Add a Comment

Comment by James Doyle-Roberts on May 7, 2012 at 0:15

I think we'll be seeing more & more of the blurring of journalism & theatre in the future. Here's a link to the review of

"The Agony & Ecstasy of Steve Jobs"

Comment by National Theatre Wales on April 30, 2012 at 3:12

I'm so glad you finally got to see the show Lindi.  So many people have echoed your thought about the moment of release when the documents fly into air.  Amidst all the challenges, it is so important to remember and celebrate the joy of action.  Speaking of which, the action you and other activists took around this production played a huge part in its impact.  Thank you for your faith and tireless energy.

Comment by Lindi Carter on April 27, 2012 at 12:06

I had been thinking that I'd missed out 'joy' in my list of 'values' (Mike mentions 'joy' twice in his comment on here), and then yesterday, I actually saw the play for the first time (I'd only read it before that, and seen glimpses) and I felt that for me it was the absolute joy of the moment the docs went up, the exuberance of the release, the decision (yes, beyond a doubt, the RIGHT, the ONLY decision!), the music, all followed by the almost celestial beauty of the twinkling and twirling in the light of those lovely confettis, that, regardless of the return to the grim 'on the ground' situation, was the moment that survived, and that I took away with me.

I remember at the US Embassy protest in March 2011, Loz Kaye of Pirate Party UK, saying - 'there's a time of testing for each of us, and it comes in different ways to each of us' or something like that.  And in the play, it's absolutely clear that Brad knew his moment, that he did not fail to accept his responsibility, that he didn't fail the test, that he can hold his head up.  And in these tired old old (hopefully dying) days of spin, this is a tremendous inspiration, and a source of joy and hope, as Occupy has indeed been, along with all the movements around the world that have seized our parched imagination, and made us think it matters who we are (and as John implies, it is all connected).

Bradley is a blessing; fight for him with all you have and honour him, as he has been honourable. 

Comment by National Theatre Wales on April 24, 2012 at 22:42

Thanks for this fantastic contribution Lindi.  Your words remind me of another driving force behind this production - predating the decision to write about Bradley, we'd commissioned Tim to write a piece that focused far more generally on the new politics that is emerging - the politics of Occupy, the new student protests, the Arab Spring (and the twitter-driven Iranian movement predating that) - the fact that a different kind of politics seemed to be emerging.  As Tim has mentioned a number of times, it was at a script meeting for this other play (which was taking shape as a very unjournalistic allegorical show) that he broached the idea of telling Bradley's story instead.  But the underlying urge to tap into, and ask questions of, a differing kind of politics through theatre, remains at the heart of this project.  (Of course, being Tim, he has addressed it with wit, theatricality and a sense of mischief - all the things that we are so often told political work lacks.)  As the focus turned to Bradley, everyone involved  tapped into a huge passion and sense of injustice around his particular case, but I think as you have spotted, there is also a wider question to each of us at the heart of this play - which is what makes it a political play rather than simply a campaigning piece.

Comment by Lindi Carter on April 24, 2012 at 15:50

When I read Michael Billington's review, I felt that, whilst he was fairly complimentary about the play, he had failed to see the significance of it, in part at least, I surmise, because he has misunderstood the significance of what is actually going on (maybe because he has mislaid - as you do - the yearnings for reality that are the necessary receptors to 'get' this play, or this 'moment'). 

For me it's the stuff of MYTH in the pure sense of that word, both on the ground and in the play, and the parallel importance of the play and the stuff being played out across the Atlantic is their ability to break up our complacency, to remind us of what our humanity entails, and to jolt that awful mundane despair/apathy which characterises our public/social life.

The itsy-bitsy 'linear' detail of a journalistic approach is, we know to our great cost, no way of arriving at truth, and to imagine that Bradley's Troo Life Story in 90 minutes would be truer than the play Tim wrote and the production you all contributed to, is to fundamentally fail to grasp the point - it's time to cut the crap and hear the call - not even 'What would you do?' but 'What WILL you do?' 'What will I do?  'Who am I?''

This play is pre-eminently for NOW - the sanitised 'after the event' picking over the pieces safe stuff is just absolutely not it.  And feeling sorry for Bradley is not it. And it's not about Bradley any more - it's about you and me.

The play itself came about (if I read it right) as an almost involuntary RESPONSE to Bradley's callout, and that's respect - hearing the call and going with it.  Presuming the chat logs are genuine, and there's no denial of that so far, Bradley hoped to invoke 'worldwide discussions, debates, reforms'.  In the chat logs he damns 'apathy' in particular, he says 'I prefer a painful truth over any blissful fantasy', and he says that he has a sense of the potential value to human society of his taking action: 'and it's important that it gets out - I feel, for some bizarre reason that it might actually change something....'  

well, stranger things have happened....

and this is about HOPE; as Tim keeps quoting: 'COURAGE IS CONTAGIOUS'.  If the play spreads the contagion (and it seems to be doing that) you can't ask for more. And there's also no better way to stand against USG's intentions for Brad than to spread the Hope and Courage necessary to say 'NO!

I think the Guardian review displays the lack of Hope that has become standard, and an anxiety to have the play 'grounded', but actually it soars, flies, like the love, peace, justice, truth still alive amongst us, even in (especially in) our fragility, that the play so faithfully draws our distracted vision back to.

 

Comment by carmen medway-stephens on April 22, 2012 at 22:50

when it is all over (whenever that is going to happen for poor Bradley) it could be good to have the sequel...and I'm sure they'll make a film...but concerning the truth...there are so many sides...can anything ever be completely truthful?  Sometimes however, the truth doesn't make for a good theatrical experience - somehow the drama is lost, I think it is the writers role to interpret the story - which is what happened I think...

Comment by National Theatre Wales on April 22, 2012 at 0:56

Thank you for these thoughtful comments Andrew.  The debate continues in the Sunday papers today, with The Independent, after a long intro on the fact versus fiction issue, deciding that 'this is a powerful, not to say radicalising piece of theatre, ultimately inspiring sympathy', while The Observer seems less certain that the mix can work.  I think that there is clearly an important issue about the ownership of one's life and story, however this needs to be thought about in the context of a world in which lives are routinely reinterpreted and fictionalised as soon as they become newsworthy.  The production has ruffled some journalistic feathers, but perhaps it is the fact that it highlights the mix of fact and fiction, and the impact of that blurring, that is noteworthy, whereas much of the media thrives on the blurring of fact and opinion without choosing to highlight what's going on.  Certainly audiences - in the theatre space and online - seem to understand that while the story may be part fictionalised the issues are very real indeed.  Campaigners outside the theatre report passionate, engaged questioning about the case from audiences after the show.  Whether any of us can impact on the huge machine in which Manning is caught is another issue. Perhaps equally important though, is the impact he is having on us.

Comment by Andrew Filmer on April 21, 2012 at 10:20

Hi John, I enjoyed watching the streamed version of the performance tonight, and I hope it continues to garner an audience from across the globe, as well as in the final performances in Nth Wales. Interesting to read your response to Billington's review. He does seem to be unsettled by the approach taken (the 'blurring of fact and fiction') in the context of Manning being yet to stand trial in the US. I think he underplays the way the production questions the depiction and portrayal of Manning himself by the media, activists, etc. This was clearly signaled in the opening scene with all its 'Bradley Manning is ...' statements, and in the way the representation of Manning is shared amongst the cast. But, despite this there is also a very particular interpretation of Manning and his actions put across and it is difficult to know how this fictionalised figure of Manning might get taken up and used in different contexts. Which is what you want. While you've clearly labelled the production with disclaimers about its status as a fictional account ('The play should not be understood as a biography or an other factual account.') you're no doubt keenly aware of theatre's ability to infiltrate, play with and re-work the real, and I gather its because of this that you've got this production up and into the pubic sphere. So I guess Billington has his doubts, and you have your assurance. I'm genuinely interested to see whether or how this production might have some effect beyond the theatre and contribute to the unfolding of Manning's own real life story.