310 Blog Post 4- Summary of the Play-Going

Now that we have officially seen all of the official plays for the course, I can’t help but arrange a hierarchy of sorts for them in my brain. At the bottom we have As You Like It at the Open Air Theatre, the best thing I can say about that performance is that the theatre was pretty. Just above that show is For King and Country at the Southwark Playhouse, and I am actually sorry about this one because I think the subject material was really very interesting, the execution was just terribly boring, and maybe that means I’m simply not cultured enough to appreciate it, but it was boring. Working the way up the list, third from the bottom is Hamlet at the Globe Theatre, a bad performance of a bad play, but there was at least something happening on stage, and it made sense which automatically puts it ahead of the last two. The next three are all Globe theatre productions, not my favorites but still an interesting experience and some of them were performed very well. Winter’s Tale, As You Like It and Othello, in that order ranged, for me, from acceptable to fun to great respectively. Because they were all performed at the same theatre with similar set designing benefits and detriments, most of my feelings for these productions stem from casting, and script, which were both top notch for Othello. The trio of plays coming in just under my top three all-time favorited favorites for this trip are, in order again, Measure for Measure at the Changeling Theatre, Consent at the Harold Pinter Theatre, and £¥€$ at the Almeida. Measure for Measure was one of those Shakespeare plays that I had never heard of before, let alone read, and strongly disliked at first, but it grew on me, and I thought Changeling Theatre’s performance was creative and interesting. Consent was a wonderful script, and £¥€$ was just something else.

            Alright, I know this sounds like mindless droning, but I’m getting to my point soon. My top three all-time favorited favorite plays for this trip were, in no particular order, Bat Out of Hell at the Dominion Theatre, Flesh and Bone at Soho Theatre, and A Monster Calls at the Old Vic. These three plays were exceptional across the board in scripted content, cast performance, set, staging, and directorial vision. The reason I felt the need to inform everyone of this list is because I have always thought of myself as a woman of the theatre more or less, I haven’t been able to go as often as I would like, but it’s something I truly love and largely why I wanted to go on this trip in the first place. I had always viewed London as a city of theatre, a metropolis of the fine arts where culture flourishes on the stage and even famous film actors find it an honor to perform at the Old Globe Theatre or the Apollo, or where they might have gotten their start in a small black box in a weird part of Southwark reciting Shakespeare above a bar pulsating music.

            I see a play like A Monster Calls and the sheer talent from the performers is astounding, coupled with the precision in their blocking, and the set design which must have required either a lot of skill, a lot of practice, or a lot of prayer because with the amount of acrobatics happening on that stage someone could have, theoretically, gotten very hurt. The choice to make the tree out of rope, and then find ways to use the rope to make sense in other scenes so it wasn’t constantly coming on and off stage was my favorite part because it allowed the play to have a kind of visual reminder all the time that the tree is always and has always been watching as well as provide the practicality of using it for other purposes in other scenes and having it readily available when needed. The cast’s quick changes, and chair positioning was another one of those precise aspects of the play’s staging that when done correctly, as it was, creates the perfect set in each scene with very little practical effort, but would have also required a lot of practice. The sound effects for the tree’s voice were the exact right amount of frightening, intriguing, and demanding attention. The way the production gave life to the story’s yew tree is exactly what is so wonderful about the theatre, it does everything a script can’t and a film doesn’t. It gives voice, and life to the characters on the page, but maintains this intimacy with the audience because it’s live, and because there is always something special gained about being able to look a person in the eye, and have them look back.

            I look at a play like Flesh and Bone and I can remember seeing the spit fly out of Terrence’s mouth and onto Jamal’s face when they argue in the bar scene. I remember talking to Elliot Warren after the play and asking about his inspiration and him telling me that the play was something he started writing about a year ago, and that he just wanted to get a message out about working class people in London today. And I read about it a little more in the opening pages of the program, and seeing how he had conducted auditions in his kitchen just a couple of months before performing it.  And I thought how sketchy it would be, as an actress, to just show up in some random guy’s house expecting to audition for his new play, especially in today’s climate. But that was how much they wanted to act, and he held auditions there because that was the only place where he could and he had to put on this show. I have just found it very uplifting, I guess, to the passion and the drive to create art in the theatre here in London. It is certainly everything I thought it would be, and it’s one of the great gifts London offers the world.  

Text-In-Context Final

Viewing Exit West as Immigration Through London

Mohsin Hamid’s Exit West has many stories that intentionally paints the world with open borders and the affect they have on individual lives, but specifically follows the journey of two immigrants. The story reveals the lives of individuals traveling from one part of the world, separated by different cultures, finding difficulties within their lives. However, Hamid uses this platform of the novel to expose the realties of immigration and the difficulties faced by immigrants within London itself. The notion that immigration is a one-sided story of immigrant or “native” is not reasonable, since immigration issues arise from acceptance and rejection viewing it through both lenses changes the way the world can begin to approach the crisis.

Mohsin Hamid uses London as a backdrop for one of the cities that his main character’s, Saeed and Nadia live in, and through their eyes explains their view of how immigration moves around them. “Nigerians were initially the largest among many groups of residents, but every so often a non- Nigerian family would relocate out of the house, and their place would almost always be taken by more Nigerians, and so the house began to be known as a Nigerian house” (Hamid, 147). This scene pictured within the book described the environment that Nadia and Saeed were living in, but also primarily subjected the reader to visualize the environment of real immigrant neighborhoods, where communities build with increasingly more migrants from different countries and demonstrates the integration of many cultures within one neighborhood, as immigrants are limited to certain neighborhoods. While Hamid explains the immigration story within London through Saeed and Nadia’s migrating journey, the reality within London sees many similarities with the story being told, making the immigration issue in Exit West real to his reader. The biggest population of migrating countries within London is estimated to be Poland, India, and Pakistan (Migration Observatory). Within London the local reaction to this is documented by The Migration Observatory through the University of Oxford, states that many British natives believe that the Nigerian population migrating to the UK is the most unwanted (Migration Observatory). This deals with how Hamid uses specifically Nigerian characters to contrast Nadia and Saeed’s migrant story and how the Nigerian people within the story represent the migrating majority that cast fear into British populace making the immigrant issue hit close to home displaying how these people live their lives as immigrants in London.

Along with depicting specific immigrant cultures within London, Hamid also brings up a good point of how many immigrant families or people stay within the country and city they have migrated to. The novel then lends itself to more intimate conversations between its main characters, “That night he asked her what the life of her dreams would look like, whether it would be in a metropolis or in the countryside, and she asked him whether he could see them settling in London and not leaving, and they discussed how houses such as the one they were occupying might be divided into proper apartments, and also how they might start over someplace else, elsewhere in this city, or in a city far away” (Hamid, 136). This scene between Nadia and Saeed demonstrates the difficulties that people who have immigrated into a different country feel, as they do not feel at home, but make the best of their situation and must begin to think of making a home for themselves within the new country they are in even if they are unwelcomed they start to behave like any human wanting to set roots. By the numbers taken by GOV.UK it is known that in 2017, 57,553 people were granted a permanent residence within the UK based on several different statuses’; study, work, family, and asylum. Though within the same year 9% of people who applied were refused, though reasons of refusal are unknown within these officially documented statistics (GOV.UK). This raises the question of how many people arriving unofficially in London stay permanently?

Lastly, Hamid uses scenes of resistance of the London native to display violence against immigrant squatters. “The operation to clear the migrant ghetto in which Saeed and Nadia found themselves began badly, with a police officer shot in the leg within seconds as his unit moved into occupied cinema near Marble Arch, and then the flat sounds of a firefight commenced, coming from there but also from elsewhere, growing and growing, all around… They heard helicopters and more shooting and announcements to peacefully vacate the area made over speakers so powerful that they shook the floor… while they saw smoke and smelled burning, and then it quiet, but the smoke and thee smell lasted a long time, particularly the smell, lingering even when the wind direction changed” (Hamid, 162). Hamid’s scene of violence depicts the unsettling unrest and anger erupted by increasing immigration within London and displays the intense relationship British natives have with immigration within this story. This is a real reaction to immigration within London, as this demonstrates the extreme violence projected at immigrant communities by London locals. Hamid makes good use of current events within London and real London immigration issues to make his novel, Exit West, a true reaction to immigration within London.

Hamid does an amazing job at using current immigration in London to support his own reaction to the view of immigration, but he also depicts a great deal of hostile reaction to show the anger towards immigration by local London populace. “The mob looked to Nadia like a strange and violent tribe, intent on their destruction, some armed with iron bars or knives, and she and Saeed turned and ran, but could not escape” (Hamid, 134). This is a true reaction of how British natives view immigrants in their homeland, they fear them, and they fear the unknown, which the immigrant represents as someone from a different country and someone with a different culture (Brookings). “After the riots the talk on the television was a major operation, one city at a time, starting in London, to reclaim Britain for Britain, and it was reported that the army was being deployed, and the police as well, and those who had once served in the army and the police, and volunteers who had received training… that nativist extremists were forming their own legions, with a wink and nod form the authorities, and the social media chatter was of a coming night shattered glass” (Hamid, 135). The resources that are excessively exhausted to protect the native land is displayed within this scene where the people are arming and protecting themselves with much government support to contain the pure British nativist agenda.

Hamid knows that not all of London opposes immigration, so he adds in the odd hospitable hand that Nadia and Saeed encounter in their life as immigrants, “And yet while all this occurred there were volunteers delivering food and medicine to the area, and aid agencies at work, and the government ad not banned them from operating, as some of the governments the migrants were fleeing from had, and in this there was hope. Saeed in particular was touched by a native boy, just out of school, or perhaps in his final year, who came to their house and administered polio drops, to the children but also to the adults, and while many were suspicious of vaccinations, and many more, including Saeed and Nadia, had already been vaccinated, there was such earnestness in the boy, such empathy and good intent, that though some argued, none had the heart to refuse” (Hamid, 137-8). This scene specifically reveals the volunteerism and humanity that can still be seen in the lives of British locals, who do not support the nativist movement and know helping the immigrant in their country is the plan that makes sense as a human being. An instance of this is an article written by the Guardian in 2017 stating their initiative to join in with other organizations to provide care and assistance to refugees and immigrants within Britain (The Guardian).  “Perhaps they had grasped that the doors could not be closed, and new doors would continue to open, and they had understood that the denial of coexistence would have required one party to cease to exist, and the extinguishing party too would have been transformed in the process, and too many native parents would not after have been able to look their children in the eye, to speak with head held high of what their generation had done” (Hamid, 166). This passage from Exit West was interesting in how it displays this sense of humanity even within the most brutal anti-immigrant person, that they fear the consequences of going to far, knowing that at some point pushing back on these people fleeing their country is immoral.

The novel, Exit West, written in 2017 seems to be a response to Brexit in the sense of immigration and how the increase of immigration in London lead to the decision of breaking away from the EU. Between the years 2015 and 2016 when the EU referendum was being brought to the forefront of the British public, immigration was seen as one of the most important issue to the people by 56% (Migration Observatory). With this idea of keeping people out brought up within the 2016 referendum, Hamid seems to be responding, “And so, irrespective of the reason, decency on this occasion won out, and bravery, for courage is demanded not to attack when afraid, and the electricity and water came on again, and negotiations ensued, and word spread, and among the cherry trees on Palace Gardens Terrace Saeed and Nadia and their neighbors celebrated, they celebrated long into the night” (Hamid, 166). The idea that Hamid poses within this passage is that coexistence and acceptance of immigration is possible. The pure cohabitation between natives and immigrants is the only reasonably human thing to do and he makes it seem that doing anything but, is the most ridiculous response to immigration. In the end it seems that rethinking how one views protection and safety within their borders is in fact an expression of fear of the unknown. When people flee their country they are fleeing danger, finding safety in desirable countries that can provide protection. The world view on immigration is a shifting issue, but the idea is that talking about it in terms of humanity and acceptance is a start for those countries in need of help. 

Works Cited

Blinder, Dr. Scott and Richards, Dr. Lindsay. “UK Public Opinion Toward Immigration: Overall Attitudes and Level of Concern”. The Migration Observatory. University of Oxford. 07 Jun 2018 Web. http://migrationobservatory.ox.ac.uk/resources/briefings/uk-public-opinion-toward-immigration-overall-attitudes-and-level-of-concern/#kp1.

Bullen, Poppy. “How You Can Help Refugees and Asylum Seekers in Britain”. The Guardian. 3 Mar 2017. Web. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/mar/03/how-you-can-help-refugees-asylum-seekers-britain.

Hamid, Mohsin. Exit West. Riverhead Books. New York, NY. 2017.

Karasapan, Omer. “Refugees, Migrants, and the Politics of Fear”. Brookings. 12 Apr 2017. Web https://www.brookings.edu/blog/future-development/2017/04/12/refugees-migrants-and-the-politics-of-fear/.

 “National Statistics: How Many People Continue Their Stay in the UK?” GOV.UK. Immigration Statistics. 24 Aug 2017. Web. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/immigration-statistics-april-to-june-2017/how-many-people-continue-their-stay-in-the-uk.

Rienzo, Dr. Cinzia and Vargas-Silvia, Dr. Carlos. “Migrants in the UK: An Overview”. The Migration Observatory. University of Oxford. 21 Feb 2017. Web. http://migrationobservatory.ox.ac.uk/resources/briefings/migrants-in-the-uk-an-overview/

Text in Context Essay

Are Clones Human?

Kazuo Ishiguro’s Never Let Me Go creates an alternate world that resembles our own except in that there are clones in the 1990s.  Most could agree that this book is a commentary on how those who are isolated from most of the population are still just like normal everyday people. The most pertinent question in this book is the humanness of the main characters, both through their view and the view of the reader. This idea of humanness has to be discussed because the book is essentially centered on the humanness of the characters in conjunction with the ethics of using clones, which means that if the idea is not discussed this book will not be understood. The look at the humanness of the characters and the ethics of clones parallels the real world with the discussion around in vitro fertilization(IVF), which is something that could have influenced Ishiguro as he wrote this book.

The narrator, Kathy, is one of the aforementioned clones in the novel. The book is written in such a way as to indicate that she is either talking to other clones or carers in the society of the book. This creates an interesting dynamic, because this book is written a bit like an autobiography and a bit like a conversation with another person. This means that while the readers are privy to Kathy’s thoughts and feelings, they are filtered by her as well, mostly through her memories. This style creates a sense that Kathy is human, because she appears like an everyday person. The lack of an outward difference in appearance is more significant when the clones go to the outside world, but the narrative style focuses on the thought process of someone whom the outside society in the book does not consider to be fully human. The way the book jumps around however, does indicate that the narrator is human, because remembering things that happened based off of other things is a very human characteristic. For example, Kathy says “This was all a long time ago so I might have some of it wrong…” at the beginning of the second chapter, which is very human (Ishiguro, page 13). There are various sentences like this sprinkled throughout the novel, as Kathy tries to remember her past in order to pass her story onward. While this idea is not directly paralleled to the debate around IVF, this idea very much ties into the overarching question of “what does it mean to be human?”. This question has plagued philosophers and scientists for thousands of years and will probably plague them for many more. However, with the introduction of in vitro fertilization in 1978 this discussion has become much more urgent and relevant to the times, especially considering the success in cloning Dolly the sheep in 1998 (Plows, page 36). However, the debate about this never really deals with how someone might tell a story about their life. Telling a story in the way this book is written means that the reader basically follows Kathy around in her life. This can make the book seem slow because her life is actually quite normal, and it is easy to see how someone would react to such a life and assume that it is a human life.

Ishiguro most likely knew about the IVF debate and either read or heard about the various articles pertaining to the ethics and questions surrounding IVF in the late 90s and early 2000s. Often this debate is paired with stem cell and genetics research even though they are not the same thing. In 1978, the first baby using in vitro fertilization was born (Plows, 36). Thus, when Ishiguro wrote Never Let Me Go, this debate had been going on for some 27 years prior.

This book focuses specifically on the lives and feelings of the clones themselves and not so much on how outsiders view them which is an interesting choice. This book directly contrasts the discussions which are made by those outside of the community with the clone community. Using the clones, specifically Kathy, as the focus of the story allows the reader insight into just how alike the non-cloned people are to the clones. They are not physically any different looking and could blend into any crowd. In one chapter, Kathy, Tommy, Ruth and two others go to Norfolk. They walk into a gallery and the lady does not know that they are clones. “…the lady asked: ‘Are you art students?’ ‘Not exactly,’ I said before Tommy could respond. ‘We’re just, well, keen.’ The silver-haired lady came out from behind her desk…” clearly indicates that the lady does not recognize them as clones (Ishiguro, 163). In this case it brings up the question of if something looks and sounds human is it definitely human? While this is not part of the debate in the early 2000s, this idea is discussed in various other similar books. Clearly, those born through IVF are human, they are just conceived in a different way.

 The IVF debate is centered more around the idea of if it should be done and what is ethical when considering using it. However, this ties into the idea of the clones, and if they are considered humans, would it be ethical to continue using them the way the society in Never Let Me Go is using them. How “normal” society is using them is made clear later in the book, when Kathy and Tommy try to get an extension to live a “normal” life , so they can have more time together.  They go to talk to Madame, the only other outsider that was not a teacher they had contact with at Hailsham, and the conversation indicates that they are indeed human. “‘Because of course’—Madame cut in suddenly – ‘your art will reveal your inner selves! That’s it, isn’t it? Because your art will display your souls!’” This speaks more to the philosophy debate regarding what being human means more than the fertilization debate, and it is still pertinent (Ishiguro, 254).

The reader becomes aware that the clones are used for organ donations as they get deeper into the book.  This is never overtly said but it is very clear in the  book . This is where many of the parallels between the idea of clones as humans and IVF babies as humans comes into play. Many of the objectors to IVF do not necessarily object directly to the fertilization but to the knowledge that many embryos are destroyed before being implanted (Levinson and Reiss, page 70). Using the ability to create more embryos and store them increases the chances of successful IVF implantation (Levinson and Reiss, 71). Some people consider the destruction of these embryos to be the destruction of human life, which is especially interesting when considering that the novel has a society that uses clones that are definitely more human than the embryos in a lab (Levinson and Reiss, 71). This issue does not come up as a specific debate in the novel, most likely because the novel is written from Kathy’s point of view. The usage of the clones as the main characters and narrator creates a clear debate about whether they are human.

The lack of overt and violent resistance displayed by the clones also adds to this debate. While there is subtle resistance throughout the book there is also the sense of acceptance on the part of the clones. This is strange, because if the clones were considered human, particularly if they themselves considered themselves human they most likely would have mounted some amount of overt resistance. The context for this novel comes from what Ishiguro knew, that most people are not going to be the revolutionaries, but are more likely to subtly resist. While this does not parallel the debate around IVF, it is still important for the consideration of the humanness of the characters. Tommy brings up the idea at one point that the clones were told all of the important information just before they could understand it. Miss Emily confirms this when talking about Miss Lucy to Tommy and Kathy, “‘She thought you students had to be made more aware. More aware of what lay ahead of you, who you are, what you were for. She believed you should be given as full a picture as possible.’” indicating that the students at Hailsham were never completely aware of what was happening (Ishiguro, 267). This was a significant ethics question in the book and the idea of telling people how they were created is something that is technically applicable to in vitro fertilization. In addition, because of this ethics question, there is the personal dilemma around a woman being required to say that she used IVF to conceive. In the UK, there is a law that covers this exact question. The law restricts the divulging of knowledge to the person receiving treatment for IVF, but those undergoing IVF need to understand what they are undergoing and when they might have to divulge this information (Dimond). Thus, the idea of who is privy to the information is indirectly linked to the debates surrounding IVF. The clones lack of information meant that the clones had almost no words for escape or even ideas about it, thus reducing their forms of rebellion to small things, like Kathy telling her story in this novel.

Ishiguro would have known about these debates, even if he did not specifically look up articles, because the ethics question was big in the media when Dolly the sheep was cloned. He would have also known about the IVF debates and how they created questions about what should be considered human. What is interesting in the book’s case is that the debates around humanness never seem to be brought out in the open. However, the book deals with many of the issues brought up by the IVF debate in subtle ways and shows how someone that is different could view their status, particularly when they themselves cannot or choose not to take part in the debate about their humanness. So, while the book may not be directly about IVF there are multiple parallels and knowing about the debates surrounding IVF helps the reader to understand the meaning behind the book.

References

Ishiguro, Kazuo. Never Let Me Go. Vintage International, 2006, New York.

Dimond, B. (1999). Confidentiality 7: Human fertilization and embryology issues. British Journal of Nursing, 8(16), 1108. Retrieved from http://ezproxy.library.arizona.edu/login?url=https://search-proquest-com.ezproxy2.library.arizona.edu/docview/199482411?accountid=8360

Key Issues in Bioethics: A Guide for Teachers, edited by Ralph Levinson, and Michael Reiss, Routledge, 2003. ProQuest Ebook Central, https://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/uaz/detail.action?docID=181840.

Plows, Alexandra, and Alexandra Plows. Debating Human Genetics: Contemporary Issues in Public Policy and Ethics, Routledge, 2010. ProQuest Ebook Central, https://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/uaz/detail.action?docID=557315.

Seguin, Eve. "Narration and Legitimation: The Case of In Vitro Fertilization." Discourse & Society: An International Journal for the Study of Discourse and Communication in Their Social, Political and Cultural Contexts 12.2 (2001): 195-215. Web.