Yasmin Alibhai-Brown: Laughing at England People Very Nice left me with a nasty taste in my mouth
It took me days to decide what I thought of the controversial England People Very Nice at the National. My impressions shape-shifted, twisted and turned confusedly. What I might have said about the play in the first 48 hours didn't make sense on subsequent days. It was a bit like the regret and wisdom that follow the thrilling kick of a really hot curry. I wonder now about critics who scribble reviews only hours after they scurry off from press nights. Would recollection in tranquillity or time make a difference to their judgements?
The play is simple, simplistic even, though technically impressive and with a sparkling cast. Hogarth and Terry Gilliam come together and have a huge laugh, sail through the waves of different migrants who, through centuries, have arrived in Bethnal Green. The script is sharp, though some lines sound too much like stand up comic gags. Writer Richard Bean and director Nicholas Hytner have staged the romp with élan. Nothing more than that, although Hytner once claimed his production would "address the issue of Islam very vigorously" – a vain promise. There is no obvious attempt to expose what lies beneath the fast waters sweeping along, no unexpected dive below the surface.
Perhaps those involved were having too much fun to mull and muse on the effect of their work. A number of reviews approve of the un-PC bravura and verve but key critics say the work is full of malevolent caricatures, racial stereotypes and (more seriously) that it lacks humanity. Anti-racist artists and activists have been protesting and have not been mollified by a (I suspect) hastily arranged Q&A session with the writer and director.
Is the play racist? No. The BNP would not enjoy it much. White working class East End blokes are not romantic defenders of the realm – just crude thugs. Besides what does that slur say about the intelligent, multiracial cast with actors such as Rudi Dharmalingam and Sacha Dhawan? We rarely see this talent on such stages. Yet there is much I do object to in the show. Words that are now rightly excised from public discourse – "Paki" etc – are revived here with panache. Audiences laugh at the jokiness of the revival, but later some may feel they conspired with something nasty and reprehensible. I wonder why I laughed at the coarse depiction of the Irish, jolly rape scenes, sinister mullahs and a happy ending which has a bigamous Bangladeshi man smiling with his white and brown families in an English suburb.
Just because we are free to offend, doesn't make it a duty for arts establishments to make sure they do, just to raise a laugh or appear brave. Is our National Theatre rehabilitating the words so they re-enter the most polite circles of the nation? There were no jokes about the Holocaust I noticed, and a good thing too.
We are going through another cycle of anti-immigrant xenophobia, last seen in the early Seventies when Enoch Powell was a hero. The Government, pushed by some tabloids, is hard on asylum seekers and migrants and even asylum children are now seen as a menace to be deported. There can be two reasons why Hytner and Bean are baffled by the hostility they have generated. Either they share some of the prejudices they show on stage – which I simply do not believe. Or, from where they sit, they do not understand the social habitat as it is at the moment. Their play could validate hostility faced by incomers or – worse – presents that pain as a rite of passage before winning acceptance. Hytner had hoped the work would not be a "controversy magnet". England people very naive.
View all comments that have been posted about this article.
Offensive or abusive comments will be removed and your IP logged and may be used to prevent further submission. In submitting a comment to the site, you agree to be bound by the Independent Minds Terms of Service.
- Print Article
- Email Article
-
Click here for copyright permissions
Copyright 2009 Independent News and Media Limited





Comments
Incredible !!
What has been missed my many, is the more covert assertion in the previous sentance that my peers and I are secretly harbouring Nazi tendancies, THAT smacks of the underlying racist tendancesof the author towards white londoners, and at the very least the rampant hypocrytical eilitism that the Left will always harbour.
A rough quote for the Dutch MP Geert Wilders seems apt. "We must not tolerate those who are intolerant of us" (paraphrased admittedly).
No doubt quoting a Right Wing politician will be playing right into the authors hands, but I suspect its time people woke up to the fact that right wing politics are no more synonimous with Hitler and the BNP than left wing politics are with Stalin.
I would wonder though, what goes on in the mind of a man who's only way of continuing a discussion is to point out the "speeling erras".
Are you that devoid of wit that this is your only retort?
On the other hand, do not beat yourself up for laughing at "coarse depictions" of other ethnicities. We all find relief and escape in gentle verbal bashing - and the fact that it is not helpful doesn't change our urge to laugh.
PS: Enoch Powell was never a hero. He was controversial and polarising to many, but a hero only to louts.
When a writer can't even get the geography right ( Brick Lane is not in Bethnal Green, no matter how many times Bean says it is ) you can't really trust him as a guide to take you on a journey and his vignettes of Brick Lane today are so barking bonkers he has to hide behind them being 'a cartoon'.
This poorly structured, mean hearted play is using being controversial to distract us from just how simple minded and truly one note it is. Do you remember that old ITV sit-com 'Mind Your Language'? This has all the depth of that and it's a great shame that important themes and an enormous budget have been entrusted to such a poor piece of work.
Why is this woman allowed to write racist articles in the Indy?
Why is she not prosecuted?
George Pitcher states "can a play be racist if it mocks all ethnicities. I think not"
Yasmin Alibhai-Brown states"is the play racist, no the BNP would not enjoy it much"
Since, when did the construction of racism depend on quantity in terms of insulting all cultures or the level of enjoyment by the BNP?
On analysing this play it is very obvious, that it portrays groups of people based on their race/religion as inferior to white english people. This play is not progessive. The play is a projection of Richard Bean's bitterness about his uncomfortable experinces in Bethnal Green. Living in Bethnal Green in isolation and living in Bethnal Green but being part of the community are two different concept's altogether.
Throughout the play gives the impression that white english people are more civilised and hold positions of power. Every other ethnic group is portrayed as dysfunctional and uneducated.
In reference to the Bengali community Richard Bean has not even got the sterotypes right. At one point a punjabi song is played? Young women with headscarfes are portrayed as angry radicals. There is not a single postive representation of the ordinary bengali person in his play. Therefore, it is difficult to believe that this play is not racist.
Under the current politcal climate Ricahrd Beans play is rubber stamping the negative generalisations of muslims and asians. Richard Bean does no favours for the beautiful people of Bethnal Green.
Those white people who were laughing loudly at the racist terms been used in this play, would they be laughing, if the same racist language were been used in an Indain resturant?
If you think the play is not racist the test is this: "encourage your colleagues/friends who are non-english/white to go and watch the play". Tell them they will enjoy it. That racism is a fact of life and that all Richard Beans's play does, is allow one to pay and view an inferior portrayal of one's own culture!! Azra Jabbar Birmingham