The Habit of Art

[ardcarp]

Just got back from watching (streamed to a local venue) The National Theatre's production of Alan Bennet's play about a meeting between Britten and Auden. This wasn't a live one but a tribute to Richard Griffiths who plays Auden.

I can thoroughly recommend it...hilarious and touching by turns.

[muzzer]

Saw it a few years ago at the National. Great play. Bennett uproariously un-PC as ever.

[Nick Armstrong]

Saw it a few years ago at the National. Great play. Bennett uproariously un-PC as ever.

Same here, had the delight of seeing the late lamented RG It was huge fun. I wasn't totally convinced by the play as a drama, but it was terrific entertainment.

[gurnemanz]

Same here, had the delight of seeing the late lamented RG It was huge fun. I wasn't totally convinced by the play as a drama, but it was terrific entertainment.

Having also seen it at NT, I agree completely with the above. RG did a great job on a difficult role, having both to portray the actor and also to act the part (Auden) which the actor was playing + a lot of lines to master. Interesting to note that Michael Gambon, who was originally meant to play the part, had not been able to cope with it. RG also great in History Boys.

[ardcarp]

Yes, it was great fun, even if I was not totally convinced by Bennett's view of Britten. But the play was as much a lampoon on biographers as anything....positively cruel to Humphrey Carpenter. The bit where he came on in drag and managed one flatulent note on the tuba (hilarious) was clearly meant to spell out the gulf between those of genius who create music and poetry and those who merely write about them.

[muzzer]

I don't recall that moment. Bit harsh on HC imho. I really enjoyed his book on Paris in the 20s, and also his one on the TW3 gang in the 60s. But the point about the gulf between creators and observers is a valid - and I might add painful - one.

[Mary Chambers]

Yes, it was great fun, even if I was not totally convinced by Bennett's view of Britten. .

Neither was I. It was hugely oversimplified. I did enjoy Alex Jennings in the role, although, except that he was a bit camp, which BB wasn't.

I think Michael Gambon would have been much better than Griffiths as Auden - or at any rate, he'd have looked better.

[Serial_Apologist]

I don't recall that moment. Bit harsh on HC imho. I really enjoyed his book on Paris in the 20s, and also his one on the TW3 gang in the 60s. But the point about the gulf between creators and observers is a valid - and I might add painful - one.

If you can, play; if not, write - to misquote Shaw. I took the latter advice.

[amateur51]

Same here, had the delight of seeing the late lamented RG It was huge fun. I wasn't totally convinced by the play as a drama, but it was terrific entertainment.

A conscious choice, in the light of dearly missed RG's considerable avoirdupois?

[amateur51]

Neither was I. It was hugely oversimplified. I did enjoy Alex Jennings in the role, although, except that he was a bit camp, which BB wasn't.

I think Michael Gambon would have been much better than Griffiths as Auden - or at any rate, he'd have looked better.

Oh I don't think that classic good looks were Wystan's strong suit

As Hockney is meant to have said after sketching Auden's face:

"if that's what his face looks like, what the f*ck do his balls look like?!"

[ardcarp]

... it was a play within a play (and sometimes within a play again) so literal appearances were not so important; and maybe that surreal Humphrey Carpenter drag sequence was a later addition.