Characters Waiting to Flourish

Being more of a 'pantser' than a 'planner' does have its upsides. It means that I get first drafts done, however terrible, without stopping to second-guess myself halfway through. Knowing I can fix something later is a huge weight off my mind and I rather like spewing rubbish onto the page - gets it out of my head anyway. Then I can move on.

However, that word vomit isn't the only reason I enjoy plunging into a story and seeing what happens, as I learned this month when I ran off the first draft of a play. It's an idea that's been floating around for a while but I had neither time nor desire to start a new project at the moment. Then, in the midst of my academic conference schedule this summer, I just decided to go for it, reasoning that I needed a welcome distraction to giving papers and trying to be a normal human being for long periods of time.

With this idea, I had an end point, some brief character sketches and progression notes but no meat on the bone, so to speak. During this (brief) planning stage, I realised that I needed another character if my two main 'events' were going to occur, otherwise my distraught heroine would be talking to herself, a drunkard and a schemer. Entertaining, perhaps, but not ideal for moving the story forward. So I came up with another character, practically at random. And you know what? She easily became my favourite.

The thing about not having many preconceptions about your characters in a first draft is that you can just let them go where they want and let them speak. This is particularly relevant in a play draft, of course, where the vast bulk is just dialogue. What came out of this was that the character I'd thought so little about took charge in a way I hadn't been expecting. She became a substitute leader with frailties she doesn't like to acknowledge and one gaping hole in her armour. Her scenes took precedence over all the others, including the sisterly relationship that's supposed to operate at the heart of the play.

I suppose this gives me food for thought when I write the second draft. There's a lot of character work to be done and the whole thing needs rewriting into something akin to coherence. No idea when that'll be with my PhD work plus the novels I'm trying to force myself to rewrite. But at least I got the draft down - and discovered a brilliant character in the process. Not bad for a few illicit weekends in July.

Preview: Wakefield Drama Festival 2013

In under two weeks I'll be attending the Wakefield Drama Festival for the third time. I reviewed my experiences in 2011 and 2012 but this year I thought it would be interesting to look ahead and see what I've got to look forward to. Seven different plays over seven nights (26th May - 1st June) always brings out an eclectic bunch of plays and this year is no different.

On Sunday 26th May Bonkers Theatrical, Kettering perform Behind Closed Doors by Janet Shaw, which explores the engagement of two university students and the domestic violence which permeates both of their families despite their differences. It apparently has 'comedy and tragedy in equal measure'.

On Monday 27th May Gainsborough Theatre Company perform Shakers by John Godber and Jane Thornton. It explores the lives of four waitresses in a cocktail bar which 'is worse than hell'.

On Tuesday 28th May St Austin's Players perform Hobson's Choice by Harold Brighouse. A comedy set in 1915, it tells the story of a widower struggling to control his daughters who work in his shoe shop, a problem that becomes more acute when one of them marries his best cobbler and decide to set up a rival business.

On Wednesday 29th May Trinity Players, Barnsley perform Side Effects by Eric Chappell. This is a comedy with such a description that it's best to just quote it: 'Frank Cook has been booked into a private nursing home, by his wife June, for a week's respite. Whilst there, he encounters the Reverend Paul Latimer who is recovering from a heart transplant and whose odd behaviour is beginning to alarm his wife, Sarah. The young, attractive Tracey might provide the answer. She is convinced that the vicar's new heart belonged to her recently deceased lover Melvin - a fairground 'wall of death' rider!'

On Thursday 30th May Wakefield Little Theatre perform Without Fear or Favour by Reece Andrews. Written by a retired police officer, this play looks at the reality of policing in suburban West Yorkshire in the 1970s.

On Friday 31st May The Yorkshireman Company perform The Grocer's Daughter by Mary Creasey and Jack Land Noble. A 'one woman comedy' set in Grimethorpe, it deals with Connie as she packs away her life before closing the shop for good. 

Finally, on Saturday 1st June Halifax Thespians perform Death and the Maiden by Ariel Dorfman. Containing strong language and adult themes, this is another one where I'll just quote the description: 'A riveting psychological thriller set in a country whose people have just wrestled power from a punishing regime of dictatorship in order to establish a democracy. But, what makes a decent society and who, if anyone, should be held to account for past failures?'

So there you go, that's the week in full. From the descriptions, I'm looking forward to The Grocer's Daughter and Death and the Maiden most but I expect the entire week to be enjoyable as it has been for the last two years.

Tickets for the individual shows are £12. A three night pass costs £30 and a seven night pass costs only £49 which works out at £7 a show. I should say thank you to the theatre for not raising this price, keeping the theatre affordable. I think the festival is a wonderful opportunity for people to see the different types of play that the Theatre Royal Wakefield offers and I wouldn't be going back for the third year in a row if it wasn't both great fun and value for money. Watch for my review at the end of the week!

For more information and to book tickets please visit their website. 

Theatre Review: A Kind of Loving

A Kind of Loving, based on the 1960 novel by Stan Barstow and adapted here by John Godber, tells the story of Vic Brown (Byron Owen) and his troubled relationship with Ingrid Rothwell (Vicky Binns). At first he is infatuated with her but quickly loses interest until Ingrid drops the bombshell that she's pregnant. Vic reluctantly marries her and moves in at her mother's but tragedy soon strikes.

Probably the most vital component of this play is Byron Owen's rapport with the audience. Although the character is downright despicable at times, his direct conversations with the audience keep them almost on his side. A side-effect of Vic's charisma, though, is that the character of Ingrid fades into the background a little. Despite the fact that she is (mostly) in the right, the story is Vic's and the audience certainly identifies with him more. Ingrid comes and goes whilst Vic is onstage much of the time. In addition, the other four members of the cast take on multiple (and sometimes hilarious) roles. When I think of the most memorable scenes it's unfortunate that they include Vic alongside someone else and not Ingrid.

The staging of this works extremely well. The doors around the stage have a dual function: they allow characters to come and go quickly and the plot to jump ahead but they also impose a sense of community on the story. Frequently, there is the sense that Vic's being watched and judged as heads pop out of the doors, portraying with simplicity the tight-knit relationships in a working-class northern town in the late 1950s/1960s. Once in a while there is a dip too far in the lighting (in fairness, that could have just been where I was sitting) but it doesn't hinder the production. In fact, the lighting works very well throughout, a standout moment being the end of the first act where the back of the stage practically glows. The music utilised often certainly compliments the story and helps set the scene - any play that begins with Doris Day singing is definitely for me! Also of note are the brief set changes, comprising of bringing stools, chairs and a sofa on to the stage: these get gradually more amusing as the play goes on with Dicken Ashworth and Christine Cox as Mr and Mrs Brown particularly hilarious offenders.

As I mentioned, four versatile cast members take on thirteen roles between them. A couple of them stand out: Dicken Ashworth as music shop owner Mr Van Huyten has a thick accent but a very distinctive personality that comes across in his lines. His appearances were welcome, although at one point his line was drowned out by the music playing at the time and I was a little disappointed. Also amusing to watch were Jacky Naylor in her brief stint as Ingrid's friend, Dorothy, and Robert Hudson as Percy Walshaw.

There are three scenes which make this play worth seeing on their own and all of them are in the second act. Vic's drunken scene with Percy is nothing short of hilarious and the audience was in stitches as it progressed. Immediately following this was Vic's confrontation with his mother-in-law (Jacky Naylor) then, finally, there was Vic's discussion with his sister (also Jacky Naylor), a poignant conversation which consolidates the themes of the play.

Overall, this was a thoroughly enjoyable night out. Although the decade has changed, the themes of love, ambition and responsibility are still as important as they ever were.

A Kind of Loving runs at Theatre Royal Wakefield until Saturday 23rd March.

Wakefield Drama Festival 2012

I should note that while this year was billed as the 'Jubilee Drama Festival' it's pretty much by chance the two coincided. Aside from standing at the national anthem, there was no Jubilee-related activity. That's why I've billed this as the 'Wakefield Drama Festival 2012'. This is the second year I've attended, thoroughly enjoying 2011 after a shaky start. I think this year felt a little more gruelling than last year but it did have some heavier productions on, adding to the overall atmosphere. I do know that attendance dropped this year - that may have been a consequence of people not wanting to buy seven night passes that interfered with the Jubilee celebrations or they might have been put off by this delightful rain we've been experiencing but, nevertheless, I'd urge people to attend next year if they can. The standard of some productions this year was phenomenal.

Sunday - Terra Nova
This felt like a grim one to start the week on - a dramatisation of the final days of Captain Scott's expedition to the South Pole. Heavy subject matter indeed but relieved slightly by occasional touches of humour and some manipulation of reality. Throughout the play, we follow Scott's wandering mind as he recalls his wife and engages in fantastical conversations with his South Pole adversary, Roald Amundsen, as he tries to keep his team alive. It was at times difficult to watch a story that we know the tragic ending of but Simon J. Vardakis as Captain Scott put in a wonderfully believable performance of a man struggling with his responsibilities and making errors of judgement along the way. The rest of the cast were equally as believable, coping with the time and reality shifts with remarkable dexterity.

Technically, the stage was well-assembled and it won 'Best Stage Presentation' at the end of the week. It even looked cold, covered in white sheeting with two raised sections which allowed Scott's conversations with his wife and Amundsen to be separated from the action. I couldn't fault the script nor, really, anything. The final scenes were so harrowing that I was close to tears, something that's never happened to me in a theatre before. All in all, this was another exceptional production from the company that provided the overall winner last year.

Monday - The 39 Steps
An adaptation of the Hitchcock film with only four actors played to the ultimate comedic effect - what could be finer? Well, not much. The key to this play is for the actors to connect with the audience and they managed it beautifully, particularly the two 'clowns' who had to play dozens of roles between them and jointly took home the 'Best Actor' prize at the end of the week.

There were some ingenious uses of staging to get laughs, including an iconic door that was pushed repeatedly around the stage to hilarious effect. In addition, a wonderful screen at the back of the stage depicted scenes too difficult to construct on stage - a plane crash, the escape across a loch (Nessie made an appearance at this point). Occasionally, however, the tension slipped a bit and a few sections became repetitive and slow. There are only so many times you can laugh at the same thing. There were, though, some fantastic character-switches for the clowns which the audience certainly appreciated. I think the finale set in the London Palladium was well-orchestrated, although the last scene of the piece felt as though it overstayed its welcome. Nevertheless, this was an enjoyable evening with some good performances.

Tuesday - Outside Edge
I think the first thing to say about this production is that there seemed to be a catastrophe pre-curtain. An ambulance at the rear entrance twenty minutes before the performance is never a good thing and I think it may have been the director who was taken off. That probably explains some of the issues I had with the play.

There was a fair bit of line-fluffing, including one incidence of the prompter having to dive in. That threw me off a bit but, to give credit to the cast, they recovered well every time there was an issue. Some of the characters were over-played but I suspect they were written that way. The play itself (written in 1979) felt a little dated from time to time but the interplay of the characters and the fundamental natures of the people involved shone through. My favourite performance came from Debby Pickering as Miriam, the long-suffering wife of cricketing captain Roger. She played the nattering, obedient wife to perfection in the first act then, as things began to fall apart as she realised her husband's lies, she morphs into a brittle, sarcastic woman struggling to hold it all in. The action takes place at a cricket club as the players compete against another team amidst failing relationships and injury. Another few honourable mention for acting must go to Helen Binns as Maggie and Chris Harrison as Kevin, both of whom were endearing and funny. A few actors seemed to struggle with the horrible natures of their characters - Ginny and Dennis being two examples - and the play could've done with the nudge from more tension in this respect. However, I liked the building up of Miriam's suspicions throughout. This play is running for a few days at the end of June and it's certainly worth a chance, especially if the cast have taken on board some of the adjudicator's opinions.

Wednesday - Someone Who'll Watch Over Me
This play is based on the real-life experiences of a hostage in the Lebanon. In all honesty, I wasn't expecting this to be one of the highlights of the week: a static set, three characters imprisoned, pain and suffering didn't assist in making me look forward to it. How wrong I was.

I can only remember once being so torn apart by a play and that was when I ventured to London to see Tracie Bennett in End of the Rainbow. Someone Who'll Watch Over Me was claustrophobic, heart-breaking yet the tension was broken by moments of light-relief as the three prisoners tried to forget the horrific situation they were in. The 'tennis match' between Michael (Derek Smith) and Edward (Simon Reece) was hilarious and the actors should be commended for their ability to switch from despair to humour in the blink of an eye. All in all, I'd imagine the actors were thoroughly exhausted at the end of it but they performed remarkably throughout - there wasn't a slip that I could discern. Something the adjudicator remarked on at the end of the play was that the audience didn't feel as though they were watching a play and that was certainly true - there was no artificiality at all and the actors really became the characters. There was a good use of music throughout, starting with 'Someone To Watch Over Me' (of course) sung by Ella Fitzgerald. However, the most heartbreaking incidence of music came from Alistair Cheetham as Adam, singing 'Amazing Grace' and bringing the curtain down on act one. There are no words to describe the effect that had on the audience. When the lights came back on no one wanted to move. As you can probably tell, I don't have a bad word to say about this production.

Thursday - Charley's Aunt
For me, there's a distinct difference between playing a production written in the Victorian era where the Victorians take the mickey out of themselves and playing it as a contemporary company taking the mickey out of the Victorian era. I realise I have a rather deep interest in this as a student of Victorian literature and it well may be that the flaws that presented themselves to me in this production were invisible to everyone else. Nonetheless, I was disappointed by something I hoped to enjoy.

The play tells the farcical tale of Jack and Charley, two young men hoping to propose to Kitty and Amy respectively before the girls leave for Scotland. Charley's aunt, whom he's never met, is supposed to be coming for lunch and that strikes the boys as the perfect opportunity to speak to the girls. At the last minute the aunt writes that she won't be attending, leaving poor Fancourt Banbury in a predicament as his friends force him to dress up and pretend to be Charley's aunt. Unfortunately, the 'aunt' soon finds herself with two suitors and things take another turn for the worse when the real aunt arrives. I suppose another one of my problems with this one was the over-acting present, especially in act one. Yes, it's a farce but the best farces stem from the dialogue and characterisation and, while the script was good enough, the actors seemed compelled to over-play it instead of letting the script speak for itself. I think the younger actors were guiltier of this than the older ones. There was an over-reliance on exaggerated facial expressions which didn't fit with the moment and, while it picked up a little towards the end, the first half dragged immeasurably. One other thing that irritated me - there was a second interval to allow a set change. Given the sparsity of the set, I rather think that could've been accomplished in a black-out with some music playing.

There were some good performances though, particularly J.E. de Tute as Banbury and K.T. Lowe as the butler, Brassett. They at least seemed to embrace their parts without mocking them from a contemporary standpoint and I was delighted when Lowe took home the 'Best Supporting Actor' award at the end of the week. However, I expected to enjoy this one much more than I did, I'm afraid.

Friday - The Glass Menagerie 
At around two and a half hours long (plus interval) this one was the lengthiest play of the week and, while I understand why it was put on Friday night, by this stage I think the audience was perhaps too tired for such an intellectual offering. That said, it gripped me throughout, though I do have criticisms of my own.

The staging seemed to be tricky if you were anywhere apart from dead centre stalls. There was a curtain across which revealed a table but, thanks to some props to the left, it impaired the view for some of the audience. I spent scenes watching two people with a third frustratingly out of sight. Nonetheless, the set felt authentic and uncluttered at the front. The production's use of music was excellent, but voices didn't always carry far enough - something which one man loudly commented on during the best scene, only to be shushed by everyone around him. Negatives aside, the actors were fantastic. Clare Foster as Laura Wingfield was remarkable, especially in the romance scene opposite Jack Cotton as Jim. I was enthralled during that scene, literally leaning forward in my seat as the tension between the pair rose and fell. One thing this production did exceptionally well was build an atmosphere. The adjudicator remarked that the atmosphere was too level and gloomy and that Amanda's (Margaret Leigh) moments of hysteria could've been used to alter the pace and, although he did have a point, I don't think it caused too much of a problem for me personally. The four members of the cast worked brilliantly together and I came out of this one touched by the performances. Clare Foster took home the 'Best Actress' award for her efforts, something very much deserved.

Saturday - One Big Blow
This isn't the play to go to if you're looking for realism! Six actors playing lots of different roles between them, it's ostensibly the story of a brass band preparing for a competition but, really, the competition isn't the thing that grabs the audience. The a cappella singing in lieu of an actual band seemed like a bad idea in concept but worked exceptionally well in practice. The additional songs the cast sang were both funny and fitting and the physical performances put in by the cast felt exhausting to the audience. It was a difficult one to keep up with at times, with all the character-switching, but it really didn't matter in the end. This one was an hilarious romp with some ingenious uses of bodies instead of props and some brilliant asides to the audience - one character commenting that he couldn't do anything because he was being a lamp in that scene to name but one. Taking the mickey out of theatrical symbolism whilst also incorporating the audience into the production was brilliant and this was an excellent one to finish the week on - light and frothy after something of a heavy week.

Conclusion
I found this year tougher than last but that may have been due in part to the weather. However, the standard of the drama this year was exceptionally high and it was no surprise to me that Someone Who'll Watch Over Me took both first prize from the adjudicator and the audience award (it was certainly my choice!). Terra Nova was given second prize - thoroughly deserved - while One Big Blow took third. My opinion tailed with the adjudicator's on four awards, which isn't bad going. I can only imagine how difficult the 'Best Actor' award was for the adjudicator given the standard of male acting throughout the week. One thing he mentioned in his summing up, though, was that was there was a distinct lack of important female characters this year. I don't know if I appreciated the male dominance as much as he seemed to in all honesty. However, it did mean that when I came across an outstanding female performance such as Debby Pickering in Outside Edge and Clare Foster in The Glass Menagerie it felt like a special moment.

Using Profanities - Pure Laziness?

Caroline Thompson, a senior BBC executive, said recently that swearing in comedies was all right now because there is an "enormous intergenerational difference about what is acceptable". This got me thinking about things I've seen, read and written lately and how they used language which could be deemed offensive.

I have to admit, I'm not a big fan of any current comedies. In my view they just can't match the class of previous decades. This may have something to do with the dependence on cheap laughs, partly stemming from bad language and partly from a buffoonery I just don't find endearing. But, as the article above says, classic comedies such as Porridge and Dad's Army didn't resort to swearing to get laughs. Yes, they sailed close to the wind sometimes but the laughs came out of what they nearly said as opposed to what they actually said. Modern British comedy has lost that to some extent.

But what of other genres? Well, I watch a lot of crime drama and hearing swearing on those feels acceptable to me because of the subject matter involved. I'm never going to get my knickers in a twist about the odd bit of swearing in a programme. My objections come from the fact that many writers (whether directed by broadcasters or not) seem to use coarse language as a crutch and as a substitute for meaningful dialogue. It's certainly easier to have a character swearing at a situation than figuring out a truly funny response to the events.  

I've seen a fair few plays this year. One thing that struck me was how the modern ones relied so much on swearing. It was something noticed by others as well as me - I had several conversations about it later, including with people who swear as often as they breathe in their day-to-day lives. One comedic play had a situation uncovered and two characters panicking about it. Instead of proper dialogue they literally just walked around the stage saying 'f**k, f**k, f**k' for at least a minute. As an audience member, I felt cheated. The word lost its resonance somewhat by the repetition and did nothing to further the plot or the characters. It was a substitute for what I'd deem 'proper writing' (as controversial as that term may be).

When I write I almost always keep to acceptable dialogue - until the situation calls for something else. I've sworn in most of my drafts to date but never just to fill space or to get a quick laugh. Profanity has to stem from both situation and character. It might be funny to have a grandmother spewing out a load of expletives but, unless you've got a reason for it, my patience wears thin.

All this may make me sound straight-laced and boring. I'm not (I hope!). I just want to see writers challenging themselves. How else are they supposed to challenge their audiences or, for that matter, entertain them?

Performance Time

Last night I attended a showcase of work by writers, directors and actors which celebrated work in this region. I was lucky enough to have a piece included: a ten-minute play called 'Shards' which revolved around a woman's inability to communicate with her dementia-suffering mother following the death of her father. The problem is exacerbated by the woman she deems responsible for her father's death becoming friends with her mother. Honestly, it takes longer to explain the piece than to watch it!

I was pleased with the way mine looked on stage. I don't think there's anything that quite matches the sensation of hearing words you've written come out of other people's mouths. The three actresses involved in my piece were excellent. I saw a rehearsal on Wednesday evening and the first thing I said afterwards was that the actress playing Eliza was scary. The director pointed out that I'd written her that way but words on a page can sometimes be so subdued and the effect has to be seen to be enjoyed. Judging from the audience reaction, I think my play went down quite well and - when I remembered to breathe - I found I enjoyed it too.

The other twelve pieces were very varied. However, my father did point out afterwards that a running motif seemed to be death. That probably says a lot about the preoccupation of writers at the moment, feeding off the gloomy atmosphere and worrisome news stories. The comedies were very good though and provided some much-needed laughter in the midst of all the death and pain.

It was an excellent night all round and I'd like to thank my family for coming to support the hyperventilating writer and the various friends who have kept me calm over the last few weeks - Claire, Sal, Laura and Nicola included! Well done to everyone involved in the performances and I hope I get to work with some of them again in the future.

Wakefield Drama Festival 2011

This may be quite a niche post but I thought I'd blog of my experiences in the last week as I attended the Wakefield Drama Festival 2011 at Theatre Royal Wakefield. The premise of the festival was pretty simple: seven plays in seven nights. Simple yet terrifying I'd imagine - for all involved. At the end of every performance the adjudicator gave his verdict and picked his winners at the end of the week.

Sunday - One Fiona, Two

This was a farce. Don't worry, it was meant to be. That said, I'm not certain I enjoyed it. The story was essentially that of Martyn, a thriller writer who owns a hotel on a Greek island and who has a lot of affairs with women called Fiona and learns something of a lesson. This was only the second production of the play and the writer and director also played a small role in the piece.

There were some excellent performances, but they were mainly from the secondary cast. One woman in particular, Rozi Afferson playing Bunty was magnificent. It's not often you can tell from the very first moment two characters appear on stage together that one has something of an unrequited love for the other one. Equally, there aren't many actresses who can pull off drunkenness with believability and make it downright hilarious. Then there was the recovery from the alcohol during a scene with barely any dialogue. It was pure genius: crisps dropping all over the place, being swept up and replaced on the table; peanuts being doused in Alka-Seltzer then drained; po-pourri being mistaken for Bombay mix. That scene was honestly worth the entry fee alone.

However, I did have some major reservations about the rest of it, some of which were picked up by the adjudicator. The pace wasn't speedy enough for a farce. Momentum slipped away just as it should have been building and this wasn't helped by strange performances from several of the leads. I say 'strange' because I fully believe they were playing the roles as written but it just didn't work well enough for me. The lead actor was miscast, I believe. I know he was supposed to be an unlikeable cad but he missed the moments of humanity which could have made him at least understandable as a character. His comedic value was overdone and a lighter touch would've helped the play as a whole. The base material was decent but it could do with some external input, and maybe some fresh faces in certain roles. As one final criticism (which the adjudicator shared), the set was full of doors and was perfect for a farce. However, the set wobbled more than Crossroads and I don't think that was intentional.

Monday - Blood Brothers

It's worth pointing out this was the play and not the musical. As such, I was a little apprehensive about how the drama would successfully take the place of the songs. I needn't have worried. This was an excellent performance. For anyone unfamiliar with the plot, it can be summed up easily enough: a downtrodden woman gives one of her twins to her infertile employer. The two boys meet and become friends, despite their class differences, though they are torn apart by their differences and their love for the same woman.

I had very few criticisms of the acting in this one. Even the bit parts of the policewoman and the milkman were amusing and well-cast. The two mothers, Mrs Johnstone and Mrs Lyons, were delicately played and understated when necessary. As for the boys, I was very impressed by two grown-up men playing the roles of seven then fourteen year-olds with apparent ease. It was something which could easily have looked ridiculous but the actors drew you into the personalities rather than the striking physical discrepancy between an adult and a boy. Equally, Poppy-Jo Lumley playing Linda managed the transition from child to woman to mother with ease. I can't fault the interpretation of any of the characters.

A couple of things which the adjudicator picked up on (which I agreed with) were the sometimes strained use of the minimal set and the disaster surrounding the gunshot at the end of the play. Firstly, the permanent set consisted of a table, two chairs and a sideboard which weren't constantly used. Occasionally, when characters sat at the table it boxed the action into two tight a corner. Secondly, the sound effect as the gun went off in the last scene was too strong and helped invoke laughter in the audience. That was a terrible occurrence because the scene up until then had been emotionally charged and brilliantly acted. It diluted the effects of the climax a little.

One thing I feel I must pick up on is the adjudicator's statement that the play feels dated. Admittedly, there are sections which jar but, overall, I found the play as relevant today as it was thirty years ago. After all, the themes of recession, class, social mobility, jealousy and anger resonate as deeply in contemporary society. I honestly think that it's a play with an active lesson and I thoroughly enjoyed watching it.

Tuesday - The Bronte Boy

I used this play as one of my excuses to go to the Wakefield Drama Festival this year. It's no secret on this blog that I'm a nineteenth-century nerd but that could've left me massively disappointed with the offering from Encore Theatre. Fortunately, the actual content of the play was extraordinary and the delivery matched it. The play tells the tale of Branwell Bronte, the brother of the famous sisters who never quite reached his potential and died before his siblings. It was written by a local author and the script was phenomenal. It isn't easy to make Victorian dialogue interesting to the modern audience but a combination of a great script and accomplished actors made that criticism obsolete.

There truly wasn't a stand-out performance in this piece: they were all equally outstanding. As Branwell, Warwick St. John delicately made us care about a character who was destroying himself and negatively influencing the lives of those around him. His first scene with Asadour Guzelian as Patrick Bronte was emotionally charged and set the tone for the entire play. Equally, his final scene was haunting as he reads aloud letters that characterise what he sees as his failed existence. The actresses playing the sisters were all fantastic and I wouldn't like to single any of them out above the others.

The problems of the play stemmed from technical, not artistic issues. There were noticeable lighting errors (or just bizarre choices) and the table centre stage was cumbersome at times, alienating characters and limiting where the action could take place. Several scenes were pushed to the far of the stage as they alternated with action taking place in the centre. A combination of lighting problems, sound effect issues and a straight-on angle caused problems for some in the audience. However, none of the technical problems ruined the overall effect of the play for me. It was powerful and it was haunting. An exceptional night of the festival.

Wednesday - The Moonbather

This was a Last of the Summer Wine script, written by the wonderful Roy Clarke. As such, it was impeccable and couldn't really fail. The audience went with a set idea of what they were going to get and I'm pretty sure they got it. I was in hysterics throughout and began choking during the last scene because I'd been laughing so much.

The trickiest part of this play was presenting characters people knew vividly without impersonating the famous actors. I think it also expected you to go with knowledge of the series. If you'd taken a foreign friend or someone who'd been living in a bunker for the last forty years they might not have enjoyed it as much as someone familiar with the programme. There were titters of recognition as each character appeared on stage and a certain knowledge of what was to come. That said, the actors did a tremendous job of portraying their characters. Paul Haley was Compo, no question. Nora Batty was there with her curlers and Cleggy was as stuttering as anxious as I'd expect him to be. If I have one criticism of the cast it would be that it was a little too large, but that stems from the adaptation and a desire to please the audience more than anything else. One scene wonders Wally, Sid and Marina could certainly have been eliminated but the sense of community and fond feeling they inspired was possibly worth their inclusion.

The set was the most detailed of the week and yet so apt. Most of the action takes place in Cleggy's living room which is furnished just as you'd expect Normal Clegg to furnish his living room. It was intricate and detailed. A black curtain came down in front of the house for scenes involving other characters and this was very neatly done. The set complimented the action and gave it a sense of the 'real', even as the play itself descended into pure farce. It didn't pretend to be more than it was: it was a funny night out that certainly gave the audience an enjoyable time.

Thursday - Warrant for a Deed of Blood

This was the one I was looking forward to the most. In fact, this was the entire reason I decided to go to the festival in the first place. The story was based on the true story of Constance Kent, the Road murderer. This investigation was covered in-depth in Kate Summerscale's fantastic book, The Suspicions of Mr Whicher. I went into this anticipating a lot, because the source material was sensational and I didn't see how they could go wrong. But, on several levels, they did.

The logical place to start, so I thought, was with the murder itself. Instead they introduced the puzzles leading up to the murder beforehand, with the discovery of the body actually happening between acts one and two. This disappointed me on several levels: firstly, I think far too much time was sent documenting what could easily have been shown in flashbacks (as happened for a fair part of act two anyway); secondly, I felt cheated that we as an audience had been denied the discovery of the body, mainly because, despite the tension at the end of act one, there was no confirmation a crime would occur. If you didn't have knowledge of the case beforehand you might've struggled with the sudden leap from irritating child to dead one. Equally, if you had knowledge of the case you may have found yourself frustrated with the presentation - both structurally speaking and in terms of the cast.

I was most impressed by the acting of older members of the cast. Sue Murray as Sarah Cox was phenomenal. I almost forgave the fact that there were some entirely inappropriate songs in the piece because she was the one singing them. Equally, the actors playing Dr Stapleton, Samuel Kent and Elizabeth Gough approached their parts in the right manner. However, the children, Constance and William, were either miswritten or misinterpreted by the actors. They seemed to act a lot younger than they actually were and the hereditary madness, a vital component of the story, was expressed in chaotic and frantic scenes. Anyone who has read anything relating to Constance Kent will know that she was seen at the time as being reserved and thoughtful with bouts of anger. This misinterpretation, on whatever level it occurred, presented me with the major fault of the play: the names could easily have been changed and it made an entirely new piece because the majority of what was seen was conjecture from the time and sensationalism. The case itself was sensational and didn't need the enhancement of the rumours. A couple of other things I would add are, firstly, that there was a musician on stage who did add to the mood very effectively at times. However, he got in the way. He was clearly visible from the left side of the theatre, meaning that some of the monologues were diluted by the fact this musician was grinning over at the side. Finally, the use of a puppet and a woman controlling it to represent Saville seemed an odd way of demonstrating his tittle-tattling. While it was well done for what it was, I don't think it was necessary to the piece.

Friday - Men of the World

I was quite dubious about this, mainly due to the small cast and the idea that the three actors would be impersonating characters from a coach holiday. I thought it would be difficult to follow and seem rather contrived. Well, it wasn't difficult to follow at all, the sparse garments adorned by every separate character were differentiation enough. Perhaps it did seem contrived, but it was supposed to. The audience could suspend their disbelief because the characters themselves felt so real - even when it was a bloke with a beard wearing a headscarf. The writing was perfect and the three actors pulling off multiple parts were phenomenal.

There were too many little characters to go through them all. However, the three bus drivers framing and telling the story were Larry, Stick and Frank (female). Larry was due to retire after the journey they proceed to tell us about but he didn't. What the rest of the play explains is why he couldn't, and it captures the relationships between the drivers perfectly. There's a moment towards the end of act two when the tension that has been brewing between Larry and Stick throughout boils over into a shouting match that was perfectly pitched. I fully believed the anger between the two men because it had been fantastically foreshadowed. Then again, it was a John Godber script so I'm not surprised at the quality of the writing. Out of all the plays this week, this was the one that I could have stayed watching for hours more. I felt extremely comfortable with the characters, as though I'd been mates with them for years.

The set was sparse, with all character equipment being kept in three boxes behind the drivers' seats. They didn't distract and meant the actors didn't constantly disappear off-stage to change character. The lighting was used successfully to segregate the action but the music was the exceptional part of the staging for me. It was used to fill interludes as one character became another and it always tried to fit perfectly with what was going on. We got excerpts from The King and I and Sister Act along with standards such as 'Show Me The Way To Go Home' and a little Chopin. All in all, the music added to the play, rather than distracted from it. A thoroughly enjoyable evening to take your mind from any troubles.

Saturday - Glorious

This told the true tale of Florence Foster Jenkins, the worst opera singer in the world. Knowing the script was written by the fabulous Peter Quilter (of End of the Rainbow fame) made me sure I was in for a fantastic evening. Quilter has an extremely delicate way of mixing the comic with the poignant and that shone through in this remarkable performance.

The set was used effectively, a nice apartment setting for the opening scene which set the tone for the whole piece. The adjudicator commented at the end that there were more stage-hands helping with the changes than actors. It all worked, though, especially given that while the changes were taking place a newscast giving a flavour of the period blared over the speakers. I also couldn't fault the acting tonight. They got laughs when necessary but there was always a sense of the pain underneath, especially in the case of pianist, Cosme McMoon played by Steve Williams, whose grimaces deserved their own award. The company was actually from Bristol, the furthest afield by far of any companies this week. It was certainly worth them making the journey. That was a play I'm never going to forget and one I wouldn't hesitate seeing again if the opportunity arose.

Conclusion

This week was certainly one heck of an experience for me. It was intense, informative and, for the most part, highly enjoyable. I'd like to thank the staff at the theatre for being so helpful and accommodating all week and for putting on some excellent food after each performance for the week-long pass holders. I'd also like to thank the woman who gave me a lift home on Friday night (and I'm afraid whose name I never caught) and give a wave to @YorkshireLawMan who I ended up sat next to on Friday. It was bizarre sitting down and having someone ask if I'm Lucy, having been tweeting at each other for several months.

My personal choice for play of the week would've been The Bronte Boy. It was fresh, written by a local writer and was suitably haunting. In the end, Glorious took both the audience award and the first prize from the adjudicator. I believe Men of the World took second while The Moonbather took third but I'll correct myself if I'm wrong. It has been a very long week! But I did enjoy it and I know that they smashed the box office record for attendance during the festival in this, it's eleventh year. I'm hoping next year they can rival that and I hope I'll be there to watch.