Via Dolorosa and When Shall We Live

Rating:
Summary: Acclaim for VIA DOLOROSA:
Review: "A uniquely powerful work... [Hare is] a passionate pilgrim evoking the human panorama behind the politics and violence." --Jack Kroll, NEWSWEEK

"A sad, funny and deeply engaging one-man show... [It is filled with] both rich humor and a wistful, wondering sorrow... It finds...as good plays always will, the echoing poetry within the dangerous chaos that is life." --Ben Brantley, THE NEW YORK TIMES

"[A] smart, lucid, shrewdly personable evening...fascinating." --Linda Winer, NEWSDAY

"A challenging and fascinating evening of theater...rigorously thought-provoking." --David Kaufman, THE NEW YORK DAILY NEWS

Rating:
Summary: (see my review sent two weeks ago)
Review: 1. I have sent you two reviews of this book in the past 3 weeks.

The first, you reported to me, was too ad hominem.

I fixed that up and 2 weeks ago sent a second version.

You still are exercising censorship and not publishing my review of "Via Dolorosa" of Dvid Hare.

Interesting that you quickly pulished my 1st review sent to you - of "Archyology".

The last review I sent you was purely non-personal and all referred to the book. I gave the two parts of the book: 2 stars and 5 stars. The two parts are totally unconnected.

Where's my review?

Dr. Baruch Hurwich [e-mail]

Rating:
Summary: Moving and humorous monologue
Review: Fortunately i had the luck to actually see David Hare perform Via Dolorosa on Broadway, not once, but twice this past spring. In fact, I was able to see nearly 30 plays in five months as part of a Duke University program taught in Manhattan. My three favorite straight plays were 1. Amy's View, 2. Death of a Salesman, 3. Via Dolorosa. What I appreciated most about Hare's two plays was his ability to reveal the complexity, stubborness, and nobility, closely bordering stoicism, that pervades the human condition.

As an agnostic and an American I was overcome by the honest critique offered by Hare. Here is someone who has wrestled with the moral and ethical dillemas and subsequently infused them into his work. I excuse his humor, because, sometimes things are so horrible all we can do is laugh, and if we cannot, then it is truly a sad thing. Stones or ideas? When shall we live? So what if you don't like all his answers, at least he's raising the right questions.

I do not expect, nor do I particularily want Hare to moderate a Palestinian/Isreali debate. What I do want is for him to dig out and contextualize the emotional elements that ground this tragic situation. As a Westerner, I understand how this passion can captivate someone from a culture in desperate need of something to live for besides material wealth. Hare accomplished exactly what he set out to do, and we are in his debt for it.

Rating:
Summary: Hare's work shines
Review: Fortunately i had the luck to actually see David Hare perform Via Dolorosa on Broadway, not once, but twice this past spring. In fact, I was able to see nearly 30 plays in five months as part of a Duke University program taught in Manhattan. My three favorite straight plays were 1. Amy's View, 2. Death of a Salesman, 3. Via Dolorosa. What I appreciated most about Hare's two plays was his ability to reveal the complexity, stubborness, and nobility, closely bordering stoicism, that pervades the human condition.

As an agnostic and an American I was overcome by the honest critique offered by Hare. Here is someone who has wrestled with the moral and ethical dillemas and subsequently infused them into his work. I excuse his humor, because, sometimes things are so horrible all we can do is laugh, and if we cannot, then it is truly a sad thing. Stones or ideas? When shall we live? So what if you don't like all his answers, at least he's raising the right questions.

I do not expect, nor do I particularily want Hare to moderate a Palestinian/Isreali debate. What I do want is for him to dig out and contextualize the emotional elements that ground this tragic situation. As a Westerner, I understand how this passion can captivate someone from a culture in desperate need of something to live for besides material wealth. Hare accomplished exactly what he set out to do, and we are in his debt for it.

Rating:
Summary: Moving and humorous monologue
Review: I first saw this piece performed by David Hare himself as a monologue. As with all plays, a certain amount of drama and charm is lost when the printed edition is the only version experienced. I saw the language and sarcasm as simultaneously refreshing, especially for those who are pessimistic about the Middle East situation, and poetic, often illustrating and describing scenes and people with warmth and edge.
I would highly recommend finding the dramatic staging of this piece, but this edition is still a beautiful essay.

Rating:
Summary: Very poor "Via Dolorosa"; excellent "When Shall We Live".
Review: To the Editor of accepted book reviews:

I find most interesting your immediate acceptance of my review of don marquis' "Archyology", which you have left on-line and which represents my true feelings about the book. Yet, I twice wrote a review of David Hare's book, "Via Dolorosa and Wnen Shall We Live". I split my grading of the book into 5 stars for the second half, and 2 stars for the first and overall. I did NOT write ad hominem, but rather described what I believe are real flaws and errors in "Via Dolorosa".

Why didn't you accept it? Is it bad for merchandising?

I am a regular and enthusiastic Amazon customer and tell all my friends about you.

I'll also tell them about your rejection of my review, with no obvious reason for it.

I would appreciate your response.

Thank you.

Dr. Baruch Hurwich [e-mail]

Rating:
Summary: 2 stars for "Via Dolorosa"; 5 stars for "When Shall We Live"
Review: [PLEASE R-E-M-O-V-E the two not-reviews-but letters-to-you you've put in as reviews, and PUT T-H-I-S in. THIS is the review. Thank you.] * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

This is not "a book". It has two totally different parts. The first, "Via Dolorosa", Hare calls a "play". It seems to be merely a monologue, a description of the author's short, recent first visit to Israel and Palestine. Rather than presenting a broad picture presenting major challenges and problems in the area, the author relies mainly on his personal experiences in rather extreme, nonrepresentative situations. E.g., in Israel: he devotes space to a difference of opinion of settlers as to whether the sabbath began at 4:15 or at 4:16 PM, and then states that no one could tell him why males are "allowed an extra 18-minute window to go on doing irreligious things.... No one can tell me why". One wonders what are these "irreligious things", but no answer is given. Hare misinforms the reader with another meaningless description: "We cannot sample [a delicious-looking stew] because today they are eating meat and we have been eating dairy. If we were German, we might be able to, because Germans need only three hours to switch from one to another." "Germans" aside, Hare has his eye of the needle trying to slip through an elephant; his facts are the opposite of reality [meat and milk]. His British Jewish neighbours could have corrected this error. Near his conclusion, he states that "an unnamed Israeli military commander" told him that 20,000 Jews were killed "in the cause of setting up the state. 'Not that every death isn't a tragedy...but...20,000 to set up a whole country; that's not so bad, you know. Not bad, for a whole state.'" - If the point of Hare's "play" is to inform, to educate his readers, his subject matter throughout is scanty; often quite peripheral matters are presented, and even these are on occasion mistakenly described. - The second half of the book is his Eric Symes Abbot Memorial Lecture delivered in Westminster Abbey on 9 May 1996. I was much taken by his opening comments that he, "an obvious heathen", was invited to speak in memory of a man who was "marked out...by the power of his Christian faith and example". Hare states lucidly his positions, many in opposition to those of his hosts, such as "Is there anything firm about Christian teaching, which cannot be reasonably countered by someone anxious to swing the myth round to suit their own prejudices?" He explains the title of his lecture as the words of Seneca: "When shall we live, if not now?" - So, 2 stars for "Via Dolorosa", 5 stars for "When Shall we Live?" - and 2 stars overall, the sad "Via Dolorosa" being the determiner of rating.

Rating:
Summary: 2 stars for "Via Dolorosa"; 5 stars for "When Shall We Live"
Review: [PLEASE R-E-M-O-V-E the two not-reviews-but letters-to-you you've put in as reviews, and PUT T-H-I-S in. THIS is the review. Thank you.] * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

This is not "a book". It has two totally different parts. The first, "Via Dolorosa", Hare calls a "play". It seems to be merely a monologue, a description of the author's short, recent first visit to Israel and Palestine. Rather than presenting a broad picture presenting major challenges and problems in the area, the author relies mainly on his personal experiences in rather extreme, nonrepresentative situations. E.g., in Israel: he devotes space to a difference of opinion of settlers as to whether the sabbath began at 4:15 or at 4:16 PM, and then states that no one could tell him why males are "allowed an extra 18-minute window to go on doing irreligious things.... No one can tell me why". One wonders what are these "irreligious things", but no answer is given. Hare misinforms the reader with another meaningless description: "We cannot sample [a delicious-looking stew] because today they are eating meat and we have been eating dairy. If we were German, we might be able to, because Germans need only three hours to switch from one to another." "Germans" aside, Hare has his eye of the needle trying to slip through an elephant; his facts are the opposite of reality [meat and milk]. His British Jewish neighbours could have corrected this error. Near his conclusion, he states that "an unnamed Israeli military commander" told him that 20,000 Jews were killed "in the cause of setting up the state. 'Not that every death isn't a tragedy...but...20,000 to set up a whole country; that's not so bad, you know. Not bad, for a whole state.'" - If the point of Hare's "play" is to inform, to educate his readers, his subject matter throughout is scanty; often quite peripheral matters are presented, and even these are on occasion mistakenly described. - The second half of the book is his Eric Symes Abbot Memorial Lecture delivered in Westminster Abbey on 9 May 1996. I was much taken by his opening comments that he, "an obvious heathen", was invited to speak in memory of a man who was "marked out...by the power of his Christian faith and example". Hare states lucidly his positions, many in opposition to those of his hosts, such as "Is there anything firm about Christian teaching, which cannot be reasonably countered by someone anxious to swing the myth round to suit their own prejudices?" He explains the title of his lecture as the words of Seneca: "When shall we live, if not now?" - So, 2 stars for "Via Dolorosa", 5 stars for "When Shall we Live?" - and 2 stars overall, the sad "Via Dolorosa" being the determiner of rating.