11 & 12

Went out with MGF S&M (yes, I am finding it hard to resist, but I will) last night to see the new Peter Brook play 11 &12. If you are wondering what it was like, then in one word: slow. In two words: very slow. Which is OK for you or me to say, but is a completely unacceptable criticism from MGF M.

You see, M is a man who enjoys watching paint dry. And, not any paint at that. We are talking about paint applied to his Napoleon-era led soldiers! And yes, for those of you who were wondering, I will not reveal his identity. Water-boarding will not help Mr Cheney

So, yes 11 & 12 it slow. Veeeeerrrrryyyyy slooooowwwww. But that's not its biggest fault. Two bigger ones come to mind.

The first has to do with the emotional narrative of the play. Basically, in the first 2/3 of the play we follow the story thru the eyes of Amadou, with whom we form an emotional bond. In the last 1/3 the story continues, but our lead character recedes to the background and we lose the emotional attachment. Now I know, emotional narrative is not necessarily what Brook is gunning for, but if that's the case, why build the audience's emotional attachment in the first place?

The second is the moral perspective which, I am afraid, can only be described as that of an apologetic Guardian reader. Now, don't get me wrong, I am a dedicated Guardian reader, however, of the un-apologetic type. So, the French are evil and not too clever. The Muslims are wise and gentle. Every fable is told as if it holds the key to all the secrets of the universe. And, by God, I am certain it doesn't.

Obviously, it's not all bad. It's beautifully done and the actors do know their trade. Let's give it a 3-star then? Not sure S&M would be that charitable. M slept throughout. S would have too but for her very British sense of "proper". Next time it's their turn to choose; Legally Blonde, here I come.

J