The second half is a Question of Attribution. This is a very good little play based on Anthony Blunt before he was exposed and when he was still curator of the Queen's pictures. The famed scene is when Blunt is caught by the Queen (who has a day off because her pool opening visit was called off at the last moment) trying to switch a picture in the palace so it can be studied. The conversation is all around fakes. Would the painting be found a fake, or just mis-attributed? But is it the painting, or Sir Anthony, that the conversation is really about? Its all very clever and witty dialogue, as you would expect from Alan Bennett. But also just a slightly unfulfilling evening at the theatre, because Bennett plays don't have any real plot or drama (except for maybe the History Boys which is why that was such a success). They are really a series of monologues.You enjoy listening to them enough, but you also would like something to have happened. Anything.
Sunday, 13 March 2016
Single Spies
This play is in fact two Alan Bennett playlets, both based on the Cambridge Spies. The first (An Englishman Abroad) is about Guy Burgess, wiling away his days in a gilded cage (and being communist Russia, the gilding is quite tarnished) . Its a rather sad little piece as he is befriended by an actress who has come out to do a play in Moscow as part of a cultural exchange. He just has no purpose now his cover is blown. No interest to anyone.
The second half is a Question of Attribution. This is a very good little play based on Anthony Blunt before he was exposed and when he was still curator of the Queen's pictures. The famed scene is when Blunt is caught by the Queen (who has a day off because her pool opening visit was called off at the last moment) trying to switch a picture in the palace so it can be studied. The conversation is all around fakes. Would the painting be found a fake, or just mis-attributed? But is it the painting, or Sir Anthony, that the conversation is really about? Its all very clever and witty dialogue, as you would expect from Alan Bennett. But also just a slightly unfulfilling evening at the theatre, because Bennett plays don't have any real plot or drama (except for maybe the History Boys which is why that was such a success). They are really a series of monologues.You enjoy listening to them enough, but you also would like something to have happened. Anything.
The second half is a Question of Attribution. This is a very good little play based on Anthony Blunt before he was exposed and when he was still curator of the Queen's pictures. The famed scene is when Blunt is caught by the Queen (who has a day off because her pool opening visit was called off at the last moment) trying to switch a picture in the palace so it can be studied. The conversation is all around fakes. Would the painting be found a fake, or just mis-attributed? But is it the painting, or Sir Anthony, that the conversation is really about? Its all very clever and witty dialogue, as you would expect from Alan Bennett. But also just a slightly unfulfilling evening at the theatre, because Bennett plays don't have any real plot or drama (except for maybe the History Boys which is why that was such a success). They are really a series of monologues.You enjoy listening to them enough, but you also would like something to have happened. Anything.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment