I’ve got a book to finish! Somehow, though, I knew I’d end up writing about last night, good or bad …
Ironically, torturous was my word of choice when I turned to Manny as the lights went up in the cinema following the National Theatre Live screening of ‘Good’. A work penned by Glaswegian playwright, C P Taylor, it is to be streamed – in real time – to cinemas across the country on a variety of dates, last night being the first. David Tennant takes the lead role and it was him I saw being interviewed, some time ago, promoting its upcoming opening in the Harold Pinter Theatre, London. A play I had never heard of before, I knew, immediately, that it was one I wanted to see – as I did, ‘Mad House’, last summer Of course, it’s at times like these that I wish I lived in London with access to the best of theatre but, alas, I stored it in my memory, regardless.
The concept, the ingredients, the story – and David Tennant. ‘Good’ seemed to have it all – well, almost. Turns out, it’s not a true story … First premiered in London, courtesy of the Royal Shakespeare Company, in 1981, it is set in pre-war Germany. John Halder (David Tennant) is a liberal-minded literary professor at a university in Frankfurt whose best friend, Maurice (Elliot Levey), is a Jewish psychiatrist. Married with three children, Halder professes to be a family man, devoted to his wife, Helen (Sharon Small) while also struggling to ‘look after’ his blind mother who is suffering from dementia. An all-round good guy, then. Or is he? Is anyone wholly good?
David Tennant’s portrayal of Halder would suggest not. For Halder is possessing of the depth of a puddle! Morally detached, he is merely playing the part, devoid of emotion. Thus, his mother is a hindrance; the lip-service of devotion he pays to his wife, a sham, as he abandons her for one of his students. His best friend, Maurice? Expendable in the wake of Halder‘s ego. Seduced by the Nazis, any doubts about joining the regime are allayed by vanity and ambition as he succeeds in justifying his every decision. We, the audience, meanwhile, bear witness to the wrestlings of his mind as he voices his inner thoughts throughout the play; as ‘good’ gives way to evil.
This play has it all. The story of an intelligent, up-standing, seemingly good man who falls prey to his ego and, ultimately, sacrifices the life of his best friend, a party to his capture and transportation to Auschwitz. A critique on human nature; the flaws and weaknesses of man. An insight into the guile of the Nazi regime and its power to seduce the morally bereft. There but for the grace of God, perhaps, but does anyone wish to acknowledge that? Is Cecil Taylor questioning the very concept of ‘good’? Highlighting the vulnerability in all of us? Are we so fickle?
Thought provoking. It was always going to be that but so convincing is David Tennant in his portrayal of Halder that one mistrusts him from the start. He says all the right words, just without any feeling … Far from likeable, surely he is nothing more than a cynic’s embodiment of good? The proverbial wolf in sheep’s clothing, and one so chillingly cold that he agrees to the Nazi ‘instruction’ to provide written justification for the euthanasia of the elderly and the infirm. (Sensitive subject matter given the recent Covid regime – sorry, pandemic!) I did suggest that this play was a critique on human nature …
Maurice (Elliot Levey), Halder’s best friend and foil, is vulnerable, scared and disbelieving as he bears witness to the professor’s surrender to the Third Reich, denying his friend’s pleas for help; clemency for his life and that of his family. In the absence of any bitterness or blame, however, that which there is is much more damning: a resignation; a sad acceptance of the truth.
This is the Holocaust from a novel perspective; an extremely uncomfortable one. David Tennant is, of course, nothing short of superb, his character integral to every scene. The ability to memorise so many lines, daunting in itself, all three actors are on stage for the duration. In short, a play deserving of admiration. Why, then, was the first adjective which came to mind – in description of our experience – torturous?
Nothing to do with the subject matter, the story, nor the quality of performance. Instead, the key lies in the little film shown to the audience in the interval. A film about the playwright, Cecil Philip Taylor, who succumbed to pneumonia at the age of 52, unaware of the worldwide acclaim ‘Good’ was to receive. Born in Glasgow in 1929, he died in Longhorsley, Northumberland where he spent most of his life, writing in his garden shed. Seeing him and listening to him speak, on film, afforded me an understanding as to the performance; the execution of the play. In a word, it is modern. Too modern for me. Minimalist in set – a grey prison-cell, in effect – it, too, is minimalist in number. For both Elliot Levey and Sharon Small embody several characters, Sharon Small even adopting the persona of a German officer! Clever, it most certainly is but, the extreme paring down, to my mind, takes on a dominance, detracting from the importance of the subject matter. Granted, I haven’t read the play and, thus, I have no insight as to the instructions of the writer. On further research, however, I chanced on a review which includes the word ‘reimagines’ in describing award-winning director, Dominic Cooke’s influence on its execution …
Sharon Small was born in Glasgow and she is, emphatically, Scottish in the play; one set in Frankfurt! Why? No need for a German accent but to venture so deliberately off-piste, I found increasingly grating, to say nothing of the language towards the end. Littered with swear words – of the ‘f’ and, moreover, the ‘c’ variety – such inclusion was, at once, unnecessary and incongruous. Modern? Left-wing? A pity …
Two hours, forty minutes we shall never get back. It had such potential. Thought-provoking in the extreme, the play is nothing if not relevant today. A spotlight on human nature, with all its flaws and vulnerabilities, it serves to show the ease with which one can be seduced – one step at a time – one’s inner conscience finding ever more ways to absolve the guilt. Susceptible to guile and deceit, fear provides the means to justify the unjustifiable; the reason to comply … The pertinence is glaring, there for all to see, should one choose to do so.
A strong ending is paramount. ‘Good’ does not disappoint. A key theme throughout is Halder‘s love of music. In his head, he hears a continuous music score as he attempts to block out reality. In the final scene – Auschwitz – there is a band in situ. Shaved heads, malnourished, in the characteristic grey/blue striped uniforms, they are the death camp orchestra. As Halder declares, ‘A real band!’. Acceptance. Stark reality. Truth …
‘There is none so blind as he who will not see.’
A proverb.
Or words to that effect …
This is Trish, signing off.
