Oxford's oldest student newspaper

Independent since 1920

Review: Top Girls

Perhaps it isn’t an easy thing to concoct a play that establishes, portrays and executes a culture of emerging feminism, draped with other leading ladies who have their own reasons for being proud of what they have done and ending with chilling sacrifice.  But the director, Max Stafford-Clark who directed both the premiere and this revival, has succeeded in reminding us why this play is a theatre classic.    

On entering, the eye was initially drawn to a fine looking dining table with the words ‘La Prima Donna’ shining out at the top – a herald of what we are about to experience.  What I enjoyed so much about the staging in general was its vibrancy and the efficacy with which it was produced.  Physical nuance was ever present. 

I was reminded, on more than one occasion, of ITV’s Loose Women, each with their constant babbling and seemingly inherent inability to listen to each other, ending in what might be described as a female equivalent of last term’s POSH.  These women are confident, loyal, clever, but not everyone was strong, which was highlighted by Marlene, perhaps typifying what woman had become by 1982. We imagine, therefore, that she is perfect by virtue of the fact that she is not like other women.  But as the play goes on, this pillar of a woman, Churchill appears to be trying to destroy before the very eyes of the audience.  And what is fascinating about it is that it is never quite clear if she succeeds or not. 

For the most part the acting, costumes and timing were good, but it took some time for them to warm up; in the first act, faces weren’t quite expressive enough and in the other two acts, accents (with one shining exception)  wobble a little bit.  The actors hold themselves well on stage, each personifying a different female nature with varied and distinguished features.  The changes that these women (or actors) have to go through is challenging, yet none shirked from giving it her all.

And now a trivial, yet curious thing – there are two intervals, which produced some confusion for some who left the theatre without realising the lack of applause.  Unless, of course, I’ve got it entirely wrong and a relatively high percentage people left due to offensive behaviour (of which there is almost none), parking tickets (but it was after 6pm) or boredom (I’ve never spent two and a bit hours so grossly absorbed).  So be warned.    

The content of the play really made me think – I found myself rooting for Marlene in adversity and, almost, weeping for any in grief.  Yet, despite an insistence on still being relevant today, I don’t think that’s quite true; Churchill captures a unique moment in history, an extraordinary zeitgeist, but one that seems almost comically dated today.  But I think that nonetheless ‘at what cost’ should be the question asked by everyone considering it.    

 

4 stars

Check out our other content

Most Popular Articles