What’s gone wrong at the National Theatre?

Now we have a Labour government, it would be nice to feel repertory will return to the National Theatre. It used to be possible to come to London for a week and see six plays. Audiences loved it. New writing spoke to old in ways which enriched both. Today, you’re more likely to see Ibsen, O’Neill, Molière and Marlowe in the West End. What happened to the library of world drama? The new practice is to offer only a couple of straight runs, sometimes first-rate. So there’s nothing to stop any random producer saying: ‘Hey, the Lyttelton seems to be empty this autumn, can I hire it to do one of my shows?’ Shaw and Granville Barker wanted to assert that theatre was art, not commerce. The model was European, not American. The excuse given for abandoning repertory is that it’s too expensive. But that depends on your priorities. If you want it enough, you can budget to make it happen. The National Theatre isn’t presenting nearly enough work. Diversity thrives on amplitude. Just like the British economy, the theatre will only prosper by expanding. If anyone argues that actors will no longer stay a year and do four shows, tell them: the National isn’t there to surrender to the culture, it’s there to change it.

Although Sunday’s demonstrations in Tel Aviv were rooted in tragedy, they also represented a triumph – a rare moment of encouragement for those of us who can hold more than one idea in our heads at any one time. The protestors despise Hamas, but they loathe and distrust Benjamin Netanyahu, Itamar Ben-Gvir and Bezalel Smotrich equally. The Israelis commemorate 7 October, but the Palestinians refer to 8 October. They can’t even agree a date. Most western commentary is hobbled by partiality and exaggeration. The minimum qualification for any decent contribution is not just to express but genuinely to feel respect for suffering on both sides.