Interview

Had you tackled any Shakespeare before doing this play?
I'm probably the least qualified director in London to take on this play were simply knowledge and understanding of how to approach Shakespeare prerequisites for the job. I have a love/hate relationship with Shakespeare as it is: I love the tragedies with a passion yet place the romantic comedies one tiny step above musical theatre. Happily, I'm quite a history buff and slave to good comedy -and making people laugh. Thankfully the latter is the main essential ingredient for the director of this play. In truth, a deep understanding of Curtis & Elton is much more important in this instance than of Shakespeare or history.

What attracted you to this piece?
It's funny! If it weren't, there'd be no point in doing it. I've actually no more interest in who really wrote the Bard's works than I have with who really composed Eleanor Rigby: that they exist is all that really matters. What drives me as a director are definite audience responses to any play I'm producing/directing. I'm not a fan of 'thoughtful' theatre where the audience aren't taken on a ride of some description. I've seen too many solid shows where I find myself in the bar having almost forgotten the play halfway down my first Guinness. What's the point? My main aim is to have audiences thrilled, repulsed, angry, delighted or terrified -or in this case roaring with laughter. Hopefully.

What are the main technical challenges posed by the production?
Casting. Without a doubt -the casting. We spent almost two full weeks trying to find the right actors who had the weight, ability, timing and the total lack of fear with making themselves look ridiculous. If Kim Moakes (Assistant Director) and I have succeeded above all things then it's with our cast. Directors are notoriously biased with their actors, I know, but in this instance I'm once again in love with the lot of them.
Then there's the small matter of comedy...a huge challenge in itself. When you also have a comedy that has, front and centre, flesh and blood historical giants such as Shakespeare, Marlowe, Johnson et al. -as well as making the bold assertion that Shakespeare was an utter dolt who could barely write -the challenge is to balance truth with high farce. This has been my single biggest care of duty to the play. Lastly, the other single biggest challenge -if you could call it a challenge -that my fellow director, Kim Moakes and I, faced was to find the comedy 'in the gaps' of the play -to physicalize absurdity, create events that do not exist in the script and to draw out of three dimensional characters, with a heart and soul, utter ridiculousness. But that's been the best thing about directing this piece and one that has turned out to be an incredible collaborative joy.


How do you expect audiences will receive the play?
I hope they laugh. A lot. If they don't then it's back to terrifying the life out of them. So you've all been warned...