|
|
|
|
|
|
Stars explained: * A production of no real merit
with failings in all areas. ** A production showing evidence of not
enough time or effort, or even talent, and which never breathes any real
life into the piece – or a show lumbered with a terrible script. *** A
good enjoyable show which might have some small flaws but has largely
achieved what it set out to do.**** An excellent show which shows a
great deal of work and stage craft with no noticeable or major
flaws.***** A four star show which has found that extra bit of magic
which lifts theatre to another plane. |
|
|
A not so elementary tale
In rehearsal: Matt Ludlum as George Edalji (left) and Sir Arthur Conan Doyle played by Scott Bradley Arthur and George
Hall Green Little Theatre
**** IT WOULD seem a good idea in terms of copyright, that if you cannot create a new work by a famous fictional character, then the next best thing is to build one around the author in the same style. That’s pretty much sums up the approach of Julian Barnes's novel ,Arthur and George, that is based on the real life events of Sir Arthur Conan Doyle working to correct an injustice and unravel the local mystery of George Edalji. Edalji was imprisoned in 1903 for
mutilating livestock and was a respected Birmingham solicitor so the
story clearly has something of a strong local interest. Enter then, David Edgar, whose adaption, first
staged in 2010 by Birmingham Rep, drew criticism that seemed to
concentrate on the comparisons of the book and play. Four years on this
seems something of a mistake as Hall Green Little Theatre delivers the
play in their studio space and shows that it stands alone without
comparison. The play works through a series flashbacks.
Edalji was the son of a Parsee-born vicar with a Scottish mother. He was
accused and sentenced, suspected of being part of the Great Wyrley gang
and playing an active part of their cattle mutilation. After what seems
like a series of unsubstantiated prejudices he is sent to prison for
seven years. He served three years before approaching Conan Doyle who
believes him to be innocent and in a very Sherlock Holmes manner, sets
to finding out the true culprits. The play, directed by Margaret Whitehouse, which
works through a series co-ordinated flashbacks began a bit shakily but
once Scott Bradley playing Doyle got into his stride his confident and
engaging performance seemed to lift the entire preceding’s . This was
again strengthened by Katherine Williams as Jean Leckie, Doyle’s new
love interest following the death of his wife. Both Williams and Bradly
have completed some formal drama training, which is rare amongst amateur
companies, and this was clearly evident as both were excellent in their
respective roles. Another trained actor is Eden Voss as Anson, the
legal counsel for Edalji, who with Bradley delivered a sharp and very
convincing scene that explores Doyle’s fanaticism as an amateur sleuth
and Anson’s view of the cold facts and suggested conclusions in the eyes
of the law. Matt Ludlum played George and at times was a
little unsure of his character but even though not appearing at all
Asian he does bear something of a resemblance to the real Edalji Nice supporting roles came too from Kalpana
Vaughn Wilson who played as Maud Edaljis’ sister with Darren Summerhill
as Woodie, Doyles sort of surrogate Dr Watson. Skillfully playing three roles was David Edgar,
(not the writer,incidentally) as Cambell, Butter and Greatorex
respectively and he managed a range of accents from Black Country to
West Country with the Queen’s English in the middle. It’s surprising that this complex play of Law and
racial prejudice has taken this long to resurface again as it is
certainly topical and the complexity of the issues certainly creates a
great deal of discussion and thought. Added to that is the fact that this is based on a
Birmingham story it makes the association with Conan Doyle and Sherlock
Holmes a great deal more than just a `Brummie whodunit. ‘To 21-06-14. Jeff Grant
1 |
|
|
|
