A State of Play?: British Politics on Screen, Stage and Page, from Anthony Trollope to The Thick of It

by Steven Fielding

A State of Play explores how the British have imagined their politics, from the parliament worship of Anthony Trollope to the cynicism of The Thick of It. In an account that mixes historical with political analysis, Steven Fielding argues that fictional depictions of politics have played an important but insidious part in shaping how the British think about their democracy and have helped ventilate their many frustrations with Westminster. He shows that dramas and fictions have also performed a significant role in the battle of ideas, in a way undreamt of by those who draft party manifestos.

The book examines the work of overtly political writers have treated the subject, discussing the novels of H.G. Wells, the comedy series Yes, Minister and the plays of David Hare. However, it also assesses how less obvious sources, such as the films of George Formby, the novels of Agatha Christie, the Just William stories and situation comedies like Steptoe and Son, have reflected on representative democracy.

A State of Play is an invaluable, distinctive and engaging guide to a new way of thinking about Britain's political past and present.

Genres: Nonfiction

312 pages, Paperback

First published November 21, 2013

Reviews

[Simon · Rating 3 out of 5]

It's useful as a catalogue of popular culture's portrayal of politicians of (largely) the Westminster model. For someone of my age, it has a certain nostalgic value. But here lies the main criticism: it is (one could argue, of necessity) highly selective. It's at its best on the television series of the eighties, nineties and noughties. At its worst on books. Either the author hasn't read widely from the shelf marked literature or he has (perhaps wisely) chosen to keep to books that have sold a copy or two. He could have made his area of study clearer. Or maybe there is an unintended deception: he does, after all, namecheck Anthony Trollope in the sub-title. He gets a page or two of barely illuminating discussion and from that point on serious novelists are either marginalised or completely ignored. Highly-regarded playwright David Hare gets a paragraph or two, but this is based on film adaptations of his plays. Maurice Edelman gets as much coverage here as in all combined studies of the past fifty years but Anthony Powell gets a single sentence; even though A Dance to the Music of Time is every bit as much concerned with politics; and an inaccurate one at that.

Too broad a sweep to have very much to say and not deep enough to make it worth saying. Is it designed for the popular market or academia? The footnotes suggest it is an academic work. The content says otherwise.

Perhaps as well as of having a politics academic write about literature and or popular culture we might have a professor of literature write about politics. An attempt to cross the disciplinary divide or a bit of a hotch-potch? Neither fish nor flesh.