(Not
to be copied without authorsÕ permission)
PHALLACY
(A
play)
By
Carl Djerassi
Program
Note
Some time
ago, Professors Alfred Vendl and Bernhard Pichler of the University for Applied
Arts in Vienna drew my attention to a superb life-sized bronze of a naked young
man that for several centuries had been described as a Roman original. Recent
modern chemical analysis in their laboratory revealed that it was a Renaissance
cast. The overnight loss of approximately 1400 irreplaceable years had many
consequences for the museum that for over a century had displayed the sculpture
as a jewel of its Antiquities collection. Aesthetically speaking, does that
revisionist attribution make the sculpture less
valuable? Does pricking the balloon of financial inflation automatically also
diminish the art historical merit of the sculpture or the viewerÕs pleasure in
its beauty? And what about the art historianÕs personal and professional
response when an unblemished favorite suddenly becomes irretrievably tainted?
For decades,
I, a chemist-turned-playwright, have also been a serious art collector, who has
been well aware of the disturbing fetishization of many art objects. But
instead of addressing primarily the change in value as a well known art object
is reattributed--a situation quite different when a work, say a presumed
Vermeer painting, is found to be forged by Van Meegeren--I decided to focus on
what effect such reattribution might have on the behavior of the principals involved
in the dispute.
This
dramatic lode has been mined before. Alan BennettÕs play and subsequent BBC TV
film, ÒA Question of Attribution,Ó uses the question of a Titian paintingÕs
authenticity to depict the relation between art historian (Sir Anthony Blunt)
and owner (Queen Elizabeth II) as well as BluntÕs behavior as a notorious
Communist spy. And Simon GrayÕs more recent ÒThe Old MastersÓ-though ostensibly
covering the dispute whether a certain painting was created by Titian rather
than Giorgione-really delves into the ethical and psychological conflict
between art historian (Bernard Berenson) and art dealer (Lord Duveen). In other
words, the principals and the art in those plays have a historical basis, which
however has been altered to make a dramatic point.
And what is
that point in my ÒPhallacyÓ? Here I concern myself with a conflict much closer
to my professional competence: the quirks and idiosyncrasies of art historian
and scientist, when they examine the age of an art object from their grossly
different perspectives: aesthetic and art historical connoisseurship versus
cold material analysis. In addition, I also wanted to explore the ramifications
of a well known character fault that transcends the gulf been art scholar and
scientist: falling in love with a favorite hypothesis and defending it against
all comers and new evidence.
Like other
playwrights working with factual material, I have modified, manipulated,
disguised or even deliberately misused many historical nuggets by claiming the
authorial freedom that any playwright rightly exercises. Thus I request that
any resemblance to the actual principals associated with the ongoing saga of
the putative Roman sculpture in the Antiquities collection of a famous European
museum be largely ascribed to coincidence and that in no respect have I
attempted to damage the reputation of a living scholar. And if the explanation
in my play of what has happened to that original sculpture should in the future
prove to be correct, it is not a reflection of my art historical acumen but
purely a playwrightÕs dumb luck.
Aside from
my interest as a scientist and art collector, there is a deeply personal reason
why I chose this theme for my newest play. Born in Vienna, I emigrated after
the Nazi Anschluss to the USA, where I became a
research scientist. In 2004, the Austrian Government offered me Austrian
citizenship. Since by that time, I had turned into a playwright, what better
token of reconciliation than creation of a play that I situated in the city of
my birth?
Carl
Djerassi
London,
Singapore, Eugene, and Hamburg, Oct. 2004 - Jan. 2005
Cast
DR. REGINA LEITNER-OPFERMANN, middle aged art historian and director of
the Department of Antiquities in an important Austrian museum.
EMMA FINGER, assistant curator of the Renaissance Art Department, late
twenties or early thirties.
DR. REX STOLZFUSS, middle aged Professor of Chemistry and head of the
art conservation department of an unnamed technical institution in Austria.
DR. OTTO ELLENBOGEN, late twenties or early thirties, recent Ph.D. and
assistant to Prof. Stolzfuss.
GERALDO LOPEZ, Spaniard of undetermined occupation (same actor as
Otto Ellenbogen, but speaking with Spanish accent).
DON JUAN OF AUSTRIA (1547 - 1578), illegitimate son of Emperor Charles V
and Hero of the Battle of Lepanto (25 years old).
BARBARA BLOMBERG, Don JuanÕs mother (43 years old).
VOICE OF HIGH SCHOOL STUDENT (sitting in back row of the theatre).
TIME
The recent past in Vienna except for some scenes in Luxemburg in 1572
during Don JuanÕs historically documented stop on his way from Spain to the
Netherlands.
Scene
1. Present time.
REGINA Leitner-Opfermann, director of the Antiquities Department of the
Museum is evidently concluding a lecture to a group of high school students.
REGINA
(With kind and animated voice): So, let me summarize the
salient points of my lecture. I know your teachers expect you to take notesÉ
and I have no doubt that theyÕre going to test you later. But there will be
time to ask your questions on the tour of our Antiquities Galleries. For nowÉ
please, put away your pens and pencils. And use your eyes, your hearts, your
souls.... Absorb the beauty of this, the most important piece of our
Antiquities Galleries: a Roman sculpture from the second century. Discovered
right here in Austria.
(Flash
up image of a bronze sculpture of a naked young man on the screen.)
IÕm sure
your chemistry teacher has told you that bronze is a metal alloy made by
melting copper and tin in varying proportions. You may even have been told that
bronze melts readily and is easily molded. And that it does not rust, is
durable, and takes a fine smooth finish. You may even have been told about the
additional presence of trace metals, but frankly who cares? ItÕs all a bit dull
if you donÕt learn to what fantastically beautiful use this material can be
put. You wonÕt learn that in chemistry!
Bronze
casting is at least 6,000 years old. The earliest bronze works were solid. It
would be 2,000 years before artisans were able to cast hollow interiors, which
opened the door to creating larger works like this beautiful young man, here.
In the sixth century B.C. the Greeks brought bronze casting to a level of
perfection never before achieved.
Tragically,
during the Middle Ages, the acute shortage of metal
needed for weaponry led to the majority of Greek bronze statues being melted
down. The ones you can see in museums are mostly survivors that had been lost
at sea or that had been buried for safe-keepingÉ and accidentally retrieved
centuries laterÉ a fact that is crucial to what youÕll see shortly on our tour.
And finally, the Romans.
Their artistic education began during their conquests of the Greek cities and
the plunder of thousands of the greatest Greek sculptures. The desire to
collect and hoard was apparently insatiable among the wealthy Romans, and after
the supply of originals was exhausted, copies were created. Hence, even if most
valuable originals were irreparably lost, their images have been preserved in
Roman copies.
This young man is one of
the most beautiful and best preserved Roman bronzes that was uncovered 500
years agoÉ not in ItalyÉ but in our own country. And nowÉ letÕs go and visit
this crown jewel of our Antiquities Collection.
REGINA is interrupted
by a voice coming from the theatre.
TEENAGE VOICE (from audience): Frau Director. A
question.
REGINA (Faintly annoyed): IÕll answer questions
during the tour. (Beat). All right. One
question.
TEENAGE VOICE (from audience): If this sculpture is
just a copy of a Greek original—
REGINA (Sharply interrupts): We do not know
whether it is what you call just a copyÉ we believe that it is actually
a Roman original of around 200 AD influenced by the Greek aesthetics of the
Polyclitus school
VOICE (Same teenager from audience):
But how can you tell whether it is a Roman original?
REGINA (Turning defensive): Young man, I have
written an entire book on the subject. You should read it. (SheÕs about to
leave and then has another thought). Suppose he
were just a copy. What then? My figure has not lost an iota of its
ravishing beauty. If it were a Roman cast of a Greek original, it would then be
a clone of the originalÉ and hence as beautiful. You know, most modern
sculptors authorize several bronze casts. The art market considers them
contemporary clones and therefore equally valuable. So whatÕs the difference
with our ravishing figure here?
VOICE (Same teenager from audience):
But a Roman copy of a Greek original is not contemporary—
REGINA (Now truly annoyed): ThatÕs enough, thank
you! WeÕre late for the tour. If you still have some questions, come see me in
my office.
(Steps off podium. EMMA intercepts her.)
EMMA: Frau Director Leitner—
REGINA: Leitner- Opfermann.
EMMA: Sorry.
REGINA: Well?
EMMA: IÕm Emma FingerÉ Renaissance departmentÉ. WeÕve met a few times
before—
REGINA: Yes.
EMMA: Yes. I just wanted to introduce myselfÉ since weÕll be working
together.
REGINA (Surprised): Oh? On what?
EMMA: You havenÕt read the report?
REGINA: What report?
EMMA: Professor Stolzfuss—
REGINA: I hardly know him. WhatÕs this all about?
EMMA: IÕm sorry, I thought the Museum Director had informed you of the
situation.
REGINA: Well, he hasnÕt, and neither has anyone else. Now, if youÕll excuse
me, I have to lead a tour.
Scene 2.
A few days later. ReginaÕs office.
REX:
You donÕt have much use for chemistry, do you?
REGINA
(Disingenuously): Professor Stolzfuss! Now what
makes you say that?
REX:
My son told me about your lecture.
REGINA:
Your son was there?
REX:
According to him, you thought trace metals in bronze were a bit of a bore.
REGINA:
Is that what I said? Frankly, my lecture dealt with the history and beauty of
antique bronzesÉ not chemistry. I barely mentioned your field.
REX:
It registered with my son.
REGINA:
I suppose it would with the son of a chemistry professor. (Beat).
There was a boy who kept asking questions.
REX:
That would be him.
REGINA:
You put him up to it?
REX:
No, noÉ
REGINA:
Are you quite sure?
REX:
I told him about our work on your sculpture, and he—
REGINA
(Starting to get angry): You did what?
REX:
I told him about the results of our work.
REGINA:
I see. And you think that was appropriate? Telling your son about results that
weÕre only discussing now?
REX:
ItÕs not a state secret. Your museum director had asked me to take a look at
your sculpture-
REGINA:
ÒTake a look?Ó
REX:
Yes. We developed some new chemical methods. We got some top-notch new
equipment. WhatÕs wrong with the museum commissioning a new approach to confirm
the putative age of a sculpture-?
REGINA (Wounded):
Putative?
REX:
ItÕs not an insult. More often than not, age is considered putative until itÕs
confirmedÉ even the age of a person. Take my son. In another couple of years,
heÕll have to produce a driverÕs license in order to buy a drink.
REGINA
(Sarcastic): And our museum director came to you for the
driverÕs license of this bronze?
REX
(Enjoying the direction of the conversation): Just a
parking permit. Doubts have been expressed whether it truly belongs in the
Antiquities galleries.
REGINA:
Are you aware of the evidence I have amassed over years of research? Summarized
in a scholarly book that has already been reprinted?
REX:
By your museum bookshop.
REGINA:
YouÕve read the book?
REX:
I always read evidence before questioning it.
REGINA:
Are you suggesting I donÕt?
REX:
It is not meant personally. A scientistÕs business is to question all
evidence and then to confirm or refute it through independent means.
REGINA:
You read my book from beginning to end?
REX:
Eventually. But I started at the end.
REGINA:
You mean the last chapter?
REX:
The index.
REGINA:
The index?
REX:
Yes, the index. And looked for the words Òtrace analysisÓ and Ònickel.Ó Now of
course, their absence is clearer since according to my son you find them dull.
REGINA:
Why did you start with those words?
REX:
Because Roman bronze has a very low Nickel content.
REGINA
(Sarcastically): I am delighted to hear that.
REX:
I wouldnÕt be if I were you.
REGINA:
Why not?
REX:
Your sculpture contains a lot of nickel. Rather typical of Renaissance bronze.
(Beat).
REGINA:
Say that again.
REX:
The nickel content of the sculpture is typical of Renaissance—
REGINA
(Interrupting): And you told this to our Museum Director?
REX:
Of course.
REGINA:
Instead of coming to me?
REX:
ButÉ he was the one who requested we examine your sculpture. Anyway, what
matters here is the nickel content.
REGINA:
YouÕre saying that our sculpture could not be of Roman origin? That all Roman
bronzes, without exception, had low nickel content?
REX:
I didnÕt say without exception—
REGINA:
You see?
REX:
IÕm saying itÕs extremely unlikely. And thatÕs why IÕm here. As a courtesy
call. To tell youÉ before informing anyone elseÉ what additional chemical tests
we carried out to prove our assumption-
REGINA
(Pouncing on this): Assumption!
REX:
Yes.
REGINA:
So, youÕre just making an assumption?
REX:
Well, no, because we carried out further tests—
REGINA:
Nonetheless, these tests were all based on your assumption. You assumed that
the sculpture is a Renaissance work. That all the evidence in my bookÉ all 345
pagesÉ is hogwash.
REX:
WellÉ hogwash, noÉ I wouldnÕt say that, not exactly hogwash—
REGINA: You see, this is what I find so I infuriating.
You slavishly follow the rules of chemistry you learned as a studentÉ lessons
you now teach to your studentsÉ who will then teach it to their
students, itÕs sterile crap—
REX
(Outraged): Crap?
REGINA (Ignores
interruption): I said ÒsterileÓ crapÉ consisting of
rules promoted by art-hating boors, shielded from any sense of beauty by a
dense fog spread from ear to ear. You disembowel every vestige of aestheticsÉ
you ignore style, form, patinaÉ in fact all connotative accompaniments. (Deep
breath). You remind me of É an
overzealous mouse trying to act like a rat.
REX: Excuse
me?
REGINA: Someone really ought to prick that balloon of
self-righteousÉ pompousÉ simplistic arrogance of yours. No, not simplisticÉcocksure.
Transforming the wine of aesthetics into vinegar! How typical of you chemists.
When chemists dabble with art, the best that can be said is the results are
unpredictable.
REX: Unpredictability is what science is all aboutÉ
REGINA:
Is it really? Then why doesnÕt that teach you humilityÉ rather than arrogance?
And why not recognize the importance of visual beautyÉ a concept that barely
exists in your chemical world.
REX:
For this discussion, the beauty of the sculpture is not important. Even the
sculpture is not important—
REGINA: So what is?
REX: Truth.
REGINA: ThatÕs all?
REX: ThatÕs all.
REGINA: How pathetic. And if the beauty of this
sculpture is not important, what about art?
REX: Define Art.
REGINA: An image from the mirror of life.
REX (Derisive): Good
God!
REGINA: All right then. How about Art being everything
other than what you see in the mirror?
REX: Better! But how necessary is that?
REGINA: Art is never necessary. It just happens to be
indispensable.
EMMA: She was still steaming when she told me about
her meeting.
OTTO: She really described him as an overzealous
mouse?
EMMA: What are you getting so worked up about?
OTTO:
She meant all chemists, which includes me. If youÕre going to side with your
boss, what are you doing hanging out with the enemy?
EMMA: SheÕs not my boss. I am a curator in the
Renaissance department. I was lent to her by the big bossÉ the museum directorÉ
to help her get out of this mess. Because a mess in the Antiquities department
is a mess for the museumÉ especially when dealing with such an important work.
Besides, IÕm not hanging out with youÉ IÕve barely started hanging out.
OTTO: It must be chemistry.
EMMA (Teasing): The
authority speaking.
OTTO: You knowÉ I
think IÕm in love with you.
EMMA: Nice change of topic. You never told me that
before.
OTTO: Not in so many words.
EMMA:
But youÕre quoting.
OTTO: What do you mean?
EMMA: ItÕs a quoteÉ itÕs been said millions of
times.
OTTO: But thatÕs true of everything said between
lovers.
EMMA: Listen. ThereÕs still a way to go on that
lover front.
OTTO: WellÉ what would you say if you loved someone?
EMMA: You want to hear it now?
OTTO: Of course.
EMMA (Reflective): If I
really loved him? (Pause). I might say: ÒIs there a way
to keep my soul from touching yours?Ó
OTTO (Startled and pleased):
Wow! Did you just think of that?
EMMA (Softer). ÒBut everything that touches me and you/draws us
together, making one from two,/as one bow gives two strings a single tongue.Ò
OTTO: My God!
EMMA: ÒUpon what
instrument are we two spanned? And what musician holds us in his hand?Ó
OTTO: You couldnÕt have thought of that just now.
EMMA: I didnÕtÉ I remembered it. Because IÕm
wondering whether one single voice can be teased out of two such different
strings as yours and mine?
OTTO: Who wrote that?
EMMA: Rainer Maria Rilke.
OTTO: So you were quoting as well.
EMMA: YesÉ but that wasnÕt said millions of times
before.
OTTO: Frau Opfermann has turned you against me.
EMMA: She doesnÕt know about you. (Beat). And her name is
Leitner-Opfermann. Opfermann was the name of her former husband.
OTTO (Dismissive and mocking):
ÒLeitner-Opfermann!Ó I canÕt stand those hyphenated names. They reek of
compromise.
EMMA: She wonÕt drop it because she made the mistake
of publishing her book under that name. A book whose basic premise your hapless
professor is now questioning. She expects to be called Frau Director
Leitner-Opfermann. How long have you been in Vienna?
OTTO: Long enough.
EMMA: Clearly not long enough to understand that
titles still count for something here.
OTTO: Not with
everyone. I call my boss ÒRex.Ó
EMMA: Not ÒProfessor?Ó
OTTO: IÕd barely started working in his lab when one
day he said, ÒJust call me Rex.Ó He laughed, but I knew what he meant. A king
doesnÕt need another title.
EMMA: I hate to think what would happen if I called
her by her first name.
Scene
4. ReginaÕs
office. Continuing where we left
off with Rex and Regina.
REGINA: What do you think of Klee?
REX: IÕm into bronzeÉ not clay.
REGINA: Paul Klee.
REX: I see.
REGINA (Dismissive):
So you have heard of him?
REX: I donÕt have to put up with this.
REGINA: WellÉ how do you like Klee?
REX: Is this relevant?
REGINA: Indeed. Because hereÕs what Klee told a
chemistÉ
REX (Prickly): What kind
of a chemist? Analytical? Organic ? Physical? (Beat). Or
was it a cook that he mistook for a chemist?
REGINA: A famous chemist.
REX: WhatÕs his name?