Press ESC or click the X to close this window

Sleeping Beauty (Susan Elkin reveiws)

Show: Sleeping Beauty

Society: Marlowe Theatre (professional)

Venue: Marlowe Theatre. The Friars, Canterbury, Kent CT1 2AS

Credits: Written by Paul Hendy. Produced by Evolution Pantomimes.

Sleeping Beauty

4 stars


This is a show which exudes quality and smooth sophistication – none of which stops the children falling off their seats in wand-waving glee and gales of laughter. We get dozens of witty original puns, terrific music led by charismatic Chris Wong, fabulous dinosaur puppets, Jurassic Park references, spectacular dancing from a lively ensemble of eight and a rather good set with quasi stained glass changing colour around the proscenium.

Ben Roddy, a much loved Marlowe regular, is at the top of his game. His Dame Nellie commands the stage for every moment he’s on it. He only has to raise an eyebrow, flick his mini crinoline to show his underwear or name his stooge in the front row to carry every audience member with him. If he isn’t yet running panto dame master-classes for young actors then it’s time he did.

New to me, and to the Marlowe panto, is the impressive Max Fulham whose excellent ventriloquism skills this show exploits to the full. Not only does he voice a monkey puppet (lots of attitude and quick fire dialogue) but there’s a sequence with a talking fly and a very funny scene in which he confronts the Dame’s front row temporary boyfriend and gives him a hilarious high pitched voice –  poor chap. But if you will buy front-row pantomime tickets …

Meanwhile Carrie Hope Fisher sings her heart out as Carrie-bosse and finds all the right jokey malevolence. As a seasoned musical theatre performer she’s quite an asset because, of course, although the humour and concepts in this show are very enjoyable the singing standards amongst the principals are patchy.

Other high spots include Ore Oduba (winner of Strictly Come Dancing Series 14 among other achievements) bringing rubber-bodied panache to a very slippery slosh scene, Ellie Kingdom being sweet but feisty as Princess Aurora and Jennie Dale’s homely Fairy Moonbeam.

I admire the way Paul Hendy manages to present a show which definitely ticks the traditional box but also feels fresh. The ghost “it’s behind you!”  scene, for example, is different with a lot of stage business involving revolving beds which works well. And, as ever, for me the very best thing in this Sleeping Beauty is the “Barrow of Pun” – this time featuring the names of musicals.

My “plus one” at this pantomime was an adult woman who hadn’t seen a professional one for decades. She couldn’t get over how funny it was and chuckled all the way home. That, and the response of the children bobbing excitedly around us, says it all really.

 

First published by Sardines: https://www.sardinesmagazine.co.uk/review/sleeping-beauty-18/

I’ve admired the work of Paterson Joseph, actor, for a long time – most recently in Noughts and Crosses and Vigil both for BBC TV. He does imperious authority very well. He won’t remember it but I met him once too – at a charity event. He was about to play Julius Caesar for the RSC in 2012 and told me about it.

I was intrigued, therefore to see that this multi-talented man, who wrote a book Julius Caesar and Me  about that production of Julius Caesar has now penned a historical novel The Secret Diaries of Charles Ignatius Sancho.

Sancho was the first black man to vote in a British general election in the late 18th century because, despite a chequered past, he was eventually able to buy property which at that time gave him the right to vote.

Sancho knew people like David Garrick, Samuel Johnson and William Hogarth as well as being sponsored by Lord Montagu. Paterson and Sancho go back some time. He has performed his 2011 one man play about Sancho’s life  An Act of Remembrance (published in the Oberon Modern Plays series) all over the country so I suppose a novel to explore further what an actor might call the “back story” is a logical progression.

The diary format takes the form of letters to Sancho’s son Billy. We read about Sancho’s possible parentage and birth on a slave ship. Slavery runs through this novel like an ugly dark thread. In real life the older Sancho became a  very active abolitionist. As a child he was taken in by three women in Blackheath – effectively, chillingly fleshed out in this novel as is the slave catcher, Jonathan Sill, prowling London looking for black people to send forcibly to the plantations.

In Paterson’s take on it, Sancho’s fortunes do a lot of dramatic rising and falling before he eventually settles very happily down with his wife, Anne Osborne, and gets enough work to keep his growing family in their own home.  I don’t think there is any evidence that it actually happened by I enjoyed the account of Sancho’s persuading Garrick to let him play Othello for one night. It’s well informed, of course. Paterson played Othello at Royal Exchange Manchester in 2002 and 2007.

One of Sancho’s talents is music – he composes and teaches. And I was delighted  to hear some of his work featured on Radio 3’s The Early Music Show recently in honour of Black History Month.

Unlike many people I was well aware that there were many black people living and working in Britain long before Windrush – one of the things Paterson, says in his introduction that he wants to establish. Nonetheless it’s a fine thing to read another novel (see Laura Shepherd-Robinson’s Blood and Sugar for another example) which really focuses on this.

I found the rather arch Fielding-esque chapter headings tedious although I see that Paterson is simply trying to make the writing feel authentically eighteenth century. It’s a minor gripe though. This is a compelling novel which introduced me to a fascinating historical figure I knew nothing about and I really appreciate that.

download

 

Next week on Susan’s Bookshelves: Christmas Stories by Charles Dickens

Show: The Silence of Snow: The Life of Patrick Hamilton

Venue: The Bridge House Theatre, London SE20 8RZ

Credits: Written and performed by Mark Farrelly

The Silence of Snow: The Life of Patrick Hamilton

5 stars

Mark Farrelly is a phenomenal actor and writer. In fact I think his skills have developed even since I first saw him in action in Howerd’s End two years ago. Since then I’ve seen Naked Hope

(his Quentin Crisp show), Jarman (twice) and Howerd’s End again. And he’s riveting every time.

The Silence of Snow dates from 2014 and was, actually, the first play Farrelly wrote. It tells the sad and tortured story of Patrick Hamilton (1904-1962) author of plays such as Rope and Gaslight and novels such as Hangover Square and The West Pier. He was very successful when still quite young but was a heavy, compulsive drinker beset by the “black dog” of acute depression so his life was blighted.

Farrelly inhabits Hamilton totally and the intimate, almost televisual play is ideally suited to the small space of the Bridge House because it means that Farrelly is physically close to the audience who become the participative  listeners as Hamilton awaits the horror of an electroconvulsive therapy session in a hospital – a scene which more or less frames the action although there is also an epilogue in which we meet the dying Hamilton once last time.

He is very adept at slipping into other roles: his sneering tyrannical father, ineffectual la-di-da mother, a metal-voiced London prostitute, Michael Sadleir of Constable, who becomes Hamiliton’s publisher, and others. In each case there’s a subtle switch as, whipping off Hamilton’s glasses, Farrelly simply turns himself into someone else. The voice work is terrific and the sound is like music with more dynamic tension than a Tchaikovsky symphony as Farrelly shifts in an instant from  subito fortissimo to subito pianissimo – thus conveying turbulent mood shifts and many colours of the mind and memory of a chronic depressive.

He’s also a master of mime whether he’s affectedly puffing a cigarette, turning a key in a door or listening to an imaginary speaker. And – comic genius – when he and his first wife, who have “saved themselves” because “that’s what you did in the thirties” finally go to bed together we get blackout and we hear a hilarious conversation with Farrelly, of course, doing both voices. Despite the dark subject matter of this play, there are quite a lot of laughs. Farrelly’s version of Hamilton is very good at sardonic one liners.

In the final scene, still only 58 but “making Methuselah look like a teddy boy”  he is hunched, a blanket round his shoulders, dying of sclerosis and kidney failure but still sucking noisily at a whisky bottle like a baby with milk. The Beatles’s Love Me Do is playing to connote 1962 and it’s  almost unbearably moving. He talks with a slurred stutter – bitter, brittle, angry, disappointed and resigned. What a performance!

First published by Sardines: https://www.sardinesmagazine.co.uk/review/the-silence-of-snow-the-life-of-patrick-hamilton/

 

Show: Julius Caesar

Society: OVO

Venue: Maltings Theatre. Level 2, Maltings Shopping Centre, 28 Victoria St, St Albans AL1 3HL

Credits: By William Shakesoeare, adapted by Micha Mirto and Matt Strachan. Produced by OVO and Knuckledown

Julius Caesar

4 stars


This fresh, succinct take on the best political thriller in the canon takes us to the turbulence of Italy in 1977 and respects Shakespeare’s “two-hours’ traffic of our stage” hint. All the clutter has gone and a cast of seven (four women and three men) tell the story with incisive clarity on a transverse stage. The 1970s projected archive footage fits aptly although the explanatory prologue is unnecessary.

Julius Caesar is a fine play and totally timeless. The politics fit any situation where there’s a dictatorial management structure and factions form to oppose/destroy it. It happens all around us, at different levels, every day. This version, intelligently directed by Matt Strachan, gets the message across with neat artistry.  There’s no soothsayer (although his famous Ides of March message is in) or Cinna the poet and many minor characters have disappeared.

It’s a production full of good ideas. After the murder Caesar (Malcolm Jeffries – very plausible and full marks for dying with one foot slightly off the ground and holding it until another character turns the corpse onto its back) slips into a seat at the opposite end of the space watching thoughtfully until he’s brightly lit as the ghost which haunts Brutus. The segue from Caesar’s death to his funeral is elegantly managed too. I like the concept of sending Calphurnia (Jane Withers) to war as Antony’s side kick, a conflation of characters such as Octavius and Lepidus, so that she becomes the epitome of a strong modern woman – looking oddly like Georgia Meloni when she triumphantly declares victory at the end. The cross gender casting is effective and there are several strong regional accents in this cast which somehow makes the play feel even more immediate and realistic.

Alis Wyn Davies gets all the decency and agony of Brutus perfectly as she tries to work out whether the end really does justify the means – while Eloise Westwood’s Portia is convincing as the anxious wife who isn’t being told what her partner is getting herself into. Cassius is a juicy part and Charlotte Whitaker really runs with it – arguing, manipulating and listening intently, convinced that her point of view is the right one: Caesar must go. The group of conspirators, usually large and individually named, is reduced here to Cassius, Casca (Mathew Rowan – good) and Brutus and actually, that’s plenty.

Tom Milligan’s Antony barely appears until the second half. Then he really comes into his own. I used to teach the “Friends, Roman Countrymen” speech alongside Earl Spencer’s eulogy at his sister’s funeral as outstanding examples of very deliberate crowd-swaying rhetoric. Milligan drives the message home with great skill – “Brutus is an honourable woman” except that in Anthony’s self-interested view, she isn’t. It’s a very charismatic performance from a young actor especially when he listens, shiftily, to Brutus’s funeral speech which comes first.

This is a compelling account of the play, well worth catching if you can.

First published by Sardines: https://www.sardinesmagazine.co.uk/review/julius-caesar-4/

 

 

I can’t remember when a book grabbed me by the throat quite as forcibly as this one did. Although, of course, I’ve read Jude the Obscure before, I’d forgotten its richness and astonishing forward thinking for a novel which was published in 1896. I read a lot – QED – but it’s rare for me to sit down with a book on a weekday after lunch and still be there as dusk falls. Almost unable to put it down, I did that twice with this wonderful novel.

First a quick, inadequate summary in case it’s new to you. Jude, from a humble background, is a dreamer: studious and bright. He yearns to go to Christminster (Oxford) and become a clergyman. Then his sexual urges get the better of him and he is trapped into marriage by an alluring but totally unsuitable, grasping woman named Arabella. They separate, and he meets someone much more suitable but the going is rarely smooth because 19th century attitudes to marriage, still driven by the church, prevail. Inevitably it ends in tragedy on several levels with some desperately dark incidents along the way.

Jude 3

 

I was fascinated by the importance of education in this novel. Schooling had been compulsory for only 16 years meaning that from 1880 every child between the age of 5 and 10 (11 after 1893 and 12 after 1899)  had to attend school.  The Forster Education Act had set up a system of state education 10 years earlier in 1870. The school Mr Phillotson runs, assisted by Sue, is managed by one of the newish School Boards and he attends regional meetings along with his friend Mr Gillingham who runs a similar school nearby. This means that almost all the characters are literate – Jude is able to study the books he sends for. Even Arabella can read and write letters competently. It also means that people like Jude and Sue, despite their backgrounds, can read academic texts and think independently.

What the novel is really about, though, is sexual morality in a patriarchal society and Hardy is exploring some pretty progressive ideas. Both Jude and Sue have been married to people they don’t love. In fact Sue finds the much older Mr Phillotson physically repulsive. So there is an argument that morally they should leave these relationships, irrespective of the demands of vows made in church and pursue the relationship which seems true and honest. Sue for a long time, feels so guilty that although she lives with Jude she refuses to have sex with him – and both their former partners keep reappearing to complicate the issue while Gillingham throws his hands up in horror “By the Lord Harry! – Matriarchy!”  Life with Phillotson is sex-free for a long time too until  a deeply disturbing self-sacrifice on Sue’s part. The evolving attitude of the widowed  Mrs Edlin is interesting too – her own marriage lay in the distant pre-Victorian past and she’s much more relaxed about sexual politics. She tries very hard to persuade Sue to see sense and grab happiness where she can.

At one point before Sue –  ever  anxiously capricious –  succumbs to guilt, regret and self-imposed penance, she says: “I may hold the opinion that, in a proper state of society, the father of a woman’s child will be as much a private matter of hers as the cut of her under-linen.” Jude, meanwhile declares late in the novel that “…the time was not ripe for us! Our ideas were fifty years too soon”. Examples of  Hardy’s astonishing prescience come thick and fast –  and pulled me up short many times.

Hardy, who was 56 when it was published, was roundly condemned for the “immorality” of Jude the Obscure which was deemed critical of religion, class, sex, education and marriage. He seems to have seen it as a final bolt shot across the bows of the Establishment, because he wrote no more novels. Instead he devoted the remaining 32 years of his life to poetry. That makes him an unusual writer for another reason: a nineteenth century novelist and a 20th century poet.

Next week on Susan’s Bookshelves:  The Secret Diaries of Charles Ignatius Sancho by Paterson Joseph

Anita Brookner – mistress of understatement, crystalline prose and unfulfilled older women –  won the Booker Prize with Hotel du Lac in 1984. I read it then and again after enjoying the rather good film of the same name starring  Anna Massey who got Edith Hope perfectly.

Edith is a novelist (romantic fiction) who is staying in an old-fashioned hotel on Lake Geneva. The autumnal “fin de saison” ambience reflects her state of mind as she observes and mixes with the other, mostly English, guests. We know from the outset first that she’s been “sent” to Switzerland by friends who are very cross with her and second that she’s deeply in love with a married man. It is a long time before Brookner reveals the precise reason for her exile – and it’s quite an arresting moment because most readers will not have seen it coming.

Meanwhile – with faint echoes of Room with a View there are other guests such as ghastly Mrs Pusey and her almost-as-ghastly daughter Jennifer. Her character – rich, self-interested, cunning, demanding, manipulative, excessive – sits somewhere between James Heriot’s Mrs Pumphrey and Mrs van Hopper who employs the unnamed narrator at the beginning of Rebecca. There’s also a man, Philip Neville, who seems gallant and shows interest in Edith but he’s chillingly manipulative too. In a novel which is full of literary cross-currents his calculatedness reminds me of St John Rivers in Jane Eyre.

So Edith has choices to make and they rattle about in her mind all the time she’s doing very little on the misty shores of the Lake. Should she let her life veer off in a totally different direction or should she simply continue more or less as she is despite the crushing disapproval of bossy friends?

Brookner, who died in 2016, was a miniaturist. Her characterisation is finely observed – and probably enhanced by her day job as an art historian.  I love the precision of the uncompromising, grown up language too. She can write elegant sentences such as “Yet it was less Mrs Pusey’s tranquil exhibitionism that worried Edith then the glimpses she had caught of a somewhat salacious mind” with ease. Every word speaks and there is never, ever any waffle. Many modern novels could shed a third of their length and be better for it. Not so Brookner. Hotel du Lac comes in at 184 pages and the succinctness is part of its perfection.

I was struck afresh this time by the title and wondered if there was a pun intended? Hotel du Lack? While Edith is staying at the titular hotel her life lacks everything she has come to be reasonably contented with – which is why she writes passionate letters to the man she actually loves despite having to take him on his own terms. Well never mind the vexed field of intentionalism the central character in this novel certainly uses her weeks by the lac to think about what her life is lacking. And it’s as good a read now as it was nearly 40 years ago when it was first published.

Next week on Susan’s Bookshelves: Jude the Obscure by Thomas Hardy

Show: Dinner With Friends

Society: London (professional shows)

Venue: Golden Goose Theatre. 146 Camberwell New Road, Camberwell, London SE5 0RR

Credits: by Donald Marguiles. Presented by Front Foot

Dinner With Friends

Photo: David Monteith-Hodge – Photographise


It’s the vibrant dynamic between the four characters, and the actors who play them which make this a fine production of a well written, truthfully observed play. Why am I not surprised to learn afterwards, first that Donald Margulies won a Pullitzer prize for Dinner With Friends in 2020 and second, that Julia Papp and Kim Hardy who play Beth and Tom and who founded Front Foot Theatre are a married couple in real life?

This poignant and accurate exploration of marriage at about the twelve year point  – when the offstage children are constantly clamouring for attention –  initially presents us with Karen (Helen Rose Hampton) and Gabe (Jason Wilson). Just back from a trip to Italy they show off to their close friend Beth (Julia Papp). They are glitteringly affectionate but they bicker and there’s a lot of tension. Beth meanwhile seems ill at ease and is clearly making excuses for the absence of her husband, Tom. It soon becomes clear that the latter couple are splitting because he has met someone else. Thereafter we get  a whole series of intense, beautifully written high octane scenes between various groupings of the four of them including a flashback – effectively done with wigs, body language, playful joshing and bright lighting – to when they were all young. Ultimately and tragically, resigned as they are to the status quo, we see that Karen and Gabe are judgementally jealous of Beth and Tom for moving on and finding happy excitement again.

All four actors are very accomplished, delivering dialogue at pace, delivering some loud pregnant pauses and doing a great deal of convincing listening. In places it’s ruefully funny. Hampton finds brittle decency in Karen while Wilson is by turns, irritated, resigned and, occasionally randy. I really admired the palpable chemistry between them.

We never see Beth and Tom alone together in marriage. Their back story is unfolded through what they and others say.  Papp gives us a dowdy and distressed woman at the beginning who becomes “pretty again”, as Karen observes, when she meets someone else. She takes the audience with her. Hardy, meanwhile, creates a very plausible character waxing lyrical about the physicality and emotional warmth he enjoys with his new love – although it’s not straightforward and there’s a nasty moment when he admits that he’s come to New York with his partner but will not be seeing his children and we see the long friendship between him and Gabe sliding gradually off the rails.

Shrewdly directed (Lawrence Carmichael), the show also makes excellent use of the refurbished Goose Green Theatre. GGT opened on a shoestring at the end of the first lockdown when we had to sit in surreally spaced rows in an end-on space. For Dinner With Friends it is configured in the round, with new lighting and sound absorbing wall covering. And it works very well. The set consists of IKEA-type storage units in different shapes which are moved to create a breakfast bar, bed, sitting room and so on. The cast move the units between scenes in slow moving, oddly compelling dance – evidently very carefully rehearsed! I had a bit of a problem with the invisible, imaginary food and drink but it’s a very minor point.

 

 

 First published by Sardines: https://www.sardinesmagazine.co.uk/review/dinner-with-friends/

First published in 1958, Things Fall Apart is a moving account of what happened in the late 19th century Nigeria when colonial Christianity arrived in Igbo society.  The conflict is partly reflective of Achebe’s own background benefiting as he did from a Westernised education. It was – and remains – an extraordinary account of two cultures tragically misunderstanding each other. The underlying message is probably “All we need to do is to listen to each other” which is as relevant today as it ever was, given tensions with, for example, China and some Islamic groups.

And consider that 1958 date. Apartheid was, by then, well established in South Africa: the Sharpville massacre lay two years into the future. Segregation was the law in the southern states of the USA and it was just two years since Rosa Parks had made her famous stand on that Alabama bus. In Britain the law allowed landlords to display notices in their windows reading “No blacks”. Nigeria was still a British colony.

The structure of the novel fascinates me. It is presented in three parts like an elegant three act play. The first part ends with the seven year enforced exile of the central character Okonkwo to his mother’s home village as a punishment for contravening tribal law. The middle section describes his exile and the third takes him back home seven years later.  And this novel has what must be one of the longest expositions in fiction. Achebe spends 121 pages of a 183-page novel showing how things are and how well they work before anything happens to change that. Thus we see marriage, death, birth, polytheism.  farming, hierarchies, inter-village relations, justice, family arrangements and everything else which binds together the Igbo way of life. Then on page 121 we read that “a white man had appeared in their clan” … “riding an iron bicycle”. Briefed by their oracle who predicts very accurately that the white man would eventually  mean trouble, the men of Umuofia kill him and that, of course, leads to retribution.

At first there are churches and for a while, an enlightened missionary who takes the trouble to get to know, and listen, to the Igbo people. Then he’s replaced by a blinkered evangelist and things begin to fall apart quite quickly. Of course, nothing about this is simple. Some Igbo people are attracted to the new religion. Okonkwo’s eldest son, for example takes the baptismal name Isaac (interesting choice given his troubled relationship with his father) and becomes a Christian. Moreover the missionaries bring schools and hospitals which seem to be a benefit. But they also bring law courts and a District Commissioner. Of course no British court was ever going to condone, for example, throwing away twins (dumping them alive in the forest) because they are cursed. The two sides don’t – in any sense – speak the same language. Corruption amongst the DC’s men works against the Igbo people too. And then, inevitably, it ends in tragedy. And, as in every literary tragedy you read the last page with a lump in your throat and the frustration that most of the novel’s suffering could so easily have been avoided.

It was always promoted as one of the greatest of 20th century novels but I haven’t heard anyone talking about Things Fall Apart for a long time now. We used to teach/read it a lot in secondary schools. In fact the copy I have, and have just reread, is one of those nice old Heinemann low budget, hard backed Windmill Series editions with an introductory note by Ian Seraillier, who was series editor. Such books used to be ubiquitous in English department stock cupboards. But this one seems to have fallen out of favour rather although I see it is still on the GCSE syllabus in Northern Ireland.

There may another reason for this. When I wrote my So You Really Want to Learn English series – class textbooks for age 10-13 in the early 2000s each chapter was based on a major extract. One of these was from Things Fall Apart.  Then ten years later we did revised editions and the Achabe family network (he died in 2013) announced it wanted £2,000 for permission to use the passage – around ten times as much as anyone else was asking for at the time. So of course I had to use something else thereby depriving thousands of young readers of an introduction to this fine, important novel. Anyone would think that the people close to the author didn’t actually want the novel to be read by the next generation. If they make a habit of this greedy stance then it’s no wonder that the book is not now discussed much is it?

Oh well. Of course you can still buy it – I don’t think it’s ever been out of print. Let’s hope teachers are encouraging students to read it anyway because it really is a novel which matters.

Chinua Achebe

Next week on Susan’s Bookshelves: Hotel du Lac by Anita Brookner