Well (I think Lat was querying this too), take a drama which has the purpose of attacking racism. In depicting racism it has to somehow rise above merely being racist itself. I don't think it can be right to ban racist language, but to justify its use the message must win out. Substituting obscene language, for example, or nudity, it can often appear to be gratuitous in spite of attempts to justify it. But 'racist language' that was felt to be gratuitous wouldn't be acceptable, would it?
Anyway, to WH: I didn't find the performances as bad as Draco did. The old business of speaking narrative rather than dialogue isn't often satisfactory. I was mildly interested in being reminded of the story.
As for the 'updating', I thought it just seemed false in what is, after all, an 18th/19th c setting. It's part of the attraction of such works that you are taken inside the community and society of the time, not to something in tune with our own time. In any case, we're so battered by obscenities being uttered everywhere that it absolutely doesn't have the effect of 'shocking' in the particular way Holloway intended.
No questioning the power of the novel, and I think this production did capture it (I liked the atmosphere created by the music), it was rough and repellent. But it isn't a play and I found some of it a bit muddling as a result of cutting (couldn't always make out who was speaking either).




. But it isn't a play and I found some of it a bit muddling as a result of cutting (couldn't always make out who was speaking either).
Reply With Quote

