Carmelo Rifici signs the direction of Macbeth, le cose nascoste, a rewriting of the Shakespearian tragedy, a show that made its debut at the LAC in Lugano in January 2020, the result of a long dramaturgical research work that the director has carried out together with Angela Demattè and Simona Gonella.
It is a work that continues the investigation into the rewriting of the classics that Rifici began with Iphigenia, liberata, and this time he does so with the advice of two psychoanalysts of the Jungian school. A performance that stems from a journey into the soul of the actors in search of their hidden sides, investigating the archetypes of the unconscious in all of us, in which Rifici seeks a space for sharing between actors and spectators.
The exploration of the psychoanalyst/patient/object relationship gives rise to a renewed reading of the Shakespearian text and the work with actors.
Similarly, the intuition hovers that, today more than ever, it is necessary to put the audience back in touch with their drives and hidden fears and desires, which underlie not only Macbeth, but all literature that speaks of the depths of the human soul.
by
Angela Demattè and Carmelo Rifici
based on the work by
William Shakespeare
dramaturg
Simona Gonella
project and direction
Carmelo Rifici
scientific team
Doctor Psychoanalyst Giuseppe Lombardi and Luciana Vigato, expert in non-verbal communication and relational styles
with
(in alphabetical order) Alessandro Bandini, Angelo Di Genio, Tindaro Granata, Leda Kreider, Christian La Rosa, Maria Pilar Pérez Aspa, Elena Rivoltini
scenes
Paolo Di Benedetto
costumes
Margherita Baldoni
music
Zeno Gabaglio
lighting design
Gianni Staropoli
video
Piritta Martikainen
assistant director
Ugo Fiore
scenes realised by
Bruno Colombo and Leonardo Ricchelli" Scenography Workshop of the Piccolo Teatro di Milano - Teatro d'Europa
costumes made at
Sartoria Laboratory of the Piccolo Teatro di Milano - Teatro d'Europa
crowns
Alessandro De Marchi
production
LAC Lugano Art and Culture
in co-production with
Teatro Metastasio di Prato, TPE - Teatro Piemonte Europa, ERT - Emilia Romagna Teatro Fondazione in collaboration with Centro Teatrale Santacristina
research partners
Clinica Luganese Moncucco
Interview with Psychoanalyst Dr Giuseppe Lombardi and Dr Luciana Vigato
edited by Angela Demattè
What do you think of the tragedy Macbeth and the themes it proposes in relation to the psychological and symbolic situation we are experiencing today?
In today's Europe, or at least in Italy, there is a widespread feeling of frustration, of loss of not only socio-economic but also existential potential. Instead of realising that this state of affairs is the result of a very long time during which we lived above our means and that this time has passed, we prefer to remove this awareness and, as always happens with removal, project the loss of power onto others. We therefore refuse to look at our shadow side and instead of taking it upon ourselves, we project it onto others, such as migrants, who, because they are unconsciously feared to be more powerful (= more vital) than us, would rob us of our power. The same problem lies at the root of the violence that a certain type of man exerts against his women: if the latter no longer lend themselves, with their submission, to guaranteeing this man's feeling of power, he considers it legitimate to exercise this power to the point of physical suppression of the challenger, because he feels deprived of his own power by it. Hence the authoritarian drift that is sweeping Europe and Italy, behind which is evident the magical expectation of the Strong Man, of the Almighty Father who with his strength will resolve every situation, transforming the collective feeling of national frustration.
So what could this tragedy teach us today?
Well, Macbeth is instead about someone who courageously confronts the theme of the Shadow, although in the end he will prove not to be up to the confrontation he had set himself. Macbeth meets the witches when he was still immersed in the emotions of battle: his witches are a voice from the depths of the earth, from pulsating bodily matter. They are the voice of his physical power which he has just brought into play and which he is now about to hand over to the king: at the same time, however, this same power rises as a temptation to make himself the king. Power may no longer be at the service of the king, the state, the community it belongs to through the mediation of the pact of honour that connects individual power to being a member of a community. Macbeth is torn between the unconfessed temptation of power and honour. He makes confessed to himself and his wife, i.e. to his own soul, what was initially unconfessable: the voice of the witches. And therein lies his greatness. He chooses power, he consciously crosses, like Ulysses, the impassable limit. His greatness is his sincerity with himself. Unlike the miserable power figures who tread the political stage, ready to dump their responsibilities all over the place. Macbeth assumes them all, even when he realises that this will lead to his ruin. However, he does not have the greatness to withstand and overcome the challenge he has given himself and which turns out to be greater than him. In analytical work, the confrontation with the Shadow, however painful and demanding, is nevertheless feasible, on the condition of sufficient intellectual sincerity. The real difficulty lies in deciding what to do with the shadow that materialises: one can no longer remove it, but neither can one act upon it. The problem is to integrate it. But either one has sufficient fortitude for this integration or one is disintegrated by it.
So what is Macbeth's mistake?
Macbeth's mistake is that of not taking into account that the confrontation with the shadow, especially a shadow so archetypal and so powerful, is unapproachable in this way. Translated into other terms, evil is not challenged in this way. If you challenge it in this way you become its victim. Macbeth's relationship with witches is represented throughout the Middle Ages by the sale of the soul to the devil. The argument then becomes: I sell my soul to the devil so that then I will cheat him and get it back, but in the meantime I also get what the devil gives me in return. Not true, if you defy the devil you stay there. The devil is an archetype, he is more powerful than you. Another is the individual shadow, which you can relate to up to a certain point, especially if you have a strong ethical conscience. You can also take charge of it, make yourself responsible. Other is the collective shadow, the archetypal shadow, what is considered evil. This is too powerful. The theme of Macbeth is the confrontation with the shadow, with evil and in particular with the shadow of the father. It is Macbeth's confrontation with the king. The regicide is a symbol of Oedipus, of the one who takes out his father to replace him. Macbeth carries out an individual challenge and remains there. To withstand the power he is given, a man must be sufficiently consistent. Whether this consistency comes to you from the sanctity of the throne or from the strength of your personality is only a difference in quality. But in reality, if he does not have it, he is completely overwhelmed by this force. Because it is an archetypal force. Either you are such a powerful hero that you ride this archetypal force or it takes you down. He has the destiny of the hero but he does not have the stature.
So witches place in a man's hand a destiny that he does not have the stature to sustain?
That is the choice everyone has to make in the world. What is the difference between a heretic and someone who builds the new Church? It is the strength he has at his disposal. What is the difference between St Francis and all those who have tried before him? It is the ability you have, the strength you have to ride it and direct it. But the great thing about Macbeth is that he does not pretend, he does not use tricks. He knows what he is doing and challenges the witch, his destiny. At the cost of going through with this challenge. Which Lady Macbeth attempts to do up to a certain point and then fails. Nor does she succeed in mediating between Macbeth and the theme of evil. Neither she nor Banquo succeed.
What was new for you in this journey?
Using an archetypal literary text is nothing new for us. We often use film or literary works in our work groups. Culture offers a whole series of archetypal events that are powerfully orientative of the psyche. What we did in this case was to observe what Macbeth does. The first question for each person was: what struck you about Macbeth? From each person's first answer, sitting in the psychoanalyst's chair, we went deeper to see which aspects of the psyche had been touched. What we saw was that some were touched in their paternal complex quite clearly, others by the shadow aspect. Some were more defensive, others allowed themselves to be touched. The interesting thing is to see how that person, sitting in the chair, initially thought they were being defended but, as they did, they dropped their defences. At a certain point something changed. I wonder if this will also happen in the theatre. It is a significant test to realise what causes the archetypal representation of the relationship with the theme of the shadow, in particular the paternal shadow, such as Shakespeare's Macbeth. When a piece of literary material is well done it captures very strong archetypal segments very powerfully. The advantage of this text is that it is so impersonal that anyone can identify with it, without necessarily being exposed in the first person. What we then add, in this operation of ours, is that this impersonal material is revisited in the response of the individuals who lent themselves. Thus we have been able to investigate and dissect, with our own little analytical intervention that reduces defences, what can emerge in contact with Macbeth. By interviewing the actors and creators of the play, we were really able to do a survey of what might arise in today's spectator. We are very curious. Taking into account that the fathers have evaporated. What will trigger each spectator's confrontation with the shadow of the father? If we want to take it back to the beginning: it is precisely because fathers have disappeared that we have a political class represented by some very archaic figures of the paternal order. This is typical of Italian history. They certainly do not have the ethical stature of Macbeth. They say they have spoken with witches but this is not true.
Explain to us better what you mean by “shadow of the father”.
Here we need to question the shadow of the father, which is the aspect of archaic and brutal power. Frightening and at the same time attractive. The shadow of the father is the power that generates. It is the bull in the arena that you have to kill in order to eat it. It is the bison that meets primitive man. It is the male son who must face his father to become powerful in turn. It is the immediate and direct drive aspect. From this point of view, it is clear that Macbeth claims this because he pulled out the sword instead of the king. But the king rewards his own son Malcolm. Who pulled out the sword? Him, not the other son. When there was the assassination attempt on Gorbachev and Yeltsin got on the tank to protect Gorbachev, there Yeltsin replaced Gorbachev. That's how it is. The shadow of the father is powerful. In reality what matters are the power relations. It is not the principles of law. Then the ideal thing is that the relations of force coincide with the principles of law. But if they do not coincide, the balance of power still wins. Man is made that way.
Stage photos
