Scenes From an Execution - Howard Barker. Hackney Empire, 2006

This play is set in 16th Century Venice, so for me, I'm already intrigued as I have a prior interest in the history of the Doge and his palace.

Galactia, a female painter, is commissioned to paint the Battle of Lepanto. The Doge wished this to be a celebratory canvas of the triumphant victory of the Holy League Alliance, however, as Galactia paints, she is determined that she will stay true to herself and instead depicts a scene of the atrocities of war. She depicts blood and guts and the suffering of the soldiers, which is an embarrassment to The Doge.

In real life, The Battle of Lepanto was a horrific battle, and the last major naval battle to be fought entirely by galleys in the Mediterranean. A Venetian colony at Famagusta in Cyprus had been besieged by the Turks, following the fall of Nicosia. The Venetians had surrendered, having been told they could leave Cyprus, however, the Ottoman Commander reneged, imprisoned the Venetians, and beheaded the Venetian commanders. A fleet of ships from the Holy League sailed towards the Gulf of Patras where they met the Ottoman fleet. They engaged in combat and the Ottomans were decisively beaten after a four hour battle. 40,000 people were killed in those four hours.

After pushing The State (The Doge) too far, The Doge became worried that he has commissioned the wrong person, she was a wild card in a dominant male society. The painting she is producing is too real, it is too close to the truth and she can not be allowed to continue with it. Her disagreement with The Doge leads to an encounter in which he accuses her that her painting shows nothing but a slaughter and therefore she is an enemy of the Republic. He has no choice but to imprison her.

Galactia's young lover Carpeter (Tom Burke) is also a painter, but of the same regurgitated religious paintings, (Christ amongst the flocks) he has not got the visualisation of Galactia to take up the commission of such an epic painting. Nevertheless he is approached to take over from her, and he takes the opportunity to make a name for himself, however he has to paint under the critical eye of The Doge rather than being allowed to express his imagination.

The play exploits several themes, that difficulty between doing what is asked of you and staying true to yourself. Should your personal ambitions take priority over morality? Throughout the play Galactia is almost on a mission of self-destruction, ignoring the words of those around her, including her two daughters Supporta and Dementia, who are both worried about their mother's state of mind.

This is an interesting play, which is poetically easy to read, about one woman's battle through her art in pushing the establishment too far.

The Cut - Mark Ravenhill. Donmar Warehouse, London, February 2006

I have to be honest, I have read The Cut twice and I don't really understand it. The play is ambiguous in tone, but it is this ambiguity that causes frustration. It is as though Mark Ravenhill had an idea, but was not able to fully understand where he was going with his thoughts. The play has the bones of something deep and controversial, but it needs some sort of padding out. I felt like it was a wire frame and clay had been added, but no defining features had been carved or moulded into it!

The Cut centres around Paul (Sir Ian McKellen), a government official who administers "The Cut" to usually sick people. He is unnerved by the entrance of John, a man who desires to have "The Cut" because he think it will offer him freedom. It is obvious that the outside world believes The Cut will offer some sort of salvation, that it has some merit or virtue in being performed. Paul starts to crack under the strain of his job, and shows that he is tortured by what he has to do. He is not used to seeing someone wanting The Cut, he knows how painful The Cut is, and how little this dystopian society truly knows about what is going on.

Paul's wife is seemingly unaware of what her husband does for a living, and therefore conversations with her become strained. She can not begin to understand why he is always upset, but we see him trying to wrestle with his conscience as the conversation turns sour and confrontational.

The play ends with Paul, now in prison, following the introduction of a new Government and the removal of The Cut. He is visited by his son Stephen (Tom Burke) and he shares another disturbing conversation with him, he is seeking punishment for what he has done. He wants his son to admonish him. There is the inferred hope of a utopia for all, but a realisation that such a thing never really exists despite a person's hopes and best efforts. New Governments will come in with their way of doing things, or the Government in power will sooner or later backtrack into the way their predecessors did.

We are never told what "the Cut" actually is. We know it is some form of painful but ambiguous surgery, it is obviously some form of death, but is the death a part of a person and if so which part and why? The play shows a person not happy in their job and needing a way out from the political cruelty of the state, but for me the dialogue was lacking and the play was stilted. It may be one for the stage rather than the reader!

Incarcerator - Torben Betts. Old Red Lion Theatre, 2005

I wasn't sure what to expect from this play, it opens with a prison officer delivering a monologue about the perplexities that may befall the inmates mind.

The play then moves to the first scene where we see a man getting ready to be married. The tone of the play has changed as it is written in rhyming couplets which makes it fast paced, quick, slick, witty. As we go through  the play, we find that it is largely written in these rhyming couplets, and Betts' ability to play with language shines through.

The play is akin to Jacobean drama, gone is the romantic love of a Shakespeare play, and instead the rhyming verses are concentrating on the moral corruption of a modern society. It is a modern day darkly domestic tragedy which exposes the complications of wealth, debt and greed; love, sex and adultery. It is often pessimistic in its tone and attitude towards people. The play focuses on six characters, each person given both a name, and a description.

The Incarcerator [CHORUS] is a character of many faces. He is the figure of authority, the law enforcer. He tries to keep society together, but society does not conform.

The Independent Man [Stu Morris] an alcoholic loving the corporate high life. Fond of women, drinking and drugs and happy to flash his cash. He taunts Lee that marriage will suck the life out of him whilst continuing to lend him money so that he can pay for the demands Vic makes of him.

The Lusty Youth [Lee Jessop] can not control his desires, he just wants to be able to please his new wife, but she doesn't come cheap. Lee can not say no. He is impulsive, he doesn't think things through, to hell with consequences, what are they? He is a man getting out of his depth in debt, how can he keep the wolves from the door and the sharks at bay?

The Innocent [Liddle] (Tom Burke) a man with a world of opportunity ahead of him, but will he take the path of righteousness, or go back the way he came? He is like an excitable child full of wonder and innocence, but is anxious about what lies ahead of him, and therefore an easy character to mould or manipulate.

The Egotist [Vic Smith] materialistic, has very expensive tastes and won't take no for an answer. She is demanding and determined to get what she wants.

The Frustrated Intellectual [Laura Fisher] is in love with Lee, but he is marrying her friend Vic. She has a sharp tongue and a quick wit, but can she use it to make her dream a reality, or will she forever be jealously looking on?

I would imagine it is a both a difficult yet enjoyable script for an actor to perform. There is a juxtaposition of deep venom and thoughtful eloquence which gives the characters a depth and personality. There is increasing chaos and a mad violence which is almost comical, and it ends with me thinking I will never look at a fondue in the same manner again!

Macbeth - William Shakespeare Almeida Theatre 2005

Macbeth is one of Shakespeare's most brutal plays. It charters the rise of Macbeth's ambitions and his desire for power, but as he and his wife plot the murder of King Duncan, his world begins to unravel. His descent into madness begins to unfold, horrors escalate, and Macbeth goes from a conquering force, to a desolate, hopeless individual.

The play starts with the infamous lines "when shall we three meet again" quoted by three witches, confirming to each other that they will meet Macbeth at the end of a battle. We then move to a military camp and hear of the success of battle for both Macbeth and Banquo, two Generals of the King's Army. Macbeth and Banquo come across the  three witches who prophesise that Macbeth will gain rank in the Scottish nobility and then become King. The prophesy is treated with scepticism until King Duncan meets with Macbeth and confirms that he has been made Thane of Cawdor.

Macbeth then starts to consider that perhaps the witches were correct, and wonders if the rest of their prophesies will come true and he will become King of Scotland. He tells his wife all that  has happened, and Lady Macbeth decides that in order for the prophesy to come true, the King must be murdered. Whilst Duncan is asleep, Macbeth creeps to his chamber and stabs him with a dagger. The next day the death is discovered and Macbeth is made King, whilst Duncan's sons flee to England because they are scared that whoever killed their father was likely to kill them too.

Macbeth starts to worry that another of the witches prophesies might come true, and so he arranges for Banquo and his son to be murdered. Banquo's son manages to escape and Macbeth starts to fear that his power is beginning to wane. He is visited by Banquo's ghost at a feast, and as he sees the ghost he becomes raving mad, and whilst Lady Macbeth tries to calm matters, Macbeth soon realises that he doesn't have as much control over his subjects as he would like.

Macbeth decides to visit the witches in their cavern, and they show him more prophesies, including that he must beware of Macduff who has also fled to England. In fear Macbeth arranges for Macduff's wife and children to be murdered. Macduff hears about the murders and seeks his revenge. Prince Malcolm has an army in England, so Macduff joins the army, and together they march on Scotland.

The Scottish nobles are by now fed up of Macbeth's behaviour. Lady Macbeth has killed herself claiming she has blood on her hands. Macbeth sinks into deeper despair, yet he takes on the English army but is overwhelmed and meets Macduff for the final time.

There have been countless productions of Macbeth, so it's hard to know from reading the play what the particular shows that Tom performed in were like, there is however a lovely note in The Guardian regarding some of his performance!

"Tom Burke's Malcolm has a good moment when, after Duncan's murder, he starts towards the dagger-wielding thane as if about to kill him"  The Guardian 21/1/2015

Romeo and Juliet - William Shakespeare The Globe, London 2004

This is the write up I've been dreading. I have visions of my lecturers wielding their red pens as I cower in a corner explaining that this isn't an essay it's just a blog!

So, Romeo and Juliet, I don't think there are many people who do not know the story of the star crossed lovers, hence I thought I would look into this play a bit more deeply, especially as Tom did two versions of this play during its run!

Shakespeare is nearly always performed in Received Pronunciation (RP), however, this production was tackled in both RP and Original Pronunciation (OP). Whilst I understood the gist of OP, I didn't know too much about it, nor what concerns it would bring to the acting fraternity whilst trying to produce a theatre production. I therefore read Pronouncing Shakespeare by David Crystal, a delightful book which tells the background of how Shakespeare's Globe produced Romeo and Juliet in its original Shakespearian pronunciation.

It is an interesting journey reading about how the actors reacted to the news about the production and the difficulties encountered trying this "new" language. It would most certainly be enlightening discussing this project with the actors involved in it!

I think Romeo and Juliet must be Shakespeare's most well known tragedy. It centres around two feuding families, the Montagues and the Capulets, and it was one of the most popular of his plays during Shakespeare's lifetime. What many people do not know about the play, is that Shakespeare borrowed many elements of the story from various traditional love stories, even the names Montague and Capulet are believed to be borrowed from Dante's Divine Comedy.

The play is set in the Italian town of Verona, and the audience is witness to fighting in the streets between the two feuding families. From the very start the audience is aware of the strength of feeling between the warring families.

Paris, a relative of the ruling Prince of Verona, ask Capulet for the hand of his daughter, Juliet, in marriage. Juliet at the time is about 13 years old, and Capulet asks Paris to wait for two years, but in the meantime invites him to a family ball which is being planned. Whilst Capulet has asked Paris to wait for two years, Juliet's mother and nurse are both of he opinion that Juliet should marry Paris.

We are then introduced to a rather disconsolate Romeo talking to his cousin Benvolio. Romeo is infatuated with Capulet's niece Rosaline, but she is not interested in Romeo. Benvolio tells Romeo to go to the Capulet ball in order that he may meet Rosaline, but instead Romeo encounters Juliet and immediately falls in love with her instead!

Juliet's cousin, Tybalt, realises that Romeo has sneaked into the ball and tries to kill him, however, Capulet intervenes and Romeo leaves the ball, only to sneak into the family orchard. From here he can hear Juliet on her balcony declaring her undying love for him, so Romeo makes himself known to Juliet and they vow that despite the family differences they will be married. In fact, Romeo enlists the help of his friend Friar Laurence, and the couple are wed secretly the very next day!

Tybalt is still incensed that he hasn't had retribution on Romeo, and therefore challenges him to a duel. Romeo can not accept, because now that he has married Juliet, he considers that Tybalt is now his relative, so Romeo's friend Mercutio, who is not happy with either party, decides he will accept the duel on behalf of Romeo. Of course Mercutio is killed in the duel, Romeo is devastated and therefore kills Tybalt! The Prince of Verona exiles Romeo from Verona and states that should Romeo return he will be executed.

Romeo spends one night with Juliet before leaving Verona. Juliet starts to grieve for Romeo and her father misunderstanding the situation decides that Paris and Juliet should be married. Juliet refuses to marry, so her father threatens to disown her and her mother rebuffs her. Juliet has no-one to turn to but the person who knows her secret, Friar Laurence. He suggests that upon her wedding night, Juliet drinks a potion which will make her appear dead for a couple of days. He promises that he will send word to Romeo of the plan.

Juliet therefore drinks the potion as planned and her family thinking she is dead, lay her in the family vault. As with all good plans, there is always an element that can go wrong, and in this case the messenger does not reach Romeo; instead he hears that Juliet is dead, he is inconsolable and so he heads to the nearest apothecary to purchase some poison.

Romeo then heads off to the vault where Juliet is lying so he can be with her in death. Paris is at the vault mourning Juliet's passing, and he thinks that Romeo is going to plunder the vault. The pair draw swords and Romeo kills Paris, he then drinks the poison to be with his Juliet. After his death Juliet wakes up and finding Romeo dead beside her, grabs his dagger and plunges it into her chest. The two families and the Prince of Verona visit the vault and discover the three dead bodies. Friar Laurence recounts Romeo and Juliet's story to the families, who finally decide to end their violent feud.

I would imagine that learning Shakespeare's lines is difficult enough, but to be informed that you were required to perform the same play in two forms of English must have struck the actors with some form of terror! So it was interesting to read the book Pronouncing Shakespeare - David Crystal which covers the events surrounding The Globe Theatre's experiment to bring the sound of Early Modern English (EME) back to the theatre!

It is interesting that the first question of concern was whether or not a modern audience would be able to understand the language. As the book progresses through the experimental journey it was interesting to discover that EME is not too dissimilar to many dialects that exist to this day. London in Shakespeare's era was just as diverse linguistically then as it is now, so the actors would have to be incredibly good at doing accents both accurately and consistently. Obviously though, if an actor needs to learn an accent now, he can go to a voice coach and have a plethora of materials at his finger tips to listen to. EME would be harder to learn as there is no real way of actually knowing how people sounded, a lot is down to imagination and interpretation.

David's book explains how linguistic scholars have tackled EME and how by gathering information from various sources, you can conceive several plans to allow actors to learn how to read the play in OP.  The initial question was whether the entire play could be transcribed in a way that the actors would find easy to understand, read and learn. The only way to accurately describe the sounds of EME would be to write everything in the International Phonetic Alphabet (IPA) however, learning IPA is a long process, and there was not sufficient time to train the actors. Re-spelling the words was an option considered, so station would become stayshun, but this was rejected because there are a number of words in EME that have strange vowel sounds to which we do not have an equivalent in our modern alphabet!

The timeframe for doing this experiment was very tight and the actors only had four weeks to rehearse, so the full transcription idea was shelved and instead it was decided that only unusual words would be transcribed into IPA. However, reading through this book shows not just the difficulties with how to transcribe the script, but also the nuances of language, even down to how formally the language should be spoken.

EME was a more casual language than the RP of the Shakespeare that we are used to, so the speech should trip of the tongue, constants dropped at the end of words and vowels omitted from the middle of words. (Think frien(d)s or Greg'ry, "and" becomes 'n' as in fish 'n' chips). The challenge for the production was to get this more relaxed style into the play, without making the upper classes of Romeo and Juliet's families sounding uneducated to a modern audience!

It is a fascinating book to read and highlights the amount of thought and work that went into ultimately only three productions in OP. It was interesting reading about the history of EME, but this is not a book about linguistics and pronouncing EME in general, it is about the Romeo and Juliet experiment in particular, and all the other facets to getting the production to stage. It was interesting to note that actors with strong accents, such as Scottish, found it easier to pick up on a rolling "r" sound, because that is natural to their normal accent, whereas someone who has grown up with the harsh sounds of RP found it much harder to soften the sound, without it taking on an almost comedic quality.

It was enchanting to hear that the performances were well received by the audiences who were lucky enough to watch the productions, and to hear that afterwards a number of actors were wistful about returning to performing Romeo and Juliet in the standard RP. I'm not sure if this experiment has, or ever will be performed in OP again, it would be shame if it wasn't, but perhaps from an actors point of view I can understand why perhaps it would not be a popular concept!

N.b. I can't really leave this post without a Tom anecdote from the book!

David Crystal wrote "Listening to tape recordings can do strange things to your state of mind. Tom Burke (Romeo) said that one night, during the rehearsal period, he put his tape recorder on as he fell asleep. This is a recognised technique, actually, used in some methods of foreign language teaching: 'learn while sleeping', goes the slogan. The only thing was, it gave him nightmares! Queen Mab on the rampage again. He saw himself on stage, surrounded by the cast, all haranguing him in OP. And every one of them had my face!"

The Monument - Colleen Wagner. Finborough Theatre, May 2003

I fell in love with this play; it's a heartrending tale of a young soldier who has been convicted of war crimes.  I was totally absorbed by the tale of a soldier following orders and becoming a scapegoat for his crimes. Even more compelling was that his rescuer is a woman from the side he fought against, but what he doesn't know is that she wants him freed because she thinks he knows the whereabouts of her missing daughter.

The play revolves around two characters, Stetko (Tom Burke) a nineteen year old soldier, and Mejra (Marella Oppenheim) a 50 year old woman. Stetko is strapped to an electric chair. He is reminiscing about his past, the acts of rape he committed and why he was compelled to do so. The scene has been set, we know who he is and why he is there, and then Mejra enters. Stetko believes she is his executioner, when in reality she could be his salvation. Mejra tells him he can be released on the condition that for the rest of his life he will do as she says.

It is quite interesting that this condition has been put to him. He is only in this situation because he has carried out the orders of others in his past; their orders led to his destruction, these orders may lead to his redemption. Stetko believes he has nothing to lose by leaving with Mejra, however in reality he has just become her prisoner, she sets him to hard labour and carries out beatings, making him subservient.

Stetko was a yobbish soldier, one who found it easier to rape and kill women rather disobey orders. He acts like a child cowering and covering his ears so he can't hear Mejra stating that his girlfriend was raped and murdered with all those other girls he knew about. He doesn't want to face the truth, he can't handle it but Mejra makes him face his past, to remember what he has done and to whom, to ensure he visualises their faces.

The themes generated in the play are graphic and distressing and you do feel drained by the end of it; but the play is beautifully written, and there are genuine moments of tenderness shown between Stetko and Mejra. It is gripping and opens up the debate of man's inhumanity in the time of war. It shows the misery of war, that no-one is ever a winner, there are losers on both sides and there is no justice for anyone.

It was a powerful and gripping play and one I would really like to have seen being performed.

Gertrude The Cry - Howard Barker. Riverside Studio's, London October 2002

Barker has written a play based on some of the familiar figures we meet in Shakespeare's Hamlet. Mother, uncle and son from Shakespeare's play are joined by several new characters, and this play examines the love between Gertrude and Claudius, and the tangled web of love, morality and death.

King Hamlet is murdered by Claudius, poison is poured into his ear, but the King does not die without bearing witness to his wife and brother having sex before him. The King dies and Queen Gertrude cries out with an ecstatic orgasmic sob. The play examines this, and the sincerity of Gertrude in orgasm, as Claudius longs to witness this heartfelt sobbing cry again.

Hamlet (Tom Burke) is unable to mourn his father's death. He acts as an inquisitor, questioning the moral conduct of his mother and uncle, however as Hamlet has embraced madness, he is not in a fit state to be able to offer any firm advice. Indeed, Hamlet's own morality is questionable as he marries a character called Ragusa whom he despises. She again has a questionable moral conduct, because despite being Hamlet's wife, she proceeds to have an affair with her husband's best friend, Albert. Whilst Ragusa declares it is impossible to be able to love Hamlet, her mother-in-law, Gertrude, also succeeds in seducing Albert.

Hamlet is disgusted by the behaviour of Ragusa and Albert, and that of Gertrude and Claudius, but no character is willing to show any contrition about their behaviour which leaves Hamlet despairing the immorality all around him. He is confused, he does not understand what is happening around him, but believes everyone else is conversant of what is going on and as he becomes aware of what schemes have been planned, he ultimately succumbs to his fate.

This is an enjoyable black comedy of catastrophic and erotic behaviours, questioning the integrity of people and how jealousy can lead to corrupt and sinful activities. In Shakespeare's Hamlet, we don't really know out much about Gertrude. Throughout this play, Gertrude explores the elements of her sexuality, it is seen as a normal thing for a woman to do, and as a woman she is very much in control.

The play explores why Gertrude may have wished to collude with someone for her husbands murder, a theme missing from Hamlet, but we see answers through the eyes of the vivid and colourful imagination of Howard Barker.