Page View
Kamarck, Edward (ed.) / Arts in society: the arts of activism
(1969)
Rosenberg, James
Notes and discussion: looking for the third world: theatre report from England, pp. [437]-444
Page 438
LOOKING FOR THE THIRD WORLD: THEATRE REPORT FROM ENGLAND by James Rosenberg According to the old proverb, "The grass is always greener in the other fellow's yard," and this holds true in the world of theatre as it does in the larger world beyond the green room, so that Britain, for example, always conjures up in the minds of American theatregoers a sort of great roll call (accompanied by Shakespearean fanfares) of the mighty among living actors, actresses, playwrights, and directors: Olivier, Gielgud, Brook, Hall, Pinter, Arden, Finney, Scofield, O'Toole, Osborne, Richardson, Redgrave-what! will the line stretch out till the crack of doom? It is therefore first and foremost something of a letdown to an American theatre-lover with British stars in his eyes to come over here and realize that the quality of day-to-day theatre in Britain, like the quality of day-to-day life, is not much different from that back home - except, if anything, a bit shabbier. The West End is mainly Broadway writ a little less garish, the same musicals and comedies, only here housed in somewhat larger, draftier, more Victorian theatre structures. As for the "experimental" type of theatre-well, you can scarcely talk to a British theatre person for five minutes without his eagerly demanding news of Off-Broadway and the "young American playwrights." And when, after a few seconds of frantically racking your mind, you ask him which young American playwrights he is interested in, he is as likely as not to mumble something about Albee, Miller and Williams and "the people who write for La Mama." Although they really have almost no evidence to go on, most Bnriish theatregoers are convinced that America is where the real action is, and will not be stayed by dismal accounts of the amateurish awfulness and general incompetence of much that 438 passes for "experimental theatre" in and around Greenwich Village; in the same way, Americans tend rather naively to identify London theatre exclusively with new and amazing experiments by Brook and Marowitz and the Royal Court crowd, with Pinter's HOMECOMING and Antonioni's BLOW UP and Peter Watkins' THE WAR GAME, sublimely indifferent to the fact that these phenomena are, even as in New York, the exceptions that prove the rule. Yet there is a difference between going to theatre in England and in America, real though subtle, and it has little to do with qualitatively technical comparisons of performances and productions. It has something to do with the architecture of the theatre buildings I mentioned earlier, those rambling, ornate, Victorian mansions which are virtual warrens of bars, restaurants, foyers, lounges, etc. These are not just show-shops, but places where you can, and do, go to spend a long, leisurely evening of dining, drinking, socializing, and philosophizing; there is something spacious and old-fashioned about it, a touch of Dr. Johnson's 18th Century, perhaps, as opposed to the cold glitter and glamor and hustle of Broadway, and of its imitators in the provinces. It has also to do, very simply, I suspect, with the scale of ticket prices; when you hang up your ticket prices in the box-office, you make a most profound and revealing statement as to your concept of what theatre is, and who it is for, and British theatres still announce that, all the modern pressures to the contrary, they regard the institution of the theatre as a necessity rather than a luxury. Even allowing for the shocking disparity between the general economic standards of the two nations, an American cannot but be stunned by the fact that you can get the best seats in the best theatres in England for, usually, under three dollars; that quite good tickets at, say, Stratford or the National Theatre are available for well under two dollars; and that students and the working classes who are willing to sit up in the balconies can usually obtain tickets for little more than the price of a hot dog and a cup of coffee. This is not to say that the British theatre is much more successful than the American in attracting a truly broad-based, popular audience; but the reasons for this lie not
Copyright, 1969, by the Regents of the University of Wisconsin.| For information on re-use, see http://digital.library.wisc.edu/1711.dl/Copyright




