All four characters in Studies for a Portrait are homosexual men, but the overriding theme of the play is not homosexuality. Whatever might be wrong with it, the play deserves some praise for reminding people that gay characters can explore and embody other important issues than their own sexuality.
Celebrated American artist Julian Barker (Martin Bendel), a contemporary of Warhol and Bacon, is dying of pancreatic cancer. While Julian attempts gamely to continue painting, drinking and shagging until he drops dead, politicians, admirers and former lovers emerge from the woodwork to squabble over his legacy – both financial and emotional.
Each has a genuine claim over Julian, whether as a commodity, an inspiration, a benefactor, or simply as a friend. Which of these claims, the play asks, is most valid? To whom does a public figure’s legacy rightfully belong – to himself, to his public, or to his bereaved?
Julian is a largely offstage presence, cloistering himself in his studio and allowing his devotees to fight amongst themselves. Director Adam Spreadbury-Maher resists confrontational histrionics in favour of calculating nastiness, enabled by some delicious turns of phrase from playwright Daniel Reitz. Julian’s current and former lovers, Chad (James Holmes) and Marcus (David Price), have an especially honest and vicious enmity.
Beyond these enjoyably frank exchanges the play is heavy on flimsily motivated exposition. Backstory details are revealed in monologue to the subject, who presumably already knows his own life story, but sits through the lecture anyway for the audience’s benefit. Spreadbury-Maher’s directorial understatement allows the dialogue to shine when it’s good, but leaves the stage too static when exposition slows the pace.
Stylistically and thematically, Studies for a Portrait breaks no new ground, but it does attempt to sow something worthwhile there. Every play like this one is another step towards relocating non-heterosexual people from the LGBTQ Theatre bracket into the artistic mainstream. It isn’t an overt call to arms, but it’s one more raised fist in an invisible revolution.
I arrived at the White Bear Theatre for the first time at around 2.30 pm on Sunday 1st February to see Studies For a Portrait written by Daniel Reitz. I didn’t know that the theatre was at the back of a pub. It was full of football followers watching Inverness Caledonian Thistle versus Celtic to be followed by Liverpool versus Chelsea. Wandering around, I must have appeared somewhat lost because a man who I guess was the bar manager asked if he could help me. I said that I had come to the theatre and so he called over The Stage Manager, Loz. There was a 2.00pm showing which was now well under way which was to be followed by a 5.00 pm performance. I had come without a ticket as I had only heard about the play less than 48 hours previously. The 5.00 pm show was a sell-out as had all performances been. However Loz kindly said she would do what she could and she duly obliged; I was given a seat for the 5.00 o’clock showing. I was most grateful, as I had driven from East Anglia.
As for the theatre itself, I had heard that it is an intimate setting, and intimate it certainly is, as it seats no more than about 40 people.
Now the play. I enjoyed the performances of all four actors. The cutting spiteful exchanges between Chad and Marcus stood out and I liked Stephen Hagan’s coquettish performance as Justin the underwear model. This is the second time I have seen Stephen Hagan, and I hope we will hear much more about him.
Whilst the theme of the play centres chiefly on the ownership of the artist’s legacy, the perennial issues around aging are constantly at the fore. For example, what is the relationship between the nubile gay man (Justin) and the future (Chad Julian or Marcus)?
Towards the end of the performance there was a huge roar in the pub, and a minute or two later yet another roar. This felt somewhat surreal. I discovered after the showing that it was the reaction to Liverpool scoring 2 very late goals against Chelsea.
So overall, a very enjoyable albeit untypical theatrical experience. I would like to revisit The White Bear Theatre again. But maybe next time I will book in advance and make sure that I have checked out the football fixtures.
Here endeth my very first blog.
Hello Michael. Welcome to London Theatre Blog. Thanks for sharing your experience of the White Bear Theatre. Like Matt, I’m left wondering what part of East Anglia you hail from and what the theatre in your area is like.
Hi Andrew,
I’m off on a guilt trip now! How can I not mention Eastern Angles, the regional touring theatre company based at The Sir John Mills Theatre in Ipswich? And, yes, it’s only a few minutes walk down the road; I love it. I’d better book for their next production, Return to Akenfield. On the other hand maybe not; I am now on the theatre’s digs list, so should one of the cast give me a call, I’ve a good chance of a freebie!
You drove from East Anglia to visit a pub theatre in Kennington? I admire your dedication – are there no decent theatres near where you live?
For surreal ‘noises off’ like your late goal cheers you can’t beat the London Bridge theatre spaces (Shunt Vaults, Southwark Playhouse) – you can regularly hear tube trains rumbling past mid-performance.
The offstage roars at the White Bear are a crucial part of the experience, as far as I’m concerned. A wonderful counterpoint to almost any drama – especially the heavier tragedies. Maybe an enterprising someone could put together an avant-garde Julius Caesar or Coriolanus – with the bar noises playing the mob …?