Theme of Existentialism in Brecht’s Caucasian Chalk Circle

           “It was the best of times; it was the worst of times.” As Charles Dickens reminds us in a tale of two cities, every age seems both a peak and a deep hole to those who live through it. The 20th century, however, appears to lay a unique claim to this distinction. It was indeed the worst of times—two world wars and all. Through literature, it was the best of times as well.

Writers like Brecht strike a chord with this. Ironically, this fact is further justified (or opposed?) by the existentialist idea that life is empty of any meaning, purpose, or value other than that which individuals give to their own lives. This ideal is exhibited in Brecht’s play, Caucasian Chalk Circle. From the structure of the text to the characters, it shows signs of the principles of existentialism.

 

 

Structure

 

           As mentioned, life is empty of any meaning for the existentialists—which is evident in the text through its composition. In his typical anti-realist style, the playwright uses the device of a play within a play. This technique tells us that the author suggests dismissing what is real, the idea of common configuration and ordinary people and situations. In making the play mythological as it is, life is not depicted precisely the way it should be depicted-- like how realism does. Why else would Brecht use The Judgment of Solomon (and reverse it)?

In the narrative, Azdak thinks he must create a test. Michael is positioned in the center of a circle that has been created in chalk. Azdak claims that the birth mother will be allowed to remove the child from the center. The youngster will be torn in half if they both pull, giving them both a half. Grusha refuses to pull since she can't stand to hurt Michael while the exam is starting. Azdak gives her one more opportunity, but she cannot get Michael this time. Grusha, according to Azdak, is the real mother since she cares for Michael too profoundly to be able to harm him. The governor's wife is informed that the properties will pass to the city and be transformed into a children's garden.

This illogical combination of stories and events is not usual. It’s as if everything has turned upside down, and nothing’s left but the paper and pen of the writer.   

 

 

Characters

 

           The characters are just ordinary. Compared to Franz Kafka’s, there is nothing irrational to the characters of Brecht. What’s common is that these characters must cope with a world that is hard to understand. They struggle unsuccessfully with the unknown, trying to make sense of incomprehensible events. They cannot handle the situations themselves but, out of luck, live happily ever after.

The ending gave an idea that it’s like a comedy of errors. Akin to what happened to Grusha. Azdak declares that he will divorce the elderly couple; however, he "accidentally" divorces Grusha and the peasant man instead, freeing her to wed Simon. As Azdak vanishes, everyone dances off joyfully. The Singer praises Azdak's insight and observes that everyone ultimately received what they deserved.

 

           Though it ended happily, the text pictures a world without meaningful order or pattern, in which the characters must live according to the rules they cannot understand. A former cook for the Governor and, oddly enough, Simon Chachava, who would claim he is the boy's father, back Grusha in court during the play's final Act. Two attorneys arrive with Natella Abashvili, and each assures her that everything will be taken care of. Ironshirts beat Azdak after being informed that he was an enemy of the state. A rider enters bearing a proclamation announcing Azdak's reappointment as a judge by the Grand Duke. After Azdak has been cleaned up, the trial starts. Imagine being a judge instantly, unaware of the rules, the pros, and the cons.