2019 Year 12 IB Extended Essays

Conclusion It can be seen from the conclusions drawn that Artaud’s work and theory is distinct from Surrealism, but still expresses the basic essence of the movement. If one takes Surrealism at its most fundamental aesthetic level, without the iron fist of Breton, it shares the same basic desire for creative freedom as Artaud. Beneath the grand vision of his theory and manifestoes, what Artaud really desired was creative freedom in the theatre. This is what he attempted with the Alfred Jarry Theatre, and it is this essence of his vision which ties him back to the Surrealists. Through his manifestoes in The Theatre and Its Double , Artaud developed the most complete methodology for applying this essence to the Theatre. When you consider the work of other theatre makers who were more explicitly Surrealist in their intentions (most notably Roger Vitrac), It becomes more difficult to call Artaud’s work the movement’s most complete theatrical manifestation with respect to its faithfulness to the movement’s tenets. Vitrac’s texts were more conventionally ‘Surrealist’ than Artaud’s, but Artaud’s work in the theatre was more completely developed and more explicit with its philosophy. As demonstrated in the analysis of Les Mystères de l'amour, Vitrac’s work dipped into Artaud’s theories of cruelty before they were even written, suggesting that they might be an intrinsic property of Surrealism when expressed in theatre. When considering the later works to be influenced by Surrealism that share in Artaud’s theory, this becomes a compelling point. Calling Artaud a Surrealist is probably unfair, because his influence was so profound not as a proponent of Andre Breton’s movement, but as Antonin Artaud. His impact on contemporary theatre is more tangible and widely acknowledged than that of any other practitioner. Artaud and Surrealism are inextricably linked, and shared at their core the desire for creative and

12