Earthquakes in London: social context

Climate change and the environmental crisis forms one of the integral thematic contexts of Earthquakes in London, illustrating the uncertain, imminent threat faced by modern societies.
The play emphasises the urgency of these issues in stark contrast to the indifference displayed by many of the characters, thus highlighting the complexity of the societal response to ecological crisis.

Earthquakes in London provides a sharp critique of neoliberal capitalism, depicting how its hold on society influences the behaviour and morals of individuals.
The character of Robert, a financier and a prophetic figure, symbolises the dominance of finance in shaping our world and potentially leading to its destruction.
The characters often feel helpless against the forces of neoliberal capitalism, evidence of social inequality between the rich and the poor.

The different family structures exhibited in the play reflect contemporary societal norms, examining the effects of these on individuals.
The strained relations between the three sisters – Sarah, Freya, and Jasmine – with different lifestyles and aspirations, alongside their personal anxieties highlight the shifting nature of familial bonds in modern society.

The play touches upon the topic of women’s rights and reproductive autonomy, particularly in Sarah’s storyline.
The narrative explores the intensity of her dilemma of whether to save her unborn child or the city, representing broader themes of women’s choices and the moral implications that come with them.

The theme of political apathy is embedded into the societal context of the play, reflecting the disillusionment of the younger generation towards traditional political systems and leaders.
The character of Colin, an older generation politician, embodies this traditional political structure, while the younger characters like Jasmine reflect a more cynical and apathetic attitude towards politics.

The play conveys the deep societal reliance on technology, showcasing both the conveniences and the dangers of a technologically dependent life.
This dependence on technology is illustrated through characters’ usage of mobile phones and the internet, subtly questioning whether such dependence is skewing human connections and communication.