|
Brochure Copy: Stephen Joseph Theatre In The Round,
Scarborough, 1982 (directed by Alan Ayckbourn)
Have you ever reflected how those tiny
decisions we make every day of our lives – (Shall I take a raincoat today?)
can often require us to make further small decisions (Should I shelter in
this doorway?), that lead to larger decisions (Shall I accept this
stranger’s offer of a drink?) which then demand a really big decision
(Should we see each other again?), forcing you into those vast decisions
(Shall we share our lives together?), that finally lead to the truly
monumental decisions (Is it time we called it a day?)
Programme Note: Stephen Joseph Theatre In The Round,
Scarborough, 1982 (directed by Alan Ayckbourn)
At the very start of Intimate Exchanges,
a woman is faced with a small, fairly trivial decision. Should she resist
having that first cigarette of the day before 6.00am.
On some nights, her willpower is strong enough; on others it isn’t.
The two quite separate chain of events that result from her choice lead, by
the end of scene one, to another character making two further decisions,
this time of a slightly more important nature. Just before the interval two
more choices, more crucial still, are to be made. Finally, preceding the
fourth and final scene, another two major courses of action remain to be
chosen by the characters.
What you will see tonight then, is a single strand of a much larger web of
interconnecting alternative scenes.
Each evening is intended to be complete in itself although it will, of
course, be only ever one version of what might have happened if ...
I hope curiosity will bring you back to see some of the other 'ifs'.
None of the performances are random and the box office has a reasonably
advanced schedule of what will be playing when.
As the summer progresses, more and more versions will be entering the
repertoire and the choice will get wider. Simple mathematics will tell you
that there are over 30 scenes to be staged in all and that finally there
will be 16 versions, some vastly different, some only slightly so.
The chart overleaf will explain things more clearly and - if you're in any
doubt-the display board in the bar will tell you what particular strand
you'll be seeing or have seen tonight.
How fast the whole project comes together will depend on the reserves of
stamina of all of us - in particular the brave and remarkable cast of two
whom I particularly wish to thank for agreeing to take part in this piece of
theatrical lunacy.
Programme Note: Unknown production, 1986
Those with good theatre memories may recall
a play of mine, a few years ago, entitled Sisterly Feelings. It was
the tale of two sisters and depended on the toss of a coin and,
subsequently, the choice that each of them made onstage during any one
performance as to how the story unfolded. It was, in retrospect, a trial
sprint, a mere warm-up over a few hundred metres. Intimate Exchanges, a few
years on, was to be the marathon version.
In 1983 [sic – this should be 1981], we at the Stephen Joseph Theatre (of
which I am, of course, director) had finished our Scarborough season with a
trip to Houston, Texas where we filled the Alley Theatre with several
thousand gallons of relatively untroubled water and performed Way
Upstream to bemused oil men. When we returned, it was with a reduced
acting company of two. The rest had collapsed exhausted or wandered further
south and crossed the Mexico border, not to be heard of again for several
months.
This seemed the perfect time to pursue an idea that had been haunting me
ever since Sisterly Feelings, namely to write a large scale multi-ended opus in which
choices genuinely lead to other choices in an increasing proliferation -
one, two, four, eight, sixteen and so on. It was intended not merely as a
vast gimmick, but to pursue a theory that I had long held that the tiny,
often careless choices we make in our lives can lead to vast consequences.
In Intimate Exchanges, during the overall canon, depending on whether
or not Celia Teasdale decides to have a cigarette in the first five seconds,
several people are divorced, start affairs, have children together, die, and
even, very occasionally, live happily ever after.
It proved a far bigger task than even I had envisaged. Originally, we had
planned, the two actors - Lavinia Bertram and Robin Herford - and myself, to
open all the plays over the course of the 1983 [sic – this should be 1982]
summer months. By the time we started rehearsals in May, I had three
versions completed, another nearly so; there remained four alternative
second halves and eight alternative final scenes still to write.
We managed, eventually, to open three versions during the course of that
summer, starting with A Cricket Match; that autumn and winter came
the remaining versions, finishing in February 1984 [sic - this should be
1983] - nearly 1 year later
with A Pageant. A total of some sixteen hours of dialogue, ten
characters, thirty scenes, and dozens of quick changes. One fortnight,
around Easter of that year, we performed the ultimate marathon - sixteen
performances in twelve days which included all the possible permutations. I
remain to this day awed by the patience and enthusiasm of the audience and
eternally grateful to the cast.
As to whether they will all, one day, be done again - well, it will take
another such group of reckless lunatics with a great deal of time and
devotion on their hands ...
In the meantime, I do hope this sample tasting will both satisfy and whet
the appetite for more.
All programme notes on this page are copyright of Alan Ayckbourn and should not be reprinted in any form without permission. |
