In this article the theoretical analysis has been done on a stage play based on the drama “I don’t want to say goodbye” by A.Volodin. The author’s style in writing the play, social problems which alarmed him and his idea have been determined. Also, director A. Maemirov’s methods on directing the play and actor’s play, set design, combination of the play and the author’s idea, general artistry level have been selected and different literary works and scientists’ research were used. Additionally, deep critical analysis has been done on the actor’s play of the main characters A.Otepbergen and Zh.Makazhan, flaws in acting of the young actors have been revealed and recommendations were made on how to improve it. We can see the importance of the new direction of the staged play on today’s Kazakhstani theatre art and culture. Скачать в формате PDF
4 American Scientific Journal № ( 32) / 20 19


Assan Kirkabakov
T. Zhurgenov Kazakh National Academy of Arts
1st year master student
Almaty, Kazakhstan
Anar Ye rkeba y
associate d Professor , candidate of art history
T. Zhurgenov Kazakh national Academ y of Arts
Almaty, Kazakhstan

Annotation . In this article the theoretical analysis has been done on a stage play based on the drama “I don’t
want to say goodbye” by A.Volodin. The author’s style in writing the play, social problems which alarmed him
and hi s idea have been determined. Also, director A. Maemirov’s methods on directing the play and actor’s play,
set design, combination of the play and the author’s idea, general artistry level have been selected and different
literary works and scientists’ rese arch were used. Additionally, deep critical analysis has been done on the actor’s
play of the main characters A.Otepbergen and Zh.Makazhan, flaws in acting of the young actors have been
revealed and recommendations were made on how to improve it. We can se e the importance of the new direction
of the staged play on today’s Kazakhstani theatre art and culture.
Keywords : directing, theatre, A.Volodin, acting, A.Maemirov .

Introduction: Theatre theorist, practitioner
Vladimir Nemirovich – Danchenko once said “If there
is only classic performance in the theatre, then the
theatre is dead”. [1. p.145] Any artist needs to know the
life in order to create a character of a modern man.
Modern things come to life only if there is a foresight
of the news that comes fro m the inner laws of life.
These canons can even be found in the dramaturgy at
the turn of the century. At the end of the 20 th century
and in the 21 st century lots of news came to the
dramaturgy, it mad e an impact on the style and actor’s
play of the theatr e staged performances, as well as
filmmaking. New dramaturgical genres and large and
small styles appeared in Russia, Ukraine, Belarus,
Poland, Germany and other countries, it started to show
the human nature and its inner world from a true point
of view. How these features and cultural -psychological
phenomenon have been observed on the Kazakh stage,
whether these styles have been mastered or it has made
an impact on the development of actor’s play, we will
analyse widely on the drama “I don’t want to say
goodbye” by A.Volodin.
Assigned tasks: Comprehend the directing
methods which were used in the staging the play;
analyse the level of acting ensemble; determine the
success and shortcomings of the performance.
Analysing methods: Research has been made on
the play “I don’t want to say goodbye” based on
theoretical and semantic analysis, determining the
historica l and structural basis, methods of evaluation.
Author’s idea, director’s thought, role players’ elastic
movements, production designer’s creative sear ch have
been scientifically analysed.
Conclusion: Time changes, old goes and new
comes, but love and joy, meeting and farewell are
eternal just like a gravity. They may change their shape
and appearance, but adhere to their nature and laws.
The artistic s cene of these laws was found in the play
“I don’t want to say goodbye” which was staged on
academic drama theatre named after M.Auezov and
directed by A.Maemirov. The play was based on the
work “Don’t part with your loved ones” by Russian
writer A.Volodin.
A. Volodin is a writer who has come to the
Russian dramaturgy in 1960 -70s with his distinctive
voice, hi s own writing and his worldview. He worked
not with a photo camera that only captures a beautiful
single moment or single background, but with a movie
camera that captures constant movements and changes
of this world in motion. It means he showed not a
mom entary effect, but the dispute and success,
assonance and dissonance, misery and joy, and the
unity of settlement of life.
He focused a lot on the hum an soul’s inner drama,
its inner struggle. He worked hard by soaking up the
problems of the modern world h e lived in and being in
organic relationships with the spirit of the time. It’s
well known that each writer has his own style of writing
that he likes . The sentences of A. Volodin’s works are
usually short rather than compound. The dramaturg
tries to put a lot of thought and meaning into few words.
The language of plays is mostly understandable to
ordinary people, informative and sharp. He is a master
of describing the patterns of real life, everyday life and
ordinary events. The simplicity in his language, the
sincerity of characters he creates are his abilities to
master the folk language and to use it as much as he can
in his works.
The problems raise d in the play befit the Kazakh
proverb which says “It’s easy to get married, it’s hard
to be a family”. In this context, the theme that raised in
A.Volodin’s play a half -century ago, unfortunately,
still has not lost its relevance until today. Contrariwise ,
it has been growing year by year. The clear evidence to

American Scientific Journal № ( 32) / 2019 5

that is according to recent statistics, Kazakhst an is the
tenth in the world in terms of divorce.

If you take a look at the play “Don’t part with your
loved ones”, you can see author’s own life wi th its
artistic quality, sincerity of description the nature of the
era, the depth of picture the psycholo gical feelings.
Each character in the play is an individual and has own
personality. The playwright’s aim is to raise a common
problem through these i ndividuals and show their
image in the society, then director A.Maemirov staged
a rational picture of that in asceticism style. Previously
N.Zhakypbay, Y.Nursultan and other directors have
successfully staged plays in this direction. There
weren’t any scen ery decorations on the stage, just an
iron bed, old jugs, a video projector and chairs. During
the divorce process, the multimedia screen helped
substantively to show the characters’ inner
psychological state at that moment, the pictures were
coming up as in a photobook one after another which
was impressive, but it distracted the audience and
prevented from s eeing what was happening on the
stage. The pictures on the screen was a repetition of the
general content of the stage performance which was a
little bit over linking. Also, it has to be noted that using
“Night Serenade” by Shubert in the performance was
advantageous. The moment where the actors sing in
chorus this composition was outrageous and lead to
understand the tragedy of the play.
It is known t hat no matter what time bed is a place
of passion and loneliness. This element which has a
deep philosophi cal importance in art was a common
attribute of the paintings from T.Emin’s “My bed” to
Rembrandt’s “Lovers” and Munk’s “Sick child”. In the
performan ce the iron bed is a centre of the play. In one
of the interviews the director of the play said, “I will
show this play in a conventional theatre direction”.
Even though there is a very small number of the plays
in this direction in Kazakh modern theatre,
A.Maemirov is one of the directors who is working
hard on it. Theatre theorist and practitioner, the found er
of the “Biomechanics” system, director E.Meerhallt
spoke of his conventional theatre “Here it shows
conventional, not a natural life. If the natura l life is
clear to the audience, here it comes with questions and
secrets. The viewer finds the key to the secret”. [2.
p.17] The scene where Mitya destroys the bed means
that their marriage life has been ruined. In this
conventional stage it comes in a ha rmony with other
events. As mentioned above it is a main difference of
this direction from the natural one . The secret must not
be revealed. Whether it’s the courtroom or Mitya and
Katya’s home, the iron bed stays in the centre of the
stage. All the action s, the chain of events happen
around this iron bed. The director shows, in the context
of symbolism, that the bed is an important element of
married couple.
During the translation of the play A.Maemirov
adapted the plot to modern Kazakh society, because
A.Volodin’s play line is known to be in the socialist
society in Russia. He didn’t make any mistakes while
translating even though each character spoke in his own
language. It is an artistic translation of the artistic work.
Characters who confuse a stage an d a real life in the
play are especially typically described. People who
behaves the same in the courtroom as on a stage, like
actress Kozlova, or a conductor Mironov who
discriminates his wife in front of the judge by saying
“she wouldn’t reach my cultura l level”. Their
monologues were very successful, they had equal of
satire and tragedy.
Theatre actors wer e able to demonstrate the united
organic temper and conflict. Since the performance was
played in the small theatre, actors and spectators were
combin ed in a unique ambient atmosphere, each
character and every spectator became a common
participant and witn ess of these events. It is noticeable
that the director has successfully used a method from
B.Brecht’s system. Although this method is not widely
used in theatre art, it gives a great opportunity to truly
evaluate an actor’s play and fully understand the
character’s temper. It was a right decision to use the
small theatre to stage the play for the director who fully
understands all those aspects.
At the beginning of the play, like Fedotik in
“Three sisters” by P.Chekhov, the photographer from
the auditorium captures happy and cheerful couples,
then it was determined that eight families are getting
divorced for various reasons. But the main characters
are Mitya and Katya Lavrovs. If we put on a side the
relationship between people, there is a great deal of
contradictions and conflicts just in one person. The
human soul must consist of opposite charges rather than
the same which silently comprehends and understands
one another. In such case, a struggle in someone’s life
is a struggle in own soul. It means that whatever takes
up the fight between the good and the evil that is
happening in someone’s life and soul is the winner.
When there is a hope, there i s a doubt. But what will
take up? This question is the main reason for the
troubles of the main characters of the play. Each
character lives through love and betrayal, haughtiness
and jealousy, love and hatred. After coming to the court
one after another s om e couples make up, some
separate. But they are still lacking their own thinking.
Sometimes people can be selfish, and they become
irresponsible to their families and to their problems.
The director urges us to overcome such conflicts and to
avoid heart b reaking of our beloved ones.
In 1979 P. Arsenov has directed a film based on
this play “Don’t part with your loved ones”. The main
roles were played by talented theatre and film actors
A.Abdulov and I.Alferova. In this film Mitya and
Katya’s characters wh ich were played by these actors
were lyrical. Both were able to open the souls of the
characters and show why they ended up divorcing, their
sincerity and tragedy. If the reason for many couples to
divorce is the loss of love over time, but it’s opposite
for Mitya and Katya. They love each other very much,
but because of the difference in their tempers there is a
misunderstanding between them, they cannot reach a
consensus, and gradually lose trust in each other.
A.Abdulov’s Mitya is a self -willed, hot -temp ered,
brave young man. He lost his mind because of jealousy,
he reassured himself that his wife had an affair with
another man and in order to avoid to be dishonoured,

6 American Scientific Journal № ( 32) / 20 19
he decided to divorce, even though he loved his wife.
He tried to forget Katya, but he r ealised that no woman
could replace her, therefore he was struggling
painfully. And I.Alferova’s Katya is an unhappy
woman, who couldn’t forgive her husband mistrust,
tired of life challenges, and had no one to lean on.
While watching the film you witness the personal
drama of people who are ruining their happy life
because of their foolishness, you feel empathy and get
saddened with them.
In the play even though Mitya (A.Otepbergen) and
Katya (Z.Makazhan) love each other, they couldn’t
stand against jealo usy, haughtiness and selfishness,
therefore they decide to divorce. Expecting a happier
life after the divorce, they face difficulties, and most
importantly they can’t stop missing each other. After
parted ways when a young couple meet each other
again the y become mature enough to be able to say “I
don’t want to say goodbye…” When you read the play
you understand how much these characters change after
the divorce, in this case two actors were not able to
show that change in their characters. They remained i n
their initial states, they couldn’t develop their
characters’ tempers therefore there were many cases of
shortcomings. Both actors’ work was untruthful: they
were unable to deeply feel for everything that was
happening, not to be disturbed by the acciden tal stuff or
feelings (the moment when Mitya destroys the bed),
they couldn’t recognise the most basic qualities of the
characters and the overall scene. If we say that “Mitya’s
image was taken from Volodin’s own life”, the
character should not have been v ulnerable on the stage.
The actor didn’t understand the character’s distress and
inner struggle. There was an impression that Mitya is
unskilful, thoughtless, light -hearted and irresponsible
character. A.Otepbergen couldn’t deliver to the
audience Mitya’s heartbreak and inner struggle. From
his emotionless face and learnt verses it is clear that he
needs a deep research. The same shortcomings are
noticeable from Z.Makazhan’s play who was playing
Katya’s role. Since Z.Makazhan is a lyrical actress,
who devel op ed in one direction, all her roles are
similar, evolutionally growing process has stopped. It
means she is not growing and remaining in the same
place, therefore directors should give this performer a
role with a tough character when casting for new play s.
If she played Kerilashvili’s mother in law or a woman
commander we would have seen her in a new way.
They were not new actors on a big stage, therefore there
was a big doubt.
One of the top aims that young actors cannot reach
nowadays is to distinguish between the differences and
distinctions in character’s temper. It is known that it’s
complicated to match the appearance, facial features,
character’s temper, feeling. That could be a reason why
young actors were not able to overcome these
challenges. Th e same could be said about getting out a
message, disclosing of the idea and using language.
There are young people who are not fluent in the
language, and do not pay attention to the beauty,
impressiveness and picturesque of each word. There
were even mom ents where there was a shortcoming in
the voice intonation because of misunderstanding the
meaning of certain words. Some may disagree with this
idea, because they say that it’s a mistake to search for
word intonation. If you think of the right way of
deli vering your thoughts, then the voice will get a
message out itself directly to the spectators’ chest. If
you really understand what you need to deliver to the
audience and put all your effort in it during the two -
three months preparation for the play, then there won’t
be any shortcomings. It’s very important to keep in
mind that if inexperienced young actors keep changing
their voice and try to distinct themselves from others
there the artificiality begins.
“The personality in life is not the same as the
character in art. Artistic image is brighter, stronger and
at the same time transparent rather than real person. Of
course, in real life people are quite different, but the
uniqueness is not distinctive at the first sight. Time is
needed to know a person cl oser. In the work of art,
especially in drama, an artist makes that work for us
that needs time and straight away draws the characters
with their personality”, [3. p.347] as Russian writer
A.A.Anikst said, when a writer creates a drama
character, he descri bes a temper, actions, the
description of that particular environment and the
epoch, and also own distinction that can be
The typical distinction of the artistic image is the
necessity to reveal the essence and the nature of public
life, a s well as to see its individuality, personality traits,
and actions in order to make a clear image to the
audience. Therefore it’s important to distinguish
between the drama character who lives only on a stage
and actor’s real life and his nature.
In spit e of that, the actors who played the roles of
other family members brightened the play. For
example, Y.Turys was outstanding, he played an
elderly, and lonely Vitya who has been married for 20
years, but initially married because of compassion and
now want s to divorce because he met his first love. He
found it easy to play two different aged people and two
different tempers. In a scene where the young people
were arguing, Vitya’s weak voice and crooked body
convinced spectators when he called them to calm
dow n. Also, in a divorce scene we could notice that he
could improvise easily and confidently. By actor’s
mimic, by his speech and his cold answers, it was clear
that he didn’t love his wife. The actor was able to make
people laugh through the cry and cry w hile laughing. In
general, there is no doubt that the actor plays any roles
distinctively and there are no shortcomings like in a
In addition to that, initially living on one side of
the room with a principle of “everyone needs a private
life”, later at old age there was no one to drink tea with,
realising a value of a close one and a need of an
apartment with a full room, the monologue of an
unknown woman played by D. Temirsultanova takes to
a deep thought. The speech about “life” of a single
wom an, who has never been married, and never was
needed apart from her mother has a significance in
today’s society. We can see that she is calling young
people to understand one another by actress’ voice
which one second was crying, the next was strict, an d

American Scientific Journal № ( 32) / 2019 7

next was calm. She reached the front of the stage with
eyes full of pain and misery that touched every
spectator. There are many such characters in today’s
life who became unnecessary at their old age. This
scene is the centre idea of the play. The reaso n is that it
leads to a thought that it’s possible that those who
parted with each other, and said goodbyes may end up
alone and can suffer through their whole life.
“Role is like a number of different emotions. The
player must know what he needs”, [4. p.96] said
Russian director and theatricologist B.Y.Zakhava, in
this play apart from Y.Turys and D.Temirsultanova,
there were other experienced actors like B.Kozha,
Z.Tolganbay, Y.Daiyrov, D.Zhusip who played a role
of Kozlova, S.Askarova, G.Tutova, A.Bakhytzh anova,
they were able to fully understand their own characters
and act on a high level in the play.
The accustomed L.Malevana’s phrase “I missed
you, Mitya!” has been taken from this play and the final
was different. Russian director G.Yanovskaya’s final of
the performance based on this play is inevitable. Stage
decoration consist of a yard, mult i-storey house, a light
in the windows of each house. Exactly at this moment
Katya’s loud voice “I missed you, Mitya!” was very
impressive. V.Korvay’s “Love spirit ” violin’s tune and
different aged and with different social status women
crying “I missed yo u” from the windows in the
background lead to inevitable catharsis. The final note
of “I don’t want to say goodbye” wasn’t so impressive,
that’s why it would be go od if the director reviewed this
Discussion: However, composition of the play is
liv e. The director showed a great life and many
destinies in a lyrical way short and thoughtful.
Characters’ tempers, sincerity of their feelings, deep
thoughts were united as one. From actor’s play you
could see a dialectical unity of the beauty and harmony,
craving and thought. Despite the fact that the director
who is constantly in the search added modern temp
which is rap, Greek -style choir, Georgian national
dance and other distinctive moments, it has to be
noticed that time frame was breached. There were clear
shortcomings of the director’s work: suitcases and the
iron bed from 1970s which were fashionable at the
time, actors’ retro clothes and Mitya’s trainers fr om the
latest this year’s collection, modern songs and mistake
the years. Thus, we need to ev aluate distinctively the
director’s skill to look into the complex issues of
different time, exceptional effort to reveal the
contradictions. We have to admit that A.Maemirov’s
performances and directing readings are united and
Conclusion: “If there is an injury in the society,
it’s not theatre’s duty to heal it or to reassure by saying
“everything will be alright”, the theatre should only
point its lef t finger. Only then its duty in front of the
society is executed”, said German director
M.Tha lheimer, if the theatre can perform the problems
raised in the society then it is doing its job. [5. p. 43 -
49] In this case the job of the play “I don’t want to sa y
goodbye” is difficult. The philosophical refinements
are the most serious public diseases o f today’s society.

1. Nemirovich -Danchenko V. I. «The birth of a
theatre ». М.: «Truth », 1989. − p. 575.
2. «The creative heritage of V.E.Meyerhold » М.:
«WTO », 1978. − p. 488.
3. Аnikst А.А. « Shakespeare . The craft of a
playwright ». М.: «Soviet Writer», 1974. – p. 607.
4. Zakhava B.Y. «The skill of the actor and
director ». М.: «Enlightenment », 1973 . − p. 233.
5. Dzhurova Т. «The gloomy German genius» //
St.Petersburg’s theatre journal . 2008.