Georg Fuchs and the Social Function of Theater: notes on the book The revolution of the theater

– Georg Fuchs and the Social Function of Theater: notes on the book The revolution of the theater – The article presents and discusses some of the proposals of German theater thinker Georg Fuchs (1868-1949) contained in his book The revolution of the theater: conclusions about the Munich Artists’ Theater , published in 1909. Some of Fuch’s interlocutors during his process of creating the theater are presented. As a central axis, the discussion identifies in each of Fuchs’ aesthetic proposals his perspective of understanding art based on the role it should play in society. We thus seek to not only to identify Fuchs’ aesthetic proposals, but also to emphasize, in addition to them, his political objectives. tablish becomes rhythmic movement of the human body in organically cultivated through the movement of a festive crowd p.


Introduction
This article aims to present and discuss the main proposals of German director Georg Fuchs contained in his book Revolution in the Theatre: Conclusions Concerning the Munich Artists' Theatre 1 (Fuchs, 1909). The emphasis here will be on the relation between his aesthetic proposals and his ideals of social transformation; in this sense, the spatial aspect of Fuchs' theater appears as a fundamental point for analysis. As shown by Bernard Dort (2010) and Denis Guénoun (2003), each in their own way, the theatrical space is a fundamental characteristic for understanding the political aspect of theater. It is the architectural space that organizes the encounter between stage and audience and it is precisely in this meeting of people that lies the "[...] political vocation of theater" (Dort, 2010, p. 366).
It is worth noting that this article was based on the first chapter of the author's master's dissertation, presented to the Postgraduate Programs in Performing Arts at the Federal University of the State of Rio de Janeiro (UNIRIO), under the mentoring of PhD Professor Vanessa Teixeira de Oliveira. The main theme of the dissertation was the scenic space proposed by Georg Fuchs in his book above. As this is a first publication, after the completion of the master's research, and due to the scarcity of material in Portuguese on the subject, this article is less an analysis and much more an overview of Fuchs' thought. The proposal is that the other results obtained with the master's research can be published in future articles, which will always have, in this publication, an important reference.

Georg Fuchs and his Contemporaries
Georg Fuchs (1868Fuchs ( -1949 was a German art critic and theater director ( Figure 1). During the early years of the twentieth century, he wrote books that pondered art and theater in Germany, and his most widely circulated books were The Theatre of the Future (1905) and Revolution in the Theatre (1909). Situated in the debates brought by Modern Theater, the questions brought by Fuchs also rethought the art of theater as an autonomous art and the emergence of the figure of the director as the artist who creates this modern stage (Roubine, 1998). References to the work of Fuchs can be found in the writings of other theorists of the time, such as Russian director  Fuchs (1901).
Another artist who was a contemporary to Fuchs and who dialogued with his work was Edward Gordon Craig (1872Craig ( -1966. In his text The Theater in Germany, Russia and England of 1908, which is part of the book On the Art of the Theater, Craig (1964) describes his visit to the theater founded by Fuchs. In the following excerpt, Craig shows his admiration both for the physical aspects of theater, praising the architecture and scenic machinery, and for the public success of the debut show directed by Fuchs: It is completely out of the ordinary, in every way, and yet we see princes lending their support to the enterprise and not calling it 'eccentric' and, withal, the people encouraging it. I tried in vain to find a place for the show that same night: there was not a single one, despite being at the end of the season. Thanks to the kindness of prof. Littmann, I could see, during the day, the stage, the room and the machinery of the sets and lighting. They are unlike anything I have seen to date. [...] It is very small, but very complete. Nothing was arranged at random; the cables, the sets, the lighting fixtures all seem concealed. One would say that everything was put in a closet. All the sets that are being used are suspended in the most careful, most ingenious way imaginable. The stage was ready for the performance of the night, with the furniture covered with cloths. Even though they had been serving for months, the sets were impeccable and not even the meeting angles showed traces of fatigue. Everything looked wonderfully preserved (Craig, 1964, p. 150).
Based on the observations of these two renowned artists of the Modern Theater on the scenic space proposed by Fuchs, the present article has as object of study the book Revolution in the theater 2 , published by Georg Fuchs one year after the opening of the Munich Artists' Theater (Munchen Kunstler-theater) (Figure 2). Despite the proximity of Fuchs' proposals to those of his symbolist contemporaries and the dissemination of his writings at the time, there are currently few works entirely focused on his work 3 . Nevertheless, his name is often mentioned in titles that refer to that specific period in the history of European theater 4 . Source: Littmann (1908, p. 6).
The book Revolution in the Theatre is divided into nine chapters 5 , in which the author develops his main ideas for a transformation of the German theater of the time and points out how he put them into practice in the creation of his theater. The book's epigraph is Rethéâtraliser le théâtre!, whose literal translation would be retheatralize the theater!. In the preface, he affirms that this is the motto of the book and that this is the purpose for which he ponders the transformations that would give rise to that which he calls a revolution in theater.
Two proposals that would support this revolution come to mind: the first would refer to bringing back to theater the old traditions of street theater, popular festivals, Dionysian dithyrambs, while incorporating modern and tasteful aesthetic elements; so that this could be achieved, the stage and the theatrical building were rethought and Fuchs designated this new spatiality as relief stage 6 . These two strands of Fuchs' thought seek only one objective: to make the theater a place that is able to bring the stage and the audience closer together, to generate an overwhelming emotion and an aesthetic experience of harmonious unity for the entire theater community. Thus, throughout the book, the author discusses how his proposals were implemented in the creation of the Artists' Theater and how this new theater should work its various areas.

On the Social Function of Theater
Already in the first chapter, Fuchs presents, even if briefly, all the subjects that he will seek to address throughout the book. These include the architectural transformation of the theatrical building and scenography, with the purpose of evoking a feeling of rapture in the audience; he mentions his understanding of theater as a commercial enterprise and that for that reason it would be necessary to please the public that was not being attracted by the theater of his time. He makes his admiration for Johann Wolfgang von Goethe clear and justifies his concerns in theater as legitimate by the fact that Goethe also reflected on them.
Thus, Fuchs reintroduces the itinerant troupes and the Renaissance theater that employed few scenic elements and theatrical conventions to stage their plays. According to him, this manner of doing theater was lost with the popularization of opera. The influence of foreigners is seen as im-peding the progress of German theatrical art. In this sense, the Thirty Years' War, in the 17th century, is considered an interruption in the German theatrical culture, since its territory had been occupied by other peoples, mainly the French. From then on, there would be an increase in the incorporation of the rules of French classical theater into the German repertoire and promoted by intellectuals of letters such as Johann Christoph Gottsched (1700-1766) (Saadi, 2018).
Similarly to the aims of all cultural movements in Germany today, those of the Artists' Theater should not be understood as a revolt against tradition, but, rather, as an awakening of good tradition. We reestablished where our organic development was interrupted by the Thirty Years' War and other cultural upheavals. Naturally, it would be an impoverishing archaism if -as some romantics demanded -we reintroduced the primitive relations of the stage of the times of Hans Sachs and Shakespeare. This would not correspond to our general culture. Instead, we must strive to create the spectacle that would now exist if the development from the very simple beginning to the present had never been interrupted and if, along the way, all the artistic and technical discoveries had been employed as they were developed 7 (Fuchs, 1909, p. 37-38). Fuchs' book begins with the question: Why do we attend the theater?, and he replies: the audience attends the theater for diversion and entertainment. According to the author, the playwright can achieve different notable goals, touch the audience's soul, explore human experience, etc.; however, if the audience gets bored, the author is not forgiven. The main motivation that would lead the audience to the theaters would be the need to feel a powerful and profound emotion, related to the human need to feel as belonging to a crowd, to a collective, as it happened in great religious rites and in great collective events. It is this feeling of communion that would invest theater with its artistic specificity in relation to other artistic genres and would make it an art in itself.
However, in modern times, we rarely have the opportunity to participate in sumptuous acts or to rush into the turmoil of rampant festivals, or, with a bludgeon in hand, to rage against the barriers of unjust power; we seek new, more greedy ways, partly bourgeois, partly also more refined, spiritualized, in which we could experience the old and strong magic. We gather in sumptuous homes, dress festively, gaze at and let ourselves be gazed at. We walk through crowded corridors and flood our senses in quantity, diversity, This excerpt is particularly interesting, as it shows the social aspect of the theater proposed by Fuchs; that is, he seeks a theater that makes the public feel the emotion of being part of a collective event, yet he does not propose a popular theater. On the contrary, the aim is to try to ensure that an elegant and bourgeois theater can provide overwhelming feelings similar to those felt at major popular events.
In the English version of the book, translator Constance Connor Kuhn, in a note, points out that Fuchs reflects the temperament of his time, because at that historic moment, at the beginning of the 20th century, Germany had been at peace for forty years and the imperial military pageantry, which had always been important and present in German culture, had become just a stereotype. And further states: "The susceptibility of the German public to the emotional excitement of pageantry as it was later exploited by Hitler has been frequently discussed" 9 (Kuhn apud Fuchs, 1959, p. 205). Fuchs' proposal, as also happened with the thought of Richard Wagner (1813-1883), in some way, already touched on points that were important for the propagation and consolidation of the Nazi ideology years later. Despite not being the subject of the present work, this subject paves the way for possible objects of future research, mainly on the role of theater and the spectacle to disseminate ideologies.
Fuchs highlights his main objectives in the creation of the Artists' Theater and in the development of a new stage. He believes that art is nothing more than "[...] a rhythmically ordered satisfaction of this orgasmic desire to intensify life" 10 (Fuchs, 1909, p. 5-6). And, to him, the theater of his time does not achieve this objective, which is why the revolution in theater would be necessary. From there, he presents a strong criticism of the traditional stage model and of literary drama, as both put the stage and the spectator in an opposition relationship, which makes it difficult for the theatrical experience to happen in a unified and harmonious way. In the second chapter, Fuchs further addresses the function of the theater: As we have already recognized, the objective of the theater is to excite and discharge an exuberant tension. If we are so excited we cannot contain this emotion within the limits of the convention. We must rise above conven-tion, above reality, in a cosmos in which the 'world', which in reality is never perceived as a unity, but always as a 'fragmented work', suddenly manifests itself in a harmonious and balanced manner. If that is the goal of art in general, then that is the goal of theater in particular 11 (Fuchs, 1909, p. 54).
The excerpt highlights the feeling of enthusiasm that would go beyond the closed stage of Italian theater, the theatrical convention, and that it would be through art that the viewer would be able to perceive the world in its harmony. This feeling, according to him, is related to the fact that the theater brings together a large number of people in the same space, and this meeting is the main characteristic of the theatrical event. It should not be forgotten, however, that to Fuchs this great meeting does not include the most popular layers of society, it is a collective meeting full of pomp and good taste; such characteristics would be important to really attract the audience that the author wanted to reach. "[...] when we attend the theater, we gather with as many people as possible so together we feel a collective uplift" 12 (Fuchs, 1909, p. 55). This collective uplift is argued by Fuchs as being equivalent to that which Aristotle defined as catharsis: "[...] purification, relaxation of the forces of life through a complete and relentless performance of the upper choir" (Fuchs, 1909, p. 55).
From that moment on, the Greek notion of Choir is introduced in the discussion to address the origins of theater art, which would have appeared initially as a dance, a rhythmic experience of the body in space and associated with the event of a ritual. Gradually, music, poetry, and drama appeared, with the purpose of elevating these sequences of rhythmic movements, that is, theater would be an elevated form of ritualistic dance.
The emergence of the Greek orchestra appears as proof of the importance of the power of catharsis for the creation of a festive crowd in the theater. Now, I do not want to go on describing how the festive crowd moved by the actor gradually feels compelled to create a circle of a particularly exciting movement. This more emotional group enters a more intimate correspondence with him, like a chorus, and applauds him with clapping and shouting. Finally, resorting to musical instruments to animate him more and more, the orchestra develops. Finally, from this narrow circle, the individuals are again pulled towards the actor by the force of his rhythmic attraction and are drawn to his action as playmates. What matters for us here is to es-The festive crowd is related to the idea of unity and has direct consequences on the development of a new scenic space (Fuchs, 1909). The notion of fest appears as a possibility of creating a unity between stage and audience long lost in Western theater (Dort, 2010). The consequence of that was the withdrawal of people with taste from theater, as they no longer found satisfaction in it, and, according to the author, this was due to the theater no longer exercising what would be its real function. The function of theater is, therefore, related to the idea of a festival, a meeting place to celebrate a culture common to the whole community. The theater would be a place of poetry, music, painting and architecture under dramatic regulation, but without repudiating the innate principles of each art.

On the Function of the Playwright
According to Fuchs, drama needs to stop being literary and become theatrical. The playwright needs to attend the theater, think about the stage, understand theatrical activities and think about the rhythmic action of the scene, he needs to be aware of his role as an artist of the scene, and not just of writing. The author attributes to literary drama the main reason for the distancing of theatrical art from its true function. Fuchs does not define a concept of literary drama, he treats the term as usual; however, its main characteristics are criticized from the beginning to the end of his book, and the theater proposed by him is presented, at all times, in opposition to this idea.
The author points out that, in the theater of his time, the dramatic text is constructed far from the theater and the whole stage aims to illustrate it, considering it as the main element and generator of the entire staging. The author also criticizes the psychological character of this text, which does not use all the potential of the theater and has as a characteristic the evident separation between stage and spectators. Literary drama would have forgotten the origins of theater as a fest, a ritual; would have understood the According to Fuchs, the authors who write these dramas would be men of literature, who want to take the drama out of theater, that is, they would not be men of theater and, for this reason, they would not be concerned with the effects produced by the texts in a staging. The following excerpt highlights the importance of the aspect of organizing the staging in the playwright's work; that is, there would be a work of stage director intrinsic to the function of playwright.
In his criticism, Fuchs presents the theater of the time as of bad taste, attended by uneducated people, the texts of the plays would be written in a vulgar way and the characters would be ordinary people. Such characteristics can be identified with the naturalist theater, very widespread in this period, which sought to present in its plays the reality and conflicts of the people and workers. In pursuit of similarity with reality, popular language was used, the text was written in prose and the set and costumes portrayed the hostile environments, as no aspect of reality could be left out (Roubine, 2003). Furthermore, Fuchs claimed that his theatrical proposals clearly separated him from the Meiningen theater -which inspired naturalistic directors across Europe in the late 19th century.
It is worth emphasizing here the similarity of Fuchs' thought with that of Swiss scenographer Adolphe Appia (1862Appia ( -1928. Appia proposes that dramaturgy must arise from movement and for movement. Accordingly, the playwright should move away from naturalist writing and approach, as much as possible, a scene writing: The less the dramatic author makes his characters dependent on the environment, the more he will be a playwright; because by saying playwright one also says director; it is sacrilegious to specialize the two functions. Therefore, we have to establish that if the author does not accumulate them in himself, he will not be able to accomplish neither one nor the other, since it is from their reciprocal penetration that living art must be born. With very rare exceptions, we still do not have that art, just as we do not have that artist. Shifting the center of gravity, we have it as if divided; our dramatic art lies, on the one hand, on the author and, on the other hand, on the director, leaning now on one and then on the other. It should lie, clearly and simply, on one and the same person (Appia, 1963, p. 136-137).
In opposition to literary drama and naturalism, the dramatic poet should act in the theater almost as a director, using the theatrical essence and playing with it, never denying it. For, how could a performance be satisfactory if it denies its own means of expression? Although Fuchs does not speak of the term theatricality throughout the book, he somehow indicates that this theatrical essence must be present in dramaturgy. Real dramatic poetry would seek to develop a living, rhythmic and complete organism, which could arise from the smallest, simplest and most quotidian of humanity. When the physical rhythm is present in the drama, thus also being possible in the stage, the audience would be so absorbed by the events on the stage that these experiences would become everyone's, that is, they would become common. According to Fuchs, this is the reason why we attend the theater in the first place.
What literary scholars know as 'stage knowledge' is knowledge not of the resources and nature of theatrical art, but of the tricks and practices that must be used to drain the theatrical elements from literature and make them usable in theater. For that reason, most men of letters are unable to judge actors and their achievements. The vast majority of good critics in an analysis of a novel or painting show both intellectual acumen and distinct taste, but when they judge an actor they are completely lost and make the most surprising mistakes. This occurs because they are not used to thinking of the actor and the theater as parts of an independent art, but only as instruments of literature 15 (Fuchs, 1909, p. 149).
The playwright must know humanity in its most diverse manifestations so as to be capable of creating his characters. The greater his knowledge of human conundrums, their characteristics, personalities, the greater the possibility for the author to create complex and interesting characters. Moreover, to have a delicate understanding of the possibilities of the forms, which are inherent in the personalities of the actors, to know how to identify the actor and character, their common characteristics and those that need to be worked on. The transformations in the structure of the stage and sce-Beatriz Magno Alves de Oliveira -Georg Fuchs and the Social Function of Theater: notes on the book The revolution of the theater Rev. Bras. Estud. Presença, Porto Alegre, v. 11, n. 3, e105573, 2021. Available at: <http://seer.ufrgs.br/presenca> 12 nography propose a new drama, and more than that, they provide the ideal space for it to emerge.
It was not by chance that the Munich Artists' Theater debuted with the play Fausto by Goethe; according to Fuchs, in addition to being the best dramatic work in German, the first part of the play has a chaotic structure that would present more possibilities for the stage. Therefore, the classic and naturalist styles would not be appropriate for its staging and, thus, Goethe's play was considered to be little dramatic and rarely staged until then. Fausto was not written according to the rules of classical theater, it has numerous changes of set and effects that would hardly be reproduced accurately in the naturalist staging. For these reasons, Fuchs claims to have had a hard time convincing the other artists involved in the theater project to stage such a play.
For this modern style of drama given to us by Goethe in Faust, both classicism and naturalism were inappropriate. Faust was considered 'nondramatic,' and even after so much time it was with great effort that I presented it at the Munich Artists' Theater 16 (Fuchs, 1909, p. 193).
The author describes that, in his staging of Faust, even a spectator who does not understand the German language is able to delight aesthetically with the performance. Its poetic rhythms and harmonies would unveil the complete and intelligible unity of the play (Fuchs, 1909). In order to achieve this effect, he claims to have created a relief stage that always emphasizes the whole scene and the sequence of rhythmic events performed by the actor. The relief stage is always described in opposition to the stage of opera and naturalist theater.

On the Relief Stage
Fuchs presents the differences between an opera show and a theater show, mainly in relation to their stage spaces and their architectures. Theater requires a shallow stage, while the opera needs a deep stage, so that it is possible to place the entire choir. In opera, the choir must not only suggest an optical impression of the crowd as in the plays, the illusion of crowd is created by the sound, so the size of the choir depends on the musical tasks that it will perform on stage. That is, while in theater it is possible to reduce the number of actors and still generate a perception of crowd on stage, in Another fundamental issue in defining the concept of relief stage is the criticism of the traditional or Italian stage. The author questions the need for a deep stage, the use of stage costumes 17 and theatrical illusionism. Fuchs considers that due to the depth of the stage, the actors seem very small on the scene, in addition to the need to use many objects for the stage to be filled, which would make it difficult for the actors to move. To justify his criticism, he addresses Wagner's experience at the Bayreuth Festival Theatre (Bayreuth Festspielhaus), where, even with all the machinery and a good scene painter, it was not possible to reach the desired level of illusionism.
Even if the stage equipment is not the most essential, it still gives us the most tangible evidence of the need for a new stage. In today's average theater, the stage design is, at best, reminiscent of the historical and gender paintings of the sixties and seventies [1860 and 1870] -and should remain at that level. The impossible perspective of traditional scenic boxes, the limelight that pervades everything, the spurious material completely excludes the intervention of the genuine art of painting 18 (Fuchs, 1909, p. 48).
According to Fuchs, the problem was that Wagner wanted a level of imitation of reality that was impossible to achieve with the technologies of the time. The aesthetic solution would be to use artistic suggestion and symbolism to generate in the viewer a feeling close to that desired by the staging. Fuchs recognizes that the relief stage is just one of the different ways to solve the problem of scenic illusion. Creating a scenic unity using techniques that are not related to one another seemed impossible: artificial lights, limelight, a painting in impossible perspective, and the actor's body too small in the middle of the large stage. How could it be possible that the scenographer could create a visual unity with so many disparate elements? Wagner, as Ostini reports, raised 'technical requirements that Böcklin considered artistically unattainable'. And Böcklin 19 was absolutely right in his opinion. Wagner clung to the scenic box with its limelight and machinery, thus excluding the painter's intervention in the true and artistic sense of the word. Wagner achieved nothing more with this impertinence with Böcklin than the conviction, which was later expressed frequently: Wagner did not understand painting. Böcklin, like any true painter, reasonably sensitive to pictorial values, had to try to achieve a unified spatial effect using completely false lighting and contradictory perspectives. Not to mention the rela-

E-ISSN 2237-2660
Beatriz Magno Alves de Oliveira -Georg Fuchs and the Social Function of Theater: notes on the book The revolution of the theater Rev. Bras. Estud. Presença, Porto Alegre, v. 11, n. 3, e105573, 2021. Available at: <http://seer.ufrgs.br/presenca> 14 tion of this fictional spatial effect to the factual and constant size of the human figure that appears in it! 20 (Fuchs, 1909, p. 49).
The definition of relief stage would not be technical, but stylistic. That is, there are different ways to achieve the relief effect, the mechanisms of Artists' Theater would be just one of the ways. The purpose of the relief stage would be to intensify the dramatic experience. This phenomenon would not occur on stage, but in the viewer's mind and spirit in response to what happens on stage. The viewer would be amazed by impressions that would reach him through his senses.
According to Fuchs, it is natural for human beings to stand out from a group, to go ahead, to communicate something. Such act would be a discovery of humanity almost as old as theater itself. According to him, anyone moves to the area before the public, to the proscenium, when they want to communicate with it; with the actor, it would not be different. With this justification, the proscenium is considered the most important feature of theatrical architecture, as it is the dividing line between the audience and the stage.
The actor feels instinctively and knows from experience that in positioning himself in the proscenium he is more effective: both because he has less chance of being covered by a partner, or by some part of the stage; and because he leaves the background far enough behind him, so the background has less power to attract the attention of the audience 21 (Fuchs, 1909, p. 96).
The author poses an important question about lighting and the use of the proscenium: On traditional stages, the lighting predominantly employed the limelight, the front row of lights has the effect of flattening and obfuscating the actor's image if he is very close to it, in addition to making his image closer to a caricature due to the effect caused by the lights coming from below. Thus, Fuchs states that the very use of limelight lighting discouraged an actor's natural tendency to position himself in the proscenium. With the advent of electric light, the stage, the lights and the proscenium must adapt to receive the actor, not the other way around. This was the trend of the Munich Artists' Theater, with all its scenic machinery and its electric lighting system. The essence of art theater, therefore, is not to seek technical innovations, inventions of machines, tricks and devices, but to employ architectural solutions, by which visual arts can create the most favorable framework for drama and for the actor, and the most favorable reception conditions for the viewer 22 (Fuchs, 1909, p. 109).
Thus, Fuchs sought to create a theatrical architecture conducive to the creation of a relief stage. In front of the Artists' Theater stage, there was the orchestra pit, which when not in use was covered and used as an extension of the proscenium. The stage was shallow in relation to its depth, the acting area was proportionally wider than usual. At the Artists' Theater, they sought neither an Italian box nor a panorama, but instead a scenography more favorable to the movement of the bodies, which would unite in a rhythmic pattern. In other words, the stage was left free of many scenic objects, the emphasis was on the rhythmic movement of the actor; thus, the scenography was designed mainly using the resources of scenic lighting.
In the back of the stage, a large screen with a non-realistic painting was modified according to the incidence of light. The objective was not a painting with depth in perspective, but a plan in relief, the screen as the background of the relief and the actors highlighted in relation to that background. By purely architectural means, three planes were created on the stage: a proscenium, a medium stage, which was generally used as a scenic space, and an interior stage where the screen was placed. Regarding the lighting of these spaces, Fuchs (1909, p. 112) states: The front and middle stages receive their light from the front to the top. The upstage has its own independent light sources, arranged in such a way that all levels of lighting and, above all, the atmosphere can be generated by the light itself, according to the laws of painting aesthetics. Leveraging this five-color light apparatus, however, not only enables us to suggest color values, but also chiaroscuro tones and, at the same time, alteration of the stage etc., monumental and wide, and sometimes quite intimate spatial representations 23 .
In his book, Fuchs presents the floor plans and detailed designs of the Artists Theater (Figure 3 and Figure 4): the stage with little depth, the cyclorama at the back of the stage for the light to bounce, the proscenium over the orchestra pit, the audience in auditorium format so that all viewers could have a complete view of the stage. His main reference in this regard  Source : Littmann (1908, p. 21). As architect Max Littmann, responsible for the construction of the Artists' Theater, tells us in his book on the process of building the theater:

E-ISSN 2237-2660
The stage itself, with a 10-meter proscenium opening, was 18.70 meters wide and only 8.70 meters deep. Not only because of the totally novel layout of the space due to the exclusion of the high plane of the stage, but mainly because of the artistic principle, a completely different stage design than what we usually see proved necessary here 24 (Littmann, 1908, p. 31).
Such features of the new stage seek to provide a free space so the arts that contribute to the art of theater can develop. Theater would not reach perfection only as a synthesis of all arts, but as an art in itself. Drama would be possible without word or tone, without set or costume, simply as a rhythmic movement of the human body; however, stage art could enrich these rhythms and forms with the richness of other arts. "Dramatic art is essentially dance, that is, the rhythmic movement of the human body in space" 25 (Fuchs, 1909, p. 55-56).

On the Actor's Work
Based on this idea that theater is fundamentally the actor's movement, Fuchs criticizes the naturalistic theater actor, with his grimaces and few mo-

E-ISSN 2237-2660
Beatriz Magno Alves de Oliveira -Georg Fuchs and the Social Function of Theater: notes on the book The revolution of the theater Rev. Bras. Estud. Presença, Porto Alegre, v. 11, n. 3, e105573, 2021. Available at: <http://seer.ufrgs.br/presenca> 18 vements. According to him, the actor's art originated in dance, that is, it must be the rhythmic movement of the actor's body in space. Thus, the music hall actor and buffoons would be better prepared physically than the theater actors of the time. Fuchs notes the interesting fact that Greek theater emerged in the same period as Greek gymnastics, which would justify an approximation between the actor's work and the gymnast's work, both related to the body and to movement.
Fuchs also refers to the Japanese theater actor, who is praised for his physical fitness and body control, in addition to the absence of long texts on stage, which would favor the actor's movement. The actor's art is an art in itself, independent of dramatic text and staging. Such art would demand from the actor the ability to submit body and soul to the laws of rhythm. Thus, there should be a return to traditions and a revival of the actor's art, which is the most fundamental and essential element of theater. Fuchs' thought about the actor's function in theater is closely related to the thought of Appia (1963, p. 13) on the same subject: The actor's body, alive and mobile, is the representative of movement in space. His role is, therefore, capital. Without text (with or without music), dramatic art ceases to exist; the actor is the holder of the text; without movement, the other arts cannot take part in the action. In one hand, the actor seizes the text; in the other, he holds, as in a bundle, the arts of space; then, he irresistibly brings the two hands together and creates, through movement, the integral work of art. The living body is, therefore, the creator of this art and holds the secret of the hierarchical relations that unite the various factors, as it is at the head. It is through the body, plastic and alive, that we must return to each of our arts and determine their place in dramatic art.
In the excerpt above, Appia presents the importance of the actor's work in the art of theater. In proposing a living art work, he attributes the essence of theater to the movement and, consequently, to the actor, as he is the element capable of generating and uniting all other artistic genres that constitute the theater.
Fuchs reflects on the variety theater, which consisted of different artistic forms gathered together in a single presentation, such as music, acrobatics and monologues. Over time, the variety theater came closer to a light comedy with no intellectual pretensions (Pavis, 2008). Drama in its simplest form is rhythmic, mixing the movement of the body in space. The variety theater is the place where drama in its simplest form is still cultivated today as dance, acrobatics, juggling technique, tightrope, illusionism, wrestling and boxing, games with trained animals, musical performances (songs), masquerades and everything. The dramatic effect of these performances can hardly be denied, as well as their possibility of artistic refinement 26 (Fuchs, 1909, p. 179).
According to Fuchs, this non-intellectualized and popular theater truly knows the functions of drama, as the variety artists understand the joy with which humanity must awaken and make their mind uplifted and proud. The author states that, in general, variety artists come from the lower classes of society and that for this reason they would not have a concern with the aesthetic quality cultivated in the upper classes. Thus, such artists could truly develop their physical and artistic skills. These would be the positive and negative points of the variety theater, because as the artists developed good techniques and good physical fitness, it would only require a treatment of good taste so the variety shows could please a more erudite audience.
However, if we undertake to make a perfect scheme through which variety and art can be unified, we need to ensure that vaudeville not only will not resign from any of its functional and technical values, but that it will embrace certain principles of art that can strengthen the expression of their own characteristics and their own gestures 27 (Fuchs, 1909, p. 184-185). Therefore, the Variety Theater would need to embrace certain principles of art that could strengthen its expression, its characteristics and its qualities. If this theater was not so successful at the time, it would be due to the lack of taste and investment in costumes, sets and makeup. In addition, the author presents one of the main differences between the theatrical building and the spaces used by variety shows, which are usually held in restaurants and nightclubs, where the audience can enjoy drinks and food. In other words, the variety theater would feature a different social dimension than that found in theaters and opera houses, and that would not make it any less important. On the contrary, it is precisely in this aspect that its importance would lie in order to conceive a new theater.  , in the context of preparing the exhibition for the artists' colony of Darmstadt, began to think of an alternative stage model that would satisfy their wishes for the transformation of theatrical art. The new architecture should be presented to the audience with a staging that used its space well, to prove its efficiency. Although the proposal for the construction of the theater did not materialize at that time, still in 1900, Fuchs published in one of his pamphlets that which came to be the origin of the Artists' Theater. He quotes an excerpt from that pamphlet in his book, almost a decade later:

Final Considerations
In accordance with the newly awakened spirit of applied art, the theater objective would now become the basis of scenography, not for the purpose of painting, antique knowledge or the pleasure of reproducing old things. Everything would be simple as to color, graphic design and architecture, personally felt, and designed from the outset in such a way that the work and the actors would come into their own with an incomparably greater and purer effect than has ever been thought possible 28 (Fuchs, 1909, p. 199-200).
The problem of giving theater an organic totality could only be solved by scenic designers or scenographers. The use of the term design here is not trivial, in this historical moment, discussions were taking place about the limits between applied and fine arts. It is worth noting that Behrens is considered one of the creators of the art of design, that is, he was concerned with the creation of a work of art that also had use value. Accordingly, Fuchs realizes the importance of thinking about scenography from this same perspective, that is, a scenography that had a function in the stage, just as his theater sought to have a function in society. Thus, as other symbolists, Fuchs proposes that the work of the scenographer should se separated from the professions of theater painter or decorator.
Then, the context of the arts in Munich was fundamental, as the rapprochement between theater and fine art artists facilitated the creation of the Artists' Theater. Numerous scenic experiments were carried out at the Prince Regent Theatre (Prinzregententheater) and cooperation with the Munich Court Theater (Hofspielhaus München), always in conjunction with Considering all that was discussed about Fuchs' experience at the Artists' Theater, it can be observed that his symbolist aesthetic proposals, in many points, are similar to those of Appia, Craig and Meyerhold. However, continuing Wagner's proposal, Fuchs also has political ideals that underlie all of his aesthetic creation. His interests in relation to the construction of the Artists' Theater, the criticisms of naturalist theater and his political position clearly show that what he seeks with theater is indeed very little revolutionary. Apropos, after World War I, Fuchs abandoned the theater and dedicated himself to the Bavarian separatist movement that sought the formation of an Austro-Bavarian State, whose capital would be Vienna. The movement intended to maintain a monarchical and anti-communist State; to that end, it received support from the crown prince of the Bavarian throne. Due to this political involvement, he was accused of high treason against the government and was sentenced to twelve years in prison. While in prison, he wrote a book on prison system reform (Koss, 2000). In opposition to the consolidation of a liberal capitalist society and in favor of a conservative resumption, Fuchs wanted a theater capable of uniting the German people around their old myths and, for that purpose, he used modern resources and aesthetics. The understanding of theater and art as means capable of generating social transformations would reverberate in the work of several directors throughout the 20th century and, even today, it triggers fervent discussions in the artistic world.  12 In the original in German: [...] wenn wir in das Theater gehen, als uns mit möglichst vielen anderen in einer Erhebung zusammen zu finden, zusammen zufuḧlen (Fuchs, 1909, p. 55). 13 In the original in German: Ich will nun nicht weiter schildern, wie sich allmählich aus der festlichen, von dem Darsteller bewegten Menge ein Kreis besonders stark bewegter loslöst, der sich getrieben fuḧlt, mit ihm in engere Korrespondenz zu treten als Chor, der ihn anfeuert durch Händeklatschen und Schreien, der endlich zu Musikinstrumenten greift, um ihn mehr und mehr anzufeuern, woraus das Orchester erwächst, und wie endlich aus diesem engeren Kreise wieder einzelne durch die Gewalt der rhythmischen Anziehungskraft des Akteurs ganz zu diesem hinubergerissen und als Mitspielende in seine Aktion hineingezogen werden. Uns kommt es hier nur darauf an, festzustellen, daß das Drama auch in seiner komplizierten und vergeistigten Form nichts anderes wird, als es in seinen Uranfängen war: rhythmische Bewegung des menschlichen Körpers im Raum, organisch erwachsen aus der Bewegung einer festlichen Menge (Fuchs, 1909, p. 57).