I have seen several good and bad Lears in my time and never a non-professional version so I was slightly apprehensive and yet, knowing a great deal of the cast's previous work, intrigued. But for the most part I was extremely impressed.

For the few who don't know the story, in a nutshell ….
King Lear decides to divide up his Kingdom to spend his retirement between his three daughters with all pomp and no responsibility. However, the youngest and favourite, Cordelia, refuses to merely flatter him with lies as Goneril and Regan do. She is disinherited and banished, as is the Duke of Kent because he dares to differ, but he disguises himself as a servant and continues to watch over the King.
The Duke of Gloucester's bastard son Edmund lies about his brother Edgar to get in his father's good graces and Edgar runs off to hide in the woods pretending to be a mad man called Poor Tom. When Lear is chased out of both his daughters' homes and the Duke of Gloucester has his eyes gouged out for attempting to aid the King and Cordelia, all the wronged good guys meet on the heath with the two old men being helped by those they've chased out.
Needless to say all the baddies get their comeuppance, some of the good die and everyone else learns from the lessons and makes a new start.

It is a notoriously difficult play to do and not just because it calls for at least two older actors as Lear and Gloucester, to work very hard both physically and mentally. It has often been stated in various interviews and books that the big conundrum for modern productions of the play is that to be old enough for the role both in age and maturity, means you may be too old to manage it. Even Brian Blessed had to retire from a recent production due to ill health.

The set design by Michael Bettell was very simple, yet stunning and effective. The ornate 'wooden' throne on a set of steps created a strong focal point, as, after all, the throne is the valued prize throughout the entire play. It also created seating and levels so that only two other chairs were used, easily moved by 'soldiers' to wherever they were required. I did love the idea that everyone who wished for the throne and its power, sat it in at one point. For this reason in retrospect I was disappointed that Albany (Greg Robins) sat on it, however I suppose we were to speculate on whether or not he was a 'good guy' until the end.

However, I realise it was 'sculpted' to resemble a tree but I still didn't feel it worked as well for the outdoor scenes. I almost expected it to turn around or move slightly and enable the black space behind to be Poor Tom's cave. This is not the fault of the designer but the run-up areas from either of the Teatro Technis' off-stage entrances could also have been used more effectively. Using the physical doors when coming to or from the heath scenes rather broke the illusion of being outdoors, defeating the sterling work the actors did in these scenes, especially when you could see Gloucester stop and remove his bandage from his eyes before the doors closed behind him.

The script was cut down to approximately an hour each side of an interval which was excellent. I didn't even miss the explanation of Kent's (Ian Recordon) disguise to the other characters by Edgar at the end. The only part which actually stood out as missing, for me, was the scene where the King of France proposes marriage to the disinherited Cordelia (Hannah van der Westhusen), as it explains why Cordelia is in France and leading the French Army (quite literally with sword ably wielded). Also, it was not really clear why Edgar (Adam Hampton-Matthews) suddenly appears to be made King and sitting in the throne. I thought perhaps there was another cut here, but I have checked and there was nothing which really explains this. It was a nice idea by the director to put Edgar 'the good', on the throne but slightly jarring. I was with someone who did not know the play, who found these leaps a bit confusing and I am slightly concerned as the French tour does play greatly to school children and confusion can lead to disinterest in a younger audience.

However, there is plenty to grab their attention especially at the end with a spectacular fight scene choreographed by Lindsay Royan and Richard Kirby. Hats off to the members of the company, male and female, who were involved as I know how much practice and effort those take especially in such a small space. Along the way there is a fight with Oswald and of course the gouging out of Gloucester's eyes. Well done to John Morton (Gloucester) and Michael Mayne (Cornwall). This scene, especially in such a small space, can be overdone to either extreme squeamishness or unintentional comedy and I felt the director, Martin Mulgrew, and his actors managed to find the exact middle ground.

I did feel the 'bad' characters were slightly one-sided in that you knew they were bad from the moment they entered, especially Edmund (Joseph Burke), Goneril (Jill Ruane) and Regan (Haidee Elise) with lots of deep dark looks and squinting eyes. I would have preferred to have seen a slower burn, as the greed for power, wealth and indeed lust, poisoned them. I would have liked to have seen, as well, more of a relationship whether good or bad or merely for show between the two daughters and their husbands, other than the husbands standing dutifully behind their wives' chairs. This way, the greed and whiff of lust would have been seen to poison these relationships as well rather than just be told it with the words. This all said though, I did love the moment when Albany and Cornwall kneel in front of the King, facing each other, heads bowed. The sneaky looks at the map as it was divided were lovely and the look Cornwall glanced up to Albany as he received his portion was delightfully deadly. I did note as well the first notice of Edmund, especially by Regan, but this would have been even more special if there had been any affection or even rejection of it between her and her husband. But I am also aware that with a large cast to corral and lot of lines to learn, nuances can be missed. Perhaps the luxury of another week to prepare and another week to perform will give the actors more time to 'play'.

I must point out some wonderful performances and moments. As previously said, Lear is a tough role and Robert Pennant Jones was powerful and heart-breaking in equal measures. Some of his lines may not always have been exact but he was ably supported by a strong ensemble company. He was powerful at the beginning with just a whiff of coming frailty and petulant and playful when the madness struck.

Ian Recordon as Kent was, as always, strong and watchable even though much of what makes this character so interesting was cut for expediency. The scene in the stocks especially though pulled out whatever comedy could be found and was all the more welcome for it. The double act he created with Tom Salyers as the Fool was lovely. The Fool is often played either sombre or silly and often makes little sense because the actors and directors don't quite understand him. However, this time I actually understood much more of what he was saying and the relationship he and Lear had was very touching, although I got the impression that even the Fool knew he was expendable and grew slightly frightened of Lear's growing madness. This added a dimension I had never seen before.

I also liked very much the idea of Edgar being a bit of a nerd in glasses with a book in hand completely unprepared for the life he is forced into. It made his generosity and kindness to both the king and to his father and even later to his brother, even more poignant. The relationship he created with the Fool was also very sweet. In fact, I felt this was a very knowing Fool not easily fooled by disguises.

The two smaller roles of Oswald; looking like everyone else smelled bad, and the Doctor; full of tender concern, were ably handled by Richard Pedersen and Peter Novis.

I was very impressed by the cohesion and 'ensemble-ness' of the company and production. The 'chorus' of soldiers (Ben Belbin, Fred Janaway, Samuel Macqueen and Amy Wackett) worked well in all of their guises and created stories behind the scenes, rather than just standing about listening and looking out of place as so often happens. They certainly got their moment in the sword fight at the end which looked wonderful, especially as said before, in such a small space with men and women fighting together and against each other. It was always well balanced and believable.

The costumes by Lea Tunesi and others were well done with very small and quick changes to tell us who was who and setting us in a non-specific time without looking jumbled or odd. Lighting by Stephen Ley and sound by Laurence Tuerk added perfectly to the sparse set, letting us know where and when we were.

So, other than a few niggles, I did enjoy the production and heartily recommended it. Well done all and good luck in Paris.

Photography by Ruth Anthony