Kate Maltby Kate Maltby

Under the moonlight, this serious moonlight

There’s a moment in Moonlight, Harold Pinter’s last full-length play, when Andy, a petty patriarch on a drab deathbed, accuses his wife of monopolising the love of his estranged sons. ‘They always loved their loving mother’, he rails, Lear-like. ‘They helped her with the washing-up!’



Uttered with poisonous invective here by David Bradley, it’s a reminder of Pinter’s knack for locating fraught family dynamics in the most ordinary of domestic details, then presenting them with biting, bitter comedy. But although Bijan Sheibani’s production is peppered with such great moments, there’s plenty of stodge to sit through between them.



Moonlight has always been an elliptical text. It is a play about waiting, whether for death, for a family visit, for reconciliation, for meaning – hence the incessant comparisons to Beckett. But it’s also a family drama, and thus its abstract nature is at odds with our natural urge to understand the full narrative, with the Schadenfreude and curiosity that emerges when we glimpse a window onto other families’ dysfunction.

Pinter may be right to demonstrate, with this text, the futility of such curiosity.

Kate Maltby
Written by
Kate Maltby
Kate Maltby writes about the intersection of culture, politics and history. She is a theatre critic for The Times and is conducting academic research on the intellectual life of Elizabeth I.

Topics in this article

Comments

Join the debate for just $5 for 3 months

Be part of the conversation with other Spectator readers by getting your first three months for $5.

Already a subscriber? Log in