Puzzling, political, wired: Dr John Cooper Clarke Review

The show started as it meant to go on – a bit unusual. My first thoughts pertaining to Dr. John Cooper Clarke were about his aesthetic: he was dressed in all black save his purple-tinted specs, with wayward, dyed hair and looking as if he was suffering from cachexia. The latter was merely the first hint of his time spent dabbling in drugs. The second hint was slightly less subtle, in the form of a poem named “Get Back on the Drugs”. In fact, it wouldn’t be inaccurate to extend this inebriated parallel to the whole show. It felt exceptionally reminiscent of, in my sobriety, observing with awe and bemusement the stellate cognitive leaps made by a tripping peer. These wonderful, often outwardly nonsensical topic changes, were only half of the story, however. Dr. Clarke’s characteristically rapid recital only served to add to his wired image. After the performance I felt reborn, left to wonder exactly what I’d just witnessed.

The conclusion I reached about what I’d just witnessed could only be described as mixed. It is impossible not to comment on Dr Clarke’s humour, which was sharp and furthered significantly by the situational obscurity. This is probably best illustrated by the piece “Can Somebody Tazer the Chimp With the Razor?”, a florid forewarning against employing a chimp as a butler. The audience received the poem with bemused laughter and applause.

“It felt reminiscent of observing the cognitive leaps made by a tripping peer”

Dr. Clarke’s literary aptitude also left an impression, best exemplified by the two-line “Necrophilia”. This was apparently a reconciliation of his rhyming yet minimalist traits. You can’t, after all, be a rhymer and write a one line poem! Despite only having two lines this piece provoked a schismatic response from the audience: unabashed laughter was mixed with slightly more tentative peels. “Forget foreplay and all that palaver“, the poem advised, “Have a cadaver”.

Dr Clarke’s controversial themes were purposeful, being used as a tool to segue into more serious social issues. Whilst waiting for his rendition of “Beasley Street” to get funny (spoiler: it did not), I started to consider how the show was subtly choreographed. In retrospect, his first piece was a relatively mild introduction, a cautious foray into his style in the form of a verse or two about the humble hire car (“Bang it, prang it, say ta ta, It’s a hire car baby”). This was closely followed by a few poems with grittier subject matter. And then, onto “Beasley Street”, an excellent illustration of British poverty with not a hint of humour: “It’s a sociologist’s paradise/ Each day repeats/ On easy, cheesy, greasy, queasy, Beastly Beasley Street”. Dr Clarke had used humour to manipulate the atmosphere so that a more social message would be tolerated.

While his black humour served a purpose, it was the malodourous undercurrent of misogyny throughout that I found to be more blatantly offensive. I felt that this was more an insight into Dr Clarke’s personal views than a comedic pivot. Various poems and prose subtly communicated some rather distasteful views about women. The most concerning of which was the line “I’m keeping her under lock and key, I’ve fallen in love with my wife”.

“At the same time puzzling, offensive and all together nonsensical, it nonetheless had a pervasive moral theme”

The values of the support acts were, however, unfaultable (and their delivery wasn’t too shabby either). They can best be summarised as feminist, socialist poets who emphatically bounced from oppression to opiates in elegant, eloquent and hugely entertaining prose. My particular favourite was the colourful and creative equivocation of gender fluidity and forniphilia in a narrative about “The Man Who Wanted to Become a Chez Long”. These acts almost at seemed at odds with the Dr Clarke’s views. If he had anything at all to do with their selection then perhaps I have misjudged him.

Overall, the show can be described as a strange, sensory experience; I left perplexed, but feeling more aware of social issues. At the same time puzzling, offensive and all together nonsensical, it nonetheless had a pervasive moral theme and lines that kept me giggling for days after the performance.