WHY Grotowski in Pontedera? I am oftenasked this question.

To be able to answer – from the Pontederapoint of view, of course – I will try to outlinesome relevant facts that eventually broughtGrotowski to start his work in Pontedera in1986. Other than the long-term collabora -tion between the Centre for Theatre Researchand Ex peri mentation in Pontedera and theLabo r a tory Theatre in Wroclaw, and our deter-mination, major political events in Polandhere played a significant role.

The first visits of Grotowski and theLaboratory Theatre to Italy date back to the1960s, marked by two main events: thepublication of Eugenio Barba’s book Allaricerca del teatro perduto (In Search of a LostTheatre, 1965) and the performances of TheConstant Prince at the Spoleto Festival in1967. Nevertheless, only in the 1970s did theimpact become strong enough to initiate awide and deep influence. This was due to thepublication of the Italian edition of Towardsa Poor Theatre in 1970 and to the LaboratoryTheatre’s memorable participation in theBiennale Festival in Venice in 1975. Here, foralmost two months, the Lab ora tory Theatre

carried out a complex programme, whichincluded workshops, paratheatrical projects,work encounters with young Italian theatregroups, and twenty presentations of Apoca -lyp sis cum Figuris in a converted gun powdermagazine on the island of San Giacomo inPaludo.

The participation of the Polish Laboratoryin the Biennale Festival marked the profes -sional biography of a generation of theatrepeople, among them the young group thatwas part of the Centre at Pontedera. Severalgroups and companies came into being,while others disbanded. For many, it was likea new birth, a new life in the theatre. Para -doxically, all this happened a few years afterGrotowski announced his exit from thetheatre.

The Centre for Theatre Research and Ex -peri mentation was born in Pontedera in 1974

on the crest of the wave of the independenttheatres movement, and very soon it becamethe leader of this constellation of theatres.From its beginning, Eugenio Barba and JerzyGrotowski were the essential references forthe Centre, and even something like its do -mest ic ‘gods’.

ntq 25:4 (november 2009) © cambridge university press doi:10.1017/S0266464X09000621 333

Carla Pollastrelli

‘Art as Vehicle’:Grotowski in PontederaIn this testimony, Carla Pollastrelli charts the main stages leading to Grotowski’ssettlement in Pontedera in Italy and to the creation of the Workcenter of Jerzy Grotowski.As the Year of Grotowski, supported by UNESCO, draws to a close, her words provide afitting tribute to a man whose influence has surpassed all geographical boundaries,whether those of his native Poland, adoptive Italy, or place of temporary refuge, the UnitedStates. Carla Pollastrelli is the co-director of the Fondazione Pontedera Teatro. PontederaTeatro. From 1986 to 2000 she was an executive of the Workcenter of Jerzy Grotowski,which in 1996 was renamed the Workcenter of Jerzy Grotowski and Thomas Richards.She has edited translations of Grotowski’s texts in Polish into Italian since 1978, and isthe co-editor with Ludwig Flaszen of Il Teatr Laboratorium di Jerzy Grotowski, 1959–1969:testi e materiali di Jerzy Grotowski e Ludwik Flaszen con uno scritto di Eugenio Barba(Jerzy Grotowski’s Laboratory Theatre, 1959–1969: Jerzy Grotowski and Ludwig Flaszen’sTexts and Materials and a Text by Eugenio Barba (Fondazione Pontedera Teatro, 2001;second edition, La Casa Usher, 2007), and the collection of Grotowski’s texts, Holiday eteatro delle fonti (Holiday and the Theatre of Sources, La Casa Usher, 2006).

Two key words, which, today, are quitebanal but which then were emblematic ofthe renewal of the theatre taking place, weredirectly drawn from Grotowski’s experience,inspiring the practice of many groups inthose years. The first was ‘laboratory’, whichreferred to theatre (antibourgeois) outside con -ventional spaces, where a different relation -ship between actors and spectators existed,together with the necessity of working in anensemble, where the process was more im -portant than the result. The second key wordwas ‘training’ (the term used in English, ofcourse), which referred to the practice of self-teaching – another notable term – by thoseyoung actors who did not have, or refused tohave, an academic education. ‘Training’ alsodenoted an ethical approach to the work ofthe actor.

In the spring of 1977, I landed in Ponte -dera at the invitation of Roberto Bacci, thedirector of the Centre for Theatre Researchand Experimentation, whom I had met dur -ing the 1975 Biennale, where I was workingas an interpreter for the Laboratory Theatre.My dowry consisted of the theatre acquain -tances and contacts that I had made duringmy long periods of study in Poland.

We carried out several projects with Polishtheatres, artists, and scholars at the Centre. Inparticular, we established a strong, sys tem -atic link with Grotowski’s Laboratory Theatreand organized workshops, seminars, andparatheatrical projects. In 1979, we presentedApocalypsis cum Figuris in Pontedera – theLaboratory Theatre’s last performance. Atthe same time, I worked on translations andpublications as an authorized translator oftexts by Grotowski, Ludwig Flaszen, andother scholars close to the activities of theLaboratory Theatre.

In the summer of 1980, Poland compelledthe attention of the entire world due to theextra ordinary action of the independent tradeunion Solidarnosc (Solidarity). After the coupd’état of 13 December 1981 which imposedmartial law, Grotowski left Poland and, aftera short visit to Denmark, came to Italy at theinvitation of the Centre in Pontedera. Herehe was joined soon afterwards by the inter -national group of the Theatre of Sources and

by the company of the Laboratory Theatre.For several months in 1982, in spite of theprevailing precarious conditions and the un -certainty of his future prospects, Grotowksicarried out his activities in Italy betweenPontedera, Volterra, Rome, and Santarc an gelo.Our collaboration and friendship streng th -ened during that cru cial and drama tic period.

Towards the end of 1982, Grotowksidecided to ask for political asylum in theUnited States. It was only in the autumn of1984 that he was able to travel to Italy again,and it was quite natural for us to proposethat he create a base for his work in Ponte -dera. In December of the same year, togetherwith Roberto Bacci, we had preliminary talksto assess the possibility of establishing aninstitute directed by Grotowski, with full art -istic independence; the Centre was to ensurethe administration, logistics, and organ iz a -tion, as well as adequate space at Gro tow -ksi’s personal disposal. Our proposal was akind of carte blanche offered to a great masterby a small theatre with limited resources.

Eventually, in August 1986, we started theWorkcenter of Jerzy Grotowski. It was notmeant to be a drama school, or a workshop,or a training centre, but a creative institutefor the continuous education of artists whowere responsible for themselves, and wherethe elements of artistic craftsmanship werea vehicle for individual development. Thiswas not easy at a time when the idea of theproduct and the image common to businesspredominated even in the arts, and the ideaof research only seemed to make sense whenapplied to the market or to technology.

So, in the beginning, there were Grotowski,Thomas Richards, and a few collaboratorswho, at different times, subsequently left theWorkcenter. There were also sessions inwhich participants for the long-term prac -tical programme were chosen. Young peoplecame from all over the world. One of the firstto appear was Mario Biagini, who is now theassociate director of the Workcenter, withThomas Richards as its director.

We, in the Centre for Theatre Researchand Experimentation, knew little more thanthat. Of course, we were aware that this wasa new phase in Grotowski’s artistic trajec -

334

tory, and he himself often stressed that thiswas the last: in any case, it continued foralmost fourteen years. We were also awarethat transmission was an important aspect ofthis last phase. It was not until after one yearof activity that Peter Brook, with a brilliantflash of intuition, defined the research devel -oped at the Workcenter as ‘Art as Vehicle’ –meaning that the work-opus is a sort ofvehicle for work on oneself.

We thought we understood: words wereknown to us. They were ‘transmission’,‘tradi tion’, ‘individual development’, ‘workon oneself’. In actual fact, I have the impres -sion that we were like ants sitting on an ele -phant. We were fascinated by the evocativepower of Grotowski’s texts, talks, and lec -tures, but often did not understand that cer -tain formulations had to be taken literallyand not like a sort of great metaphor. It didnot dawn on us that tradition was not simplya matter of knowledge or a model to bereferred to, but that it was transmitteddirectly from one person to another throughresearch and practice.

It became usual to compare the Work -center to a kind of hermitage – and this

especi ally in the beginning. Yet, the retreat-like situation of the Center was due, on theone hand, to the demands of the work and,on the other, to Grotowski’s health. Hisillness dictated a sort of complex ritual in hisrelationships and his rare public appear -ances and comments.

Only two years after the Workcenter hadstarted could we witness, together with a fewother invited people, the nature of the work.As far as I am concerned, it was a shock – theshock we feel when we are con fronted withabsolute rigour, impeccable crafts manship, adiscovery of the potential en coded in thehuman being’s organic presence, and withan unknown form of art.

For fourteen years, Grotowski was, for theCentre at Pontedera, like a hidden heart,pulsing and radiant. When I think back tothe circumstances that led to setting up theWorkcenter, I believe that our merit lay inour contribution to creating the necessaryconditions that allowed the master in exile tobuild a bridge to the future.

Translated from the Italian by Carla Pollastrelli with Maria Shevtsova

335