A Perspective on the Progress of the Theatre of Saad al-Faraj, with Emphasis on Censorship in Kuwait and the challenged Play Custom is Second Nature

Abstract

This study is an examination of the life and work of the Kuwaiti dramatist Saad al-Faraj (1938 - ). al-Faraj’s name is virtually unknown in the West – particularly in the English-speaking West, although he is well known in Arab World. Only one academic study of any significance has appeared in Arabic on this eminent and fascinating dramatist, who was honoured by NCCAL and the Arab Theatre Institute at the end of his life. This study do not attempt to be comprehensive but focus on particular stages of al-Faraj’s career. This study is, therefore, the only one to attempt to see al-Faraj whole. To do so it combines an account of his life which seeks to comprehend the various forces that shaped his thinking with an analysis of one of his main dramatic work. The study concentrates on the years following the trauma inflicted on the Arab world by the catastrophe of the defeat of June 1967. Al-Faraj’s career can be divided into two phases: the immature plays of his young manhood; his late period – the ‘Epic theatre’, when his Nasrism politics were the main factor shaping his drama. The study places al-Faraj in his historical and sociocultural context and provides a brief background explaining the literary and theatrical traditions of the Arab world that influenced his activity as a dramatist. His late work is then examined in turn and his play Custom is Second Nature is analysed in accordance with the focus of the study. This means that special attention is given to the late period, but no significant work is neglected. The study aims to trace the trajectory of al-Faraj’s development using a variety of sources: the plays themselves, al-Faraj’s own journalism and critical writings, interviews with him, and his close friends and colleagues, in addition to a number of journals, books and articles, some of which contain important interviews with al-Faraj that shed light on his thought and ways of working. Conclusions will be drawn but, more importantly, questions will be raised, and it is hoped that scholars will consider this playwright and his work a subject meriting further research.