Reviewing the original opening production at the Royal Court Theatre Upstairs in June 2000, Michael Billington of the Guardian remarked that “judging ’4.48 Psychosis’ is difficult. How on earth do you award aesthetic points to a 75-minute suicide note?” So the task lies before me, reviewing not just a play difficult to review but difficult to interpret in the first place.

The script is said to consist of a scrawling monologue with no explicit characters, stage directions or scene divisions. This leaves open a massive breadth of pliability for those adapting it, which makes it a bold choice. So if my job of reviewing it is difficult then producing this play as a student production is an extraordinarily brave endeavour.

I was sceptical initially, assuming this was a serious case of biting off more than a student cast and crew could chew. As soon as I stepped into St, John’s chapel though, I felt that this was something that was going to be at least very interesting. Sitting in the middle of the chapel was Rebecca Mackinnon, the play’s lead; with the two other cast members, Ben Salter and Callum Cheatle, standing with their back to the audience in the darkened front of the chapel. The audiences chairs were around the sides and back of the chapel, meaning that the play was going on at the same level as the audience, and at any time no more that nine or ten metres from where any one audience member was sitting.

I waited several minutes with the rest of the audience for the play to start, in total silence in the darkened chapel. It was rather chilling, and put me in the frame of mind to witness what was to be the most thought-provoking and emotional exploration of mental illness I have yet experienced in any medium.

One could write several doctoral thesis’s about the content of ’4.48 Psychosis’s’ script so I won’t attempt to give a detailed analysis of it here. Suffice it to say that the play is a very effective attempt to dramatise the psychological collapse, clinical depression and contemplation of suicide. There are numerous esoteric points to the script which I have enjoyed reading about and encourage you to do also, as there are many writers more able than I to do so.

What I can comment on, however, is this particular performance. The program to the play states “Depression is not silent, is not polite, and does not conform to social constraints.” Accordingly, the performance was not and did not do these things either. For a start its choice to stage the production in a chapel was a controversial decision, in the teams own words “an important statement” which ultimately paid off. The whole technical side to the production was nothing short of perfect, the lighting team in particular working magic to augment the effect.

The main praise however must go to the cast. Even though this was the only production of the play I have seen, I am certain they did the script justice. Though her co-cast were outstanding in their secondary roles, it was Rebecca Mackinnon who stood out as the star of the production. Her voice often went into rants, screams, tantrums and moved along erratically with stop/start monologues interspersed and combined with seemingly random physical movements around the stage, which added to the effect of the breakdown between reality and imagination which the play sought to portray. It was the type of voice that if you heard in the street you’d turn away in embarrassment wanting to avoid getting caught up in or wishing to make yourself think it wasn’t really there. But as is pointed out in the program depression knows no social boundaries and “needs to escape the stereotypes society places upon it.”

The directors showed their ingenuity throughout the play by using a ribbon as a prop to denote the self harm depicted by the main actress. They also utilised chairs that had were amongst the audience (specially marked to be left empty) that Salter and Cheatle would occasionally sit in during the play to keep the actors moving and the pace of the visual side of the play up with the dialogue.

Only one possible criticism could be levelled, which was that the speaking was quite fast and at times difficult to follow. However, this is more testimony to the fact that the audience needs to pay attention and let themselves be immersed into the play, than to any failure on the part of the cast or crew. Ideally one would see the play twice as it is a complex and confounding piece of art. After all the play is supposed to provoke thoughts not entertain. The team finish their play synopsis by stating that “If anything, we hope that this performance might begin to open a discourse regarding mental illness in society.” I’m not sure this will happen, but though I can only speak for myself, I think many will feel far more enlightened on the subject as result of seeing it.

Peter Bolton