Toast: The Other Palace London
July 15th 2019
I read the memoir on which this is based shortly after it came out and it had a wonderfully Proustian effect on me – as the author was growing up at exactly the time I was, the food references were enormously resonant and I kept on mentally exclaiming as I read ‘OMG I SO remember that taste/look/smell/packaging’ – this last incredibly important I think. It never crossed my mind that it would (or even could) be adapted for the stage.
But all kudos to Henry Filloux-Bennett who saw dramatic potential in this work. He has adapted it in a way that is both interestingly creative and at the same time very true to the original work – this combination of characteristics being the Holy Grail of stage and cinema adaptations I think. Love – no passion – for food was NS’s center as he grew up and provided the stability that his life at home did not have – losing an adored mother, the intrusion of a substitute, the battle between them – as much for his father’s focus and affection as it was a ‘food fight’ and his coming to terms with his sexuality. The absolute main focus of the book and the adaptation was the role that food played in NS’s life and how it was a form of therapy that helped him understand and come to terms with himself, is destiny, his personal home life etc. etc. It’s also interesting (and this is something that only seeing the stage adaptation made me realise) that while being wholly autobiographical everything centres on the home and the kitchen – no reference (unless I missed it) to school life which is such a large part of growing up. One other aspect of this adaptation which was somewhat different from the book was the dealing with his sexuality. In the book, as I recall, the only indication of this was in his noticing the young gardener at an age when he was not really sure why he was noticing that – and the upset (devastation?) he felt on suddenly finding out that he had left and a much older man had replaced him. His father was more aware than he realized. I think this was the only reference to this matter in the book and I think it was largely there not to say that he was gay but rather it was an early loss of something/someone loved (if that is the right word) and subsequently he had to deal with other, different and harsher losses throughout the book. In this adaptation, later on, this sexual theme was a little developed with his going to a location where he could see (or at least be aware of) of people having sex. It made for an amusing scene but I felt that it did not really fit in to the overall structure and brought an element in to the story that, for me, distracted from the main theme and ideas.
The one-set evocative kitchen was imaginatively used and I was surprised at how physically vigorous the production was – movement almost developing into dance was a very significant element, most powerfully in his dance with his mother on the kitchen surface. Much of the movement was stylized and choreographed – particularly the appearance of the cooking at various stages of its creation- an amusing nod to the ‘and here’s one I created earlier’ of TV cooking shows – or Blue Peter! Probably the most powerful element was the opening of the second part, immediately after his mother’s death where his father, rolling in emotional agony on the floor, was periodically illuminated by the harsh light from a fridge – magical and powerful staging. With these physical elements just mentioned, it would be interesting to see the script and whether much if not all of this was written in by the author or whether it came from rehearsal and the input of director and choreographer – a question that has often intrigued me with modern dramas. Not an issue in Shakespeare as you know you have simply the spoken words and indications of entrances and exits.
Giles Cooper made an effective Nigel – he made a decent attempt as an adult at playing a child/young person (always tricky and very rarely is it done as successfully as in Dennis Potter’s play Blue Remembered Hills in the original BBC performance) and Lizzie Muncey was very touching as the painfully resilient Mother. Stephen Ventura gave an effective performance as father although at times he seemed to veer a little towards a cartoonish approach – and this I found much more noticeable in the performance of Marie Lawrence as Joan – I felt the character deserved a slightly more serious approach and too often it was a performance being played very broadly for laughs.
But anyway a superb evening and it is gratifying that something a bit more radical and edgy (as opposed to the staging of films) is a great success on the stage. I wonder what the author will be writing next…