tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8651145764236805587.post6116558570805538791..comments2024-03-06T08:27:42.713+00:00Comments on Deliq.: Continuing the dialogue...maddy costahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04929576408540749708noreply@blogger.comBlogger9125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8651145764236805587.post-41752738994996368202013-10-18T08:01:50.475+01:002013-10-18T08:01:50.475+01:00.“It's been noted several times that I didn....“It's been noted several times that I didn't talk about the acting, or the direction: I'm afraid that's because I didn't have anything particularly positive to say.”<br /><br />Why is that?<br /><br />And why does your entire assessment of BAME theatre writing revolve around something Kwarme Kwei Arme said once upon a time? Is there no scope for diversity at all? Are we all to be judged by this second hand dictum? The Gospel Of Kwarme as interpreted by Maddy?<br /><br />“I raised the cultural lens in this discussion because it disturbs me that anyone – British, Asian, anyone – should think that Fu Manchu retains even a shred of currency in 2013.”<br /><br />I’ve already pointed out (at length) that this is the case. Yes, it’s disturbing but Fu Manchu IS currency in 2013. The Times Literary Supplement said so this year. Do you want me to produce a list of highly respected academics who’ll absolutely back me on this? Because I certainly can. Niall Ferguson recently wrote in the Radio Times “Could China’s rise repeat the same disastrous trajectory of Germany a hundred years ago? It’s something to ponder the next time you order a Chinese takeaway” as well as positing that they (the Chinese) “think differently” (to us).<br /><br />“I haven't read the Fu Manchu books, on the assumption that they're bad literature”<br /><br />You do a lot of “assuming” don’t you. Actually Sax Rohmer was a stunningly good writer of pulp-fiction (which you possibly consider beneath you), able to conjure a world both lurid and dream-like as well rivetingly exciting with enough twists and turns to keep anyone turning the pages till they reachthe breathless climax. Was he Proust? No, but for what he was he was damn fine. And I can say that despite the fact his portrayal of my race (one of them anyway) is deeply troubling. It’s called objectivity. You should try it sometime.<br /><br />“I don't think Fu Manchu makes good theatre, either.”<br /><br />No, I suppose that’s why there’s been at least 12 feature films and several TV series made about him. I mean, larger than life inherently theatrical characters with macabre charisma never make good theatre, do they? Honestly, you’ll be saying that Brecht shouldn’t have based Arturo Ui on Hitler next. Or is Richard III “not currency” in 2013?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8651145764236805587.post-57074120049849754362013-10-18T08:00:09.978+01:002013-10-18T08:00:09.978+01:00I don't know, Maddy. One minute you want to &q...I don't know, Maddy. One minute you want to "bow out". The next you're posting in multiple locations. Here's some responses-<br /><br />“Earlier in these comments, you've written: “The arbiters of cultural taste, the custodians of theatrical excellence, the assessors of the performing arts all had a collective indifference to exclusion and blatant discrimination when it came to East Asians.” Not all: Lyn Gardner worked hard to bring that exclusion and discrimination to light.”<br /><br />I actually think Lyn would agree that she responded to what was on the ground rather than “bring anything” “to light”. And that’s what Lyn is. Brilliantly open and responsive (unlike most of the rest of you). But we were the ones who shouted about it and put ourselves on the line. Even then it was Lyn responding on her own. People like yourself and Matt Trueman are very good at pouring scorn on a writer’s first work (within two minutes of it beginning and out of sheer ignorance in your particular case) but you haven’t been so gutsy about standing up to the mainstream when they’ve cast non-East Asians in East Asian roles again. And again. And again. <br /><br />“I find it interesting that Libby Purves, since being sacked, has used her new blog as an opportunity to review a show in the Ovalhouse studio about gay rights. Would she have been able to review the same show for the Times?”<br /><br />Yep. You’re absolutely right.<br /><br />“You're right: I haven't joined in the discussions about opportunities for south-east Asian actors over the past year.”<br /><br />Sorry to be pedantic but your geographical terminology is wrong. South-East Asia is basically Vietnam downwards. It’s not even majority Chinese and doesn’t include China, Hong Kong, Japan, Korea or Mongolia . The term is East Asian.<br /><br />“There are other answers. Actors like yourself writing plays, for instance.”<br /><br />Then why jump on it as soon as it’s out of the traps? This is the second paragraph of your review-<br /><br />“As soon as the cast creep on stage wearing stark white phantom masks, singing of how orientals have slanty eyes and mysterious ways, and should never be let anywhere near Shakespeare, it's clear that the satire throughout will be blunt as a sledgehammer, too indignant for subtlety.”<br /><br />Can you really not see the fatal flaw here? You’d already decided it was crap. And you didn’t even know what I was parodying. You can read my blog on the Yellow Peril if you like http://fumanchucomplex.wordpress.com/2013/09/10/what-was-the-yellow-peril/. I’ve got pages and pages of quotes. The lyrics of the opening song are an accurate portrayal of what was being said at the time. Even now, this goes on. One the speakers at the associated discussion events, Professor Mawdsley of Oxford University, wrote a paper entitled Dr. Livingston meets Fu Manchu in the Dark Continent about the way Western media portrays China’s involvement in Africa in pretty lurid fashion. I already pointed out to you the UK media’s reaction at last year’s Olympics to Yi Shiwen’s record-breaking achievements in the pool: she was drugged/genetically modified, Chinese athletes are “robots”, Chinese training methods are “relentlessly cruel”. Fu Manchu’s imprint on Western media psyche is huge. But not in The World According To Maddy. <br /><br />“Other people disagree – but my job was to review your play as I saw it, not other people's responses.”<br /><br />I’m sorry but I completely disagree. Your job is to present an objective appraisal of the play. IMO too many of you critics are arrogant enough to place yourself way above ordinary theatre-goers. This is plainly misrepresentative. Even then you were damning inside the first couple of minutes with no enquiring mind. This is nothing short of negligent, frankly. I’m trying to imagine you reviewing Philip Larkin, “They fuck you up, your mum and dad”. Bit indignant for subtlety innit.<br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8651145764236805587.post-72018927176135379912013-10-16T23:26:40.737+01:002013-10-16T23:26:40.737+01:00Contrary to what you infer, I would have loved to ...Contrary to what you infer, I would have loved to have been able to report that your play was brilliant. But to me, it wasn't. Other people disagree – but my job was to review your play as I saw it, not other people's responses. It's been noted several times that I didn't talk about the acting, or the direction: I'm afraid that's because I didn't have anything particularly positive to say. I focused on your writing because the subject matter interested me, and offered lots to talk about. Do I think your writing in your play did your subject matter justice? No. Did I think it was a debate worth having? Yes, which is why this discussion continues.<br /><br />There's something crucial about Kwame's cultural lens construction that you've omitted in your most recent comment. “By writing with cultural specificity, you create stories that have universal resonance.” The first time I heard Kwame talk about this, it was at an event to discuss opportunities for BAME theatre-makers. He was on a panel with a white director, who argued that writing from your cultural lens is limiting and excluding. His response troubles me, because I'm not convinced it's not racist. I raised the cultural lens in this discussion because it disturbs me that anyone – British, Asian, anyone – should think that Fu Manchu retains even a shred of currency in 2013. Your play gives it a lot of currency: Fu Manchu dictates the characters, the style, the language, the plot. I haven't read the Fu Manchu books, on the assumption that they're bad literature. I don't think Fu Manchu makes good theatre, either.<br /><br />But again, this is just my opinion: several commentators have now contributed to the Guardian comments stream – which has reopened! WTF!!! - expressing others. Isn't it great that I'm not the final word? Whatever I think of the quality of your play, the debate is an important one – and I'm not sure how much a bland three-star review would have helped in supporting that debate.maddy costahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04929576408540749708noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8651145764236805587.post-73273149913407960752013-10-16T23:25:30.515+01:002013-10-16T23:25:30.515+01:00Hi Daniel – I'm having to break up this reply ...Hi Daniel – I'm having to break up this reply bec my comments boxes are playing up...<br /><br />An Ikeda Quote came up in my twitter stream on Monday that felt pertinent to this discussion: “Remaining silent in the face of injustice is the same as supporting it.” One of the most challenging things about this conversation has been the extent to which it's forced me to address my complicity in the injustices you address. It's easy for me to say that the Fu Manchu narrative is irrelevant in 2013, that its anniversary should be ignored rather than celebrated: I'm not its target. I can ignore it from a place of some privilege.<br /><br />Earlier in these comments, you've written: “The arbiters of cultural taste, the custodians of theatrical excellence, the assessors of the performing arts all had a collective indifference to exclusion and blatant discrimination when it came to East Asians.” Not all: Lyn Gardner worked hard to bring that exclusion and discrimination to light. We need more people like her in mainstream media, people who will support fringe and minority and outside-London and experimental theatre practice: this is part of the change that I've been arguing, through Dialogue, needs to be forged in the critical culture. I find it interesting that Libby Purves, since being sacked, has used her new blog as an opportunity to review a show in the Ovalhouse studio about gay rights. Would she have been able to review the same show for the Times? I doubt it. That she is choosing to widen her scope on her blog strikes me as progress.<br /><br />You're right: I haven't joined in the discussions about opportunities for south-east Asian actors over the past year. There is a lot of campaigning I do to expose and challenge the way theatre is made, staged and experienced; this particular issue, I overlooked. This is why it felt so important to remind readers of the background discussion in my review. You'll note that I deliberately used the word “initiate” change: four “establishment” productions doesn't solve the problem, it begins suggesting an answer. There are other answers. Actors like yourself writing plays, for instance.maddy costahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04929576408540749708noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8651145764236805587.post-9699615062307755102013-10-15T12:16:58.550+01:002013-10-15T12:16:58.550+01:00Sorry, Maddy, CANNOT let this go-
“So when Anna C...Sorry, Maddy, CANNOT let this go-<br /><br />“So when Anna Chen says in her blog, “If UK Chinese don't see this they'll have missed a treat”, there's something quite intriguing about that to me: what if this play has a natural constituency, and a two-star review in the Guardian is getting in the way of it? Would it be better for the play not to be reviewed at all?”<br /><br />In a word. NO. <br /><br />Is mainstream coverage the sole preserve of the (white, middle-class) “establishment”?<br /><br />You’d have us as “niche”?<br /><br />I don’t write for a “niche” audience. I write for everyone which I suspect is what bothers you because you cite the need for a “cultural lens”.<br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8651145764236805587.post-34463078004899984372013-10-13T23:21:34.252+01:002013-10-13T23:21:34.252+01:00Well here's something I've learned: my com...Well here's something I've learned: my comment boxes have character limits. What a hypocrite! <br /><br />A couple of things I'd like to pick up on in here. Firstly, your note "I think of you as an obstacle". I met a playwright called Ryan Craig last year and he said something that has really stayed with me. Sometimes, he argued, a play has a natural constituency, and mainstream criticism gets in the way of that. He's Jewish, and he writes plays about and in many ways for Jewish people – but if a mainstream critic sees one of those plays, doesn't appreciate that, and slaps a two-star rating on it, it will stop those people from coming. There are issues here with star ratings (when I started with Time Out, they weren't being used), and issues here with the authority invested in mainstream critics – an authority I'm trying to reject. But there are also massive issues with the ways in which theatre is marketed, the reliance of the industry of those star ratings – which is fine when they're high, shit when they're not – and a question over how theatre might be marketed better. This, too, is something I'm thinking about within Dialogue. <br /><br />So when Anna Chen says in her blog, “If UK Chinese don't see this they'll have missed a treat”, there's something quite intriguing about that to me: what if this play has a natural constituency, and a two-star review in the Guardian is getting in the way of it? Would it be better for the play not to be reviewed at all?<br /><br />The second thing I'm interested in is your perception of BAC as: “Elitist, exclusive and full of Rules (no scripts).” One of the most challenging things in writing about theatre at the moment is not taking sides in the ongoing division between “New Writing” and “New Work”. I see so much antagonism between people who make theatre by writing plays, directing plays, whatever, and people who – for want of a better word – devise plays, and I just don't want to be part of that. It's all theatre. But I realise it doesn't look like “all theatre” when some buildings won't even let you through the door. I have a really good friend who writes plays and sometimes when talking to her I get the impression she feels a bit betrayed by my rampant enthusiasm for David Bowie merboys etc. It's really important to me to work against this perception that places like BAC are elitist and exclusive – or that, eg, the Royal Court is elitist and exclusive for people who work in different ways, who don't write conventional scripts, whatever. I feel at home in all these places: it's useful to be reminded of how they feel to people who feel they don't belong there.<br /><br />And that, I'm afraid, is where I kind of have to bow out of this conversation, at least for a bit: talking to you has swallowed up my entire weekend, and now I have to get some other work done. Thanks again for a properly thought-provoking couple of days. Oh, and it turns out I can't come see World of Extreme Happiness tomorrow because I have dance practice: I'm in a dance group called the Actionettes and we're performing on Sunday and Vera Chok is coming to the show with her friends and frankly I AM TERRIFIED. Definitely all critics should put themselves on the line like this. It's good for the soul. All very best, Maddymaddy costahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04929576408540749708noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8651145764236805587.post-12590775704393231582013-10-13T12:30:08.886+01:002013-10-13T12:30:08.886+01:00“Public schoolboy humour”. I didn’t go to public s...“Public schoolboy humour”. I didn’t go to public school. I’m from a provincial working-class background. I was parodying “bastions of Englishness” that the Daily Mail might like us to return to via Jeeves & Wooster and Blackadder. Again, I think I caught the style a little too well for you but even then I think you’ve blown it out of all proportion. As Madam Miaow points out at least one of the cock jokes had a savage intent about racial/nationalistic stereotyping. I also played on the idea of Nayland & Petrie (with whom I tried otherwise to stay close to the way they’re characterised in the Sax Rohmer books) had real love inside them and if they were free to express that love how much happier and more fulfilled they’d be which is why the homo-eroticism is there. Classic English repression as a possible source of oppression of others.<br />When you say that “of course it’s York’s choice to write cod-Edwardian schlock” but then you wonder what other “stories” I could write if I went straight to “rejecting” rather than “re-enacting” I sense a great deal of contradiction. You are effectively telling me what I should write. It’s interesting you mention Kwarme because (no disrespect) it’s basically “kitchen-sink”, innit? Yet, Kwarme having black actors in white face masks in a period-drama pastiche-ing black & white cinema, vaudeville and music-hall would be more “old-fashioned”? And all this talk of what “stories” I could write. Maybe I don’t want to write “stories”. Maybe I want to create garish performance mock establishment tropes. Or is that too unconventional for you?<br /><br /><br />Once again I do have to reiterate a fairly simple point about “cod-Edwardian schlock-horror” which Matt & Maddy (sound like breakfast DJ’s) just don’t seem to be able to grasp. “cod-Edwardian schlock-horror” is what Sax Rohmer’s Fu Manchu books are. Matt described it as “schlocky Sherlocky”. Err…yeah. That’s what Rohmer was doing. And that’s where East Asians are imprisoned in the eyes of UK media. Inside “cod-Edwardian schlock-horror”. So we subvert that form. Other (unpaid) online reviewers showed great appreciation of this. <br /><br />Finally, I agree it’s a “brilliant thing” thing that I’m a British East-Asian writer. You certainly didn’t make it sound like that though. My first play. Which I raised the funds for myself (have you seen those Arts Council forms? Holy tick-boxes, Batman). Compare with the reviews for The Herd at The Bush. “yes it’s this, yes, it’s that but it’s Rory’s first play…”etc but that’s because Rory’s white, middle-class, from a theatrical dynasty, just played Iago at the Nash, is clearly a Clever Chap and it’s at The Bush but this upstart trouble-maker half-Chinese bloke with an English surname in the less salubrious part of South London who is isn’t being earnest po-faced and exotic and who isn’t telling “cultural stories”? Knives out.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8651145764236805587.post-76930287245353350592013-10-13T12:29:15.661+01:002013-10-13T12:29:15.661+01:00Interestingly Matt Trueman managed to come up with...Interestingly Matt Trueman managed to come up with the truly reductive and leadenly conservative suggestion that “If only York had outsourced the concept to a slapstick superstar like Sean Foley or Cal McCrystal.” In other words, “should’ve given it to a Famous White Man”, and I can’t help thinking that if Sean Foiley had put on the exact same work in a big theatre Misquotin’ (allegedly) Matt would be singing his praises about how funny and clever the whole thing was.<br /><br />“I wasn't supposed to see Daniel's play: I had tickets to see a scratch show by Make/Shift with Chris Brett Bailey as a kind of David Bowie mer-boy (how brilliant does that sound?) plus Clout's The Various Lives of Infinite Nullity at BAC, but had to cancel because Michael Billington was off sick and Lyn Gardner had to pick up his shows so I got one of hers. So already I was in the wrong place”<br /><br />This is incredibly revealing. You were all up for a night of David Bowie mer-boying with the Experimental Kool Kidz down in Battersea (where they won’t even let me Scratch ‘cos I write scripts) and you got lumbered with my “cod-Edwardian schlock-horror farce burdened with cock jokes and schoolboy sniggering”. Dear me. There you are gushing about something you didn’t even see then totalling my stuff (which genuinely makes people laugh) because of your ingrained prejudices about “cod-Edwardian public-school humour”. Maddy, I can honestly say after these exchanges that I like you but this is poor form frankly.<br /><br />FWIW BAC is everything I despise about modern theatre. Elitist, exclusive and full of Rules (no scripts). They sent me their “manifesto”. I’m convinced you have to have to a certain type of university degree to understand a word of it.<br /><br />“We should never let them act in Shakespeare”. That line really got you, didn’t it? I’m guessing it’s too “obvious” for you but I would reiterate the questions I posed in the last post I made which you didn’t address. If it’s so “obvious” why were none of you (who actually have the gift of a platform and therefore a voice) saying anything when East Asians were continually and blatantly excluded year on year out? Why were none of you challenging that state of affairs? Why was it left to ordinary actors to effectively risk career hari-kiri to say it? Believe me, every day I walk through the NT stage door I say a small thank you because this is not a profession populated by people who let bygones be bygones. Do you know that when I was in a Shanghai-set Romeo & Juliet in Basingstoke a few years ago we had letters before it even opened? “My husband and I wish to see Shakespeare the way it was intended…and certainly not Chinese”. The first all-black production at the NT was celebrated I believe. I’m in the first all EA one now. Not a word. If it’s not blatant it simply won’t get heard.<br /><br />I don’t watch Jeremy Clarkson either. The only episode of Sherlock I’ve ever seen is “that” one (and then only this year as “research”). But when it’s in direct relation to me and my racial background I think I have to take note otherwise I’m operating in some kind of separatist vacuum.<br /> <br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8651145764236805587.post-19768312975189186672013-10-13T12:27:25.418+01:002013-10-13T12:27:25.418+01:00Hi Maddy, I’ve found an East Asian theatre reviewe...Hi Maddy, I’ve found an East Asian theatre reviewer for you http://madammiaow.blogspot.co.uk/2013/10/fu-manchu-complex-review-boisterous.html I’m such a dunce. Her poetry’s so good I just don’t think of her as a critic.<br /><br />Firstly, let’s clear up one thing-<br /><br />“It hasn't been an easy conversation – how could it be, when I've criticised his work, in public? There's quite a lot of anger in his responses, of course there is.”<br /><br />I’m actually more than happy to be criticised in public. I quite enjoy it if I’m honest. I like ruffling peoples’ feathers. I’d actually like to write a play that would have ALL you critics slinging insults at me but that wouldn’t make sense box-office wise and that’s the crucial point here. It’s hard to sell tickets at a place like the Ovalhouse. It’s doubly hard with bad reviews and that’s what some of you need to bear in mind, frankly. There’s much worthy-talk about artists being free to experiment and fail but that only seems to apply to certain people. There was a production I saw earlier this year in a major theatre where frankly I’m amazed the director’s still working but of course it was given respectable 3 star reviews because essentially that’s what critics are there to do these days-wave the establishment over the line.<br /><br />Maddy, I remember you used to review for Time Out but I can’t for the life of me recall reading any of your reviews. Now we’ve had this conversation I’d be genuinely interested in what you thought of things but I haven’t been before, I admit. Matt Trueman on the other hand is a total non-entity as far as I’m concerned. His ludicrously blinkered and laughably ignorant “review” of my play is the only review of his I’ve ever read<br />I don’t take a lot of notice of critics. By all accounts I’ve been well reviewed for my performance in The World Of Extreme Happiness but I haven’t read them because (unlike with FMC Complex) I don’t have to sell the play. I’m occasionally interested in what Lyn and Kate Bassett think and Andrew Dickson's interesting but beyond that I don’t bother because the fact is critics do not react or think like “normal” audience members. Their criteria is completely different. I think of you as an obstacle, Maddy. One I have to find a way of bypassing if my work is to find an audience. I’m not a massively experienced writer but I realise I need to find a way of making something for an audience that at same time will “impress” a critic. A lot of comedy practitioners talk of “comedy-snobbery” and I can’t help thinking I should’ve made the play a tad more boring and dull so you would think it “weighty” enough. <br /><br /><br /><br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com