'If you don't let us dream, we won't let you sleep' review or 'I heard you the first time!'
'If
you don't let us dream, we won't let you sleep', Anders Lustgarten
Royal
Court Theatre, Wednesday 20th
February 2013
Written
for Culture Wars
I
wish the Royal Court would stop shouting at me. It's starting to
royally piss me off. Don't get me wrong; I still hold my breath
every time I go to this theatre. But the number of times I leave
feeling a little flat – especially after seeing a play which
supposedly SPEAKS TO US ABOUT THE WORLD WE ARE LIVING IN TODAY – is
starting to creep up.
'If
you don't let us dream, we won't let you sleep' (the title of which
is WRITTEN ALL IN CAPITAL LETTERS) is part of the Court's New
Playwrights Programme. It's written by Anders Lustgarten, who is a
political activist and clearly a very bright and passionate man.
Lustgarten
has a lot to say about today's financial situation and the fierce
spiral of shite we're all being dragged into. But the fact remains
that this play is shouty, profoundly confused and pretty crude. Has
this piece been picked for its voice or its volume?
Set
sometime in the 'near' future (is there a context I loathe more?),
Anders' play depicts a world in which human behaviour is being
commodified by ever resourceful traders. Some clever corporate bods
have come up with a new idea: a 'Unity Bond' that goes up in value
only when the number of addicts and re-offenders go down. It is a
surprisingly optimistic enterprise which is rapidly and somewhat
predictably reversed. Soon enough, the investors find themselves
betting small fortunes not on the resilience but on the demise of the
fellow human race.
It's
a bold idea – but one that only wafts hazily throughout this play.
For much of the time, we're shown snapshots of a city that's gone to
the dogs. Racism is running riot. Old nurses are being ignored by the
very hospitals to which they dedicated their lives. And the money men
are ruling the roost, clucking and cackling on top of their massive
wads of cash.
Such
over-amped characters and over-stretched scenarios are begging for a
light, comic touch. But director Simon Godwin has played things far
too straight. The majority of performances are much too earnest and
feel thumpingly over the top. Meera Syal is one of the few to tap
into the play's comic potential and her vaguely satirical scenes are
the among the few scenes we take seriously.
It
isn't just the tone that's out of whack but the structure too. This
play might just have worked if all the scenes were kept fast, furious
and slicingly amusing. But the early shot-gun scenes are loosely
threaded together for an extended and fairly excruciating final act,
in which all the put-upon characters place the whole economic
situation on trial.
Everything
becomes grindingly over-explicit, as the 'austerity' measures are
picked apart by an angry throng. There are a few gems of economic
insight in here but it's really tough to stay engaged. We've been
dragged in so many different directions; the tone has swung all over
the place, the characters have shed their skin countless times and
the director feels bizarrely absent. The dialogue, too, is a curious
mixture of dry and sentimental, precise and sweeping, and is very
hard to stick with.
It's
all deeply frustrating. Why do so many new writing schemes pick plays
that explicitly 'talk about today' rather than plays with a
resounding, unusual and honest voice? I strongly believe it is how
the playwright speaks – and not specifically what he/she speaks
about - that reveals the most. It's the melody and not the lyrics of
a script that matter; the rhythm, passion, humour and tremble in the
playwright's voice.
Comments
Post a Comment