Curtain up on the fall of communism
What's the hottest topic on the British stage right now? The collapse of Soviet communism.
Granted, there is one fairly solid reason: 2009 marks the 20th anniversary of the fall of the Berlin Wall, which is often seen as the beginning of the end for the USSR. But I don't think that completely explains it.
I've long held the belief that the shock inflicted by the fall of communism on the British left is the unspoken subtext of many plays written in and since the 90s. I'd argue that the whole "in-yer-face" school (which, yes, we all know is just a handy label for what was actually a pretty diverse body of work), rose in part from a generation who grew up opposed to Thatcher, asking what they were meant to believe in a world where socialism was also seen to have failed. I'm not saying that the generation of playwrights before them were committed Stalinists, but the generation of Brenton, Bond, Churchill, Edgar and Hare did all at least profess to some kind of socialism. Despite its horrific failures, it does sometimes feel as if they miss the comforting presence of a massive European communist superpower.
Even so, it is striking to see Burnt by the Sun at the National, followed by Over There at the Royal Court and then the revival of Howard Barker's Victory at the Arcola, all in one week. Each, in its way, deals with the question of revolution and counter-revolution. While Burnt by the Sun focuses on the bloody civil war in the years following the Russian revolution, the rise of Stalinism and the beginning of the Terror, Over There looks at Germany's struggles with reunification in the years following the fall of the Berlin Wall – itself a revolutionary moment. Victory is more elliptical. Set nominally during the Restoration, it is in fact again about the shocks visited on a nation witness to revolution and counter-revolution within 20 years. With its anachronistic talk of "Reds" and "Commies", it is clear Barker is at least in part using the period to explore more contemporary politics.
It is the timing that is most interesting, however. All these plays were written to explore the failure of socialism, but are now being staged as we witness what looks suspiciously like the total and absolute failure of capitalism. The old claim that "the left won the culture war while the right won the economic war" has started to look dangerously misplaced...
Read entire article at Guardian (UK)
Granted, there is one fairly solid reason: 2009 marks the 20th anniversary of the fall of the Berlin Wall, which is often seen as the beginning of the end for the USSR. But I don't think that completely explains it.
I've long held the belief that the shock inflicted by the fall of communism on the British left is the unspoken subtext of many plays written in and since the 90s. I'd argue that the whole "in-yer-face" school (which, yes, we all know is just a handy label for what was actually a pretty diverse body of work), rose in part from a generation who grew up opposed to Thatcher, asking what they were meant to believe in a world where socialism was also seen to have failed. I'm not saying that the generation of playwrights before them were committed Stalinists, but the generation of Brenton, Bond, Churchill, Edgar and Hare did all at least profess to some kind of socialism. Despite its horrific failures, it does sometimes feel as if they miss the comforting presence of a massive European communist superpower.
Even so, it is striking to see Burnt by the Sun at the National, followed by Over There at the Royal Court and then the revival of Howard Barker's Victory at the Arcola, all in one week. Each, in its way, deals with the question of revolution and counter-revolution. While Burnt by the Sun focuses on the bloody civil war in the years following the Russian revolution, the rise of Stalinism and the beginning of the Terror, Over There looks at Germany's struggles with reunification in the years following the fall of the Berlin Wall – itself a revolutionary moment. Victory is more elliptical. Set nominally during the Restoration, it is in fact again about the shocks visited on a nation witness to revolution and counter-revolution within 20 years. With its anachronistic talk of "Reds" and "Commies", it is clear Barker is at least in part using the period to explore more contemporary politics.
It is the timing that is most interesting, however. All these plays were written to explore the failure of socialism, but are now being staged as we witness what looks suspiciously like the total and absolute failure of capitalism. The old claim that "the left won the culture war while the right won the economic war" has started to look dangerously misplaced...