We were still at the stage that I thought Janie might just be converted on to Shakespeare, so I booked a couple of Bard productions that spring: Ralph Fiennes playing the title role in this one and Tony Sher playing the title role in the Scottish one.
The idea didn’t really work on Janie – especially Richard II, which she found long and dull, despite a great cast and very solid production.
If I remember correctly, Gainsborough was a pop up theatre on the site of a disused film studio in Hoxton. This was one of the Almeida’s homes for a while, during which time the theatre was being poshed-up a bit.
Ralph Fiennes was a nodding acquaintance of mine back then – one of several actors who frequented Lambton Place in those days. This I disclose in the interests of openness and transparency, not that nodding acquaintanceship might affect my judgment.
I thought this production was very good, but I have always had my doubts about Richard II as a play. It is one that I “studied” at school, as a precursor to Henry IV Part one being my ‘O’ Level text. If Michael Lempriere couldn’t make it interesting for me, even Ralph, Jonathan Kent directing and an excellent supporting cast were going to struggle.
Paul Taylor in The Independent liked it but was a little underwhelmed:
This production was credited as “Donmar Warehouse at the Albery” and everything about it was Donmar Warehouse, but playing away from home. This production had received glowing reviews and awards the year before at the Donmar. We missed out then but were not about to miss out on it now.
Excellent cast, Nigel Lindsay, Sarah Woodward, Stephen Dillane & Jennifer Ehle leading, with David Leveaux directing.
Our “Donmar Warehouse at The Albery” experience was a more relaxing evening and a very fine production. Janie doesn’t really warm to Stoppard, but she did warm to this one.
I won’t overdo the reviews, as they are from the original production 9 months earlier, but here’s just a couple of examples of the raving – the first from our friend Michael Billington in The Guardian…
I think Janie must have sourced these tickets, because her diary notes that we’ll be sitting in the fifth row. Great diary detail, 25 years on, that one.
We thought this play/production was wonderful and we both remember this particular evening at the Almeida extremely well.
I had been especially keen to book this production, as I had read the play in the late 1980s, found it very interesting and wondered whether I would ever get to see it performed.
Janie and I attended a preview, as oft we do. Wallace Shawn was there and we chatted with him for quite some while. He came across as being exactly the sort of slightly-awkward, self-effacing type that he depicted in the film My Dinner With Andre, which is a great favourite of ours. A couple of times I said to Wallace, “I’m sure you need to speak with some other people”, to allow him to move on without discomfort, but he made it quite clear that he was happy chatting with us and continued to do so.
We talked about his other plays, many of which I had read and several of which Janie and I had seen together. We also chatted about the Almeida production of Aunt Dan & Lemon. He told us how thrilled he was that Miranda Richardson was playing Aunt Dan, as he was a huge fan of hers. I remember reflecting afterwards, with Janie, that Wallace Shawn seemed more star struck about Miranda Richardson than we were star struck by chatting with him.
The production was truly excellent. I had wondered, when I read the play, how it could possibly be staged well. Director/designer Tom Cairns and the production team had a myriad of clever answers, not least the hugely effective but not overpowering use of video projections on a screen.
Glenne Headly was superb as Lemon, as was Miranda Richardson as Aunt Dan. An excellent supporting cast including Corey Johnson and Kerry Shale.
Our friend Michael Billington loved this play/production:
It’s a shame that the Guardian mis-labelled the photo as Natasha Richardson (daughter of Vanessa Redgrave, no relation to Miranda). I wonder whether Wallace Shawn laughed or cried at that mistake back then?
Charles Spencer in The Telegraph considered the piece to be pernicious and wrong-headed, which is an interesting counter-argument to those coming at the piece from a more liberal perspective:
Thinking about the play some 35 years after reading it and 25 years after seeing it, I am struck by the thought that the play would, today, seem implausible, because an academic with Aunt Dan’s views would be lucky to survive even one semester as an Oxford don. Mind you, Wallace Shawn probably wouldn’t last much longer in an elevated academic institution either. Having thought provoked in this manner is not for wimps.
One of the very best and most memorable evenings we have spent at the theatre.