Friday, 6 August 2010

four stars, preachy, or lightweight

You get some idea about the anodyne treatment of climate change in Earthquakes in London from the reviews. The Daily Telegraph's critic describes himself as 'a crusty climate-change sceptic'. He gave the show four stars.

The American expat blogger Webcowgirl still found the play preachy:

if I want to read about climate change, all I have to do is pick up the paper any day of the week; it’s covered extensively in the news. I don’t go to the theater to hear this all over again: I go to learn about people and what makes them tick ...

This is a key point. Does Earthquakes add anything you couldn't read in the papers? Webcowgirl adds:

if you are very concerned about climate change you will probably find this a wonderful show.

Andrew from West End Whingers replies in a comment below:

I think if you are very concerned about climate change you will probably find this frustratingly lightweight and somewhat patronising.

I agree. But also, if you accept what the great majority of climate scientists are saying, then there isn't an opposition between 'climate change', on the one hand, and learning 'about people and what makes them tick', on the other. There's a relationship there. Only Earthquakes doesn't bring that to life.

see also: when it's not either/or, guess who? and 10 things you need to know about 'earthquakes in london'

1 comment:

  1. Very interesting to see this analysis of the play; it really adds a lot to its desconstruction. Sad (to me) to see a show mock the Weimar attitude of today and then not really take the platform and make for the most convincing polemic possible. Shaw did it well; why not Bartlett?