談戲劇：與寺山修司「邂逅」 三部曲 | 陳恆輝 On Theatre - A Trilogy of Encounters with Terayama Shūji (by Andrew Chan)

撰文：陳恆輝 By: Chan Hang-fai

陳恆輝。愛麗絲劇場實驗室藝術總監。曾獲香港舞台劇獎最佳導演獎。 Andrew Chan is the Artistic Director of the Alice Theatre Laboratory and a recipient of Best Director Award of the Hong Kong Drama Awards.

“ 期待與幻滅，是「邂逅」的本質性格，有如宿命般伴隨著每一次「 邂逅 」。” ― 寺山修司

第一部 奇聞

與寺山修司「邂逅」已是90年代初， 他已經去世七年，當時我迷上他的電影和舞台意象，同時也開始讀他寫的文字。當時我訂了一本叫《寺山修司演劇論集》的書來看，書的開始，他說了這個「故事」。

有一次，當寺山修司跟他的劇團演劇実験室・天井棧敷在荷蘭演出完畢後，他在劇院的大堂遇上一個荷蘭婦人，她追問他：「漢斯現在如何？」寺山修司不認識她，更不知道漢斯誰，那位婦人告訴他漢斯是她的丈夫，三年前，她和丈夫一起來看他們的演出《邪宗門》， 在演出途中，漢斯被兩個穿著黑衣的演員將他從觀眾席強迫帶入演區，並且穿上戲服成為戲中的角色。漢斯的太太清楚看見自己的丈夫「變成」了劇中人，並且察覺漢斯非常享受及投入「 演出」。可是，當戲終結時，漢斯不僅沒有回到觀眾席，更一直沒有回到她身邊。她等了一晩、兩晚⋯⋯直至劇團離開荷蘭之後，他也再沒有回家。

這一次她知道劇團重臨，所以想向寺山「 討回丈夫」。

但寺山說他不認識漢斯，對這件事更是完全不知情！

期待丈夫回家的妻子希望幻滅了。 究竟這件事是真是假？

是寺山修司編造故事，還是那位荷蘭婦人「生安白造」？

無論如何，這段奇聞正剛好非常配合寺山修司的戲劇觀！

甚麼是真實世界？甚麼是虛構世界？

寺山修司不但要用空間和角色跟觀眾進行互動那麼簡單，而是將真實與虛構那條「缐」模糊化，觀眾成為角色， 在真假難分的虛幻狀態下「參與」他 的作品，從而反思自身的存在狀態。

究竟漢斯去了哪裡？
漢斯「邂逅」了戲劇之後成為了角色

他的角色在戲完結時「消失」

而這位中年的郵差亦已經在戲中蒸發 ⋯⋯

“Expectations and their disappointment are the very nature of an ” ‘encounter’, accompanying each such ‘encounter’ like destiny itself. — Terayama Shūji

Part I: An Odd Tale

My ‘encounter’ with Terayama Shūji took place at the beginning of the '90s. He had passed away seven years prior; at that time I was enamoured by the imagery in his films and stagecraft, and had at the same time begun to read his writings. At that time I had ordered a book entitled Essays on Acting by Terayama Shūji; at the beginning of the book, he told this story.

Once, after Terayama and his experimental theatre troupe Tenjō Sajiki had concluded a performance in the Netherlands, he encountered a Dutch woman in the lobby of the theatre, who inquired, "How's Hans?" Terayama did not know her, much less who Hans was; she told him that Hans was her husband. Three years prior, she and her husband had come to see their performance of Jashūmon; during the performance, Hans was forced onto the stage by two actors in black, and, putting on a costume, became one of the characters in the play. Hans’ wife saw clearly that her husband had ‘become’ one of the players, and sensed that Hans was deeply enjoying and invested in ‘performing’. However, at the play's end, not only did Hans not return to the audience, but was not to be found at her side. She waited one night, two...’til the troupe left the Netherlands. But her husband did not come home.

This time, she knew the troupe would be coming back, and so wished to ‘retrieve her husband’ from Terayama.

But Terayama said, not only did he not know who Hans was, but knew nothing of this ordeal!

The wife, who had been expecting her husband to come home, had those hopes cruelly dashed.

Was this or was this not true?

Did Terayama make up a story, or was this Dutch woman simply spinning a tale?

Regardless, this odd tale fell just in line with Terayama's views on theatre!

What is the real world? What is fictional?

Not only did Terayama aim to interact with the audience using space and character, but he sought to blur the ‘boundary’ between the real and the fictive. The audience becomes a character, ‘participating' in his works under a trance-like state where truth and lie cannot be told apart, and through this, reflects on the state of their own existence.

Where did Hans go?
Upon ‘encountering’ the theatre, Hans

became a character

This character 'disappeared' at the close of the play

And this middle-aged postman, too, disappeared into the play itself...

Translated by: Elliott Cheung