Mother Courage Part 1

As the introductory materials noted, Brecht was a die-hard Marxist, and this play pretty much demands a Marxist analysis. Brecht’s ideas about the wealthy and powerful’s economic incentive for war is obvious, but I think there’s a deeper point as well. Many (most?) of the characters in this play strive to be good people, but the social structures of wartime prevent them from or achieving this goodness, or at the very least it allows those in power to exploit their goodness. Find an example of a character in the play trying to make the right decision, and look at what factors complicate their choice. Is a better choice possible? Why or why not? 

Another important theme in this play is the commodity. In addition to people, the play is populated with numerous important things… the red high-heeled boots, the cook’s pipe, Mother Courage’s wagon. Look closely at a passage that centers around one of these things. What gives it its power? Is the power the thing has over the characters justified? Why or why not? 

Naming the protagonist of this play “Mother Courage” and placing her name in the title is a bold move by Brecht… it’s almost confrontational in the way that it forces the audience to examine both the character herself and what the concept of courage might mean in the play. Do you find Mother Courage courageous? Why or why not? If Brecht has redefined the term courage to mean something else within the world of the play, then what does it mean? How might we apply this lesson to our own lives? 

Though Brecht’s play is resolutely modern in many respects, it also reaches back to the medieval form of the morality play for much of its structure (remember we read one morality play this semester: The York Crucifixion). Modern readers tend to find morality plays one-dimensional and preachy; are these criticisms that we might apply to this play? Why or why not? Do you think that Brecht saw these characteristics of the genre as flaws or as strengths? What leads you to this conclusion?