The Mail seems to have misjudged its readership again.
What do you expect if you go to see something called Marat/Sade? Ann Widdecombe in panto?
- Paul Danon, London, England, 23/10/2011 11:34
Click to rate Rating 2
It's pretty difficult to do the Marat/Sade without explicit references to sex and sadism, so why did these people go and see it in the first place???
- Helene, France, 23/10/2011 12:30
Click to rate Rating 10
"Kate Dee, 25, from Worcester said: 'It was utter filth and depravity."... What did she expect? There's a clue in the title"Marat/Sade" And such things as theatre reviews.
- Alfred, UK, 23/10/2011 12:29
Click to rate Rating 5
Let's get this right. Audience go to see a play about a sadist and are then horrified by what they see. Typical middle class twits.
- Simon, Somerset, 23/10/2011 12:23
Click to rate Rating 7
Just wait till some artistic type shows graphic paedophilia as entertainment. We the public will rightly hate it but the artistic world and critics will be falling over themselves praising it and justifying it as Art, darling! - Arkley Barnet......................................... U R absolutely CORRECT my friend- these advocates of " allowing the artist freedom of expression" make me want to vomit! I actually HATE the idea of censorship but I also HATE the idea that any sick pervert can get away with virtually anything as long as they masqurade it as being " ART" !! I am also amazed at some of the actors agree to take part - some pretty sick people around.
- scabycat, Birkenhead, 23/10/2011 16:05
Click to rate Rating 124
censorship is always BAD except for things I don't LIKE.
What always iritates me on occasions like this ( and they come along every so often) is the cliche ridden formulaic defences that are made by those responsible . The only word we missed here was 'challenging'; but still " Insanity, individuality, sexuality, abuse of power, freedom versus control.." blimey, the whole gamut. But I bet the Islam reference didn't put that faith in anything but a persecuted-victim perspective.
- stephen, oxford, 23/10/2011 15:44
Click to rate Rating 11
ah, a classic mail can't-winism, "why is it always references to christians, what about the muslims!? oh...there are referenes to mulims? well...i bet they're nice references!"
Once again standards are going to the dogs! People go to the theatre to get away from this sort of things on television! Where do we go now!
- HardworkingMum, Warwick Warwicksire, 23/10/2011 15:26
Click to rate Rating 3
to plays that aren't about the marquis de sade?
Reporting that 200 walked out is pointless unless you say how many stayed. A totally biased and misleading report. - Phil, Sussex, 23/10/2011 13:05.....................How do you know that the Theatre that night didn't have an audience of 201. The one, being a pervert who loved that sort of thing.......not reffering to anyone in particular, cough cough.
- Dave, Hastings Uk, 23/10/2011 14:33
Click to rate Rating 2
because unlike you dave, phil actually read the article, so knows the 200 in the headline is just reader bait which actually referes to the walkouts from the entire run, and not one night. so he's right, without knowing how many stayed, how many have walked out out of other productions of the same play, or even how many leave most plays at the interval, the 200 figure is pretty meaningless.
Sliding into the swamp, when the lovies lied that Lady Chatterley was a masterpiece and it's author was a gifted individual, when it really an is an awful book with a swear word. It was stated then, in the 1960s that the shock of one word would fade, and more and more depravity would be needed to shock, still sliding toward the slime, creating a depraved morally dead society. Look around you, it is everywhere.
- Jack, Westmorland, 23/10/2011 16:07
Click to rate Rating 101
hello mr hitchens.