MU Yu

　　Abstract： Athol Fugard is a well-known contemporary liberalist playwright in South Africa.His one-act play，The Train Driver，is a story about the guilt of a white train driver who accidentally hit a black woman who was committing suicide and his journey of searching the woman’s tomb at a graveyard in the charge of a black gravedigger.The Train Driver is Fugard’s most important piece in the post-apartheid era.It presents liberal whites’ sense of guilt，which is the ethical condition that whites cannot escape their conscience in face of the social injustices of apartheid，and continues the artistic expression of reaching reconciliation with reality through moral repentance.It also takes the form of Bertolt Brecht’s “Epic Theatre” to reveal the historical predicament in New South Africa after the end of apartheid and then examines white guilt in the neoliberal context.This article focuses on form analysis，which is the “Epic Theatre” elements in The Train Driver.It tries to explain the change in Fugard’s perception of white guilt in the post-apartheid era and why he chooses to take the form of an epic theatre to present it.The article shows how the monologue in The Train Driver presents white guilt，and then analyzes the setting of the dialogue，the prologue and epilogue and the alienation effect they create to prevent the audience from identifying with the white man and his guilt.Then，it further indicates the neoliberal issues involved in stage designs，such as the background of the cemetery，the dilapidated dwelling of the black gravedigger，and the sound effects，to demonstrate that the alienation effect of the theatrical form can arouse the audience to think rationally that the death of a black woman is not the fault of the white driver，but the result of the complex neoliberal reality.In this case，the white train driver still blindly bears the guilt，rather than looking into the roots of the tragedy.The article reveals that，in The Train Driver，Fugard transcends his previous understanding of white guilt and changes the method of presentation.He realized that by merely acquiring a sense of guilt and ethical repentance，one cannot reconcile with the social reality.Due to the changes of the times，Fugard chooses the form of epic theatre to arouse the audience to explore the truth behind the phenomenon that the plight of black people has not been changed，thus urging the audience to reconsider the causes of the tragedy in the plight of neoliberalism and seeking a new path of racial reconciliation.

　　Keywords： Athol Fugard； The Train Driver； white guilt； epic theatre； alienation； truth and reconciliation

Athol Fugard and His Theatre

Harold Athol Lanigan Fugard （1932-） is a South African dramatist，actor，and director who became internationally known for his profound penetration and pessimistic analyses of South African society during and after the apartheid.In 2011，Fugard received a special lifetime achievement award at the 65th annual Tony Awards.1“Athol Fugard to Receive Lifetime Tony Award.”The committee that announced Fugard as the recipient of the award noted that “his work has always opposed racism and continues to promote the message of freedom and equality.”

　　Fugard entered theatre in the late 1950s not long after the Nationalist government came to power and put into place the structure of apartheid，2Donald Ellis, “Apartheid,” Israel Studies 24, no.4 (2019): 63.an oppressive and brutal system of racial discrimination.At the time，there did not appear to be any truly South African theatres—ones that spoke with the voices of all the country’s people.3Sheila Fugard, “The Apprenticeship Years - Athol Fugard Issue,” Twentieth Century Literature 39, no.4 (1993): 394-95.As a white South African with a liberal conscience，Fugard had to shoulder his full share of a sense of responsibility for what was happening in the country.He gave portraits of life in Sophiatown through his observations in his apprenticeship playNo-GoodFriday（1958） andNongogo（1959）.

　　In 1960s，Fugard spent a lot of time in Port Elizabeth，4Athol Fugard, Notebooks 1960-1977 (London: Faber and Faber, 1983), 80.once a dynamic place with a variety of races，cultures，and religions.But the National Party government started to implement a plan of residential segregation，5A.J.Christopher, “Apartheid Planning in South Africa: The Case of Port Elizabeth,” The Geographical Journal 153, no.2 (1987): 203.and Port Elizabeth underwent a major resettlement of population and physical replanning of its city structure.Fugard’s “Family Trilogy” （BloodKnot，Helloand GoodbyeandPeopleareLivingThere） andBoesmanandLenacaptured the change of population.Under thePopulationRegistrationActof 1950，the population of Port Elizabeth was then divided into Whites，Indians，Chinese，Blacks and Colored.6A.J.Christopher et al., “Segregation and Cemeteries in Port Elizabeth,” South Africa 161, no.1 (1995): 41.The last two kinds were mainly housed in the urban periphery，New Brighton and Korsten，whereBloodKnottook place.Black individuals were obliged to possess passbooks and identification papers，and were otherwise confined to designated zones known as “homelands” or “townships，” which lacked suitable housing and amenities.The colored couple inBoesmanandLenawere marginalized and expropriated by this unjust law.

　　Apart from witnessing the misery of the oppressed，Fugard also worked to create and sustain theatre groups throughout the 1960s and 1970s.Despite South African drama’s particular vulnerability to censorship and the deliberate persecution of black artists，Fugard and his collaborators produced plays defiantly indicating the country’s apartheid policy.The most prominent period was his collaboration with about six black amateurs.They created the Serpent Players to experiment with “improvised theatre” in the 1960s by first importing Italian Commedia dell’Arte.7Athol Fugard, Notebooks 1960-1977, 92.Later，avant-garde experiments of “Pure Theatre Experience，”8Athol Fugard, Statement (New York: Theatre Communications Group, 1986), v.improvisation and Brecht’s epic theatre became the Serpent Players’ tasks for performance.In the process of improvisation，Fugard encouraged his actors to imagine and perform what would happen next.9Athol Fugard, Statement, vi.From this technique derived the imaginative，collective，and shapeless dramaOrestes，a combination of Greek myth and South African reality，and the documentary “Political Trilogy”：SizweBansiisDead，TheIsland，andStatementsAfteranArrestUndertheImmorality Act.Theatrically sparse，with small casts and little reliance on elaborate sets，costumes，or props，Fugard’s interpretation of his world，his use of low-cost “poor theatre” and political “epic theatre” for its maximum effect，and his dedication to his actors，both black and white，have earned for him critical respect accorded few modern playwrights.

　　After the world tour ofStatement，Fugard gave up improvisational and collective experiments in his sloppy moments.10Athol Fugard, Notebooks 1960-1977, 214.Then he moved toward a much more personal and traditionally structured play，Dimetos（1977）.

　　As a liberal artist in South Africa，censorship was not Fugard’s only problem.The chaos of the political environment and crises in his theatrical practice forced him to escape to America for a new start where he expressed more personal issues.The sense of guilt has long been the theme and motivation of Athol Fugard’s theatre，especially in autobiographical pieces such asALesson fromAloes，about liberal guilt as a member of the privileged white classes of the country and“MasterHarold” …andtheBoys，telling of a pang of guilt for wrongdoing towards his black friend.Those plays were performed to much acclaim in London and New York City.So wasThe RoadtoMecca（1985），the story of an eccentric older woman about to be confined against her will in a nursing home.

　　Then，during the dismantling of the apartheid from 1989 to 1994，Fugard came back to South Africa to echo the liberal and democratic trend inMyChildren！MyAfrica！ （1989），Playland（1992） andValleySong（1996）.South Africa’s apartheid regime unofficially ended with the release of Nelson Mandela in February 1990.

　　Then，in 1992，a year which saw the breakdown of negotiations among the parties to the transition and increasing violence on the ground in South Africa.The Truth and Reconciliation Commission （TRC） promoted a transition from apartheid to a new age by focusing on apartheid victims and perpetrators and articulating future aspirations.Fugard then established a mode of“forgiveness and reconciliation” in the play of confession，Playland，which takes place from the last day of 1989 to the first day of 1990.The resolution ofPlayland“identifies it as a play which attempts a leap of faith over the crisis ideology and into the promise of a negotiated and happyended future.”11C.Maree, “Truth and Reconciliation: Confronting the Past in Death and the Maiden (Ariel Dorfman) and Playland (Athol Fugard),” Literator 16, no.2 (1995): 27.

　　In the end of twentieth century，Fugard turned inward to explore his memory as the process of self-questioning his life journey and guilt.12Dennis Walder, “‘The Fitful Muse’: Fugard’s Plays of Memory,” The European Legacy 6, no.7 (2002): 697.He published a memoir，Cousin（1994），and a play，TheCaptain’sTiger：AMemoirfortheStage（1997），that has strong autobiographical elements.So did other plays of his since the beginning of the twenty-first century：Exitsand Entrances （2001），a record of the early-stage life of the great playwright，andSorrowsand Rejoicings（2002），which is about a poet who returns to South Africa after years of exile.

　　The new South Africa had entered into neo-liberal era and become a liberal democracy after the apartheid.But the black population did not have the access to a bright future.Due to high unemployment rates，they lived hand to mouth through a variety of activities like street vending，day labor，odd jobs，recycling，and underground markets for drugs，sex，weapons，and stolen goods.13Andy Clarno, Neoliberal Apartheid: Palestine/Israel and South Africa after 1994 (Chicago: University of Chicago Press,2017), 34.Fugard roots his work in his country’s cruel reality： black unemployment inVictory，the HIV problem inComingHome，the missing immigrant issue inHaveYouSeenUs？ （2009） and poverty inTheTrainDriver，which is also a piece of meditation on white South Africans’collective guilt about apartheid and a culmination of personal guilt sinceBloodKnot.

The Train Driver

TheTrainDriveris a succinct two-man play in ninety minutes.On the surface，it appears to be an introspection of the train driver and his inner demons，who appears at an unmarked graveyard on the outskirts of an undeveloped village in the middle of nowhere.Gradually，watching the two men at work on stage，a world of make-believe and contradictory tension comes alive，raising issues about post-apartheid white guilt and black poverty under neoliberalism.

　　TheTrainDriveris Fugard’s most important piece in the post-apartheid era.It presents liberal whites’ sense of guilt，which is the ethical condition that whites cannot escape their conscience in face of the social injustices of apartheid，and continues the artistic expression of reaching reconciliation with reality through moral repentance.It also takes the form of Bertolt Brecht’s “Epic Theatre” to reveal the historical predicament in New South Africa after the end of apartheid and then examines white guilt in the neoliberal context.

　　TheTrainDriverwas staged in different theatres in Europe，America and South Africa from 2010 to 2018.It was also introduced in China in 2015，directed by Wencong Chen.After the premiere，the first comment appeared inShanghaiTheatre，in which Xin Ying14忻颖：《阿索尔·富加德：来自非洲的世界戏剧》，《上海戏剧》2015 年第9 期，第32 页。［XIN Yin,“Asuo er fu jia de：lai zi feizhou de shijiexiju”(Athol Fugard: World Theatre from Africa), Shanghai Xiju (Shanghai Theatre) 9 (2015): 32.］praised that“like a scalpel，these works cut through social ills and go into the hearts of spectators.”

　　From the perspective of content，reviewers who favored this play saw Fugard’s great power in depicting South African reality.Charles Isherwood15Charles Isherwood, “In Tortured Empathy, a Ghost Hovers,” The New York Times, September 10, 2012.inTheNewYorkTimessaid the play“offers a moving portrait of a man coming to recognize the deep divisions that still plague his country and makes a modest but eloquent addition to Mr.Fugard’s oeuvre.” Lesley Stone16Lesley Stone, “Theatre Review: The Train Driver Doesn’t Take the Easy Track,” Daily Maverick, May 10, 2018.felt touched by this pure theatre and “the incredibly moving script and sterling performances.” It is also an important play in Fugard’s career，as Terry Teachout’s comments17Terry Teachout, “A Parable of Despair and Reconciliation,” The Wall Street Journal, September 13, 2012.showed that Fugard sought to walk the most precarious of tightropes by composing artistically serious plays that closely represented the turbulent political life of his native country.

　　Meanwhile some audiences felt tired of the monological outpouring inTheTrainDriver.John Clum18John Clum, “Athol Fugard’s The Train Driver,” Clumtheatre, September 5, 2012.watched the performance of the Signature Theatre version and was not satisfied with its theatrical forms because it was played out “in monologues，silences，and snatches of conversation between the two men.” Those who hold the same opinion said： “This is an inordinately talky play that repeats itself a lot，and as a result ends up being a tedious，drawn-out affair.”19Terry Morgan, “Theater Review: Athol Fugard’s The Train Driver Spins its Wheels,” LAist, October 20, 2012.

　　As for theatrical genre or form，some comments noticed thatTheTrainDriverwas a piece of “the Theatre of Absurd.” Joe Dziemianowicz20Joe Dziemianowicz, “Theater Review: The Train Driver by Athol Fugard at Signature Center,” New York Daily News,September 10, 2012.of theDailyNewsdescribed the play as “easy to admire for its sensitivity，but hard to recommend for its sluggish repetitiveness，” bringing the Signature season “to a yawning conclusion.” Back Stage’s Erik Haagensen21Erik Haagensen, “The Train Driver,” Back Stage, September 18, 2019.said Fugard’s play was “not his most effective” and characterizes it as “barely dramatic，too obviously symbolic，and so self-consciously Beckettian…” Matt Windman22Matt Windman, “Theater Review: The Train Driver-2 Stars,” Newsday, September 13, 2012.noticed the absurdist influence，saying the play was “a bleak Beckett-style drama.”

　　According to those theatrical reviews，audiences were mainly aware of the artistic form of absurdity and the white train driver’s guilt.However，my article would like to point out thatThe TrainDriveris also presented in the form of “Epic Theatre，” for the unconnected dialogue between Roelf and Simon always interrupts the hysterical outpouring of guilt，the prologue and epilogue told by Simon create a rupture in the train driver’s story，and symbolic stage elements，in fact，indicate a certain history in South Africa.

　　In the academic community，Dennis Walder，an expert on Fugard’s theatre，offered a sample of trauma study，an analysis through a post-colonialist angle and a pensée on theatre’s duty in post-apartheid South Africa.23Dennis Walder, “Remembering Trauma: Fugard’s The Train Driver,” South African Theatre Journal 27, no.1 (2014): 40.In apartheid，the theatre had a monolithic，clearly unjust external enemy to contest，but inTheTrainDriver，there is no such foe.Walder in his essay emphasized the theatre’s role in remembering past wrongs and individual mental state.Because after liberation to the present，the Truth and Reconciliation Commission has often been accused of giving vent to poisonous guilt rather than chasing the evils of apartheid，at least theatre cannot solve personal loss and suffering.Theatre takes the mission of revealing an individual’s memory.TheTrainDriver，a work of negative dialectics，builds an anti-hero who rejects redemption but publicly vents his sorrow.Walder’s post-apartheid studies follow Fugard’s memory of his past and his duty to continue to bear witness，24Dennis Walder, “‘The Fitful Muse’: Fugard’s Plays of Memory,” The European Legacy 6, no.7 (2002): 698.also known as “acknowledging the importance of recalling the traumas of the past” as Holocaust narration does.

　　Other scholars studied this play through the lens of psychoanalysis.Rashid thought that Fugard applies some “therapeutic techniques for individuals living in a racially segregated society.”25Aaisha Rashid, “Healing Through Drama—De-Stressing in Athol Fugard’s Plays,” Research Journal of Language and Literature 4 (2019): 18.And the play was his attempt to free white people’s mentality from the prolonged enslavement of apartheid，build self-awareness of individuals and bridge gaps between the white and black races.Specifically，in Rashid’s opinion，Roelf was “diagnosed” with PTSD，whose symptom is being unable to go through this culpability.

　　Instead of focusing on the white，Meera noticed “the plight of impoverished blacks in South Africa”26S.Meera, “The Plights of Impoverished Blacks of South Africa in Athol Fugard’s Plays: The Train Driver and The Island,” Research Journal of English Language and Literature 4, no.1 (2016): 208.and saw the effort to find reconciliation and harmony in a society ripped by its horrible and traumatic past.Through a blurry attempt at social absolution，this endeavor managed to connect black and white with peace and understanding in order to heal.

　　In the Chinese academic circle，there was a post-colonialist study in 2012.Shu Xiaomei noticed that Fugard took the artistic responsibility to expose social problems in post-apartheid reality such as untrust between races，unemployment，poverty and high crime rates and he offered a religious redemption as a solution to achieve lenience and reconciliation in New South Africa.27舒笑梅：《后种族隔离时代的冲突与和解——评阿瑟尔·富加德的〈开火车的人〉，黄美华主编《亚非语语言文学研究》，北京：中国传媒大学出版社，2012 年，第137～143 页。［SHU Xiaomei,“Hou zhong zu ge li shidai de chongtu yu hejie—— ping A se er fu jia de de kaihuochederen”(Conflict and Reconciliation in Post-apartheid Era—On Athol Fugard’s The Train Driver), in Yafeiyu yuyanwenxue yanjiu (Studies on Asian and African Language and Literature), ed.HUANG Meihua,Beijing: Communication University of China Press, 2012, 137-43.］Her study firstly explored the factual truth and moral truth in Roelf Visagie’s heart.When he discovers the identity of “Red Doek，” Roelf understands the hopeless situation of black people after the fall apart of the apartheid state and reaches reconciliation with his “culprit” Red Doek.Next，Simon Hanabe，on behalf of blacks，gives his forgiveness to Roelf，a white man who commits a “crime” on a black woman.But Roelf’s death at the hands of tsotsis hints that the hatred between black and white has not been solved and reconciliation has a long journey to being achieved.Finally，Shu concludes that the play is the epitome of severe reality with the distance between black and white living spaces，their difference in lifestyles and the estrangement from spiritual pursuit.Additionally，Wang Dan gave an analysis from the perspective of space theory.28王丹：《论〈火车司机〉中鲁道夫的道德空间变化》，《戏剧之家》，2017 年第13 期，第45 页。［WANG Dan, “Lun huochesiji zhong ludaofu de daodekongjian bianhua”(On the Change in Rodulf’s Moral Space in The Train Driver), Xijuzhijia(Home of Drama) 13 (2017): 45.］Wang focused on the loss，finding and rebuilding of Roelf’s moral space，revealing his path of seeking redemption.

　　Existent essays focus mainly on the personal trauma that TRC was unable to solve or contemplate theatre’s role in tackling it in post-apartheid South Africa.My study will further explore the sense of guilt behind personal trauma and reconsider the mission Fugard’s theatre takes in new South Africa in a neo-liberal era.My argument is thatTheTrainDriveris more an“epic theatre” than “the Theatre of Absurd” as it has some elements of epic theatre and Fugard himself is also practitioner of Bertolt Brecht.I also found that former studies omitted the time when Fugard created this play.At that time，South African had already entered the neoliberal epoch，and beforeTheTrainDriver，certain neoliberal issues such AIDS and black unemployment were captured in some plays.My article will discuss how and why Fugard deals with white guilt in his epic theatre in neo-liberal South Africa.

Form Analysis

Before theatrical form analysis，my article introduces Fugard’s use of “epic theatre” and his adaptation of some Brechtian techniques.

　　“Epic theatre，” a concept in modern theatre，is identified with reason （Verstand），the process by which the audience is made to detach himself from the character on the stage and feel his emotions.29John Willett, Brecht on Theatre (London: Methuen, 1986), 16.The central idea of “epic theatre” is “Alienation，” also known as Verfremdung.Contrary to Aristotle’s theatre，where empathy turns a special event into something ordinary，epic theatre and its Verfremdung turn an ordinary one into something special.30Bertolt Brecht, Brecht on Performance (London: Bloomsbury, 2014), 46.Practically，Brecht mainly criticize the bourgeois society in which he lived in his epic theatre.

　　In the Brechtian system，actors are trained to use a somewhat complex technique in which they are a performer and an impersonator，to detach themselves from the characters portrayed.They force the spectators to look at the play’s situations from such an angle that they necessarily became subject to criticism.31John Willett, Brecht on Theatre, 72.

　　Speaking of techniques，there are explanatory subtitles or illustrations on a screen，players stepping out of character to address，summarize，or sing songs，and stage designs that do not reflect any location but make the audience aware of being in a theatre by exposing the lights and ropes.32Ibid., 96.

　　Bertolt Brecht is a beacon in Fugard’s theatrical practices.In his theatre，we see the influence of epic theatre.Inspired by Brecht’s gestic acting when he ran the Circle Players and the Serpent Players in the early 1960s，Fugard explored disillusion and social critique in the apartheid era.Fugard had directedTheCaucasianChalkCirclein 1964.33Athol Fugard, Notebooks 1960-1977, 119.Then in 1966，Fugard had been readingMessingkaufDialogues34Ibid., 120.for learning techniques and inspiration during the creation ofBoesmanand Lena.He was fascinated by Brecht’s “Leichtigkeit” （“ease” in English），which alludes to the game，the fun which is linked to great seriousness of purpose.35Bettina Fischer, “Athol Fugard’s Use of Bertolt Brecht as a Source and Influence”(master’s thesis, Rand Afrikaans University, 1991), 25.Fugard’s notebook and other records of theatre practice also reveal that he consciously adapted Brecht’s theory in his practice from the 1960s to the 1970s.And the influence of Brecht is far-reaching in the later periods.In Fugard’s practice，“role-playing” and “breaking the fourth wall” are in frequent use by Fugard and other practitioners of “Theatre of Resistance” in South Africa.

　　In Brechtian theatre，“role-playing” means an actor can play many roles in theatre.A kind woman Shen Teh and her evil cousin Shui Ta are played by the same actor inAGoodPersonofSzechwan.In this case，the shifting personality interrupts the audience’s empathy with the character.

　　“Breaking the fourth wall” is a technique borrowed from Chinese acting.In Brecht’s explanation，he requires his actor to talk directly to the audience.Plays are usually displayed as if the stage had four walls and not three.36John Willett, Brecht on Theatre, 136.In epic theatre，Brecht argues that there is no fourth wall“cutting the audience off from the stage.”37Ibid.The stage action is taking place not in reality or without an audience.In principle，it is possible for the actor to address the audience directly.

　　The prologue functions to “establish the topicality and sketch out the subjective problem.”38Bertolt Brecht, Brecht on Performance, 166.By way of a prologue，Shen Teh received instructions from three gods in search of a good person inThe GoodPersonofSzechwan.Brecht establishes the play’s primary conflict by having Wong，a meager water vendor，serve as the narrator.The protagonists in this play grapple with the impossibility of goodness in the face of capitalism，much like Wong，who makes money when his neighbors are in pain.To put it another way，it is almost inevitable to betray one’s fellow citizens in order to thrive on this planet.39Bertolt Brecht, The Good Person of Szechwan, 3-11.Sometimes，songs and chorus are part of the prologue like “The Courage Song”in MotherCourageand “Mack the Knife” inTheThreepennyOpera.

　　The epilogue usually contains a moral lesson or leaves the audience with an open question.The epilogue ofTheGoodPersonofSzechwanhas often been interpreted as an example of Brecht’s didactics： “How can one be good when society forces one to be bad？” By the duality of Shen Teh and Shui Ta，Brecht wants the audience to examine themselves，scrutinize their society and make a change when they find something wrong.

　　These techniques had been adapted in Fugard’s practice.As for “role-playing，” he made his actor John Kani play both Styles and Buntu40Athol Fugard, Statement, 5.inSizweBansiisDead.On European and American tours，Kani made comments in newspapers and directly addressed them to the audiences.41Ibid., 6.This adaptation ofSizweBansiis social-politically effective through the extension of the character’s narrative and representation of the all-encompassing but invisible apartheid system.

　　“Breaking the fourth wall” in Fugard’s practice works to interrupt emotional tension.In the case ofTheCoat，the performer breaks off with a weary gesture after immersion in her character and speaks to the other actors： “Tired，fellows.I think she feels tired.”42LIU Yaokun, “An Experimental Theatre Laboratory—On Fugard’s Play The Coat,” South African Theatre Journal 18,no.1 (2004): 47.AlthoughTheCoatwas not strictly created in the mode of epic theatre，it is a balance of emotion and reason.The dramatic rhythm shifts away from the emotional depiction of the character’s psychological thoughts and toward a rational and didactic critique of the current circumstance.43Ibid.Then，an alienation effect is produced when both actors and spectators are abruptly removed from their empathetic participation in the events.

　　To summarize，“breaking the fourth wall，” interruption of emotional tension and the use of prologue and epilogue are the most representative alienation techniques in both Brecht’s and Fugard’s practices.

　　Therefore，the rationality of applying Brecht’s epic theatre theory in the form analysis ofTheTrainDriverlies firstly in Fugard himself as a practitioner of Brechtian theory who also created a South African version of epic theatre.Secondly，the elements of “epic theatre” inThe TrainDriverhave not been fully explored by either theatrical critics or the academic community.Brecht’s influence on Fugard has been evidenced in his works before liberation.

　　My article will clarify how the monologue inTheTrainDriverpresents white guilt and analyses the setting of the dialogue，the prologue and epilogue and the alienation effect they create to prevent the audience from easily identifying with white guilt.Then，it will further indicate the neoliberal issues involved in stage design such as the background of the cemetery，the life of the black gravedigger，and the sound effects to demonstrate that the alienation effect of the theatrical form ofTheTrainDrivercan arouse the audience to think rationally that the death of a black woman is not the fault of the white driver，but the result of neoliberal reality.

Hysterical Monologue

In content，the monologue traces the process of the train driver killing the black woman and the devastating impact of the incident on his life.By relating the truth and his confession，the white train driver finds religious redemption and reconciliation with his reality.Monologue builds a bridge between the past and the present and establishes an ideal utopia to resolve conflicts and contradictions.

　　Roelf Visagie makes his monologue over the course of six scenes.At first，he talked about the accident of killing the woman wearing a Red Doek and his situation that he was on the journey to find her tomb to swear at her for her irrationality of embroiling an ought-to-be innocent train driver.An exhaustive but fruitless search for her home in Swartkops Pondok four weeks after the track suicide finally led him to Shukuma graveyard and Simon Hanabe.

　　Scene Two follows his psychological trauma and hysterical outpouring.That the woman and her child were pulverized on December 12，2002 ruined the festival ambience of Christmas in the Visagie family.After three days of searching，Roelf managed to find that it was Simon Hanabe who took the charge of burying the dead.

　　In Scene Three，there was a totally deranged man who could not stop crying and cursing.Roelf complained about the damage to his life and that the only chance left for his salvation lay with the ineffable God：

　　ROELF： …I’ll tell her how she has fucked up my life...the selfish black bitch...that I am sitting here with my arse in the dirt because thanks to her I am losing everything...my home，my family，my job...my bloody mind！ Ja！ Another fucking day like this one and I won’t know who I am anymore or what the fuck I am doing！ Jesus！ Jesus！Jesus！ Help me！44Athol Fugard, The Train Driver (New York: Theatre Communications Group, 2010), 13.

　　But things start to change.Monologue helps achieve spiritual sublimation in the third and fourth scenes.Having the experience in Shukuma graveyard，Roelf began to realize a bleak reality.Buried by rubbish and without names，black people were lying dead without respect，decency，and identity.In this scene，the audience could notice the transformation in Roelf’s attention from indulgent self-pity to sympathy for the dead woman.But ideally，Red Doek’s death was just attributed to “life without hope.”45Ibid., 40.Stuck in poverty and despair，the black woman lost the courage and hope to put up with life.What’s more severe was that “Nobody Wants Her”and no one claimed her after death.46Ibid.The silence and indecency in the destitute graveyard gave Roelf chilling thoughts on death.Monologue further reveals that the guilt Roelf had in mind was not merely for Red Doek herself but for the same nameless black people lying dead alongside her： “...［W］as it like this for her？ Was it dark like this for Red Doek？ Darker...I say...because her darkness was somehow inside her…”47Ibid.

　　In Scene Five，there is a speech without a living audience.It also can be regarded as a confession to the Almighty，a Dostoevsky-like redemption and a utopia of dealing with the past.Roelf made up his mind to claim the hopeless Red Doek.In his claim，an announcement leads the way to reconciliation，at least with the Almighty： “Well，that is not the way it is any more because now I hold up my hand and say： ‘I Claim Her！’ Me...Roelf Visagie...the driver of the train that killed her...wants her to be his.”48Ibid.

　　As the only person Red Doek saw in her last moments，Roelf Visagie made his choice to take the responsibility for human life and death in his monologue.

　　InTheTrainDriver，Scenes One to Three depict his futile effort at grave-finding and shedding his psychological trauma.Artistically，there is “a living moment”49Athol Fugard, Notebooks 1960-1977, 89.for Roelf to solve his bygone wrongs.The stage functions as a victim hearing or amnesty hearing for the train driver to exorcise his guilt.Public hearings were highly theatrical，staging testifiers who brought very emotional and dramatic narratives.50Catherine Cole, Performing South Africa’s Truth Commission: Stages of Transition (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 2010), 8.Since the theatre of post-apartheid echoes the theme of “truth”and “reconciliation，” the monologue part can be seen as a platform where Roelf confesses his truth and achieves reconciliation with his past wrong with the Almighty as his witness.

　　Fugard takes the form of monologue to arrange the theme of guilt in his epic theatre.In the perception of white guilt，the audience can act as the TRC commissioner and observe the contradiction in Roelf’s narration.In monologue，though a confession of guilt has been witnessed，it is incapable of correcting past wrongs，for Roelf the train driver had no name to claim or made any compensation but shared a catharsis with Simon and the play’s spectators.

　　Monologue here works as a confession of guilt，a record of personal psychology and takes its mission as TRC commissioner，which build an ideal domain of utopia to deal with the past.

Unconnected Dialogue

The “catharsis” came to a halt after Roelf claims his victim，but he hesitated to leave as if his mission was not complete.Roelf was too self-indulgent to release himself from the past.A reviewer criticized Roelf’s lack of curiosity about Simon，the black gravedigger who seems to have nothing to do with the white man’s guilt.Billington said it unbalances the play by placing more emphasis on Afrikaner anxiety than on the actuality of black poverty.51Michael Billington, “The Train Driver—Review,” The Guardian, January 31, 2010.

　　The issue is that the balance lies in the connection between Simon Hanabe，a black Xhosa，and Roelf Visagie.Does Simon in this play function simply to share a meal and shack with Roelf，appreciate a plain apricot jam in Afrikaans，or exchange some memories of childhood with him？ And what’s the meaning of arranging a prologue and epilogue for the actor of Simon Hanabe？ These questions need to be discussed with reference to Fugard’s epic theatre.

　　InTheTrainDriver，the dialogue seems to prevent physical action or plot development.Elisabeth Vincentelli52Elisabeth Vincentelli, “‘Train Driver’ Leaves Station OK, but Finally Derails,” New York Post, September 10, 2012.noticed the play wanted to say something big and deep about the desperate mess South Africa was in，but the metaphor wasn’t grounded，because the entire 90-minute show consisted of Roelf trying to exorcise that trauma while Simon listened and thoughtfully ate from a can.Two men shared the stage but not much else； she argued Fugard never established any meaningful or dramatic connection between them.

　　On the contrary，Vincentelli ignored the unseen and the undone hinted at in the dialogue between Roelf Visagie and Simon Hanabe.Through dialogue，Fugard achieves a kind of alienation to reveal the ill-gotten advantage and blindness of the white train driver rather than his fault in the accidental killing.The dialogue shifts away from the hysterical depiction of white guilt and toward a reality between the white train driver and the black gravedigger and works as an interruption of or alienation from emotion，a re-establishment of interpersonal relationships and a revelation of true guilt.

　　Overall，the dialogue between Roelf and Simon is unconnected and fragmentary because of the white man’s impatience and the black man’s forgetfulness and illiteracy.In the opening scene，two men were sometimes to the point of violence.

　　ROELF： Think，Simon！ Maybe four weeks ago Mr.Mdoda comes to you with one big body and one baby body and he say to you put them in the same hole...（Holding up his forefinger）...Two？

　　SIMON （Holding up his forefinger）： Look，two bodies！

　　ROELF： No！ No！ Don’t shake your head again.Any more head shaking，my friend，and the bloody thing will fall off your shoulders.Just think！ Four weeks...53Athol Fugard, The Train Driver, 24-25.

　　In the first scene，Simon asked why Roelf wanted the woman and what their relationship was，and all he got was a “No.” The scene of Simon asking Roelf’s trouble has no role in promoting action or solving a problem.

　　SIMON： …So why you want this woman with the red doek？ Did she work for you in the house？

　　ROELF： No.

　　He slumps down on the ground with his back to the fence post.

　　SIMON： Did she do the washing in the backyard？

　　ROELF： No.

　　SIMON： Did she steal from you？

　　ROELF： NO！54Ibid., 12.

　　After this ineffective communication，they suddenly talked in Afrikaans.This conversation ended up with Simon’s warning of ferocious black tsotsi and chasing Roelf out of Shukuma the next day.The two men rested at Simon’s shack for the night in Scene Two.There was little talking，just two people staring at each other，which created a boring silence for some of the audience.Roelf，in the shack with poor hygiene and a bad smell，told Simon what had happened between himself and Red Doek.Tired of Roelf’s monologic gibberish，Simon went to sleep.As the scene faded out，“I sleep now”55Ibid., 23.is a concise response to Roelf’s third retrospective monologue about “the killing” and its aftermath，which interrupts Roelf’s emotional talking and the audience’s empathy.

　　In Scene Three，Simon had no idea where he had buried Red Doek four weeks before，which made Roelf extremely impatient and frustrated.Their discordant collaboration in gravefinding led to more anger and agitation for Roelf Visagie.The bleakness of the graveyard further irritated his fragile heart so he had to make crosses on the holes to calm his conscience，which Simon has already told him would be stolen for a more practical use.The “good” behavior of respecting the dead and the meaningless action of searching for Red Doek is stopped slowly by Simon’s apprehension.The dialogue below concentrated on the divergent attitudes toward death and ceremony.After Roelf’s harangue on the inhumanity of the burials in Shukuma graveyard，Simon，with disbelief and fear，approaches Roelf warily to stop his deranged behaviour，which in Roelf’s eyes is self-righteous respect for the dead.

　　SIMON： Stop now，whiteman...

　　Roelf has moved to another grave.

　　SIMON： Whiteman！...Stop now...

　　ROELF： Stop what？

　　SIMON： Stop what you doing.56Ibid., 27.

　　Before this conversation，they seemed to build a kind of friendship.Roofie（Roelf’s nickname called by Simon） got along well with his friend Andile（Simon’s Xhosa name），except in the circumstance involving Red Doek and death.They couldn’t agree on which corpses have been buried in Shukuma.For the white Afrikaner，he believes the proverb in Bible that goes：“Individual is made by God’s image.”57Ibid., 40.Despite dying homeless，man is always connected with God.Roelf claims： “We was all made in his image...you...me...Simon...every human being...made in his image.” Unlike Roelf Visagie’s need for a ritual like a cross and flowers，Simon only covers these bodies.And the rubbish on the graves was meant to deter people from digging them up.What he does as a ritual is sing a Zulu lullaby to calm the long-sleeping ghosts.

　　Immersing in coping with his personal guilt，Roelf was blind to the situation at graveyard and made useless compensation for the dead by making a cross out of wood.Simon found the ritual impractical as wood was used for making fire，but Roelf insisted that the ritual was out of respect for the dead.Their divergence on respecting the dead is not a problem of humanity but of white privilege，colonial and post-colonial history and its legacy.

　　At the same time，in the dialogue，there is a re-establishment of interpersonal relationships and a revelation of true guilt.The concentration on interpersonal dynamics distinguishes Brechtian theatre from the classical theatre that came before him.Rather than focusing on the characters and what occurs to them，Brecht’s emphasis is on the “how” and the characters’reactions to a scenario and one another.58Bettina Fischer, “Athol Fugard’s Use of Bertolt Brecht as a Source and Influence,” 152.The dialogue not only stops the deluge of guilt but also builds a contradictory relationship between the white and the black.

　　In Scene Three，Simon started to sense Roelf’s inner distress and self-indictment.In the short conversation，the black gravedigger，who had never accused the white man of being guilty，gently told him： “You must stop now looking for her，” which furthers their alienation.Apart from treating the dead，their sharing of food and childhood memories and their imagination of ghosts in the graveyard are a part of the actions that connect two independent men of different races.

　　Scene Four is the night of the second day in Shukuma graveyard.In the monologue part，it shows the epiphany of Roelf from hatred for Red Doek to feeling pity for all dead people.But Simon just thought Roelf was willing to see her ghost.The scene ends with Simon’s meal.On the third night at Shukuma，Simon shared his bread and jam after Roelf claimed Red Doek.In Scene Six，Simon actually did not know what was “claiming the dead.” This conversation went in Afrikaans：

　　ROELF： Do you understand？I do not want to swear anymore because she is mine now.I claimed her.

　　SIMON （Shocked）： What you saying？You want to marry her？

　　ROELF： Don’t talk shit，Simon！

　　SIMON： No，man，it’s you talking shit.She’s lying in the ground and you want to marry her？

　　ROELF： No man！You did not understand me.59Ibid., 43.

　　In his elucidation to Simon，Roelf “feels that way inside his heart” to claim the unwanted body.Simon，though not totally comprehending，offered a plan to finish Roelf’s unfulfilled wish of burying “Red Doek.” Simon said that the next day another nameless female body would be sent to Shukuma graveyard and he wanted Roelf to dig a hole for her as he should do for Red Doek.Roelf finally took action by digging a hole before his story ends.

　　In the dialogue，there is a mechanism of blocking-up the audience’s empathy with white guilt.The subtextual action is that Roelf and Simon build contradictory relations in which the two men who had never met before bind and pull each other.For one thing，the play constructs a relationship between a white man and a dead woman who once dwelled in a hopeless pondok60A shabby small shack.；for another，a white man and a black man are living from hand to mouth in the squatter camp.

　　The play raises questions for the audience： why would Roelf have a moral responsibility to Red Doek instead of Simon？ Is his guilt merely from accidentally taking someone’s life rather than being negligent in caring for someone in the same desperate situation？

　　Dialogue seems to be unable to achieve the expiation of guilt inTheTrainDriversince conversations go without the two characters reaching a common understanding in most circumstances due to Roelf’s unstable emotion，hostile attitude，and self-protective isolation.By arranging the sequence of dialogue and monologue，the performance achieves a scrutiny of the sense of guilt.The disagreement over death and ritual and the rebuilding of the black-white relationship in the unconnected dialogue play an alienating role in interrupting the white man’s hysterical monologue and in delineating a picture of reality about the white man’s blindness.

Prologue and Epilogue

In a theatre review，Robert L.King61Robert King, “The Problems of the Explicit,” The North American Review 297, no.4 (2012): 40.commented that the play would be better without its prologue and epilogue.Alessandra Rao62Alessandra Rao, “The Train Driver Review,” Cultural Encounters: Arts in New York City, October 4, 2012.echoed the superfluity of the prologue and epilogue and commented that the play’s ending is “a rather abrupt，unnecessary attempt.” However，without the prologue and epilogue，the work may risk being reduced to a form of white liberal humanist writing imbued with white pathos and sympathy for black pain and suffering.They function as a further alienation from the white man’s guilt.

　　In Brecht’s practice，prologue and epilogue are often equipped with song or chorus，indicating a certain break with the dramatic conventions of the time.63John Willett, Brecht on Theatre, 84.Though there are no songs in Fugard’s theatre，he has always made his characters storytellers； Kruger believes that it is a mix of African oral tradition and Brechtian technique.64Loren Kruger, The Drama of South Africa: Plays, Pageants, and Publics Since 1910 (London: Routledge, 1999), 18.Prologue and epilogue inTheTrain Driverestablish topicality and sketch out the subjective problem.65Bertolt Brecht, Brecht on Performance, 166.

　　From the start，Simon the gravedigger，standing in a desperate land，told of the existence of a white train driver：

　　SIMON： My name is Simon Hanabe.I am the one who puts the nameless ones in the grave.This is how it happened.When I first see the whiteman...So I say to myself： Simon，what is this man doing here among our sleeping people？ Who is he looking for？ Then he sees me watching him and he comes to me and starts talking but that time I didn’t know what he was saying—his words were all mixed up like he was drunk…66Athol Fugard, The Train Driver, 7.

　　InTheTrainDriver，Simon is the demonstrator，like that of Brecht’s “street scene.”67John Willett, Brecht on Theatre, 121.He finally determined what kind of experience is to be presented to the spectator，a black gravedigger’s life disturbed by a white train driver in the tortures of guilt.The prologue establishes the topicality of a black man in poverty.

　　When curtain calls，Simon made the whole story of Roelf Visagie and his destiny with tsotsi clear to the audience.In the epilogue，Roelf’s death finally endangers Simon’s living，which is dependent on dead bodies.At last，although he denied his friendship with a white man to the police，the tsotsi is still a tough problem and has a chance to return for him.The play fades with the state of Simon’s rest “in a helpless gesture.”68Athol Fugard, The Train Driver, 47.The bleak future is looming for the unemployed Simon： “When they are gone Mr.Mdoda tells me he is finished with me and that he will get somebody else to bury the new nameless one.So there it is.I haven’t got a job and now also I haven’t got a spade.”69Ibid., 39.

　　The play ends with another story about a less emotional issue，Simon’s unemployment.The prologue involves a less emotional dramatized narrative，which is a black gravedigger meeting a white man and helping him find a woman’s tomb.In the epilogue，however，there is a direct narrative that Simon’s encounter with this white man cost him his job.The theatre presents the spectator not only with solved problems but with unsolved ones too.70John Willett, Brecht on Theatre, 66.His final despondent state may be “a reflection on South Africa’s long-standing economic ‘Achilles Heel’ of unemployment which particularly afflicting young black men.”71Connal Parr,“Drama as Truth Commission: Reconciliation and Dealing with the Past in South African and Irish Theatre,” Interventions 23, no.1 (2021): 110.The combination of prologue and epilogue finally leaves the audience with a social-political problem more than an ethical one.

　　The alienation produced by prologue and epilogue breaks the consistency of stage time.The audiences have witnessed all this tragedy： a black mother who died with her child，a ruined white man and a black man who does unfavorable work.Interrupted by Simon Hanabe’s narration in the present tense，spectators will be less immersed in Roelf’s emotion，as the epic theatre requires that it appeal less to feelings than to the audience’s reason.72John Willett, Brecht on Theatre, 23.

　　The prologue and epilogue，the classic theatrical device of Brechtian theatre，in which Simon directly addresses the audience about his situation，detaches the audience from the white man’s guilt and reveals the black reality of a certain period.

Stage Elements

Overall，the dramaturgical outline ofTheTrainDriverwas more perceived as the theatre of the absurd.At a first glance at the stage，there is a sandy surface scattered with hubcaps，old bits of pipe and small piles of stones，and upstage a small hut—bleaker than the empty place inWaitingforGodot.The combination of stones and soils peaks here and there.At stage left is a fence made of several wooden stakes twined with wires； at stage right，the interior of Simon’s pondok，a shack in bad condition.

　　As the curtain rises，the audience’s attention would be immediately focused on a greyhaired man in rags who is ready to introduce himself as a storyteller.The burial rites have their history，that is，the division of residential zones as apartheid’s legacy remains“evident in extensive poverty，educational deprivation，and a warped criminal justice system which，because it was developed an instrument of political oppression，seems incapable of dealing with ordinary crime.”73Attwell, David and Barbara Harlow, “Introduction: South African Fiction after Apartheid,” Modern Fiction Studies 46(2000): 1.

　　This historical reality is abstracted as the background of absurdity on the artistic stage.Craig W.McLuckie74Craig W.McLuckie, “Power, Self, and Other:The Absurd in‘Boesman and Lena’ —— Athol Fugard Issue,” Twentieth Century Literature 39, no.4 (1993): 429.had already noticed this feature in Fugard’s theatre and argues that unlike Beckett，who builds a stark world as a universal metaphor for absurd metaphysical existence，Fugard，less inclined to the metaphysical situation，provides specific information on his characters’ living conditions and thus defines absurdity as produced by power structures against humanism that govern life，not just as the condition of life itself.

　　The stage that presents Beckettian absurd rudeness furthers the alienation effect.The setting of Shukuma graveyard as non-verbal staging aspects，are—following Brecht’s view—all technically conducive to the plot，obvious evidence of existential absurdity，apartheid legacy and neoliberal severity.

　　According to the original stage directions，the wasteyard is “an Eastern Cape graveyard outside Motherwell.”75Athol Fugard, The Train Driver, 26.A study of the cemeteries of Port Elizabeth showed that racial inequality in the provision of the cemeteries had existed at least in the early 1990s.Out-of-town and illegal burials were frequent on open spaces adjoining black suburbs like Motherwell，with evidence of many black burials not officially documented.76A.J.Christopher et al., “Segregation and Cemeteries in Port Elizabeth,” 43.The reason for illegal burials is that families can hardly pay municipal burial fees （2000 rand per annum） due to severe unemployment.Changing funeral practices and rituals in urban areas hint at how black South Africans have negotiated urbanization.77Michelle Hays, “‘The Last Thing That Tells Our Story’: The Roodepoort West Cemetery, 1958-2008,” Journal of Southern African Studies 37, no.2 (2011): 298.For them，cemeteries reflected the social and political context.It is an epitome of the removals and the impotence of habitants to make a change as apartheid approached and terminated.The depiction in this play attempts to recapture lost or forgotten lives in the disrespect and neglect of the apartheid and neoliberal years.

　　The geographical location，which remains stagnant for the entirety of the play，is not only an inheritance of existential absurdity but also exists as the trace of the hard survival of the powerless from history to the present.In practical terms，the social injustices，and economic inequalities which Nationalists had imposed upon Port Elizabeth will not be easily neutralized after the black government is in power or through liberal and free-market exchange.The background elements work to arouse the audience’s reason for thinking the true severity of neoliberal South Africa lying behind the blindness of white guilt.

　　The staging also presents Simon’s Spartan life without sustenance，alimentation and other requisites，an existence of poverty.What the white man never cared about was that Simon Hanabe was dressed in a dusty，old light brown work suit.A stretched-out filthy T-shirt could be seen beneath the work suit，covered with mud on his face，chest，feet，and lower legs.He moved around the stage slowly and with much effort.His actions were all forced，and he gave the image of a weary man who had been worn down by life’s trials.

　　When Roelf and Simon stayed in the pondok-like shack，the white man also turned a blind eye to the humble interior.A “bed，” also a jumble of blankets on the opposite side，is not a good choice for sleeping.Next to a bed sits a wooden box with a candle on，the only light in the darkness.What Roelf saw was that a place like that would drive his wife crazy because of its poor hygiene and bad smell.He was unaware that the poor black man had no access to a comfortable residence.

　　From Simon’s Spartan living，the audience can reasonably doubt the necessity of Roelf’s guilt for Red Doek rather than for Simon in their dialogue.The set of the black gravedigger in this epic theatre revealed another fact，that deprived of the chance to acquire good skills and knowledge in youth，impotent low-class black men were systematically disadvantaged in the labor market.The historical loss of education，occupation，property rights，and life possibilities faced by the majority of South Africans even deteriorated during the time of neoliberalism.

　　Under this inequality，an extreme rebellion was formed as a way of living.As important，the unshown character，tsotsi，takes the role of theatrical suspense，which at the beginning lays the threat of ever-encroaching offstage forces to the black and white pair.

　　At their first meeting，Simon warned Roelf of the threats from tsotsis who dislike and kill white people and might not be very fond of black ones as well.They have no tolerance for a white man staying in the area where “black people is sleeping.”78Athol Fugard, The Train Driver, 7.And Simon was mugged for the extra money he had received from Roelf for buying food.On stage，the symbolic sound effect for these hooligans is the howl of death hounds：

　　SIMON： Amagintsa is like the dogs in the bush，always smelling for new ones to dig up and eat.Just so with the amagintsa.They are smelling you out now，Roofie.Very soon they will find you and eat you with their knives.Dogs got long teeth，amagintsa got sharp knives.Pasop，witman！79Ibid., 32.

　　Their existence as tsotsi，in a specific place and time，is vital to the story’s implicit conflict between black and white，the individual and his/her environment，and subculture and mainstream culture.80Clive Glaser, “The Mark of Zorro Sexuality and Gender Relations in the Tsotsi Subculture on the Witwatersrand,”African Studies 51, no.1 (1992): 47.Roelf’s death at the hands of tsotsi indicates that Roelf Visagie reconciled with his moral reality through monologic confession while there is a further step that needs to be made in racial reconciliation.

　　The play fascinates audiences by penetrating them emotionally and laying bare their inhibitions.The liberal existentialist way of seeking redemption is not that effective for the audience because the culprit is not really the train driver.Further，it is the alienation in the theatrical prologue，epilogue and other stage elements that rescue the play from pure catharsis and fulfill the main task of revealing the factual truth behind Red Doek’s death，Roelf’s guilt and Simon’s situation.

White Guilt and Alienation

In the case ofTheTrainDriver，the reconfiguration of Roelf Visagie allows Fugard to square his “claim” of Pumla Lolwana’s tragic story with the skill of being a writer，of listening to stories and presenting them in creative ways as a kind of truth commissioner.81Connal Parr,“Drama as Truth Commission: Reconciliation and Dealing with the Past in South African and Irish Theatre,” 110.The title page ofTheTrainDriverstates： “For Pumla Lolwana and her three children—Lindani，Andile and Sesanda—who died on the railway tracks between Philippi and Nyanga on the Cape Flats on Friday，December 8，2000.”82Athol Fugard, The Train Driver, 2.

　　TheTrainDriverwent on stage in 2010，having been initially conceived in 2002，two years after the accident took place.For eight years Fugard had been trying to write that story of Pumla Lolwana，he explains in an interview： “Trying to deal with it because I felt I needed to go through a process myself to understand how a human being can end up in a place so dark，so without hope，so alone，that she would do that not only to herself but her three innocent children as well.”83Andrienne Sichel, “A Legendary Playwright Bares His Soul,” Sunday Independent, February 21, 2010.

　　Stephen Sachs，a director ofTheTrainDriveralso confessed that the work presents “a kind of summation，a dramatic expression” of who Fugard is and of his “lifelong internal struggle” to exhume “the bones of the nameless black dead” and claim these characters as his own.84Connal Parr,“Drama as Truth Commission: Reconciliation and Dealing with the Past in South African and Irish Theatre,” 111.“This is for me the whole； it’s my truth and reconciliation，” Fugard said inTheGuardian： “I think all of my writing life led up to the writing of ‘TheTrainDriver’ because it deals with my inherited blindness and guilt and all of what being a white South African in South Africa during those apartheid years meant.”85Michael Billington, “The Train Driver—Review.”

　　It seemed that in their sincere desire to “claim” the victim，the train driver or proxy Fugard overrides the human tragedy of Pumla Lolwana.86Connal Parr,“Drama as Truth Commission: Reconciliation and Dealing with the Past in South African and Irish Theatre,” 98.His redemptive Christian liberalism foresees to the redemption of South African whites from guilt.Michael Billington commented inThe Guardian： “…［I］ncluding white liberals，who have neither understood nor alleviated the plight of South Africa’s urban poor.”87Michael Billington, “The Train Driver—Review.”Fugard has no intention to condemn the incumbent Government nor does he attempt to offer any solutions.

　　Once against the apartheid regime，Fugard uses theatre as a form of rebellion instead of a violent revolution.For liberalists，a means of political change includes the idea of the autonomy of the individual，the primacy of the individual against any social or political collective，the moral equality of all persons before the law and in terms of political participation，a belief in the power of reason and negotiation to bring about social amelioration and a concomitant rejection of violence.88Andrew Foley, “Fugard, Liberalism and the Ending of Apartheid,” Current Writing 9, no.2 (1997): 58.Fugard’s existentialist notion，which he says is the theme that has gone through all his work，is that “man can only really experience his existence through the pain.”89Barrie Hough, “Interview with Athol Fugard: Port Elizabeth, 30 November 1977,” Theoria: A Journal of Social and Political Theory 55 (1980): 41.

　　Decades after apartheid，the reality shocked Fugard and many South Africans.Fugard said：“This is a moment in terms of South Africa’s post-apartheid history when we are perilously close to betraying what we fought for.”90Brian Phillips, “Ploughing the Page: An Interview with Athol Fugard,” Journal of Human Rights Practice 4, no.3(2012): 391.Although black-white relations are improving，particularly among younger South Africans，he said，the gap between the country’s economic haves and have-nots is widening.The belief that this unique history turns its back completely on a policy of violence and moves forward to negotiation and dialogue comes to nothing.

　　Theatrically，Fugard surpassed his liberal solution of treating new-era problems in this epic theatre.The play changes the problematic status of Fugard’s sentimental，redemptive themes，and the alienation of the story saves it from certain liberal humanist pitfalls in that the prologue and epilogue give a try to challenge the neoliberal status quo.With all the alienation techniques，Fugard can make his audiences witness the immense pain of the white train driver and examine their existence and guilt by sharing it.More importantly，after the suffering and empathy，the epic theatre encourages the audience to figure out a solution to Simon’s unemployment and address South Africa’s collective problems.Meanwhile，inTheTrainDriver，Fugard surpasses his former perception of his personal guilt and white guilt in a self-focused manner.There seems to be a contradiction in white guilt.The death of the black woman is caused by the cruel reality of neoliberalism，but the white train driver is ineluctably tortured by a feeling of sadness and remorse over past wrongs as a white man was supposed to react during the apartheid period.It is difficult for the audience to identify with the train driver or to empathize with his sense of guilt.InTheTrainDriver，Fugard surpasses the limitation of the liberal way of thinking.That is，a white man chooses to reconcile with social reality by acquiring a sense of guilt，confessing，and exploring a new way to achieve reconciliation in seeking the truth that the fate of blacks cannot be fundamentally changed by a presentation of guilt.