| Home | Discussion | Contact |
1969:
revolution as personal and as theatre
1968, for all of those who wanted to live against a world without future, was a great year. But as almost always, I was a late developer. It was 1969 before I got going.
1969 was good but wasn’t great: it seems useful to reflect on this period a bit, as a bit of contrast with the madness of today’s normality.
PREAMBLE: MY BACKGROUND
.
I turned 19 in the summer of ’69. It was an exciting period for me like losing my political virginity (my real virginity was lost a little later, and a little late: as I said, I was a late developer).
For years I’d been very lonely, a very withdrawn adolescent, with very
few friends, and with these my only passion, apart from music, was Left-wing
“politics”, in the sense of responding to the news in the media. I’d been
brought up in an ex-CP liberal-lefty family. They were basically libertarian in
the sense that they neither encouraged nor discouraged, approved nor disapproved
of anything we did, at least when it came to anything ‘moral’ or social. It
was a ‘make your own mistakes, just get on with it’ attitude that bordered
on indifference.
My parents allowed my youngest sister to sleep with her English teacher
boyfriend in the house (her room was a little separate from the main flat we
had), and he’d have breakfast and sometimes lunch and supper with us in the
main flat (if Chris Woodhead is reading this, which he surely is, he must be
green with envy!). They were very much into High Culture. My mother was a consumer
and appreciater of culture - she sang
in the Philharmonic Chorus and was an antique dealer and had the very best of
tastes and was a great admirer of Freud. My father was more a creator
of art - illustrations, paintings, arty games. German-born, he liked Kafka,
Schwitters, the arty aspects of the Dadaists, the surrealists, the arty
Jacqueline de Jong/Asgar Jorn wing of the post-’62 S.I. (he knew nothing of
the radical wing, and, judging from his later reactions to my attitude towards
art, wouldn’t have liked it one bit), didn’t like pop art, but liked Johnny
Heartfield and Georg Grosz, quite liked Brecht[1], but preferred Pinter and
Becket (whose aestheticisation of non-communication and meaninglessness
justified his own), had a cultural
(rather than political) opposition to journalism and psychoanalysis along the
lines of Karl Kraus. Likewise, his critique of Stalinism was of its social
realist art (he’d left the Communist Party in 1950 because of Stalin’s
persecution of artists; almost all of his CP friends left only 6 years later).
Apart from the use of culture and art as a mediation in discussions with his
colleagues and friends, art for him was a retreat into abstraction, the pleasure
of being alone creating. He painted abstract paintings, and was a lecturer in
design. Very modern. He was generally gentle, but, typically, didn’t
communicative about daily life at all, for which mathematical games and abstract
paintings were a soothing consolation.
Up
till then my politics had been pretty much as a lefty spectator – I’d gone
along on CND demos from the age of 8, with one or more members of my family. One
of my 3 older sisters knew people who were part of the Committee of 100, the
more radical section of CND; she got arrested on a sit-down in Whitehall or
somewhere, and had only the very best things to say about the cops - they were
all so polite, warning her about that they were about to arrest her, asking her
if she was ready to be picked up by the four of them, picking up her shoe, etc.
(early 60s); my posh uncle paid the fine. I’d of course gone along on demos,
but had only shouted slogans maybe and had just marched, most of the time
feeling that everyone was together apart from me. It was a fantasy place to meet
people which I was incapable of doing since I hadn’t sussed that meeting
always depends on your own initiative in the end. Although I must have liked the
atmosphere - the jazz, the beatnik bohemianism of it all, nevertheless, demos to
me became a banality, a quarterly ritual, almost always on a Sunday, something
to go and feel a part of some movement but not really moving. Undoubtedly for a
lot of older – mainly, but not only, Middle Class - teenagers than me it had
been an opportunity to get away from the family for a few days and maybe get off
with girls or blokes and just have fun, regardless of the political content
which was often a pretext. As a pretext though, it did
have a rebellious image, especially when headmasters banned CND badges in
schools. So it attracted some of the right people. A year or so ago I had a
dream (which in fact was a simple memory of what it was like) of a CND march
entering London after over 3 days marching from Aldermaston, and everyone on the
pavements clapping the marchers and some of the bystanders joining in and the
marchers took over the whole road, which was wide and there were no cars. The
dream had a warm glow to it ~ it was a memory of a sweet naivety. Nowadays the
idea of clapping people who’d walked a long way against nuclear weapons, or
about anything, would be unheard of. Most of this time my politics had been down
to arguing with Tories and others at school about Vietnam and immigration
policy, taking my opinions from Tribune or the New Statesman, or, by ’67,
International Times, Oz and Private Eye. I liked Che Guevara and Fidel Castro
(partly because he’d said he was in favour of the abolition of money), but not
Mao particularly – the shameless personality cult was totally off-putting to
me. In ’67, at the age of 17, I made a little badge out of letraset, with the
words “Conform! - Be a hippy!”
on it. Very radical – but I only wore it once in public, I was so inhibited. In ’68 I
went on Vietnam demos but never hit a cop or chucked anything. I liked what went
on in Paris in May, but, being in Berlin to learn German, didn’t follow it too
closely.
1969
At
Christmas 1968 a CP dissident friend/lover of my dad gave me “Obsolete
Communism: The Left-Wing Alternative”, a book by Daniel and Gabriel Cohn-Bendit
– a book which, in a standard political ultra-left anarchist-type way,
clarified some ill-formed ideas in my head, and revealed some new things as well[2].
As a result of this book I started to read Solidarity texts. English Solidarity
had been mentioned in the book, so I spent the next 3 months reading what seemed
like almost everything they published, a kind of intellectual approach to
revolt, but then coming from a Middle Class family (and being lousy at sports),
this initial approach was almost inevitable. At the end of April ‘69 I got in
touch with Solidarity over the phone and they put me in touch with people in the
North London Revolutionary Socialists (which included people some of whom were
later to become part of the Angry Brigade). This was quite a major step for me,
because I’d never got involved directly in any activity other than putting a
Lefty/liberal political poster up in my window at home and trudging on demos,
and had very little social life. Suddenly I was meeting lots of people in London
about my age, when previously I’d had virtually only three London friends.
Suddenly I found different places to visit, different actions to be involved in.
For the
anti-government strike on May 1st I handed out Solidarity leaflets
which I’d not even half read, with a bunch of people I felt pretty nervous
with, but who were friendly enough. Later I got involved in a strike, well
supported by Solidarity, of a shitty factory near Wembley (Punfield and
Barstow). Solidarity were sometimes a bit militant, but they didn’t ever try
to manipulate working class struggles they were involved in; their weakness was
that they often held back from a proper open dialogue of differences – but
then what Organisation with a capital O doesn’t? (it’s the problem of
thinking yourself of having a specialist role rather than a fellow proletarian
with a very different history of alienation who has to struggle to communicate).
But they did offer genuine support, in the form of propaganda and helping on
pickets (in fact, late into the summer, I got arrested for sitting down on the
picket line). However, most of the time on the picket line, us “politicos”
would just speak to each other, whilst the strikers – all Asian - remained in
their closed network. Personally, I can’t remember having any proper
conversation with any of the strikers. I remember one guy, who was later a
leading light in the Angry Brigade, suggesting we blow up the factory’s
electricity generator. People didn’t criticise it for its substitutionism (the
guy had hardly even spoken to the strikers, and hadn’t even been much on the
picket line) but only said that that was something that was only worth doing if
and when the strike had failed (though that’s not really true). In most of
these conversations I had nothing really to say – I lacked confidence and
experience and didn’t know what I thought, though I did
think blowing up of the generator idea was a bit weirdly conspiratorial:
however, you never really know what you think until you start to say it, which I
didn’t. But there was a constantly fluid atmosphere of discussion and argument
– some people, for instance, criticised the name ‘Solidarity’ because it
sounded too nicey and other-directed. People would argue about the differences
between East London Solidarity, more working class and utterly down to earth in
its texts, whereas North London was more theoretical – and people would argue
the limits of both (though nobody argued what it might mean about the de facto
hierarchy in Solidarity).
At
a free concert near Parliament Hill we handed out leaflets (these I did read) attacking the largely hippie audience, amongst whom were
my best friend at school and his friends who I knew a bit. One of them said we
were just full of hate. Here it is:
WHAT THE FUCK ARE YOU DOING HERE ?
YOU
DESPISE YOUR BULLSHIT CONVENTIONAL TELLY ORIENTED FOLKS
WHO SIT ON THEIR ARSES IN THEIR PLASTIC PADS AND RECEIVE THEIR CULTURE
SERVED UP IN HANDY PACKAGES. DON’T
YOU ?
THEN WHAT THE FUCK ARE YOU DOING HERE.
?
YOU
HATE YOUR PARENTS YOUR BOSS, YOUR TEACHERS ---- THEIR VALUES,THEIR AMBITION,
EVERYTHING ABOUT THEM STINKS. THEY HAVE YOUR WHOLE BLOODY LIFE MAPPED OUT FOR
YOU. DO YOU THINK YOU CAN ESCAPE BY GROWING YOUR HAIR TAKING DRUGS,SMASHING UP
TUBE TRAINS,OR BY GOING TO THESE SHIT ‘FREE’ HIP CONCERTS.
SO WHAT THE FUCK ARE YOU DOING HERE ?
CAN’T
YOU UNDERSTAND THAT THESE SCENES ARE NO DIFFERENT FROM THOSE THAT YOU ARE
KICKING AGAINST ? ------ TAKE YOUR
PICK, SUNDAY NIGHT AT THE LONDON PALLADIUM, BEATLES, PINK FLOYD ITS ALL THE SAME
SHIT. YOU JUST SIT THERE ON YOUR ARSES AND JUST
SOAK IT ALL UP. SO YOU WANT TO FREAK OUT.WELL YOU CAN’T. NOT
WHILE YOU KNOW THAT TOMORROW YOU HAVVE TO RETURN TO THE SYSTEM YOU ARE TRYING TO
ESCAPE FROM. FOR UNTIL WE DESTROY THEIR WHOLE SYSTEM, TEACHERS BOSSES IMPOSED
AUTHORITY AND MONEY, WE ARE CAUGHT UP IN IT AS MUCH AS DESPICABLE PARENTS, AND
UNTIL IT IS DESTROYED WE ARE INCAPABLE OF CREATING ANYTHING…………
FUCK THE SYSTEM – IT FUCKS YOU!
Though in
retrospect I really like this leaflet, despite its nihilist limitations, at the
time I felt a little embarassed and not articulate enough to argue about it.
The
day before the Free Stones Concert in Hyde Park we stuck up stickers in
Goldsmiths college saying simply, “Riot! – Hyde Park tomorrow!”, which
I’d written in felt-tip markers. We’d gone along partly to help a Punfield
and Barstow striker make a speech and collect money for the strikers, who
weren’t getting strike pay. At Goldsmiths that day there was a teach-in partly
organised by Malcolm McLaren, later of Sex Pistols/Richard Branson ad fame.
He’d collected a motley crowd of male star rebels, many of them media hate
figures. These included the former Notting Hill rent collector for Rachman,
Michael X, whom everyone was supposed to support because he’d re-modelled
himself along Malcolm X lines and
had got a lot of hassle from the cops, getting arrested for contravening the
Race Relations Act. Also, the dockers leader, CP shop steward, Jack Dash, and
Alex Trocchi, former member of the SI and low level promotor of heroin chic
along William Burroughs lines. All of them were considered heroes by the
underground press such as IT and OZ. I remember on that day the student union
hacks – “I’m a moderate!” – were preventing non-student union members
from going into the free festival-cum-teach-in: our little group opened up a
side-door and told everybody how to get in. In fact this was far more
interesting than what was going on on the stage, which was little more than just
a radical version of a chat show. When a group of radical womens liberationists
disrupted the whole thing, and were treated in a blatantly patronising manner by
the stage, we felt we had to support the women, though, quite honestly, I
remember feeling that everyone was a bit on show, including the women. At the
end of the day, a few cops came into the college, and were met with indifference
by everybody. McLaren was furious, rightly, but none of us did anything to
attack them - well, no one got arrested, despite the hash smoking. We used the
free student facilities to print a leaflet for the Stone concert, which was a
milder more political version of the leaflet distributed on Parliament Hill –
“Do you control your life? Do you control your work? Do you control your leisure?” -
something like that (I’ve lost it), about as short as the Parliament
Hill one, which was partly written by me and which reflected a more intellectual
and far less gutsy approach.
On
the day of the Stones concert I managed to lose my ‘comrades’ (as we used to
say and some people still do) in the crowd and bumped into the hippy type friend
and his girlfriend who’d been on Parliament Hill and
we popped some pills. At that sombre moment when Jagger read out a poem
by Shelley in memory of the recently deceased Brian Jones, a load of cans and
bottles were chucked at a large crowd who were standing up and obscuring the
view. An innocent age. Just as they started playing ‘Street Fighting Man’ I
suddenly saw in the distance my ‘comrades’ prancing and jumping and dancing
up and down with great big flaming torches held up high, chucking the leaflets
up into the air to distribute them. When the song was over, the creepy presenter
denounced, through the monopoly of the mike, my group for trying to spoil
people’s fun. I heard later that they’d been taking the piss out of him,
clearly not his idea of fun.
Also
during this summer I got involved in the re-birth of modern squatting in
Redbridge, East London. Andy Anderson of Solidarity had written a little history
of the post World War ll squatting movement, when 100s of thousands of returning
servicemen and their families took over empty properties to re-house themselves
after the bombing. The local council had called in thugs, some of whom were
members of Mosley’s Fascist lot, to illegally evict squatting families. A
pregnant woman had been chucked down the stairs and had lost the baby. So people
from all over piled down there to protect another family the night their
eviction had been predicted. Only they didn’t turn up that night, but the
next, when I’d gone home to sleep after a sleepless night waiting to beat them
up. So they were repulsed without me. However, I continued going there,
sometimes chopping and changing days with Punfield and Barstow, where the strike
was. One day we went to the public gallery of the council, where the question of
squatting was low down on the menu. People shouted through it, because it was
the only way not to fall asleep during the long proceedings that had nothing to
do with why we were there. When the question of squatting finally came up, there
was uproar, and the chairman of the council closed the meeting. Some of us –
not me – jumped over into the council meeting area and one took the mayor’s
chain and medallion off his neck. Then the cops piled in and started pushing
everybody out. The guy who took the mayor’s medallion gets nicked, one of our
group. Loads more people get nicked. We all rush to the car park and try to stop
the cop van from getting out, kicking the sides and doors, blocking the exit. A
French guy says “If I were back home we’d have been turning over cars by
now”. Instead, we all lined up outside the police station to demand to know
what had happened to our friends – what they’d been charged with, had they
phoned a solicitor, etc. The cops push us back a little, demanding we form a
single file. I ask one cop why, he says he’s only doing his job, I say
“That’s what they said at Nuremberg” and he then he grabs me by the arm
and nicks me. This was the first time in my life I’d been arrested, my first direct
experience of the police: reading about them and hearing other people’s
experiences of them might help but you only really know the cops when you get
nicked. Despite a bit of secondhand knowledge, I was really surprised by this
seemingly unwarranted arrest, surprised by having my arm twisted behind me: this
wasn’t what had happened to my sister 6 years previously. I was shocked when
one of the cops threateningly called me a “Stupid cunt”, when I was forced
to give my fingerprints because one of the others who’d been nicked had been
leant on – not quite beaten up, but we could all hear his cries. How naïve,
how Middle class. I was charged with the heinous crime of “obstructing the
footpath” but when my trial came up a couple of months later, I got off. I was
defending myself without a solicitor
and, although I felt proud of myself, it was really due to the fact that the cop
came out with the wonderful statement that
“he would have been obstructing the footpath if he’d stayed there a
few seconds longer”, to which the clerk of the court made one of those
sneering eyebrow-raising facial expressions which said “what a moron!”.
Shamefully, I was so full of myself for
getting off that I was really scathing towards the guy who’d taken the
mayors’ chain off for pleading guilty, even though it was under pressure from
an uninformed newly substituted solicitor (that was another thing I learnt at
that time: defence solicitors are often as much your enemy as the prosecution
ones, a banality, I know, but it was all new to me). When I think about it, I
still feel ashamed for putting him down when he already felt really down.
This
was the summer where squatting really took off. It started off for homeless
families, who very often had been helped by politicos like us, and often were
represented in their negotiations with the council by ‘professional’
squatters like Ron Bailey, who’d been on the periphery of Solidarity, and
self-styled anarchists like Jim Radford. But very quickly it extended to young
homeless people. The West End was full of young, mainly working class, teenagers
who’d left their families and come to London for a bit of adventure but had
found the streets not paved with gold, and were forced to sleep rough. Though
some of them were kind of “hippies”, most didn’t define themselves like
that or even really fit the description. They organised themselves into the
London Street Commune, with the help of an older radical who, for the media,
called himself Dr.John, but was, in fact Phil Cohen, a guy who’d been involved
in King Mob. (King Mob were famous in the scene for helping to liberate Powis
Square in Notting Hill, and for dressing up as Father Christmas, going into
Selfridges and giving out toys to the kids; when Security nicked Santa Claus,
the kids were astonished that the toys had to be handed back; these stories
doing the rounds at the time were my only notion of what ‘situationist’
ideas were all about). Under the banner of ‘The London Street Commune’
disparate groups took over 144 Piccadilly, a vast rambling building at Hyde Park
Corner, opposite the Queen’s garden, virtually next to the Hilton Hotel. They
were denounced by the media as ’filthy hippies’ despite the fact that most
of them weren’t, and by Ron Bailey, who said that squatting was for families,
not for single people. Nice guy. Our lot went along to support it, though
personally I found the whole atmosphere very confused and, having a rather
formalistic stick-in-the-mud ideology of workers councils with mandated
delegates and constant meetings, borrowed from my reading of Hungary 1956, I
couldn’t see how people were really organising collectively. But they did,
though there was a lot of cliquishness.
One incident that has hardly ever been mentioned about the squat was
when a bunch of media-incited skinheads turned up in the night to shoot
air-guns at the squatters. They were pelted from the roof with heavy
water-filled carpet bowls, thousands of which had been stored in the empty
building prior to the take-over (presumably the carpet bowl company was using
the place as a warehouse). Skinheads
at that time weren’t really racist – many gangs included a couple of
blacks – but had arisen in reaction to the love ‘n’ peace ‘feminine’
image of Middle Class hippies (much of which, in Britain at least, was really
a manipulated creation of the cadres of the music and youth culture industry):
hence the close-cropped hair, the big workman’s boots, the braces and
turned-up trousers – an exaggeration of the male working class image.
Despite the love ‘n’ peace image of the hippies, those heavy carpet bowls
thrown from on high easily beat the skinheads' air-guns, and their attempt to
invade the squat was quickly defeated.
What
did defeat the squat, was the
invasion of cops: over 200 “hippies” were arrested, many beaten up and
most kept in jail for a minimum of a week, many a lot longer. An hour or so
before the cops invaded a faction of the squat (the squat was full of
different cliques) led by the charismatic Syd Rawell got wind of the invasion
but kept the news for his little group only, getting only his followers out
before the cops moved in. After the beatings of the hippies the cops proceeded
to smash the place up – skirting boards and all, just so the Press could
print some lovely snapshots of how dreadfully the filthy hippies had treated
such a wonderful building. John Lennon then went on TV to offer the London
Street Commune a little island off Scotland, an offer taken up by Syd Rawell,
who represented himself as the London Street Common spokesman, when well over
200 of the Street Commune were inside (whose presence there was partly down to
the fat that Rawell hadn’t told them about the impending invasion of
course). Some of those who managed to avoid being nicked, but not part of
Rawells’ clique, then went on to squat a place in Endell Street, near Covent
Garden, and were then reinforced for a while by the dribble of people being
released on bail from prison. A meeting of ultra-left supporters – us,
anarchists, libertarians etc. was held with some of the Commune at Freedom in
Whitechapel when some skinhead guy came in with a
‘comrade’[3]*
and said he could bring his gang in to discuss things together, especially our
common hatred of the cops. Everyone said, “Sure”, and the next moment
about 25 skinheads walked in. For a moment I thought there was going to be a
fight, considering what had gone on at Piccadilly, but in fact they genuinely
wanted to talk (it is possible that they hadn’t heard about the
air-gun/carpet bowl battle). It shows how gangs and sub-cultures at that time
were far more open and fluid and less rigid than they are now: it would
require a massive social crisis, brought about by the increasing mass of
marginalised individuals themselves, for such a possibility to return.
That
summer I was very much the activist – we’d go on demos (say, about Ireland)
and shout “2 – 4 – 6 – 8 – copulate and Smash the State!” (not that
I was doing either), or go on pickets, say of Pentonville Prison, for a black
guy who’d been imprisoned there pending deportation. But it was also
integrated into what for me was a a fairly exciting social life as well – say
going to Portobello at the end of Saturday, picking up the fruit and salad stuff
that had been left over, and having a party with some wine others had nicked
(me, I never nicked at that time). Or going to a housewrecking party in Muswell
Hill and shooting off by car at the end of it to help out some people who were
organising the first squat in Brighton – a squat of some old Ministry of
Defence Territorial Army buildings not far up from the clocktower, hanging out
on the roof all week-end, getting into arguments with young CP militants about
smoking dope in the squat (me, I never smoked at that time).
In
late July, the School’s Action Union (SAU), along with some older
‘radicals’ (some were and some weren’t), organised a ‘living school’
which was originally to be held at the London School of Economics (LSE), the
most famous hotbed of ‘revolutionary’ activity in the country (they’d been
the first to have a sit-in and had become famous for destroying a locked gate
across a corridor designed to control them). When the governors withdrew
permission for the SAU conference to take place there some SAU activists took
over a section of the college which could only be entered by means of a ladder
through a window. Others diverted the venue to Conway Hall, less than half a
mile away. Me and the people I knew argued that we should all continue at LSE,
because a situation of confrontation was the best form of radical education. But
the ‘radical’ specialists, like Michael Duane (former headmaster of Rising
Hill School, a State school which had been closed down for being too
progressive) and Sheila Rowbotham, already a bit of a feminist celebrity,
claimed that they wouldn’t be able to get their ideas across in such an
atmosphere (which showed how much their ideas were not really a practical attack
on this society). I should say that at this time I put my arguments only one to
one with individuals or groups of individuals: I had no confidence to speak out
in such a large meeting (several hundred people), despite the fact that this was
an immediate practical question. The majority voted to disband the small
occupation of LSE and continue the ‘living school’ in the traditional
ultra-left environment of Conway Hall. It was there that a group of radicals
who’d been at Cambridge University talked and performed examples of short
plays they’d performed, uninvited for the most part, in schools, plays which
parodied the education system (some of them - namely, John Barker and Jim
Greenfield - later became the leading lights in the Angry Brigade, a far cry
from their Please Stop Screaming Theatre, or PSST, days). This inspired me, and
some SAU people, all but one of whom I’d not met before, to try to do
something similar in London later in the year – in September.
For most
of the others, the SAU activists, the project of doing what was termed
“guerrilla theatre”- going uninvited into school playgrounds – was seen as
a means of getting new SAU contacts in those schools which hadn’t formed a
group. For me, not having been involved in SAU (I’d left school in January
1968) it was an exciting thing to do, and a belated rebellion against school, a
rebellion once removed, as it were (a timid soul, one of the rare rebellious
things I’d done at grammar school was to walk all the way on a cross country
race, for which crime the house master had threatened to bring in a magistrate
friend of his to intimidate me). We rehearsed the play under the direction of a
guy who’d been part of the political theatre crowd at Cambridge – Bruce
Birchall, a student drop-out from whom the term “filthy hippy” must have
originated (he probably thought
that dirt must be next to ungodliness; when a girl he had a brief relationship
with cleaned up his Notting Hill flat whilst he was out, he exploded in fury; he
was as neurotic about cleanliness as some people are about dirt). Nevertheless,
we all got on with him o.k. and no-one mentioned his hygiene.
In Cambridge, apart from the guerrilla theatre in
schools, he’d put on “The Marat/Sade”, a kind of Brechtian style
‘revolutionary’ play which was a play within a play – it’s full title
being “The persecution and assassination of Jean Paul Marat as performed by
the inmates of the asylum at Charenton under the direction of the Marquis de
Sade”, written by Peter Weiss in 1964, performed in all the good theatres
throughout Europe (it’s still used as a standard acting school dramatic
exercise, a classic study in Brechtian drama. In London it had been performed by
the Royal Shakespeare Company with Glenda Jackson as the inmate playing
Charlotte Corday, the woman who assassinated Marat (the most well-known
representative of the extreme left during the French Revolution), an appropriate
part for a woman who was to later become a New Labour Mini-star.
Particularly as the character of the inmate was a woman who had sleeping
sickness and kept on dozing off half way through her counter-revolutionary
discourses. Clearly a role that required absolutely no acting ability on her
part whatsoever. The Cambridge production had starred Jim Greenfield and John
Barker, who later on became the well-known anti-heroes of the Angry Brigade,
with Jim as de Sade and John as Marat (I think). Apparently, they’d gone round
Cambridge after performances singing the songs in the streets and then went on
to more practical attacks - window smashing and graffitti. I’m sure that this
was something the Royal Shakespeare Company also did after the show in the
Aldwych (Glenda Jackson’s Secret Past Horror Shock!). Bruce’s Cambridge
theatre lot also did a bit of clever “anti-theatre” stuff. There was a
conventional theatre production of Max Frisch’s “The Fire Raisers” - a
play, meant to be an allegory of the appeasement of Hitler during the 30s, which
involves lodgers moving more and more drums of petrol into the attic of the
landlords house, palming off the owners with claims that it’s not petrol or
giving them reassuring excuses for its presence, reassurances that the owners
wanted to believe. During the
interval Birchall’s lot started rolling in drums which smelt of petrol into
the foyer and the back of the auditorium, partly blocking the fire exits,
telling everybody who looked, “Don’t worry, there’s nothing in them”,
mirroring the play and panicking many of the audience, before being kicked out.
This was a bit like another group – in Leeds, I think, who did something
similar with a cinema performance of Bunuel’s “Exterminating Angel”, an
often claustrophobic film where, inexplicably, loads of bourgeoises find
themselves stuck in a room for a long time, despite the fact that the door is
wide open. The Leeds group chained up all the exits to the cinema. Since the
film ends with the funeral of those who had died in the room held in a cathedral
full of bourgeoises who then find themselves stuck there without any way of
getting out, you can imagine how the audience trying to leave the cinema might
have felt. At a Barcelona performance of the Marat/Sade during the early 80s,
when the play ended with the uprising of the inmates against the bourgeoises who
had come to watch the play a guy in the cheap upper circle seats threw an open
plastic bottle of cheap wine into the expensive seats below. Inevitably, he got
some hassle from security. The spectacle of the critique of the spectacle,
whether it be Brecht, Weiss, Frisch or Bunuel, is not meant to be taken
literally but followed at a few steps distance: if it were not for this albeit
tiny distance, the mystification becomes apparent.
As far as I remember, Bruce wrote most of the script
of the 10 minute play we were going to take into schools, though it was
basically improvised as we went along and we wrote most of the leaflet that
accompanied it. Often we rehearsed without him, mainly in a ramshackle disused
factory which, I think, was the base for the Arts Lab, who allowed various
groups to use it for free, unsupervised – for rehearsals, meetings or
whatever. Imagine that now – no money to pay, no security guards. Another
person who helped us out was Phil Cohen[4]and his girlfriend, Pam
Brighton[5], who was involved in
Agit-Prop Theatre, whose leading light was Roland Muldoon[6].
We also rehearsed at 144 Piccadilly. Shortly after the eviction there, we were
putting part of the leaflet together on the concourse outside Euston station.
Two cops crossed from the far corner of the quadrangle, directly towards us,
came up to us and told us we were not allowed to be there if we had no ticket
for a train – bullshit, of course, since the concourse was full of people just
sunning themselves. They threatened to nick us if we didn’t move on. This was
the atmosphere towards long hairs at the time of 144 Piccadilly. Our only
gesture of defiance was to shout, when we’d almost left the concourse and were
about100 yards from the cops, “Fuck the pigs!” or something similar.
The
first school we went to was close to Baker Street – a secondary modern. We’d
chatted with a couple of pupils there the day before and they said we should
come along. We had no idea what to expect and were slightly worried we might be
attacked. We rushed into the playground blowing whistles and beating a drum to
attract attention, with school caps on our head, whilst the guy who played the
teacher was dressed in a gown and mortar board, swishing a traditional cane.
There were about 300 kids there and we started to shout “Roll up, roll up –
for the education play. We’ve got exams, we’ve got prefects, we’ve got
detentions, we’ve got the cane…roll up roll up…” The pupils immediately
gathered round us, noisy but obviously interested. But very soon after starting
the play a group of teachers stepped in. Surprisingly the kids tightened the
circle round us so as to prevent the teachers from getting near us.
Nevertheless, the teachers did eventually get to us, ordering us to get out.
Their logic was impeccable: ”Have you got permission? You’ve got to ask for
permission first. But we wouldn’t have given it to you anyway.” We argued
with the teachers whilst handing out leaflets, fairly quickly leaving the
playground to continue the play on the path just outside. The kids then gathered
on the other side of the fence, some clinging to it, whilst some teachers tried
to drag them or push them away, one even hitting one of the kids, scared we’d
poison their innocent little minds. Despite threats of detention, and even
suspension, the kids took little notice of the teachers, continuing to watch and
listen to the play. Suddenly some of the kids shouted, “The cops are
coming!” They arrived with a teacher and tried to drag one of us away. We
pulled him free, to the cheers of the schoolkids. A teacher said, “You’re
disturbing our kids” (my emphasis).
“Do you want us to stay?”, I shouted. “YES!”, they yelled back in
unison. (later, some of the others said that I’d been a little demagogic
asking them that, but since it all turned out o.k. it was accepted). The cops
made it clear we’d be nicked if we didn’t leave. After leaving, 4 boys
slipped out from the school and came up to us to say we should come again and
that they’d protect us from the cops, beat them up if necessary. Can you
imagine that happening now? We
learnt later that after we’d left there’d been a semi-riot when the 200+
pupils in the playground refused the Headmaster’s orders to get inside or be
expelled. Not all the teachers were on the side of the Head either: a
sympathetic art teacher helped produce anti-authoritarian posters which were put
up round the school and teaching virtually came to a standstill. Three boys were
accused of inviting us into the school and were threatened with expulsion.
On the same day, we quickly went onto another school
– a grammar school close by,
catching the kids as they left at the end of the day. And so it went on for four
days, though nothing really was as good as the first school. The third school we
went to they also called the cops, after having got the prefects to push the
kids back away from us, and after the Head and a teacher having threatened to
beat two of us up. The cops took our names and warned us about trespass. As we
left kids were being pushed away from the windows whilst waving to us. A month
or so later 250 kids in this school walked out in support of a teachers pay
claim, with an SAU activist being suspended for it (“insubordination”).
The fourth school was a girl’s school with a
liberal/progressive reputation. This was the only school where we thought we had
permission to put on the play, but our friends there got it wrong, as the Head
dispatched the only male teacher at the school who screamed at us “DON’T
ARGUE!” when we tried to explain the misunderstanding, and when he threatened
to call the cops, we left, in the interest of our friends, who could have been
victimised if we hadn’t.
The
seventh school was St.Paul’s Public School for Boys, run by a very publicly
right-wing Head, who kept files on, and liked to personally interrogate,
suspected druggies, threatening them with the courts if they didn’t grass on
the grass smokers. There were several secret SAU activists who lived in fear of
victimisation if the authorities found out. We’d had fairly typically middle
class arguments about going to such a school, along slightly Lefty avant-gardist
lines (well, we were meant to be recruiting for the SAU, and 3 of the 4 others
were SAU activists) – i.e. should we go there since our main interest is in
comprehensive and secondary modern schools in the most deprived working class
areas. Nevertheless, the excitement and energy released from the momentum of
creating situations in which the discussion flowed and the reality of social
relations became glaringly concrete and immediate, meant our stodgy reasoning
got dispensed with: St Paul’s was a ripe target because it felt it would be
fun to do it there. And I, for the first time, was playing the Teacher in our
play, because the guy who normally did it had a bad sore throat. The boys there
don’t respond at first, but after a few minutes of banging, announcing and
doing the intro, there’s a fair crowd, but some are hostile – one of us, who
has the longest hair – gets water poured over him, and insults are shouted[7].
Anyway,
the play continued with brilliant me as Teacher, when the deputy Head came onto
the scene and asked us to leave. We totally ignored him and continued the play.
Deputy Head:
Will you please leave – you haven’t got permission.
Teacher
(me!): These exams have been specially designed to test you intelligence and
ability. Your whole future, your entire livelihood will depend on the next 3
hours.
Deputy Head
(getting agitated): If you don’t leave I shall have to call the police.
Teacher (to
deputy head): Late for my lesson again? – get to the back of my class!
Utterly baffled and frustrated, the deputy leaves to
the sound of laughter from a few brave boys.
This was a good example of using a theatrical form as
simply a pretext, a tool, for creating a situation quite untheatrical: i.e.
exposing very concretely a hierarchical role and contradiction. Such a use of
‘theatre’ is only possible where people go in uninvited and where such
people are not attached to the precise ‘artistic’ means of conveying a
critique, but are more into shaking themselves and the situation up, singing its
own tune.[8]
The play over, we got into a discussion which was
quickly broken up when the bell rang for the end of break, everyone instantly
rushing back into school. On the way out we are met by the cops, who gave us a
mild warning about entering the premises without permission. We said it was
highly unlikely permission would be granted, though why we bothered to speak to
them about such things I put down to naivety. In the text we later produced
there’s this interesting reflection, ”Anyway, in the event of us being given
permission in any school it would seem
as if the authorities were in league with us. The advantage of a surprise
performance includes the spontaneity and relative openness (away from the
presence of authority and the cramping influence of the classroom) of the
reaction obtained. In this way we were making our position clear right from the
start – allying ourselves with the pupils against authority. Only through this
method could we hope to win the trust and confidence of the students.”
An hour or so after St.Paul’s we went off to a
secondary modern school in Clerkenwell, near Kings Cross, where an anarchist
friend of ours was a pupil. During the previous school year, after a molotov had
burnt a hole in the door of the Head’s study, the head decided to ban boots in
the school, an attack on the skinheads in the school, who were in the majority.
They responded: boot prints appeared around the school, on the floors and walls
and ceilings, drawings of boots were chalked up on blackboards, and finally the
Head was presented in assembly with a gigantic papier mache boot. The Head felt
compelled to unban the boots. So we longhairs arrive at this skinhead school,
shortly after the eviction of ‘hippies’ from Endell St. squat, where the
London Street Commune had gone after the eviction of 144 Piccadilly. We stay
outside the school, because our friend hadn’t turned up and because a lot of
the school seemed to be hanging around outside in a small square just outside
the gates. We start the play but amidst cries of “Go back to Endell St!.”
and stone throwing from some of the kids, we end it quickly as some of the
skinheads start lifting a great big paving stone (we find out later that the
Endell St. ‘hippies’ had appeared earlier that day at Clerkenwell
Magistrates Court, just around the corner). We hand out leaflets, start talking
to the boys about conditions in the school and what we think the education
system’s all about. They all want an end to physical punishment, which
wasn’t to be abolished in this country until the late 80s (not that
humiliating kids in other ways isn’t equally miserable). No one wants school
uniforms, but many want a smoking room and everyone wants “proper biology
lessons”, which at that time were pitiful (probably they still are, but in a
different modern way).
A tall spindly man appears, tells the boys to get out
of the square and starts pushing them around.
I say, “They’re allowed to be here. Who are you to tell them what to
do? They can decide for themselves what to do.” The man, who turns out to be
the Head, ignores us and strides angrily away back through the school gates to
cries of “Bastard…cunt!”. The boys are more sympathetic towards us.
“Let’s burn down the school!”, a couple of them say. Being a bit of Lefty
still, I said, “What’s the point? – they’ll only send you to another.”
“Shall we occupy the school?” one of them asks. “Yeah – if you want –
we’ll help, but it’s up to you” was the gist of our different replies.
Then the cops arrive. “Back into school!” the Sergeant orders. I say loudly,
“They’re allowed out in lunchbreak. Why should they get back inside?”,
(not the kind of mouthy role I’d play nowadays probably, but…)”Because I
say so”. “Do you make the laws?”, “No, I interpret them”, “Maybe you
break them a little to suit your own ideas” – I was talking as much to him
as the boys of the school, performing the rabble rouser a bit.After resuming
ordering the boys about, he hurries after me when I’m a bit away from the
others and says softly, “Look here, young Barabas[9],
if ever I see you again I’ll pull of your beard and cut off your hair, you
fucking long-haired wierdo.” I reply in a loud theatrical voice so others can
hear - “What? Did you call me a fucking long-haired wierdo?”. “Are you
calling me names? Are you calling me names?”, says the sergeant, putting on a
better show of outrage, and
promptly nicks me.
The cops meanwhile threaten everyone with being nicked
for obstruction – both us “guerrillas”(it sounds better than ‘street
theatre actors’) and the schoolkids, so everyone moves off from the square to
a small park up the hill, and start sitting around in groups discussing schools,
the cops and so on. A cop comes into the park and, pointing to one of us –
Michael, says to the mainly skinhead schoolkids, “Do you Want to grow up to be
like them – filthy, long-haired, unemployed…? /Silence. Micheal asks them,
“Well, would you prefer to be like him or like me?” “LIKE YOU!” they all
shout back, and the cop (us politicos called them ‘pigs’ at the time) storms
off.
Eventually
all of us get nicked and one of us gets beaten up a bit by the cops. The cops
who arrest the last two of us get thumped on the back by some of the skinhead
kids. The kids swear and hiss and boo at the cops, some of them hurling
themselves at the gates round the back of the police station, trying to break
them down. Solidarity, unity in anger -
one of the best things in the world. Later on, the Evening News came out with
the headline “Boys Incited To Burn Down School!”, whilst the Evening
Standard said we’d offered the boys drugs and that a hundred schoolboys had
chased two hippes and shouted and jeered at them. When the papers appeared, some
of the boys were so pissed off they tore them up outside the school. Meantime,
we were packed off to Ashford Remand Centre, even though our parents had turned
up in court to put up surety for the bail which most of us had been granted (the
only one of us that wasn’t was a couple of years older than us, the only one
of us who was from a working class background – he went to Brixton for a week
before bail was granted). There we were made to have a public cough ‘n’ drop
medical inspection and a semi-public bath and then we had to wear prison
clothes: my trousers were far too big – I had to permanently hold them to stop
them falling down, and my shoes were far too small, cramping my toes. It was
only 24 hours, but when it’s your first time in prison and you’ve got no
idea how long you’ll be there, and you’ve never known anyone who’s been
inside, it was a little worrying, though it was the boredom I remember most,
because we were kept isolated for most of the time. I was so naïve, I remember
being really outraged at the fact that teenagers were kept in prison without
bail for 6 months or more before trial, at which they were often let off.
The leaflet we’d handed out in the four days of our
guerrilla theatre actions advertised a meeting at my house on the afternoon
we’d got nicked: 12 kids turned up, we didn’t, but the cops did, staying in
a van outside, whilst one stood outside the front garden. For several months
afterwards, my phone was tapped.
The trial was almost 3 months later, and took 3 days.
Like the whole of that summer, I suppose it was a kind of revelation for naïve
little me. I hadn’t expected such a degree of lying on the part of the cops
and hypocrisy on the part of the magistrate, though since then it’s something
I take for granted. For instance, so that the Headmaster wouldn’t have to
appear as a witness, and to give greater authority to the police, a Chief
Superintendant claimed to have been there, and described everything that had
happened to the Headmaster, though elaborating with a few extra lies. We were so
taken aback by his convincing performance, and perhaps also stressed by the
whole trial, that we began to
question our own memories – had he been there and we hadn’t noticed? Was it
not the Head who’d first remonstrated with us? The Sergeant said I’d shouted
from the police car, “Go, lads, and burn down your school – we shall support
you”. Etc.etc.
One
thing I remember from that summer was that after the experience of the schools
theatre actions, I turned from being inarticulate to becoming much more
confident and flowing in my speech. Not permanently, but for a sufficiently long
period to make me see that there’s nothing like a bit of consciously chosen
history and rebelliousness to release those repressed qualities. Each
intervention in each school generated discussions with the kids and amongst
ourselves which, although a bit Lefty and militant, were also self-critical and
analytical in a dialectical way most people have little experience of. It left a
profound mark, a powerful root in my grasp of the world. It gave me a direct
concrete understanding about the nature of the cops and of the press, and of the
possibility of the breakdown between different youth scenes that technically
should have been opposed to one another. Although in the current epoch people have never been so entrenched in
their separate scenes, this possibility remains the only vision for a worthwhile
future and it’s partly because of this that I’ve thought it worth recounting
a bit of that period.
However, the downside of the experience was that I got
into political theatre of a less self-educational, more limitedly Agit-Prop kind
18 months later, participating in Bruce Birchall’s Street Theatre projects. In
the schools actions, the play wasn’t very interesting but the real life
situation it provoked was. In the Notting Hill Theatre Workshop, some of the
plays weren’t bad, but it provoked neither interesting discussions nor
anything more practical either. The only good thing was the cosy feeling among
us the players (though most people got pissed off with Bruce for being very
bossy, whilst supposedly criticising bosses in the plays). In fact, in terms of
the performances, I have only one memory which is interesting, for me, at least.
We were performing a play about the cops we’d written together in a noisy
black club in Notting Hill, a club that had constantly been raided by the cops.
Throughout most of the performance, a group of blacks, teenagers, were very
loudly playing dominoes, banging the pieces hard onto their upstairs table.
I’d put together a 3 minute monologue done like Dixon of Dock Green about how
sad and pathetic it was to be a cop – “I only arrest someone so as not to be
lonely”. The whole place was silent, the dominoe game had frozen, I had them
in the palm of my hand. There’s no punchline to this. It’s just that it’s
about the first and last time that I’ve been in this narcissistically
flattering limelight in the spectacular theatrical sense. The interest for me is
in what it says about the attraction of being the centre of attention, the
attraction of the stage, the high you get when everyone’s eyes are on you.
Whenever I hear some middle class asshole saying “It must be the worst job in
the world being a stand-up comedian” I think of that night. Here I was, still
pretty unconfident, but it was easy peasy to get up there and act out a script
I’d memorised in front of people who could have booed you off stage. But then,
what has spectacular confidence, the confidence of the role, ever had to do with
real confidence, the confidence to
express your likes and hates directly?
“When I began in the theatre, I thought I was an introvert in a field
of extroverts. But they’re all terrified, frightened, insecure people who have
found this remarkable outlet of playing all these characters who are not
themselves” said Robert Young, an actor of that period. Shirley Booth
said, “Acting is a way to overcome your
own inhibitions and shyness. The writer creates a strong, confident personality,
and that’s what you become – unfortunately, only for the moment.”
In a world in which the self is squeezed to the tenuous margin of
existence, the desire for the glory of momentary fame is the false exit from
this marginality, a seductive trap enticing you with a possible standing
ovation. But the flattery of the ego-boost gets you nowhere, keeps you separate
and trapped in the circle: you become
more insecure and more and more addicted to overcoming this insecurity by
the perfection of performance. During this epoch, challenged by the general
atmosphere of disrespect for this society, celebrity actors were far more
critical of their roles than nowadays. Marlon Brando said round about this time,
“Why should anyone care about what any
movie star has to say? A movie star is nothing important. Freud, Gandhi, Marx
– these people are important. But movie acting is just dull, boring, childish
work…”. One might question his list of “important” heroes, but the
point is – are there any celebrities who question themselves nowadays? Or take
this, from Bette Davis, “What would I
tell a young actress starting out today? Take care of your health. Deny yourself
fun like you’ll never know. And when you make a picture, you have to say,
“This is all I do”. Pretty bloody boring, if you think about it.” This is not to say that celebrities aren’t aware of some
aspects of their misery. For instance, Graham Norton said recently, “It’s
funny that now I’m a success, my life has come to an end. All the stories I
have to tell happened before I made it.”. And Geri Halliwell recently
spoke of how desperately lonely she felt. It’s
just that, with the suffocating weight
of money terrorism, they are hardly going to begin to even just think
about endangering their vast salaries let alone contribute to a movement that
could re-start their lives (and ours’).
The only exciting thing connected to the Notting Hill
theatre group was when we participated in the subversion of the launching of The
Festival Of Light. The Festival Of Light was a collection of religious people
and other Guardians of Morality, like Cliff Richard, Mary Whitehouse (the
clean-up TV campaigner), Malcolm Muggeridge (a Catholic journalist/media pundit,
a favourite for schoolboy impressionists because he was so ponderously pompous,
had weird upper class mannerisms and facial expressions and a corny upper class
accent), and others I can’t remember. The whole disruption was well worked
out. A delegate from each little group met up and each told everyone what they
were going to do and everyone had to just remember the action they would come
after – say after the screaming monks or whatever. Someone had managed to get
hold of tickets, or maybe they were forged. We go in – TV cameras are there.
Most of us dress smart conventional and claim to be Wimbledon Young
Conservatives. Our act is to rabidly cheer the stage[10].
Bit by bit people do funny things: a guy goes to the front of the audience and
just below the stage slowly takes his clothes off; some nuns start to very
ostentatiously snog and grope each other – this, in a large hall – Central
Hall Westminster – with probably at least 50 real nuns, and hundreds of
Christians of various kinds; a large group hang over the balcony a large sign
with Cliff Richard’s secret gay name (Gordie?..can’t really remember) –
Cliff Richard goes bright red. Someone shouts to Malcolm Muggeridge, “What do
you think of homosexuals?”. He replies in his usual constipated and contorted
manner, his repressed way of oozing self-righteousness, “I don’t like
them”. Because I’m from the Wimbledon Young Conservatives I shout out, in my
poshest accent, “Hang them! Hang them!”. The guy next to me, who’s a
genuine Festival of Light supporter and with whom I’d chatted before in my
ridiculous Young Conservative role, says to me in a lightly admonishing sort of
way, “That’s not a very Christian attitude”. Various things are going off
– people are dancing erotically, others are shouting, us we’re cheering a
lot and often for a lot longer than any of the rest of the audience. The guy
next to me turns and says, “Look over there -
they’re going to do something next, I’m sure of it.”
I feel a little nervous and embarrassed for him – any moment now he’s
going to find out I’m not on his side and it’s going to be a little shock as
we go into our not-so-Grand Finale. We continue cheering for a hell of a lot
longer than anyone else (and there are only 8 of us) and the chairlady at the
mike on the stage says, “We appreciate your enthusiasm but would you kindly
refrain from indulging it excessively “ or something like that, and so we then
jump out of our seats and rush towards the stage, rattling football rattles and
blowing plastic horns and kazoos. Security grab us and chuck us out. Me and this
woman in our group go round another entrance and say, still in role, to the guy
at the door something like “This is appalling – we got mistaken for
troublemakers because we were in the same row as them, and we got kicked out.
There’s been a dreadful mistake!”. He lets us in. People are throwing
leaflets around from the balcony, the place is fairly chaotic. The woman I’m
with and me get up and run up the aisle arm in arm shouting, “Fuck for Jesus!
Fuck for Jesus!”. Security grab us and kick us out properly this time. On the
telly afterwards it was just described as a load of hecklers disrupting the
launch meeting – none of the inventiveness was mentioned.
This was an epoch when there was a far greater margin
of freedom, freedom from money worries and work, in which the fight against
hunger had been superceded by the fight against boredom. Money madness hadn’t
taken over because the working class were on the offensive – strikes defeated
the governments’ attempts to rein in the wildcat strikes in 1969 - and much of
this offensive was as much to do with fighting boredom as asserting dignity and
solidarity.
[1] He didn’t really like the rather hack, Lefty tub-thumping aspects of Brecht, but not from a radical angle, more from an ‘art for art’s sake’ perspective, which tended to dsimiss any sense of purpose. He’d known Brecht a bit, mainly through his wife who was a friend. I guess they’d met during his acting days in Berlin, before he left in 1933. It’s well known that when the steelworkers rose up in East Berlin in 1953 and went to Brecht’s theatre to ask for help in supporting them he refused. What’s not well known is what my dad told me about him: he felt so guilty and ashamed after the steelworkers were crushed by the tanks of the Stalinist leader, Ulbricht, that his health suffered, and it led to his death in 1956, at the age of 58. If nothing else, this shows how a culture of proletarian subversion usually has nothing to do with its practice, and that those who consider ideas as something separate from real life risk are at best useless when it comes to any genuine struggle against this world. Fear had nothing to do with his failure to support the steelworkers: Brecht’s international reputation put him in the unique position of having nothing much to worry about. His only response to the uprising was to write a brief poem after it was all over -The Solution - which, though written in verse form, I reproduce here as a statement, because the verse form adds nothing to it: “After the uprising of the 17th June, the Secretary of the Writers Union had leaflets distributed in the Stalinallee stating that the people had forfeited the confidence of the government and could win it back only by redoubled efforts. Would it not be easier in that case for the government to dissolve the people and elect another?”. Neatly put, but too little too late, and no use in stemming that dreadful feeling of self-betrayal, betrayal of everything he’d apparently held dear to him, that must have torn and worn away at him until death.
[2] Later I could see the
stupid and arrogant side of Daniel Cohn-Bendit’s role in May ’68 - as
mouthpiece/spokesman for a movement whose most radical tendencies were a
refusal of representation; in it was the germ of a sickening political
career which eventually led him to support, as a deputy in Germany’s
Parliament, NATO’s bombing of Yugoslavia and Kosovo.
partner’ or ‘colleague’, so formal and stiff. Above all, it’s specialist, separating politico relationships from friendships.
It also sounds a bit militaristic - soldiers often call each other ‘comrades’. It also has corny Stalinist connotations, like
those nasty Reds in cold war spy movies. However, it seems sometimes necessary – how else can one refer to people
who aren’t exactly friends but are on your side in a fight with authority?
[4] He ended up teaching sociology – concentrating on marginal groups - to Police Recruits, and now is Professor of Cultural Studies, teaching psychologists about yoof. Nice guy.
[5] She ended up doing Ken Loach-type tv shows, like Days of Hope, about the General Strike of 1926. A month back I half-listened
to a totally uncritical radio play by her about a woman who starts a business on the Internet, gets American funding and leaves her
husband for her American backer, a glaring example of how irrelevant the political content of a piece of fiction is – once you
specialise in a particular form, the content is just a matter of adjustment to what might be popular in any particular epoch. If
there’s a significant social movement anytime in the future in this country doubtless it will be accompanied by those who
specialise in representing it in dramatic form. Such a movement will have to attack these recuperators from the start if it’s going
to advance.
[6] Muldoon was the most famous purveyor of Street Theatre, having started it before 1968, and usually performing on demos, classic hammering-home-the message stuff. Once, whilst waiting for Pam Brighton to finish the theatre group’s meeting , he told me in a very bossy way, to get out, because my silent presence was distracting him. Pam apologised later for his behaviour. At a performance in a polytechnic Agit-Prop, Muldoon’s group, got heckled towards the end of their play, partly just from a situationist-type perspective - for being a theatre group. The actors exploded defensively – “We’re into excellence!”, one of them shouted arrogantly, sounding a bit like an Ofsted inspector. The last I heard of Muldoon was that he was getting loads of celebrities to help raise funds to renovate some provincial theatre (Leeds, I think). At least he’s lost all pretensions to any radical content.
[7] Now, I think, well, why not? - but reading back on the text I later wrote with one of us there’s a lot of resentment towards kids who weren’t playing their role of respectful audience; sure, in St.Paul’s their motivation was clearly different from that of kids in other schools, but the disdainful contempt for a naughty audience who hadn’t been asked if they wanted to watch was a typical symptom of our attachment to our Middle class ‘educative’ role, our belief that here was a play worth being respectful of, and anyone who didn’t show respect by their “predictable puerile comments and antics” was just a nihilist philistine. Sure, that’s fairly exaggerated but it was a tendency; the other tendency being that we were the ones getting an education (later that year, on November 5th, some people, including Barker and Greenfield, were going to do a play of the People’s Trial of a particularly hated cop in the Notting Hill area; they had a model of the cop and of a judge, whom they were going to dump on the fire after they’d finished the play but the kids, who really hated this particular cop, grabbed the papier mache models and dumped them on the fire before the play could begin; the performers were a little annoyed, but obviously let it go, after all, if you get too attached to the role of performer you’ve lost the point.
An incident of a more thought out subversion of a (supposedly subversive) play took place round about this time. In Birmingham, I think, a fringe theatre was putting on a performance of Peter Handke’s “Insulting the Audience”, which, as its title suggests, was meant to be an attack on the passive role of the spectator. Though it was scripted , Handke had said that the script was only a list of suggestions, that the play should be improvised. However this fringe theatre group had decided to play it as written down, to the letter. Some clever bunch, into what would now be called performance art, but was then just lumped together under the title Street Theatre, went along and sat in the audience. Knowing the script, they constantly did exactly the opposite of what the actors were about to say, a few seconds beforehand. So, for instance, just before the people on the stage said, “You just sit on your arses, facing the performance, keeping still and quiet” they all stood up, turned their backs to the stage, jumped up and down and screamed and shouted. The actors, having got into reciting their script automatically just trundled out this, now inappropriate, ‘insult’ that simply rebounded on them. The rest of the audience were in hysterics, the performers livid. Of course, if the street theatre group hadn’t just wanted to play a practical joke, they would have accompanied the joke with some theoretical critique, starting off with, say, the explicit critique of the absurd intellectual pretension of ‘criticising’ the spectator without criticising the spectacle. But most of these theatre groups, existing in the far greater margin of freedom of those days - especially in terms of lack of money worries, had no perspective other than that immediate sense of fun and the ‘creative’ specialism that was considered necessary to conjure up such a situation.
[8] A more socially significant example of this spontaneous turning around of a classic situation was during the riots in Brixton in 1981. A Sunday Mirror reporter wrote that he was standing outside a smashed half-looted clothes shop when a young woman came up to him and said, “May I be of assistance, sir. I’m sure we can find something your size. And if we can’t find something today, I’m sure we’ll have something in stock tomorrow.” The reporter found it crazily bizarre, and seemed genuinely confused by it.
[9] Most people know Barabas as the murderer whose release the crowd called for instead of that of Christ; the Bible describes him as a revolutionary who’d killed a Roman soldier.
[10] We borrowed this idea from the movement in the States, where loads of young people had gone along to an election meeting of George Wallace, the racist Governor of Alabama, and completely disrupted it by very loud clapping, stamping and cheering. In the early 80s about 10 of us went along to a right-wing meeting about the rates. There was obviously no point in the usual political heckling, though some Leftists there were into that.. We just cheered and cheered, shouting absurdly supportive comments which made it hard for the speakers to be heard. At one point this Asian guy in the audience goes berserk, screaming about how we were stopping him hearing what was being said and threatening us, shaking with inflamed fury, with the security guards holding him back and trying to calm him down, an outburst which completely stopped the meeting for a couple of minutes. About 10 minutes later we see him on the other side of the hall and he’s giggling uncontrollably to himself, trying to stifle a hysterical laugh. “What a nutter!”, we say to each other, but then, just after, he strolls past us, beaming at us with an infectious grin and waves as he leaves, saying, “See you later, comrades”. He’d been on our side – and had spontaneously and independently thought of a brilliant way to add to the disruption. We all felt really great afterwards.