Giant

by Mark Rosenblatt

'I wanted to put you bang in the picture. Apprise you of the difficulties. Because, in case you hadn't noticed, he's a human boobytrap. And now, guess what, surprise surprise, boom!'
A world-famous children's author under threat. A battle of wills in the wake of scandal. And a chance to make amends…
It's the summer of 1983, The Witches is about to hit the shelves and Roald Dahl is making last-minute edits. But the outcry at his recent, explicitly antisemitic article won't die down. Across a single afternoon at his family home, and rocked by an unexpectedly explosive confrontation, Dahl is forced to make a public apology or risk his name and reputation.
Inspired by real events, Mark Rosenblatt's debut play Giant offers a nuanced portrait of a fiendishly charismatic icon – and explores with dark humour the difference between considered opinion and dangerous rhetoric.
Giant was first performed at the Royal Court Theatre, London, in 2024, directed by Nicholas Hytner and starring John Lithgow as Dahl, alongside Elliot Levey, Rachael Stirling, Tessa Bonham Jones, Romola Garai and Richard Hope.
'Shocking, challenging, spectacularly good… Head-on, unflinchingly, Giant confronts the vile antisemitism of one of the most beloved children's authors of all time, while sweeping along in its ferocious cross-currents of dialogue all the pitched battles of society today… what is so good about Rosenblatt's play is that it's so tightly focused, and so colossally universal' - Evening Standard
'Subtle, intelligent and stylishly crafted… lots of well-timed jokes, but again and again, the poison seeps through… the timing of this thoroughly absorbing play could hardly have been more apt' - The Times
'Brilliant… as dark and sharp-toothed as one of Dahl's fictive monsters… sophisticated writing that speaks directly to our times… shows a necessary bravery. This is exactly what theatre is for' - Guardian
'Incendiary… a play that says things that many people may be thinking, but are too afraid to air in public. It's not simply about Dahl, it's about all of us' - Daily Mail

Genres: Plays, Drama, Fiction

128 pages, Paperback

First published October 3, 2024

Reviews

[Nadja]

Giant is a thought-provoking play that is unfortunately more relevant than ever.

[Harry McDonald]

This was my play of 2024 - an immaculate production of Rosenblatt's play, led with a titanic performance by John Lithgow, all the scarier for how utterly without strain it felt. The play so skilful, moving between Roald Dahl at his most sensitive and his most ferocious, surrounded by people with... varying intentions and motivations as to his best interests. Rosenblatt makes him so human even as he is utterly vile.

[Scott]

An explosively tense showdown! This must be a great challenge for actors.

[Jason]

A tough play to read (and I imagine an even tougher play to sit through)! Superbly written, deeply ugly and sadly very timely.

[Javier Fernandez]

It's sad that the author of the first book I truly fell in love with as a child, Charlie and the Chocolate Factory, was a hateful anti-Semite. It's hard to believe that Roald Dahl (portrayed wonderfully by John Lithgow on Broadway) is truly the author of so many beloved classic children's books. I guess the lesson here is that you can't read a writer by what he writes.

[Doug]

Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose. Rosenblatt's astonishing debut play could not be more relevant. It imagines a 1983 confrontation between beloved, though decidedly cantankerous, children's author Roald Dahl, and representatives of both his British and US publishers, over the writer's controversial endorsement of a book (God Cried) condemning Israel's actions in the 1982 Lebanon war.

On the one hand, Dahl is absolutely correct in seeing Israel's actions as tantamount to genocide (sound familiar?) - but on the other, he spouts some outrageously inflammatory, sweeping and definitely antisemitic remarks about the Jewish race in general (all of which stem from Roald's actual words on record). It makes for riveting, if uncomfortable drama. Wish I could have seen the recent premiere production at the Royal Court, featuring bravura performances from John Lithgow (who bears an uncanny resemblance to the real Dahl) and Romola Garai.

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/09/27/th...
https://www.theguardian.com/stage/202...
https://www.theguardian.com/stage/202...
https://www.standard.co.uk/culture/th...
https://www.timeout.com/london/theatr...
https://www.thetimes.com/culture/thea...

[Joel Wall]

A knotty story about a very complicated man, this is an important piece that addresses Dahl's antisemitism as well as showing his support for Palestine. Obviously perhaps this would be impossible considering the basis on real life, but I would have liked there to have been another character within the play who could give legitimacy to his support of Palestine while still opposing his antisemitism, as all of the characters are either 'neutral' or pro-Israel.

[Hayden Finkelshtain]

A play needs to be performed, all I have to go on here is the text. I believe strongly that, at the end of it all, the actors in a show are the last line of defence for authenticity. Good writing, bad writing, ultimately the actors make or break a show by mining for subtext (that is either generously provided by excellent penmanship or that they endow poor text with). Without seeing this show performed it is really difficult to say if it works.

That said: I struggle with this text. Roald Dahl was pretty famously antisemitic, but this script, in my mind, is far too blunt an instrument to really say much about it. The events of the play obviously take place well before October 7th, 2023, but with everything that followed that day in mind, including Israel's (and the US's) entrenchment of fanatical, far right nationalists into their governments, much of the commentary on Israeli geopolitics in the 80s feels both underwhelming, and off to the side.

I don't think that the characters in this piece really struggle, nor do they change, and so we end up with an evil Roald Dahl gradually unveiling his evilness, and the rest of the company slowly expressing their views, but never really inspecting them.

I guess I ask myself what the piece is saying, and it seems to be saying that Roald Dahl hated all Jews because he hated Israel. Fine. Conflating a people with a government is wrong. But there is no real modern commentary or utility here as far as I can see. What is this adding to the conversation? I'm not sure.

Perhaps performed, especially with the likes of John Lithgow in the driver's seat, some deeper meaning comes to the surface. I hope that is the case. Writing about antisemitism in 2026 is a deeply important issue, I just am not convinced that this text adds anything.

[Jim]

I really loved Giant. It’s such a striking, thought-provoking play that takes on the complicated legacy of Roald Dahl with a lot of courage, but also a lot of nuance. It doesn’t shy away from his very real and troubling anti-Semitism, but it also doesn’t turn him into a one-dimensional villain. Instead, it leans into the idea that people are complicated, even the ones we admire.

What really worked for me was how it set up Dahl’s beloved status in literature alongside this darker side of his personality. For so many of us, he represents imagination, childhood, and a certain kind of mischievous magic. That’s what makes the play land so hard. It disrupts that image and forces you to sit with the discomfort of holding both truths at once.

I also thought the portrayal of Dahl was incredibly well done. He isn’t written as purely evil, but as a fully human figure, someone capable of charm and warmth alongside beliefs that are genuinely upsetting. That complexity felt honest. And when the gloves come off, it’s honestly a bit shocking, not because it’s out of nowhere, but because you’ve come to understand him just enough for it to really hit.

In the end, I think Giant works because it doesn’t try to resolve everything neatly. It trusts the audience to wrestle with the tension. It left me thinking a lot about how we reconcile the work we love with the people behind it, and that’s not an easy question. It’s an unsettling experience in the best way, and absolutely worth reading.

[Gina Dalfonzo]

I read an interview with the playwright that got me interested in this one, though I'm not much of a Roald Dahl fan. Obviously Dahl is gifted, but in most of his works I've felt a mean streak that put me off. Rosenblatt definitely picks up on that here. As it turns out, one probably has an easier time with this play if one is not a Dahl fan (though Lord knows we all have our problematic favorites whose dark sides we have to reckon with).

The writing and the characterizations are sharp and strong, especially for a first play. And of course the current conflict highlights the complexity of some of the issues it tackles. I could nitpick a few things here and there -- it's not at all clear what Liccy sees in Roald, for one thing. As nice as he can be at some moments, those moments are few and far between. And there's a little bit of lag in the second act. Rosenblatt really brings it in for a landing, though -- the ending is quietly but resoundingly devastating. Like Dahl or loathe him, or a bit of both, you come away -- or at least I came away -- haunted by the question of how to have any kind of relationship, personal or professional, with someone who has beliefs that are utterly loathsome and is utterly unrepentant. On the whole, I'd call it a brilliant piece of work.

I hear the play will be shown in movie theaters at some point, and I hope it shows near me, because I really want to see it staged now.

[PC]

(4.6)

I really liked this play! Given the times that we are in, this is a very ballsy play to put out. The play explores different perspectives of the Palestinian/ Israeli conflict. Although Dahl was antisemitic, this play still pushes for a complex conversation about the conflict.

I like that this was well-researched, and that different parts of Dahl personal story was woven in, such as the medical valve he created, his son’s tragic accident, and Olivia’s death.

Furthermore, I could not help thinking about JK Rowling. John Lithgow, the actor chosen for Dahl, was recently cast to play Dumbledore in Harry Potter. Lots of people were against him taking the role, because he would be adding to a franchise that was written by a controversial author. When asked for a statement, he half-defended her, and I guess while reading this I wonder about the need to separate art from the artist. Can we still enjoy the art of a controversial figure if the author is still alive? When they are dead, it’s sort of a moot point. Anyway, just thoughts I have been mulling over!

[JB]

We could’ve done things! We could’ve explored what it means to become a banally evil adult and the irony of Dahl doing so. Instead, we get a trite “is he or isn’t he antisemitic”, “all anti-Zionism are antisemetic” piece.

Also the staging of this is incurably weird. Characters stay in convos far too long and there aren’t great choices for the actors to make so they just stand still.

[Alan K]

Now I'm Ready to See the Show

Enjoyable,insightful read into the life/mind of the creator of so many interesting characters, but arguably none more fascinating than himself. Faced with a public relations kerfuffle, Roald Dahl solves it in a way consistent with a writer whose characters are quirky, and always fascinating

[JPS]

Powerful and timely. I could hear John Lithgow as I read the play. I think Mark Rosenblatt has masterfully used the story of Raold Dahl to examine today's conflicting views of Israel and the rise of antisemitism.

[Ian Carpenter]

4.5 Exceptional button-pushing complexity. I would love to see this performed, but, as a piece of writing it's clever, balanced and offers no easy ways out. It's a time of flaws and Rosenblatt creates a Dahl believably full of them.

[Shaun Grace]

This really details the harmful views Roald Dahl held regarding Jewish people. An interesting read as someone who grew up on his books. Also it is super relevant today with the things currently happening in the middle east

[Sean]

It's really a masterclass in writing a monster while making him horribly human at the same time.

I can't believe the writer started this in 2018
I can't believe this is the writer's first play.

[Clare McHugh]

Saw the play, and bought the script in the lobby. A very powerful play, devastating about insidious anti-Semitism

[O]

A masterpiece. Saw it in London. Painfully good.

[Tim Grimes]

Powerful. An interesting and unsettling portrait of the famous writer

[Georgia Darwin]

jealous of anyone who saw this performed 🙌

[Mary]

An uncomfortable but compelling look at Roald Dahl and a moment in his life. Simple staging, with a focus on the dialogue.

[Steve Mayer]

As enthralling and upsetting to read as it was to watch.

[Becky Lang]

This is the most important play of this moment in time. Period. Full stop.

[Tommy Romano]

Interesting concept but left with more questions than answers, the biggest being any sort of stance

[Cary S]

A very talkly, “idea” play. I’m sure it’s a stellar performance by John Lithgow, but all of the other characters were stock on the page, with limited to no theatricality. Here’s a point/counterpoint on a frankly exhausting and exhausted debate, with no progress or original conclusions. Instead of Dahl, it could have been a Columbia college student and a reform rabbi debating the self same issues. Maybe seeing is believing on this one….

[Bobby Sullivan]

Good play. Through most of it, Roald walks the line of nuance between criticizing the Israeli government and its actions and actual antisemitism. But by the end, he tilts over the edge into full hatred of Jews. Not surprisingly, it's apparent that the reason is that he's never actually known any Jewish people on a personal, human level.

[JDW]

Interesting story wow. Very dense and thought provoking. I got lost on the British slang sometimes but aside from that very strong and intriguing!