What Is The Adaptation Of Joanna Murray-Smith's Berlin Endorses?

‘Compare how Iain Sinclair’s adaptation of Joanna Murray-Smith’s Berlin endorses, marginalises or challenges the concept that commemorating the past places an unreasonable burden on those in the present.’

Joanna Murray-Smith’s play, Berlin challenges the concept that commemorating the past, places an unreasonable burden on those in the present. Dissimilarly, Iain Sinclair’s adaptation endorses this concept.

The presentation of the abiding concept of anger is encapsulated by the characters in Berlin, which explores the effects of commemorating past trauma. Murray-Smith portrays anger, prominently within her character, Tom. Tom’s anger becomes evident during the commencement of Murray-Smith’s script, when he is discerned as predominantly replying

Subsequent to Charlotte divulging one of her most traumatic life experiences, Tom validates her and how “that’s a sad story”. This small act expresses comfort, validation and sympathy which deepens their connection and assists an intensifying passionate connection betwixt them. Contrastingly, this simple act is deficient from Sinclair’s adaptation. Not only does this alteration take away from the intense nature of their relationship, it suggests a lack of empathy from Tom, placing him in a negative, villain associated light. Furthermore, this subverts Tom’s values and his argument that historical culpability is still important. Additionally to this, there is a visible space between the two lovers which is opposing to Murray-Smith’s script, where before one of the most intimate acts, Tom “moves closer to [Charlotte]". Murray-Smith’s actions not only portray a literal, physical closeness between her two characters, but moreover creates the emotional, passionate closeness. The passionate tendencies of this relationship allow the audience to sympathise with these characters, making them more emotionally vulnerable and willing to connect with their ideological views and values. Sinclair’s production lacks this subtly intertwined intimacy. Through creating a physical distance between the two characters prior, to what now is not portrayed as an act of intimacy but, an animalist act of sexual desire. Charlotte and Tom are not only seen to be distant from each other, but also entirely different levels of the set.On the higher level of the set, the only two things visible is Charlotte and the painting, whereas on the lower level everything is visible (including Tom). The conspicuous placing of Charlotte symbolises that she is the most significant item and idea in view, as well as she is physically and intellectually higher than Tom. Whereas Tom is underserving of