Al Smith's
Radio, easily one of the best plays I saw at the 2006 Edinburgh Fringe, has finally come to New York as part of the Brits Off Broadway festival. You can read the NYTimes review of the show
here.
If you haven't already read it, be warned: it doesn't have many nice things to say. But the more I think about
Radio's reception, the less surprised I am by it. What works well in Edinburgh won't always work well in New York. But there's more to it than that. Something that the reviewer alluded to, and also struck me when I saw
Radio last summer, is how, despite its obesession with American culture, how quintessentially British the play was, how enamoured it was of its colonial overtones. Essentially, the entire monologue centers on middle-class America of the 1960’s, its obsession with being the center of the world and its tendency to plant flags throughout the world (and eventually, the solar system). And while a young progressive hyper-critical liberal like myself is willing to admit some guilt about current American imperialism, I’m not sure whether most Americans (especially middle-class Baby Boomer that most resemble the main character of
Radio) carry this same sense of shame. Especially about American politics of the 60’s and early 70’s; this was after all, the era of LBJ’s Great Society and the Civil Rights Movement (two momentous struggles strangely absent from
Radio’s narrative). And even if, with an eye on the growing opposition to the war in Iraq, there’s a growing national consensus about American imperialism, it can’t yet be expressed with the same post-colonial shame we see in Radio. Although an undeniable part of modern British identity, I’m not sure whether American has gotten to this stage yet. I suppose this is the difference between imperialism and post-colonialism; the American writer and the British writer.
There's clearly something unique about the American experience, some ineffable truth about ourselves that only an American can reveal. To be frank, I have no idea what that truth is exactly. But I think we ought to go looking for it, don't you?
An investigative history of the Hartford Circus Fire of July 6th, 1944. Nominated for a Fringe First at the 2006 Edinburgh Fringe Festival.
Dear Stephen, thanks for this post - I think you've hit the nail on the head. I'm glad you enjoyed it in Edinburgh - it certainly did heaps better over there. Indeed the NYTimes review was a sore kick, especially given the response we'd been given in Edinburgh and around the UK - I certainly had a good think trying to figure out quite where the project went semi-tits-up over in New York. But I think my analysis is simple - and it's exactly the same as your summation. I've got to say, I don't think it's something I could have figured out without the experiencial evidence the Brits off Broadway festival flagged up - but it's certaily a good lesson to learn. I'd be interested to see how the play went down if I had written it around a British subject (I bet my back teeth the Brits would have hated it and the American's would have had the inverse experience). I guess what I'm saying is that I don't think it's about the nature of American audiences (as some members of my team thought), but more about how this play's subject goes down to those for whom the story's personal (or more directly personal than E'burg).
And I guess that brings me onto another line of thinking - when I write something, I never think it's going to live any longer than it's initial incarnation. "Radio" was written for Tom for Kandinsky at that venue at that time. The fact that the play (as you saw in Edinburgh) took place in a cave helped a great deal - as did the time of day it was on, and the audience we were playing to. I knew we didn't need to be too careful about the facts, as I appreciated the cultural distance the audience would be watching it from (even though much of the Edinburgh audience was american). I don't know whether I ever thought about the imperialism / post-colonial critique, but certainly there's a similarity between the two in that it's about looking back, and the subjectivity of history - I guess that holds true for both sides of that question. I certainly never wanted for the play to be a metaphor for the Iraq conflicts - not consciously at least. And also, as facetious as it sounds, it'd be hard to write a play about the space programme without setting it in America.
But sod it. Would I do it differently? No. Would I have brought a different play to BOB given the experience we got? Probably. Was it worth it? Absolutely.
So thanks for the crit - really good analysis, probably the most useful response the show's had. Just wish you'd reviewed it for the NYT! I'll keep an eye on your blog - it's a great read. Are you guys back in Edinburgh this year?
All the best,
Al
(alastairsmith@gmail.com)