Galileo Galilei

Galileo is not a Hero; He is a Common Man Who Succumbs to Extreme Pressures of Society and Authority

Despite his courage to venture into unexplored realms of science and thought, Galileo is not a hero. He is only a man. Galileo is made completely human. In the quest for a hero, one might ignore his almost hedonistic desire for food, thought, and fine wine and the sacrifices that he makes to acquire money. These characteristics of Galileo are revealed early in the play, when he plagiarizes another man's telescope invention in order to get a salary raise from the city, the Pope says, "He has more enjoyment in him than any other man I ever saw. He loves eating, drinking and thinking, to excess. He indulges in thinking bouts! He cannot say no to an old wine or a new thought".

However, one cannot ignore a hero's cowardice in the face of physical pain. In this light, he is reduced from hero to ordinary man. In this scene, the Pope and the Inquisitor are in the midst of an argument over the pending examination of Galileo by the Inquisition and the torturous methods that may be involved. The scene subtly reveals the evil at the heart of the Inquisition. The Inquisitor states, "He is a man of the flesh. He would soften at once" This describes the basic human instinct to shrink from pain. Every man has his breaking point and Galileo is no different. Also, Galileo is a man of science; he knows more of how pain can be inflicted than most men. As the Inquisitor later adds, "Mr. Galilei understands machinery" With this knowledge added to the fear of physical discomfort, Galileo later does what most men would do under the circumstances: he recants. Because this scene reveals the negative side of the Church and the human-ness of Galileo, the audience is not distracted from the criticism of the institution. If Galileo had been portrayed as a hero, that aspect of the story would have taken precedence over the theme of institutional control; the heroics would linger and the criticism would be forgotten. Brechet is also reminding us that heroes are unnecessary, man is capable of anything if he opens his mind, just as Galileo does.

Brechet clearly disagrees with institutions that hold complete control over the common man. Scene 11 illustrates just how broad and deep the control of the church is at this point in Galileo's life. Here we see only two characters, both officers of the Catholic Church, each on separate sides of the issue. Oddly enough, the individual who relents is the higher in rank, the Pope. He should have complete control because he is second only to God in the Catholic hierarchy; he is a man of science, but he is also a tool of religion, as the Inquisitor reminds him: “Ah, that is what these people say, that it is the multiplication table. Their cry is, 'The figures compel us,' but where do these figures come from? Plainly they come from doubt. These men doubt everything. Can society stand on doubt and not on faith? ……….and now the mathematicians turn their tubes on the sky and announce to the world that you have not the best advice about the heavens either up to now your only uncontested sphere of influence”

The Pope's duty is to serve God and tend his flock on earth, and he, like any shepherd, cannot allow God's people to wander from their faith. He must have obedience and loyalty in the name of God, and therefore must censor anything of detriment to the greater cause; despite his personal beliefs, he must do whatever is necessary to uphold the Church and it's control over the people. Thus, even the Pope falls under the cloak of the Church. He is a slave to duty and must answer first to his position and second to his personal feelings. As the Inquisitor tells him, the fate of faith is in his hands: “Doctors of all chairs from the universities, representatives of special orders of the Church, representatives of the clergy as a whole, who have come believing with childlike faith in the word of God as set forth in the Scriptures, who have come to hear Your Holiness confirm their faith: and Your Holiness is really going to tell them that the Bible can no longer be regarded as the alphabet of truth?”

He is under tremendous pressure to save the faith of the people, thereby preserving the foundations of society. The Pope must choose between duty and conscience he is adamantly against Galileo's condemnation, but so many lives would be shattered if the common people were told that there was more to the universe than they could find in the Bible. Like the little monk's parents, they would feel very alone.

"'There is no eye watching over us, after all,' they would say. ’We have to start out on our own, at our time of life. Nobody has planned a part for us beyond this wretched one on a worthless star. There is no meaning in our misery'"

The people rely on the Church to lead them to a better life in heaven; their faith is all that they know. It is the Pope's duty to preserve the unity that comes from shared faith, and because he is controlled by that which he governs, he cannot refuse to punish Galileo for fear of social collapse.

Brechet cleverly uses Scene 11 to plant seeds of thought in the minds of his audience members. Through the controversy of Galileo's life and the circumstances surrounding his session with the Inquisition, Galileo explores both the dangers of institutional control and the folly of elevating men to a heroic status. One will only be disappointed when both prove fallible.

Conflict Between the Individual and the World

Most of the time Brecht portrayed a clash between the ends means between the past rational way and the present Reality or we can say the conflict between the individual and the world. It energy through different ways as a conflict between the old order and the new world, as far as Brechtian style is concern he showed the collision between the two irreconcilable ideologies.

In the plays he showed the stagnant traditional view of religion and also the pasteurization of the moral standards with an unaccommodating ideas of the established tradition but it is a human need to redefine all the rigid ad orthodox nations street’s Galileo is a historical personality but its prior concern is to change the whole rigid old structure of the society is based on the so-called religious beliefs.

Galileo character seemed the representative of new scientific view, which is opposed by the obsolescent elongation of the church. The whole depiction of the church in `life of Galileo’ is dictatorial one, which has a complete hold over the political matters and also on science. It seems that the domination on both classes as an opposition for the new world order or you can say free research. ‘Science is ruined and church is sitting on it with fat behind’

So we can say that Galileo’s new invitation is challenging because it shows the new idea about science and it became a threat to the social standards. The protagonist is of the opinion that in his day’s astronomy has reached the market place and has thus broken the monopoly of an exclusive coterie. In this play when the balled singer announced that the earth is hot the center of the sun, then whole order of the society turned upside down. The builder will keep his building for himself and the woodchopper will burn his own fuel whereas.

‘Princes will have to wax their own boots’

The emperor can bake his own bread for orders the soldiers want care two hoots

They’ll go for stroll instead’

The whole scenario of Galileo society was so much stagnant that if they start to think about the new idea that awards questions arises from them. The sees the topsy-turvy Copernican macrocosm as a working model for their own social microcosm. It seemed that old order felt a threat this dread is of an existential nature like that of a little mimic’s company peasants who without a divinely appointed order will begin to say; ‘There is no meaning in our misery hunger is simply not having eaten and not a Test of strength’

The language or linguistic change is refocused in scene 4 when the Aristotelian philosopher commences an arid disputed by Galileo that his lens-polisher will not be able to follow the argument.

Brecht’s Anti-villain hero Galileo breaks an age old age idea about the universe but also shatters the traditional concept of a hero because he accepts not virtue but martyrdom.

In the end we can say that Brecht does not simply dismiss religion as kind of pre­-scientific superstition and also its necessity. In the clash between religion and. Marxism Brecht not only reconcile religion with dialectical materialism but also to develop human socially in which religion necessity is denied.

“Life of Galileo” As an Epic Drama.

The literary term ‘Epic Theatre’ is customarily applied to a form of opus in which the author recounts a story, using as many episodes and characters as a comprehensive account of his subject cries out for. “Life of Galileo” by Berchet is a play pregnant with all the stipulations of an epic drama. The play is a beauteous addition in the world of Epic Theatre with narrative idiosyncrasies, storyline ins and outs, high-principled theme and panoramic characters.

The term “Epic Theatre” which was first manipulated in Germany in the 1920’s and has become implicitly associated with the name of Brechet. From the beginning of his career, Brechet had to be skirmish in the face of battle against the prevalent theatre of his day which he dismissed as ‘culinary’ since like connoisseur, it delighted the sense of taste without encroaching on the mind.

For Brechet, the traditional or dramatic theatre was a place where the audience were absorbed into a comforting fallacy which played on their emotions and left them haggard, but with a sense of satisfaction which biased them to accept the world as they found if what he himself was looking for, was a theatre that would help to metamorphose the world.

So, life of Galileo is an interpretation of Brechet’s Thespian thought. Narration has been given before starting any scene that is a major characteristic of an epic drama. In this play, the author relates an account in a way that invites the on lookers to consider the events involved and then to make their own evaluation of them.

The epic drama has been fabricated as a montage of independent incidents, which shows a process taking place. It moves from scene to scene by curves and jumps which keeps the audience on the ball to the way in which things are happening. So that, they may, at length, be capable to judge whether that is in right way. For an instance, in the first scene, Galileo succinctly hints at telescope but in fourth and fifth scene, it is described point by point. Moreover, role of monks proceed scene to scene. Change for the amelioration lies at the centre of Brechet’s thinking. It shows his ripened sagacity. This propounds that the hero of the play should not be a fixed character. Galileo in the play has been presented as a round character. He, in the first version of the play, appears to be an ardent satirist and a supercilious scientist who is fully assertive of his new theories that will change the entire world, but in due course, he himself declares his scientific verdicts to be null and void under the menace of torture.

Another characteristic of “Life of Galileo” as an epic drama is that man’s thinking is inured by his social situation and will change if that changes. When Sagredo puts Galileo on the alert that his discovery is theological dynamite, Galileo insists jubilantly, “Humanity will accept rational proof.” But in the end of the play, the state of affairs and situations changes his outlook. It makes us feel that hero is forced to be decisive.

As an epic play, “Life of Galileo” is ample with arguments. Galileo as well as men of the cloth make arguments on their behalf to substantiate their ideas right. Galileo gives arguments to a mathematician, “Gentleman to believe in the authority of Aristotle is one thing, tangible facts are another. You are saying that according to Aristotle, there are crystal spheres up there, so certain motion just cannot take place because the stars would penetrate them. But suppose, these motions could be established? Might not that suggest to you that those crystal spheres do not exist? Gentleman, in all humility, I ask you to go by the evidence of your eyes.”

Unlike traditional drama, in his play, arguments have been given with ratiocination in lieu of experiences and feelings. In this play, Brechet portrays a world that is tangible, limitless and in the strength of reality that is adaptable and able to alter. It turns the spectator into an observer and instigates him for actions.

At the end of the play, the discrepancy between the scientific and other developments of Galileo’s time and the straight local social structures that prevented them from being taken for a ride, for the general benefit would have left the audience with unequivocal questions about the nature of society.

Like a master-piece epic drama language in “Life of Galileo” varies with character. Galileo strikes a scientific ad logical tone. He uses aphoristic and figurative language; it is intentionally made striking to lend force to his damnation. By contrast, the procurator’s language is occasionally flairy while that of the Florentine Mathematician and philosopher is in fun chichi and double-edged. Galileo’s change with Andrea and Mrs. Sarti are direct and laconic as well as taciturn. Vanni introduces the vocabulary of manufacturing industry into the play. The Life of Galileo is replete with a number of literary, Biblical allusions and quotations from Dante, V Roe and Einstein. This stylistic choosing of the references also lend colours to its recognition as an epic drama.

In epic theatre the stage setting of the play was always a general, traditional and historical. Props (including doors) and furniture were to be purely realistic and above all of social and historical interest, costumes were to be individualised and to look threadbare. The props and pieces of scenery for “Life of Galileo” were portable and easy to assemble and remove. The bareness of the stage brings the action to light in a cool, unatmospheric space which was intended to counter-balance the relative lack of Epic form in the writing.

Lastly, “Life of Galileo” is an above board effort of Brechet in writing an Epic in which he goes through with flying colours. Epic theatre cuts across the traditional divisions completely and brings the people to the point of recognition.

Conflict Between Faith and Doubt in Galileo

Brecht's Galileo dramatizes the warfare between faith and doubt (reason). It has been widely assumed that faith is the foundation of religion. Religion comes into existence only through the agency of faith. In contrast, science comes into being on the strength of doubt and reason. Disciples of science are of the view that doubt is the gateway of science, whereas faith is the matrix of religion.

Since time immemorial people have been persuaded that faith is the only way to truth. This view has an absolute say in the community of religious people. In the community of the seventeenth century Christian thinkers in the west this view had gained an absolute hand. The 17th century Christian thinkers believed that the ultimate way to truth is faith.

In the 17th century Galileo Galilei found out a new way to truth. His new way is the way of reason, the way of doubt, and the way of creative skepticism. Galileo gave birth to a reasonable, an experimental, and an inductive method of making an inquiry. Through this method Galileo began his investigations and observations. What he found ultimately is the scientific truth. He invented telescope. This device enabled him to declare that the universe is not as perfect and spotless as Ptolemy, Aristotle and champions of the Bible had supposed. Galileo sought to give an explanation for the limitations of Ptolemaic - Aristotelian - Christian world view. Galileo pointed out certain faulty issues in the philosophy of Aristotle. He found out the four moons of Jupiter. He proved the Ptolemaic theory about the celestial motion incorrect. Most importantly, he stated that the Copernican heliocentric theory is correct at all points. In this way Galileo found out totally new truths. These new truths of Galileo were radically different from the conventional truths established by the traditional Christian astronomers. Galileo succeeded in finding out these iconoclastic truths by doubting all those erstwhile truths. Had Galileo not been reasonable enough to doubt the erstwhile truths, he might not have arrived at his new scientific conclusion. Having acquired a bunch of scientifically and experimentally proven findings, Galileo declared that reason and doubt rather than faith can lead to better destinations of mankind. This claim of Galileo happened to offend the Christian Inquisition. The Christian Inquisition felt that Galileo's claim is a painful insult to the stronghold of Christian dogma. Since a thousand years those religious fanatics had been drugged by the opium of religion, they were blinded by faith. For them faith is and ought to be sovereign in each and every moment. That is why the Inquisition became intolerant of Galileo's genuine and sense based truths. Thus, arose a controversy between science and religion, between rational doubt and religious faith. It is this controversy in which the seventeenth century, Galileo was enmeshed. Galileo had to become courageous and heroic in his single handed battle against the superstitious Inquisition, against the organized superstitions of Christianity. But Galileo did not have that much courage and dauntlessness. He was somewhat timid. Due to this timidity he began to waver in his own conviction. He was afraid of the physical punishment the Inquisition was going to level against him. That is why Galileo decided to compromise. His decision to compromise led to the recantation. The recantation of Galileo marked the humiliating defeat of doubt and the unashamed triumph of the Christian superstition. Galileo's recantation brought to an unprecedented halt the march of progress made in the territory of science. The defeat of doubt does not mean the end of the age of science. Doubt did not die; reason was not eliminated. These two elements of doubt and reason of science were temporarily defeated. But at the underlying level rational skepticism and creative doubt have been working jointly to shatter the ego of faith in the future.

In thirteen chapter, we find Galileo working on the project of his scientific investigations. At that time his eyesight was almost damaged. With his dim eyes also Galileo did not renounce his sustained interest in conducting scientific inquiry. Galileo, in the final scene of course, felt humiliated for not being heroic at the moment of defending his truth. But he was also of the conviction that science must not be associated with the name of one scientist only. Science is the grand project to which every disciple of science must make contributions. The failure of one scientist does not mean the failure of science.

Brecht's Dramatic Technique in Galileo

Brecht's theory of theatre known as 'Epic Theatre' is an anti-illusionist theatre that runs counter to the Aristotelian 'Theatre of Illusion'. It is in the light of this 'Epic Theatre' that we need to understand his dramatic technique. By using long pauses, harsh lightening, empty stages, episodic plot, placards announcing the change of scenes, concept of anti-hero, alienation effect or estrangement, narrative form and violation imposed by traditional dramatic form.

Brecht's dramatic technique is intended to create an effect of estrangement among the audience by making the characters declare boldly that whatever the audience is watching is only play-an illusion not reality. The audience is urged to remain intellectually vigilant and not identify with the characters of the play. The audience will have to maintain a critical stance. The long pauses in the play obstruct the smooth flow of the plot. Use of harsh lighting won't allow anything to be hidden so that the façade of illusion is dismantled. Empty stage makes the audience stop and think curiously about what is to follow. Unity of plot is not emphasized. The play cannot be seen as a whole where the parts serve to create an organic whole. Parts can stand on their own self. Their significance is judged in isolation and their existence doesn't depend on their contribution to the whole. This idea of the episodic plot gives against the Aristotelian idea of unity of plot. Use of placards to announce the change of scene helps to remind the audience of the illusion of theatrical performance. Galileo is an anti-hero because he acts like a coward fearing the instruments of torture. He doesn't fulfill our expectations from a hero as we have traditionally understood him. He doesn't have the courage and the power to prove himself as a great figure. Rather, he acts like a person who runs away from the threats and dangers. He, in short, is very anti-heroic. Aristotelian theory of theatre laid a great emphasis on the adherence to the unities of time, place and action. In Galileo, there is a violation of these unities. The events of the plot cover decades and are shown to have taken place in places that are far away from one another. The hero is not a person pursuing a single action with commitment. The play talks about many actions that do not coalesce into a single uniform action. Galileo uses narrative form in that it takes past events as a material for dramatization. The play is a dramatization of past events and thus carries a sense of historical facts being narrated. It is opposed to the idea of imaginary present of drama which unfolds before us as if it were happening in front of us for the first time. The play Galileo demands the special relationship between the characters and the audience. The audience is not demanded to show empathy towards the characters and be lost in sentimentality. They are urged to maintain a distance between themselves and what happens on the stage. A greater sense of detachment and critical response is demanded of them.

Dramatic Irony in Brecht's Galileo

Dramatic irony implies to the speech and action of a character that is guided by partial or utter misunderstanding of the reality. The character is not consciously using irony to satirize someone. Irony is realized from conscious or unconscious speeches or actions. It happens to take place in the play when there is difference between appearance and reality.

Virginia utters an ironic statement. Her Galileo father Galileo was an astronomer. She might tell her father to cast her horoscope because the much awaited marriage of her with Ludovico was going to be fixed. Instead of letting her father to cast her horoscope she said "I need another astronomer other than my father Galileo to cast my horoscope for my forthcoming marriage with Ludovico. This is one example of dramatic irony.

Another brand of dramatic irony can he observed in the behavior of Cardinal Barberini.  Cardinal Barberini was himself a mathematician. He was well aware of the correctness of Galileo's theories. Because of this awareness he had scholarly respect and sympathy for Galileo. Despite intimacy and sympathy for Galileo, Cardinal Barberini revealed his dogmatic, superstitions and vindictive attitude to Galileo immediately after he became pope VIII in the chamber of Veticon. The higher position of power cardinal Barberini reached, the more unreasonable and illogical he appeared to be. A reasonable man lost his reason and became brutal when he assumed the higher level of political and theocratic power. A sympathetic man to Galileo became an exceedingly brutal man when he reacted the position of power. When Cardinal Barberini put on the robe of pope he began to reveal his corrupted and intoxicated nature. Out of his intoxication he became reckless and extremely regardless. To speak in a straightforward language, Cardinal Barberini, who has now become pope VIII, victimized Galileo, though he himself became victimized indirectly. In his endeavor to falsify Galileo he himself was falsified. In a move to denude Galileo Cardinal Barberini, himself, was denuded. This is a brilliant example of dramatic irony.

From the conversation of the little monk with Galileo, we come across a funny example of another sort of dramatic irony. The little monk appears to have been on the horn of the dilemma. He knows about the limitations of faith-oriented knowledge and Ptolemaic-Aristotelian-Christian world-view. He too asserts the superiority of reason-led scientific knowledge. But he becomes terribly frightened by the religious implications of the scientific theories. He tries to persuade Galileo to stop his scientific investigations. He clearly points out that Galileo's scientific findings generate a host of religious implications. In this way he makes Galileo precautions in his move to explore scientific findings. A man with the horns of a dilemma, the little monk makes an ironic move to put a free man like Galileo on the similar horns of a dilemma. This is ironically funny.

In scene twelve there is another kind of Irony. In the Garden of the Florentine Ambassador at Rome, many well-wishers, friends, disciples and daughter of Galileo have been looking forward to know how Galileo reacts to his being forcibly interrogated in the Inquisition. Their much-expected waiting ended in a humiliating disappointment. Andrea Sarti had expected that his master Galileo would never recant. But having heard that his master recanted, he felt painfully humiliated and disappointed. Andrea Sarti uttered the following statement, "Unhappy is the land that has no heroes". To this utterance of Andrea Sarti, Galileo responds "Unhappy is the land that needs a hero." This remark uttered by Galileo is ironical. Any sincere utterance of by Galileo is ironical. A quester of truth, free from the bondage of dogma and creed, must be given the freedom to live an ordinary life, to think ordinarily, and to behave ordinarily.

Apart from these instances of dramatic ironies there is one different kind of irony. Galileo knew that due to his un-preparation to face martyrdom, science was defeated. He also knew that his further effort in scientific research can't revive the defeated spirit of science. But he does not stop doing scientific research even in his old age. It sounds ironical.

Significance of Telescope in Brecht's Galileo

Galileo, the character who has been given a central role in the play with the same name is a scientist credited with the invention of the telescope and the instrument stands for the spirit of science. The telescope is a tool used by astronomers to find out the facts about the heavenly bodies and their movement.

It is the window through which scientists can get the objective knowledge of the world. It is opposed to religions orthodoxy which stands for superstition, blind faith and ignorance as well as status quo. What Galileo does with the telescope is the key to understand the conflict in the play. The tension is between science represented by Galileo and the telescope and the orthodoxy of religion represented by the church and the different people of the ecclesiastical hierarchy.

The play refers to a time in European history when the church was the caretaker of truth. Scientific truth or the spirit of scientific inquiry was suppressed. The role of religion was very great. The scientists had to fact danger to life and were kept under observation. The church was the arbiter of truth, I all areas of knowledge. However, the fervor for scientific inquiry was gaining ground. If religion doesn’t test established truths and holds fast to them science examines established truth. The role of the telescope is very great, but it was seen with suspicion by the popes and other churchmen. It had to be used secretly because of the hostile religious environment. Telescope in the play Galileo poses threat to religious faith and the authority by challenging earlier scientific theories and the belief held by the church. In the conflict between science and the religion, science has suffered. However, when ‘discourse’ is smuggled out of Italy into Holland, it reaches the masses and they finally know what truth. In a way it is the victory of the telescope. Thus, telescope occupies a great place in the play Galileo.

Marxist Standpoint of Brecht in Galileo

Doubtless, Brecht is a Marxist playwright. In Galileo, Brecht infused Marxist leaning. In this play he represented Galileo as a victim of an institutionalized power. The Inquisition brutalized Galileo's sincere theories viciously and mercilessly. The institutionalized and organized form of power, that is, the Inquisition, knew that what Galileo declared was un-doubtly true.

Even the very representative of the inquisition cardinal Barberini had known that Galileo's theories are correct. He had extended the grain of sympathy to Galileo. But their sympathy and intellectual regard for Galileo dwindled down when cardinal Barberini became pope in the chamber of the Vatican. Cardinal Barberini's sympathy for him disappeared soon after he assumed the power of the pope in the chamber of the Vatican. The more powerful he became, the crueler he appeared to be. The more Barberini enjoyed the organized and over institutionalized theocratic power, the more brutally he distorted the truth advanced by Galileo. The way the theocratic power embodied by pope Barberini functions suggests that the institutionalized power works exactly like a bourgeois power, though it does not know the truth. There is a politics of ignorance. The theocratic institution abused its power by putting a painful curb on the progressive science. The bourgeois institution which makes a sincere quester of knowledge be fooled and ridiculed. Galileo had to come into relationship to the aristocratic cosmos the Medici. Had Galileo been economically strong enough to survive, sponsorship and patronage would have exerted no pressure on him. The dire economic necessity of Galileo brought him into Florence. The theocratic power-network took advantage of the economic dependence of the individual. In an attempt to take advantage of Galileo's economic condition the theocratic power-center viciously distorted and falsified that individual's quest, and his theory. This is not only a simple case of atrocity. On the strength of its organized power and institutionalized body of politics, the Inquisition interrogated Galileo till he recanted his recently discovered scientific theories and findings. The Inquisition in this regard seems to be fascist and capitalistic. It knew that Galileo is sincerely true. But pretending that Galileo is wrong, it imposed its own politically motivated truth. Furthermore, it exploited and dominated an individual so as to spread the political aura of its own truth.

The relationship between Galileo and the Inquisition is not the relationship of truth and falsehood; rather it is the relationship of power and domination. Theirs is the relationship of power politics. The battle between Galileo and the Inquisition is the battle between the political truth of the Intuition and the pure scientific truth embraced by Galileo. Hence their relationship seems to be a relationship of domination.

In this relationship of domination, the helpless individual is defeated. It is natural also. But this alone is not and can't be the intention of the playwright. To show an individual being victimized by socio-politico-economic circumstance is not the ultimate purpose of Brecht the play writing. The ultimate goal of Brecht, the Marxist playwright is to show that an individual is capable of altering the deep-seated socio-political structure no matter how defeated and victimized he/she may be. In Galileo we can see Galileo engaged in his hopeless revolt against the dictatorship of the Inquisition. Brecht did not bother whether the individual succeeds in this move against the impregnable tyranny of the Inquisition, which increasingly resembles the fascist and the capitalist structure. Brecht is committed to show that an individual, no matter how defeated, struggles to pose an exceedingly challenging jolt to the foundation of socio-politico economic circumstances.

Brecht's Marxist leaning can be seen in the concept of his epic theatre. Brecht does not like his theatre-goers to be easily deceived by the spectacular and the epic theatre. Instead of being emotionally vulnerable Brecht demanded his audiences to be rationally alert. Brecht disapproves emotional vulnerability on the part of his readers, on the part of his theatre-goers. Brecht is of the opinion that the theatre goers must be rational enough to cast aside illusionist conventions. Audiences in epic-theatre, according to Brecht, must be rational enough to penetrate the painful, alienating truth behind the appealing veil to illusion. Brecht sounds Marxist in his strong defense of the emotional vulnerability of audiences and in his strong support of a rational bent of audiences’ mind.

Spirit of Science and Galileo

Brecht dramatizes the conflict between Science and religion, Creative doubt and Christian faith, Free thought and bigotry, and the induction and deduction. He not only dramatizes the conflict, but also its hindering consequences. Brecht demonstrated how the dogmatic Inquisition and the Ptolemaic-Aristotelian world view forced science to move in the direction of extinction.

 Galileo had discovered that the earth is not the center of the universe. This discovery of Galileo became a living proof of the fact that Ptolemy is wrong. Galileo found out that the celestial bodies are not as perfect and spotless as Aristotle had supposed. This second findings put a slap on the face of Aristotle. One after another Galileo propounded scientific findings, all those findings were practically proven. There was every reason to believe that Galileo's findings were, doubtless, correct what was acquired as a mode of knowledge through the medium of the telescope was testable and practically true. Galileo put forward a beautiful bunch of radical and golden scientific ideas. But those scientific truths were unpalatable to the Inquisition, the organized center of superstition. Under the banner of the faith's sovereignty the Inquisition invaded the autonomous territory of science. Under the impression that Galileo's theories ruined the sacred temple of Christian faith, the Inquisition forced Galileo to face either severe corporal punishment or to recant his theories. Frightened of the physical punishment, Galileo recanted. When the public heard that Galileo recanted, people suddenly grown belief in the miracle of science dwindled down to nothing. The prospect of the emergence of the scientific enlightenment was doomed to extinction owing to Galileo's recantation.

Thus, the play Galileo dramatizes how the Christian superstition defeated the progressive march of science. It also does not hesitate to display that as a result of the battle between science and religion, science was defeated, but the scientists were not. Even after the time of recantation Galileo continued to get involved in scientific research. He had hoped that in future there may come another courageous scientist who help science to flourish. With this hope in his heart, Galileo gave continuity to his scientific research.

It is Galileo Galilee who sowed the seed of science, though this seed failed to germinate and take root because of his timidity. Had he not sown the seed of science, later scientists might have to work hard to locate the space of science. The real scientific spirit was embodied in Galileo. But this scientific spirit failed to obtain the actual level of its concrete manifestation. Both the character of Galileo and the spirit of science found their joint manifestation in the text of Galileo. It is explicitly noticeable that at the heart of the play Galileo lays the manifestation of the spirit of science and the character of Galileo.

Had the play intended to manifest the character of Galileo, it should not have incorporated the event of Galileo's violent interrogation in the Inquisition. The Intuition interrogated Galileo formidably. The purpose of the Inquisition in interrogating Galileo was not to modify the character of Galilea but to subdue the spirit of science. The politics of interrogating Galileo in the Inquisition are the politics of extinguishing the burning flame of science. Hence the ultimate goal of the play Galileo is to project how the spirit of science was dampened by the rigorous politics of the Christian Inquisition.

By the same token, the play Galileo aims at representing the character of the seventeenth century scientist Galileo. Brecht represented Galileo as a genius tainted with scars of idiosyncrasies. When we see Galileo's limitless hunger for old wine and new thought, we could not help thinking that there were certainly some signs of abnormalities in his personality. When we find him doing scientific research even in old age we could not help appreciating the mark of his scientific prodigy. When we find him recanting for fear of physical punishment, we hate him for his timidity.

Galileo as a Scientist

Galileo Galili, a top and high-ranking historical figure was born with zealous soul and marvellous human seat of intellect with restless nature. His oeuvre opened a new epoch in the world of science. He was a maverick who shattered the predominant ideas prevailed about the rotation of the earth. He pioneered the Copernican system as an element in the new thinking that is about to revolutionise science and society.

With the Dutch invention, telescope, Venetian Galileo explored the extraterrestrial phases and corroborated that Copernican theory was bang on. He migrated to Florence in search of more cure and scope. For research as he had no means to aggrandise his wherewithal and research in Ptolemaic system in Venice.

Galileo was “great but discontented man. Dissatisfaction is a necessary evil for a scientist who always looks around the prevailing universal phenomena sharply.”

Galileo’s brainy research on a mere hypothesis turned the table of ever set idea about the revolution of the sun and centre of the earth that had the kosher favours of theology. Galileo said; “Yes, I felt that first time I saw one of those. We are not the only ones to feel it. Walls and spheres and immobility! For two thousand years, people have been believing that the sun and all the stars of heaven rotate around mankind, but, now we are breaking out of it, Andrea at full speed. Because the old days are over and this is a new time.”

Galileo had the calibre and zealot to metamorphose the whole world overnight. Like a first rate intellectual or philosopher denounced and despised the sloth and inefficacy to explore the universal truth of the layman. He handed out brickbats the society in these words, “Our cities are cramped and so are men’s minds, superstitions and the plague. The universe has lost its centre overnight and woken up to find it has countless centres. Suddenly, there is a lot of room.”

Galileo’s heretical discoveries about the solar system brought him to the attention of the inquisition. When the Vatican Research Institute, the Collegium Romanum proves Galileo’s explorations, the theological gentry immediately react against him and he is summoned up in total court for inquisition. In the court, he experiences an excruciating trial and is compelled to apostatize his theories and inventions.

Here a debility of his spunk comes to our knowledge that only “to save his skin” he comprises with the prevailing circumstances and perpetrate recantation. His apprentices were dumb founded by his reaction. Andrea said, “Like a man in the street, we said he will die but he will never recant! You came back.”

Galileo replies, “I have recanted but I am going to live. Your hands are stained” In reality, this illustrious man was forced to abjure his theories publicly in papal court. Everyone, Tom, Dick and Harry, treated him as a blasphemer who exchanged theological beliefs. Because of this astronomy, they were left two millenniums behind.

After backing out of his theories, this great man carried on his work privately, eventually, smuggling his work out of his country by his pupil, Andrea, but he could never be recognised by the society.