Do I Know What I Ve Done? Yes. I Know Quite Well What I Ve Done

‘Do I know what I’ve done?...Yes. I know quite well what I’ve done.

I have done murder.’

Director: Tamar Saphra

Stage Manager: Kate Lynas

Producer: Lottie Rugg-Easey

Synopsis:

The year is 1929, the aftermath of WWI sees the emergence of authoritarian regimes which as we know, eventually culminate in WWII. The end of the War is resulting in the beginning of the breaking down of class barriers – the great demotic shift – which, though incredibly subtle; is pivotal. The General Strike of 1926 highlights widespread discontent. We are in the famous Jazz age, which is adopted by the British a little later than America, yet with just as much gusto. With this, comes a generation who were not only dance mad, but party mad – partly due to the fact they can now dance at home as a result of the invention of the gramophone. Modern industrialisation leads to mass production, and with this comes an obsession with Material goods.

However, with all this going on outside, we see the blinded; the lives of those existing in the comfort of their antique Oxford world.

It is in the context of this political and social climate; that this classic thriller takes unfolds.

Brandon wants to commit the perfect murder. He hungers for excitementand sees this motiveless action as a means of making him feel alive. He convinces his weak-minded friend Granillo, to assist him in the murder of their fellow Oxford University undergraduate: Ronald Kentley. Brandon then proceeds to have various friends round to their house, including Kentley’s father andsenile aunt, for a small party;the food to be consumed off a wooden chest within which the body has been stored.

A thunderstorm rages on the streets of London surrounding their comfortable house in Mayfair. Eventually, the guests depart, but Brandon’s vanity and Granillo’s inability to control his nerves have led their guest Rupert; to suspect them.

An audience are made aware of the dangerous battle between the individual and the society that surrounds it and the frivolous post-war culture that shapes such characters as those whom we see within this play. The intrinsic human desire for reason, logic and a sense of belonging does not fare well against the unruly power of the individual human mind.

(Hamilton based the play loosely on the Leopold and Loeb murder case, where two University of Chicago students murdered a 14 year old boy in attempt to commit the ‘perfect murder’. The trial became famous in part due to their defence Lawyer Clarence Darrow’s influential criticism of capital punishment, a key theme Hamilton draws upon in his play.)

Cast:

Wyndham Brandon

‘He has a rich, competent and really easy voice’–A classic evil genius, smooth and satanic and dangerously aware of his own mastermind. He’s a devout worshipper of the philosophies of Frederick Nietzche andhas a frightening obsession with the non-rational and needs to ‘live dangerously’. ‘He is almost paternal with everyone he addresses, and this seems to arise from an instinctive knowledge of his own good health, good looks, success and natural calm, as opposed to the harassed frailty of the ordinary human being’. His vanity is his Achilles heel.

Brandon is bored with just about everyone and everything;he yearns for excitement and takes sadistic pleasure in testing people to their limits. Though an audience do not want to like him; a frightening realisation comes in the fact that we unavoidably do.

Charles Granillo

‘He is enormously courteous – something between dancing-master and stage villain. He speaks English perfectly. To those who know him fairy well…he seems a thoroughly good sort.’

The charming and seemingly composed, yet utterly weak-minded friend of Brandon, whom he persuades to assist him with the murder. Puppyish and fragile,we see him being led by Brandon, and are aware of a slight homoerotic power dominated relationship between the two young men. He is upstaged by Brandon constantly, and spends the majority of the play drunken and terrified.

Sabot

(This is a part I believe could be made female if needs be, as is done in the Hitchcock film)

Brandon and Granillo’s (clearly-to-intelligent-to-be-a) butler, whomanages to stay completely out of the trouble that unfolds by keeping to himself. He is French, and a little ridiculous.

‘An almost perfect servant – intelligent, alert and obedient, but not, perhaps, completely impersonal – his employers bring in the habit of making the occasional advances towards him. Whoever he is with, he has an air of being breathlessly anxious to apologize for something or anything. He is married, quietly ambitious, industrious, and will have a restaurant of his own one of the these days.’

Kenneth Raglan

Their good-looking, naïve and simple friend who represents the epitome of careless and mindless wealth. We begin to see him as a criticism of the of upper-class youth, as he really has very little going on in his head.Most importantly, ‘In the presence of Granillo and Brandon he is merely, of course, tentative and hopeless.’

‘He is very young, fair, simple, good-looking, shy, foolish and good. He has no ideas whatever. He still thinks that nightclubs are dens of delight, but that there is probably one girl in the world for him who he will one day find. His pathetic ideal, in his bearing before the world, is sophistication. To hear him alluding to ‘simply staggering binge, old boy,’ when he has merely got mildly intoxicated, is to have exemplified at once his sense of humour and wickedness.

Leila Arden

Leila is Raglan’s double, in female form and their subsequent unrelenting flirtation is enough to make an audience member squirm, yet it definitely offers some very welcome comic relief. Just like Raglan, she ‘has no ideas and she also has the same tendency to conceal that deficiency with a show of sophistication. She has a fairly good stock of many-syllabled and rather outré words which she brings out with a rather comic emphasis, rolling her eyes the while, as though she doesn’t really mean what she is saying. In this way she never actually commits herself to any emotion or feeling, and might even be thought deep. But she is not’

SirJohnstoneKentley

(The recently murdered) Kentley’s elderly and increasingly senile father whom, like Leila and Raglan, represents the comfort,naivety and simple mindednessthat comes with beingexcessively rich. He is relatively adorable, and he is one of the only characters who we can really like – yet, he sticks out at this party full of a younger generation. He is ‘slow-moving, utterly harmless, gentle and a little listless. His listlessness and gentleness, however, derive not all along from a natural kindliness, but also from the fact that he has been in a position of total authority throughout the greater part of his life, and has had no need to assert himself. But he has only too plainly never abused that authority, and the whole effect of him is completely captivating’

Mrs Debenham

Kentley’s senile aunt, who hardly ever opens her mouth nor listens to anything that is said to her or around her, ‘her sole means of expression being a sudden, broad, affable smirk’. Clearly, she is losing the plot and her sudden smirks are at times a little terrifying. After these sudden smiles however, she ‘immediately relapses into the lost, miserable, absent-minded gloom which characterizes her. She is, indeed, so completely a nonentity as to acquire considerable personality and distinction from the very fact.’Like Leila, she offers some all too welcome comic relief amongst the tension that characterises the play.

Rupert Cadell

Their dangerously intelligent, sarcastic yet slightly deranged older friend – considerably more comfortable in the mind, than the body. Though he does not begin to rival Brandon in his looks, nor his composure – his intelligence is unparalleled. His relentless sarcasm results in cathartic release for an audience; hesays what we are all thinking, yet with infinitely less politeness. He has an‘exquisite’walking stick, as he is lame in the right leg. ‘He brings his words out not only as though he is infinitely weary of all things, but also as though articulation is causing him some definite physical pain which he is trying to circumvent by keeping his head and body perfectly still. His affectation almost verges on effeminacy, and can be very irritating, but he has a very disarming habit, every now and again, of retrieving the whole thing with an extraordinary frank, open and genial smile.’

These characters, as seen in Hamilton’s detailed descriptions, are incredibly rounded and complex and would therefore provide brilliant and challenging roles for actors to master. Additionally, the majority of the cast are of the perfect playing age for students and this will undoubtedly aid in the quality of the piece as a whole.Though it is, quite obviously, a male dominated play, the two(possibly 3) female roles provide a great deal of the comedy and are key to the retaining, and at times releasing, of the dramatic tension.

Why is it still relevant?

This is a play of its time, and it is also about the concept of ‘time’. I’m not a fan of modern updating of texts unless they lend themselves to this quite obviously, or you’re trying to make a specific point. Hamilton himself also disliked many aspects of modern life – it seems an insult to his legacy to modernise a piece of theatre that criticises the ‘modern’ time period, even that within which it is set. We’ll keep it as it was intended.

We’re in upper class London watching priggish students bored and reckless with their wealth at a time when the world economy is plunging into decline, a brilliant irony. The setting and characters are also about as far from Sheffield as you can possibly get. Despite the decision to keep it in it’s 1929 time frame, it’s obvious that clear parallels can be drawn and that the play remains of utmost relevance today – namely; that we’re mid economic depression right now. It also explores universal themes of youth and naivety, war, death and murder, the law and going even deeper – reason, matter and the purpose of existence. That’s a whole lot of philosophy to play with.

Why would it be good for SuTCo?

Rope is overflowing with concepts of the world and existence and is rife with a tense dramatic irony. In the forefront of all this, is a murder mystery verging on black-comedy that promises to be incredibly entertaining and painfully tense with some brilliant, and at times ridiculous characters. One review of the most recent professional production at the Almeida Theatre in 2009 described it as ‘like Pinter by gas light’. Rope remains one of Tamar’s favourite plays, and she does not think it is done enough, nor is Patrick Hamilton enough appreciated for his work. Hitchcock’s American adaptation of the text was massively successful and is well renowned, but we want to bring it back to its’ British routes. We believe it is of utmost importantto celebrate British playwrights, as they are the ones who analyse the culture we are living in.

The play is also about students and youth, however an entirely different perspective on students and youth than anything we may encounter here in Sheffield. We are getting a glimpse into an entirely different world, and one that still exists, despite appearing to us so utterly out-dated, as do the class boundaries it highlights.

What has also become obvious to us, is that this era is making a fashionable comeback. The Jazz age is being brought back into popular culture, for example with the new film of the Great Gatsby and the seven hour adaptation due to run at the National Theatre this summer. Similarly, the popularity of the film ‘The Artist’ highlights the renewed sense of appreciation for the 1920’s and so it is clear that such a pieceas Ropewill draw in an audience. Hamilton wrote of what he knew; the play is quintessentially British, and we want to demonstrate that Britain lived the 1920’s too.

It’s a catch for the actors too, and we know SuTCo is pretty good at the whole acting thing, and this play really is one for the cast – we’ve got a classic villain and his easily led and terribly frightened assistant, an over-intelligent slightly deranged friend, two ridiculously rich and naïve youths who fancy each other, a lovable gentle elderly man, his mute sister and a dead man in a box. What more do we really need to make a good piece of theatre?

Most importantly, this is a thriller – people like thrillers and will undoubtedly be drawn to it.

Though abundant with various political philosophies of human existence and reason, the play is also incredibly accessible. The plot is simple, the dialogue is easy to understand and the language can now be considered comical – this will draw in wider audiences. A lot of non-theatregoers don’t realise that they can be scared in a theatre, or feel the kind of seat grabbing tension that you might feel in a cinema. We want to show them that they can, and they can enjoy it and maybe even learn from it too.

Music and Design

Then there is the music. Our plan is to have small live jazz ensemble who will play the audience in in the foyer and then move up to the balconies in the circle, the music ceasing when the action begins. They will provide a musical interlude during the interval, and certain instruments will feature at a few key points in the play. This will create an tangible sense of an era that was defined by it’s arts; particularly its’ music.The band will also provide a brilliant publicity opportunity: people love free, live music and it will inevitably create a buzz around the play. We’d be looking to work closely with the Jazz Ensemble to compose to period-specific music.

Perhaps most importantly: Brandon and Granillo are staging their own ‘show’, and the self-reflective, self-conscious aspect of the piece will therefore be drawn attention to in having this live band. This is a play that greatly wants to draw attention to it’s own existence as a piece of theatre.

The 1920’s are also brilliant years to put to the stage – we’re in the Jazz era; a time obsessed with the aesthetic. This gives the costume and set designers a great theme to work within.

Hamilton has given us a vivid context for the play, which however is set solely in a room in a London house in Mayfair – we do not see the outside world. This not only gives us ‘London’ as an invisible backdrop, it also gives us something personal to work with. We want a classic feel, and as written by Hamilton; the chest containing the body is the central focus of the set – it harnesses all the dramatic tension that the thriller spits out. We only ever see one room, which means no set changes. And the time frame is continuous – everything we see happen in the room is everything that happens in that room while we’re watching. We’re really hoping for tons of ideas from a design team, and want to create as accurate, in terms of period, a space as possible for the thriller to unfold within. We will also need a fairly large costume team to help put our play in its decade.

Rights and week slots

Rights are from Samuel French and are £93 a performance.

Any week slot can work, but preferably weeks 6/8 so we can getfirst years involved too.

The Production Team

Tamar - Director

I will be going into second year of my English Literature and Theatre degree. This year, Iwas ProducerSuTCo’s ‘Peter Pan’ and DSM’d and light operated for the School of English/ Sheffield Theatre’s ‘The Rover’. I’ve also acted in various school/ extra curricular productions, and heldseveralother Stage Management positions, including interning at a Community Theatre and Dance company. I aspire to take an MA in Theatre Directing once I’ve has finished my degree, so though this will mark my first directing of a large show, I am utterly dedicated as I aim to peruse a career in this. This time period is one that I believe cannot ever be over-explored, and also one that I know very well, understand and know will be beautiful when put to the stage.

Kate – Stage Manager

I will be going into my second year of Theatre and Performance. In terms of SuTCo, this year, I was blood opp for ‘King Lear’ and Stage Manager for ‘Peter Pan’. I also DSM’dfor ‘The Author’, an MA piece, from which I learnt the essential skills needed for this role. I’ve also acted in various college productions as well as semi-professional productions. When Tamar asked me to be part of the production team, I was thrilled because this era has always fascinated me – from the fashion, to the music to the post-war spirit of it all.

Lottie - Producer

I’m going into my third year of English Literature and Theatre. I am a funding and development assistant at Point Blank Theatre Company, so I’ve plenty of experience in getting funding for arts projects. I was Set Designer for SuTCo’s ‘Closer’ and since then I’ve ASM’d at the Courtyard in the West Yorkshire Playhouse and at the Lincoln Drill Hall. I’m also taking a design and production module this year, which has given me further insight into the production process. I’ve also acted in various productions, such as ‘The Rover’ and ‘Hamlet’.