• Listen to this segment

| the entire program

GUEST: Tim Robbins, academy award winning actor, screenwriter, director, producer, activist, and musician. Robbins is director of “1984” for the Actor’s Gang

In 1948, British writer George Orwell wrote his seminal novel Nineteen Eighty Four, about a future world where the fictional-sounding country of Oceania was at war. As part of this war, the all-too-real totalitarianism that usually accompanies it, is out of control. Orwell’s protagonist, Winston Smith, is an intellectual worker at the Ministry of Truth, who is arrested by the government’s “thought police” and degraded and psychologically tortured. The government surveillance of citizens and incessant media propaganda are eerily reminiscent of George W Bush’s America. The fact that the terms “Orwellian,” “doublespeak,” and “Big Brother” are part of today’s standard lexicon, is a testament to how relevant Orwell’s book has remained for generations. Now, the Actors Gang, an award winning theater ensemble in Los Angeles, brings 1984 to the stage at the Red Cat Theater at Disney Hall. The Actors Gang has just returned from an extensive international and national tour of the production. Directed by Academy Award-winning actor and Actors’ Gang artistic director Tim Robbins, 1984 is showing at the Red Cat through July 6th.

Tickets are available though www.redcat.org, or by calling 213.237.2800.

For more information about the Actors Gang, visit www.theactorsgang.com

Rough Transcript

Sonali Kolhatkar: George Orwell wrote his book many decades ago. 1944 I believe was when he actually wrote the book.

Tim Robbins: 1948

Sonali Kolhatkar: I think it was published in 48, he wrote it, you know, in the 40’s about this future world of totalitarianism. Why in your opinion is 1984 relevant today?

Tim Robbins: Well, you know, it’s interesting. When I first received this script my first reaction was “Oh, 1984, it’s already happened. We are past that. We are ok.” And then I read the adaptation by Michael Gene Sullivan from the San Francisco Mime Troupe and I thought, of course, that he was making all this up, you know, and I had to go back to the book before I talked to him about his adaptation. And I was delighted and horrified to see that he hadn’t made much up and that in fact that this was what Orwell had written and what I had forgotten. And so it was kind of scarily relevant, unbelievably prescient and it wasn’t the greatest hits that we all remember, you know. It wasn’t that Big Brother was watching you, necessarily, or that “War is Peace” or “Ignorance is Strength.” It was more the nature of the government and the use of fear, and the use of a constant war with an unseen enemy.

Sonali Kolhatkar: Patriotism, too.

Tim Robbins: Yes. The “Two Minutes’ Hate,” the idea that the telescreens inspire us to hate. All of these themes were so relevant and then I got to the chapter “War is Peace,” which is central to the adaptation, the stage adaptation. And that kind of knocked me on my butt. I was so bulled over by Orwell’s explanation of the nature of war after the nuclear bomb, what it would become.

Sonali Kolhatkar: There is also one of the most famous things that have come out of Orwell’s book, which has become part of our everyday lexicon, are the terms doublespeak, newspeak, etc, the sort of propaganda-meets-patriotism aspect of Orwell. Do you see that as also relevant to today’s society, or are we not there yet?

Tim Robbins: No, it’s definitely in place. It’s an effective means for the people that are in government or in high levels of journalism, they need a certain ability to hold two sets of facts in their heads at once and find a convenient truth for the situation they are in. I can’t imagine that most of these people, these people that are in the inner circle in Washington, whether they are politicians or journalists, believe that they were snuckered in 2002. The fact is we knew. Journalists knew that there was something fishy about this propaganda that was being given to the American public. A journalist worth any kind of degree they might have gotten or any job they have had should have asked questions and probably did ask questions, so doublethink and doublespeak is the ability to know that that truth exists, but to ignore it conveniently when it is necessary.

Sonali Kolhatkar: As Dan Rather showed us, very famously in terms of his realization that, when we are in a war, we have to be patriotic. We have to support the government.

Tim Robbins: Yeah, well, the problem is getting into that war. And I think so many people knew. I mean, how can an actor know…

Sonali Kolhatkar: …and the New York Times not know? Right? Well, also, there is the issue of the media in 1984. There are these screens everywhere and the constant repetition of images and repetition of words in the media that today, I mean in 1984 it was government-controlled, but in America today, it’s private media.

Tim Robbins: Well, you know, you explain to me the difference between the corporate media and the government. I’m not sure that there is a clean break, a clean line, demarcation there. In 1984, the telescreens use the threat of Goldstein and terrorism, the threat of the enemies of Big Brother, constant graphic imagery of violence that was visited upon our culture by the enemy. Distrust of anyone that would step outside of the party line. All of this exists, to some extent, I think less so today than it did when they were cooking up the war in 2002 and 2003. Certainly that was a very intimidating time for someone that wanted to try and stand in the way of the train towards war, but the fact is that, I think, what we are seeing now is that they never ever had any kind of majority. What they were able to do was effectively intimidate the majority into believing that they were a minority. They had a very large megaphone, but very, very few people. And I find this when I go around the country and meet people, whether it’s in airports or in bars. You know, I travel without an entourage or any kind of bodyguards and I feel completely safe out in heartland America. People didn’t buy this war; don’t buy this uber-patriotism. In fact I think it is limited to talk radio and probably about maybe 15% of the people. But, in general, the American people do not believe this and don’t buy this false patriotism, know that what it is to be an American is to support different opinions and to be able to have conversations, to be able to disagree with your neighbor and still find a way to bring over a pie when they are sick, you know, or some food. There is a great heart out there in America and I think we have been told for the past twenty years to distrust and to demonize our supposed enemies. And it shouldn’t be enemies. It shouldn’t be that Republicans hate Democrats and Democrats hate Republicans. I was talking to John Dean last night and he said that one of the things that Barry Goldwater was very upset about was when the Republicans were starting to attack Clinton in his first month in office. He said there is something very uncivil about that, and I don’t know what’s going on. They talked about what is this new conservative, who is this. And that’s how John Dean hatched the idea for his second book. “The Conscience of a Conservative” was Barry’s book, and John Dean wrote a book about conservatism.

Sonali Kolhatkar: Speaking of America and the heartland, who do you see Winston, the main character in Orwell’s book, 1984, that you direct the play adaptation, who do you see Winston represent in America today? Is he the average American, or is he sort of the more liberal, more educated American?

Tim Robbins: Winston does buy into a revolutionary concept. I mean, he does say to O’Brien that he will participate in anything it takes to overthrow Big Brother. He is then arrested and tortured. He can be anyone of these anonymous people that are being held. I think I was a little taken aback but I remember there was, in the South, there was a “terrorist cell” arrested. And I read about it and I realized they were arrested for talking about it.

Sonali Kolhatkar: Thoughtcrime?

Tim Robbins: Thoughtcrime. And that’s interesting. You know? Ok. They talked about it, do we prosecute them? And what exactly is the crime? You know, it’s crossing a line. And we have seen the line crossed again and again and again. And the shocking thing about last week is that there are actually four Supreme Court justices that believe that habeas corpus is not necessary. Four Supreme Court justices would undo the Magna Carta. That’s extraordinary.

Sonali Kolhatkar: Well, many would of course point also to the Supreme Court as being responsible for George W. Bush’s presence in the Whitehouse as well. And let me ask you about that. I mean, we have been through eras in this country before that have been Orwellian. Right? McCarthyism and other aspects of what we see in Orwell’s book. Is the Bush era uniquely so, or is it more of the same that we have seen in the past in your opinion?

Tim Robbins: I think they are the worst example of abuse of power. John Dean last night said it makes Watergate look like, you know, a picnic. I think the thing we haven’t addressed yet that we have to start figuring out is how many billions of dollars these cronies of Bush have stolen from the American people. Because if you consider that our taxpayer dollars are paying for this atrocity and you consider that there is billions and billions and billions of dollars missing and unaccounted for, effectively what we have done is we have been ripped off in a major, major crime. And I would think that the American public would want some kind of answers.

Sonali Kolhatkar: You know, sometimes, when you think about what Orwell raises, the specter of what he raises in 1984 happening over and over again in this country, in other countries, you know, Orwell was British and wrote about the government in England, I mean wrote about it from his country of origin. We see it happening over and over again. People learn their lesson and then it happens once more. It reminds me of the other Orwell book that he is famous for, Animal Farm.

Tim Robbins: He wrote an essay about 1984 after it came out, and said that he has known two authoritarian systems of government in his lifetime. One is communism and the other fascism. And he said that book is an equal warning against both. It is so relevant in so many different places of the world, too. We have been, with this production, to 40 states including states that one considers red states. I don’t buy into that whole concept, but Utah, Texas and Arizona, we have been all over. And then around the world we have been in Hong Kong, China, in Australia, in Europe. And everywhere, it resonates. The book means something to so many people, because unfortunately, everywhere you go, there is some kind of degree of leader that will try to cater to fear and try to limit civil liberties because of the enemy; the unseen enemy. And in the book, Goldstein, the unseen enemy, actually to some degree, O’Brien tries to make Winston believe that it doesn’t even exist. That it’s a manufactured evil. And it’s, you know, going back to many books written about this; Manufacturing Consent of Noam Chomsky. How do you get your agenda through if you have an agenda that is not necessarily for the betterment of the society? The scary thing is that a lot of these people believe it is, believe they have justified some kind of, you know, beneficial gain to be had.

Sonali Kolhatkar: The ends justify the means type of thing?

Tim Robbins: Yes. And whatever we have to do to justify the means, whatever we have to lie about or cheat about or steel about, it is necessary in the long run. We are actually making a moral sacrifice for the greater good. We are taking it upon ourselves to make this sacrifice for the general good of the populace.

Sonali Kolhatkar: So when you have taken this play to different countries, people don’t necessarily identify it as a reflection of what is happening in Bush’s America, they also identify it with their own governments?

Tim Robbins: Yes, absolutely. And, you know, in Europe, they are not that far away from communism. A lot of the people in the western parts of Europe are people that have been in the eastern part about 10-15 years ago. In China, certainly, it resonates. Throughout the United States it resonates in many ways because of recent events, but also because of the world and the history of the world and the recent fall of communism.

Sonali Kolhatkar: So in many ways it is very appropriate that Orwell wrote this book with an imaginary country that could essentially be any country. Oceania could be any country, the enemy could be any other country as well.

Tim Robbins: In fact in the book he explains that the difference between Oceania, Eastasia and Eurasia is not really that much difference. And what war is, it’s not about conquest anymore. Once the nuclear bomb came into the picture, it wasn’t about conquest, it wasn’t about a land grab. Couldn’t be, because it was too dangerous. So in effect, what war became was a way to deplete resources. A way to still produce, still make profit for the elite minority, and the only way they can make products that don’t provide any further comfort for the populace or education for the populace is war. War is a way to deplete resources, so you can spend billions and billions of dollars on weapons, tanks and all kinds of things, but you are not getting anything out of it. And the fact, what Orwell contends, is that that’s the agenda. Without that kind of spending, the poor would be lifted up. The poor would have enough food. They would not be overworked. There would be time for education, for culture, for the expansion of the mind. War keeps us in a perennial state of fear and, economically, a perennial state of an economic depression. So the section War is Peace goes through Goldstein’s theory about what Big Brother uses war for, in effect just as a way to deplete resources.

Sonali Kolhatkar: So how have American audience in the so-called red states responded to this play? I mean, I’m sure there is some sort of selection effect, of course, that goes into the people who do come to see the play may be predisposed to liking Orwell. But do you see a lot of people being very clear about the fact that we live in Orwellian times?

Tim Robbins: I think we have inspired conversations after these plays. Sometimes with talk back, sometimes just in the lobby that have really resonated for the audiences and that’s really what we are in the theatre to do. In some way it affects people emotionally so that they can have a conversation about the themes of the play. It’s a, you know, of course wherever we go, the Actor’s Gang finds new audiences, finds young audiences, finds people that have never seen the kind of theatre we do and at the same time we also go into communities that are used to having musicals and light fair. And sometimes those people react negatively. They don’t want to think in the theatre. They don’t want to have questions raised. And that’s ok. But that’s not the majority of the audience. The majority of the audience tends to hang in there with us and be moved emotionally by the story and it is very exciting for us.

Sonali Kolhatkar: You were talking about people needing to be entertained. 1984 is not exactly the kind of book that ends on a light note, doesn’t have a happy ending. Especially for people who are not familiar with it. Do audiences leave shaken? Do you see people sort of shaken to their core when they watch this play?

Tim Robbins: I think they are moved by it. I think it’s – you have to remember it’s also a romance. You know, Winston finds a certain liberation and freedom that very few people find in Oceania. It is the ability to break through that wall, and it comes very simply with love. It comes very simply with the love of a woman and the ability to have a sensual relationship with her in the midst of all this oppression. There is something kind of extraordinary about that, and so that’s part of the story as well. Yes, it does not end well for Winston Smith, but it is a journey that I think people, you know, based on our recent audiences we have had, it’s a good ride for them. There is a lot of humor in the play, it is not, you know, don’t think about that film that was done.

Sonali Kolhatkar: I was going to ask you about that. Are you talking about the Richard Burton/John Hurt film? Didn’t influence you?

Tim Robbins: No, as a matter of fact, that was what I kind of wanted to avoid.

Sonali Kolhatkar: Why?

Tim Robbins: I think it is just too on-the-nose, bleak, gray, futuristic when it doesn’t need to be. For me, if you are going to visualize 1984, walk out, today is a beautiful day, it’s sunny out, could very well happen in the midst of flowers and budding spring. It’s not about that kind of vision. Now we set ours in one room and there isn’t really any visual representation of sunny days. I don’t want to be misleading. But what I did do in approaching it was try to find the humor that’s in the book.

Sonali Kolhatkar: Tim, let’s talk briefly, to round out this interview, about your thoughts on getting out of the Orwellian era we are trapped in. Do you feel that the current president, whose tenure will be ending very shortly, is going to, by his simple act of leaving that this era will end? Do you see hope through the presidential election that is coming up?

Tim Robbins: I have hope in the American people. I think that they have shown themselves to be resilient and ready for change. What is happening with Obama is very exciting, but it is not going to change overnight because one man gets elected. And I think a lot of people know that.

Sonali Kolhatkar: He seems to be showing a side of himself after being declared the nominee that may not be that pretty for progressives. You know, rejecting public funding and taking this very hard-line position on Israel, lecturing black fathers on Father’s Day. What is that all about?

Tim Robbins: That is probably about getting elected. But I will say he has received public financing. He has just done it through the internet. I mean, you have got to give him credit for that. He is financing his election with $5 and $10 donations. I think what he is trying to avoid is being outspent on those [inaudible] money things that the Republicans are so vicious about, you know, the stuff that is outside of the campaign.

Sonali Kolhatkar: So you are hopeful about the movement supporting Obama?

Tim Robbins: I’m hopeful about the movement of the American people. They are being fed up and wanting change, but what we all have to realize is that if Obama is elected, it is then, on day one, our job to make sure that a progressive agenda goes through. It is not going to magically happen. It is not going to just drop out of the sky because one man gets elected. And I think progressives understand that. What is going to be tricky is getting those people who have just been mobilized for the first time in their lives to realize that it is not some kind of magic show that changes everything once there is a Democrat in the Whitehouse.

Sonali Kolhatkar: And people have this tendency to say well, he is just doing this to get elected, but once he gets in, then he is going to turn around and do what we really want him to do without needing to feel like he is accountable to the movement.

Tim Robbins: I think you have to just realize that whatever the alternative is, it’s so much worse.

Sonali Kolhatkar: McCain is just Bush II?

Tim Robbins: Oh, even worse. Please, let’s not have any more of that. Let’s at least have a shot at some kind of universal health care, let’s have a shot at getting out of Iraq. Again, I’ll say this. The real movement does continue. That’s why they call it a struggle. It doesn’t necessarily manifest in victories. But what it is is an obligation and a commitment to trying to get better as a country, trying to get more generous and more compassionate. It is also a very Christian thing and a religious thing in general. Every prophet had the same lessons for his followers, to find a way to be more compassionate, to be more progressive, to be more in line with the spirit of love and inclusion, and so for me, it’s not about four-year cycles or elections, it’s about the continual thing. And one of the things and one of the ways that Winston wins in 1984, and one of the ways that I think we all win is if we don’t believe that we are living in an Orwellian, oppressive society. We find ways to be free. I think that if you are locked in into the media for too long, it’s probably the worst thing for your spirit, because you wind up accepting all of the oppression that is on there for you. You also wind up believing that it is a much more disastrous life we are living than is really true. And then what you can do is just turn the thing off.

Sonali Kolhatkar: And go see 1984.

Tim Robbins: And go see 1984. Or go out take a walk, take your bike out, see what’s around you. Surprise yourself. Go to a rock club. I don’t know. You find the people that are, when you go out, you find the people that are actively involved in their lives are so much freer than the people that are completely obsessed with information and politics. I think it is important to be involved, I think it is important to educate yourself about what is going on, but it’s also important to dance, it’s also important to sing, it’s also important to turn your TV off and your radio off from time to time and just have a good time. That’s part of the spirit of rebellion as well. You have to remember that part of the revolution is being able to smile and laugh. And I think too many people get too depressed about what is going on and part of the liberation and victory for Winston Smith, however brief that victory is, is in the simplicity of a kiss.

Special Thanks to Claudia Greyeyes for transcribing this interview