Note: This bibliography is a listing of monographs, articles, reviews, and scholarly reports reflected in the secondary literature pertaining to Bertolt Brecht’s work and influence in several Asian cultural arenas, namely: China, Japan, Thailand, Indonesia, Malaysia, and India. For the sake of timeliness preference was given to scholarship which appeared within the past 25 years; however, this list contains some older works which should be included in any bibliography of this nature.

The entries in Section III are not annotated.

“BB” = Bertolt Brecht

I. Brecht Yearbook/Brecht Today

Brecht Today/Brecht heute, vol. 1. Eds. Reinhold Grimm, Jost Hermand, Walter Hinck, Eric Bentley, John Spalek, Ulrich Weisstein; Managing Ed. John Fuegi (Frankfurt/Main: Athenäum, 1971).

1. Tatlow, Antony, “China oder Chima?” 27-47.
   One of the first attempts at bringing postwar BB scholarship to the fore of critical inquiry. Article contains an overview of previous work on BB and his relationship to Chinese thought. Tatlow investigates how BB’s “Chinabild” has influenced his societal consciousness and how that influence has informed the process of historicization.

Brecht Today/Brecht heute, vol 3. Eds. Gisela Bahr, Eric Bentley, Reinhold Grimm, Jost Hermand, Walter Hinck, Ulrich Weisstein; Managing Ed. John Fuegi (Frankfurt/Main: Athenäum, 1973).

2. Tatlow, Antony, “The Hermit and the Politician: On the Translation of Chinese Poetry,” 198-209.
   Tatlow examines the problems of translating poetry in general, and in particular Chinese poetry, both in terms of “reproducing” and “recreating” (Nachdichtung) a given text. Article traces the translation process from Chinese poems, to Klabund’s German-language rendering, Ezra Pound’s and Arthur Waley’s respective English versions, and finally to Brecht’s attempts which culminated in his “Chinesische Gedichte” [see BFA 11 / 255-266].

Brecht Yearbook/Brecht-Jahrbuch 1977. Eds. John Fuegi, Reinhold Grimm und Jost Hermand in Verbindung mit Gisela Bahr, Eric Bentley, Walter Hinck, Hans Mayer, Ulrich Weisstein und der Internationalen Brecht Gesellschaft (Frankfurt/Main: Suhrkamp, 1977).

3. Müller, Klaus-Detlev, “Brechts Me-ti und die Auseinandersetzung mit dem Lehrer Karl Korsch,” 9-29.

Brecht Yearbook/Brecht-Jahrbuch 1978. Eds. John Fuegi, Reinhold Grimm und Jost Hermand in Verbindung mit Gisela Bahr, Eric Bentley, Walter Hinck, Hans Mayer, Ulrich Weisstein und der Internationalen Brecht Gesellschaft (Frankfurt/Main: Suhrkamp, 1978).

4. Horn, Peter, “Die Wahrheit ist konkret. Bertolt Brechts Maßnahme und die Frage der Parteidisziplin,” 39-65.
   Horn examines the Chinese elements in BB’s Maßnahme and seeks to compare with the political machine in the People’s Republic of China.

Brecht Yearbook/Brecht-Jahrbuch 1980. Eds. Reinhold Grimm und Jost Hermand (Frankfurt/Main: Suhrkamp, 1980).

5. Schlenker, Wolfram, “Brecht hinter der Großen Mauer. Zu seiner Rezeption in der Volksrepublik China,” 43-137.
   Schlenker’s article traces the Chinese reception of BB’s work through the late 1970s. Article also provides needed background and history of Chinese theater movements.

Beyond Brecht / Über Brecht hinaus, [1982]. Eds. John Fuegi, Gisela Bahr, and John Willett (Detroit: Wayne State University Press; Munich: edition text + kritik, 1983).

6. Bharucha, Rustom, “Beyond Brecht: Political Theater in Calcutta,” 73-90.
   Article surveys the political theater tradition of Calcutta, India, and compares this to BB’s work. Bharucha criticizes the BB plays adapted for the stage in Calcutta, saying they simply gloss or alter too much the original intent of Brechtian theater. Ultimately, says Bharucha, Indian political theater must find its own voice.

Brecht in Asia and Africa / Brecht in Asien und Afrika. Eds. John Fuegi, Renate Voris, Carl Weber, Marc Silberman; Consulting Ed. Antony Tatlow (Hong Kong: The International Brecht Society, 1989).

7. Zuolin, Huang, “A Brief Account of Brechtian Reception in China,” 1-4.
   A brief reception history of BB in China from the author, complete with personal anecdotes. Zuolin sees (in 1989) a “bright prospect” for BB’s plays and theories in China.
8. Koreya, Senda, “Greetings from Japan to the International Brecht Society,” 5-8.
   Koreya’s remarks from the IBS symposium.
9. Tatlow, Antony, “The Context of Change in East Asian Theatre,”  9-12.
   Tatlow remarks on the intertwining ways in which cross-cultural change and exchange happen. In particular with BB and China it has been a two-way influence, with BB changing Asian theater and vice versa.
10. Tatlow, Antony, “Brecht and the Paradigm Change,” 13-29.
    Tatlow describes how the conditions and prerequisites of critical thinking in all areas of academic study have shifted. He gives a detailed assessment of where BB scholarship stands at that time in conjunction with the discussion of the postmodern paradigm shift. Tatlow calls for a rethinking of BB’s reception towards a “relationalistic” view that has BB as a precursor to Critical Theory and its “openness.”
11. Weber, Carl, “Brecht is at Home in Asia: A Report on the IBS Symposium in Hong Kong December 1986,” 30-46.
    Weber claims that the “Brecht-Müdigkeit” was put to rest at the IBS symposium, with new stage productions of BB’s plays, and lively, engaged discussion within the international academic context of the symposium. His main question: are the old contradictions still able to reflect the new contradictions?
12. Yong, Chen, “Brecht and Current Transformation of the Theatre in China,” 47-53.
    Yong discusses the influence BB had on China in the wake of political revolution.
13. Dianjie, Xue, “Brecht’s Drama and the Modern Chinese Stage,” 54-59.
    The article shows how the techniques in BB’s theater have influenced modern Chinese theater, using examples of Verfremdungseffekte in Chinese theater.
14. Jianming, Li, “Brecht and the Chinese Theater in the Eighties,” 60-68.
    This article identifies three stages of BB reception in China and seeks to explain why the Chinese disposition had almost ruled out any serious understanding of BB and his theories.
15. Schlenker, Wolfram, “Paradigmenwechsel—auch in China. Neue Chancen für Brecht auf chinesichen Bühnen?” 69-79.
    Schlenker points to three factors for the Chinese paradigm change in theater. First the existence of old and new Chinese theater traditions, second the structure of the Chinese audience and its expectations, and third China’s cultural-political situation at the time.
16. Jiayao, Li, “Characteristics of Narration: Brecht and Pingtan,” 80-86.
    This article draws three conclusions: BB ought to find more spectators as his popularity grows; the Chinese BB reception must be oriented towards the audience and successfully integrate theory with praxis; and the mutual permeation of East and West is beneficial for all art.
17. Tatsuji, Iwabuchi, “Die Brecht-Rezeption in Japan aus dem Aspekt der Theaterpraxis,” 87-100.
    Tatsuji shows the commonalities of BB reception in both Japan and China.
18. Dessaive, Miriam, “Brecht in Pakistan,” 101-106.
    Dessaive reports on the work of theater groups in Karachi, most notably a group called “Destak” for its emulation of epic theater techniques and invigoration of democratic resistance against the military dictatorship of the time.
19. Dalmia-Lüderitz, Vasudha, “Brecht in Hindi: The Poetics of Response,”107-121.
    This article discuses BB’s aesthetics from the unfamiliar perspective of “Theaterpoetologie” of Sanskrit. An important characteristic is the connections between drama and presentation.
20. Nagavajara, Chetana, “Brecht’s Relevance: A Thai Perspective,” 122-133.
    Nagavajara describes the difficulties of staging Brechtian theater in Thailand, a place where art has traditionally been in the service of religion, patriotism, and the monarchy.
21. Torres, Maria Luisa F., “Brecht and the Philippines: Anticipating Freedom in Theater,” 134-154.
    The author provides evidence that the political situation in the Philippines and the entrenched political consciousness of the people lend themselves to an ideal precondition for epic theater.

Essays on Brecht / Versuche über Brecht. Eds. Marc Silberman, John Fuegi, Renate Voris, Carl Weber (Madison: The International Brecht Society, 1990).

22. Kao, Shushi, “Brecht et l’Autre chinois: Questions preliminaires,” 85-98.

The Other Brecht I / Der andere Brecht I. Guest Eds. Hans-Thies Lehmann and Renate Voris, with Marc Silberman, Antony Tatlow, Carl Weber (Madison: The International Brecht Society, 1992).

23. Tatlow, Antony, “Analysis and Transference,” 124-133.
    Tatlow engages the problematic of “deconstructed” readings of BB’s works and questions the efficacy of the postmodern transference process between reader and text, using examples from BB’s work which touch on Chinese thought.

Focus: Margarete Steffin. Eds. Marc Silberman, Roswitha Mueller, Antony Tatlow, Carl Weber. (Madison: International Brecht Society, 1994).

24. Hanssen, Paula, “Brecht’s and Elisabeth Hauptmann’s Chinese Poems,” 186-201.
    Hanssen investigates Steffin’s lesser known contributions to BB’s “Chinesische Gedichte” and open up deeper inquiry into the close collaborations between BB and Steffin.
25. Suvin, Darko, “A Brief Introduction to Senda Koreya: Theater Director and Brechtian,” 290-321 [includes bibliographic listing].
    Article examines first the background and upbringing of Japanese theater director Senda Koreya, then presents a listing of approximately 50 stagings of BB plays to situate Koreya’s productions between 1923-1990, and finally offers Koreya’s thoughts about his engagement with BB’s plays and texts and how BB has influenced Koreya’s own work.
26. Koreya, Senda, “Meine Brecht-Rezeption,” 322-345.
    See annotation above.

Brecht Then and Now I / Brecht damals und heute I. Guest Ed. John Willett; Managing Eds. Marc Silberman and Maarten van Dijk with Roswitha Mueller, Antony Tatlow, Carl Weber (Madison: International Brecht Society, 1995).

27. Chowdhury, Kabir, “Brecht in Bangladesh,” 111-116.
    Article chronicles BB’s emergence as a popular playwright and author after liberation in 1972.  BB has become “standard reading” in many literature courses at university. Chowdhury credits the improvement of theatruical songs in local plays to BB’s influence. The author also comments on BB’s continued critical relevance in third-world countries especially where there still exists large-scale exploitation.
28. Bodden, Michael, “Area Theater and the Brechtian Tradition: Indonesian Grassroots Theater,” 152-173.
    Bodden investigates how local theater groups, many of them at the grassroots level, have come to terms with Brechtian theater. Most have an indirect relationship with BB mainly through BB’s students, such as Augusto Boal. The author shows how productions of BB’s plays are used to mobilize societal change in Indonesia.

Intersections / Schnittpunkte. Managing Editor: Maarten van Dijk (Waterloo, CA: International Brecht Society, 1996).

29. Thompson, Peter, “From Shen Te to Shui Ta: Gendered Reading, Utopian Communism and Stalinism?” 220-243.
    Thompson’s article has three facets: first to analyze and critique post-Marxist and deconstructivist approaches to BB’s concept of reality and portrayal of gender roles in capitalist society; second to criticize BB’s use of a Marxist orthodox lens in questions of class and gender; and third questions the very possibility of such criticisms.

drive b: Brecht 100, Theater der Zeit Arbeitsbuch and The Brecht Yearbook (1998). Ed. Marc Silberman (Berlin: Theater der Zeit / International Brecht Society, 1997).

30. Stillmark, Alexander, “Der Kaukasische Kreidekreis in Hanoi, 1983,” 64-5.

Where Extremes Meet: Rereading Brecht and Beckett. The Brecht Yearbook / Das Brecht-Jahrbuch 27. Guest Editor, Antony Tatlow. Managing Editor, Stephen Brockmann (Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin Press, 2002).

31. Tatlow, Anthony, “Saying Yes and Saying No: Schopenhauer and Nietzsche as Educators,” 8-42.
    Tatlow reveals BB’s and Beckett’s “passage through East Asian thought”—especially Buddhism—by tracing the relationships between Schopenhauer and Nietzsche, the parallels between BB and Beckett, and their own responses to these the philosophies of Schopenhauer and Nietzsche, on the path towards deconstructing and testing the ideological presuppositions of each author.

Brecht and Death / Brecht und der Tod. The Brecht Yearbook / Das Brecht-Jahrbuch 32.Eds. Jürgen Hillesheim, Mathias Meyer, and Stephen Brockmann (Pittsburgh: The International Brecht Society, 2007).

32. Simpson, Patricia Anne, “Brechtian Specters in Contemporary Fiction: Emine Sevgi Özdamar and Rohinton Mistry,” 388-404.
    Simpson examines the “Brechtian specters” in the work of two contemporary authors who attest to the potential “afterlife” of BB in varying postnational contexts. In Özdamar we see BB’s influence in her character development; by contrast Mistry’s work creates a space for criticism of the cultural icons of the European left, including Brechtian dramaturgy.

II. Communications from the International Brecht Society (CIBS)

1. Dalmia-Lüderitz, Vasudha, “Brecht on the North Indian Hindi Stage: Facts and Figures,” CIBS  17:1 (1987), 53-61.
   Article traces the trajectory of BB’s reception and production on the Hindi stage, from BB’s introduction in the 1960s, through the productions of multiple BB plays directed by the German Fritz Bennewitz and Indian theater practitioners like Habib Tanvir and Amitava Gupta in the 1970s, and during the trend of translating BB into various Indian dialects throughout the 1980s. Includes a listing of performances of BB’s plays in Hindi 1963-1983.
2. Burney, Shehla, “Dramaitc Text to Performance Text: Brecht’s The Exception and the Rule as an Indian Folk Form,” CIBS 17:2 (1988), 48-53.
   Examines how aesthetic form in a theater production of BB’s The Exception and the Rule is mediated, translated, and socially constructed to create meaning by a working-class audience in India.
3. Tatlow, Anthony, “Brecht’s Position in World Theatre,” CIBS 19:2 (1990), 20-29.
   Tatlow takes a critical view of BB on the world’s stages and seeks  to redefine some terms: “world theater” and “Brecht” himself.
4. Suvin, Darko, “The Yamabushi (As Presupposed in Tanikô),” CIBS 20: 1-2 (1991), 42-52.
   Suvin defines Yamabushi and maps the word’s etymology in Japanese. The article then touches on Elisabeth Hautpmann and BB’s engagements with attempts at translating the Taniko and Waley’s The No Plays of Japan.
5. Bodden, Michael, “Brecht in Indonesia and the Philippines: A Brief Report,” CIBS 20:1-2 (1991), 85-88.
   Bodden offers evidence of how Phillipine and Indonesian theater have appropriated and integrated Brechtian concepts as their own in order to “support, expand and articulate” their efforts towards a viable and thriving theater culture in each respective context.
6. Iwabuchi, Tatsuji, “Senda Koreya und sein Brecht-Kollektiv,” CIBS 22:2 (1993), 57-58.
   Article details Koreya’s work and efforts to proliferate BB’s dramaturgy in Japan.
7. Koreya, Senda and Darko Suvin, “Burehito-No-Kai [The Brecht Group] Experimental Performances,” CIBS 22:2 (1993),59-70.
   A performance list of the above.
8. Bodden, Michael, “Nationalism, People’s Theater Networks and Critical Audiences: Appropriations of the Brechtian Tradition in the Philippines,” CIBS 23:1 (1994), 57-74.
   Bodden argues for BB’s inclusion as a “fellow traveler” in the Philippines en route on the cause of national liberation. He explores the process of appropriation of Brechtian theater in the Philippines.
9. Iwabuchi, Tatsuji, “Brecht heute: seine Bedeutung auf den Bühnen Japans,” CIBS 27:2 (1998), 40-44.
   Chronicles the introduction of BB in the Japanese theater context, highlighting Japanese director Senda Koreya.
10. Loeser, Philipp, “Brecht on Jujitsu: Shared Histories, Intercultural Issues and Global Cultures,” CIBS 31 (2002), 73-79.
    Loeser contends that BB still deserves a place in the ongoing discussions about cultural change in an increasingly globalizing world.

III. Monographs, Anthologies, Articles, etc.

1. Allana, Nissar, ed., A Tribute to Bertolt Brecht (New Dehli: Theatre and Television Associates, 1993).
2. Ayugai, Monika, “Bertolt Brecht und das japanische Theater. Aspekte der Brecht-Rezeption in Japan,” Diss. (CUNY, 2003).
3. Berg-Pan, Renata, Bertolt Brecht and China (Bonn: Bouvier, 1979).
4. Bodden, Michael, “Brecht in Asia: New Agendas, National Traditions, and Critical Consciousnes,” in A Bertolt Brecht Reference Companion, Siegfried Mews, ed. (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1997), 379-395.
5. Gellner, Christoph, Weisheit, Kunst und Lebenskunst. Fernöstliche Religion und Philosophie bei Hermann Hesse und Bertolt Brecht (Mainz: Grünewald, 1997).
6. Grimm, Reinhold, Bertolt Brecht und die Wetliteratur (Nürnberg: Hans Carl, 1961).
7. Hayot, Eric, Chinese Dreams: Pound, Brecht, Tel Quel (Ann Arbor: U of Michigan P, 2004).
8. Hecht, Werner, Karl-Claus Hahn und Elifius Paffrath, Hrsg., Brecht 80. Brecht in Afrika, Asien und Lateinamerika (Berlin: Henschel, 1980).
9. Jecht, Dorothea und Shaswati Mazumdar, eds., German Studies in India / Aktuelle Beiträge aus der indischen Germanistik (München: iudicium, 2006).
10. Khatri, C.L., and Kumar Chandradeep, eds., Indian Drama in English: An Anthology of Recent Criticism (Jaipur: Book Enclave, 2006).
11. Kloepfer, Albrecht, Poetik der Distanz. Ostasien und ostasiatischer Gestus im lyrischen Werk Bertolt Brechts (München: iudicium, 1997).
12. Lü, Longpei, “Brecht in China und die Tradition der Peking-Oper,” Diss. (U Bielefeld, 1982).
13. Maharishi, Anjala, A Comparative Study of Brechtian and Classical Indian Theatre (New Delhi: National School of Drama, 2000).
14. Martin, Carol, “Brecht, Feminism, and Chinese Theatre” in The Brecht Sourcebook, Carol Martin and Henry Bial, eds. (New York: Routledge, 2000), 228-236.
15. Mazumdar, Shaswati, Feuchtwanger/Brecht. Der Umgang mit der indischen Kolonialgeschichte. Eine Studie zur Konstruktion des Anderen (Würzburg: Königshausen & Neumann, 1998).
16. Mews, Siegfried, ed., A Bertolt Brecht Reference Companion (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1997).
17. Nagavajara, Chetana, “Brecht’s Reception in Thailand: The Case of Die Ausnahme und die Regel,” in Monatshefte 75:1 (Spring 1983), 46-54.
18. Onderdelinden, Sjaak, “Brecht and Asia,” in Theatre Intercontinental: Forms, Functions, Correspondences, C.C. Barfoot and Cobi Bordewijk, eds. (Amsterdam: Rodopi, 1993), 25-42.
19. Plischka, Hans Peter, ed., Perspectives on Lion Feuchtwanger and Bertolt Brecht: “Calcutta, 4th May” (Calcutta: Avantgarde Press, 1994).
20. Tan, Yuan, Der Chinese in der deutschen Literatur. Unter besonderer Berücksichtigung chinesischer Figuren in den Werken von Schiller, Döblin und Brecht (Göttingen: Cuvillier, 2007).
21. Tatlow, Antony, Brechts Ost Asien (Berlin: Parthas, 1998).
22. Tatlow, Antony, The Mask of Evil: Brecht’s Response to the Poetry, Theatre and Thought of China and Japan. A Comparative and Critical Evaluation (Bern: Peter Lang, 1977).
23. Tatlow, Antony, Shakespeare, Brecht, and the Intercultural Sign (Durham, NC: Duke UP, 2001).
24. Tian, Min, “Who Speaks and Authorizes? The Aftermath of Brecht’s Misinterpretation of the Classical Chinese Theatre,” in Theatre Symposium. Crosscurrents in the Drama: East and West, Vol. 6, Stanley Vincent Longman, ed. (Tuscaloosa: U of Alabama P, 1998), 86-97.
25. Uchino, Tadashi, Crucible Bodies: Postwar Japanese Performance from Brecht to the New Millennium. Enactments (Greenford: Seagull, 2008).
26. Uchino, Tadashi, “Political Displacements: Toward Historicizing Brecht in Japan, 1932-1998” in The Brecht Sourcebook, Carol Martin and Henry Bial, eds. (New York: Routledge, 2000), 185-205.
27. von Felbert, Ulrich, China und Japan als Impuls und Exempel. Fernöstliche Ideen und Motive bei Alfred Döblin, Bertolt Brecht und Egon Erwin Kisch (Frankfurt: Peter Lang, 1986).
28. Wang, Mei-Ling Luzia, Chinesische Elemente in Bertolt Brechts “Me-ti. Buch der Wendungen” (Frankfurt: Peter Lang, 1990).
29. Yagi, Hiroshi, Brecht in Japan und Japan in Brecht (1980).
30. Yagi, Hiroshi, Brecht in Japan: Notate zur Aufführung von "Der Jasager" und “Der Neinsager" (1983).
31. Yang, Peter, Theater ist Theater. Ein Vergleich der Kreidekreisstücke Bertolt Brechts und Li Xingdaos (New York: Peter Lang, 1998).
32. Yim, Han-Soon, Bertolt Brecht und sein Verhältnis chinesischen Philosophie (Bonn: Institut für koreanische Kultur, 1984).
    
    

IV. Book Reviews

1. Tatlow, Antony, The Mask of Evil: Brecht’s Response to the Poetry, Theatre and    Thought of China and Japan. A Comparative and Critical Evaluation, in:    Brecht Yearbook/Brecht-Jahrbuch 1980, 286-291.

2. Gellner, Christoph, Weisheit, Kunst und Lebenskunst. Fernöstliche Religion und      Philosophie bei Hermann Hesse und Bertolt Brecht (Mainz: Grünewald,           1997);

            Kloepfer, Albrecht, Poetik der Distanz. Ostasien und ostasiatischer Gestus im                                 lyrischen Werk Bertolt Brechts (München: Iudicium, 1997);
Yang, Peter, Theater ist Theater. Ein Vergleich der Kreidekreisstücke Bertolt                                  Brechts und Li Xingdaos (New York: Peter Lang, 1998),
in: Helene Weigel. The Brecht Yearbook / Das Brecht-Jahrbuch 25 (2000),              442-455.

3. Bock, D. Stephan, Coining Poetry. Brechts “Der gute Mensch von Sezuan”. Zur    dramatischen Dichtung eines neuen Jahrhunderts (Frankfurt: Suhrkamp,       1998), in: The Brecht Yearbook / Das Brecht-Jahrbuch 26 (2001), 319-           330.
   
4. Hayot, Eric, Chinese Dreams: Pound, Brecht, Tel Quel (Ann Arbor: U of   Michigan P, 2004), in: The Young Mr. Brecht Becomes a Writer / Der    junge Herr Brecht wird Schriftsteller. The Brecht Yearbook / Das Brecht-            Jahrbuch 31 (2006), 391-395.
   
5. Grimm, Reinhold, Die Erweiterung des Kontinents. Brechts “Dreigroschenoper”   in Nigeria und der Türkei (Würzburg: Königshausen & Neumann, 2007),          in: Gestus–Music–Text / Gestus–Musik–Text. The Brecht Yearbook / Das           Brecht-Jahrbuch 33 (Storrs, CT: International Brecht Society, 2008), 284-  287.