• "A Body without Labels"Anton Giulio Bragaglia and the Search for the Dancer-Actor in Fascist Italy
• Giulia Taddeo (bio)

This article examines the work of Anton Giulio Bragaglia (1890–1960), a theatre and film director, stage manager, militant critic, and theorist of theatre, dance, and cinema. During the 1920s, Bragaglia set out to reform the status of actor-dancers, making this interdisciplinary role central to a wider project of "theatrical theatre" and the re-theatricalization of theatre on both the stage and the written page, ideally in connection with figures such as Vsevolod Mejerchol'd, Georg Fuchs, Edward Gordon Craig, and Adolphe Appia.¹

To pursue this project, Anton Giulio Bragaglia focused on two distinct but complementary levels, conceived and practiced as an organic whole: set design/scenography and the human body. The first level has been quite thoroughly investigated by theatre studies, but to date the second has received much less attention. This article focuses specifically on Bragaglia's reflections on and practices surrounding the action of the human body "in a representative situation."² Bragaglia was a fervent supporter of Fascism, and I aim to demonstrate that, in the very decade in which the Fascist regime was consolidating power, he imagined a performing body that overcame the division between "theatre" and "dance." At the same time, this body he envisioned was both subjugated to and incompatible with the regime, in that it was substantially incoercible, laying outside of univocal classifications of theatre versus dance. He also theorized this body on the basis of a direct engagement with the concrete practice of theatre and its needs, including his own keenly felt need to be recognized as Fascism's most representative theatrical artist. [End Page 126]

To capture the connotations of this complex dancer-actor body, I analyze three volumes by Bragaglia, La maschera mobile (The Mobile Mask, 1926), Scultura vivente (Living Sculpture, 1928), and Jazz Band (1929), and position them in relation to their theatrical and political contexts.³ As will be discussed below, these volumes focus almost exclusively on dance: this reflects not only my choice to valorize Bragaglia's thoughts on dance but also Bragaglia's own approach to theatre as a whole. In fact, to re-theatricalize the Italian theatre of his time, which he considered excessively centered on the dramatic text, Bragaglia looked to the dancing body as a primary source of inspiration. Dancers (and in particular modern dancers) could inhabit the stage and develop their poetic language without resorting to the spoken word; in Bragaglia's view, this offered an enormous range of possibilities to renovate Italian theatre from its foundations, through the search for a performing body capable of "speaking" without words. As we will see, this project was both groundbreaking and deeply rooted in Italian theatrical history.

In addition to offering an opportunity to delve into Bragaglia's work, these books provide a glimpse into 1920s theatre and society and, as such, inevitably interact with the narratives produced around Fascism thus far. Insofar as these books were born out of close engagement with the practical needs of theatre, they allow us to consider the conditions under which theatre was produced in the Fascist period and how it interacted with the regime in terms of financing and aesthetic conditioning. Antonio Gramsci has argued that "the practical organization of the theatre as a whole is a means of artistic expression" and, if this is true, we must ask ourselves what these volumes demonstrate about the languages and power dynamics operating in the theatre of the time.⁴ They are an example of writing by a man "trusted" by Fascism, a man who, perhaps even unconsciously, propagated an idea of corporeality that is at least partially incompatible with the principles underlying both the regime's complex of "rites, myths and symbols" and, as I will show, the field of dance as well.⁵ This contradiction lends new depth to the study of this controversial historical moment and of the aesthetics and collective performances that dominated Fascist life in both theatrical (mass theatre) and social arenas (rallies, liturgies, sport celebrations, etc.). It conveys a sense of the fluidity of theatrical life, a fluidity that eschews...

• “没有标签的身体”安东朱利奥布拉加利亚和在法西斯意大利寻找舞者演员
• 朱莉娅·塔迪奥（生平）

本文考察了安东·朱利奥·布拉加利亚（1890-1960 年）的作品，他是戏剧和电影导演、舞台监督、好战的评论家以及戏剧、舞蹈和电影理论家。在 1920 年代，Bragaglia 着手改革演员-舞者的地位，使这一跨学科角色成为更广泛的“戏剧戏剧”项目的核心，并在舞台和书面页面上重新戏剧化戏剧，理想情况下与Vsevolod Mejerchol'd、Georg Fuchs、Edward Gordon Craig 和 Adolphe Appia 等人物。^1个

为了完成这个项目，Anton Giulio Bragaglia 专注于两个截然不同但又互补的层面，作为一个有机整体来构思和实践：布景设计/布景和人体。戏剧研究对第一个层次进行了相当彻底的研究，但迄今为止，对第二个层次的关注要少得多。这篇文章特别关注 Bragaglia 对人体“在典型情况下”的动作的思考和实践。^2个Bragaglia 是法西斯主义的狂热支持者，我的目的是证明，在法西斯政权巩固权力的那十年里，他设想了一个表演团体来克服“戏剧”和“舞蹈”之间的界限。与此同时，他设想的这个身体既受制于政权又与政权不相容，因为它基本上是不可胁迫的，不在戏剧与舞蹈的单一分类之外。他还在直接参与戏剧的具体实践及其需求的基础上对这个机构进行了理论化，包括他自己敏锐地感到需要被公认为法西斯主义最具代表性的戏剧艺术家。[第126页结束]

为了捕捉这个复杂的舞者-演员身体的内涵，我分析了 Bragaglia、La maschera mobile ( The Mobile Mask , 1926)、Scultura vivente ( Living Sculpture , 1928) 和Jazz Band (1929) 的三部曲，并将它们定位在与他们的戏剧和政治背景有关。^3个正如下面将要讨论的，这些书几乎只关注舞蹈：这不仅反映了我选择评价 Bragaglia 关于舞蹈的思想，也反映了 Bragaglia 自己对整个戏剧的态度。事实上，为了将他那个时代的意大利戏剧重新戏剧化，他认为意大利戏剧过于以戏剧文本为中心，Bragaglia 将跳舞的身体视为主要的灵感来源。舞者（尤其是现代舞者）可以在舞台上表演并发展他们的诗意语言，而无需诉诸口头语言；在 Bragaglia 看来，这为从基础上革新意大利剧院提供了巨大的可能性，方法是寻找一个能够“说话”而不用言语的表演团体。正如我们将看到的，

除了提供深入研究 Bragaglia 作品的机会外，这些书还提供了对 1920 年代戏剧和社会的一瞥，因此，不可避免地与迄今为止围绕法西斯主义产生的叙述产生了互动。就这些书的诞生是出于对戏剧实际需求的密切关注，它们使我们能够思考法西斯时期戏剧产生的条件，以及它如何在融资和审美条件方面与政权互动。安东尼奥·葛兰西 (Antonio Gramsci) 认为“剧院的实际组织作为一个整体是一种艺术表达方式”，如果这是真的，我们必须问问自己，这些书展示了当时剧院中运行的语言和权力动态的哪些内容. ^4个它们是法西斯主义“信任”的人写作的一个例子，这个人甚至可能在不知不觉中传播了一种至少部分与该政权的“仪式、神话和象征”复合体背后的原则不相容的物质观念。而且，正如我将展示的，舞蹈领域也是如此。⁵这种矛盾为研究这个有争议的历史时刻以及在戏剧（大众剧院）和社会舞台（集会、礼仪、体育庆典等）中主导法西斯生活的美学和集体表演提供了新的深度。它传达了一种戏剧生活的流动性，一种回避……的流动性。