What do you think?
Rate this book
The British Trilogy #3
The Absence of War
After a long period of turmoil, the Leader's office has imposed an uneasy period of calm on the Labour Party. But the leader, George Jones, knows he has only one chance of power.
The third part of a trilogy of plays about British institutions, The Absence of War offers an original look at the way modern politicians think and act, as well as a meditation on the classic problems of leadership.
Alongside the first two parts of the trilogy, Racing Demon and Murmuring Judges, about the Church and the Law, David Hare has also written Asking Around, a documentary book which supplies the background to the writing of the plays.
The third part of a trilogy of plays about British institutions, The Absence of War offers an original look at the way modern politicians think and act, as well as a meditation on the classic problems of leadership.
Alongside the first two parts of the trilogy, Racing Demon and Murmuring Judges, about the Church and the Law, David Hare has also written Asking Around, a documentary book which supplies the background to the writing of the plays.
96 pages, Paperback
First published February 24, 1994
3 people are currently reading
65 people want to read
About the author
David Hare
116 books85 followersSir David Hare (born 5 June 1947) is an English playwright, screenwriter and theatre and film director. Most notable for his stage work, Hare has also enjoyed great success with films, receiving two Academy Award nominations for Best Adapted Screenplay for writing The Hours in 2002, based on the novel written by Michael Cunningham, and The Reader in 2008, based on the novel of the same name written by Bernhard Schlink.
On West End, he had his greatest success with the plays Plenty, which he adapted into a film starring Meryl Streep in 1985, Racing Demon (1990), Skylight (1997), and Amy's View (1998). The four plays ran on Broadway in 1982–83, 1996, 1998 and 1999 respectively, earning Hare three Tony Award nominations for Best Play for the first three and two Laurence Olivier Award for Best New Play. Other notable projects on stage include A Map of the World, Pravda, Murmuring Judges, The Absence of War and The Vertical Hour. He wrote screenplays for the film Wetherby and the BBC drama Page Eight (2011).
As of 2013, Hare has received two Academy Award nominations, three Golden Globe Award nominations, three Tony Award nominations and has won a BAFTA Award, a Writers Guild of America Award for Best Adapted Screenplay and two Laurence Olivier Awards. He has also been awarded several critics' awards such as the New York Drama Critics Circle Award, and received the Golden Bear in 1985. He was knighted in 1998.
source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Ha...
On West End, he had his greatest success with the plays Plenty, which he adapted into a film starring Meryl Streep in 1985, Racing Demon (1990), Skylight (1997), and Amy's View (1998). The four plays ran on Broadway in 1982–83, 1996, 1998 and 1999 respectively, earning Hare three Tony Award nominations for Best Play for the first three and two Laurence Olivier Award for Best New Play. Other notable projects on stage include A Map of the World, Pravda, Murmuring Judges, The Absence of War and The Vertical Hour. He wrote screenplays for the film Wetherby and the BBC drama Page Eight (2011).
As of 2013, Hare has received two Academy Award nominations, three Golden Globe Award nominations, three Tony Award nominations and has won a BAFTA Award, a Writers Guild of America Award for Best Adapted Screenplay and two Laurence Olivier Awards. He has also been awarded several critics' awards such as the New York Drama Critics Circle Award, and received the Golden Bear in 1985. He was knighted in 1998.
source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Ha...
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 6 of 6 reviews
June 8, 2023
babes this is a dry, musty book that i wasted a year of my education and sanity on. spoiler alert!! fuck all happens. i went into this thinking “oo look at me being cultured. i might enjoy this”. did i fuck.
January 5, 2020
The West Wing in the UK without Aaron Sorkin’s ear for dialogue. The final play in a trilogy about British Institutions circa 1990, The Absence of War gets close but doesn’t connect. For all the play remains depressingly relevant – almost thirty years on, the criticisms of the Labour Party remain sadly true – George Jones, the central character of the play, is too constrained by Hare to carry this story. I like the idea of a once-popular and powerful politician who, during the biggest campaign of his career, is too timid and too reliant on consensus. There’s some truth to that, but that almost felt like a tacked-on narrative. Too many characters and extraneous plot points crowd the narrative. Not recommended.
June 8, 2023
I didn't want to waste another second of my life thinking about this play after finishing my drama exam this morning but people need to be warned. This is the worst thing I've ever read and Ive read all of Twilight and 50 Shades. The play gets 2 stars cause Lindsay is a slay character and she deserves the world
July 23, 2018
The third of David Hare’s trilogy of plays looking at British institutions: in this one the Labour Party is under examination. In its narrative, The Absence of War is much more straightforward compared to the previous two plays. Although the others had a central narrative holding the play together, they were built around clusters of characters opening different perspectives on the main story; The Absence of War is narrower, following the leader of the Labour Party and his minders through a general election. It has the one perspective and sticks to it. As the play and the campaign progress and things aren’t going well characters raise different strategies and we can have our sympathies and balance the arguments, but, compared to Racing Demon and Murmuring Judges, it is all relatively straightforward. And the other two plays seemed broader in implication: 25 years later the questions raised about the Church of England and the British legal system are probably still pertinent, but The Absence of War is about the Labour Party at a specific time, attempting to modernize after the ‘civil war’ of the 1980s, but before the rise of New Labour. Of course, certain questions, such as the relationship of the party leader to the party once he has surrounded himself by minders and assistants and advisors, remains, but the basic institution under examination has now changed – or changed twice, to New Labour and then to Corbyn: the play is now a historical document. It certainly has its interests, but it is a fairly easy experience. (Although probably still depressing for Labour supporters.) And other than the occasional speech where a character addresses the audience, the play has limited interest in its theatricality: it is easy to imagine it as a T.V. programme.
December 1, 2023
It's well-written as you'd expect from Hare, but the central character (George Jones) just isn't plausible enough as an inspirational leader of the Labour party. True, the point is that his passion has been smothered by spin doctors to make him electable, but Lindsay (his new marketing manager) points out that his "dynamite" character comes out in private but not in public, yet in the play that dynamite character doesn't come out in private either.
The behind-the-scenes machinations are brought brilliantly to life as Lindsay and finally George and his deputy leader battle against the spin doctors to bring George back to life. It clearly influenced Feed the Beast, which is more fun but less sophisticated politically.
As you'd also expect from Hare, it's over-long with too many small, unnecessary characters. George is accused by Malcolm (shadow chancellor) of being flabbily verbose but the same can be said of Hare himself. As and amateur actor and professional editor, I could have cut about a quarter of the script without losing anything important dramatically.
The layout is unhelpful, giving the impression that the script was meant to be read rather than performed. To expand on that last point, the script is difficult for actors in many ways:
1) Stage directions are mixed up with dialogue, making it difficult for actors to distinguish between what they're meant to do and what they're meant to say.
2) Often a stage direction says that an actor has exited. When did they exit?
3) One stage direction simply says that several conversations break out on stage. At this point I want to grab Hare and shout in his face: “So, David, you want the actors to say things on stage but you won't tell them what? You're the playwright. Telling actors what to say on stage is THE DEFINITION OF YOUR JOB.”
The behind-the-scenes machinations are brought brilliantly to life as Lindsay and finally George and his deputy leader battle against the spin doctors to bring George back to life. It clearly influenced Feed the Beast, which is more fun but less sophisticated politically.
As you'd also expect from Hare, it's over-long with too many small, unnecessary characters. George is accused by Malcolm (shadow chancellor) of being flabbily verbose but the same can be said of Hare himself. As and amateur actor and professional editor, I could have cut about a quarter of the script without losing anything important dramatically.
The layout is unhelpful, giving the impression that the script was meant to be read rather than performed. To expand on that last point, the script is difficult for actors in many ways:
1) Stage directions are mixed up with dialogue, making it difficult for actors to distinguish between what they're meant to do and what they're meant to say.
2) Often a stage direction says that an actor has exited. When did they exit?
3) One stage direction simply says that several conversations break out on stage. At this point I want to grab Hare and shout in his face: “So, David, you want the actors to say things on stage but you won't tell them what? You're the playwright. Telling actors what to say on stage is THE DEFINITION OF YOUR JOB.”
May 8, 2013
A scathing play based on the 1992 general election in the UK which shows how elections are lost as much as won.
Displaying 1 - 6 of 6 reviews