Louise Dearman, Tony Yazbeck, Alexandra Silber and Ben Davis in Kiss Me, Kate. All photos: Chris Christodoulou
Show Hide image

Proms 2014: the John Wilson Orchestra thrills with Cole Porter's Kiss Me, Kate

A triumphant return to the Proms for the John Wilson Orchestra with the original 1948 version of Cole Porter's great musical.

There are few conductors who receive rapturous applause before they have even lifted their baton for the first beat. At the Proms, John Wilson is one of those lucky few. It’s not an honour that is earned easily. Since 2009, when Wilson first brought his meticulously musical approach to classic film and stage music to the Royal Albert Hall, he has garnered a reputation for innovative, witty programming and consummate musicianship that has resulted in his concerts becoming some of the hottest tickets of the season.

As well as a conductor, Wilson is something of a musical detective. Over the past few years, he has been instrumental in recovering the original scores of many classic musicals, including High Society, Singin’ in the Rain and An American in Paris. With his orchestra - a kind of super-group of musicians hand-picked from the best ensembles in the world - he produces performances of these lost scores of such clarity and feeling that you are left wondering how such music could ever have been allowed to get lost in the first place.

This year, he brought us the original 1948 orchestrations of Cole Porter’s Kiss Me, Kate, complete with a full company of singers and dancers. This isn’t the first time Wilson’s orchestra has played for a whole show at the Proms: this one follows on from the success of 2012’s semi-staged My Fair Lady. Stuffed as it is with big-hitting numbers - “Too Darn Hot”, “So In Love”, “Why Can’t You Behave?” and “Always True To You in My Fashion” - this Kate was a much-anticipated treat of the 2014 season.

John Wilson in action

The show lived up to its billing. The company ensemble singing was excellent, the dancing sharp and balletic, the costumes clever. Great use was made of the Royal Albert Hall’s size and shape - performers chased each other up and around the orchestra via the organ, wriggled through the prommers in the arena, and characters trying to escape the venue got a big laugh with a “round and round and round” gag. The sound, too, held up, with only the odd glitch affecting the performers’ radio mics.

Kiss Me, Kate came at the end of a difficult decade for Cole Porter, in which he has struggled to replicate the success he had enjoyed in the 1930s with shows like The Gay Divorce and Anything Goes. His decision to base a musical around a production of Shakespeare’s The Taming of the Shrew was unexpected, to say the least, but ultimately vindicated - spanning over 1,000 performances in its initial run, the show because Porter’s longest-running hit.

The Shakespearean “play within a play” elements ask a lot of the show’s principals, who alongside the fast-paced dialogue and vocal agility must give convincing performances in the Shrew sequences. (The domestic violence in Shakespeare’s play requires a slight suspension of feminist anger if it is to be enjoyed.)

In this production, the principals managed this admirably. Broadway stalwart Ben Davis was suitably arrogant and unctuous as leading man Fred Graham/Petruchio, while Tony Yazbeck made an elegant, raffish Bill Calhoun and Lucentio, his virtuosic tap-dancing a joy to watch. These two were outshone, though, by the women. Louise Dearman’s Lois Lane/Bianca was completely captivating, and her rendition of “Always True to You in My Fashion”, complete with audience interaction and jaunty winks, was one of the highlights of the show.

Alexandra Silber (left), leading the cast as Lilli Vanessi/Katherine, was the stand-out of the evening, though. Critically acclaimed for her recent performance as Maria in the San Francisco Symphony’s West Side Story, Silber brought a similar range and passion to this part. Her “I Hate Men” had the audience gasping and applauding by turns, her “So In Love” was tender and touching, and the way she threw flowerpots at Davis’s head was truly magnificent.

The 1953 MGM film version sanitised some of Porter’s songs, but this was Kiss Me, Kate in all its glory. Jason Pennycooke’s take on “Too Darn Hot” was sultry and saucy, and he was ably backed up by the company with some spectacular choreography. But the best, and rudest, lyrics are of course in “Brush Up Your Shakespeare”. Lines such as “If she says your behaviour is heinous,/ Kick her right in the Coriolanus” deserve to be roared to the rafters, and so they were.

The real star of the show, though, was always going to be the orchestra. From the first impossibly crisp syncopations of the overture, their sound bewitched the ear. This was the tightest pit band in the world, plucked out of the darkness and given pride of place on stage. As always with Wilson’s outfit, the orchestra’s shape concealed several other ensembles which emerged as the score went on - a sparkling horn section, a jazz trio, a cool, laid-back drums-and-bass duet. Over it all lay the strings, swooping fiercely as Wilson pushed and pulled Porter’s melodies to reveal their maximum emotional potential.

In fact, the only disappointment of the evening was that it wasn’t possible to spend more time drinking in the extraordinary musicianship displayed by the orchestra - at times, the dance sequences felt like they got in the way. But in between the high kicks and lifts it was always just about possible to see Wilson, jiving along on his podium, making it all happen.

You can listen to this performance on the BBC Radio iPlayer for 30 days, and a televised version will be broadcast in December

Caroline Crampton is assistant editor of the New Statesman. She writes a weekly podcast column.

OLI SCARFF/GETTY IMAGES
Show Hide image

The West can never hope to understand Islamic State

Graeme Wood's The Way of the Strangers: Encounters with the Islamic State reminds us of something that ought to be obvious: Islamic State is very Islamic.

The venue for the declaration of the “Islamic State” had been carefully chosen. The Great Mosque of al-Nuri in Mosul was a fitting location for the restoration of a “caliphate” pledged to the destruction of its enemies. It was built in 1172 by Nur al-Din al-Zengi, a warrior famed for his victories over the Crusaders. When Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi ascended the pulpit in July 2014 and proclaimed his followers to be “the backbone of the camp of faith and the spearhead of its trench”, he was consciously following in Nur al-Din’s footsteps. The message could not have been clearer. The Crusaders were back and needed defeating.

Time present and time past are both perhaps present in time future. In Islamic State’s propaganda, they certainly are. Sayings attributed to Muhammad that foretold how the armies of Islam would defeat the armies of the Cross serve their ideologues as a hall of mirrors. What happened in the Crusades is happening now; and what happens now foreshadows what is to come.

The Parisian concert-goers murdered at the Bataclan theatre in 2015 were as much Crusaders as those defeated by Nur al-Din in the 12th century – and those slaughters prefigure a final slaughter at the end of days. When the propagandists of Islamic State named their English-language magazine Dabiq, they were alluding to a small town in Syria that – so they proclaim – will at last bring the Crusades to an end. Every issue is headed with the same exultant vaunt. “The spark has been lit here in Iraq, and its heat will continue to intensify – by Allah’s permission – until it burns the Crusader armies in Dabiq.”

How much does Islamic State actually believe this stuff? The assumption that it is a proxy for other concerns – born of US foreign policy, or social deprivation, or Islamophobia – comes naturally to commentators in the West. Partly this is because their instincts are often secular and liberal; partly it reflects a proper concern not to tar mainstream Islam with the brush of terrorism.

Unsurprisingly, the first detailed attempt to take Islamic State at its word ruffled a lot of feathers. Graeme Wood’s article “What Isis really wants” ran in the Atlantic two years ago and turned on its head the reassuring notion that the organisation’s motivation was anything that Western policy­makers could readily comprehend.

“The reality is,” Wood wrote, “that the Islamic State is Islamic. Very Islamic.” The strain of the religion that it was channelling derived “from coherent and even learned interpretations of Islam” and was fixated on two distinct moments of time: the age of Muhammad and the end of days long promised in Muslim apocalyptic writings. Members of Islamic State, citing the Quran and sayings attributed to the Prophet in their support, believe themselves charged by God with expediting the end of days. It is their mandate utterly to annihilate kufr: disbelief. The world must be washed in blood, so that the divine purpose may be fulfilled. The options for negotiating this around a table at Geneva are, to put it mildly, limited.

In The Way of the Strangers, Wood continues his journey into the mindset of Islamic State’s enthusiasts. As he did in the Atlantic, he scorns “the belief that when a jihadist tells you he wants to kill you and billions of others to bring about the end of the world, he is just speaking for effect”. Although not a report from the “caliphate”, it still comes from front lines: the restaurants of Melbourne, the suburbs of Dallas, the cafés of Ilford. Wood’s concern is less with the circumstances in Syria and Iraq that gave birth to Islamic State than with those cocooned inside stable and prosperous societies who have travelled to join it. What persuades them to abandon the relative comforts of the West for a war zone? How can they possibly justify acts of grotesque violence? Is killing, for them, something
incidental, or a source of deep fulfilment?

These are questions that sociologists, psychologists and security experts have all sought to answer. Wood, by asking Islamic State’s sympathisers to explain their motivation, demonstrates how Western society has become woefully unqualified to recognise the ecstatic highs that can derive from apocalyptic certitude. “The notion that religious belief is a minor factor in the rise of the Islamic State,” he observes, “is belied by a crushing weight of evidence that religion matters deeply to the vast majority of those who have travelled to fight.”

Anyone who has studied the literature of the First Crusade will recognise the sentiment. The conviction, popular since at least the Enlightenment, that crusading was to be explained in terms of almost anything except religion has increasingly been put
to bed. Crusaders may indeed have travelled to Syria out of a lust for adventure, or loot, or prospects denied to them at home; but that even such worldly motivations were saturated in apocalyptic expectations is a perspective now widely accepted. “Men went on the First Crusade,” as Marcus Bull put it, “for reasons that were overwhelmingly ideological.”

The irony is glaring. The young men who travel from western Europe to fight in Syria for Islamic State – and thereby to gain paradise for themselves – are following in the footsteps less of Nur al-Din than of the foes they are pledged to destroy: the Crusaders.

Jonathan Riley-Smith, who revolutionised the study of the Crusades as a penitential movement, once wrote an essay titled “Crusading as an Act of Love”. Wood, in his attempt to understand the sanguinary idealism of Islamic State sympathisers, frequently echoes its phrasing. In Alexandria, taken under the wing of Islamists and pressed to convert, he recognises in their importunities an urgent longing to spare him hellfire, to win him paradise. “Their conversion efforts could still be described, for all their intolerance and hate, as a mission of love.”

Later, in Norway, he meets with a white-haired Islamist to whom the signs of the impending Day of Judgement are so palpable that he almost sobs with frustration at Wood’s failure to open his eyes to them. “To Abu Aisha, my stubbornness would have been funny if it were not tragic. He looked ready to grab me with both hands to try to shake me awake. Were these signs – to say nothing of the perfection of the Quran, and the example of the Prophet – not enough to rouse me from the hypnosis of kufr?”

Wood does not, as Shiraz Maher did in his recent study Salafi-Jihadism, attempt to provide a scholarly survey of the intellectual underpinnings of Islamic State; but as an articulation of the visceral quality of the movement’s appeal and the sheer colour and excitement with which, for true believers, it succeeds in endowing the world, his book is unrivalled. When he compares its utopianism to that of the kibbutzim movement, the analogy is drawn not to cause offence but to shed light on why so many people from across the world might choose to embrace such an austere form of communal living. When he listens to British enthusiasts of Islamic State, he recognises in their descriptions of it a projection of “their idealised roseate vision of Britain”. Most suggestively, by immersing himself in the feverish but spectacular visions bred of his interviewees’ apocalypticism, he cannot help but occasionally feel “the rip tide of belief”.

The Way of the Strangers, though, is no apologetic. The time that Wood spends with Islamic State sympathisers, no matter how smart or well mannered he may find some of them, does not lead him to extenuate the menace of their beliefs. One chapter in particular – a profile of an American convert to Islam whose intelligence, learning and charisma enabled him to emerge as the principal ideologue behind Dabiq – is worthy of Joseph Conrad.

Elsewhere, however, Wood deploys a lighter touch. In a field where there has admittedly been little competition, his book ranks as the funniest yet written on Islamic State. As in many a British sitcom, the comedy mostly emerges from the disequilibrium between the scale of his characters’ pretensions and ambitions and the banality of their day-to-day lives. “He can be – to use a term he’d surely hate – a ham.” So the British Islamist Anjem Choudary is summarised and dismissed.

Most entertaining is Wood’s portrait of Musa Cerantonio, whose status as Australia’s highest-profile Islamic State sympathiser is balanced by his enthusiasm for Monty Python and Stephen Fry. His longing to leave for the “caliphate” and his repeated failure to progress beyond the Melbourne suburb where he lives with his mother create an air of dark comedy. Visiting Cerantonio, Wood finds their conversation about Islamic State ideology constantly being intruded on by domestic demands. “His mother was about ten feet away during the first part of the conversation, but once she lost interest in the magazines she walked off to another part of the house. Musa, meanwhile, was discussing theoretically the Islamic views on immolation as a method of execution.”

The scene is as terrifying as it is comic. Were Cerantonio merely a solitary eccentric, he would hardly merit the attention but, as The Way of the Strangers makes amply clear, his views are shared by large numbers of Muslims across the world. Just as Protestant radicals, during the 16th-century Reformation, scorned the traditions of the Catholic Church and sought a return to the age of the Apostles, so today do admirers of Islamic State dread that the wellsprings of God’s final revelation to mankind have been poisoned. What, then, are they to do?

That their enthusiasm for, say, slavery or the discriminatory taxation of religious minorities causes such offence to contemporary morality only confirms to them that there is a desperately pressing task of purification to perform. As Wood observes, “These practices may be rejected by mainstream Muslim scholars today, but for most of Islamic history, it barely occurred to Muslims to doubt that their religion permitted them.” Verses in the Quran, sayings of the Prophet, the example of the early caliphate: all can be used to justify them. Why, then, should Islamic State not reintroduce them, in the cause of making Islam great again?

Perhaps the most dispiriting section of Wood’s book describes his attempt to find an answer to this question by consulting eminent Muslim intellectuals in the US. Scholars whose understanding of Islam derives from a long chain of teachers (and who have framed documents on their walls to prove it) angrily condemn Islamic State for ignoring centuries’ worth of legal rulings. It is a valid point – but only if one accepts, as Islamic State does not, that scholarship can legitimately be used to supplement the Quran and the sayings of Muhammad.

When Wood asks Hamza Yusuf, an eminent Berkeley Sufi, to demonstrate the group’s errors by relying only on the texts revealed to the Prophet, he struggles to do so: “Yusuf could not point to an instance where the Islamic State was flat-out, verifiably wrong.” This does not mean that it is right but it does suggest – despite what most Muslims desperately and understandably want to believe – that it is no less authentically Islamic than any other manifestation of Islam. The achievement of Wood’s gripping, sobering and revelatory book is to open our eyes to what the implications of that for all of us may be.

Tom Holland’s books include “In the Shadow of the Sword: the Battle for Global Empire and the End of the Ancient World” (Abacus)

The Way of the Strangers: Encounters with the Islamic State by Graeme Wood is published by Allen Lane (317pp, £20​)

This article first appeared in the 19 January 2017 issue of the New Statesman, The Trump era