Escaped Alone by Caryl Churchill, Royal Court Theatre, 12 March 2016

A conversation with Janie back in January.

Janie: I’ve just heard Front Row. They were talking about an amazing new play by Caryl Churchill at the Royal Court.

Me: (inquisitively) Yessss…

Janie: …so why haven’t you got us tickets for it?

Me: (nervously) Cripes – I’ll look into it. Leave it to me.

But of course, I had already bought tickets for Escaped Alone at the Royal Court. I’d bought tickets for the play so long ago, Janie and I had both forgotten about it. So long ago, that we hadn’t then quite worked out when we were going to take our winter break. I had, for that reason, booked for right at the end of the run, 12 March, to ensure that our holiday window was as wide as possible.

By the time we returned from our winter trip to Nicaragua, we were aware that Escaped Alone had received rave reviews from almost all the critics, that several of our friends had already seen it and that no-one seemed very able to explain what the play is about.

Thus we went to Sloane Square with a great sense of expectation; perhaps that in part explains why both of us found the play rather disappointing. Yet I didn’t find the piece quite as obscure and mysterious as critics (and friends) inferred. So, for those readers who wonder what this play is about, (even those of you who have seen and/or read it) here is my take on the work.

Caryl Churchill gives us, at the front of the play text, the quote “I only am escaped alone to tell thee” from the Book of Job (Job’s servant with bad news) and also from the epitaph to Moby Dick (Ishmael’s words). But I don’t think this clue leads naturally to the idea that Mrs Jarrett’s (Linda Bassett’s) dystopian speeches are supposed to be her describing actual experiences prior to visiting the garden and/or that the garden scenes take place while other aspects of the world are turning hellish.

The start of the play reveals that Mrs Jarrett knows the other three women only slightly when she joins them in the garden. The other three clearly know each other well; that familiar trio are given and use only first names. It is only Mrs Jarrett, the surnamed partial outsider, who steps outside the comfort of the garden to make dystopian speeches in partial, flashing light of the outer stage.

In the garden scenes, as the play unfolds, each of the three familiar friends makes a relatively lengthy speech in which they reveal their inner demons. In Sally’s case, it is the fear of cats. In Lena’s case, it is workplace-induced depression/agoraphobia. In Vi’s case, it is obsessive thoughts about her killing of her husband and the effect it has had on her life since. Mrs Jarrett doesn’t make such a speech within the garden – we have heard plenty about her demons in her dystopian speeches from the outside. So Mrs Jarrett merely says the phrase “terrible rage” many times over, when it is her turn to open up to the others with a longer speech in the garden.

The point is, I think, that all four women are describing inner demons; Mrs Jarrett only articulates hers outside the garden. We all have inner demons, which we can only really “escape alone”, or sometimes reveal to friends as personal dystopiae, because those worries are unique to us.  There is an interesting counterpoint here with Hitchcock’s take on inner fears (which in his case manifest as plot devices and ways of making the audience anxious) – fresh in my mind after seeing Hitchcock/Truffaut the previous day. Perhaps Churchill’s subtle focus on the notion that everyone has inner fears explains why Escaped Alone seems to have resonated so well with the critics (and perhaps also audiences).

Janie and I have seen a fair smattering of Caryl Churchill in our time. They are often short works, with an absurd, obscure and/or dystopian feel to some or all of the piece. This piece didn’t seem, to us, to add much to that Churchill oeuvre. Among the critics, only Billington (whose review was also very good) at least alluded to dystopia overkill and the use of similar ideas in earlier Churchill works. Blue Heart, A Number and especially Far Away all came to my mind while watching the play, prior to reading that Billington review.

Yes, Escaped Alone had a super set. Yes, the production had a superb posse of senior actresses, but the play/production simply didn’t resonate well with either of us, unlike many of Churchill’s earlier works.

The audience was ecstatic at the end of the show, but then it was a last night audience and the critics had universally told readers that the play/production was top ranking. Thus the audience went into critic-induced raptures at the “Da Doo Ron Ron” rendition by the four ladies in the garden, sandwiched between two of Mrs Jarrett’s dystopian speeches, soon after Sally’s cat phobia speech, just before Lena’s depression/agoraphobia one. An excessive response, in my view, to something that was a nice touch but not a coup de théâtre.

Similarly, the universal acclaim for this play/production seems excessive to both of us, although perhaps this piece does far more for people who have been less steeped in Caryl Churchill.

Visitors by Barney Norris, Bush Theatre, 6 December 2014

This was a really excellent piece, performed beautifully.

We went to see this only a month before mum died, by which time her dementia was getting rapidly worse. So I went with a mixture of trepidation and eager expectation.

I needn’t have worried – the play handled dementia as its central theme with great balance and dignity. An excellent effort from a young playwright in his 20s.  Barney Norris, you are now on our watch list.

Here is a link to the Bush resource on this play/production.

All of the performances were good, but Linda Bassett and Robin Soans were both exceptional.

There’s a neat little interview with Barney Norris (playwright) and Eleanor Wyld, one of the performers:

Mostly well received by the critics – click here for a search term that finds the reviews.

In Basildon by David Eldridge, Royal Court Theatre, 3 March 2012

This was our first theatre visit after returning from Vietnam in February.

A really good one too.

Here is a link to the Royal Court stub for this piece.

We rate David Eldridge highly as a playwright. Here was a superb cast and Dominic Cooke himself directing.

We really enjoyed this play and production.

The critics on the whole loved this piece – click here for a search term that finds the reviews.

Below is a link to the trailer:

Wastwater by Simon Stephens, Royal Court Theatre, 2 April 2011

We do both like a bit of Simon Stephens. We’re also partial to Linda Basset’s acting. This piece reminded us why on both counts.

We actually thought it was brilliantly acted and produced throughout.

Here is a link to the Royal Court resource on this play/production.

Three seemingly different stories that sort-of overlap and sort-of don’t. It’s hard to explain why, but Simon Stephens has a way with drama that simply keeps you gripped and thinking throughout.

Here is a very interesting behind the scenes short film from Sky Arts, including interviews with Simon Stephens, Linda Basset and several of the other cast and creatives, about Wastwater:

Royal Court – Wastwater from daniel bougourd on Vimeo.

Here is a link to a search term for reviews and other resources. The reviews are not universally great – some rated it very good, some rated it poor and cold-hearted.

We rated it very highly.

The Stone by Marius von Mayenburg, Royal Court Theatre, 14 February 2009

This was a short play with a good cast and minimal set. We wanted to like it more than we did like it.

Set in Dresden, it is about a house that changed hands while retaining secrets across 60 years of political strife.

Janie usually hates plays that jump backwards and forwards in time, as this one did.

The play and production is well described in The Stage – here.

…you get the point.

Not sure what we ate afterwards – in all the temporal confusion it’s a miracle that we succeeded in getting food and getting home in that order.

 

Henry IV Parts One & Two by William Shakespeare, Royal Shakespeare Theatre, Part Of A Back-Aching Weekend In Stratford With Bobbie, 27 to 29 September 1991

Back in the day, when I didn’t look much like the bard, Bobbie and I were partial to a bit of Shakespeare.

This sounded like the real deal, with Robert Stephens as Falstaff and Michael Maloney as Hal. A little-known (at that time) actress Linda Bassett played Mistress Quickly and Adrian Noble directed the thing.

Besides, I had studied Henry IV Part One for my English ‘O’ Level, so obviously I knew what I was talking about.

Here is a link to the Theatricalia entry for Henry IV Part One – which we saw on Friday 27 September.

My log for Henry IV Part One reads:

Back-aching but worth it

Whereas for Henry IV Part Two, which we saw on Saturday 28 September, it reads:

Seriously back-aching but still worth it

Here is a link to the Theatricalia entry for Henry IV Part Two.

Both plays were long – hence the back ache. I was still suffering the aftermath of my multiple lower back disc prolapses the previous year.

They were very good productions though.

Below is Michael Coveney’s Observer review of Henry IV Part One:

Coveney on Henry IV Part OneCoveney on Henry IV Part One Sun, Apr 21, 1991 – 56 · The Observer (London, Greater London, England) · Newspapers.com

Below is Michael Billington’s take on Part One in the Guardian

Billington on Henry IV Part OneBillington on Henry IV Part One Thu, Apr 18, 1991 – 26 · The Guardian (London, Greater London, England) · Newspapers.com

Below is Kate Kellaway’s Observer review of Part Two

Kate Kellaway on Henry Part TwoKate Kellaway on Henry Part Two Sun, Jun 2, 1991 – 72 · The Observer (London, Greater London, England) · Newspapers.com

Here’s Michael Billington in The Guardian ecstatic about the pair after seeing Part Two

Billington On Part TwoBillington On Part Two Sat, Jun 1, 1991 – 21 · The Guardian (London, Greater London, England) · Newspapers.com

We stayed in an unmemorable B&B on the edge of town. I vaguely recall a bossy (i.e. rule-laden) owner.

I think we ate good food. Fatty Arbuckle’s or Lambs, and then The Glory Hole, if I recall correctly. I’m pretty sure the latter on the Saturday night because Henry IV Part Two was so darned, back-achingly long, there was only one eatery in Stratford open that late in those days.

We suffered for our art, going to Stratford, back then.

Juno And The Paycock by Sean O’Casey, Lyttelton Theatre, 22 February 1989

A midweek visit to the theatre with Bobbie. How on earth we ended up at the National for a major production on press night I have no idea – perhaps a couple of Bobbie’s journalist friends/colleagues had to divest themselves of a pair of tickets at short notice.

Midweek theatre was a habit we had acquired during my quieter months in late 1988 but this was not a sensible idea once my Binders career got going, as I might be deadline-ridden or out of town at the drop of a hat in my new career – so such mideweek jaunts became rare.

Having said that, it seems that February 1989 was a relatively quiet month for me, in terms of client contact anyway, certainly compared with the frantic few weeks I spent on my first major assignment in December 1988 and January 1989:

I don’t recall being quiet at work, though, so I must have been immersed in something or things that didn’t require meetings. I think I ran a tendering process or two, got involved with some proposal writing and helped out on a few projects staffed by people who didn’t really “get” accounting.

One thing I most certainly wasn’t doing was strutting around the office like a “paycock”. Which brings us back neatly to the matter at hand – a Wednesday evening visit to the National to see Juno and the Paycock with Bobbie.

It’s a good play – one of O’Casey’s best in my opinion – a synopsis and the play’s provenance can be found here. The 1989 Lyttelton production was a good one to be sure – that’s what I wrote in my log anyhow.

Linda Bassett played Juno and Tony Haygarth played the Captain. It was a very good cast altogether, in fact – see this Theatricalia entry for details.

Below is Michael Billington’s Guardian review:

Billington on PaycockBillington on Paycock Fri, Feb 24, 1989 – 34 · The Guardian (London, Greater London, England) · Newspapers.com

Below is Michael Ratcliffe’s Observer review:

Ratcliffe on PaycockRatcliffe on Paycock Sun, Feb 26, 1989 – 44 · The Observer (London, Greater London, England) · Newspapers.com

Strangely, it was revived again at the Lyttelton in 2011 with Ciaran Hinds and my neighbour, Sinead Cussack. Here is a link to a list of many productions.

It is hard to find any information on-line about the 1989 production, although some of the 2011 reviews hark back to the earlier production. But take my word for it that the 1989 production was good. I’m pretty sure it got good notices. Bobbie might remember yet more about it than I do. I’ll ask her.

A Place With The Pigs by Athol Fugard, Cottesloe Theatre, 20 February 1988

I rated this play/production superb in my log – I remember it well and fondly.

Jim Broadbent and Linda Bassett were both outstanding – I think this might have been the first time I saw either of them in the theatre and it was, I think, my first experience of seeing an Athol Fugard play performed. If so, it was the first of many in all three cases.

Here is a link to the Theatricalia entry for this play/production.

No on-line reviews of the production we saw, of course, but there is an almost contemporaneous one from the Yale Rep in 1987, which you can read transcribed here.

Michael Billington didn’t much like it – below is his review clipped:

Billington On PigsBillington On Pigs Thu, Feb 18, 1988 – 21 · The Guardian (London, Greater London, England) · Newspapers.com

Michael Ratcliffe didn’t much like it either – pearls before swine this play/production – Ratcliffe’s review clipped below

Ratcliffe On PigsRatcliffe On Pigs Sun, Feb 21, 1988 – 24 · The Observer (London, Greater London, England) · Newspapers.com

The play is about a Russian soldier hiding in a pig sty for many years after the war and possible recriminations for his desertion are over. No doubt it is meant to be a parable with relevance to the Afrikaner position in South Africa.

Frankly, I found it hard to engage too deeply with the parable at the time, but did think it was an interesting and entertaining play, especially in the hands of the talented cast.

Unusually for productions that please me so much, Fugard himself directed this one – I’m not keen on the idea of playwrights directing their own work and usually detect some untrammelled egotism in such productions, but I think Fugard might be an exception to the “don’t direct your own plays” rule of thumb.

Did Bobbie enjoy this one as much as I did? I think so, at the time, but whether it stuck so long in her memory as it did mine is a question I’ll have to ask her.