The Substance promotional poster.
Used to illustrate the blog but used
without permission).
BW
The Substance promotional poster.
Used to illustrate the blog but used
without permission).
BW
The other day, a work colleague and friend, posted an image of a jar on Facebook with the instruction to imaging placing a positive word beginning with the first letter of your first name (typing the word in the comments section of Facebook). I thought about this for a little while and came up with 'Belligerence'.
Now I don't know where the word came from but I do know that I liked the word's phonetic qualities. For some reason, I had forgotten its meaning (basically, a belligerent person is someone who is prone to being argumentative and aggressive).
So why did I choose this word? Was it really an accident?
Sigmund Freud talks about how a lot of things we perceive as slips of the tongue actually warrant exploration. I certainly remember at secondary school replying, 'Yes, Mum' as my name was out out to my embarrassment on one occasion.
In which case, nothing is truly arbitrary and meaning can be ascribed to everything.
This has led me to wonder whether my seemingly random remembrance of this word is my unconscious trying to tell me something.
As children, we are mainly encouraged not to argue, be aggressive or to be angry. I was bullied at various points throughout my school life, so I can see the problems inherent within that notion. In very real terms, sublimating your feelings of frustration, fear and uncertainty can cause lifelong issues. The only time I retaliated at school was after a prolonged period of being bullied. I ended up getting the boy in a headlock when I just couldn't take anymore. From then on, him and his mate left me alone. Also interestingly, when the bell rang at the end of the break time, I retaliated I went straight to my next class. Conditioning and structure are very important.
By nature, I am not a fighter, although at its most focused, I can see the value of argument and debate but it does need to be controlled in some way. For example, a child having a temper tantrum every time they want something, probably shouldn't be rewarded with a gift. Behaviours are learnt or are they?
The writer, psychiatrist, psychotherapist and psychologist, Carl Jung was very interested in archetypes and how as human beings, it is necessary to come to terms with the less palatable aspects of our characters, our 'shadow selves', the bits we consider unacceptable and to try to incorporate them into our more society friendly personas.
I have always been fascinated by the idea of Freud's topography of the psyche, particularly the unconscious and later, the Id. Those primary energy channels that probably tie up with the most extreme emotions (or help to generate them). When we experience, love, hate, rage etc, we can probably thank the unconscious for the emotions.
I am currently undergoing a period of intensive self exploration, a confrontation of who I am and who I hope to become. As such, looking at my moods and the triggers for said moods is imperative for my future progression. I have learnt that sometimes anger provides a useful release for pent up frustrations. Being single and mentally going rounds in circles at times (OCD etc), whilst trying to structure and understand a chaotic world does lead to moments where I wish to scream at the moon.
Anger, if channelled correctly, can generate tremendous amounts of positive change and indeed, creativity. If you don't believe me, just listen to any number of songs such as Bob Dylan's Idiot Wind or Elvis Costello's Tramp The Dirt Down for examples of how the worst life events, relationship break-ups and loss etc can produce incendiary works.
But left untethered, anger can cause physical problems and lead to addictions to try to conceal the more unpleasant aspects of character and rage can produce.
Over the years, I have got most angry inside when I have felt most frustrated, exploited or hurt. Seeing people angry or argumentative terrifies me as the 'fight or flight' imperative may be useful in a warzone, but serves minimal use in day to day living.
So what word did I find after I finally discarded 'belligerence'? Benefaction.
But although, I prefer the act of giving, somewhere inside I sense that it goes hand in hand with those primal energies and drives that we live with throughout our lives. If the human condition is essentially to be born and then to die, at my most withdrawn and/or depressed, I see myself mirrored in the subject of Edvard Munch's The Scream.
Where there is anger and frustration, there can be hope for change.
Barry Watt - 17th August 2024.
Afterword.
Carl Jung and Sigmund Freud were both very prolific. Their ideas can either be read in more condensed forms via other writers or in their own words translated for interested parties. I can probably guide you in the right directions but you can read more if you want. Needless to say, my summaries of their ideas are my interpretations of their theories etc as they apply to me.
Bob Dylan's Idiot Wind originally appeared on his album, Blood on the Tracks and in its live 1976 incarnation could well win the award for the angriest and also paradoxically, most life affirming songs of all time. As part of the indirect lessons suggested by this blog, go and see the performance from Fort Collins in 1976 on You Tube that also appears in an audio form on the album, Hard Rain.
Elvis Costello's Tramp The Dirt Down featured on his album, Spike. It's an extremely angry song exploring his feelings surrounding Margaret Thatcher and the Conservative Party during the 80s. One of the most articulate and beautiful songs that you will ever hope to hear.
Edvard Munch's The Scream is a painting that continues to resonate within Western societies.
BW.
Photo.
For your current state of mind, I would like to offer you a prescription of bubbles...
Barry the Swan looking resplendent. |
I really like Nathan Bowen's street art. It's often located outside building sites or closed businesses. |
Dear Stranger... Making connections. |
A moth or butterfly came to say hello. |
A friend's envelope design. |
Embroidery on a card. Again, it moved me. A gift from a friend. |
I saw this yesterday. Something about the positive affirmation and the little house. |
James Haddrell is the Artistic Director of the Greenwich Theatre. His creative choices have helped to diversify the productions staged within the venue. On one day, you may see a touring production of a satire of a classic novel and on another, a singer performing the works of Piaf. I was recently lucky enough to see his productions of the two Pinter plays, A Slight Ache and The Dumb Waiter. His directorial work and support of both fringe and new plays in general have helped to rejuvenate the Greenwich Theatre. This is the third time I have interviewed James Haddrell and each time I have learnt something new about the processes of theatrical production. I interviewed him just prior to the end of the run of the Pinter plays, so without further delay…
You are currently staging two of Harold Pinter’s plays in the
Greenwich Theatre, A Slight Ache and The Dumb Waiter. When did you first
become interested in Pinter’s work and what informed your choice of plays?
I have been interested in
Pinter’s work for years, with some key productions informing that – Malcolm
Storry in English Touring Theatre’s production of The Caretaker here in Greenwich and Keith Allen in The Homecoming come to mind. I have
always wanted to tackle The Dumb Waiter.
I’m a huge fan of Beckett too, and the links between The Dumb Waiter and Waiting
for Godot are clear. I love the evocation of old comedy double-acts that
sits within The Dumb Waiter, the
blend of absurd comedy and the surreal. And of course, the final tableau is
unforgettable. In seeking a suitable pairing for that, I wanted to find a piece
that contrasted as strongly as possible, and when I read A Slight Ache I was immediately convinced. Set in a different
class, replacing the real-time boredom of The
Dumb Waiter with an existential treatment of time, replacing the
psychological impact of casual violence with the psychological impact of
anxiety, agoraphobia and class-riddled social convention, the play nevertheless
does end with an astonishing, unforgettable reversal, and in that regard it
partners with The Dumb Waiter
perfectly.
I have seen many of Pinter’s plays before (several more than once)
and I found your production of A Slight
Ache to be revelatory. Your production subtly revealed to me a subtext involving
class relations, which I had not really considered before when seeing the play.
The rather insidious way that the couple feel the need to dictate the work of
the match seller. Do you agree that this is one way of exploring the play? Also
the play was originally a radio play, did this hold you back in any way or did
it liberate you, in terms of set design etc?
I think you’re absolutely right.
The couple’s casual disregard for the humanity of the Matchseller (whether he’s
there or not – he’s there for them so their conduct towards him is telling in
any case), the belief that they can buy him (Flora’s “can I buy your tray of
matches?” devalues his trade in such a dismissive way), their colonial view of
the world, whether talking about villages or continents – all of these come
from the disregard of others and the sense of self-importance held by those in
a position of economic strength.
The translation from radio to
stage is something we tackled before when we staged four of Caryl Churchill’s
short plays. There is an inherent challenge in the shift – radio drama needs a
script that describes everything, which delivered on stage can seem
over-written, dense and wordy. However, the biggest shift in this case is the
presentation of the match-seller on stage. On the radio there is no presence,
but I was adamant, whether the interloper proved to be real or not, that the
audience should see what Edward and Flora see. Whilst that may seem to limit
the audience’s interpretation of the nature of the figure, making a decision
for them, for me the match-seller is absolutely there – whether in the flesh or
as fantasy, Edward and Flora feel his presence so an audience should be invited
to share in that.
Pinter’s plays offer a variety of challenges for actors. Personally,
despite the fact that they loosely inhabit the so-called ‘Theatre of the
Absurd’, I have always felt that they capture the routine practices and regular
mundanity of the human condition in an often realistic fashion. Human
conversations are often uncomfortably punctuated with moments of silence. How do you as a director work with the actors
to inhabit characters who quite often have back stories that are not fully
developed?
I agree – mundanity, and the
sinister overtones that can exist within that mundanity, sits at the heart of
Pinter’s work. The question about back stories is an interesting one. Different
actors like to tackle that in different ways, but I always invite actors first
to draw out whatever is offered in the script and then to improvise and devise
a back story from that. For The Dumb
Waiter, the time it was set and the age of our characters meant that they
had probably both fought in the war. For Edward and Flora we had to make
decisions about family – there are no children mentioned but could they have
had children? Could Flora have wanted them and been let down by Edward? I do
think back story creation is an important exercise. Actors need to know what is
driving their characters and what associations their characters are making in
every statement, but as director I always make the creation of those stories a
collective exercise. All of the actors along with the creative team in the
rehearsal room have a place in devising each character’s story.
I have noticed that you often work with the same actors. For
example, you have worked with Kerrie Taylor on a few occasions. Does the
practice of working with someone whose methods you respect and understand add
to the development of the shows? How much input would you allow an actor in
creative decisions outside of the development of their character? If they
offered suggestions based on mise-en-scene etc, have you in the past or
currently, integrated such ideas into your productions?
Absolutely – working with the
same actor on a number of occasions is valuable for a range of reasons. It
creates a shorthand in rehearsal. It develops a deep sense of trust so if I
need to push actors to explore difficult emotional ideas they are prepared to
do that with me (Kerrie is tackling something very different with me now,
moving from Pinter to Philip Ridley’s Vincent
River in which she plays a mother whose son has been murdered). And yes,
absolutely – I always take suggestions on all aspects of a show from cast
members – particularly, I have to say, with costume, which can contribute to a
character and to an actor’s ability to embody that character.
Additionally, you seem to have a strong supportive team working
with you. How has working with the same Stage Manager, Cora Parkinson helped
you in the development of your shows?
Cora is a fantastic young stage
manager who I first worked with in 2021 when she was a first year technical
theatre student. I immediately hired her to work with me on a professional
basis, and Vincent River will be our
tenth show together. When you have someone in rehearsals that you’ve
collaborated with so many times, they become far more important than their job
title would suggest. Cora understands the aesthetic that I’m looking for, the
exercises I favour with actors, my sense of humour – and I always look to her
to validate decisions I’m making – does this work, is this funny, impactful,
appropriate? Those kind of collaborations are incredibly important for me, and
I’ve never been a believer in the auteur approach. I always make theatre with a
team.
You are shortly going to produce a new version of Philip Ridley’s Vincent River. I remember seeing the
play some time ago with Louise Jameson in the role of Anita. I have noticed
that you are pairing Kerrie Taylor in the role of Anita with a recently
graduated actor called Brandon Kimaryo as Davey. I feel that the pairing will
help to bring out the nuances of the play, the nature of experience and how
perceptions of any event differ based upon time and involvement. From your past
experience of working with actors at different points of their careers within
the same production, do you find that a very special energy and rapport
manifests as a result of the combination? Do both parties come away from the
experience with new insights into the art of creating characters?
Working with actors at different
stages of their careers is always exciting. It happened last year when we
presented Mike Bartlett’s An Intervention
with Lauren Drennan playing opposite newcomer Helen Ramsay, and as you say
we’re doing it again this year with Kerrie Taylor and Brandon Kimaryo. It’s
always challenging to work with actors who don’t share many cultural references
– I’m always referencing films, plays, music, directors, performance styles etc
in rehearsal, and often it means nothing to one of the two actors in the room –
but that’s exciting. I love the discoveries that everyone makes along the way,
and it’s definitely the case that all of the performers learn from each other.
I always encourage that in any rehearsal room. No actor is a complete master of
their craft, and clearly neither am I, and there is nobody with nothing to
share.
Philip Ridley is one of those playwrights that I have noticed more
as I have explored the productions of fringe theatre. As is the case with Harold
Pinter, I have seen a number of his plays. His plays also cover an eclectic
range of themes, relationships and their inevitable ups and downs, violence,
drugs and their repercussions. Sometimes, they are shocking and at other
moments, extremely tender. A number of his plays feature a small number of
characters, which allows him to focus on character development. What attracted
you to Philip Ridley and his works? There is definitely a continuing resurgence
of interest in his work. What do you feel is contributing to his current
popularity?
It’s such an interesting
question. I’ve loved Philip Ridley’s writing for years, but he’s certainly in
the ascendancy again. I think a lot of the things that his work deals with are
of particular importance to young audiences – identity, sexuality,
coming-of-age narratives, inter-generational power (which is not to say that
those things don’t impact on all ages, but they feel particularly live for
younger theatregoers) – and I think those audiences have become more important
to producers in the wake of the pandemic. Younger audiences have returned to
theatres, and to live performance, earlier than others, so venues need to
present work that appeals to that audience. Also, I think that Philip’s work is
fundamentally left-wing, and we’re living in a moment where the rise of the
right is being felt ever more painfully – so many of the issues that he
addresses have a renewed potency.
When you are producing the works of living playwrights, do you
ever approach them if there are ever any textual or content issues that you
wish to address that may be hindering certain aspects of the production of a
play? Alternatively, do you prefer to see the play text as the starting point
and that your job as a director is both to celebrate it but also to mould it
into something that is uniquely the work of yourself, the actors and your
production team?
I love having access to a
playwright – Philip has been into rehearsals already and we have been in
regular contact – but that said every new production has an obligation to
recreate a play for the time, the venue and the audience for which it exists.
Similarly when I take on a script I always strip out all of the stage
directions and start again with the words spoken by the characters. Also, although
I certainly don’t consider myself a writer, I often work with actors to write
interior monologues or conversations, to bring those charged theatrical
silences to life. In that way the script is just a starting point for the final
production.
Returning briefly to the subject of your current Pinter
productions, who designs your promotional images? The advertisement for The Dumb Waiter and A Slight Ache consisting of a gun and a wasp being forced backwards
against a yellow background is one of the most powerful images I have seen in a
while and it also succinctly captures the themes of the plays. The Vincent River promotional image is also
strikingly indicative of the contents of the play. Do you offer input into the
images that are used to promote the shows at the Greenwich Theatre?
Most of the posters for our
in-house productions are designed by a company called Dragonfly Design. I have
worked with them since about 2005 when I was the marketing manager for the
venue. Their main designer, Malcolm Reid, also did all of the editing and
production design for our online pandemic productions of Berkoff’s The Secret Love Life Of Ophelia and
Caryl Churchill’s The After-Dinner Joke.
With the posters, I always have an input but the final image is very much a
collaboration between Dragonfly and Greenwich Theatre.
I have noticed through your articles in the South London Press that you often highlight and celebrate the works
of other theatres. I feel a tremendous degree of respect for you for your
support of other theatres. How often do you get to see productions outside of
the Greenwich Theatre? Do you feel that in the current economic climate that
theatre visits are often sacrificed owing to ticket costs? To me as an audience
member and avid attendee of many productions, I feel that theatre is even more
relevant during times of turmoil. Would you agree with that sentiment?
My theatregoing has reduced a bit
in the past few years as I now have a young family, but I’m starting to rebuild
that. I’ve had great visits to the Unicorn Theatre and the Park Theatre
recently and I’m at Hampstead Theatre next week, and I obviously see a lot here
at Greenwich Theatre. Once my routine is back to its usual rhythm I’ll be
seeing 3-4 shows a week. I’m also planning to get back to the Edinburgh Fringe
this year or next, and I would usually catch 50-100 shows at the festival each
year. I do think that audience sizes are reduced at the moment, partly as a
hangover from the pandemic and partly because of the cost of living crisis –
and we’re also all finding that the audiences that are coming to see our shows
are booking far later than they used to. Younger audiences make later decisions
anyway I think, and more traditional audiences got so used to last minute
cancellations or illness, and then train strikes and even horrendous weather,
that I think they have been reconditioned to make later decisions.
And yes, I’d completely agree.
Theatre is at its strongest, as all the arts are, in times of turmoil. Stories
offer either escapism or intellectual challenge, taking audiences away from
difficult situations or helping to confront them – I feel privileged to be a
part of an industry with storytelling at its heart.
What are your future plans with the Greenwich Theatre? Will your
theatre continue to offer a creative space for students and also continue to
stage an eclectic range of productions for both adults and children?
Absolutely. We’re planning to
maintain our recent run of in-house productions of work by important
playwrights – the work is attracting attention across the industry and beyond,
and at a time when the availability of touring theatre has reduced it is vital
for us to fill the gaps with quality shows. At the same time, Greenwich Theatre
occupies a really important position in the national theatre ecology. We are a
mid-scale venue where young companies can step up from the fringe and try out
new work without risking huge amounts of money, but where they can earn a good
return if their show does well. We will continue to support and nurture those
early career artists, in both the main house and the studio, and to present
work for a wide audience. Our work for families and children also remains
important to us. The 2023 Greenwich Children’s Theatre Festival was the biggest
ever, and plans are well underway for this year’s pantomime, as well as a host
of other family shows in between. It may sound like a cliché, but we really do
strive to offer something for everyone at Greenwich Theatre…
Thanks to James for allowing me to interview him again and I
recommend that you go to see Vincent
River at the Greenwich Theatre (23rd
June 2023-15th July 2023) if
you can.
Afterword.
The Greenwich Theatre continues to offer an eclectic range of
productions for all ages. Please see the
link to their website below:
Greenwich Theatre, London
Off-West End Theatre
Any references to Harold Pinter’s plays are used to illuminate
this blog and the Greenwich Theatre’s recent productions. They are copyright to their respective
copyright holders. If you ever get the
chance to see Pinter’s plays, please go and see them as his works are still
amongst the most vital and important plays in modern UK theatre.
Also the works of Stephen Berkoff, Caryl Churchill, Samuel Beckett and Mike Bartlett are also
worthy of your attention, if you like to see eclectic plays that touch on a
myriad of themes and ideas.
Dragonfly Design have their own website, if you would like to see
further examples of their work:
Dragonfly (dragonfly-design.co.uk)
James Haddrell is a regular columnist in the South London Press newspaper, which can also be read online:
South London News – South London
Press & Mercury (londonnewsonline.co.uk)
Additionally,
the Unicorn Theatre, Park Theatre and Hampstead Theatre are all theatres who
produce essential works:
What's
on | The Unicorn Theatre
The term 'The Theatre of the Absurd' was coined by the writer, Martin Esslin in relation to the works of a number of significant playwrights writing during the 50s and 60s including Pinter, Beckett, Ionesco and Pirandello. He wrote an excellent book on the subject entitled The Theatre of the Absurd which is still available and offers a good way in to Absurdist writings. An edition is currently available from Bloomsbury Publishing. Although, it can also be bought second hand too.
Photos and promotional images (Used with the permission of James Haddrell & the Greenwich Theatre).
Gus and Ben waiting for their job in 'The Dumb Waiter'. (Gus played by Jude Akuwudike and Ben by Tony Mooney) |
The brilliant promotional image for 'The Dumb Waiter' and 'A Slight Ache'. |
Kerrie Taylor and Brandon Kimaryo. Also promotional image for 'Vincent River'. |
A promotional image for the forthcoming production of 'Vincent River' at the Greenwich Theatre. |
It's 3.40am on Saturday morning, precisely eight days since I attended Juliette Burton's show, No Brainer at the Museum of Comedy in London. My head is a mess of ideas that need to be focused in some way, hence this blog. The show has been resonating in my head since I saw it and my overactive psyche has been motivating me to produce something about it. As such, here goes...
No Brainer is a palimpsest of a show (I mean that as a compliment). Juliette Burton has described it as a work in progress. As a creative work, it is engaging, emotionally raw, funny and chaotic but it is also coherent and will by definition, change with every performance (long may it remain a work in progress). If that brief summation sounds confused, go and see the show and see what I mean.
Juliette Burton has experienced mental health issues throughout her life. I suspect that exploring statistics would reveal that many of her audience may have experienced mental health issues too. Personally, I have and do. But significantly, Ms Burton uses her mental health issues to explore herself and in doing so, holds up a metaphorical mirror and sign, reading 'You are not alone'.
No Brainer is the result of Ms Burton's extensive exploration of the brain from a variety of angles. I felt honoured to hold a plastic brain in my hands and to realise that this organ is very likely responsible for everything I get up to in a day. Not only does it generate and articulate thought but it also helped me to find the Museum of Comedy (okay, I walked in the wrong direction initially but that's allowed). Scientific understanding and learning to love or at least, to attempt to come to terms with the aspects of your personality that cannot be quickly changed were some of the ideas that I took from this show.
Ms Burton offered various concepts such as the fight or flight model. As a result of my job and my studies over the years, I have encountered the idea before, particularly in relation to moments of anxiety. Interestingly for me, Ms Burton added freeze and fawn to the model. I have noticed that I personally have frozen at various points of crisis. I have wondered whether this has constituted indecision as a result of OCD on some occasions (in order to overcome recurrent negative cyclical thoughts or the possibility of them kicking in) or else the age old notion that bad things won't happen if I become invisible.
I froze during a certain key moment in the show that I cannot describe as I felt (and still feel) that it was one of the catalysts for this show and indeed for Ms Burton's continuing exploration of scientific and other theories for coping with mental illness and with life. In many respects, the fact that I did nothing and nor did the other audience members worried me, although to rationalise the moment, it occurs within the structure of the show. For me, it shows Ms Burton's consummate skills as a performer that she can channel the emotions connected with a key moment of crisis, represent the event yet come out of it with a smile and positive affirmation to let the audience know that she is okay. I wanted to hug Ms Burton at that moment and I suspect that lots of the other audience members did too.
I think that Ms Burton's assertion of the idea that good and bad memories continue to exist even if they remain repressed or sidelined remains valid and vital for our everyday lives (certainly a fundamental tenet of quite a bit of psychoanalytic theory). These memories can be triggered by a variety of stimuli such as an odour, taste or sound etc. Memories can both help and hinder us but it's important to acknowledge their continuing existence especially if they represent something urgent that requires closure.
One thing is certain, No Brainer has resonated with me for eight days. I did a short course the other day on emotional intelligence and thought to myself that Ms Burton is definitely a good example of a human being with high levels of emotional intelligence (I mean that as a compliment). To continue to explore yourself, open yourself to others, whilst also retaining the wisdom to separate those essential ingredients that are yours alone demonstrates to me a performer that is not only growing, but also helping her audience to explore themselves in a safe and creative way.
In the distance, I can hear the Eurythmics song, When Tomorrow Comes. It's a memory but also like No Brainer a point of departure. Ms Burton, you have done it again, you have created a work that will continue to change over time but also allows the audience to take what they can or like and run with it. But I am definitely not moving into Elm Street, despite the property prices. Thanks for your emotional honesty and your inspirational show.
Barry Watt - Saturday 20th August 2022.
Afterword
Juliette Burton has an excellent website, which is regularly updated with future shows etc:
Juliette Burton | Comedian, Writer, Speaker, Actor
Eurythmics were a very successful band and their songs still mean a great deal. When Tomorrow Comes has always inspired feelings of positivity whenever I hear it yet not in a contrived manner, the lyrics move me. For more on the band and their music, please check their website. The song is copyright to them:
Home - Eurythmics | Official Site
Elm Street is of course, the home to a serial murderer as depicted in the A Nightmare on Elm Street series, which I surprisingly haven't seen:
A Nightmare on Elm Street - Wikipedia
Museum of Comedy puts on an eclectic collection of performers and shows. Their website is below:
Promotional Image (Used with the kind permission of Ms Burton. The image is copyright to the photographer, Steve Ullathorne and Ms Burton)
Juliette Burton - No Brainer Promotional Image Photographer - Steve Ullathorne BW |
Jeremy
Brett and Timothy Dalton made me want to act. They both had an incredible intensity
and truthfulness to their work which still rivets me.
When you
are performing, do you have a preference for acting technique or method or does
your development of character largely depend upon the role you are playing?
I have no
idea about acting technique… in fact for me, the more I think about and
analyse it, the harder it gets. I honestly couldn’t tell you how I act, I just do
it. Just tell the truth.
For some
years, you have been working as a playwright and performer. When did you
decide that you wanted to write plays?
In 2012,
when I went through a series of successive emotional shocks. My girlfriend and
I split after fifteen years, I ran out of work as an actor, my friend killed
himself… on and on it went. I experienced an agonising loneliness, and a
profoundly deep depression and hopelessness. Out of that pain came the desire
to create and connect, as the alternative was despair, and perhaps worse. I
finally felt that I had something to say, because of course, people who’ve lived
safe, unchallenging and emotionally avoidant lives don’t tend to write
interesting drama.
What are
the particular challenges that you face as a playwright who also performs his
own plays? I have noticed that you work with different directors (most
recently, Sarah-Louise Young on the play Jarman). Does working with a
director provide you with the mental space that you need to fully engage with
the creation of a character in whichever venue you find yourself in?
It’s much
easier, I think, if I’ve written it, because as the actor I know what the
writer is intending! But you still need a great director to bring out the
fullness of the words, because even the writer doesn’t always consciously
realise the full depths of what they’ve written. That’s especially true of Jarman, where my brilliant director Sarah-Louise Young brought me and the
play to life in ways I could never have envisaged.
Your plays
focus on extraordinary personalities; creative, unique, occasionally flawed
individuals but most importantly, they are based on real people. How do
you go about becoming these characters? From observing your work, I can
see that you must put a lot of work into their realisation and that a sense of
kindness and empathy surrounds your development of the characters. Have
you developed your performance of the roles at any point after receiving the
feedback of family members or friends of the personalities you portray?
Again, I
try not to think about it too much. I observe if the character has any distinctive
mannerisms, and whether it’s helpful or not to adopt those on stage (sometimes
they can get in the way). Far more important is to see where one coincides
emotionally with the character. So for example when I began playing Quentin
Crisp, I identified hugely with his loneliness and isolation, and that was my
way in to playing him. With Derek Jarman I identify with his emotional courage
and love of fun, and that’s been the key. Feedback from family and friends has
always been hugely encouraging.
In the four
plays that you perform in repertory, The Silence of Snow: The Life of Patrick
Hamilton, Quentin Crisp: Naked Hope, Howerd’s End and Jarman, you
directly engage the audience, incorporating them into the action. I have
been invited to read you questions on stage when you were Quentin Crisp and was
given a spotlight/torch to illuminate the action when you were Derek
Jarman. How do you select the audience members that you use and what are
the advantages of directly using the audience in this way? Your
engagement with the audience was slightly different when you were Dennis in Howerd’s End and when you were Patrick Hamilton but equally rewarding for the
audience.
I always
pick audience members at random… take the risk. Another example of why it’s best
not to over-think. All my characters speak directly to the audience because I
dislike the ‘fourth wall’ in theatre, and think it’s often a way for actors to
hide from the audience emotionally. Infinitely better to turn out front and
address people, make them realise this is about them. One of the reasons live
music and comedy are more popular than theatre is because music and comedy
engage the audience directly, and people love it. Yet still theatre stubbornly
refuses to recognise this, even though Shakespeare had characters talking
directly to the audience four centuries ago. My work is a one-man mission to
trample down the fourth wall and break into people’s hearts.
Please can
you talk about your motivations for producing works on the individuals that you
have chosen? Are they people that you have admired and/or do they
represent aspects of your personality either now or in the past?
Yes they
are all aspects of me. Patrick Hamilton is my reckless, egotistical side (which
I’ve tamed through therapy, but can still play on stage). Quentin is my
loneliness, my sense of being alone on the planet without companionship. Dennis
Heymer in Howerd’s End is my tenacity, my determination to connect with
people who are closed-off emotionally and Derek Jarman is my passion for
creativity, love, sex, adventure, colour, and my awareness of my mortality. A
human life is no longer than a lightning flash, so no excuses for not living it
to the full. Anything less is a straight-up tragedy.
You
produce four of your plays in repertory, which enables the audience to see them
all if they wish. From the perspective of a performer, what are the
advantages and disadvantages of staging the productions for short periods in
different venues?
To me
there are no disadvantages. It’s joyful! You get to switch characters all the
time, something actors rarely do now that the repertory system has died. True
actors are mercurial, so we love being different people at the flick of a
switch. Also when the challenge is so intense (especially with frequently
different venues), there isn’t time to worry about your lines or your
performance, you just have to get out there and be, and consequently feel all
the more alive and spontaneous.
Also does
the size and style of the venue alter how you perform the plays?
Not
remotely. You can be intimate and up close in a room of a thousand people. I’ve
never understood why anyone thinks otherwise.
Your most
recent play, Jarman encapsulates the life and works of a furiously creative
individual who worked in many mediums including film, videos for bands such as
Suede and The Smiths, art and sculpture. Do you also produce art works
outside of the world of theatre?
I don’t. I
can’t play an instrument, paint or draw. All my passion and energy go into
performing, and it’s something I want to continue doing for as long as I can. When you perform, time stops for you and the audience, and you connect most
fully with what matters in life: the truth of who you are. The rest of the time
people seem to spend merely avoiding themselves.
Finally,
what are your future plans and are you working on any more plays?
I’ve got
performance plans stretching a year ahead. No new plays in mind at the moment. I’m perfectly content if I never write another… maybe I’ve said all I need to
say? Equally, if a new idea occurs to me tomorrow or in five years’ time, I’ll
engage with it with all the gusto as if it was my last day on earth.
Thank you for allowing me to interview you, Mark Farrelly.
Barry Watt - 3rd July 2022.
Afterword.
Mark Farrelly has a website, which contains details of his work and performance schedule:
Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf? is a play by Edward Albee and remains one of the greatest plays of all time (in my opinion). A very successful film starring Elizabeth Taylor and Richard Burton is also worth seeing. I tend to try to see most London productions of the play.
Trafalgar Studios continues to stage varied and interesting productions. More information about their history and past productions etc can be found on this website:
Trafalgar Studios - Trafalgar Entertainment
Sarah-Louise Young is another talented and eclectic performer/producer. Please see her website and my previous blog interview with her:
Sarah-Louise Young (sarah-louise-young.com)
Suede are a band who rose to dominance in the 90s and continue to produce music that explores the myriad hues of the human condition. Their website is below:
The Smiths were a band that produced music and in many respects, a sensibility that still resonates today. They disbanded in 1987, although both Morrissey and Johnny Marr continue to produce their own music and tour separately. The other members of the band, Mike Joyce and Andy Rourke have also continued to work within the music and creative industries over the years.
The lives of Quentin Crisp, Derek Jarman, Patrick Hamilton and Dennis Heymer can be explored through the works of Mark Farrelly and through their own works. Please see below link to see an obituary for Dennis Heymer as he is slightly less well known than the other names mentioned:
Dennis Heymer; OBITUARY. - Free Online Library (thefreelibrary.com)
The photos at the start of the interview of Mark Farrelly as himself and as the aforementioned Patrick Hamilton, Quentin Crisp, Derek Jarman and Dennis Heymer have been kindly provided by Mark Farrelly and were taken by and are copyright to Jacky Summerfield.
Please check Mark Farrelly's website for the future schedule of his performances around the United Kingdom:
Mark Farrelly Schedule | MARK FARRELLY
BW.
Photos (The below photos have been kindly provided by Mark Farrelly and were taken by Jacky Summerfield who owns the copyright to the images).
Mark Farrelly as Derek Jarman |
Mark Farrelly as Quentin Crisp |
Mark Farrelly as Dennis Heymer |
Promotional image of Mark Farrelly as Patrick Hamilton |