The shows will go on

The truly remarkable thing about the storm raging around the performances to be or not to be at the new cultural center in Ariel is that it has arisen only now, in the 44th year of the occupation. And it has arisen only now because until now, none of the Jewish settlements beyond the pre-Six Day War border had a performance hall that would have been appropriate for staging the repertory offerings of Israel's professional theaters.

	Actress Lilian Berto has refused to perform at the settlement of Ariel’s new cultural center.
	Photo by: Daniel Tchetchik

Now there is such a hall, in Ariel, a place that many people who are already prepared to accept the principle of partitioning the land between us and the Palestinians take for granted will remain on the Israeli side. The Palestinians however, have still not agreed to this, and therefore, even though Ariel is only 20 minutes from Kfar Saba, its geopolitical situation is controversial.

The establishment of a college some years ago in Ariel, and the new cultural center that will open in the town in November, are attempts to blur the controversial status of the town, and imply that Ariel's entitlement is the same as Hatzor Haglilit's, to paraphrase former prime minister Ariel Sharon's remark regarding the fate of Netzarim in the Gaza Strip and Tel Aviv. Even he understood, apparently, that this was not really so.

This is the first time the matter of actors and artists refusing to perform beyond the Green Line has come up. The reason for this is that another venue has been added to the regional halls, the consumers of culture on which public theater depends for its existence. The theaters' marketing people embarked on a battle among themselves to conquer the new bastion of culture, with each of them fearing someone else would get in before them.

The Cameri is scheduled to appear at the new Ariel center during the season beginning on November 8 with three plays, Habimah and the Be'er Sheva Theater with two each, and the Khan Theater with one.

	Ariel’s new cultural center
	Photo by: Emil Salman

Political statements

Every theatrical performance, being put on by a group of people with a statement to make in front of a particular audience that has come to see them, is a political event, in a broad sense. The fact that in recent years the Israeli public theater has avoided dealing directly with political issues on stage is itself of political significance. It was not always thus (see "The Patriot" or "The Queen of the Bathtub" ). The fact that Jews are living in Ariel, and have built a cultural center there is also of political significance. Ignoring these facts is also a political act, though one that can be called ostrich politics.

Israel's public theaters have no option but to perform in Ariel. In this respect they are like the Bezeq phone company or the Israel Electric Corporation. They receive public funding in part to offer their product to the periphery.

However, they could, and should, have prepared themselves for the fact that performing in Ariel would present a problem for them with the artists and actors. Yes, actors have signed contracts in which they have undertaken to perform anywhere the theater is booked. But if an actor informs the theater he will not perform on a given evening (because he has an alluring contract in an international film or because he objects to performing in Ariel for political reasons ), all the theater can do is to charge him for the expenses incurred because of this refusal, be it the cost of preparing an understudy to step in for that performance, or even of canceling it. Both sides know it is not worth it to them to end up in court with suits for breach of contract. Both sides know they are likely to need each other again. A theater manager can hint to an actor who doesn't want to perform that this may lessen his chances of being cast in the future. The most apt story concerning this issue concerns Michael Curtiz, directed the film "Casablanca," and who supposedly told his assistant, after a very bad screen test by a certain actor: "What an awful actor. Never invite him again, unless we need him."

The essence of the actor's craft is to provide the illusion of an emotional experience, while using his or her own personality and in the course of far-reaching emotional and physical exposure, in return for pay. This broad definition includes on the one extreme playing King Oedipus, or Lady Macbeth, and the entire range of possibilities on a scale at whose other extreme is participating in a sexual act for payment, also known as prostitution. Let there be no mistake here: I am not saying that actors and actresses are prostitutes. Rather, in this profession, there is an unavoidable element of commercialization of emotions, and actors need a stage in order to perform and the love of the audience to earn a living.

There is tremendous importance in the petition signed by more than 50 theater people, about half of them actors. However, many more actors have not signed this position, and some of them will not. And there have been those (Gila Almagor and Yossi Graber, for example ) who have declared they are indeed against the occupation, but that if they are part of a production their theater will present in Ariel, they will perform. And some of the reported signatories have changed their minds, in part or in full.

In this matter the playwrights, directors and the musicians have no weight or influence: Shmuel Hasfari was ahead of his colleagues by a day, declaring he was against performances in Ariel and taunted them for their silence. However, he immediately said he has no control over plays that are already running ("Havdalah" ). Ido Riklin and Dori Parnes (the makers of "The Count of Monte Cristo" ) are against performances in Ariel. It will not be within their power to prevent them there even if they want to. Udi Ben Moshe and Keren Peles (who both perform in both "The Caucasian Chalk Circle" and "Scapin's Deceits" ) have not yet had their say on the issue.

	The actor Shlomo Bar-Shavit says he will perform anywhere.
	Photo by: David Bachar

At most, in future contracts, artists may be able to demand a paragraph stating their plays will not be performed in the territories.

The power is illusory

Bertolt Brecht's "The Caucasian Chalk Circle," which is slated for performance in Ariel, is an interesting case. Brecht is a political playwright, but his politics is far from unambiguous. He wrote the play as a political fable and at its start is a prologue of a fight between two kolkhozes over a piece of land. The play's conclusion is that the woman who is more concerned about the welfare of a child is worthy of having him, even if she is not his biological mother. And whoever tends a piece of land best is deserving of owning it. In the Cameri's production this exemplum is mentioned, with a wink indicating it has no connection to our issue.

The people of Ariel who see the play will easily be able to identify with Grusha, the heroine, who is not the biological mother. They have, in their own opinion and that of their supporters, tended the land better than the Palestinians who were there before them: It's a fact, they have even built a culture center.

At the moment the actors ostensibly have the upper hand. After all, without them, you can't do theater. But the power is illusory, and hides great weakness. If I look at the repertory the public theaters have sold to Ariel, it seems it will be possible stage everything. I expect no problem with regard to holding the performances even though some of the actors appearing in them are opposed to performing there. It appears all of them are replaceable.

True, there are actors for whom there is no replacement but what is the practical significance of this statement? Not long ago actress Hani Furstenberg, who gives a marvelous performance as the ventriloquist's dummy in the play "Ghetto" at the Cameri, had to go abroad for the shooting of a film. She was replaced in the performance by an actual ventriloquist's dummy, and Gadi Yagil manipulated it and spoke in its voice. The audience was not informed and this was a one-time thing. "Ghetto" in any case cannot be performed in Ariel because it requires a large stage, and thus the problem solved itself for Itai Tiran, who has signed the petition and really is an actor who cannot be replaced easily.

	Itay Tiran has refused to perform in Ariel, as well.
	Photo by: Daniel Tchtchik

I have great respect for all the actors and other theater people who are opposed to performing in Ariel. But I know (and they know ) that many of them, when the choice comes down to sticking to their signature on the petition or risking their and their family's income and - will have to swallow their principles and ensure that they earn their living. The petition has stirred up a fuss; it will refresh the theater people's dormant political awareness. It will last for a week or two, until the next scandal. It is important. It will not change the modes of action of the public theaters, because their managers are politicians too small to deal with fundamental political issues. It will arouse waves of demagoguery and hatred, which will bring in the specific issue of military service and some will call the actors "leftists" and "anti-Zionists." Ultimately, the performances in Ariel will go ahead as planned. Political change is not going to be ushered in by theater people. It is doubtful the theater can bring about such a change by other means either. A pity.