I'm Not Running (National Theatre)

I saw this last week and retitled it "I'm Not Staying". This is a bad play, with unbelievable and unsympathetic characters . Caroline is told by another doctor that there is aman dripping in blood with severe injuries in the A & E and she continues to have a conversation with Sandy and then get his phone number. I guess she was out of class the day they taught the words: First Do No Harm.

The set is clearly part of the Nationa;s austerity budget for scenery and I felt while watching it I was seeing everyone's 5th choice for each of the actors. I'm a fan of David Hare's and have been for more decades than I care to remember but like many older playwrights he seems to have lost the fire that propelled him to the top of his profession. He's just marking time now with nothing really to inspire him.

According to David Hare, we’ve all got it wrong. And so have the critics.



He’s very against “documentary plays”, which sounds a bit like having a go at “This House” amongst others.

www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/real-life-drama-is-killing-art-says-sir-david-hare-ttzpfwgg9

The Times further sticks the boot into Sir David Hare today in their leader column no less:

“His play Via Dolorosa launched at the Royal Court Theatre in London in 1998 with a solo performer: Sir David Hare. This consisted of profound reflections on the intractable Israeli-Palestinian conflict, based on the insights of Sir David Hare. These were gleaned from a brief visit to the region in 1997 by Sir David Hare. Reviewing Hare’s work a few years afterwards Dominic Dromgoole speculated that “maybe the real enemy all along was vanity and that eventually couldn’t be defeated”. Sir David Hare could put him right on this, doubtless in a 90-Minute monologue”

There's a nice bit of stagecraft with the projections and revolves and set changes. The set and design is still rubbish, but the change is fun.

I agree that the latest Hare is bad, but the Times article is just snide. There is no evidence that Hare doesn't admire This House or My Name is Rachel Corrrie; those are just assumptions based on a superficial reading of what Hare was saying. He himself has done semi-documentary stuff - like Stuff Happens - so isn't against it. Here is a perfectly friendly discussion, full of mutual admiration, between Hare and Graham, in which Hare says: 'This House is one of the best definitions of the process of politics I have ever seen.'

www.theguardian.com/stage/2018/may/06/david-hare-james-graham-drama-politics-labour-party

The article is trying to create a row where there isn't one. And Hare's wider point is right: far better to create character and metaphor than come up with a copy of political events we all know about: the problem is that Hare has lost that knack.

Was anyone at the talk and heard Hare's actual words? Now I've read the article more closely it strikes me as odd that the Times are claiming it as an attack on James Graham, who really has never written a documentary or verbatim play about modern political events. This House comes closest but was fictionalised (or at least stylised) and used historical events as a metaphor for current politics. The majority of his plays are not overtly about politics, and those that are, like Labour of Love or the Vote, aren't based on real people. I could name twenty playwrights whose work could more accurately be described as documentary style.

I guess Privacy was semi-verbatim but that wasn't about politics or rehashing events.

This comes only a couple of weeks after the Times' hatchet job on his Brexit TV movie, alleging an on-set feud and diva-like behaviour from Benedict Cumberbatch. The Times' own work of complete fiction according to James' Twitter.

I see that this is currently scheduled to limp on for another 25 performances in January, with loads of seats (including the cheap ones at the front) still available, many of them no doubt returns. And the last one of these is an NT Live, which I can't imagine filling many cinemas! I feel sorry for the cast.

They have been known to schedule the first run of a show without declaring the final performance, and then - instead of announcing the rest complete with designated final performance - just quietly let the whole thing drop, within the last few years. I think you're right that this was fairly tightly contracted, I feel like we've known the closing date of January 31st for a really long time and also there's the NTLive, but I bet they've still got the option to drop terrible shows if the circumstances are right.

Whatever our misgivings about what When We Are Sufficiently Embarrassed About This Stupid Title might be like, surely it's got to be better than this. Hasn't it?!

(EDIT: from early comments in since I said that, it seems not)

Even a member of NT staff who commented on my early departure looked furtively around, leaned in and said "Don't worry, it's just one big argument. Go on, go!"

Agreed learfan, I enjoyed it too. One thing about David Hare, there are always a few good jokes. I and the stranger on my right chuckled for a long time about the votes one.

I meant to say earlier, did anyone else wonder what happened to Sian Brooke's voice? It was a weird mix of both shrill and blurred.

Was at the NT box office yesterday, people in front of me were collecting tickets for this and their circle seats had been upgraded to the stalls.