The announcement by Mario de Marco, the new Minister of Tourism and Culture, of the government’s intention to abolish the Board of Classification for the stage has delighted some and irritated others. But if this measure is taken little will change from the current situation.
Theatre makers have been enjoying considerable freedom in what they present for some years, well before the hullabaloo over the banning of the less than savoury Stitching- Paul Xuereb
There is no doubt that our theatre makers have been enjoying considerable freedom in what they present and act for some years, well before the hullabaloo that was raised over the banning of Anthony Neilson’s less than savoury Stitching.
Unifaun was able in 2006 to produce Mark Ravenhill’s sexually explicit Some Explicit Polaroids, and in 2007 Shaffer’s Equus, with its scene of full nudity.
In 2008, Sarah Kane’s Blasted, with its scenes of violence, rape and even cannibalism was also performed, and in the same year Philip Ridley’s Mercury Fur, with its depiction of partying in a dystopian England, in which a group of young drug addicts organise ‘parties’ in which the paying guest ends up torturing and then killing a child, the author’s ultimate aim being to show how love can be born even in an atmosphere of great evil.
Not all of these are great or even very good plays, but the sordid spectacles were often dramatically effective and mostly acceptable.
Has there been much prevention or crippling of plays hostile to the Christian religion?
One thinks of Howard Brenton’s Paul, also performed by Unifaun, a play based on the assumption that Christ not only survived his crucifixion but also persuaded Saul to preach his doctrine.
Christ is exposed as a somewhat despicable being, and so is Peter, Christ’s anointed successor, who is shown as knowing that Christ never rose from the dead, and submits to his on execution only to defy the emperor Nero’s scorn for Christian beliefs.
It is by and large a digni-fied play, but the Board of Classification did not ban it or even prune it (save for one very coarse expression).
Unifaun’s production of a strange piece, certainly not a great one, Howard Barker’s The Seduction of Almighty God by the Boy Priest Loftus, showed a sick and utterly unworthy religious order in the 16th century, and those who saw it will remember how poor Loftus ends up being sodomised not once, but twice.
Lansley’s Immaculate, produced by Theatre Anon, is a light piece, with a comical Archangel and a comical Lucifer, not to mention a somewhat dim young man surely meant to remind us of St Joseph. I shall only say that Mia, the Madonna figure in the play, is a prostitute.
The play is a comical and far from reverent version of the begetting of Christ, to which all strict Catholics are bound to take umbrage, but it was performed unchanged.
What will happen once the current administration, or a Labour successor (assuming it agrees with the planned reforms) makes the legal changes promised?
Most importantly of all, Unifaun, Theatre Anon and other groups will themselves decide what classification to give their productions, and I feel sure they will acknowledge the freedom being given them by taking the task of classification quite seriously.
It will probably be easier for them to include tricky political material in their productions, and perhaps one or two may extend the stage attacks on religion to very grotesque extremes, but then they may become liable to prosecution under certain legislation, unless these laws are also changed.
We shall now , of course, avoid such embarrassing occasions as the one where members of a visiting English drama company interrupted their perfor-mance briefly to inform the audience they were not allowed to utter one of the author’s lines as it contravened Maltese law.
We shall also, I am sure, have public productions of Stitching and so be able to judge if it was worth waiting for.