David Edgar’s play Destiny: Why Did He Write it?
As anyone can plainly see, Destiny by David Edgar is a very political play. The question I am going to delve into today is why. Not “why” is it a political play, we know that it is because it focuses on an alt-right group. The question we need to ask is “why” did David Edgar write a political play in 1976? To do this we will explore Britain during the 70s, British politics at that time, and the specific themes that this historical period brought to the table.
To begin, Britain in the 70s was not a pretty sight. There were quite a lot of things happening, social strife in the industry field, downturn in the economy, a rise in public and domestic violence, and a sharp turn into extremist political movements. Starting in the 70s English trade unions became more and more active, and not in the best of ways. Before, unions would stage protests and strikes if there were perceived injustices against them, and the government would meet with them to create concessions legislatively. But a new minister of industrial relations, Michael Foot, took the approach of giving the unions anything they asked for. Soon, strikes were being initiated at an alarming pace, and more often than not they were unsanctioned. Yes, there were some legitimate concerns in the unions that they felt they had to protest, but workers in fields with decent rights, wages, and concessions were also rioting. This led to mass confusion, a generalized disdain for the working class, and economic downturn (Morgan, “Britain in the Seventies”).
Due to strikes halting production in multiple industries (including mining, water, and transport) and the millions of working hours that were lost, inflation rose immensely. In some reports, price inflation went up by nearly 30%. During the early 70s Britain was bailed out by the US, and that was beginning to add up. Coupled with inflation and a rise in unemployment, the economy collapsed. Not only that, but old economic models were proving to be outdated. In 1970 Heath became prime minister and took up an anti-state budget that focused on the private sector and granting tax cuts. This left the government unprepared for the upcoming rise of inflation. Keynesian economics had failed, and new models were desperately needed (Morgan, “Britain in the Seventies”).
It was not until 1976 (which was Britain’s lowest point economically speaking) that some measures were starting to be decided upon. Cash limits were given for public spending and the government decided to take a hard line against unions to stop them from running with unchecked power. This stronger stance lead to increased tensions, and lead to a rise in violence. People were unemployed, desperate, and faced with an economy that was crashing and a seemingly uncaring government. They did not know that the government’s hardline would help them in the long run. Union strikes became more violent, and a few years later would be the Winter of Discontent, which involved the shutdown of vast swaths of industry due to strikes, and lasted from October 1978 to Spring 1979 (Morgan, “Britain in the Seventies”).
Although the violence in England was alarming, it did not hold a candle to what was being seen in Northern Ireland. The IRA (Irish Republican Army) had sought to free itself from British control and make Ireland a “whole” nation. While conflict with Northern Ireland lasted for many decades, in the 70s the British government made drastic decisions to stop their attempted ceding. They would arrest protestors and try them without juries. They would be locked up in internment camps, and there was even a massacre called “Bloody Sunday” when a military regiment opened fire on Irish Catholic protestors, killing 13 civilians (Morgan, “Britain in the Seventies”).
All of this culminated in the final nail in Britain’s coffin; a sharp “right” turn in politics. The two main political parties in England, the liberal Labour group and the conservative Tory group, were headed towards their respective extremes. Due to economic, violence, and industry/ unemployment issues, conservative and nationalist groups rose up and demanded a return to the “old days” where Britain was king and could care for its people. And this is where such groups such as National Front and the British Campaign to Stop Immigration took hold, and these two groups specifically are what David Edgar based Destiny on (May, Part 1).
To summarize the plot, Destiny is about the rise of a neo-fascist group in England called “Nation Forward”. The play focusses on the ideals of this party and how they conflict with the other political groups (Tories and Labour). There is also a concurrently running plot about union workers striking for better wages and racial equality (workers of Indian descent are not paid as well as their White counterparts), and how the political parties deal with these unions. Destiny does try to give some humanity to the people in Nation Forward; the main spokesperson, Turner, is a veteran who lost his business to capitalism (a Jewish developer buys out that block his shop is on). The people who attend the Nation Forward rallies are “normal” people who just wish to have stability back in their lives. But as the play progresses, they begin to pin all the evils of the world on the “soft” liberal government and the immigrants that began to settle in Britain after WWII. At the end of the play we see what Nation Forward really is; a group pushing Nazi ideas (Edgar, “Destiny”).
Doe this all sound familiar? It is eerily similar to what was going on in the 70s when Edgar wrote this play. Edgar, a lifelong journalist, was constantly steeped in politics and its effect on society. He researched and reported on the National Front and the British Campaign to Stop Immigration groups; and after coming into contact with them and their extreme conservative ideals, he created Destiny to be an aggregate of everything that was occurring in Britain at that time (May, Part 1).
Destiny is more than just a carbon copy of the issues that were prevalent in England; there are themes displayed in Destiny that show Edgar’s thoughts and opinions on politics. The old adage holds true: writing tells more about the author than the topic. Mainly I would like to focus on the dichotomy of structure and disorder within the political parties (May, Part 3). At the start, the Nation Forward party is incensed over the perceived “weakness” and “lack of initiative” in the current government. They want a strong government who can do what “needs to be done”. And in some respects the rules of the government do restrict them (Edgar, “Destiny”).
Yet when it gets down to actual policies, we see that Nation Forward has no real plans beyond extreme nationalism. There is a scene where Turner is practicing for a debate and all of the questions about policies are reworked to circle back to immigration and a broad xenophobia. The same can be said for their rallies; people speak out of turn and there is a general air of disorganization. This party is very unstructured and if they take power, they would not be able to achieve much (Edgar, “Destiny”). They do not have the understanding of government and the policies necessary to make change; they would implement their radical ideals and then find themselves with a slew of problems that did not magically disappear with the radical policies’ enactment, and then they would have no idea on how to solve the issues (their plan didn’t work, now what?) (May, Part 3). This is what Edgar is saying with the portraying of the Nation Forward party in Destiny, and through it one can see his opinions on the real-life analogues that he researched. It is no surprise that Edgar was a staunch supporter of the Labour party in England.
That is not to say that the Labour party in Destiny gets a free pass. Their representations in the play show that they are blind-sided by the “new” party and their radical ideas (Edgar, “Destiny”). They are trapped in their traditions and rules, and they are drowning a bit in the onslaught of disdain that is being showered on them by the populace. One can see a clear parallel with the officials meeting with the union organizers and trying to placate them, and Michael Foot’s treatment of unions in England (May, Part 3).
David Edgar, drawing from real life events in England (taken through the filter of journalism) created a play that was at once a snapshot of a turbulent era and also a subtle opinion piece on the ideologies of political extremes. The far left is seen as slow old men, taken aback by ever changing conditions and to wrapped up in rules to effectively adapt. The far right is seen as a chaotic force; sweeping up large swaths of disenfranchised and frustrated people, all rallying to their angry calls, yet when the anger dies down they are left with no real strategy or the skills needed to enact real change (May, Part 3). It is a wonderful testament to how the instant gratification mindset can cause even more turmoil, and how people (when faced with rising tensions and hardships) can slip into hateful and centralist views. Destiny holds more value than just a piece rife with themes and symbols interesting to only theatrical aficionados. From a historical standpoint it not only gives an in-depth look at a “foreign” nation’s life from the eyes of a native, but what the populace felt and experienced during that time. It allows one to become immersed in both the political and social ramifications of Britain’s 1970s. Destiny then is a crystal clear look at the past, as well as a quiet warning of what can happen to any nation if these circumstances were to arise again.
*The audience for this piece could be either theatre, historical, or political scholars. The best pieces of research are those that pull from multiple fields. This essay would be presented in either a lecture or conference, and as such I wrote it more “casually” as it would be read aloud, with maybe an accompanying visual presentation. When it comes to presenting, audience interaction is important; so please forgive my lapses of strict scholarly format. I would rather connect with my audience with a few jokes then bore them with staunch MLA format. *
Works Cited
Edgar, David. “Destiny.” Drama Online, 1997, www.dramaonlinelibrary.com/playtext-overview?docid=do-9781408183571.
May, Tom. “'An Ideology Red, White and Blue in Tooth and Claw': David Edgar's Destiny (1978) – Part 1 of 3.” British Television Drama, 14 July 1970, www.britishtelevisiondrama.org.uk/?p=7040.
May, Tom. “'An Ideology Red, White and Blue in Tooth and Claw': David Edgar's Destiny (1978) – Part 3 of 3.” British Television Drama, 14 July 1970, www.britishtelevisiondrama.org.uk/?p=7046.
Morgan, Kenneth O. “Britain in the Seventies – Our Unfinest Hour?” Revue Française De Civilisation Britannique. French Journal of British Studies, CRECIB, 13 Dec. 2017, journals.openedition.org/rfcb/1662.
