Edward Bond

[Conchis]

He is a major dramatist - possibly, he is Britain's most important post-war dramatist (and, yes, I am aware of the enormity of that statement).

YET - his plays are barely performed in this country and large numbers of people who consider themselves 'theatregoers' have never seen any of his plays, or have even heard of him (I was talking to a few such last week).

You might argue that Bond has not always been helpful to his own cause - and has perhaps gone out of his way to antagonise people who might have been helpful to him.

Yet the loss is the British Theatre's. He is possibly the only major dramatist operating to day whose work actually encourages people to think.

It also needs to be said: his work is actually very accessible and often very funny. The man has a sense of humour, even if it isn't of the belly-laugh kind.

Anyone else got any thoughts on E.B?

[french frank]

I can't see that any of his plays have ever been on Radio 3, though there is this 45-min interview with John Tusa, broadcast in … 2001.

And, yes - or rather, no: I haven't seen one of his plays!

[Conchis]

I can't see that any of his plays have ever been on Radio 3, though there is this 45-min interview with John Tusa, broadcast in … 2001.

And, yes - or rather, no: I haven't seen one of his plays!

Thanks for the link, ff. I shall enjoy listening to that.

There was a BBC Radio broadcast of Early Morning back in 1993, although I can't remember whether it was on 3 or 4.

Not really your fault you're not familiar with his work - it just isn't produced that much in the UK any more, although some of the reasons for that may be ascribed to the playwright himself.: https://www.thestage.co.uk/news/2016...eatre-is-dead/

[Serial_Apologist]

More to do with his politics, I would have thought.

[Conchis]

More to do with his politics, I would have thought.

He is a Marxist and Marxism is now thought (by many) to be unfashionable.

[Tevot]

Hello there,

It is an awful thing of me to admit, but I thought Edward Bond was no longer with us !

Back in the very early 1990s I was in an amateur production of "The Sea" at Bradford Playhouse. It struck me as being well written, cogent, dramatic and funny. At the time, I bought some of his works - "Bingo" (which is about William Shakespeare - Bard and Landowner) - and "The Fool" (about John Clare) impressed me at the time.

I also liked some of Bond's collected essays on Art and Politics though isn't there perhaps an irony in a playwright feeling it necessary to explain at length the motivation behind his work?

As to whatever happened to Edward Bond - the very same question was addressed by the Independent some years ago. Link below:

http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/theatre-dance/features/whatever-happened-to-edward-bond-2122521.html

Bond himself has a website on which you can find articles and letters he has written.

http://www.edwardbond.org/

Thanks Conchis for this thread. I'll have to revisit some Bond. Hopefully I can find the time!

Best Wishes,

Tevot

[Belgrove]

I've seen The Women, which did not improve upon Euripides.

[Richard Barrett]

I've been an admirer or Bond's work since seeing his massive Greek-tragedy-inspired The Woman at the National Theatre in the late 1970s during my student days. Saying it didn't "improve on Euripides" is to rather miss its point, I would add.

Of course there's a musical connection here too, with Bond having provided libretti for several works by Hans Werner Henze. On the continent he is widely regarded as the most important living British playwright (which might or might not be viewed as a recommendation). I contacted him through his publisher in late 2003 with some questions and received a courteous and interesting reply, together with some hand-typed poems.

I think his theoretical writings on theatre and politics (The Hidden Plot) are valuable for artists and audiences in all genres. I return often to his words from the preface to Saved: “... if the spectator thinks this is pessimistic that is because he has not learned to clutch at straws. Clutching at straws is the only realistic thing to do. The alternative, apart from the self-indulgence of pessimism, is a fatuous optimism based on superficiality of both feeling and observation.”

[Conchis]

Hello there,

It is an awful thing of me to admit, but I thought Edward Bond was no longer with us !

Back in the very early 1990s I was in an amateur production of "The Sea" at Bradford Playhouse. It struck me as being well written, cogent, dramatic and funny. At the time, I bought some of his works - "Bingo" (which is about William Shakespeare - Bard and Landowner) - and "The Fool" (about John Clare) impressed me at the time.

I also liked some of Bond's collected essays on Art and Politics though isn't there perhaps an irony in a playwright feeling it necessary to explain at length the motivation behind his work?

As to whatever happened to Edward Bond - the very same question was addressed by the Independent some years ago. Link below:

http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/theatre-dance/features/whatever-happened-to-edward-bond-2122521.html

Bond himself has a website on which you can find articles and letters he has written.

http://www.edwardbond.org/

Thanks Conchis for this thread. I'll have to revisit some Bond. Hopefully I can find the time!

Best Wishes,

Tevot

George Bernard Shaw did this regularly. Many people (John Osborne included) prefer(red) the essay to the actual plays.

I'll admit, I often struggle to understand Bond, the link that ff has posted above being a case in point, although perhaps I listened to it too late at night when my own batteries were low.

Tevot, if you've been in a production of one of his plays, I envy you - I think the best way to understand a play (and to judge its quality as a piece of performance art) is to participate in it.

[Conchis]

I've been an admirer or Bond's work since seeing his massive Greek-tragedy-inspired The Woman at the National Theatre in the late 1970s during my student days. Saying it didn't "improve on Euripides" is to rather miss its point, I would add.

Of course there's a musical connection here too, with Bond having provided libretti for several works by Hans Werner Henze. On the continent he is widely regarded as the most important living British playwright (which might or might not be viewed as a recommendation). I contacted him through his publisher in late 2003 with some questions and received a courteous and interesting reply, together with some hand-typed poems.

I think his theoretical writings on theatre and politics (The Hidden Plot) are valuable for artists and audiences in all genres. I return often to his words from the preface to Saved: “... if the spectator thinks this is pessimistic that is because he has not learned to clutch at straws. Clutching at straws is the only realistic thing to do. The alternative, apart from the self-indulgence of pessimism, is a fatuous optimism based on superficiality of both feeling and observation.”

That note to Saved - printed at the end of the published text - caused me to go back and immediately re-read the play again, because I felt I must have missed the whole point. 'Irresponsibly optimistic' was the last thing I'd thought it was!

[aeolium]

I can't see that any of his plays have ever been on Radio 3, though there is this 45-min interview with John Tusa, broadcast in … 2001.

And, yes - or rather, no: I haven't seen one of his plays!

According to a website list I have compiled by someone interested in R3 radio drama down the decades, R3 has broadcast at least two of Bond's plays, In the Company of Men in May 2003 and Early Morning in May 1993. There may have been other broadcasts in the 1970s when Bond was much more in the public eye as a playwright, but the list of R3 broadcasts is not as comprehensive for that period.

[Conchis]

The byline in that Independent article ('Mark Ravenhill wonders where it went wrong') sticks in my craw a bit - there may be no home for Bond in the 'established' British theatre any more, but that doesn't mean he's lost out where it really matters - i.e., in being influential, significant, still creatively fecund and receiving major productions in other parts of Europe. His agent Peggy Ramsay (who represented almost all the important post-war British playwrights) once stated that he made a living out of his plays - probably not a bad living, either. That in itself is a significant success, so talk of his career going 'wrong' is a bit wide of the mark.

[Richard Barrett]

talk of his career going 'wrong' is a bit wide of the mark.

It's par for the course in superficial discourse about many artists' "careers", as if their value is to be exclusively measured by high-profile exposure in big high-profile venues etc., when their priorities might just not include other people's idea of what constitutes success.

[french frank]

According to a website list I have compiled by someone interested in R3 radio drama down the decades, R3 has broadcast at least two of Bond's plays, In the Company of Men in May 2003 and Early Morning in May 1993. There may have been other broadcasts in the 1970s when Bond was much more in the public eye as a playwright, but the list of R3 broadcasts is not as comprehensive for that period.

Thanks for that, aeolium. I did an internet search but Radio 3 'stuff' probably wasn't then placed where it could be found.

[Conchis]

It's par for the course in superficial discourse about many artists' "careers", as if their value is to be exclusively measured by high-profile exposure in big high-profile venues etc., when their priorities might just not include other people's idea of what constitutes success.

Absolutely true. Somehow, I doubt that becoming a big-league screenwriter and West End playwright was ever part of the Bond 'gameplan.'

He did, however, do a fair bit of significant screenwriting in his early days - Nicolas Roeg's excellent Walkabout, alleged bits of dialogue on Antonioni's Blow-Up and, most significantly for me at least, his contribution to Nicholas & Alexandra (1971), where the bits written by him are very prominent and obvious - the dialogue between Ian Holm and Michael Jayston near the end of the film but, best of all, Count Witte's anti-war speech at the beginning, superbly delivered by Laurence Olivier. Some of the most extraordinary language ever to feature in a 'commercial' film - it's amazing they left it in!