Stories From Suburban Road

I'm glad I got to see this production. (..Lucky, too - although I'd phoned in a booking the week before, it seemed to have gone missing on the night, and there were almost no seats left when I arrived. The FOH dealt with this really well, and one of them managed to find me a programme after they'd all sold out. Very helpful.)

IÂ’m afraid, however, that I canÂ’t give an unbiased appraisal of the show, even though I have nothing to do with this company or anyone in the cast. You see I wanted a copy of the programme because, although not mentioned directly by name, I'm still mentioned in it...!

I was in the original cast of this play in 1990, helping Alan Becher devise and stylise much of the script (...I'm the one responsible for that goanna!) I toured WA from 90-92, and was also in the 2002 national tour by the Perth Theatre Company, playing an entirely different set of characters, ten years later (which earned me an Equity nomination). I also arranged and played most of the music in those productions. Tonight I found I still knew virtually all the dialogue by heart, and was experiencing nostalgia for a completely different reason.

So the best thing about going to see the show at the Old Mill (the stage where we did our first ever production) was that I finally got to SEE the play!



The next best thing was that it was quite different.

I was glad to see a new approach in general, and many little bits that were significantly new.
Susan LynchÂ’s direction followed all of the original intentions, but with a fresh and interesting style.

Rearranging the casting of who played what combination of roles was interesting for me and worked fine.
Each actor in the role of Tom played their part really well, and there was a solid ensemble feel. But I was most captivated by the peripheral characters, who were solidly brought to life. Congratulations Warren, Alex, Garry, Sarah, Sharon and Stefan.

I found some of the split narrative translated strangely…where we'd put it in previous productions it had matched the business we’d created, and we could also drop and change character very quickly. The script probably said “so and so character now says this line” but because the business was different in this production, and actors were dressed in character-specific costume, it sometimes seemed a little out of place…it might have been better to reassign some of those phrases or hand them back to the main narrator.


I liked Alison BrayfordÂ’s set very much. It went in a much more naturalistic direction than IÂ’ve been used to, and yet it was still extremely versatile. The use of realistic costumes and furnitureÂ…very absent in the originalÂ…actually worked very well. EverybodyÂ’s minor characters were assisted by the costume definition.

However, I didn’t really like the way some stage effects were moved… by techs with radio headsets, at rather distracting times. I know the cast was much busier offstage now, with their many costume changes, but I’d still have preferred to see an actor remove their own chair, rather than these conspicuous ‘telephone operators’. (especially if the actor’s right there and making an exit anyway; removing Murdoch’s chair drew a lot of focus at a most inopportune time - did the chair really need to be removed right then at all?)

I also wouldÂ’ve preferred not hiding any action offstage, in scenes like catching the bantam or sawing the legs of the cow, among othersÂ…if we have to imagine whatÂ’s going on anyway, we might as well imagine it in full view. Walking offstage to visit an invisible dead cow while nothing happens onstage is not particularly dramatic, when that tension couldÂ’ve been kept onstage.
(Actually, I quite liked the look of the hessian ‘hole’, but not how it was so awkwardly set up.)

Transitions couldÂ’ve been tighter in general, in my opinionÂ…there were some rather huge pauses where one thought came to an end, the actor travelled a bit, then began the next thought. It could possibly have just crossfaded more continuously, without pausing the monologue. The same goes for changes between stories. ThatÂ’s just my personal preference; IÂ’m someone who hates unnecessary blackouts and wants every scene transition to be integral to the scene itself; and dialogue cues to be sharp.

However, some of the new transition scenes between stories were lovely and drew laughter from the crowd – mum spit-cleaning Tom’s face, Tom’s recorder playing, and the kids dancing are a few that spring to mind.

King Bantam - was a lovely introduction to everybody's main character, particularly Mum and Tom.

Ally Breen - Great porridge scene. Meeting Ally lost some of the suspense…particularly the fear of the sugarbag. (The narrators of Tom’s thoughts when he met Ally seemed to arrive way too early – signalling in advance and spoiling any potential surprise)

Mr Gallagher – the whole card game was great. Really liked Rudolph. Both the songs were great.

New Kid/Goanna – Big chunk of ‘our end/other end’ monologue might have been illustrated? New kid was very clearly characterised. Alex Desebrock’s goanna was a great interpretation.

Biddy – probably my least favourite, but still not bad. A tad too slow in parts. But I think it worked better than ours where you could have Mum & Tom in the same scene (this story was previously told by the actor who'd played Mum, so they didn't appear together like this.)

Down Como – I very much liked how the water scenes were set off the edge of the stage. The new girl was great..kids all had good energy, age, attitude.

Prof Murdoch – Well interpreted monologue and some really nice character moments from everyone else.



As I said, these are thoughts coming from a highly biased perspective. IÂ’m really glad I saw the show, and everyone around seemed to really appreciate it. One of the best new experiences for me was to hear everybodyÂ’s comments during interval (especially those close to HungerfordÂ’s vintage), and how they were enjoying it.

A couple of times you may have heard me laugh out loud where no one else thought it was funny…that was me thinking “damn – I’ve performed that line about 180 times and that’s the FIRST time it’s occurred to me to do it like THAT. “
I had this experience in 2002 playing many scenes opposite an actor who was playing the characters IÂ’d originated and thought I knew wellÂ…I got to watch a new interpretation up close. I, too, was reinterpreting what had been someone elseÂ’s original roleÂ…different choices, not necessarily better or worse, just different. And thatÂ’s how it should be.

ThatÂ’s whatÂ’s fun about going to the theatre, as opposed to films.

Thanks a lot.

Craig