His Teeth

Continuing on my prison related theatre theme, last night I went to see His Teeth from creative arts company, Only Connect.  I am quite familiar with Only Connect as an organisation because I wrote a case study about their work in the resettlement and rehabilitation of ex-offenders for my dissertation.  However, I had never actually seen a full production by them.

His Teeth, written by Ben Musgrove, is inspired by the stories of Only Connect member Ralph Ojotu and tells the tale of a young man, Eric (Kareem Dauda) who comes to the UK illegally from Lagos, only to find himself under the control of human traffickers Roger (Dymond Allen) and Derek (Junior 'Mila' Miller).  Unable to run because of his illegal status, Eric finds himself minding trafficked children and is irresistibly drawn to drug addict Sarah (Eleanor Wyld).  Unfortunately for Eric, Sarah also happens to be Derek's girlfriend and when they finally do manage to run away together, Derek brutally murders (by decapitation) a young boy who was in Eric's care, thus framing Eric for the murder. The plot is complicated by a sub-plot involving the police officer (Harry Raffety) who becomes obsessed with not only catching Eric, but also with Sarah. A confident Harry Raffety handles his character's slightly bizarre progression very convincingly, but despite this, the narrative is often confusing and would possibly have benefitted from further dramaturgical work.

However, Designer Takis' gauze box, inside which the majority of the action takes place and the projection work of Mic Pool, leads us on an atmospheric journey from the jungles of Nigeria, to the council estates of London and are used to great effect to suggest the paranoid and drug-addled mental states of the characters.  Having said that, the gauze box at times was limiting as it meant that often the characters appeared to be in 'soft-focus', which was appropriate sometimes, but I personally would have liked to have been able to see the often nuanced performances of the actors.

Which brings me to the real revelation of the piece: the cast.  The majority of the actors are ex-offenders or at least have a some point been at risk of offending and similarly they have had no or little theatrical training prior to joining O.C.  Only Connect prides itself on producing professional standard theatre (as it's ticket prices will attest!) and certainly the production values here would not have looked out of place in any mid-scale theatre.  Often I suspect people are generally kinder when critiquing theatre staged with non-actors and this practice is open to debate when paying audiences are involved, but certainly these actors could hold their own with any seasoned professional.  While one must give great credit to Director, Maggie Norris for coaxing such detailed work out of her inexperienced cast, Kareem Dauda in particular, brought such vulnerability and poignancy to the role of Eric and, as the central character, he held the play together with great aplomb. Dauda is due to start professional training in the new year and despite his hang-doggedness about the lack of agents willing to come and see an ex-offender during our conversation after the show, I have no doubt that he has a good chance of being able to secure more paid acting work in the future.

Think Tank, New Philanthropy Capital recently published their research into the economic value of the arts in the criminal justice system and coincidentally use Only Connect as a case study in this report. There has also been much general discussion about the economic value of the arts in our society of late, however, much of this discussion, I feel misses the point.  Yes, there are transferable skills to be gained through participation in the arts which will improve people's chances of employment or, in the case of offenders, reduce the economic consequences of crime by reducing re-offending.  However, the focus on the economic is only half the story.  The sense of achievement to be gained from taking a bow at the end of a performance or seeing your artwork exhibited or your writing published cannot be measured in economic terms, especially when one considers that 42% of male prisoners (52% for young offenders) were permanently excluded from school (Prison Reform Trust 2011:54) and that only one in five are able to complete a job application form (ibid.).  If you have already been failed or betrayed by the mainstream avenues to becoming a functioning member of society, these not insignificant moments of victory can be a powerful catalyst to change, after all, many prisoners haven't even been particularly successful in crime or they wouldn't be in custody in the first place!

Director, Chris Johnston (of Rideout, Creative Arts for Rehabilitation) writes excellently about the 'easy dreaming' (Johnston in Balfour 2004:107-122) of the offender which often involves fantastical, but poorly thought through solutions to problems.  He goes on to say 'the act of dreaming is a kind of self-hypnosis in which unsustainable aspirations are buckled on like the armour of ancient warriors' (ibid.)  This dreaming, whilst often being compensatory and escapist, is of course a product of incredible imaginative powers and it is these imaginative powers which, when channelled in a more structured way, can allow the opportunity for participants in arts projects to explore these poorly written personal narratives, articulate the inarticulable and begin to imagine new personal narratives or at least entertain the possibility of their existence.

In the case of His Teeth, and also of Unprovoked (see previous blog post) for Ojotu, Foley and the actors, being given the opportunity to tell these stories, has, no doubt in their own ways, been transformative for the tellers and for the audience a chance to consider what one's own narrative might have been in similar circumstances. While everyone will take something different from stories such as these, one cannot put a price on these experiences.  As Einstein once said 'Not everything that can be counted counts, and not everything that counts can be counted.'*

*Thanks to whoever it was at the recent Anne Peaker Debate who expressed something similar!

Unprovoked

Last night I jumped on the 31 bus to one of my favourite venues, The Roundhouse in Camden to see 'Unprovoked' by Kathrine Smith. The play tells the harrowing story of the murder of the 15 year old daughter of Mary Foley at the hands of another young woman at a party in 2005. The story leads us through the events surrounding the death of 'Olivia' (Lala Semakula), through the trial of 'Chloe' (Daniella Lamattina), her killer, and chronicles how Foley came to find it in her heart to forgive her daughter's killer.

Featuring an all-female cast of young actors, the tale was simply staged by Directors, Angus Scott-Miller and Emily Momoh with minimal set, using only projected images as a backdrop. This story needs little embellishment as the emotional journey of Mary Foley through shock, grief, anger and finally reconciliation, a journey deftly handled by Lorna Gayle, is moving to say the least. It is especially inspiring to know that Foley has continued to work with The Forgiveness Project to tell her story in prisons and youth groups to prevent more unnecessary deaths of young people at the hands of their peers. The play serves as a realistic portrayal of the growing, but little reported on occurrence of girl-on-girl knife crime and reflects the messiness of urban teenage relationships, the nature of violence and the power of forgiveness.

Mary Foley, was present for the performance, the first time that she had seen the story played out in front of her. She sat dead centre in the front row and after the performance, despite being visibly moved by what she had seen, she took part in a Q & A session with the audience, supported by Marina Cantacuzino from The Forgiveness Project. What struck me was how this quite ordinary woman, caught in a quite extraordinary situation, responded in such a way that makes us all question, how strong we might have been, faced with such monumental trauma. Foley, however, is quite clear on the factors which led to forgiveness. She described becoming aware of changing, putting up barriers and retreating from her family and friends. She eventually found herself in a very dark place, full of bitterness and anger but it was at this point when she began to entertain the word 'forgiveness'. The more she reflected on what this word might really mean, the more she realised that actually, as she says 'forgiveness is not a weakness', but it is in fact, a way of taking charge of our lives and removing the power from those who have hurt us.

Another factor which was key in her path to reconciliation, was correspondence with her daughter's killer and beginning restorative processes. The more she began to find out about this young woman's childhood, one which had been filled with domestic violence and abuse, the more she was able to look beyond the pain and grief, to see the bigger picture and the humanity of her daughter's killer. As Foley says, this doesn't mean that it justifies the violence or that it negates the inherent injustice of this brutal and unprovoked attack on an innocent young woman. Quite the opposite, she sees it as 'an act of freedom' and her continuing educational work as a way of paying tribute to her daughter.

Inevitably, the subject of this summer's riots was raised in the Q & A and we can, I believe, learn much from Foley's experiences. She is adamant that communication and open-heartedness is the way forward. By taking the time to listen to what is going on in the lives of our young people and to genuinely try to understand them, we might begin to instill a sense of self-worth and self-respect. The celebration of their gifts and talents, rather than the 'monstering' of these disaffected young people, might just encourage them to in turn, celebrate their own gifts and talents and those of their peers. After all, as Foley herself speculated, after hearing about some of the troubled lives that these young people lead, could you honestly say you'd be any different in the same environment? It is perhaps easy to be dismissive and indignantly say "Of course I would!" but on the opposite side of the same coin, could you say you'd be able to forgive, like Mary Foley did? I'd like to think I would, but I suspect I'm not that brave.