Geister in Princeton (Schauspielhaus Graz)

This review is for the World Premiere (Saturday, September 24th 2011) of Geister in Princeton, written by Daniel Kehlmann. This production was directed by Anna Badora and performed on the main stage at Schauspielhaus Graz.

Kurt Gödel (Silberschneider) und alter-ego (Widerhofer)

Complex story. Complex stagecraft. Watching this 100 Minute long modern tragi-comedy I couldn't help but feel overwhelmed by the story of Kurt Gödel, his theories and the ability of Daniel Kehlmann to put this all into a digestable piece of theatre. The centre of Gödel's theory is that we (and time) exist an infinate number of times; each version of us lives in different spheres of existance where our decisions always get made the same way, that our lives circle like a train. Sadly, I cannot explain his theory as well as the stage Gödel was able to.

The core theme of parallel lives was explored by the use of 4 Gödels: the main Kurt Gödel (masterfully played by  Johannes Silberschneider), a Gödel alterego (played by Rudi Widerhofer), the young Gödel (David Rauchenberger), and the Student-Gödel (Claudius Körber). Two or more Gödels often shared the stage at the same time, existing parallel. A good example is the Vienna Circle scene, where we see the Student-Gödel take part in a scholarly discussion on mathematics while the main Gödel watches (as if remembering his past self) or he's working out a mathematical equations on a board (as if the two worlds or time periods live parallel).


I find the idea of playing with our preception of time particularly fascinating when it comes to stage productions thanks our, the audience's, readiness to believe the various realities as living parallel as presented on stage. I was reminded of Tom Stoppard's Arcadia, where the room of a country manor house is the set (very naturalistic) and in the final Act it is used by simultaneously by characters in the 1800s as well as the present. There are already essays and journals written on this idea of the Five Wall, aka time and the way theater explores the notion of parallel worlds. Unlike Stoppard, Kehlmann's piece is not ancored to a single setting to show us the Fifth Wall, instead we follow the main Kurt through various moments in time and experience his existance through the Fifth Wall. In Arcadia, a character from the past and a character from the present would drink from the same wine glass without any awareness of the other time period, they are walled from each other; however, we as audience get the benefit of seeing the place and objects as timeless.
In Geister in Princeton, we have the Student-Gödel courting his wife (who also was double cast, in this scene we had the older Adele played by Steffi Krautz), and in a later scene it was the younger Adele (Swintha Gersthofer) who gets courted by the main Gödel while being watched by the Student-Gödel. In both scenes, we readily accept the scene as being authentic and real, in other words: not a recollection that's being illustrated for the audience, but rather a dialogue between Gödel and Adele happening for the first time and we just happen to see it. We accept the idea that Gödel is Gödel regardless of age, he can be timelessly used within a scene just like Stoppard's wine glass. Even though the 'timeless' Gödel did manage to catch my attention as being something post-modern, I must say having the story generally follow a normal cause-and-effect timeline in connection of the main Gödel proved to make the piece less exciting.

End of the Vienna Circle scene

Post-modern theatre pieces tend to work very cyclical, just like Gödels theory. Yes, there was a lot of cyclical story telling: we saw certain characters or sections repetitivel. The best example of cyclical story telling in this piece is: Prof. Schlick - acted by Dominik Warta-, who is in a discussion with the Student Gödel, but in the background we see a body double of his get shot, then the Vienna Circle scene where real Schlick actually get shot and the main Gödel as well as Student-Gödel are present, and finally the desceased Schlick who haunts the main Gödel later in the piece. Although this proves to be cyclical, it also proves to be cause-and-effect story telling. It makes me wonder what effect would the story have had if perhaps these three Schlick events had been told none-linear, would the audience not be able to understand and therefore deam the show as unwatchable or would we the piece be even more chaotic, post-modern and subsiquently effect with regards to the central theme?

As for the stage design, a glass wall that at a moments notice, could be turned opaque was the main trick employed by the director. The glass wall divided the entire stage so that only the downstage playing area put the actors in the same room as the audience. Very risky because isn't it the fact that actor and audience are in the same space that makes theatre special, interesting and effective? I must admit at some points the glass got in to way, I would find myself getting bored with all the acting done behind the screen. However, most of the time scenes would switch between being behind the scene and in front so that the audience wouldn't feel cut off from the actors.

As for the acting, the actors were well cast and each helped the story be told. Stand outs are definately the main Gödels and Einstein (played by Hans Peter Hallwachs). But to be fair ensemble members like Franz Solar,  Franz Xaver Zach or Simon Käser added humor to the performance that with its complexities had a tendacy to become too heavy.

All in all, it was an interesting evening but not necessarily for everyone. The ideas presented in this piece are oftentimes very complex and meant for an adult audience. The Schauspielhaus also offers a small introduction exhibition on Kurt Göbel found in the 3. Rang, which is definately a worthwhile read before watching this production.

Overall - 6.5/10