... a writer has a lot of material but nothing really to say: Feynman checks in. (Hat tip, Maxine Clarke.)
The problem here seems to be the playwright's desire to say something important and be theatrically innovative at the same time. This is something that has brought serious drama to the sad pass it is currently trapped in. The sine qua non for every good play is interesting characters doing and saying interesting things. Not some great idea or profound moral (the latter especially tends to turn out to be just a trendy notion).
The theater, like journalism, has tended to attract people who would have been better off in the church or social work.
This reminds me of that earlier post in which you discussed attending a reading by Colm Toibin...something to the effect of writers' prerogative to desist from grandstanding in their works. That if something new must be proposed it should be incorporated in the lives of the characters and not "thrown down" to the reader in a pontificatory barrage.
ReplyDeleteIs this another way of saying that it was OK for me to fall asleep during Michael Frayn's "Copenhagen"? I did like the play, but it was sure long.
ReplyDeleteIncidentally, did you read the review of "Trainspotting" over at the Grumpy Old Bookman? Hilarious!