We are developing the social individualist meta-context for the future. From the very serious to the extremely frivolous... lets see what is on the mind of the Samizdata people.

Samizdata, derived from Samizdat /n. - a system of clandestine publication of banned literature in the USSR [Russ.,= self-publishing house]

I think this guy needs to find another line of work

This story, in The Times (of London), caught my eye:

Gerard Earley was so impressed by Ian Hart’s performance in the West End that he got to his feet to applaud. Ian Hart was so unimpressed by Mr Earley that he ran from the stage to scream threats at him. Ignoring the appeals of John Simm, his co-star, the actor lunged at Mr Earley, whom he accused of talking during his performance. When Mr Earley protested that he had not been talking Hart launched into a furious rant and had to be restrained by ushers. Hart, who says that he does not enjoy the relationship between performer and audience, could now face police action.

Chatty theatre-goers are very irritating. I am sure that readers can understand how annoying it is to sit in front of a noisy person while watching a film, or listening to a concert of a certain type, etc. Usually, the theatre/venue relies on the audience being sufficiently well-mannered to behave, but in this increasingly infantilised culture, I notice that there tend to be more and more signs and instructions, such as telling people to switch off their mobile phones, etc.

Of course, when such venues are privately owned, the owners can set whatever restrictions they want and hope that customers accept them – if they do not, they will go elsewhere. So if a steward working in a cinema, say, observes a couple chatting away, using their phone, eating loudly or being generally boorish, they should be able to chuck them out without a refund.

But while the circumstances of this case I mentioned are in dispute, it does appear that this actor is particularly sensitive to perceived noise or interruptions. He sounds as if he is not cut out for live performances. Better take up something less stressful, old chap.

8 comments to I think this guy needs to find another line of work

  • coniston

    Please don’t be condescending ..Ian Hart is a wonderful actor. Yes, he lost his cool. (We all do at times). It is because he cares a great deal about acting. The same intensity that makes his performances so memorable also means, that with the right combination of circumstances, he can ‘lose it’. He has acted for almost 2 decades. Allow him one slip before you snidely tell him to find another line of work.

  • Johnathan Pearce

    Coniston, I wasn’t condescending, and I imagine that if anyone is going to be so, it will be coppers who are interviewing this hothead about his behaviour, as reported.

    If he has acted for two decades, then perhaps he should have learned some professional self restraint by now.

  • coniston

    I love this site and think you posters have a great track record. But you f–k up from time to time and fess up and move on. Should you deny that ability to others? If so then you should be the first one to call to shut down this site because you have made errors of judgment/failure to fact check etc.

  • Ignoring the appeals of John Simm, his co-star

    Are we supposed to believe that the nearby presence of the most evil man in the universe was a coincidence?

  • Vinegar Joe

    Wouldn’t you just love to see Russell Crowe and Ian Hart on stage? I wonder who’d throw the first punch…..or telephone. Useless wankers.

  • Johnathan pearce

    Coniston, sorry, but I still think you are wrong. When if If When someone is vile or abusive on this blog, as does happen, the editors ban them or issue a warning.

    With a theatre, say, if an actor is aggressive to a paying customer, which is a key point, then it
    is a different situation entirely. No one pays to read our comments.

    If I were rude or physically threatening to a client, I should be fired.

  • Rob

    Mr Earley sounds quite feeble to me. He had to take the day off work because of this? I’d have laughed at this quivering luvvie. What was he going to do? He lays a finger on you (after having wrung himself into a righteous fury over nothing at all) and you get the chance to punch his lights out.

    Real theatre!

  • Paul Marks

    Classic F.M. is pushing (every day) the new production of “An Inspector Calls”.

    A play that is the best part of the century old – with the old message of “the rich are thoughtless and unkind – and their actions have a terrible effect on the poor”.

    And this message (bashed home in culture endlessly for the last couple of centuries) is supposed to be “ground breaking” and “thought provoking” and so on and so on.

    Of course rich people are sometimes thoughtless and unkind (too wildly different things by the way), but this is not the cause of poverty.

    Nor are wages low because of nasty employers, and they living standards of most people over the long term can NOT be improved by regulations and/or unions.

    Nor are most unwed mothers, forced to suicide, the victims of rich cads (in fact not even 1% of them are – or ever were).

    Why am I banging on about one play?

    Because it is still typical – after almost a century the “culture” people have not moved on or had any new thoughts.

    They are pathetic.

    “But J.P. Priestley was a great man”.

    No he was not – he was a shameless liar. For example in “The Foreman Went to France” film he has noble union people opposing the Germans in 1940 in the face of pro Nazi employers. In reality the Communist party in France was busy organizing strikes and actual sabotage in order to HELP the Nazis (because of the Nazi-Soviet pact).

    The “creative cultural people” are just as much lying scumbags today as Priestley was.

    “But Britian Paul” – yes Britain. In Britain the Labour party campaigned AGAINST rearmament in the 1930s (it denounced people like Stanley Baldwin as warmongers), it even worked to get rid of the RAF.

    Yet now the education system and the media (and the rest of the culture) teach a version of “history” with no connection to the facts of the case – in short the culture is controlled by lying scumbags (just as stated above).