'Waste' at the National Theatre

Last week we went to see 'Waste' at the National Theatre, an Edwardian play by Harley Granville Barker. I've only seen one of his other plays ('The Voysey Inheritance', also at the National) so I was quite keen to see this.

It's a tale of politics and intrigue that was banned at the time. It's about the old boys network and covering things up for one another until that's no longer possible. Political needs and public decency and how far you can stretch "the truth", particularly under a Conservative government and a well connected Prime Minister with a bill he needs to be taken through Parliament by an up and coming younger politician.

Unfortunately, that younger politician has an affair with the former wife of an Irish rebel and she become pregnant. In a tough scene she goes to him to tell him her news and her intention to have an abortion which sadly kills her. If word gets out that he was the father then his career - and the bill - will be destroyed. We see the scheming to keep it secret but word gets out and he commits suicide. And that is the 'waste' of the title - drummed in, just in case you don't get it, by a waste bin lying on its side for the bows by the cast at the end.

But, you know what? I didn't really like it. Sorry Harley, but there were just too many words, too many long, long speeches and an absence of any warmth or compassion. The set didn't help either, with a very bare stage for most of the time, with only a chair or a bench and acres of cold space trying to be stylish with sliding panels making for an interesting sight but visually cold. That's not to say that there weren't any good performances, there were. But the text and the staging put me right off quite early on in the play and I could never quite get into it. I quite liked the scene with the scheming politicians all looking after their own factions of the party and thought that was quite realistic but ultimately 'so what?'. Why should I care about these rich and privileged schemers? There's nothing in the play to make me want to care.

I think, ultimately, that was the problem I had with the play - there was nothing to make me care about the characters or the unfolding story. Where was the scene to make me admire the young politician, to make me care about him and his cause as set out in his bill? There wasn't one or if there was it was too subtle for me. The only warmth in the play was from his sister when she tried to give him hope in the middle of the night when she knew he was contemplating suicide to avoid the scandal. That was a nice performance by Sylvestra Le Touzel but too little and too late.

I should also name-check Charles Edwards as our 'wasted' politician without a future, if only for memorising all those words. And there were so many of them. He gave a nice performance but ultimately left me cold and with little thought for the character. Who cares about him? Certainly not me.

Of course, there's more waste in this play than just the politician. His one-time lover and her unborn baby, his sister's life that is shattered and tattered, frayed by the publicity - other people suffer too. At the end the politician's secretary came on to tell the sister that he'll continue her brothers' brave fight and will never give up, some emotion (at last) resulting from the effect the politician can have on other people. But again, too late.

Sorry Harley and sorry National Theatre, but this one's not for me.

'Richard II' at Shakespeare's Globe

Last week we went to see 'Richard II' at The Globe and luckily the rain held off but there was still the inevitable helicopter sweeping low and drowning out some of the speeches. I've not seen 'Richard II' before so it was nice to finally see it and see it at The Globe.

It opens with priests coming on stage as the audience is still arriving, swinging incense and lighting candles ready for the coronoation of the boy-king Richard who soon leaves the stage to be replaced by the man-king. Richard is the annointed of God, the rightful heir and ruler of England. He doesn't have to fight for the throne, it's his by right, and that's how he rules. He gets whatever he wants and that turns him into a spoilt brat and not a very nice person. He has his sycophants that crawl around him and he has his ardent followers. Two of these, Mowbray and Bolingbroke accuse each other of treason and seek their king's permission to duel and bare the proof of their accusations on their bodies. The king refuses and exiles both of them.

Shortly afterwards, John of Gaunt, one of the king's advisers and uncles (and Bolingbroke's father) falls ill and dies, and the king takes all his lands and possessions to fund a new campaign against those pesky Irish. As the king leaves so does Bolingbroke re-appear demanding his inheritance and birth-right and gathers the nobles to his cause and against the king and so the king is overthrown and Bolingbroke takes the crown and becomes Henry IV. Richard is imprisoned and, hearing Henry say he wishes his problems would go away, he is slain in prison in a final fight. Henry rebukes the lords who did this but the scene is set for his own tragedy.

It's quite fast paced and zips along from scene to scene and the narrative is easy to follow as we see Richard come to more fervently believe in his own divine right to rule and his decisions becoming more erratic and hurtful to those he should love so that even the uncle of his queen sides with Bolingbroke. He floats round the stage in his long, flowing white and golden robes marking him out a s creature distinct from the soldiers and courtiers and towards the end his robes become greyer and less graceful. We're witnessing the downfall of a king. He's pragmatic enough - and not at all stupid - to be able to see the end coming but doesn't know what to do. How do you fend off a rebellion when you have no army?

It's a really good production of the kind I've come to expect from the Globe and once again the stage has been changed to make it unique to this production. I loved the burnished gold of the walls and columns, all very regal and other worldly. The costumes were great and I loved the minimalist brass band that came on every now and then for a quick blast. Charles Edwards was great as Richard, careless and carefree and knowing his every whim will be catered to until the end.David Sturzaker was arresting as Bolingbroke, grabbing every eye when he was on stage, just as he did with his charm in 'Merchant of Venice' earlier this year. I will also give a shout out to William Gaunt as John of Gaunt - William used to a Champion in the 1960s and still retains his mesmerising powers. He gets the most beautiful speech when, on his deathbed, he prophesies the end to the dream of the glories of Olde England when he talks about:

This royal throne of kings, this scepter'd isle,

This earth of majesty, this seat of Mars,

This other Eden, demi-paradise,

This fortress built by Nature for herself

Against infection and the hand of war,

This happy breed of men, this little world,

This precious stone set in the silver sea,

Which serves it in the office of a wall,

Or as a moat defensive to a house,

Against the envy of less happier lands,

This blessed plot, this earth, this realm, this England.

It fair brings a lump to the throat - that wily old poet knew what he was doing with those words.

There is some lovely poetry in this play but, for me, some of it was missed by the over-long speeches, particularly by Richard. Sometimes less is more. But it's a grand production so go along and see it if you can.

'Blithe Spirit' at the Gielgud Theatre

Have you been to see 'Blithe Spirit' with Angela Lansbury yet? No? What on earth are you waiting for? Scoot on over to the Gielgud Theatre as quick as your legs (and public transport) can carry you and get prepared for some big ole laughs, chortles and general jolliment. Yes, I enjoyed it - I even laughed out loud!

Miss Lansbury hasn't played in the West End for decades so that alone makes this worth seeing and she is well worth seeing. We managed to get tickets in the sixth row right in the middle so had an excellent view of the proceedings. I've never seen this play on stage but saw the film years ago so, although not terribly familiar with it, am reasonably aware of the central plot. Having said that, I totally forgot the surprise ending so won't spoil it for you.

It's the tale of a writer and his wife (Charles Edwards and Janie Dee) who live in a nice country house with the requisite servants for the late 1930s. They're hosting a small dinner party after which the local medium (Angela Lansbury) has been invited to demonstrate her powers. Unbeknown to her, he's going to write a book about a fraudulent medium so wants some first hand observations to include in the book. She accidentally summons the ghost of his first wife (Jemima Rooper) who only he can see or hear which leads to all sorts of confusion and mayhem. Then the medium is invited back to try to undo her work... and that's where it gets complicated.

I don't know why I'm always so surprised when I enjoy a Noel Coward play but I am. I should have learned by now really. There are the usual witty exchanges between characters who are all terribly urbane and worldly, of course, as well as some more knock about fun when the ghost appears and vases start floating in the air. It's all really good fun and a well constructed play with a nice set of a country drawing room with comfy-looking furniture and big curtains just waiting to billow in the ghostly breeze.

Janie Dee (who I saw a couple of months ago in a Sondheim show at the St James's Theatre) was on top form with an accent that wouldn't just cut glass, it could easily cut a diamond or two. Her timing was excellent as she milked every scene for every laugh as she swished around in her evening dress and day-time skirts. She looked right in character and would fit into a 1930s drawing room effortlessly. Charles Edwards was also good but a little restrained next to the perfect pitch of Janie. She also out-acted Jemima Rooper who was flouncy and pouty throughout - her character as the ghost of the first wife, obviously - but Jemima didn't quite stand up against the rest of the cast.

It was also nice to see the rather portly Simon Jones as the Doctor. To me, of course, he will always be Arthur Dent in his dressing gown in the TV series of 'Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy'. Nice to see him again.

Angela Lansbury was, of course, terrific as the dotty medium with her over the top wardrobe and facial expressions. She's played this role before of course (and I don't mean on Broadway) when she played the drunken writer of salacious novels in the film 'Death on the Nile'. This was Angela having fun and enjoying herself going slightly over the top in a role in which she'd not only allowed to go over the top but is positively encouraged to do so. Whether going into a trance or talking to thin air thinking she's talking to the ghost who's actually behind her, she did it all with great comic timing and cheeky sparkle. She knows she's over the top and is sharing the joke with us. She's a delight!

I'd forgotten about the ending so won't spoil it for you if you plan to go - and you should.  It's a great production with a lavish set and costumes, all designed to entertain. A nice touch when the final curtain went down was to project a portrait of Noel Coward onto the  curtain as we all left. Well done whoever thought of that.

An added bonus was that I was definitely in the younger half of the audience on the night. Some old-time fans of Miss Lansbury were obviously out in force to see her again, such as the white haired geezer behind me who laughed every time she raised an eyebrow. Now that's loyalty.