In our class discussion about existentialism, “theater of the absurd” was mentioned, and I wanted to see if I could connect it to something in my niche of interest. As I was thinking of different media that could connect to this concept, I thought back to one of CYSO’s (Chicago Youth Symphony Orchestra) spring concerts where we performed Petrushka by Igor Stravinsky. This work fell into my niche of Russian art (My mom is Russian, and I lived there for a year. I spent a majority of my time in theaters, museums, and showcases.), and I wanted to explore it through the lens of the “theater of the absurd.” 

To start, I want to give some context on the piece itself. This work holds a large significance in the arts as a whole. Firstly, this work was originally a ballet meant to be performed by Diaghilev’s Ballets Russes. This dance company holds an important position in the history of dance as the Ballets Russes troupe pushed the envelope in terms of style, choreography, and performance. They performed their productions in Paris during the early 20th century and were constantly met with outrage from the public who, at the time, was revolted by the dance troupe’s departure from traditional performance. Arguably of equal significance is Petrushka’s legacy on the world of classical music. Stravinsky’s work in the beginning of the 20th century broke the preceding norms of classical music. His use of dissonance, complex rhythm, and new approach to musical form broke away from the somewhat rigid traditions of classical music and opened the door for experimentation in the ways in which composers convey a message. These complexities made Petrushka a stand alone work, pushing it past being just a ballet score. 

Now that I gave you a perhaps unnecessary recap of the significance of the play, here is how I believe it connects to our conversation about existentialism. In the ballet and score, Petrushka has a defined narrative. It follows Petrushka, a living puppet who experiences love, jealousy, and despair, ultimately leading to his death. To me, Petrushka represents the human condition. His character is a puppet, meant to highlight the lack of radical subjectivity humans have. Throughout the story, he searches for meaning through “human systems” (i.e. love). In the end, his search for meaning through these means is futile, leaving him in a state of despair. The story follows him past death, as in the closing of the work, Petrushka taunts and curses the purposefully ambiguous “Creator” for causing his unhappiness. Ultimately, I think this piece of art comments on the same things as existentialism: how the search for meaning through made up systems is done in vain. Petrushka’s story explores the binaries of freedom and confinement, the struggle of an individual in an absurd and senseless world, and the line between the illusion and reality of life.

I think it is important to mention that this work precedes the formal movement of existentialism, so I can’t formally say this is an intentional work of the “theater of the absurd”; however, I find it interesting that this work was developed and performed in France, where this philosophy would be explored a few decades later by Camus and Sartre.

If you are interested you can watch part of the film adaptation of the ballet on Youtube. It is wordless like the ballet but has more elaborate sets, costumes, and staging (I recommend reading a libretto). In some ways it is absurd simply based on the artistic choices in the music and production (you will see what I mean). Also it is important to mention that the adaption is filmed in 1990’s Russia, a time and place where blackface was acceptable in theater.