|This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to . If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.|
|WikiProject Biography / Arts and Entertainment||(Rated Start-class)|
|WikiProject Theatre||(Rated Start-class, Low-importance)|
|WikiProject England||(Rated Start-class, Low-importance)|
The section on Saved and his next play bear a striking similarity to this website: http://www.amrep.org/articles/3_3a/morality.html I don't have time to pursue this further tonight, but could someone look into this? I will watch the pages as well. Thanks! Bruxism 06:02, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
- I've recast the para on Saved to avoid the copyright violation, and added some references. Full referencing of the article would aid the avoidance of copyviol, and also improve the article.
- At the same time I added some references to performance, the play following was in the Cottisloe, again a smaller performance space. It might be appropriate to make the observation that Bond went from 'big' opera to plays performed in smaller spaces - but I'm trying to avoid original research - something to think about. Kbthompson 10:05, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
This article was clearly written by someone who ADORES Bond and is very frustrated that he isn't universally famous. That's not really the right approach to an encyclopedia article... -188.8.131.52 15:47, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
I've just taken a glance over this and can't see any explicit lack of neutrality. The choice of word "fecund" to describe a working relationship is ripe but not inappropriate, for example. And Bond is famous, at least in the English-speaking world, and a fair amount beyond that. Could you be more specific about what it is and where precisely you find this problem? DionysosProteus 18:29, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
I think that for instance, the abundance of adjectives and adverbs in the last paragraph is a bit of an overkill:
Bond remains a colossal figure in contemporary drama. He is hugely respected (what is this supposed to mean?) and popular in mainland Europe; but has been largely ignored or neglected by producing venues in his homeland.
This is indeed not proper for an encyclopedia article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.108.40.206 (talk) 03:39, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
I edited the article to bring the tone down a notch whilst preserving the basic intent of the original writers.MrBrueghel 02:12, 2 Jan 2007
I don't think there is a problem with the tone here. Bond is commonly regarded as one of Britain's, if not the world's greatest living dramatists, by most in the British theatrical profession and theatre academia and you will find one of his plays on any course on modern British drama worth its salt - usually Lear. However, you could source such comments from the programme to 'the Sea' at the Haymarket for instance, or one of the numerous books on Bond such as Michael Mangan's Edward Bond [Northcote House 1998] - though for my money Jenny Spencer's Dramatic Strategies in the plays of Edward Bond ( Cambridge 1992] and finally [!] in pbk is the best book on his work. 'The Sea', Bond's resituation of the 'Tempest' is an astonishing production BTW, as indeed was 'Lear' at Sheffield.
The reasons for Bond's difficult working relationship with Britain's theatre community is probably too complex for a wikipedia style article, but the sour quarrels between Bond and the RSC and subsequent litigation, without precedent in UK theatre history, led to a mutual cold war between Bond and British theatre directors and theatres. Bond doesn't want his plays performed in Britain, as he doesn't trust British directors to do his work justice, and they in turn regard Bond as immensely difficult because he wanted total command of how his plays are staged. No one apart from Beckett ever got that. not even pinter.The Europeans were and are happy to do this, however, as the French and Germans adore him. How Kent manged to convince Bond to let him stage his work I don't quite know, though of course Kent's work at the Almedia was greatly admired by everyone who saw it. Maybe Bond is just getting more tolerant as he get's older. I just wish they'd revive Lear as a touring production as it is an astonishing, albeit extremely gruelling work, and everyone deserves the right to see what is one of the finest plays written in the period.
So it isn't as if Bond is ignored by Britain or that the theatre community do not regard him as a great playwright, they just do not stage him professionally, with the exception of Big Brum whom Bond approves of and allows to do his work. However all students doing Modern British Theatre courses or studying in drama school since about 1970 are very familiar with Bond's work and his influence is very powerful. Sarah Kane - 'You can learn everything about playwriting from studying Saved' to Mark Ravenhill - 'More than ever it seems to me. Bond is our contemporary.' There is a good radio discussion at Theatre Voice on Bond from 2005 as part of the Reputations series - http://www.theatrevoice.com/the_archive/the_archive_an/default.asp?letter=R.
BTW the full title of the latest Bond critical book is The Hidden Plot: Notes on Theatre and the State [Methuen 1999] - for Bond all theatre is about politics it has been and always is.
A quick response to Steve's comments above: There's an article by Michael Billington in The Guardian ( http://arts.guardian.co.uk/print/0,,331935879-123425,00.html ) with some excellent information about Bond's conflict with the theatre establishment in England. The article also includes comments by Jonathan Kent about Kent's desire to direct two more of Bond's plays, Bingo and Saved, though it gives no indication of when or if that will happen. Older Wiser Juliet (talk) 05:59, 9 March 2008 (UTC)Older_Wiser_Juliet
- The best reply I can make to StevenBarfield is that although I happen to agree that Bond is a major playwright and a hugely influential one, the article is not the place to make unsupported comments to that effect. If he can provide citations for the Kane and Ravenhill quotes, I would be happy to include them in the article. Whatever Wikipedia says about Bond should be strictly factual; it happens to be a fact that he has been hailed by other writers as a master, but we need sources for the hails, as it were. Lexo (talk) 13:09, 14 July 2008 (UTC)
"Since the early 1970s, Bond has been conspicuous as the first dramatist since George Bernard Shaw to produce long, serious prose prefaces to his plays." In which case the author should read a bit more. Try starting with Arthur Miller. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.127.116.11 (talk) 09:49, 17 March 2013 (UTC)