
Chronicling the 1960s and 70s in the North East of England, London and what was to become Zimbabwe, Our Friends in the North charts a devastating defeat of left wing aspirations in the face of political and personal corruption. The story is predominantly told through the experiences of Tosker, Mary, Geordie and Nicky, four young people from Newcastle whose lives take very different paths. The 1990s TV version of Peter Flanery’s play was magnificent and the actors, including Daniel Craig and Christopher Eccleston, really made the characters their own, so my hat goes off to the brave individuals who decided to resurrect the story. Actors Tony Neilson and Tracey Wilkinson, who appeared in the TV series, provide a nice link between the two productions.
The ambitions of director Erica Whyman were certainly epic, in choosing to use 14 actors to play 43 characters across 17 years (!). The play has been rewritten and revised, with one of the characters stepping out of his role to provide a commentary on events at the start and finish of the production. That it begins in the 60s and ends in 1979 – the year when Margaret Thatcher became Prime Minister – is apposite and symbolic of the erosion of left wing, socialist ideals. This is a play in which the self-serving actions of those in power infiltrate and impact upon the individual, leaving the working classes most vulnerable - embodied through Nicky’s disillusionment and especially the naïve, put upon Geordie. The multiple roles assumed by the cast weave this theme together and link what is ostensibly a disparate set of characters. The corrupt actions of local builders and MPs eventually filters through to characters like Tosker and Mary, who after suffering the squalid conditions of the initially celebrated cities in the sky, made to a cheap spec, eventually stoop to the same levels of bribery to ensure they can bring their child up in a suitable home. Nicky, wanting to emulate and better his socialist father Felix, eventually sees through the machinations of local politicians and ironically becomes ‘apolitical’ despite maligning Geordie for being such at the start of the play. The death of Felix at the end of the play is enormously symbolic as we see socialist principles fall by the wayside and the working class Tosker criticise the ‘greedy’ trade unions at Felix’s funeral - the self-seeking attitude he adopts would characterise the decade to follow.
The subplot involving the Rhodesian Bush War illustrates in converse the dangers of political idealism and shows how this in itself can become warped, through the character of Joseph, a ‘Rhodesian’ who, treated like an animal by his employers, eventually becomes an extremist fighting the white government and involving himself in a war where both sides use increasingly bloody tactics. A clever use of lighting and improvisation of a realist-cum-minimal set design helps to distinguish England from Zimbabwe in a very evocative way. The statement being made here, about the UK’s complicated involvement with events in the country, is interesting and bears no small resemblance to that involving the UK and Afghanistan.
This play tackles generational conflicts through Felix and Nicky and seems to advocate that we should learn from the past – a significant message given current disillusionment with ‘new’ Labour politics and the eradication of a polarised politics as depicted through Donoghue’s reminiscing about ‘soapbox’ oratory. It also seems to address the North/South divide and for me illustrates that it hasn’t gone away totally – there is still something transgressive about hearing regional accents in the theatre and this shouldn’t be the case. The dialogue is one of the play’s strengths; by contrasting straight talking honesty with corrupt twisting of the truth and omissions, the struggle each character experiences is depicted effectively through a powerful script.
The highlights of the play were the scenes in Zimbabwe and the struggle between the moralistic cop Roy Johnson and the wholesale corruption through the Metropolitan Police – all actors in these scenes gave powerful and mesmerising performances; in particular, Paul McLeary was excellent as Roy Johnson. I must also mention Neil Phillips in the role of Donoghue, who gave a nuanced and mannered performance which totally captured a complex man as flawed as he was appealing – you could really see why Nicky would be attracted to him. However, despite an extremely impressive performance in the second Act, Craig Conway’s initial portrayal of Geordie was a little off the mark – he seemed to play Geordie’s naivety as mental deficiency in the first half, which undermined the power of Geordie’s character change by the play’s finale. There seemed a lack of subtlety to this volte-face which was a real shame as he was excellent as a man propelled forward by righteous indignation in the final scenes. There were also some rather dreadful stabs at South African accents which I will not go into further here …
On the whole this play was a thought-provoking and timely assessment of political ideals and the individual and an incredible example of many of the actors’ skills, as the audience saw them each take on multiple roles. I have focussed on the political slant of the play but there is also a warm humour and grace to many of the performances which makes each character seem like more than a vehicle for the themes the writers wanted to portray. It’s a very long play and tighter editing could have been employed, but generally I would commend this version of an epic, Shakespearean tale.
Recent Comments