First performed at the Royal Court Theatre on 4th
December 1972, this play was published a year later. The copy I have was issued
by the publishers as a review copy (the publisher’s slip is still loose within
the pages), but not to me. No, I picked it up in a second hand book shop some
years later.
That the play’s first performance took place in such
an august location says a great deal about the theatrical world’s respect for
the playwright at the time. Of course, his ‘Look Back in Anger’ had deservedly
set him up as a ‘name’ in the literary world way back at the end of the 1950s.
But, whether this play would have received such respect had it come from the
pen of a lesser known writer is open to doubt.
The piece is partially ‘improvised’. Much of the
intended dialogue is specified but there are passages where the cast is
intended to react to the audience, especially where public participation might
be encouraged by the antics and words of a couple of cast members placed within
that audience. I expect that such risky participation was what drew many into
theatre. Certainly, the early dialogue given the cast would be insufficient to
garner much in the way of admiration. It’s banal and uninspiring on the page.
Performance may well have brought it more life but the text is decidedly flat
and lacks the humour that’s clearly intended.
But, as time passes on the uncluttered stage, we’re
bombarded with significant comment on social issues of the time. In particular,
the Older Woman is given the task of demonstrating the then growing tolerance
of pornography and its detrimental effects on women. At the time there was
increasing awareness of the way in which pornography objectifies women and
portrays rape as not only acceptable but actually desirable, even by the women
thus abused. Osborne’s clever use of a mature but attractive woman to
apparently enjoy her readings of graphic female abuse is very effective on the
page and, I suspect, even more so in performance. The playwright was, of
course, very concerned about social issues and he uses the play to highlight
many aspects of life that he wants people to think about. I suspect that
audiences would leave the performance with a deeper understanding of the
destructive tendencies of pornography.
There are aspects of this play that definitely don’t
come across in the text. I can imagine that performance would enliven,
invigorate and excite the written words to make the whole experience more
meaningful and enjoyable. But there are elements of the piece that defy
explanation. Many of the passages are drawn from other sources, often obscure,
without reference to those sources, so that it’s difficult to know whether a
specific point was being made in any given circumstance. Sometimes, the
juxtaposition of dialogue and action appears almost absurd; whether this was
deliberate and whether it was a theatrical device employed to unsettle what
Osborne probably viewed as a complacent middle class audience is uncertain at
this distance. The effect on the page is simply confusing, but, again, in
performance, it would probably be more effective.
On balance, this is definitely a play to be seen
rather than read. But I don’t think I’d be tempted to attend such a performance
now. I think the piece is of its time and unlikely to transfer to the modern
day in a form that would render it entertaining or thought-provoking. The
debates opened here are now well established and no longer bear the rawness and
immediacy they would have had at the time of its writing.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/stage/2006/apr/29/theatre.biography for a piece on the biography of John
Osborne.
2 comments:
Hi Stuart - I've just popped over from the Ink-slingers League - I'm catching up with everyone's blogs after my Christmas break. Looking forward to reading your posts - Sharon
Hi Sharon, good to meet you. I'll try to make my posts interesting and useful. And, if you're interested in trying your hand at a writing contest, just pop over to the tab above, 'Writing Contests', where I keep an up to date listing.
Post a Comment