|
WSWS : Arts
Review : Theater
Politics and the theatre: two plays in Toronto
By Carl Bronski
20 May 2003
Use
this version to print
| Send this
link by email | Email the
author
I know what men can be!Clifford Odets,
1935
This past month, two expressly political plays opened and closed
in Toronto after their scheduled three-week runs. The first, a
revival of Clifford Odets 1935 classic, Awake and Sing!,
was staged at the Equity Showcase Theatre, a converted church
hall and actors studio located in the heart of an inner-city
neighbourhood. The Co., a collective of theatre artists very much
influenced by the tradition of the New York Group Theatre of the
1930s, mounted the production.
The second play, Gagarin Way, by the young Scottish
playwright Gregory Burke, was staged on the fringe of Torontos
downtown entertainment district at Buddies In Bad Times Theatre,
as part of the well-known Du Maurier World Stage Festival. It
was presented by the Crows Theatre group, a well-established
company that also brought to the city Shopping and F**king,
another apparently very hot installment from the despairing
but comedic Cool Britannia literary-theatrical trend.
The interplay between political ideas and artistic expression
in the theatre has always posed a difficult challenge to writers
and directors. The struggle to produce real-life dramathat
is to say, works that express what is universal in human experience
through a portrayal of particular human relationships and dilemmasis
no small undertaking. After all, if it does not ground itself
in an understanding or at least a serious investigation of the
driving forces of society, how can any theatrical presentation
successfully penetrate existing ideological constructs in the
search for something that is true?
In the case of Odets, this concern, at least in his earlier
works, was central not only to his plays ideational spine,
but also to his development of dialogue, character and form. In
the case of Burke, Gagarin Way, despite widespread critical
acclaim, ultimately goes in the opposite direction.
It seems there is a street in Lumphinnans, Scotland, a former
Little Moscow mining village in the now defunct West
Fife coalfield, that was named (due to local Communist Party influence)
after Soviet cosmonaut Yuri Gagarin, the first man ever launched
into space. Burke, who hails from the area, was intrigued by this
bit of municipal geography. I wanted to write about the
rise and fall of the Soviet Union. I wanted to know how you got
from this great Empire to a street sign in just a generation.
There is certainly something to be said for a working class,
college dropout who chooses as his first artistic topic what is
certainly the greatest political question of not only the twentieth
century, but this current one as well. How one approaches this
matter unavoidably says volumes about ones own prognosis
for the future of, indeed, even the possibility for, progressive
social development.
Burke makes no bones about his choice. Following in the footsteps
of the original angry young Scot, Irvine Welsh, Burke
depicts a bleak and brutal social landscape populated by the disaffected
and disillusioned victims of a globalised, vacuous consumer capitalism.
A place where the world is shite, where all that workers
want is a few shiny beads. Thematically, Burke is
interested in investigating whether the great political and philosophical
worldviews of the twentieth century have any relevance today.
He answers with an emphatic No.
Its West Fife near the turn of the new century. The coalfields
have given way to unemployment queues, night watchmens sheds
and minimum wage component assembly jobs. Eddie, a crazed, nihilistic
hooligan, and Gary, a demoralised former shop steward initially
influenced by the Stalinist and syndicalist traditions of the
area, hatch a plot to kidnap and kill a Japanese executive who
they believe is slated to visit the computer chip factory where
they now work.
Gary, who has come to embrace anarchism, believes the terrorist
act will spark a de-politicised working class to rise up against
their oppression. Eddie is simply curious to see what, if anything,
the violence might produce.
Tom, a hapless university graduate cum security guard
and potential young Blairite is inadvertently caught up in the
scheme. He hopelessly tries to moderate their positions: The
economy. Capitalism. Its not an end in itself. Its
a tool. We can use it. Eddie, Gary and their kidnap victim
have seen a bit of life. This is one bill of goods none of them
will buy.
Our two working class anti-heroes are a bumbling tandem. They
disagree on almost everything. They cant organise their
disguises nor can they ensure bullets for their gun. They are
unaware that the Japanese no longer own the factory and that the
executive that Gary abducts, Frank, is, in fact, a
former local lad turned cynical, middle-aged efficiency consultant
from Surrey. As it turns out, they are entirely incapable of refuting
the world-weary Franks own nihilistic retortsexcept
in the end, with a switchblade.
What are we to make of all this? Gregory Burke is the toast
of London. Gagarin Way has been published and produced
in dozens of countries and 20 languages. The critics are in awe
of the plays fast, violent pacing, its tight structure and
the humourous Scottish dialect. And theres more. It seems
to be about ideas! Well, yes. But inasmuch as it equates socialism
with the treacherous politics of the Stalinist and trade union
bureaucracies, the ideas spring from a poisoned well.
The real core of the play centers on Garys ultimately
futile search for a political perspective in a world, as Burke
himself writes in the preface to the piece, where economics
decides the fate of people, not their politicians. Governments
are powerless when up against a multi-national, the vagaries of
the stock market and history.
Yet, any investigation into the reasons behind the failure
of either Stalinism or trade unionism entirely escapes the playwright,
despite his stated intention for the play. The argument goes something
like this: The power of globalised capitalism is unassailable.
All attempts by socialists to change that fact have been abject
failures, ending in Soviet police states, or fascist victory or
a sterile capitalism where workers learn to hug their chains.
With such an outlook, it is no wonder that poor Gary is doomed
to a final, abject moral capitulation.
When Gary brings up the heroic example of the workers who fought
against fascism in Spain, Frank dismisses it with the remark that
once they knew they were beat, they turned on one another.
Gary cannot refute this hoary, right-wing canard. Repeatedly,
he meekly accepts Franks set piece slursYour
workers. All they want is to own things. Gary basically
agrees. For him, workers dont want to be organised.
Frank pontificates that Russia seems to go from one dark
age to another. Gary goes a step further. Whats
wrong with the dark ages? he asks.
Perhaps to counter certain criticisms, Burke has produced a
rosier spin for the published volumes preface. If the independent
political activity of the working class is no match for global
capitalism, well, at least, he smugly opines, the people
remain. We remain and we find other things to keep ourselves amused.
One wonders what these other things are.
Certainly any inquiry into the fate of the working class movement
in the twentieth century and its trajectory into the twenty-first
requires a patient, historical explanation. It is, to be sure,
something that would not have been provided to Gary by either
the Communist Party, the Labour Party or the trade union bureaucracy.
Indeed, in that fact lies Garys true tragedy. But neither
has it been uncovered by Burke.
It is astonishing to read in his preface, for instance, that
during the British miners strike of 1984-85, in the Fife
coalfieldsan area that fought as hard and long as any other
districtdefeat was not only inevitable, but that the Fife
miners, as well as everybody else, knew it from the start! The
fact that Burke believes that thousands of miners, along with
their wives and children, endured hunger, cold and brutality for
over a year with absolutely no hope of victory speaks volumes
for his view of the working class as a noble, but perhaps rather
brainless victim.
This is not, however, the most disconcerting thing about the
play. What is worse, Burke actively agitates against genuine investigation!
There is, from the opening comic 10-minute riff by the self-educated
Eddie about the works of Sartre and Genet, an anti-intellectualism
that permeates his message. Sartre was nothing more than a snappy
title writer. Genet was simply a thief.
Tom, the most ineffectual of all the characters, holds a politics
degree with an emphasis on left-wing political movements.
Gary weighs in with the position that intellectual propaganda
means nothing. Naybody listens tay a fucking debate.
It is clear that Burke is aiming at much more here than an
exposure of the pretensions of this or that ivory tower. For him,
enlightenment can be attained with a simple cruise along the surface
of appearance. After all, havent all the grand theories
from the high foreheads of the past century led to nothing?
In Gagarin Way, Burke has managed to inject his own
defeatist political positions directly into the debate on the
future of the working class movement. The body of the play, not
to mention its brutal, utterly hopeless ending, promotes the perspective
that Garys predicament, and the current political confusion
in the working class itself, cannot be remedied. Capitalism may
be terrible, but there is no alternative.
* * *
In 1935, a 29- year-old Clifford Odets, the new wunderkind
of the Broadway theatre, commented on the thematic drive behind
his then-current work, Awake and Sing!, and the soon-to-be-produced
Paradise Lost. I believe in the vast potentialities
of mankind. But I see everywhere a wide disparity between what
they can be and what they are. That is what I want to say in writing.
I want to say the genius of the human race is mongrelised. I want
to find out how mankind can be helped out of the animal kingdom
into the clear, sweet air.
At the time, Odets had three plays running simultaneously on
the Great White Way, Awake plus the more openly propagandistic
Till The Day I Die and the sensational Waiting For Lefty.
The period marked a conscious effort by the writer to grapple
with the challenge of appropriately blending the directly prescriptive
spine of traditional agitprop theatre with a more rich, mature
and dialectical expression of the human condition.
There was no doubt, particularly after the staging of Lefty,
that one of Odets major strengths was his ability to infuse
his theatre as a weapon style with a natural, street-wise
expressiveness that went far beyond the often cartoonish agitprop
productions of the time. The rapturous response, still discussed
today in theatre circles, to the opening night of Lefty
gives ample testimony to that ability. (See accompanying interview).
But it was Awake and Sing! that represents perhaps his
most successful interplay of political and theatrical expression.
As critic Brooks Atkinson noted in the New York Times following
the opening of the play: The theatre of the Left is becoming
increasingly dynamic and is no longer a skirmish on the fringe
of the theatre, for it has a coherent program which the Broadway
theatre has always lacked, and it is informed with a crusaders
zeal. It knows where it intends to go; and it does not doubt its
ability to get there. The Broadway theatre has no program and
no convictions; and in the midst of a vast, social upheaval it
has no comment to make.
Indeed, Atkinsons criticism of the state of the traditional
Broadway theatre in 1935 could easily be transposed to the current
scenes in New York, London or Toronto where the Lion Kings
and Mama Mias of the world still hold sway, and where legitimate
political theatre is so often confused with self-absorbed explorations
of gender, ethnic or sexual identity. It is to the credit of Toronto
director Dean Gabourie and the Co. theatrical collective that
Odets seminal work has been presented to local audiences.
Awake and Sing! is the story of the Bergers, a Jewish
family in the Bronx, and their moral and material struggles in
the depths of the Great Depression. The family is led by the mother,
Bessie, an omnipresent force who will stop at nothing to keep
her brood togethereven if it means crushing its individual
members in the process. Her power is only sometimes balanced by
her father Jacob, a rather passive Marxist who, with perhaps more
conviction than determination, tries to ameliorate Bessies
fearsome effect.
It is a tall order. Bessie undercuts her son Ralphs romance
so that she can keep his meager warehousemans wage in the
house. She forces Hennie, her pregnant and abandoned daughter,
to marry a poor soul she does not love in order to maintain the
familys reputation. Her husband, Myron, has been emasculated
years ago. She mistrusts Moe the lodger, a war veteran turned
hustler, who thinks that what the country needs is a good
five-cent earthquake. She makes a point of belittling Jacobs
socialist musings, sensing that it is this perspective that most
threatens her own position.
In the scene that drives the play to its climax, she viciously
smashes the old mans beloved collection of Caruso recordings.
Only her brother Morty, a smug, grasping little businessman, is
treated adoringly, not only for his obvious monetary success in
life, but in the vain hope that he might dispense to the family
more than a few tokens of his largesse. With him, she makes common
cause to cheat her son out of an inheritance.
It is clear from the opening chaotic kitchen scene to the climactic
awakenings of Hennie and Ralph that Odets has created
a deeply layered family of working people not stereotypically
angry and noble as per the classical agitprop theatre of the time,
but contradictory, quarrelsome, confusedsomehow straining
against their situation with only a flickering light to show the
way. As soon-to-be critic Alfred Kazin wrote after first seeing
Awake as a youth, It seemed to me, sitting high up
in the balcony of the Belasco Theater, that it would at last be
possible for me to write about life...watching my mother and father
and uncles and aunts occupying the stage by as much right as if
they were Hamlet or Lear, I understood at last!
The final act of Awake shows the rejection of Bessies
and Uncle Mortys perspectives by Hennie and Ralphbut
not through any overt counterattack and in interesting and contradictory
ways. Hennie, smothered by an unwanted baby and a new husband
she unjustly blames for her unhappiness, takes a desperate grab
at a better life by running off with Moe. Make a break or
spend the rest of your life in a coffin, he exhorts. As
they depart for greener grass, however, one is left
unconvinced that their empty lives will necessarily be fulfilled
by simple flight.
Ralph, on the other hand, decides to stay, but on his own terms,
invested now with a nascent understanding that his task must be
to put into action what his grandfather could only talk aboutso
that life shouldnt be printed on dollar bills.
The feeling of disquiet, the yearning for
a better life lies at the heart of Odets best work.
But it is not simply the dreams of a better material existence
that drive his characters and inform his themes. It is a belief
that peoples yearnings are intimately bound up with societys
own development. Odets makes us understand that only working peoples
self-sacrifice and collective action will move the world forward.
And despite their imperfections, despite their personal tragedies,
they are entirely capable of the task.
See Also:
Interview with Dean Gabourie, director
of Awake and Sing!
[20 May 2003]
The element of social
tragedy in King Lear
[21 November 2002]
A failed attempt at
"relevance"
The Three Sisters by Anton Chekhov, directed by Andrew
Benedict
[12 September 2001]
Australian play from
the 1930s strikes a contemporary chord
[8 August 2001]
Top of page
The WSWS invites your comments.
Copyright 1998-2008
World Socialist Web Site
All rights reserved |