About time there was a theatre picket line

The publicity unit at Company B Belvoir must be rubbing their hands with glee as controversy swirls around a show opening tomorrow night.

A mysterious opinion piece in The Australian today takes aim at the director (of a co-operative show, mind you) with the provocative title 'Roll up for the show trial with the Jews in the dock'.

It then goes on to say that director of the show 'Shannon Murphy ... doesn't understand objections to My Name is Rachel Corrie'.

Murphy is quoted in an article in the Sydney Morning Herald saying, "I don't know how on earth this incredible woman's story could make you not want to have it told - it's actually quite disgraceful. If the arts start having censorship, where do we go?"

My Name is Rachel Corrie is a play based on the real life events around a woman of the same name who went to Palestine at the age of 23 as a member of the International Solidarity Movement (ISM). She was then run over by an Israel Defense Force bulldozer not long after arriving.

ISM are a Palestinian based left-wing organisation that is "committed to resisting the Israeli occupation of Palestinian land using nonviolent, direct-action methods and principles". They have some pretty hard core elements as you would expect and are not all flowers and roses.

Murphy is quoted further, saying "when I read it, I felt so passionate about making sure that, if it had not been done in Australia, that it was seen as soon as possible. I couldn't fathom why nobody else had jumped on it straight away.

"I then learned other people had tried [to get the rights from Corrie's parents]. I think it became hard for a while - a lot of people were wanting it, so they wanted to restrict who received it because it's a true story. I think her parents are cautious and just want it to happen at the right time. Timing is everything, really."

The Australian then quotes Cynthia Ozick of the Israel News;

"ON Justice Brandeis's celebrated principle that "The remedy (for free speech) is more speech," it is good and salubrious that My Name Is Rachel Corrie can finally be seen on a New York stage. Every word is Rachel Corrie's own, culled directly from her journals and e-mail messages.

"Corrie is in Gaza, a member of the International Solidarity Movement, a front for the PLO. The new recruits are called on to stand as human shields before arms caches or shooter hideouts or outlets, concealing tunnels dug from Egypt to Gaza (to) smuggle guns, rocket launchers, explosives intended for assaults on Israeli citizens.

"For Corrie, in 2003, living and writing in the very heart of the second intifada, there is no mention of intifada, only of Israeli aggression; no acknowledgment of ongoing suicide bombings, rockets, bus explosions, attacks aimed at discos, eateries, malls, holiday gatherings no recognition, for all her concern for children, of kindergartens inculcating six-year-olds with the beauty of "martyrdom".

"Finally Corrie begins to contemplate departing from Gaza: Succinctly, she advises herself: "Travel elsewhere."

"There is an old-fashioned word for this mentality, the kind of earnest temporary do-goodism that is likely to do harm: the word is slumming.

"As it turned out, Corrie did not travel elsewhere. A tragic casualty of the war she chose to join, she was cut down -- horribly -- by an Israeli army bulldozer (which) was clearing brush to thwart cover for launchers, explosives, and ambush.

"In view of the play's manifestly political intent, and particularly in the lurid light of the editors having concluded with an accusation of deliberate murder, the London audiences who jubilantly welcomed My Name Is Rachel Corrie, and the New York audiences who weepily do the same, should know at least this much: they have been spectators at a show trial. And there are Jews in the dock."

Unfortunately, The Australian doesn't really explain what the Israel News is. It shoudn't be confused with local rag The Australian Jewish News, but rather a weblog run out of the Zionism and Israel Information Center which has its own clearly-defined agenda.

The review from Ozick isn't a bad one - maybe a bit too long-winded for my liking. But it would have been nice if The Australian properly declared the source to show the subjectivity of what the reviewer was writing. Well, at least before having a good old go at this Co-op theatre production.

But as they say, any publicity is good publicity.