“No doubt we shall actually talk to each
other in the days to come,” I blithely remarked in this column last
issue. How wrong could I be?
Bullying
To recap briefly:
On 7 August I went to see Badac Theatre’s production
The Factory at the Pleasance on
the Edinburgh Fringe. It aimed to evoke the industrial process
aspect of the Holocaust by treating the audience as Auschwitz inmates,
and bullying them relentlessly. At one relatively unobtrusive
point in the performance I refused a command to move by saying,
moderately, “No,” when yelled at. (I subsequently altered this to
“Say ‘please’.”) The performance moved on without me and without
disruption; I left the theatre. That night, director/performer
Steve Lambert and a comrade spent some time ostentatiously following me
around the venue’s club bar. It was clear that they didn’t want
to talk, just to make me uncomfortably conscious of their presence
close by; basically, they were intimidating me.
That was as far as things had got when I wrote the last Prompt
Corner. In fact, Lambert did much more heavying the following
night, with wordless but strong psychological threats over a sustained
period, including making to follow me as I left; only by bringing the
matter to the attention of the venue's director did I get out.
The following day I logged the matter with the police, though I was
told that it didn't amount to an incident for which I could be given an
official case number.
Assault
My friend and colleague Chris Wilkinson, who as well as being a theatre
director is one of the
Guardian's
theatre bloggers (and one with whom I frequently and candidly disagree)
had, by chance, already booked to see the show the following day.
When he heard my account of the performance, his initial response –
which he kept to himself at the time – was that I had
over-reacted. In the event, however, he found himself feeling
exactly the same, and so started refusing to face the way he was
ordered to, and also challenged one bellowed "MOVE!" with "Or
what?" Chris, however, stayed with the show until the end (a
scene set in the gas chamber in which the audience are ordered to strip
in exactly the same way as the other orders barked out, but this time
apparently on the assumption that they
won't comply).
Fully a week after the performance he attended, Chris was violently
assaulted in the venue's club bar by Lambert and another company
member, in separate incidents. (Other members of the company
hauled the attackers off; Chris later had a lengthy and
non-antagonistic conversation with those others.) Since the
Independent had briefly written up
my run-ins with the company, I suggested to Chris that he get in touch
with them for a follow-up story. While he was actually on the
phone to the paper, Lambert assaulted him again in the street outside
the Pleasance’s main campus. Chris, having reported the initial
attacks to the police, returned with details of this new assault, and
on being told his options, he chose that a formal police warning be
given to Lambert.
Inaccuracies
The result of Chris’s call to the
Indie
[led to a floow-up item in which
]
I count six inaccuracies in 130 or so words, which is going it
somewhat. Most saliently, Chris did not pull faces during the
performance, blow kisses at them in the bar or “exchange colourful
verbals” with them (unless by “exchange” one means have a torrent
directed at him out of nowhere and respond with a single moderate
epithet).
Lambert apparently later apologised to the staff of the bar and to the
management of the venue, which (unusually for the Edinburgh Fringe) had
a financial stake in the production. Well, whoopee. Never a
word even of discussion, let alone apology, to either Chris or
myself. He also continued to be welcome in the bar after his acts
of unprovoked violence, with the result that Chris and I remained
apprehensive and on the alert against his possible entrance, and
downright fearful on the one occasion he did turn up. In some
ways, the Pleasance’s inaction has been more disturbing than Lambert’s
actions.
The
Financial Times “legalled
out” all my references to events after the actual performance, leaving
my account of the show as my first ever no-star review. Chris
fared better at the Guardian, who after some legal consultation
published a blog entry by him at
http://blogs.guardian.co.uk/theatre/2008/08/edinburgh_festival_holocaust_s.html
– the thread of comments beneath it includes several by me. I
don’t intend to rehash much of that discussion, but it raised some
interesting points regarding Chris’s and my behaviour in the light of
our status as critics.
Aware
Leaving aside the question of the extent to which we “disrupted”
performances (which I maintain was infinitesimal), a number of
commenters seemed to take the opinion that a critic’s duty to cover the
event in question effectively limits her/his rights in common with any
other audience member to respond as they may feel appropriate or
warranted. This surely cannot be the case. A critic has a
responsibility to report the event, certainly, but it is fantasy to
believe that such a report can ever be written in terms that are both
rigorously impersonal and significantly meaningful. Reviewing is
a matter of perception, and articulation of that perception; however
stringent one’s training, it is at root a subjective activity.
Remember, too, Heisenberg’s axiom that the act of measurement
inevitably affects the condition of the thing measured. Chris and
I may possibly have found that our professional status as critics
invested us with greater assurance of our common status as contracting
parties to the performer/audience agreement, and so we felt more able
to behave in the way we did in performance; however, we were not
abusing our status as critics – rather, we were making full use of our
status as aware audience members. It seems to me that the
dishonesty, the betrayal of truth as regards the event, would be to
suppress such response rather than to give vent to it. Steve
Lambert seems to disagree, but then his declaration on the company web
site that “Badac's work has always focused on human rights issues”
evidently doesn’t extend, outside the theatre, to the basic human right
not to be physically attacked.
I’m sorry to go on at such tedious length: a month and more later, this
grotesque saga continues to haunt me. The most grotesque aspect
of all is that such comparatively minor unpleasantnesses can serve to
overshadow the enormity of the events dealt with in the play.
Written for Theatre
Record.