Volume 9, Issue 2

This article proposes revisiting Howard Brenton’s The Churchill Play (1974). I contend that the play offers pertinent insights into how authoritarian governments come into being through the implicit cooperation of people who, wittingly or unwittingly, enter into a “conspiracy of obedience.” Although inspired by political issues that were current in Britain in the 1970 s and 1980 s, the play’s illustration of the fragility of democracy resonates with today’s political atmosphere, especially that experienced in the United States. By anchoring my argument to the theories of Bertolt Brecht, I aim to clarify Brenton’s intent and encourage a more parabolic reading of the play – perceiving totalitarianism not as the usurpation of power by a single individual or group, but as the consequence of people’s complacent and self-serving tendencies to comply with the status quo.

Both Goodnight Desdemona (Good Morning Juliet) (1990) and Harlem Duet (1997) are Canadian feminist appropriations of William Shakespeare. Both deal, at least partly, with Othello , and both can be considered subversive re-visions of Shakespeare’s play which aim to articulate oppositional intervention in the canon. These similarities notwithstanding, the plays have not often been studied concurrently. Also, while several critics have explored them, mostly separately, in terms of their adaptation/appropriation of Shakespeare, seeking to spell out the transformations they have brought to the “original” text, little has been said about how the iconic figure of Shakespeare still holds sway in these new dramas, albeit in different ways and to varying degrees. Likewise, their dramatization of the character of Othello remains rather understudied. This essay explores the “new” Othellos of the two plays, contending that their positioning in the two texts evinces some similarities while their characterization differs widely, given the plays’ generic difference, but mostly the two playwrights’ rather divergent feminist perspectives which, in turn, substantially shape the plays’ respective appropriation techniques.

This paper explores the themes of hospitality and trauma in Alexandra Wood’s The Human Ear (2015) by focusing on the modes of encounter with the Other in the play. As Lucy, a woman in her twenties, tries to come to terms with the death of her mother as a result of an unspecified bomb attack, she finds out that her estranged brother, Jason, killed himself. In the meantime, however, a man who claims to be her brother keeps turning up at her door, and through these encounters we can trace the possibilities and limits of hospitality. By referring to the theories of Emmanuel Levinas, Jacques Derrida, and Sara Ahmed on home and hospitality, this paper argues that in The Human Ear , the redefinition of the relationship with the Other is represented as a means to come to terms with trauma as Lucy’s process of welcoming the stranger is connected to her process of healing from trauma.

Outside Paducah: The Wars at Home (2016), a play written and performed solo by James Allen Moad II, a former Air Force pilot, explores the enduring effects of war on American veterans and their families after soldiers return home from the battleground. The play moves beyond the individual representation of a traumatized veteran by addressing two intertwined issues: the collective and transgenerational burden of war, both in the form of physical wounds and/or moral injuries. Outside Paducah contributes to promoting the stage as a dynamic place to think about the war legacy and to question and challenge war itself by stressing the importance of understanding the cost of war on both personal and societal levels. The play shows that the scenes of war fought in foreign lands are brought back to the home territories and families, who become equally demoralised by the perpetuation of war in their homelands. The soldiers return as ghosts of their previous selves and haunt their families and friends from one generation to the next. Therefore, war remains an open wound at the core of the American nation. At the same time, the play sheds some light on the harsh realities of the underprivileged and how joining the military often seems to provide a way out of the world of poverty and lack of resources.

Borrowing from both a painting and the retrospective exhibition of David Wojnarowicz, History Keeps Me Awake at Night , this paper targets two recent American plays: Annie Baker’s The Flick (2013) and Matthew Lopez’s The Inheritance (2018). In both, the playwrights point to the neglect of history, or rather cultural memory, as I will insist on calling it, as one of the ills affecting a “historicidal” society such as that of the United States. An immersion into the present and concurrent obliteration of one’s cultural inheritance results in a populace easily manipulated in the interests of corporate control, and more importantly for the plays under consideration, into unhappiness and disconnection, an erlebnis , in sum, which proves lethal for individuals and the larger groups of which they form part. Both plays further seem to argue that the most troublesome of such a thing is how little consciousness of the problem there is, a surefire indication that induced amnesia is making alarming headway among the younger generations.

This article explores the ways in which contemporary theatre is engaging with English national questions. In the context of the current devolutionary movements in Britain, I apply a national specificity, focusing on plays and performances which address the politics of just one of the three nations within Britain: England. While this study of the specifics of England and Englishness is already well-established in literary studies (Gardiner) and political science (Kenny; Nairn), there is yet to be a sustained critical engagement with England in theatre studies. Following a discussion of Jez Butterworth’s Jerusalem (2009) in light of its planned West End revival in 2022, I then turn to two recent theatrical representations of England in Mike Bartlett’s Albion (2017 and 2020) and the Young Vic’s My England shorts (2019), which I propose offer more rigorous, reflexive explorations into English national identity. As questions over England’s cultural and political representation become increasingly loaded and difficult to navigate, I suggest that the beginnings of this English national register in the theatre marks an attempt to nuance these debates, opening a productive space for critical inquiry.

According to Ernest Renan, a nation is formed by its collective memory; it is a country’s shared experiences which enable it to become (in Benedict Anderson’s much later coinage) an “imagined community.” Building on these ideas, commentators such as Kavita Singh and Lianne McTavish et al. have shown how museums play a key role in helping nations to form an identity and understand their past. However, as these critics and those from other disciplines (including postcolonial studies) have noted, museums can also reflect and reinforce the unequal power dynamics between nations which result from colonialism and neocolonialism. This article demonstrates that these ideas are directly relevant to the 2019 play A Museum in Baghdad by the Palestinian-Irish playwright Hannah Khalil. This play is set in the Museum of Iraq in three different time periods: “ Then (1926), Now (2006), and Later ” (an unspecified future date) (3). Khalil uses specific characters – most notably, Gertrude Bell during the “Then” sections, the Iraqi archaeologists Ghalia and Layla during the “Now” sections, and a “timeless” character called Nasiya who appears across the time periods – to question the degree to which the museum is perpetuating Western views of Iraq.