★★★★★
Five Stars
Three chairs, three sets of overalls and a blank space… My pupils also rolled into the cynical depths of my theatrically weary eye sockets. I bet even now you are also savoring the pleasure of a self-satisfied sigh; what a luxury it is of knowing that one’s prejudices have been confirmed (yet again!). Yes, I agree, it sounds like yet another entry into that lengthy catalogue of pretentious student drama at Oxford. But allow me the luxury of a cliché when I say – this one is a bit different.
For one it is directed by theatre luminary Jack Clover whose piece Beachcombing was one of the most impressive pieces of new writing last year. Ever since he won drama cuppers last year, Clover has deservedly been one of the big names on the drama circuit. It explains the second reason why If Alice is a bit different. Clover has been able to call upon the expertise of ex OUDS president Aofi Cantrill, Revue co-president Georgia Bruce and Zennor playwright Lamorna Ash. Basically the thesp A-team if ever there was one.
The play is constructed from a series of loose episodes that contrast the everyday life of Alice with the futures and outcomes she could have had. These fragmentary glimpses establish that Alice is in a mediocre relationship with a domestically challenged Iron Maiden fan and that she suffers regrets about not pursuing her full potential at university. Her dissatisfactions are understandably taken out on Mr Iron Maiden when they have an argument one night. As we gradually learn more about the banality and pettiness that characterizes her life, we see a series of stylized interludes in which Alice listens to a voicemail from her boyfriend the morning after their argument. These interludes are set to ‘be my baby’ by the Ronnets and the music becomes more distorted with each successive interludes. They give an undefined sense of escalation that makes sense in light of the eventual meaning the voicemail will have.
Like Beachcombing, If Alice… has a very distinct tone. Unremarkable people talk about a lot of very unremarkable things and Clover plunges us into this world of uniform unremarkable(ness). But he allows us to learn the codes and patterns that betray the meanings behind the unremarkable signifiers of his characters’ lives. Jay cloths for example initially come up as a side detail, but as we see by the end (without wishing to spoil the end) Jay cloths mean rather a lot. This love and attention for banality is part of what made both productions distinctive. It is what gives them a very comfortable almost homey feel. Its very hard to describe, but its definitely there. There is very little pretension about any of it.
Yet the superficial modesty of the proceedings, belies the enormous skill required to pull it of. It is very hard to make the unremarkable interesting and compelling. Georgia Bruce’s versatility allows her to create a character that is interesting and sympathetic despite the fact she plays a character distinguished by being totally undistinguished. Cantril and Ash likewise do a tremendous job in switching between diverse characters in a variety of styles, often moving between stylization and naturalism with great ease. Were it not for the dynamism that their role swapping brings, the play would be as grey, dull and mediocre as the people it portrays.
The play is however far from sharing the greyness of its character’s lives. Rather it makes for an extremely captivating, engrossing and compelling story. All of this of course would be impossible were it not for a script that cherishes the details of everyday life and gives them a sense of value all of their own. This again would not however be enough. Clover’s confident directorial voice tells the story with the necessary control and moderation that the script demands and were it not for this, the production would not convincingly come together.
So all in all we’re talking about a production with some very impressive and well-oiled parts. Yet my one complaint is the same I had with Beachcombing. It does not feel as if there is much of a summation of these excellent parts. It does not feel to me as if we are being offered much more than a story (or the suggestion of a story). This is perhaps an unfair criticism, for it is totally vague in defining what more is left to do. And yet I feel something is still ever so slightly lacking. I’ll stop there before you role your eyes again. But do go and watch and see what feeling the play leaves you with. I have a feeling it will be one of this term’s most worthwhile productions.
