|
|
|
|
Articles
|
|
|
Articles |
Words, Words, WordsDateline: 16th March, 2003Last week I talked about the desire of some people for theatres to live on a "Diet of Ayckbourn", a middle of the road, middle class and middle aged programme. One reaction was very interesting: in referring to my question about whether we should "pander" to those who want nothing but this kind of programme, my correspondent replied:
I couldn't agree more! There is a very fine line to be walked here. Like the difference between sentiment (genuine feeling) and sentimentality (wallowing in feeling for its own sake), the difference between genuine realism and the desire to shock is small and it takes a good writer to get it right - and a good audience member to recognise it, too. Witness the first reactions to Sarah Kane's Blasted, which had reviewers - especially (but not restricted to) those from the tabloids (and how they can complain of sensationalism baffles me!) - rising to ever-increasing heights of hysterical condemnation. They have since been forced to eat their words -and all credit to the majority of them for being willing to admit they were wrong. Words are powerful and we misuse them at our peril. They can comfort and reassure and they can shock and horrify. More importantly, they can jolt and disorientate; they can make use look at the familiar in a new light; they can force us to question. If all a play does is comfort and reassure or shock and horrify, then, although the audience may have enjoyed it, all it's done is confirm prejudices. If it causes us discomfort because it makes us question our own or society's assumptions, then it's done us a great service. It's crossed the line into real artistic validity. Articles Indices:
|
|
|