Tears of a clown…
Robert Cromarty and his night at the circus…
the final countdown | technical aptitude | seven white masks
The Final Countdown
Captain Theatre have been a company that have been ever-present in Durham Theatre for the last three years, a close-knit group who, between them, have written, acted, produced, directed, and tech-ed a host of shows: Antigone (Edinburgh Festival), Triangles (DDF), The Taker, the Taken, the Right, and the Left (DDF), The Spanish Tragedy, Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead, Hansel and Gretel (DDF and Edinburgh Festival), Pains of Youth (Edinburgh Festival), Love Loves Love (DDF), their back catalogue is certainly impressive. Now, for their final show in Durham, they have chosen Justin Butcher’s Scaramouche Jones.
Scaramouche Jones is an interesting choice for a play: a one man show, first performed in 2001, it is effectively the life story of a 100 year old clown, the eponymous Jones. Born on 31st December 1899, he decides on 31st December 1999 that he has lived long enough and his final performance is the telling of his personal history which incorporates several of the major events of the century. Thus personal narrative and world history interconnect and seem to mirror each other. Some aspects of the script were irritating, particularly Butcher’s implication that the second half of the Twentieth century is simply a hangover after the horrors perpetrated in Nazi Germany, intoned by the fact that by 1951 Jones has developed the layers of Seven White Masks his life lacquers to him forcing him to become the clown. The Odyssean and Swiftian overtones of Jones’ life journey were also a little trite, such as the character’s vision of England as a modern Ithaca and his constant paean of “My father is an Englishman”. The general theme, that of millennial preconception and an opportunity to ‘wipe clean’ the slate of the Twentieth century, while screaming of being worthwhile, was insignificant as all that mattered here was the skill in the writing of the narrative.
Director Hanna Wolf decided that the pre-show, now seemingly a pre-requisite in Assembly Rooms productions, should entail a ‘birthday party’ atmosphere, complete with bunting, fairy lights, cake, and a capering group of tutu-clad ‘Creatures of Theatre’ – who would act as a dumb-show chorus during the play – spiralling throughout the theatre entertaining and annoying the audience in equal degree. This group, Gethin Alderman, Luke Algar, Hatty Dawson, Annabella Forbes, Bronwen Jones, Blair Mowat, and India Rakusen, were a constant presence throughout the play, and their actions portrayed the narrative spoken by Scaramouche. However, I feel that this was a major mistake in this production. One could not fault what they did, they were consistent, dedicated, and clearly enjoying themselves, but one must question why they were there at all. Far from adding anything to either the text or to the performance of Giles de Rivaz as Scaramouche, in my opinion, they detracted massively. The facial gurning of some of the chorus and their antics stripped the emotional content from what was being said and seemed an impediment to de Rivazrather than an aid. Their presence could have been justified if the style of the Chorus had been different; a chorus themselves composed of clowns, for example, would have served as a much more fitting group for this production, but in the incarnation that was offered they were of little value. Thus this aspect of the production was disappointing for me, even though its style was very redolent of earlier Captain Theatre productions.
Technical aptitude
There were other aspects that also fitted well into the style of theatre which Captain Theatre have offered in the past. The first of these is a high degree of technical aptitude provided by Alex Carruth and Nick Boalch. The lighting was some of the best I’ve seen at the Assembly Rooms in recent terms, simply for the range of lighting effects utilised – washes, spots, backlighting, and shadow were all used to achieve a design that served to add depth to both stage and performance. The music, likewise, was reminiscent of prior shows, but this is due to the presence of company composer Blair Mowat. Mowat’s music, minimalist in this production – designed around keyboard, single violin, and tuba – played across several scenes, with the band constantly present on stage. The music was successfully and skillfully used for the most part, with the notable exception being the opening number where the Chorus were called to ask “What ever happened to the Clowns?”, which was not also harsh on the ears but cringeworthy in the extreme. However, after this false start the music added to the production, although at times it still felt too loud for the intimacy the play demands.
In terms of the technical effects and the staging of the production, it was rather a mixed bag. There were some real successes, such as the use of snow machines for a blizzard effect; a number of staging blocks with folding out sections; and some good use of the fly gallery for ropes, nooses, and signs to arrive intermittently. However, some things simply did not look good: notably the pole-dancing poles that were so flimsy it forced the Chorus into a series of knee-bends and little else. Another example would be the trio of miniature gypsy caravans that were designed to be moved across the stage by a concealed radio-controlled car; while this was a nice idea the execution let it down as the connections between the carriages broke on every occasion it moved, forcing a chorus member to hastily shuffle it across the stage. However, for the most part the technical aspects of the production were very solid.
Seven white masks
Yet all of these things are largely inconsequential for productions of this play as it is one that succeeds or fails on the strength of the performance at its heart, in this case that of Giles de Rivaz. In this respect this show must be seen as a success. Giles de Rivaz deserves praise for sustaining his performance throughout an hour-and-a-half play where all the words were spoken by himself alone. Even memorising such a mass of text would be daunting for most actors, and so I have nothing but respect for de Rivaz. His portrayal of the aged Scaramouche was consistent and, at times, very moving – particularly the moment where he almost drowns escaping from a ship in Venice. The moments where his journey reaches the moments of great trauma, the occasions where Scaramouche’s already pallid face is veneered with one of the Seven White Masks he acquires during the play, allowed de Rivaz to show that he can portray true tragic emotion with a high degree of skill. Each of these moments is preceded by de Rivaz removing a part of his clown’s apparel, an effective, if not particularly subtle, physical evocation of his self-deconstruction. The nadir of his life, as a gravedigger in the concentration camp at Split, also provides him with the destiny to become the clown as he entertains the children before they are executed. Again a poignant moment, but clearly Butcher does not adhere to Angela Carter’s view that “the child’s laughter is pure until he first laugh
s at the clown” (Nights at the Circus).
But the part of Scaramouche also requires great versatility from its actor, not least because of the fact that during his Swiftian journey from Trinidad to England, via Africa, Italy, Poland, and Germany, he encounters various accents which Scaramouche then impersonates. Here de Rivaz was less successful as the accents tended to blur together, becoming indistinguishable. Also, at times he could have been directed to have more variation, as his voice was rather monotonous when Scaramouche’s life was not at a moment of high drama. Likewise, it was never clear whether he was acting the age he was during that point in his narrative, or if he was always 100 years old, as the transition between athleticism and weariness was haphazard. Nevertheless, these niggles were small, as his overall performance was strong, and the moment at the end of the play when he staggered to the rear of the stage to welcome death was replete with pathos.
So was the swansong of Scaramouche Jones a fitting swansong for Captain Theatre? The answer is yes and no. Yes, because it allowed them to show once again that they do stylised theatre well, but also no because this is a play that does not require and does not suit all of the frippery that was included. To state it pithily, this was definitely a case of more being less.
As always Crom, you have come out with the harshest review possible, although maybe that's the point of criticism…
I thought this was an excellent production, Gilez's accents were well distinguished and the stylistic "frippery" was delightful to watch.
Still, I do have to admit that the opening song was a pretty weak, shame that.
Nevertheless, well done Captain Theatre, you will be missed!
As always Crom, you have come out with the harshest review possible, although maybe that's the point of criticism…
I thought this was an excellent production, Gilez's accents were well distinguished and the stylistic "frippery" was delightful to watch.
Still, I do have to admit that the opening song was a pretty weak, shame that.
Nevertheless, well done Captain Theatre, you will be missed!
As always Crom, you have come out with the harshest review possible, although maybe that's the point of criticism…
I thought this was an excellent production, Gilez's accents were well distinguished and the stylistic "frippery" was delightful to watch.
Still, I do have to admit that the opening song was a pretty weak, shame that.
Nevertheless, well done Captain Theatre, you will be missed!
Believe me, I am never deliberatley harsh. Also in the second paragraph there should be a", was" between "worthwhile" and "insignificant". I think this was my editing error, so sorry about that.
Believe me, I am never deliberatley harsh. Also in the second paragraph there should be a", was" between "worthwhile" and "insignificant". I think this was my editing error, so sorry about that.
Believe me, I am never deliberatley harsh. Also in the second paragraph there should be a", was" between "worthwhile" and "insignificant". I think this was my editing error, so sorry about that.
This is not "harshest review ever." I, for one, largely agree with the points made.
This is not "harshest review ever." I, for one, largely agree with the points made.
This is not "harshest review ever." I, for one, largely agree with the points made.
I'm afraid you've missquoted me there Ben, I said "harshest review possible" – basically Crom doesn't pull and punches, but that's surely due to honesty and not malice.
I'm afraid you've missquoted me there Ben, I said "harshest review possible" – basically Crom doesn't pull and punches, but that's surely due to honesty and not malice.
I'm afraid you've missquoted me there Ben, I said "harshest review possible" – basically Crom doesn't pull and punches, but that's surely due to honesty and not malice.
a bit unecessary to quote the Angela Carter line “the child’s laughter is pure until he first laughs at the clown.” we all know you're very clever and know lots of quotes. Well done.
a bit unecessary to quote the Angela Carter line “the child’s laughter is pure until he first laughs at the clown.” we all know you're very clever and know lots of quotes. Well done.
a bit unecessary to quote the Angela Carter line “the child’s laughter is pure until he first laughs at the clown.” we all know you're very clever and know lots of quotes. Well done.
No "Me", it would be unnecessary to quote, let's say, the Oompa Loompa song from Charlie and the Chocolate Factory. But you probably aren't intelligent enough to grasp why Crom included that quote in the first place. Should we write simplified reviews for you from now on?
Captain theatre – Good!
Dancers – why?
Giles de Rivaz – Excellent!
No "Me", it would be unnecessary to quote, let's say, the Oompa Loompa song from Charlie and the Chocolate Factory. But you probably aren't intelligent enough to grasp why Crom included that quote in the first place. Should we write simplified reviews for you from now on?
Captain theatre – Good!
Dancers – why?
Giles de Rivaz – Excellent!
No "Me", it would be unnecessary to quote, let's say, the Oompa Loompa song from Charlie and the Chocolate Factory. But you probably aren't intelligent enough to grasp why Crom included that quote in the first place. Should we write simplified reviews for you from now on?
Captain theatre – Good!
Dancers – why?
Giles de Rivaz – Excellent!
thanks for your comments crom – interesting and insightful as ever.
the inclusion of a'chorus' in the production was something that i think we all knew might divide an audience. purely a matter of taste i think – some people would like it, others wouldnt. the decision to include six other actors (plus a three-man band) in what was written as a one-man show was of course something of a departure from the script, but i think it reflects hanna's desire to do something different, and innovative, with what she saw as a blank canvas - part of the attraction of the script. personally i think the creatures of theatre were fantastic and entirely achieved what they were intended to: one and a half hours is a long time to sit and listen to someone talk, so we were concerned to bring the story to life thru visuals as much as we could – the creatures were a crucial part of this, helping to bring to life the world of scaramouche's memories. the other main reason for including a chorus was, simply, for a bit of fun. quite a lot of theatre in durham of late has been a bit overly-serious (dare i say self-important). we wanted this production to be fun and entertaining, particularly as so much of the script deals with themes of a far more sombre nature; again, the creatures were vital to this – particularly in the pre-show ('a pre-requisite in assembly rooms productions'?).
i was a bit disappointed to see that crom chose to comment negatively on the fact that on saturday night the caravans broke! i would have thought that crom, of all ppl, would know that sometimes tech and props can just go wrong! i thought that the cast dealt with this perfectly well. and it was a remote control caravan! come on, thats awesome!
finally (sorry this is getting rather long), a quick note on the accents. perhaps the three trinidadian accents were quite similar to each other, and likewise the 3 italian and 3 gypsy accents; but i would hope that the trinidadian was not 'indistinguishable' from the welsh, nor the english from the italian or african; and if yasu was reminiscent of other accents, it does state that he is 'a bizarre concoction of arab, negro and italian'.
finally (i mean it this time), on the age thing – the idea was to blur the lines a bit between his 100 yr old self and his younger self, as he drifted in and out of his memories, reliving or simply describing them to varying degrees. but if this was unclear or ineffective, then fair enough!
right. finished now. thanks to everyone who came to see the show – hope most of you liked it! and thanks to everyone involved – i am proud to have been a part of it.
thanks for your comments crom – interesting and insightful as ever.
the inclusion of a'chorus' in the production was something that i think we all knew might divide an audience. purely a matter of taste i think – some people would like it, others wouldnt. the decision to include six other actors (plus a three-man band) in what was written as a one-man show was of course something of a departure from the script, but i think it reflects hanna's desire to do something different, and innovative, with what she saw as a blank canvas - part of the attraction of the script. personally i think the creatures of theatre were fantastic and entirely achieved what they were intended to: one and a half hours is a long time to sit and listen to someone talk, so we were concerned to bring the story to life thru visuals as much as we could – the creatures were a crucial part of this, helping to bring to life the world of scaramouche's memories. the other main reason for including a chorus was, simply, for a bit of fun. quite a lot of theatre in durham of late has been a bit overly-serious (dare i say self-important). we wanted this production to be fun and entertaining, particularly as so much of the script deals with themes of a far more sombre nature; again, the creatures were vital to this – particularly in the pre-show ('a pre-requisite in assembly rooms productions'?).
i was a bit disappointed to see that crom chose to comment negatively on the fact that on saturday night the caravans broke! i would have thought that crom, of all ppl, would know that sometimes tech and props can just go wrong! i thought that the cast dealt with this perfectly well. and it was a remote control caravan! come on, thats awesome!
finally (sorry this is getting rather long), a quick note on the accents. perhaps the three trinidadian accents were quite similar to each other, and likewise the 3 italian and 3 gypsy accents; but i would hope that the trinidadian was not 'indistinguishable' from the welsh, nor the english from the italian or african; and if yasu was reminiscent of other accents, it does state that he is 'a bizarre concoction of arab, negro and italian'.
finally (i mean it this time), on the age thing – the idea was to blur the lines a bit between his 100 yr old self and his younger self, as he drifted in and out of his memories, reliving or simply describing them to varying degrees. but if this was unclear or ineffective, then fair enough!
right. finished now. thanks to everyone who came to see the show – hope most of you liked it! and thanks to everyone involved – i am proud to have been a part of it.
thanks for your comments crom – interesting and insightful as ever.
the inclusion of a'chorus' in the production was something that i think we all knew might divide an audience. purely a matter of taste i think – some people would like it, others wouldnt. the decision to include six other actors (plus a three-man band) in what was written as a one-man show was of course something of a departure from the script, but i think it reflects hanna's desire to do something different, and innovative, with what she saw as a blank canvas - part of the attraction of the script. personally i think the creatures of theatre were fantastic and entirely achieved what they were intended to: one and a half hours is a long time to sit and listen to someone talk, so we were concerned to bring the story to life thru visuals as much as we could – the creatures were a crucial part of this, helping to bring to life the world of scaramouche's memories. the other main reason for including a chorus was, simply, for a bit of fun. quite a lot of theatre in durham of late has been a bit overly-serious (dare i say self-important). we wanted this production to be fun and entertaining, particularly as so much of the script deals with themes of a far more sombre nature; again, the creatures were vital to this – particularly in the pre-show ('a pre-requisite in assembly rooms productions'?).
i was a bit disappointed to see that crom chose to comment negatively on the fact that on saturday night the caravans broke! i would have thought that crom, of all ppl, would know that sometimes tech and props can just go wrong! i thought that the cast dealt with this perfectly well. and it was a remote control caravan! come on, thats awesome!
finally (sorry this is getting rather long), a quick note on the accents. perhaps the three trinidadian accents were quite similar to each other, and likewise the 3 italian and 3 gypsy accents; but i would hope that the trinidadian was not 'indistinguishable' from the welsh, nor the english from the italian or african; and if yasu was reminiscent of other accents, it does state that he is 'a bizarre concoction of arab, negro and italian'.
finally (i mean it this time), on the age thing – the idea was to blur the lines a bit between his 100 yr old self and his younger self, as he drifted in and out of his memories, reliving or simply describing them to varying degrees. but if this was unclear or ineffective, then fair enough!
right. finished now. thanks to everyone who came to see the show – hope most of you liked it! and thanks to everyone involved – i am proud to have been a part of it.
Well I'm certainly not intelligent enough to grasp the need for the Angela Carter quote. Anyone who fancies picking something more relevant: http://thinkexist.com/quotes/with/keyword/clowns/. As far as 'more being less' goes, I'd disagree – I thought Giles' performance was the best I'd seen in my time at Durham, but I still think the show would have dragged a little with just the one actor for an hour and a half.
Another minor point is that the review misses just how funny the play is/production was. Yeah, the holocaust scene is incredibly moving, but gypsies hanging out their washing between Mussolini's toes is hilarious.
Anyway I liked it a whole lot and i'm not writing here to complain about the review but to say thanks to Giles and Captain Theatre. Yeah rock on.
Well I'm certainly not intelligent enough to grasp the need for the Angela Carter quote. Anyone who fancies picking something more relevant: http://thinkexist.com/quotes/with/keyword/clowns/. As far as 'more being less' goes, I'd disagree – I thought Giles' performance was the best I'd seen in my time at Durham, but I still think the show would have dragged a little with just the one actor for an hour and a half.
Another minor point is that the review misses just how funny the play is/production was. Yeah, the holocaust scene is incredibly moving, but gypsies hanging out their washing between Mussolini's toes is hilarious.
Anyway I liked it a whole lot and i'm not writing here to complain about the review but to say thanks to Giles and Captain Theatre. Yeah rock on.
Well I'm certainly not intelligent enough to grasp the need for the Angela Carter quote. Anyone who fancies picking something more relevant: http://thinkexist.com/quotes/with/keyword/clowns/. As far as 'more being less' goes, I'd disagree – I thought Giles' performance was the best I'd seen in my time at Durham, but I still think the show would have dragged a little with just the one actor for an hour and a half.
Another minor point is that the review misses just how funny the play is/production was. Yeah, the holocaust scene is incredibly moving, but gypsies hanging out their washing between Mussolini's toes is hilarious.
Anyway I liked it a whole lot and i'm not writing here to complain about the review but to say thanks to Giles and Captain Theatre. Yeah rock on.
I must confess that don't see the relevance of the Angela Carter quotation either. The episode in Split doesn't show that Butcher disagreees with Carter's point, so why bring the issue up?
My two cents: I thought this was a very professional production, occasionally beautiful, excellently acted, but I was underwhelmed by the script. It was overwritten, too prosey, and the narrative was weak. I'm surprised it was chosen to be staged. Good work from Captain Theatre; not so great from Justin Butcher.
I must confess that don't see the relevance of the Angela Carter quotation either. The episode in Split doesn't show that Butcher disagreees with Carter's point, so why bring the issue up?
My two cents: I thought this was a very professional production, occasionally beautiful, excellently acted, but I was underwhelmed by the script. It was overwritten, too prosey, and the narrative was weak. I'm surprised it was chosen to be staged. Good work from Captain Theatre; not so great from Justin Butcher.
I must confess that don't see the relevance of the Angela Carter quotation either. The episode in Split doesn't show that Butcher disagreees with Carter's point, so why bring the issue up?
My two cents: I thought this was a very professional production, occasionally beautiful, excellently acted, but I was underwhelmed by the script. It was overwritten, too prosey, and the narrative was weak. I'm surprised it was chosen to be staged. Good work from Captain Theatre; not so great from Justin Butcher.
It is often frowned upon when directors comment upon their own show but in this case I felt it was perhaps necessary. I knew from the start that the decision of the chorus would divide the audience but as Giles says, I wanted to try something new- I am 21 after all, we are a young company- the chance to take a risk does not happen very often so I say go for it. Caravans for example- its lovely idea but occasionally student tech will fail. This is not something to get upset about- the cast handled it very professionally, it did not upset me in anyway, it was a little unfortunate on our final night but what of that.
Like all directors I make mistakes; gambles don’t always pay off. However I stand by my creatures as a smart and enjoyable aspect of this production. Although I have the deepest respect from Giles for taking on such a huge part, I was aware from the beginning that we are all just starting to find our feet in this profession and so to put him on the stage by himself for over an hour would be a little presumptuous of all of our abilities at this moment in time. I felt it more appropriate to give Giles the opportunity to play a great part as well as to give seven actors a chance to get involved in a fun show, to experiment with visual language and to give captain theatre an opportunity to explore the script’s potential in our own style.
So why chose this play I sense the next response would be? Well, because it’s a brilliant/beautiful script and Giles has an exceptional talent (an Arab/Italian/Negro accent is not very easy!). Also because it is a blank canvas (which appeals to the CT style-I think, unlike Crom, better than other texts I have picked up in the past) and because it was fun, something I see to be essential in putting on a play.
It is often frowned upon when directors comment upon their own show but in this case I felt it was perhaps necessary. I knew from the start that the decision of the chorus would divide the audience but as Giles says, I wanted to try something new- I am 21 after all, we are a young company- the chance to take a risk does not happen very often so I say go for it. Caravans for example- its lovely idea but occasionally student tech will fail. This is not something to get upset about- the cast handled it very professionally, it did not upset me in anyway, it was a little unfortunate on our final night but what of that.
Like all directors I make mistakes; gambles don’t always pay off. However I stand by my creatures as a smart and enjoyable aspect of this production. Although I have the deepest respect from Giles for taking on such a huge part, I was aware from the beginning that we are all just starting to find our feet in this profession and so to put him on the stage by himself for over an hour would be a little presumptuous of all of our abilities at this moment in time. I felt it more appropriate to give Giles the opportunity to play a great part as well as to give seven actors a chance to get involved in a fun show, to experiment with visual language and to give captain theatre an opportunity to explore the script’s potential in our own style.
So why chose this play I sense the next response would be? Well, because it’s a brilliant/beautiful script and Giles has an exceptional talent (an Arab/Italian/Negro accent is not very easy!). Also because it is a blank canvas (which appeals to the CT style-I think, unlike Crom, better than other texts I have picked up in the past) and because it was fun, something I see to be essential in putting on a play.
It is often frowned upon when directors comment upon their own show but in this case I felt it was perhaps necessary. I knew from the start that the decision of the chorus would divide the audience but as Giles says, I wanted to try something new- I am 21 after all, we are a young company- the chance to take a risk does not happen very often so I say go for it. Caravans for example- its lovely idea but occasionally student tech will fail. This is not something to get upset about- the cast handled it very professionally, it did not upset me in anyway, it was a little unfortunate on our final night but what of that.
Like all directors I make mistakes; gambles don’t always pay off. However I stand by my creatures as a smart and enjoyable aspect of this production. Although I have the deepest respect from Giles for taking on such a huge part, I was aware from the beginning that we are all just starting to find our feet in this profession and so to put him on the stage by himself for over an hour would be a little presumptuous of all of our abilities at this moment in time. I felt it more appropriate to give Giles the opportunity to play a great part as well as to give seven actors a chance to get involved in a fun show, to experiment with visual language and to give captain theatre an opportunity to explore the script’s potential in our own style.
So why chose this play I sense the next response would be? Well, because it’s a brilliant/beautiful script and Giles has an exceptional talent (an Arab/Italian/Negro accent is not very easy!). Also because it is a blank canvas (which appeals to the CT style-I think, unlike Crom, better than other texts I have picked up in the past) and because it was fun, something I see to be essential in putting on a play.
John stop playing devil's advocate. The point isn't whether the quote could have been chosen better, as I think Crom is old enough, and probably written enough essays, to decide for himself whether he thought it was relevent to the point. The point is that "Me"'s comment is far less relevent and a sympton of this worrying belief that any show of wide knowledge, literature etc is pretentious and unnecessary, something you wouldn't expect from students of a top university.
Anyway, the show sounds good and Captain Theatre will be missed. Maybe even mourned. I realise the immense danger of sounding sycophantic here, but I think even if you'd never met Narayani and Hanna you'd have to acknowledge that their plays have been among the most exciting and professional in Durham. Even Your Mum would agree. Ka-boom tish.
John stop playing devil's advocate. The point isn't whether the quote could have been chosen better, as I think Crom is old enough, and probably written enough essays, to decide for himself whether he thought it was relevent to the point. The point is that "Me"'s comment is far less relevent and a sympton of this worrying belief that any show of wide knowledge, literature etc is pretentious and unnecessary, something you wouldn't expect from students of a top university.
Anyway, the show sounds good and Captain Theatre will be missed. Maybe even mourned. I realise the immense danger of sounding sycophantic here, but I think even if you'd never met Narayani and Hanna you'd have to acknowledge that their plays have been among the most exciting and professional in Durham. Even Your Mum would agree. Ka-boom tish.
John stop playing devil's advocate. The point isn't whether the quote could have been chosen better, as I think Crom is old enough, and probably written enough essays, to decide for himself whether he thought it was relevent to the point. The point is that "Me"'s comment is far less relevent and a sympton of this worrying belief that any show of wide knowledge, literature etc is pretentious and unnecessary, something you wouldn't expect from students of a top university.
Anyway, the show sounds good and Captain Theatre will be missed. Maybe even mourned. I realise the immense danger of sounding sycophantic here, but I think even if you'd never met Narayani and Hanna you'd have to acknowledge that their plays have been among the most exciting and professional in Durham. Even Your Mum would agree. Ka-boom tish.
My mum actually calls all my plays "bloody depressing" and doesn't like the theatre. So there.
My mum actually calls all my plays "bloody depressing" and doesn't like the theatre. So there.
My mum actually calls all my plays "bloody depressing" and doesn't like the theatre. So there.
I find that comment bloody depressing myself…
I find that comment bloody depressing myself…
I find that comment bloody depressing myself…
"The lighting was some of the best I’ve seen." Tell us about some u havent seen.
"The lighting was some of the best I’ve seen." Tell us about some u havent seen.
"The lighting was some of the best I’ve seen." Tell us about some u havent seen.
[...] directors and actors, or between directors and writers. Readers of a certain vintage will remember Captain Theatre and the Mark Quartley-Johnny Scott Axis of Breathtaking Modernity; for better or for worse, [...]
Leave your response!
Most Commented