Theatre
Trial by Laughter
King’s Theatre, Glasgow
Neil Cooper
***
IN AN increasingly apocalyptic looking world, how far do comedic provocateurs go in pointing out the inherent ridiculousness of their self-serving masters? As with most things, in terms of so-called leaders more resembling grotesque caricatures than actual functioning politicians, we have been here before. This is something Ian Hislop and Nick Newman’s timely dramatic sketch-book of the trials of 19th century bookseller and pamphleteer William Hone makes abundantly clear.
One minute, Hone and his cartoonist comrade George Cruikshank are hustling their national lampoon of the gluttonous Prince Regent and his well-upholstered cronies to the masses. The next, Hone is hauled before the courts to answer charges of blasphemy, not once, not twice, but a suitably biblical three times in as many days. Of course, it’s a massive stitch-up designed to wear Hone out, but even the establishment’s well-worn tactic of attrition blows up in their faces like the whiffiest of Hone’s ever-rumbling raspberries.
Caroline Leslie’s Trademark Touring and Watermill Theatre production goes with the flow of Hislop and Newman’s historical confection. The clock at the centre of Dora Schweitzer’s wood-panelled courtroom set whizzes back and forth from the cut and thrust of each trial to the roots of each alleged libel, with detours into the buffoonish Prince Regent’s chambers en route.
When Joseph Prowen steps up to plead his case, he looks and sounds every inch a hero of our times, even as he pre-dates similarly absurdist legal actions from the 1960s Oz magazine trial to Hislop’s own capers in the dock as editor of Private Eye.
While urgency may be lacking at points, it's more than made up for in the comic romp stakes, as Jeremy Lloyd’s Prince Regent plays kiss-chase with his mistresses. By the end, Hone might have remained uncompromising to the last, but it is Cruikshank who sold out to the king’s shilling. Such is the way of things as professional satirists bite the hand that feeds them, already a part of the class they so cuttingly critique.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel