Roald Dahl was a genius—and a shocking bigot | | |
|
Pablo Picasso’s
mistreatment of women.
T.S. Eliot’s
prejudice.
In its three-year run, my
Back Story column
has repeatedly asked how an artist’s noxious behaviour or views should be weighed against their talent. This week I tackle that very contemporary question again. The latest artist-culprit is
Roald Dahl,
a beloved children’s author and the subject of “Giant”, a new play at the Royal Court Theatre in London. As with Eliot, Dahl’s offence is antisemitism.
The debut playwright, Mark Rosenblatt, and distinguished director, Sir Nicholas Hytner, could not have known or wished that “Giant” would be quite so timely. The action is set in the aftermath of an Israeli invasion of Lebanon—in this case the invasion of 1982. In an old-fashioned sort of theatre, Dahl and the other characters, some real and some invented, discuss the fallout of a book review he has written that includes incendiary remarks about Jews.
It’s a terrific play. Three big distinctions are contested in the on-stage debate: the lines between self-defence and aggression, between an artist and his work and between legitimate criticism of Israel and antisemitism. Dahl’s comments, in his (real-life) review and elsewhere, leaped across that last boundary. He said and wrote indefensible things, which are quoted in the dialogue.
But one of the play’s strengths is that it affords the Dahl character (pictured) some cogent arguments alongside his hateful calumnies. Meanwhile nobody on stage repudiates his marvellous books on account of his reprehensible opinions. Rather than suggesting that his flaws diminish his talent—or vice versa—“Giant” does something more interesting: it explores the links between them.
Dahl’s fiction operates on what I think of as the “more” principle of storytelling. He introduces a wacky premise—a small girl has magical powers, say, or meets a friendly giant—then pushes it to ever-more outlandish extremes. For his baddies he creates grotesque caricatures which he exaggerates to the max. In Mr Greenblatt’s play, you see what happens when this way of thinking is applied to actual people. Teasing escalates into bullying. The nastiness that thrills young readers of Dahl’s stories becomes cruel and disgraceful.
The “art v artist” dilemma is in vogue because of fresh sensitivity over offences that were once overlooked. But another reason it keeps cropping up is that it has no solution—not, anyway, if you hope to determine, once and for all, how far an artist’s achievements and misdeeds negate each other. “Giant” swerves this dead-end reckoning, showing that Dahl’s brilliance and his failings were complementary rather than contradictory. It is an insightful conclusion, if also a discomforting one.
Thank you for reading Plot Twist. Share your thoughts on Dahl—on the page and off it—by writing to us at plottwist@economist.com.
Elsewhere in The Economist this week: | | |
Editor’s picks
Must-reads this week | | |
The Economist recommends
What to read, see and listen to | | |
|
-
What to watch: “The Franchise”, playing on HBO and Max in America from October 6th and on Sky Comedy and NOW in Britain from October 21st. Armando Iannucci, Jon Brown and Sam Mendes, three celebrated film-makers, have joined forces to attack a common foe—the Marvel Cinematic Universe. Their new satire follows the cast and crew of “Tecto: Eye of the Storm”; Daniel (Himesh Patel), the first assistant director, must mediate between egotistical actors, the precious director and bullish executives from Maximum Studios. The show offers a withering assessment of the state of modern cinema. Superhero films may be a serious business, but they are also preposterous.
-
What to see: “Abraham Lincoln: His Life in Print” at the Grolier Club in Manhattan. Interest in Abraham Lincoln’s life remains fervid (see story
above); this small, focused show argues that he was probably the most self-made man in American political history. He was born into desperate rural poverty in Kentucky and, by his own estimate, had perhaps a year of formal schooling. This exhibition showcases the books he read to educate himself, as well as speeches he gave, legislation he sponsored, campaign flyers and other ephemera. The Grolier is a midtown jewel and free to enter—making this a perfect lunch-break diversion.
-
More to see: “Silk Roads” at the British Museum in London. There was not one ancient “silk road”, but many trade routes that stretched from East to West. Spices, silks and sculptures travelled across mountains and oceans. The roads were used for millennia, helping spread new ideas and religious beliefs. This exhibition focuses on 500-1000AD, a period of vibrant cultural exchange. More than 300 treasures are on show, from Byzantine jewellery to sketches of Chinese envoys with camels and horses. “What comes to mind when you hear the term Silk Road?” the curators ask. After this exhibition, far more than fabric.
| | |
|
Was this email forwarded to you? Sign up here.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This email has been sent to:
account@kait.dev. If you'd like to update your details please
click here. Replies to this email will not reach us. If you don't want to receive these updates anymore, please unsubscribe
here.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Copyright © The Economist Newspaper Limited 2024. All rights reserved.
|
|
Registered in England and Wales.
No.236383
Registered office: The Adelphi, 1–11 John Adam Street, London,
WC2N 6HT
|
|
|
