On the radio

On Sunday I was a guest on the Nat Nollid show hosted by the lovely Rebecca Burge on ONFM.

The main guest on the show was Justus Emman, a fascinating guy who writes books and was on the show to talk about Voodoo. This meant that as well as theatre I had to talk about my opinions on Voodoo and its practice in the UK.

So for interested parties I include below a cut down version of some of what Mr Emman was saying, with my contribution towards the end:

Discussing Voodoo on the Nat Nollid show with Rebecca Burge by Ellie Dawes

And here is a recording of our discussion of this blog, theatre and what to look out for on the stage in 2012!

Ellie Dawes discusses theatre 2012 on the Nat Nollid show with Rebecca Burge by Ellie Dawes

I talk about this production of A Midsummer Night's Dream, Haymarket's Tempest and The God of Soho at the Globe. I also naturally plug Breakfast Cat Theatre's upcoming version of Macbeth!

The Twitter account I'm talking about, which I've set up to promote Macbeth, can be found here, please follow and retweet it!

Please forgive my clumsy editing! You can listen to the whole show, with the full fascinating discussion with Justus, on Rebecca's website.

52 - Aladdin, Ashcroft theatre, Croydon

52 plays!! I realise this might lose impact as I am blogging a few days after seeing this last production of 2011 on New Year's Eve. But believe me dear reader, I saw this (and The Borrowers) in December 2011. Which makes my challenge complete.

I was pleased to see a panto as my final play. You might think a panto is slightly less worthy than some of the other plays I have seen over the year. You are wrong. Pantomime is the greatest example of British culture I know.

Try seeing a Pantomime outside of the UK and you will run into problems. Then try explaining Pantomime to a German, an American, an Indian and witness the look of bemusement.

To me the clever puns, cross-dressing, colour and nonsense you see in a pantomime demonstrate the wit, diversity, exuberance and eccentricity that make up our national identity.

Look back in time and you can find the pantomime's ancestors in mummer's plays and even mystery plays. Look forward and find its children in modern films like Shrek (people think the idea of having innuendo and cultural references for the grown-ups in children's films is new. I'd say American cinema is just catching up.) Naturally as a leftie British person I usually treat patriotism as an embarrassing and rather dangerous disease but actually I do think that our literary and cultural heritage is something we can be proud of.

Now usually I'd advocate forgetting the celebs and patronising the smallest local pantomime you can find for maximum community feeling and naughtiness. But I did think this Aladdin was particularly good in terms of sheer volume of cheesy jokes. My favourite:
"I just saw Michael J. Fox down the garden centre"
"How did you recognise him?"
"He had his back to the fuchsias"

I also thought the set was lovely and glittery, the dancing impressive and the actors full of the essential energy and mirth. Wishy Washy (played by that geeky new bloke from Hollyoaks) was the star of the show, interacting really well with the kids, delivering exposition at roughly the speed of sound and jumping around the stage like a mad thing.

Something I would have liked to see improved somewhat would be the costumes. Pantomime dame costumes can be really magnificent and silly and although Twanky's were colourful I thought they could have been slightly more inventive and daft. The exception to this was the cool ming vase dress 'she' wore in the finale complete with a hat that looked like a lid so she could shrug her shoulders and draw her head in to make her head disappear. That was awesome.


I feel a bit sad now my 52 plays resolution is complete. Obviously I'd like to go to the theatre a lot in 2012 too, but with a new resolution to save some money and go on holiday to India I suspect my theatre trips might become less frequent. When I see something particularly great or awful, I'll definitely keep posting on this blog, it has been nice to practise writing down my thoughts and ideas.

Anyone considering upping their experiences in 2012, I can't recommend the 52 plays idea enough. I can honestly say it is one of the best things I have ever done. I feel like I know much more about theatre than I did 12 months ago, I see plays in a wider context and have a far better idea of what kind of theatre I really love. Instead of setting yourself the usual dull dieting or sporty challenge this year, why not embark on something that will improve your mind instead of your body? Watch 52 films, see 52 plays, read 30 books (52 books seems a bit much to me), go on 52 dates, whatever. Choose something you are passionate about and learn more about the thing that you love.

Above all my lovely blog readers, I hope you find a way to have a happy, constructive and successful new year. Noone else can make this happen but you.

51 - The Borrowers, Nuffield Theatre, Southampton

The Borrowers was everywhere this Christmas, bemusing as the last I heard of it was when I read the books and watched the BBC series as a child. Daisy says it's because people our age who enjoyed the old BBC series have grown up and had children of their own and want them to enjoy The Borrowers too. Surely some mistake as I am FAR TOO YOUNG for anything I liked as a child to have come full circle. *Resolutely ignores 1980s revival*.

I liked the new adaptation on the TV this Christmas, but for me there was a lot more magic to be found in this theatre production. For one thing, they kept the story set in the 1950s which made it much more nostalgic, and for another it was live theatre which is always that bit more magical than the TV.

I wanted to see The Borrowers because it struck me as a great challenge to produce on stage, what with half the characters being a few inches tall. This production tackled this brilliantly, with tiny puppets and oversized props. One of the most magical moments came as we saw on one size of the stage the fully sized human boy passing dolls furniture into a small hole in the floorboards which simultaneously in another area of the stage Pod, Arietty and Homily received from above fully sized versions and arranged them in their home.

Other favourite moments included the wasp who appeared much larger than the Borrowers and darted around the stage in a very waspish manner by wearing those bouncy leg stilt things like paralympic runners wear (no-one in my office can agree on what these are called). Lunging at them with a large curly sting he held in one hand he was both fearsome and comical, the ideal children's theatre monster.

I also loved the giant boot the borrowers hid inside, the set really was incredibly impressive.

There were a couple of oddities about this production, one being that the gardener, played by an excellently hammy older actor, was constantly referred to as a young boy by the other characters. We were not sure whether this was a combination of creative casting and lazy script editing or a joke that none of the audience seemed to get.

The other strange thing was the half songs the characters occasionally started but didn't finish. When Arietty started singing at the beginning I thought 'great, it's a musical' but then after a few lines she stopped and continued acting as if the song hadn't happened. This happened a couple of times and left me a bit bemused.

Despite these occasional moments of strangeness this was a triumph of clever stage craft and a charming and Christmassy family show. I hope other companies are brave enough to take on The Borrowers for future Christmas productions.

50 - The Collaborators, National Theatre

This is transferring from the Cottesloe to the Olivier (the larger theatre in The National) and is well worth a trip to see. Go on, go and see a new play. It's by John Hodge (screenwriter of Trainspotting, Shallow Grave, The Beach).

I was surprised by how funny and surreal this play was, considering the content (in Moscow, 1938, writer Mikhail Bulgakov (Alex Jennings) is commissioned to write a play about Stalin to commemorate his 60th birthday).

The play is also more subtle than I expected. Yes, it has something to say about art controlled by the state. But it's also a skilful portrait of an artist who gets lost in his work.

It is worth seeing this just for the amazing darkly comic performance of Simon Russell Beale as Stalin. Initially affable and light hearted he offers to write scenes of Bulgakov's play for him, but in exchange Bulgakov should take over some of his own work; signing papers and making decisions. Things spiral into a nightmare as Bulgakov unwittingly agrees and inspires Stalin to commit more and more terrible atrocities on the people of Russia.

Go and see this, particularly if you enjoyed Every Good Boy Deserves Favour at the beginning of 2010 which was on a similar topic and was stunningly brilliant. And, of course, the White Guard in July 2010 which I missed because I am an idiot.

49 - The Crucible, Chichester players

I have never seen a production by The Chichester Players and was really impressed, not just by the excellent production but also by the ticket sales! It was a reasonably long run and when we went, on the last night, New Park was full to bursting.

It's quite possible word had spread through the run about how good this production was. The acting was really first rate, and the director, Richard Brookes, knew what he was doing, framing even difficult scenes with loads of people on stage at once really beautifully.

All three of us, even my sister who claimed before the play that she "didn't like the crucible" were absolutely riveted. When we emerged from the theatre someone on front of house mentioned that it was a long performance and we were genuinely amazed to find we had been watching this for three hours.

If I had a criticism of this production it would be that I personally did not need to see the projection of the Miller interview at the beginning and found that a bit unnecessary, as if the Players felt that I as an audience member needed to have the parallels in the text pointed out to me. I think they could have best used that footage on their website or Facebook page to promote the production in the run up, and for people to check out after seeing the play to drive traffic to their site. However, I don't know if that was just me, other people might have found it useful to have the play put into context for them. I'd be interested to hear what other audience members thought.

We had a really enjoyable evening seeing this play, it was better than some professional productions I have seen at Chichester Festival Theatre in the past, as well as being much better value! I'll definitely look out for future Chichester Players productions.

48- Steel Magnolias, Bench Theatre at The Spring in Havant

More brilliant theatre from the ridiculously talented female actors of The Bench! We laughed and cried at this brilliant subtle production. The cast were all simply marvellous, it was great to see Alice Corrigan and Jo Gardner working together again, a duo just as magnetic as they were earlier in the year in Daisy Pulls it Off.

Because I have a complete inability to do any accent I am always really impressed when non-professional actors do a great job on tricky accents. The Southern American accents in this production were mostly spot on and couldn't have been easy to maintain with such highly charged emotional acting.

My siblings and I were really proud of my mum Sue Dawes who played M'lynne. The range of emotions she had to portray was pretty astounding; from hopeful happiness on her daughter's wedding day to anger, concern culminating in an explosion of grief in the final scene. I think my mum is brilliant.

This was a highly charged emotiona play, nicely directed. Well done to the director, cast and team. Special mention to whoever was responsible for such a great range of different hair styles and costumes too!

47 - 13, National Theatre

I was very excited to see 13 because Earthquakes in London was one of my favourite plays of last year. However 13 did not quite have the emotional punch of Earthquakes. I think this was because Earthquakes concentrated on presenting a terrifying view of climate change, confronting us with a selfish present and a dystopian future that was very close to the bone. 13 on the other hand tried to represent a much wider issue of belief and apathy in today's society. Although the points about whether we can change our world in a big way or whether it is best to compromise to affect the changes we can were interesting, the issues were a bit too broad and therefore lacked impact. I didn't really like the way religious faith was associated with demanding political change through protest because I don't see a link between those things in real life people.

It was slightly unsatisfying to watch the idealist and symbol of hope in the play be confronted with the harsh reality. His protest, a result of his speeches in Hyde Park going viral on YouTube, arrives at Westminster and he is granted a meeting with the Prime minister. The PM is a popular liberal conservative who also happens to be the mother of his friend who died as a result of a drunken stunt a couple of years previously.

The resulting negotiations are too complicated for the audience to choose a side, these issues are not black and white. But while that might be very realistic, it doesn't make for the most satisfying play to watch.

What did make the play great to watch were the sparkling snappy clever dialogue you'd expect from Mike Bartlett and the colourful realistic characters who you just had to empathise with. The overarching metaphor of peeking inside the box was brilliantly realised with an enormous revolving box which made up the set in the first half which the characters would act around and inside. I felt a bit bereft when this box was removed in the interval because I liked it so much.

The touches of London that crept onto the stage made the production feel very contemporary, at one point a Barclays bike whizzed across the stage. However the play's claim to be set in a slightly alternative London where strange things happen did not make sense to me. There was nothing explicitly supernatural going on, many of the characters and events were certainly bizarre, like the brilliant old lady playing and singing a Rhianna song on the piano. But the real London is full of bizarre characters doing funny things, so the only reason to set the play in "a dark and magical landscape, a London both familiar and strange" was so the play could portray a realistic London but include a Prime Minister, US envoy etc without satirising real people. I thought this was a bit of a cop-out for the playwright.

Reading this post back, it seems a little negative. I actually loved this play, it was funny and deep and engaging and contemporary. I'm being a bit hard on it because I loved Earthqakes so much. And this is not quite as brilliant as Earthquakes.