Over the past twenty years, Charles Wood has written 13 stage plays, at least 20 screenplays, and more than 14 television plays (of which one was divided into two series, each of six 50-minute episodes). His major plays have been performed at either the National, Royal Shakespeare Company, or Royal Court Theatres; he has an international reputation for his work in the cinema; and writes regularly for television. Yet his work, though mentioned respectfully on the whole by modern theatre critics, has not received a full and considered critical appraisal. This study sets out to provide a fuller examination of a major aspect of his work; his treatment of War for theatre and screen. Its first chapter offers essential, and hitherto unpublished, biographical material concerning Wood's own Army career, and his early connections with the theatre. This provides a foundation for a consideration of those of his early plays, written from 1958 to 1965, with the Army as the basis for subject matter. These two chapters form a framework for the main emphasis of the study: his portrayal, in theatre and film, of the Second World War in Dingo, and 'How I Won the War'; and the Victorian conflicts in India and the Crimea, as shown in H, and 'The Charge of the Light Brigade'. Finally, there is a consideration of Veterans, and Has "Washington"? Legs?, two plays concerned with the making of films about War. The writer's source materials, both written and visual, are explored, and photographs accompany the text. An analysis of important scenes and characters is provided. Most importantly, the focus, where possible, is on the plays in performance, with observations on the rehearsal process (studied at first-hand in Has "Washington" Legs?) and the interaction at various stages between dramatist, director, and designer. Where available, original typescripts have been used, and comparisons made, where appropriate, with final, printed versions. Existing prompt copies have been referred to where available, and use made of conversations and interviews with the author and his associates. To widen the perspective, there is also an appraisal of critical responses from both reviewers and critics of modern drama.<p
