Framing Contemporary Playwriting within the Shakespearean Problem Play— on Race, Gender, and Politics: Is there a Limit to What Can be Brought to Stage?

Echoing the words of poet and academic Cesar A. Cruz, “art should comfort the disturbed and disturb the comfortable.” Playwrights possess a unique ability to translate literature to life, where their creativity serves as a mirror to reflect not only our individual biases, but as well as the current social climate and moral convictions that exist. Theatre offers a perspective that transcends the limitations of a page—the option to disengage from written material in response to overwhelming content is not a recourse within the realm of live theatre. Regardless of the discomfort and problematic nature of the theatrical content, the abstention from disengagement can be attributed to the expected norms of etiquette in theatre. Consequently, an audience find themselves to remain seated throughout a designated duration, thus necessitating a confrontation with their internal responses and recognition of their role within the narrative’s social message. Feelings of discomfort serve as a catalyst for introspection. The power of theatre lies not only in it’s power to challenge and provoke, but also offers a space to suggest empathy, understanding and self-examination. A conscious decision to remain, despite having to enduring discomfort stands as a commitment to engaging with the complexities of the human experience and social reformation, amplifying the impact of playwriting. This specific genre of social commentary is summarized under the term problem play— beginning with Shakespeare, to Norwegian playwright Henrik Ibsen, and Irish playwright George Bernard Shaw. It is imperative to recognize both the positive impacts and potential regression that can result from social narratives and reconcile with questions regarding creative censorship. Are there limits to what can be shown versus written? Does the portrayal of intense subjects such as violence, racism, and gender (with the intent to inspire change) become inadvertently damaging; the risk of being reduced simply into a form of “trauma porn?” In contemplating this, this creates a realization of the balance between social commentary and sensationalized elements. Is there an unspoken “appropriate” approach in addressing these problems. Examples of this debate on social morality plays can be examined in particular dramatists George Bernard Shaw, Gillian Greer, Clint Dyer, Roy Williams, and Ivo va Hove.

Writer of a Doll’s House (1879) Henrik Ibsen popularized the genre problem play, which is described as “a type of drama that developed in the 19th century to deal with controversial social issues in a realistic manner, to expose social ills, and to stimulate thought and discussion on the part of the audience” (Problem Play). While Ibsen is recognized as perhaps a “pioneer” of this style of playwriting, Shakespeare holds recognition in being the first writer to implement this creative type of work. Shakespearean plays, often categorized by three genres: the

“Comedies," “Tragedies,” and “Histories” influence the ideas in problem play. Shakespeare’s plays offer critique on wars, religion, social orders, gender and tyranny, each holding significance within this theorized genre. The problem play is often a realistic reflection of the current world through non-tradition, “like many people who object to vivid sexual scenes and scenes of physical violence in twenty-first-century movies and plays, there were many in the nineteenth who felt the same way about much milder depictions of real life” (Sprinchorn). This genre serves the purpose to test an audiences threshold for relevant subjects that depart from traditional theatre conventions to provide entertainment and escapism. This style of writing generates social reactions and controversy, thus lasting in the collective consciousness long after the final act. Irish playwright, George Bernard Shaw, profoundly shaped the purpose of social art by having audiences introspect and recognize human rights.Shaw, an influential contributor to Ibsen’s Play of Ideas, turn away from standard playwriting to offer commentary prevailing social and gender structures. His impact on issues such as inequality, social reformation, and political rights is brought to conversation in the 1913 play Pygmalion. The protagonist, Eliza Doolittle undergoes a transformation from a lower-class woman with a Cockney dialect to a refined member of proper society. Throughout the narrative, Eliza’s evolution is most noticeable in her speech and mannerisms. Her femininity and intelligence is scrutinized and condemned through the male gaze. Shaw uses of the problem play addresses the problematic concept of patriarchy and misogyny, thus drawing acclaim for his nuanced portrayal of societal challenges. Recognized as a master of social dramas, critics explain that Shaw “depicts society in its true colors and discusses all the problems prevalent in society with the help of speechless and discussion in his plays” (Shaw). Despite a perhaps controversial reputation, his significance within this literary movement remains over a century later, with the relevance of these issues still applicable today. However, the problem lies in adapting the play for contemporary audiences while preserving its original commentary on class and gender without diminishing the impact. Shaw’s approach was met with more admiration than criticism, possibly because he used language more-so appropriate for the time period. Academic Regina Gokaj remarks:

There were a lot of controversial concerns in his plays, such as prostitution, gender discrimination, false morality, social strata divisions, political views etc... (in) his plays the social, economical and political matters are interwoven, especially his strong objection towards the inequality and bitter injustice to the mass of people due to capitalism at the time he lived (Some Problematics).

The revival of Pygmalion at the Old Vic Theatre in 2023 raises concern about the fidelity to Shaw’s original work and the limits of the problem play. Is the director Richard Jones too faithful to the traditional message in Shaw’s writing, reducing the play to being casted as outdated? Shaw’s commentary on gender is still relevant, however it is interesting to consider modern sensibilities and adaption. The potential risk of playwriting and performance is a testament to the power of power plays. Yet, the challenge lies in how these plays are received. Does too much controversy define its impact and take away from the intended change? Richard Jone’s adaption perhaps takes away from the commentary on misogyny and unintentionally mocks it, failing to be satirical. Critics wonder whether the play’s unchanged approach is harmful or if it still resonates with contemporary audiences— would changing it act as a disservice to Shaw? Reviews suggest the challenge is not in the original writing, but in the performance itself and inability to adjust certain components. Critic Evie Rowan comments on the Cockney accent and implies the classist distastefulness, “however, doing something old and slightly fusty, such as Pygmalion, things need to be different. And I’m not sure exaggeration works here. It just meant the core and heart of the play gets slightly overlooked” (Evierown). The tension between staying nd upholding Shaw’s writing and adapting to modern times becomes a central issue, perhaps deterring the intention of social commentary. The use of degrading words in the dialogue, such as “whore,” accompanied with laughter creates questions on it being a feminist play, or actually the opposite and ironically maintains undertones of misogyny. What’s on Stage critiques the lack of modernity, “all in all, it’s an incredibly frustrating evening, a wasted revival of a play that for all its old-fashioned notions, still speaks resonantly – and impeccably – to the modern age” (Pygmalion at the Old Vic Review). The significance of adaptation is possibly a what makes a problem play— Jones misses the chance to transform the work to reflect the current social climate. Does writing from one hundred years ago that reflected that climate have the ability to accurately represent issues today? The Guardian’s comments on the lack of change:

 How do Pygmalion’s class commentaries and critiques of mobility and morality speak to us now? It is unclear in this production, directed by Richard Jones, which does not unfold like a period piece exactly, nor a radical reworking, but wavers on the fringes of being a play with something to say to us today (Pygmalion Review). 

Following Shaw and Jones’ criticism of gender inequalities, Boy Parts, a 2020 novel written by Eliza Clark stands as compelling provocative literary work. The novel has been adapted into a theatrical production, showing at London’s Soho Theatre in 2023. The play, made possible by the collaboration of solely female writers, actor and creative lighting/sound technicians reflects the feminist tones. The narrative follows Irina, a young female artist obsessed on the dual pursuit of photography and sexualization. The story is daring, unapologetic and and probes societal boundaries—challenging the resilience of both readers and audience. Irina’s sadistic artistic expression is marked by her killing men (often young) in gruesome ways. Her imaginings involve cutting glass into the eyes of her photographic subjects. Clark’s narrative serves to invert the the male gaze paradigm, by having women instead be the one to perceive men simply as sexual objects of desire. Irina, an exaggerated caricature of female power, serves to challenge the persisting gender inequalities and biases.

The stage adaption, adapted by Gillian Greer, intentionally does not visually show the gruesome scenes detailed in the novel, possibly to avoid the risk of excessive brutality overshadowing the feminist theme and leaving it up to the audiences’ own imagination. The absence of these visuals prompt the audience to reflect on Irina’s character and her reliability in retelling these stories. One of the most important characteristic of Irina is her lack of empathy and lack of backstory. She is a woman who is simply violent because she is made that way. This decision subverts the cultural inclination to scrutinize women’s motives, expecting a reason, while male motives are rarely questioned. This adaption is an important example of Ibsen’s theory of the problem play. Greer articulates Irina’s artistic obsession as a manifestation to prove “her power and threat...her work is a way of proving to the world what she is capable of doing (however) her work gets swallowed by the machine of capitalism and the patriarchy of the art world” (Eliza Clark). While the play successfully addresses these themes, it misses the opportunity to explore more of the disturbing violence— perhaps due to a limit of eighty minutes. The caution to avoid devolving into “trauma porn” is criticized in a review from the New York Times, “it’s an engrossing and darkly funny one-woman show, but doesn’t quite make the best of its provocative premise” (Barekat). The pinnacle of the play’s social commentary appears during the conclusion, as Irina’s film is projected at a gallery where she violently stabs a young male character with glass previously described in the play. The play becomes a thriller in this scene, reminding the audience of Irina’s sociopathic power. The moment is marked by the interplay of sound and red lighting. The audience sits through the victim’s screams as he pleads for her to stop— the only time in the play there is another voice—as Aimée Kelly brilliantly voices all of the characters over the course of the play's ability to both sympathize and loathe the protagonist. The art director and gallery viewers assume that Irina’s creation is purely fictional; merely a performance created with an actor and fake blood. This scene is significant examining it under the problem play as it comments on societies inability to hold women to the same degree as men. Women are often doubted and met with skepticism, whether that be in work environments, talked over by men, the #MeToo movement, and other cases, as explained by writer and journalist Michelle Penelope King on the authority gap:

We tend to assume that a man knows what he's talking about until he proves otherwise... whereas women tend to be underestimated more. They tend to be interrupted, more talked over more. They have to prove their competence more and we often feel uncomfortable when they're in positions of authority (King).

Irina’s outburst and anger underscores the struggle of the authority gap in being believed and taken seriously. She has committed the most heinous act, however still has to convince the men around her that she did in fact kill somebody, “I don’t understand what the fuck I have to do for you too recognize me as a threat? It’s like, am I even doing this shit? Have I even fucking done anything?” (Greer). Irina’s violent nature is not merely an example of violence, and thought it may be disturbing, it goes beyond shock value: this final moment encapsulates the societal issues explored in the play— women struggling to be recognized and credited in artistic endeavors and beyond. However, reflecting on the play as a whole, the question comes to mind, how far can one go to strengthen a message, and is there a limit for a reason, distinguishing what should be shown versus read. The New York Times even critiques the absence of the play’s decision to avoid violence:

It’s refreshing, but it’s also something of a narrative dead end. There are no subplots here, no moral ambiguities, no ifs or buts. There just isn’t enough else going on to provide satisfying complexity or depth as Irina hurtles from one misdeed to the next in a steeplechase of cruelty and self-sabotage (Barekat).

Playwrights Clint Dyer and Roy William’s, in their theatrical trilogy Death of England (premiered at the Nation Theatre) take the opportunity to engage with a multifaceted exploration of social issues. This narrative delves into the Black experience in London, gender dynamics, interracial relationships, stereotypes, online racism, “cancel culture” and appropriation. Described as “uniquely brilliant” by the Standard, Dyer and Williams interweave these human rights issues with the contemporary political climate in the United Kingdom; such as Brexit, immigration, the British royal family, and the housing crisis. The plays provokes controversial reactions, thereby prompting a critical examination of the boundaries of representation. The ambitious exploration of sensitive topics can actually risk diluting the message. Afridiziak Theatre News, a African-Caribbean online publication created to celebrate culture, offers a perspective of the play— reviewed by Christina Nicole, she voices her personal experience “there were times when it made me and triggered intense emotions, causing me to reflect on the concept of being British and my own identity. It was a thought-provoking experience that will stay with me for a long time” (Nicole). In the tradition of influential playwrights such as Ibsen, Shaw, and Shakespeare, Dyer and Williams embrace live theatre as a platform for the articulation of their perspectives for social reformation. They use this genre to strengthen their opinions, “exposing social ills” and generating reactions through the use of language and proactive scene, such as Carly, a white woman, who opens the second act simply by speaking on Black men in an intolerant racist manner, that ridicules identity and normalizes micro-aggressions. However, the writers posses a remarkable ability to still appreciate the complex relationship between Carley and Denise within the play, particularly in navigating racial identity and interracial relationships. The play undoubtedly includes all three of the Shakespeare genres and elements of the “Problem Play,” with historical context, comedic interludes, and a tragic component. The realistic and disheartening portrayal of racism, “seamlessly blend(s) moments of laughter with deep self- reflection.”

Turning attention specifically to the most recent production, Death of England: Closing Time, the production gives voice to Denise, a Black mother’s struggle to grapple with the intricacies of her relationship with Carly, her white daughter in-law. The controversial nature of the production sparks discussion about the boundaries of expression, prompting an examination on the limit of what should be portrayed? The play has been met with criticism regarding the abundance of topics, suggesting over ambitiousness reduces the narratives impact, “like the previous installments, this aims to be a microcosm for modern Britain, but it suffers from the writers’ eagerness to comment on every pressing issue imaginable: vaccine skeptics, the cost of living crisis, refugee policies, cultural appropriation, social media cancellation” (Swain). Despite these critiques, Dyer and Williams seem to overall succeed in contributing to social discourse. Critics acknowledge the play’s ability to push boundaries without crossing them, influencing the importance of forgiveness and flaws in humanity, “making racially crass comedy on a hen night is never acceptable, but what hope for society if it lacks the power to forgive and educated” (Review: Death of England). The reviews suggest that while the play may be assertive, it is able to balance the line between social commentary and offensive content.

A further example of contemporary literature that challenge social ills can be found in Hanya Yanagihara 2015 novel A Little Life, adapted into a play at the Harold Printer Theatre in 2023. Directed by Ivo van Hove, known for his successful 2018 Dutch play adaption of the novel, A Little Life presents issues surrounding mental health. The production features graphic moments of Jude (played by James Norton) self-harming his nude body, scars and assaults. The novel, which has been both criticized and loved, often categorized under the term “trauma porn” faced heightened criticism in the stage production, prompting contemplation on the threshold of trauma, “at what point does it become less about the cautionary tale, and more about the entertainment” (Carpenter). The overarching themes of queerness, mental health, substance abuse, racism and trauma that are central to the novel perhaps become diluted through the unnecessary visual details of Jude’s trauma. Arguably, this play exists within the framework of the Shakespeare problem play, as it follows the trajectory of a young man’s life and the effects of his trauma on his relationships amidst the complexities in New York City. However, Hove’s disturbing portrayal and instances of self-harm has sparked debates on whether this adaption damages the intentions of the novel. Hove attempts to brings these themes and societal issues to stage perhaps crossed a line and disturbed the audience rather than inspiring social change. It has been described as both “an anthropological study of pain” and “unethical” (“A Little Life Review”). Hove’s dedicated approach to this adaptation introduces risk, potentially veering towards nihilism rather than social reformation. The phrase “trauma porn” has been used to describe the novel/play and the fascination with watching trauma for entertainment—whether that be portrayed in the media, podcasts, theatre, news outlets, etc. Framing this within Shaw and Ibsen’s categorizations, it is imperative to question the line between meaningful representation and exploitative sensationalism. The uncomfortable portrayal of violence still retains weight, inviting one to reflect on whether the inherent risk of overshadowing social commentary with sadism is justified by the prospect of fostering change. Writer Arifa Akbar reviews the play and comments on the audiences’ own relationship to the character:

We are positioned as jurors of sorts, bearing witness to all that is done to Jude... not only to watch the drama unfold but also as mirrors, reflecting the passive pain of witnessing. Ultimately this returns us to the same central contention: is this a story that wallows in the horror of bearing witness, or one that dares to look that horror unflinchingly in the face? (Nicole). 

The dynamics of conversation within theatre serves to represent the power in this particular medium that both encourages diverse perspectives and challenges thresholds. In addressing issues in a socially moral context, should there an line in approaching these problems? Does creating limitations to protect morality inversely harm the freedom of art and ethics? These questions lead to an examination of the potential consequences of proactively exposing social problems through performances. Notably, literary figures and directors such as George Bernard Shaw, Gillian Greer, Clint Dyer, Roy Williams, and Hanya Yanagihara bravely navigate these challenges. Drawing parallels with Henrik Ibsen's Shakespearean-inspired intent to expose societal inequalities and effect reformation through a humanistic medium, this discourse centers on the social problem play and how success can be measured by controversy. The transformative nature of theatre cultivates a connection and trust between actors and audiences, thus bearing the capability of shaping societal perceptions and norms.

Works Cited

“4 Ways Culture Can Bring You Comfort - Google Arts & Culture.” Google, Google, artsandculture.google.com/story/4-ways-culture-can-bring-you-comfort/ zAWhmk2WD5hOww?hl=en. Accessed 7 Dec. 2023.

Barekat, Houman. “‘boy Parts’ Review: Onstage, a Dangerous Woman Isn’t Enough.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 27 Oct. 2023, www.nytimes.com/2023/10/27/theater/ boy-parts-play-soho- theater.html#:~:text=It’s%20refreshing%2C%20but%20it’s%20also,of%20cruelty%20an d%20self%2Dsabotage.

Barekat, Houman. “‘boy Parts’ Review: Onstage, a Dangerous Woman Isn’t Enough.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 27 Oct. 2023, www.nytimes.com/2023/10/27/theater/ boy-parts-play-soho-theater.html.

Carpenter, Jade. “Are You Addicted to Trauma Porn?” Stellar, 21 Feb. 2023, stellar.ie/real-talk/ issues/are-you-addicted-to-trauma-porn/115874. Curtis, Nick. “Death of England: Closing Time at the NT – Uniquely Brilliant.” Evening Standard, Evening Standard, 10 Oct. 2023,

www.standard.co.uk/culture/theatre/death-of- england-closing-time-national-theatre-review-b1112452.html. Dyer, Clint, and Roy Williams. Death of England: Closing Time. Methuen, 2023.

“Eliza Clark’s BookTok Sensation Boy Parts Becomes a One-Woman Show.” The Guardian, Guardian News and Media, 20 Sept. 2023, www.theguardian.com/stage/2023/sep/20/ eliza-clark-boy-parts-aimee- kelly#:~:text=%E2%80%9CShe%20wants%20her%20art%20to,patriarchy%20of%20the %20art%20world%E2%80%9D.Evierowan. “Review of Pygmalion.” A Young(Ish) Perspective, 22 Sept. 2023, ayoungishperspective.co.uk/2023/09/22/review-pygmalion/ #:~:text=Now%2C%20I%20don’t%20think,the%20play%20gets%20slightly%20overloo ked.

Greer, Gillian, and Eliza Clark. Boy Parts. Nick Hern Books, 2023.
King, Michelle Penelope. “The Authority Gap: Why Women Are Still Taken Less Seriously than Men.” Forbes, Forbes Magazine, 9 Nov. 2022,

www.forbes.com/sites/michelleking/ 2021/10/26/the-authority-gap-why-women-are-still-taken-less-seriously-than-men/.

“A Little Life Review – James Norton’s Sexually Abused Lawyer Is Spared No Misery.” The Guardian, Guardian News and Media, 5 Apr. 2023, www.theguardian.com/stage/2023/ apr/05/a-little-life-review-james-norton-sexually-abused-harold-pinter-theatre-london- hanya-yanagihara.

Nicole, Christina. “Death of England: Closing Time - Review • Afridiziak Theatre News.” Afridiziak Theatre News, 10 Oct. 2023, www.afridiziak.com/reviews/death-of-england- closing-time-review/.

“Problem Play.” Encyclopædia Britannica, Encyclopædia Britannica, inc., www.britannica.com/ art/problem-play. Accessed 7 Dec. 2023. “Pygmalion at the Old Vic Review – a Production Left with Little to Say.” WhatsOnStage.Com –, 20 Sept. 2023,

www.whatsonstage.com/news/pygmalion-at-the-old-vic-review-a- production-left-with-little-to-say_1528372/.

“Pygmalion Review – Patsy Ferran and Bertie Carvel Don’t Find Play’s Heart.” The Guardian, Guardian News and Media, 20 Sept. 2023, www.theguardian.com/stage/2023/sep/20/ pygmalion-review-patsy-ferran-bertie-carvel-old-vic-london-shaw-class.

“Review: Death of England: Closing Time – National Theatre.” The Quinntessential Review, 15 Oct. 2023, theqr.co.uk/2023/10/15/review-death-of-england-closing-time-national- theatre/.

Shaw and the Problem Play - Uoanbar.Edu.Iq, www.uoanbar.edu.iq/eStoreImages/Bank/ 4137.pdf. Accessed 7 Dec. 2023. Shaw, George Bernard, et al. Pygmalion.

Some Problematics of Bernard Shaw’s Drama Regjina Gokaj - Core, core.ac.uk/download/pdf/ 236406219.pdf. Accessed 7 Dec. 2023.
Swain, Marianka. “Death of England: Closing Time – Awkward Two-Hander Tries to Cover Too Much Ground.” The Telegraph, Telegraph Media Group,

10 Oct. 2023, www.telegraph.co.uk/theatre/what-to-see/death-of-england-closing-time-national-theatre- review/.

Yanagihara, Hanya. A Little Life. Picador, 2016.