From the Theatre Blog at The Guardian
Oh look, Malta’s made the news again. Copy and paste this link into your browser because for some reason I can’t get the direct link right and my technical person is in Amsterdam
http://www.guardian.co.uk/stage/theatreblog/2009/feb/20/anthony-neilson-stitching-ban-play
Anthony Neilson’s Stitching: don’t ban this sick play
Yes, it’s an extreme and unsettling work, but the Maltese government is wrong to disallow its staging
It has been a hell of a fortnight for British theatre. England People Very Nice and Seven Jewish Children have generated what feels like more comment and debate about theatre than the last 10 years put together. What has been heartening, though, is that none of those bitterly opposed to either play have actually called for an outright ban.
Unfortunately, less attention has been paid to the news that Anthony Neilson’s play Stitching has been banned in Malta. Yes, banned. Banned in a democratic European country due to host one of 2018’s capital of culture celebrations.
Malta has a board of film and stage classification which is nominally in charge of providing age restrictions. As well as their six categories (U, PG, 12, 14, 16, 18), the board also has the option to “ban and disallow” productions from being staged.
The reasons given for banning Stitching are as follows:
1 Blasphemy against the state religion – pages 10 and 17
2 Obscene contempt for the victims of Auschwitz – page 29
3 An encyclopaedic review of dangerous sexual perversions leading to sexual servitude – eg pages 33, 34 and several others
4 Abby’s eulogy to the child murderers, Fred and Rosemary West – page 35
5 Reference to the abduction, sexual assault and murder of children – page 36Malta’s “state religion” is Catholicism. It should perhaps be noted in passing that the classification of Mel Gibson’s ultra-violent, antisemitic film The Passion of the Christ is U. The blasphemy to which the censor refers is a character in the play saying “Jesus fucking Christ” and in response to the suggestion that “Sunday is the Lord’s day”, replying “Fuck him”. Similarly, the “obscene contempt for the victims of Auschwitz” is committed by, yes, a character in a play. It is worth stating that the charge refers to a single line in which the male character claims that his first experience of masturbation was inspired by a picture of a naked Jewish woman in a concentration camp. Yes, it is uncomfortable and unsettling, but it also makes a point about this character’s troubling amorality and raises questions: Does the character understand the context of the nudity at the time? Is it precisely the context which arouses him? What does that say about this character?
The fact that Malta even operates theatrical censorship has already attracted strong criticism from the Council of Europe. Moreover, the ban is a breach of fundamental rights and freedoms as outlined in articles 6 and 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights: “Freedom of expression constitutes one of the essential foundations of a society, one of the basic conditions for its progress and for the development of every man … It is applicable not only to ‘information and ideas’ that are favourably received or regarded as inoffensive but also to those that offend, shock or disturb the state or any sector of the population.”
What the Maltese government has issued amounts to a didactic list setting out what characters can and can’t say in a work of art. It is unacceptable that the police force of a European democracy in the 21st century has the power to issue notices ordering that a play is not performed. We can only hope that Unifaun theatre’s planned legal action against the Maltese government succeeds, leading to a change in this deplorable law.
There is a Facebook group to keep you up to date with the protest – I urge readers to join.
7 Comments Comment
Leave a Comment
Looks like some people are still stuck in the no-fun-with-butter mentality of some 35 years ago.
[Daphne – Last Tanga in Bormla….]
If you call this art, then “Cikku bezzaghni” must have been a superstar!
[Daphne – John, that is demonstrably not the point. If we had to start banning bad art…..]
No, he was truly artful in the way he swore. He would put all the right adjectives and what not with swear words in a truly artful and natural fashion. He would scare the shit out of everyone at the Luqa MLP Club when he got a bit hot under the collar, and start really swearing. Mintoff’s bodyguard would insert three or more swear words in every sentence in such a manner that no one would even think of starting an argument with Cikku on bird trapping, wine making or rabbit breeding, let alone politics.
Now if this is not art, then what is?
‘Stitches’ when compared to Cikku’s compilation of unwritten odes to “il-Madonna” is a non starter.
Ma’ tifhimx f’dawn l-affarijiet, Daphne.
[Daphne – I spent the few few years of my working life at Timber Wharf, Marsa.]
So that’s where you developed your good Taste(s) Daphne. Today my dad told me that the Marsa area used to be a dangerous area (before the war) where a lot of armed thefts occurred in broad daylight.
In one occasion the robbers held up a businessman in a karozzin and before they left they cut the horses reins.Today they would take the car keys.
@Daphne. “the few years of my working life”. Or should that be ‘a few’? From what you write, it seems that you have worked for around twenty years, and that’s not a few years.
[Daphne – There’s a word missing. It should have read ‘the first few years of my working life’.]
@Daphne. It must be tiresome having to deal with communicators who have a rather keen eye for detail that you’re not even allowed a typo, but it did change the whole meaning of the sentence. What’s more now you have an offended relative writing on the other thread. Veru ghandek pacenzja.
I actually went to watch a rehearsal of ‘Stitching’ and I can only conclude that the classification board didn’t quite get it. Yes – it’s brutal. Yes – there were a couple of scenes which made me feel pretty uncomfortable, but it’s also honest, and ultimately a sad and touching portrayal of two people who go to extreme lengths to save their failing relationship. And all the lines vis-a-vis Auschwitz etc that have been quoted with wild abandon have been completely misunderstood. This has been said many times before, but I’ll say it again – how can one judge the merits or otherwise of this play without having actually seen it? Words on a script are just that – words which can only come to life with the input of the actors and their interpretation of the text. I sincerely hope that by the end of this debacle, the public will have the chance to watch it as it is meant to be performed, and judge for themselves.