Much as I appreciate the ex-Cantabrigian Rupert Christiansen’s integrity as a journalist and critic, I couldn’t help but feel that his recent Telegraph article, ‘Modernising classics is a cheap trick’, demonstrated a depressing level of snobbery and disengagement with the current theatrical climate. Now, to be fair, I haven’t seen the production at the centre of his grievance, the National’s recent revival of ‘Man vs Superman’: with VILF Ralph Fiennes in the leading role, you can’t get tickets for love or money. Nevertheless, he raises several points which really can’t be allowed to go unchallenged.

Mr Christiansen subscribes to the line that updating texts “patronises an audience by assuming it lacks a modicum of historical imagination or the ability to draw its own parallels and conclusions”. In other words, we shouldn’t (for instance) have to bedeck the set of Richard III with swastikas for folks to twig the chilling permanence of violent despotism. But he seems to forget that bringing a classic truly ‘up-to-date’ does not simply mean dreaming up heavy handed contemporary analogies. These days, modernised productions will frequently ask audiences to radically rethink their interpretation of the text.

If someone were to ask me if watching Othello made me re-evaluate the challenges for women in positions of military authority, I would be forced into a slightly baffled “Urrhm. No.” But Robbie Taylor Hunt’s upcoming production of Othello (ADC Week 4 Mainshow) is attempting to confront precisely that issue by not only bringing the setting bang up to 2015 but also swapping the genders of four characters.

“There’s a significant underrepresentation of women in theatre, so I hope the production exposes and tackles some gender problems,” Robbie told me.
Shifting the subtext of classic plays to explore contemporary issues around gender politics can add fresh and relevant dimensions to what can sometimes be stale texts. This is certainly the case with Othello. “The frameworks of relationships and manipulations differ because of the gender differences, adding interesting new considerations and themes”, Robbie told me.

Reading through his updated text, Iago’s concocted suspicion of the (now male) Desdemona’s affair with the (male) Cassio crackles to life with renewed danger and urgency. Iago’s inception of such terms as ‘foul’ and ‘false’ into Othello’s vocabulary have infinitely more euphemistic weight than would be the case in a traditional production.

Naysayers, Christiansen included, will argue that we should respect the author’s wishes and “use his thought process as a starting point”.

But we are in an age of theatre where putting a play up does not simply mean meekly kowtowing to text and author, with no room for directorial imagination.

Some of the most engaging productions are those which are prepared to dissect and interrogate classic texts, to challenge them even as they present them. This is not, as Rupert suggests, “theatrical solipsism”, but a vital form of engagement with our artistic heritage, as we revisit and challenge our intellectual past in a manner that the most powerful theatre has a unique capacity to achieve.

I recall, for example, seeing a superb production of Camus’ Les Justes at Corpus. The most striking, and chilling, feature was the presence of newspaper clippings, covering the walls, and documenting the rise of international terrorism in recent decades (ISIS and the like).

At what point, I wondered as I watched, do the ideas espoused by these ‘freedom fighters’ tip over into a brutal imitation of the very regime they report to resist? What trail has been left by violent political resistance in the 65 years since Camus wrote the text?

A truly up-to-date production can make the boldest of statements, countering the present with the past, developing historical ideas and demonstrating that these plays, which can be reinterpreted and re-examined for every generation, truly are ‘classics’.