Brecht’s Conclusion: A Disempowerment of the Gods?

Upon their arrival in Szechwan, the Gods identify the mission of their travels as to disprove the common suggestion that “No one can stay on earth and remain good” by showing “some people who are in a position to keep our commandments”(6). Before exiting earth on a pink cloud, the Gods declare victory, identifying Shen Teh as a good human being who proves that leading a “good life” is indeed possible. Nevertheless, this victory is hollow at best. Shen Teh negotiates how selfless she must be (via bartering concerning how often her shrewd and somewhat exploitative cousin can drop by) while they float away, revealing the need for balance which has driven her dual performances as self and her more aggressive cousin Shui Ta makes it impossible to truly keep the commandments. In order to do good one need’s resources and in order to keep these resources one must deny charity to the deserving, breaking what we can assume is the overriding sentiment of these unarticulated commandments. Even though Shen Teh is given resources by the Gods, an extraordinary circumstance, maintaining these resources becomes impossible due to the great need of the impoverished, and she must resort to economic exploitation to help others, effectively revealing that committing moral indiscretions to “survive” is not merely the poor man’s problem, but a universal one. Furthermore, as the Gods disappear, Shen Teh, who in all appearance has made an honest effort to live a moral life, asserts “I cannot remain here” in light of the presence of tormenters at all sides, insinuating her effort to keep the commandments may end in her demise(113). Just as the prematurely hacked trees, Shen Teh’s utility to the Gods may ultimately lead to her demise.

The play’s tragic end clearly asserts that good is not possible on Earth in light of limited resources, but the significance of the portrayal of the Gods, one of which utters “Are we to admit that are commandments are fatal? Are we to sacrifice them? Never! Is the world to be altered? How? By whom? No, everything is as it should be, as not only callous, but disempowered is a bit more murky.  In this moment of determination that Shen The must be their “good person” the God(s) destabilize the assumption they would be the origin of any change in the world. Their limited scope of power, which does not include the realm of economics, apparently does not include the ability to restructure the entire nature of the world in a manner that solves resource limitations either. I interpreted the transference of responsibility to improve the world and somehow address the resource limitations which compromise morality onto humans the greatest significance of this disempowerment of the Gods.  The fact that these commandments remain shadowy seems to also suggest that humans have the responsibility to interrogate the totalizing rules dictated by higher powers, really any source of authority, in order to form the most workable societal structures.  This transference heightens the political nature of the play, which is made even more explicit in the epilogue of the play, in which the audience is asked “What sort of measures would you recommend, To help good people to a happy end”(115).