Judged and reviewed by Imogen Sarre and Liv Edwards

The New Writing Festival was one hell of an experience. Chloe Courtney has done fantastic things this year, helping to transform a little known event into something prestigious, established, and utterly exciting. There was the most extraordinary amount of talent in the Burton Taylor on Saturday of 7^th week and I felt extremely privileged to be there, rubbing shoulders with people who will most probably end up calling the dramatic big shots in years to come. Judging the Best Production was a fascinating experience: having read all the plays before, I came to the BT with reasonably specific expectations – and was proven wrong on pretty much every count. Imogen Sarre

Toffee ★★★★★

By Charlotte Geater, directed by Meg Bartlett, Saturday 2.30pm

Review by Imogen Sarre

When reading the play, I was most struck by Charlotte’s phenomenal character constructions, by the accuracy of her representations of everyday conversational speech, and the inspired way that the breaking of the fourth wall became the play’s backbone and very reason for being. Having watched it in performance, I lament that Alfie’s awkward and quite amateur performance undermined all of these strengths. I must find fault with the way he depicted his anguish: for me, repetitive sighing, screwing up his face, pathetic head droops and a breathy delivery of lines does not constitute realism. I felt painfully aware that I was watching an actor consciously force his facial features into contortions that would mirror every thought process of his character. At points it worked fine, but when half the play is performed in such a manner (he had a lot of soliloquies) it became a tad repetitive. He could have done with a bit more direction to ensure that there was some pace and tone change. It was mostly a shame because it made the writing, which was excellent, seem mediocre. In contrast, Nik Higgens, who unfortunately had the smallest part as Jay, performed the most outstanding transition from page to stage that I have yet to witness in Oxford. He had wonderful comic timing and presence, although at times his delivery was a little mumbled. He drew out every nuance from the script and made the part and play his own – all achieved without losing, undermining, or overplaying any of the characteristics the script gave him. A phenomenal performance and I look forward to seeing him in more plays in the future.

Other aspects of the play were solid: Chris was competent, Ginger understated but very good. I liked the use of stage and set, particularly the use of the curtains, and really enjoyed the asides and ad-libbing bits that the actors had incorporated into the script to really exploit the consciously theatrical nature of the play. More of those might well help to transform the play from showing a huge amount of potential, to realising that potential.

Toffee ★★★★★

Review by Liv Edwards

Charlotte Geater’s script is intelligent and funny in equal measure in its exploration of the fragility of personal relationships we forge at university when unstuck from home, reputation, old friends. Director Meg Bartlett made great use of the theatre space, staying true to Charlotte’s set ideas (like the stage curtain) and managed to lay out a convincing representation of a student bedroom complete with book-strewn floor.  Set design aside, a student cast performing a play about students should have made the transition from Cowley to the BT studio seem effortless and yet this rendition of Toffee was at times wooden and lackluster. One of the complexities with this play is its destruction of the 4^th wall to the extent that the characters imply that they repeat the same chain of events day-after-day, helping Alfie tell the same story. This means that within the play itself, characters deliver much-rehearsed lines, anticipate what part of the story comes next and become exasperated with this cyclical chain of events but I wasn’t always convinced that the actors’ labored line delivery was completely feigned. In particular, I felt that Alfie’s character lacked the much needed depth and sincerity that he should have had. This was a surprise to me as I was lucky enough to catch the press preview of Toffee two weeks ago and the Alfie on stage then was far more relaxed and genuine in front of a small collection of NWF writers, OxStu, Cherwell and OTR than he was in front of the paying audience at the BT. It would seem that by the time the performance week arrived the actor knew the script too well – to the extent that he anticipated audience laughs with a wry smile before he even delivered the funny line. Two performances really did stand out. Jay was probably my favourite thing about the production, he carried off Jay’s dimwitted but endearing brand of humour to perfection and the pajama-clad Ginger was also a joy to watch. The production was slick and stayed true to Charlotte’s script but unfortunately its actors didn’t always do justice to the play’s striking realism.

Instead of Beauty ★★★★★

By Richard O’Brien, directed by Abhishek Bhattacharyya, Saturday 6^th March, 4.30pm

Review by Imogen Sarre

What read as quite a flat script was transformed with apparent ease into an extremely engaging and funny play: all credit to Richard for recognising what a dramatic oomph performance can give to words, and to actors and director for exploiting that. This was probably the easiest play to perform well, which is perhaps the reason why it was chosen by Michael Frayn as the best New Writing piece. I was slightly bemused by the decision to make John seem quite so blatantly homosexual – there were hints already in the script which did not require such heavy-handedness. The inane grinning and flamboyant hand gestures also got on my nerves quite a bit and mostly seemed out of character. As the play progressed this lessened, or maybe I got more used to it. Other than this slightly confused, though interesting, interpretation of the script (which I fear could mar people’s enjoyment of the overall play if the character’s inconsistencies grated just a little bit too much), the actors performed their parts brilliantly. I found myself sitting on the edge of my seat, getting totally caught up in the intensely stimulating atmosphere of sensuality created by Matthew and Mary’s monologues, where the former described his sexual fantasies, and the latter told us a past lesbian experience. Lucy’s monologue was also brilliant, not overplaying the nervous fidgeting in her presentation as is so easy to do. I never felt she was acting, or stating rehearsed lines: she created an entirely believable and likeable character. Considering such acting professionalism, it was a shame that each scene change provided a reminder that this was a student production: they took far too long and could have done with having some more of the music that was used towards the very end of the production (- perhaps they had some technical problems?). Considering this fragmentation, it’s pretty telling of the actors’ skill and intensity that after each scene there was an audible and unanimous release of breath from the audience, showing how very involved they had been in the previous scene.

Instead of Beauty ★★★★★

Review by Liv Edwards

To work with, this cast had a script crawling with all the sexual reference, gratuitous swearing and teenage angst we have come to expect from a story that sets out to document a young man’s transition from school in a small town to university in a big city. But this wasn’t all the script was about, Richard O’Brien’s title ‘Instead of Beauty’ was at risk of being left unexamined in this production that honed and delivered the script’s humour to a T but neglected the darker resonances of a dramatization of our hyper-sexualized teen-culture in which university is viewed a place of sexual education first and foremost. Personally, I found that the casting of American actors as Matthew and John drove a real rift between the script and the production: O’Brien’s dialogue complete with references to Strongbow and uses of the word ‘mate’ deserves comparison with the likes of ‘skins’ and ‘the inbetweeners’, by contrast the American accents accompanying the production brought broader, perhaps less subtle cultural associations with teen-movies like American Pie. This is by no means to say that the actors playing John and Matthew did not put in impressive performances. In fact, I think the high quality of acting in this production was its biggest strength. Matthew’s seething sexual desire and frustration in the exam hall monologue was evoked to perfection. Equally compelling was the soft-spoken Lucy in her St Dunstan’s presentation. And John’s character contrasted effectively with Matthew’s and was at his strongest in the house party scene. Mary was fantastic, oozing confidence and sexuality, particularly when she attempted to seduce a terrified Matthew. The musical interludes during the frequent scene changes were deftly handled and the idea to use a very pared down set helped the play to flow. However, it was a shame that the changing months on the hanging calendar, one of the very few stage adornments, were indiscernible from the back row. More importantly though, sadly I think the play lost momentum at the crucial moment when Matthew confesses that he slept with devout ‘Christian girl’ Lucy and this bleak world in which sexual desire out strips all other desires reaches its most destructive.

Revival ★★★★★

By Carla Neuss, directed by Sarah Perry, Saturday 6^th March, 7.30pm

Review by Imogen Sarre

OTR gave this play Best Production for very many very good reasons. I still find it quite astonishing that Sarah Perry, along with all NWF directors, auditioned to take on any of the NWF plays, not specifically this one. Her inspired creative interpretation of Revival suggested the script had at least been chosen by, if not made for, her direction. Hats off to Carla Neuss for allowing her script the freedom that meant it could be so stunningly exploited, and to Sarah for doing so. Abstract physical movement and moments of naturalism complemented one another, retaining interest and intensity throughout the performance. It was extremely slick, professional and engaging, with all actors performing their parts with consummate skill, every movement done on purpose and often in unison with one another. Different aspects of each character were beautifully drawn out using the talents of individual actors: we had an array of magic tricks, tap dancing, over exaggerated dramatic movement and quite incredibly flexible dancing. Any fears that such a physical style of performance could have become repetitive or predictable were dispelled as the play progressed. The play increasingly explored the characters’ personalities and pasts, making the figures become real people that I engaged with. Considering the type of performance, that is a serious feat. I also loved the subtle developments: performing magic tricks to make the drinks was a great idea but needed something special for the much talked about Crème Yvette – which the glitter provided. That Jo came on at the end and began drinking her own wine (Oddbins’ finest) was a lovely representation of magic coming to an end and a recognition of the cheap reality of her life, despite the exotic ballgowns, parties and dance moves. She was particularly mesmerising, combining sexuality, wantonness, poise and elegance with great skill. Her Seven Stages of Women will probably be the thing I remember most from this production, which was, in itself, completely unforgettable.

Revival ★★★★★

Review by Liv Edwards

Director Sarah Perry really made this play her own, so much so that I cannot imagine Carla Neuss’ Revival being staged in any other way.  It was certainly an ambitious undertaking to transport the audience to a time and place where bar tenders serve magic tricks in glasses, where customers slide or tap dance into the room and clients do not sip drinks but inhale them. But it really worked. Carla’s fascinating idea of a bar, where drinks are not ordered but conveyed in stories and where the boundary lines between alcohol and religion, and confession and fantasy are blurred, is entirely enhanced by this production. For the first half, the piece hovered somewhere between an interpretive dance and a poem in performance: strict ensemble choreography accompanied all speech, so that plain words on the page became a hypnotic oration. Appropriately, during the second half of the performance, this affected way of speaking and moving subsided as reality began to pinch Crispin’s customers. Interestingly, Tyler’s character became far more complex as he dropped the exaggerated hand movements and alluded to his life, rent, relatives, girlfriends. Tap dancing Fred, true to the script, remained slightly more ‘real’ than Tyler throughout and in his story telling he did well to bring a comedy to Fred’s character that I didn’t find in the script. Crispin was very likeable and he did brilliantly to perform magic trick after magic trick on stage and keep nervous fumbles to a minimum. Jo’s graceful dances that accompanied her initial stories deserved a round of applause in themselves and the actress playing Jo also managed to nail the more vulnerable side to her character in the genuinely moving monologue about her actual life. So many of the creative ideas in this production – like representing the Crème Yvette as glitter – were inspired. My only reservations about this production are that at points it was not as slick as its style really demanded: for example, the effects of the magic tricks may have benefitted from being relevant to the story told in some way – it was quite comical to hear Tyler tell a poetic story about life as a painter in Paris only to be served a cup containing two golf balls.

The Fireflies ★★★★★

By David Shackleton, directed by Rimi Solloway, assisted by Barnaby Lynch, Saturday 6^th March, 7.30pm

Review by Imogen Sarre

This play was utterly bizarre and I still don’t really understand it. I think (or at least hope) that was the point. The acting was very powerful: Filer’s deranged intensity showed through his vocal expression, gestures, facial expressions, right down to the rather red and slightly sweaty face he finished with. At points I almost felt he might burst a blood vessel. His monologue was extremely impressive – it showed quite extraordinary vocal abilities and memory that he was able to reel off such a long list of words at such a relentless pace. Boy’s character and relationship to Filer was extremely tricky to gauge and must have been harder to perform. The mix of servility and rebellion, interest and dismissive mocking, made him a paradoxical creature. It’s hard to fathom why, midway through the play, he came on wearing fish net stockings, stripy long socks and pink high heels underneath his rolled up suit trousers. I wasn’t even sure what the effect was meant to be – if it wasn’t just to show that they were both stark raving mad even if the Boy was understatedly so in comparison to Filer’s more obvious lunatism. I enjoyed the Boy’s irreverent peeing in the bottom drawer of the filing cabinet, and, while I’m on the subject of cabinets, the way that drawers opened and closed seemingly of their own accord. With a very unusual script, I think both director and actors did extremely well in their representation of it. My only complaint is that I never got emotionally involved. The brief moment when the buzzing noises Filer could hear in his head filled the theatre space made me realise the potential this play had to represent to an audience how terrifying and alienating being mad must be. I would like to see a production of this play where I felt a sense of the uncanny, rather than just being weirded out.

The Fireflies ★★★★★

Review by Liv Edwards

This was an impressively professional production of what can only be described as a challenging play to stage. Rather than imposing an interpretation onto the obscure and puzzling script, Rimi Solloway as director played the piece as it was written, which left much to the audience’s imagination, or consternation. And yet, however confusing the plot became, the dynamic between Boy and the Filer was compelling, both actors animating these nameless parts with distinct personalities. Between the two of them they impressively sustained the play’s strangeness throughout: the Filer with his stylized, cartoon-like facial expressions and the Boy in his unflinching confidence as he clattered around the stage in fishnet tights and heels, his sardonic smile helping to guide the audience’s laughter at sad, grouchy, slipper-wearing Filer. As the play progressed, the change of power in the relationship (who needs who) was artfully portrayed and added a humanizing softness to the Filer’s character. The staging of this play was impeccable, each movement as deliberate as was necessary for a play of this sort. Particularly effective was the staging of the Boy’s adoption of the ‘oratory’ pose and the climactic letter of ‘complaiynt’ episode.  I was also impressed at how Rimi managed to find a way to stage David Shackleton’s vision of a filing cabinet that opened of its own accord, a crucial feature of the play’s strangeness particularly in the disturbing scene when the filing cabinet seems to rebel against the Filer. Though not every aspect of the piece worked perfectly – I couldn’t help but feel that the balloons as fireflies served only to distract attention away from the tortured Filer – it was a very brave and accomplished production that managed to sustain my attention throughout despite the fact that I still have a very fuzzy idea of what the play is actually about.