marcel (2000). The Gift: The Form and Reason for Exchange in Archaic Societies. Trans. W. D. Halls. New York: W. W. Norton.

Meyerhold, Vsevolod (1969). Meyerhold on Theatre. London: Metheun.

Nietzsche, Friedrich (1996). Human, All Too Human: A Book for Free Spirits. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Virmaux, Alain (1970). Antonin Artaud et le theatre. Paris: Seghers.
How to Cite
Timofeeva, O. (2016). Theatre for the Dead. Stasis, 4(2).