Aging & Wisdom Quote by Janet Suzman

Theatre, Suzman implies, is never just theatre; it’s a barometer of how much risk a society can tolerate. Her contrast between “immensely exciting” and merely “entertaining” isn’t a snub of craft but a diagnosis of stakes. In a repressive system, a stage becomes one of the few semi-public places where forbidden feelings can be smuggled into the open. The audience isn’t only consuming a story; they’re participating in a small act of civic courage, reading between lines, applauding what can’t be said outright. “Exciting” here carries the charge of danger: the thrill that what’s happening might be shut down, that meaning has to be encoded, that the actors’ bodies are doing political work simply by being seen.

By contrast, in “a luxurious old, affluent old society like ours,” theatre risks becoming another lifestyle option, filed alongside restaurants and streaming: culture as leisure. Suzman’s repetition of “old” lands like a weary verdict, suggesting comfort curdling into complacency. The subtext isn’t that wealth kills art, but that it can lower the temperature. When the consequences of speech feel minimal, performance is more likely to be judged as product: Was it fun, was it worth the ticket, did it distract me?

Suzman’s own biography sharpens the point. As a South African actress who performed and spoke out during apartheid-era constraints, she knows how censorship and surveillance can paradoxically intensify the live encounter. Her line is a challenge to comfortable democracies: if theatre has become “entertaining,” maybe the missing ingredient isn’t talent but urgency.