mogadishu.

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    mogadishu.

    The commissioner for speech programmes wrote this, in The Huffington Post, about Drama on 3. Is he doing us a favour or is he on his own on this one?

    "People think they know what happens in schools. But they don't". So says playwright Vivienne Franzmann in the introduction to her play, Mogadishu which we're broadcasting on BBC Radio 3 this Sunday. Franzmann should know - she's a former teacher, this is her first play and it won her the prestigious George Devine Award for Most Promising Playwright and was a critical success.

    BBC Radio 3 has a tradition of tackling difficult issues through bringing the best of new playwriting to our audiences. Mogadishu is no exception. It's a hard-hitting story - which shows how an inner-city secondary school is driven by anger, vindictiveness, cowardice and misguided idealism when a student falsely accuses a teacher of racism. And if that description sounds excessive - last weekend the press reported figures from the Department for Education revealing that around 44 per cent of claims made by pupils and their parents against teachers were "unsubstantiated, malicious or unfounded".

    Mogadishu started life on the stage at Manchester's Royal Exchange. But now Franzmann has re-imagined it for radio. And fans of radio drama will know that transferring to the airwaves gives a play an intimacy and a directness, a reliance on language, which can leave audiences frozen as they stop the washing up, the tidying and just listen - sometimes delighted - and sometimes disturbed by the things they realise they want to hear.

    We're right there in the room as a father, worn down by a low-paid job and family tragedy, humiliates his bullying son, desperate to stop him throwing his life away. We're listening over the shoulder of a head teacher in his office as he brutally washes his hands of a good colleague, because social services have decided to investigate her home life.

    And that closeness to the action, an almost documentary feel, doesn't just apply to social realism in radio drama. Over the last six weeks on Radio 3, our broad range of drama offerings could have rushed you through the enchanted forest with the young lovers of Shakespeare's Midsummer's Night's Dream, recorded over night in woodland outside Brighton. You could have lounged in the Parisian cafes with comedian Tommy Cooper - played by Russ Abbott - on a trip to the French capital he never really made. Or, unbelievably for most of us, you could have found yourself giggling away to a seventeenth century French classic! (Courtesy of a brilliant modern comic version by Ranjit Bolt). Radio drama does that. You're not in the most expensive seats in the stalls. You're up there with the actors.

    When I first saw Mogadishu in the theatre I was astounded that a young cast could bring such theatrical skill to such a compelling text - and appalled at the situation and the authentic behaviour they portrayed of contemporary Britain. Now audiences at home will have the chance to experience that event. As Vivienne Franzmann herself might put it: people think they know what happens in radio drama. But they don't. Try listening on Sunday.
    ??

    #2
    Hello, drama teacher

    I read Matthew Dodd's blog about the play (it was a bit last-minute being posted!) - which you quote in full here.

    There often does seem to be a stoney silence on this messageboard where 'new' plays are concerned. People are perhaps selective in their listening in the same way as they are with music: not a question of whether it is good or not, but whether it 'appeals'.

    From what I've read the staged play was very well received by the critics, but for the general public it could be the kind of subject which limits the appeal. Some days ago I spent five minutes reading the news story Matthew Dodd quotes about the percentage of complaints against teachers which are fabrications. The headline caught my attention so I read the story. But do I want to spend 90 minutes learning about the problems faced by teachers today?

    This is prejudging the play, of course, or perhaps gambling on the fact that that is the sole purpose of the play - to represent a slice of 'real life' in the UK - and that the construction of a 'drama' and the subtleties and variety of characterisation will, as a result, take second place. Production and performance qualities, it goes without saying, are also central concerns. For me, those latter qualities are more important: reports and documentaries can deal with 'real life'.

    But there are still six days to Listen Again. Since plots and dénouements have traditionally been less important here [as in 'Close your eyes if you don't want to know the result'], perhaps you'd like to dissect the dramatic qualities?

    [Some people will already be intending to listen later on the iPlayer, and others will have recorded it for later listening anyway. The broadcast was rather late starting (9.45pm) because of Liszt Day]
    It isn't given us to know those rare moments when people are wide open and the lightest touch can wither or heal. A moment too late and we can never reach them any more in this world.

    Comment


      #3
      I think ff's anticipated analysis of this one, even before she's heard it, is prescient. I listened to it yesterday, and found the didacticism too upfront for most of the time. The writing is undeniably strong, but driven entirely by a set of fixed issues. This was a strength and a weakness, because most of the issues were I felt too predictable, and there was little room given for shifts in characterisation. There wasn't a single point in this play where I felt surprised at the course of events.

      Still, it was an interesting departure, if that's the right word, for a Do3, and I can't help wondering if the choice of this piece as a launch item in the R3 blog, albeit in the context of publicising a "broad range of drama offerings", indicates what we might be getting more of in the future from the Matthew Dodd stable.

      Russ

      Comment


        #4
        While the subject matter is undoubtedly important, I wonder whether this kind of drama works qua drama. I also question the scheduling. I have never understood why anyone would want to listen to or watch such harrowing material last thing on a Sunday night. Hardly puts one in an ideal frame of mind for the week ahead.

        Comment


          #5
          Originally posted by Panjandrum View Post
          I have never understood why anyone would want to listen to or watch such harrowing material last thing on a Sunday night.
          It's not usually as late as this, though the change in the schedule has shunted Do3 on to - is it 8.30pm now? It now follows the Sunday feature - the change consequent upon Discovering Music having been axed.

          I'll listen to it tonight but I think we have touched upon the problems posed by choosing social issues for the central theme. My feeling is that political issues are more successfully dramatised.
          It isn't given us to know those rare moments when people are wide open and the lightest touch can wither or heal. A moment too late and we can never reach them any more in this world.

          Comment


            #6
            Originally posted by drama teacher View Post
            The commissioner for speech programmes wrote this, in The Huffington Post, about Drama on 3. Is he doing us a favour or is he on his own on this one?
            ??
            Right, well, I'm not sure who is meant by 'us' - (drama) teachers? audiences? Anyway, here's what I think.

            Perhaps disappointingly, it's the production itself that I'd skim over quite quickly. It was altogether serviceable as far as the play went. The performances didn't raise eyebrows as far as authenticity is concerned (all right, when it opened I briefly felt I was at King Street Juniors, but that was quickly dispelled). How the re-imagining for radio differed from the stage play, I wouldn't know, but it was a straightforward production, always clear where we were and how we'd got there.

            With classic plays we usually find ourselves discussing the production; with a new play, it's the qualities of the play and for me this is where the weaknesses lay.

            'Mogadishu'? Well, I've had no experience of school since I left, but I didn't feel that this revealed anything surprising: appalling language, violence, drugs - pretty much what we've read about. Problem kids? Sadly, yes. Very tough for teachers? Yup. A lot of the 90 minutes was depiction and although radio is 'closer' and more intimate, I have a feeling that a live stage performance might have been more powerful and gripping.

            The plot was actually rather slight: spot of bother - false accusation - turmoil - dénouement. For me, and I think this was in the plot rather than the performance, Amanda the teacher was rather annoying (and unprofessional?) which made her less sympathetic as a character.

            There was more about procedures than psychology. The father-son relationship would have been an interesting one to have gone into (it was slightly ambiguous) - overall I felt the characters were serving a purpose rather than existing in their own right. Was it saying much more than that a teacher's lot is frequently not a happy one in today's society?

            Edit: I could return to criticisms of the play - a bit stern, tbh - but if no one else here listened that might be an otiose exercise?
            Last edited by french frank; 26-10-11, 11:26.
            It isn't given us to know those rare moments when people are wide open and the lightest touch can wither or heal. A moment too late and we can never reach them any more in this world.

            Comment

            Working...
            X