Written by Ben Woolf Edited by Sam Maynard and Katherine Igoe-Ewer Rehearsal and Production Photography by Johan Persson CONTENTS BACKGROUNDPRODUCTIONRESOURCES

Contents

Introduction 3

Section 1: Background to CLOSER 4 CLOSER: An introduction 5 Characters 6 CLOSER in Context 10

Section 2: The Donmar’s Production 15 Cast and Creative Team 16 Rehearsal Diaries 17 An Interview with Playwright Patrick Marber 21 An Interview with the Cast of CLOSER 26

Section 3: Resources 30 Spotlight on Deborah Andrews, Costume Supervisor 31 Workshop Exercises 35 Bibliography 39

2 CONTENTS BACKGROUNDPRODUCTIONRESOURCES

Introduction

Welcome to this Behind the Scenes Guide to the Donmar Warehouse production of Patrick Marber’s CLOSER, directed by David Leveaux. The following pages contain an exclusive insight into the process of bringing this production from page to stage. Written by playwright and director Patrick Marber, CLOSER was critically acclaimed when it premiered at the National Theatre in 1997, winning Olivier, Evening Standard and New York Drama Critic’s Circle Awards. It has since been produced in the West End, Broadway, around the world and adapted into an international movie. This is its first major London revival. This guide aims to set the play and the production in context. It includes conversations with Patrick Marber and the cast who bring the characters to life. There are also extracts from Resident Assistant Director Zoé Ford’s rehearsal diary and practical exercises designed for use in the classroom. The guide has a particular focus on costume and includes a conversation with Deborah Andrews, the production’s costume supervisor, whose role is crucial in finding the right look for each character. We hope you find this guide interesting and informative. To view the Behind the Scenes Guides for other productions please visit www.donmarwarehouse.com/discover/resources

The cast of CLOSER and Director, David Leveaux

3 Section 1: Background to CLOSER

Nancy Carroll

4 CONTENTS BACKGROUNDPRODUCTIONRESOURCES

CLOSER: An introduction

‘I believe a play should be whatever someone makes of it on the night. It is ephemeral. I’m always nervous about making pronouncements as a playwright because what I have to say about the play is the play. I can tell you when I wrote it. But I can’t tell you why. It’s mysterious to me. And I quite like that.’

Patrick Marber

CLOSER follows four characters in contemporary London as their romantic lives intertwine. Each of the characters pursues their own desires, and discovers what happens when these wants come into contact with those of the other characters. The play is set in London over a period of four years. It dramatically explores complex themes of sexual desire, jealousy and betrayal. More than anything, though, CLOSER is a play about its characters – Dan, Alice, Larry and Anna – and what they do to each other. We learn their most intimate thoughts and secrets but at the same time, almost nothing about their lives beyond the time we spend with them. What little biographical information there is lies scattered throughout the play, with truth and lies often imperceptible from one another. CLOSER is not an academic or polemic text. It’s a tightly written story about these characters and their specific experiences – told from their unique perspectives.

Director, David Leveaux

5 CONTENTS BACKGROUNDPRODUCTIONRESOURCES

Characters

ALICE – Rachel Redford

‘Men want a girl who looks like a boy. They want to protect her but she must be a survivor. And she must come... like a train... but with... elegance.’

Alice Ayres – Act 1, Scene 1

Alice meets Dan on Blackfriars Bridge after she is hit by a taxi. She has been out clubbing and carries, it seems, all her worldly possessions with her in a rucksack. She is, she says, ‘a waif’. Alice gives us a few tantalising – and conflicting – facts about her life. She has been working as a stripper in New York. Her parents apparently died in a car accident. And, on her leg, she carries a distinctive scar, shaped like a question mark.

‘As an audience, we are never quite sure if Alice has in fact told the truth about anything with regards to the events in her life. Her character is constantly evolving throughout the play; her only Zoé Ford, fixed characteristic being the scar on her leg. It is interesting to Resident Assistant Director note, however, that even this becomes a symbol of reinvention, as she provides several different explanations of how and when she received it. The explanation given is always that which will have the greatest effect on that specific listener, in that specific situation. She uses it at different moments to provoke either sympathy, interest or desire; it is a tool used to intensify her relationship with other people.’

Although Alice might be seen to be passive – she says to Dan, ‘I never look where I’m going.’ – she is not, perhaps, always to be taken at face value. It’s interesting to consider the degree to which she is skillful at manipulating perceptions of her.

‘I hope people at my age will relate to Alice. Because 24 is a strange, kind of annoying, age. You’re not young enough to be young. But you’re not old enough to be older. You’re only partly an adult. You’re kind of caught in the middle.’ Rachel Redford

POST SHOW ‘She seems very open to me… DISCUSSION That’s how she wants to seem.’ POINT Anna and Larry on Alice

We learn some important biographical information about Alice in the final scene. Should this retrospectively change the way we think of her character in the previous scenes? When is she at her most truthful?

6 CONTENTS BACKGROUNDPRODUCTIONRESOURCES

DAN – Oliver Chris ‘I’m a... sort of journalist.’

Dan – Act 1, Scene 1

Of all four characters we can glean the most categorical backstory about Dan. We learn that he is from the suburbs, that his mother is dead and his father is in a care home. At the beginning of the play he is in a relationship with Ruth, a linguist, who we never meet. Dan works as an obituary columnist. He says, ‘I had dreams of being a writer but I had no voice. What am I saying? I had no talent.’

‘Dan is a complex, dichotomous character – he waxes lyrical about beauty, love and life but in the end love ‘disappoints’ him. He wants to be a writer but ‘doesn’t have a subject.’ He writes Zoé Ford, a novel, but it is about Alice’s life, not from his own inspired Resident Assistant Director imagination. Even Alice questions: ‘do you have a single original thought in your head?’ He has a lot of ‘grand artistic feelings’ but they always fall short. He is constantly disappointed because he refuses to concede his imagined life for reality.’

Dan’s pursuit of romantic fulfillment propels the plot of CLOSER. He meets and, in turn, seduces each of the characters. It is Dan who, inadvertently, brings them to each other.

‘Dan is just a terrible romantic. He’s completely in the sway of love and jealousy and self-destruction. He can’t get the better of his inability not to love people and it leads him towards disaster.’ Oliver Chris

POST SHOW ‘Dan’s life is a compromise.’ DISCUSSION Oliver Chris POINT What do you think Oliver means by this? How does this change as the play unfolds?

Oliver Chris

7 CONTENTS BACKGROUNDPRODUCTIONRESOURCES

LARRY – Rufus Sewell

‘What d’you have to do to get a bit of intimacy around here?’

Larry – Act 2, Scene 7

Larry is a doctor – a dermatologist. Unlike the other characters, Larry’s background is working- class. When we meet Larry he is working for the NHS. As the play progresses, he takes a job at a private practice and wonders whether this might make him a ‘sell-out’.

‘Larry’s journey through the play is nicely represented in the discussion about his jumper in the Gallery scene: ‘I’ve never worn cashmere before, I feel like Cinderella at the Ball.’ He has Zoé Ford, worked exceptionally hard to become a doctor but still, perhaps, Resident Assistant Director feels a little uncertain of the status this job affords him. He is from a working class background and comes full circle through the play moving from the NHS, to private medicine and back to the NHS again – a journey triggered by falling in love with Anna and wanting to give her the life he believes she deserves. He is a wonderful doctor and subsequently has the observance to make him the most astute of the characters – there are many moments throughout the play where he throws startlingly sharp insight onto situations.’

Larry is often portrayed as older than the other characters. He was, he says, in flares when Alice was in nappies. He also seems to be more capable of controlling his feelings and ruthlessly competent in manipulating events – and people – to suit his purpose.

‘I think a strong part of Larry’s identity is that he doesn’t come from a background that doctors usually come from. He’s aware of his identity. He’s proud. But it comes with a certain complexity.’ Rufus Sewell

POST SHOW ‘You forget you’re dealing with a clinical DISCUSSION observer of the human carnival.’ POINT Larry

As Dan and Anna’s relationship collapses, Dan says that Larry truly ‘understands’. Later, Larry taunts Dan, saying ‘You don’t know the first thing about love because you don’t understand compromise.’ What is that Larry understands? How does this affect his attitudes and behaviour?

8 CONTENTS BACKGROUNDPRODUCTIONRESOURCES

ANNA – Nancy Carroll

‘They love the way we make them feel but not ‘us’. They love dreams.’ Anna - Act 2, Scene 9

Anna is a photographer. She takes expensive portraits – first of strangers, then of derelict buildings – to exhibit and sell to an apparent cosmopolitan elite. Alice, at least, isn’t impressed, describing Anna’s work as a ‘Big Fat Lie’. Anna also takes corporate jobs, leading her to meet Dan – photographing him for his book jacket.

‘Anna’s choice of photography is very telling; this is a solitary career and she seems fascinated by desolation. First there are her Zoé Ford, portraits which Alice describes as ‘just a bunch of sad strangers Resident Assistant photographed beautifully’ and then towards the end of the play Director she is photographing derelict buildings. This seems indicative of her emotional states at the time.’

When we meet Anna, we learn that she was married to a man who made money in the City but has left her for a younger woman.

‘In my understanding of Anna, when we meet her she’s going through a rather messy divorce. There’s a sense of separation and not quite knowing where she is. Certainly, she isn’t ready to meet someone else.’ Nancy Carroll

POST SHOW ‘It’s not a competition.’ DISCUSSION Anna, to Alice POINT Anna seems at first glance to carry a maturity and depth of understanding in her dealings with the other characters. Given her behaviour throughout the play, how real – or honest – is this?

Rufus Sewell and Nancy Carroll

9 CONTENTS BACKGROUNDPRODUCTIONRESOURCES

CLOSER in Context

‘The production is set in the present day. But it’s not fetishistically present. It’s the theatrical present, which is slightly different. They’re not using old style phones and old style computers. It feels like it’s now.

The play never existed exactly now, anyway. It was always a heightened reality. It’s not a naturalistic play.’ Patrick Marber

The Donmar’s CLOSER is not a period piece – it’s set in contemporary London, but outside of a specific time. David Leveaux has cleverly constructed a production in which characters type on the newest models of mac books, but still smoke inside public buildings. Nevertheless, it is interesting to consider how this play relates to its original context – the 1990s – culturally, socially and technologically.

Rachel Redford

10 CONTENTS BACKGROUNDPRODUCTIONRESOURCES

Rufus Sewell

CULTURAL CONTEXT

The 90s were preceded by a period of deep cuts to the arts, overseen by Margaret Thatcher’s government. In the West End, the 80s were the decade of the mega-musical; Phantom of the Opera, Miss Saigon, Les Misérables and Cats all premiered in the 80s. By the decade’s end all of these shows were running simultaneously in London. These shows were huge hits with the British public. But it is noticeable that they were set, respectively, beneath a Parisian opera house, in the Vietnam War, in 19th Century France and in a magical world of singing cats. None seemed to speak with a particular urgency to young Brits in their twenties and thirties. Michael Billington points out,

‘It is no accident that the Thatcherite decade coincided with the dominance of the musical: a form that combines celebration of individualism with sentimental uplift… individuals triumph over circumstance leading to a transcendent apotheosis.’ Michael Billington in The Guardian – 3 August 2006

The 90s, though, saw young writers such as Patrick Marber, Sarah Kane, Mark Ravenhill, Anthony Neilson and Jez Butterworth begin to write plays set in a recognizable contemporary Britain with characters drawn from modern life. Some journalists and critics grouped the plays of these writers as ‘In Yer Face’ theatre. The name is a semi-humorous reference to the apparently antagonistic, confrontational sensibility at the heart of these plays. Aleks Sierz, who popularized the expression, considers CLOSER:

‘Arguably the decade’s key play about relationships, and certainly one of the most successful.’ Aleks Sierz (2001: 187), as quoted by Graham Saunders in Closer, Modern Theatre Guide

11 CONTENTS BACKGROUNDPRODUCTIONRESOURCES

But whilst the In Yer Face plays – and their writers – are still sometimes lumped together, it’s a condescending term that is better understood against what had gone before. Each of these writers went on to produce a body of work completely different from the others. The plays themselves, whilst sharing some superficial similarities, now appear radically different.

‘Patrick Marber’s CLOSER [and others of this generation of new plays] were seen and discussed by people who ten years previously wouldn’t have bothered to go to see a new play. In the wake of such successes, scores of young writers emerged and contributed to the renaissance in new writing.’ Aleks Sierz, Introduction to In-Yer-Face Theatre: British Theatre Today

Nancy Carroll and Oliver Chris

12 CONTENTS BACKGROUNDPRODUCTIONRESOURCES

SOCIAL CONTEXT

‘The 90s were a jagged and violent decade. Day after day, the media brought news of war and killing: terrorist bombs, ethnic cleansing and mass graves left indelible images on the public imagination. The murder of a toddler by two ten-year-old boys in February 1993 became one of the key events of 90s Britain…’ Aleks Sierz, In-Yer-Face Theatre: British Theatre Today

Britain in the 90s was strange. For all that these negatives were real, it was also a time of renewed confidence in Britain’s relevance to the world. It was the period of Trainspotting, the Spice Girls, Britpop, Madchester, the dawn of New Labour and the election victory of Tony Blair. British fashion led the world with an androgynous, grungy heroin-chic. This renaissance was branded ‘Cool Britannia’ – a tag that immediately felt embarrassing. Socially, it was a period that saw some slippage in the way some traditional identities were held together. Conservative/Labour, gay/straight, woman/man. It’s interesting to consider how the characters of CLOSER are grappling with the implications of this greater fluidity.

Nancy Carroll

13 CONTENTS BACKGROUNDPRODUCTIONRESOURCES

TECHNOLOGICAL CONTEXT

‘The play is written in the summer of ‘96 in a nonline world. I had to go to an internet café to research the possibility of Scene 3 [set in a sex chatroom]. I wasn’t online myself – I didn’t have an email address.’ Patrick Marber

A pivotal – and memorable – scene in CLOSER takes place in an internet sex chatroom. Dan seduces Larry, pretending to be a woman and adopting Anna’s name. Arguably, CLOSER was the world’s first major play to explore the dramatic possibilities of the internet. When the play first opened, audiences were astonished – and baffled – by what was unfolding before them. As Patrick Marber recalls:

‘When the play was first presented in May ‘97 and we got to the internet scene, I would say two thirds of the audience had no idea what they were watching. They had no comprehension. Just… ‘Why are we reading rude things on a screen? What… Why are they typing? What’s going on?’

And they watched it in fascinated, appalled silence – no laughs. Then the reviews came out. And it was a time I was very conscious that the critics helped the play. The critics wrote reviews saying, ‘And there’s a very funny scene set on the internet’. Then audiences started laughing, for some reason. Not because they’d all read the reviews but it just became permissible that this might be a funny scene. But at first it was very haunting and disturbing – quite good. I quite liked it.’ Patrick Marber

It’s intriguing to think about what the play reveals about pre-internet romance and human relationships. Contemporary mainstream media is awash with stories about the impact of the online world on our capacity to make and maintain human relationships. Yet CLOSER certainly seems to depict – in a pre-digital era – an alienation, sexual cynicism and fluidity of identity.

‘When this first came out, people really picked up on the internet scene. I think, perhaps, in our production this scene won’t stand out in the same way [because audiences are now more aware of the internet]. But perhaps that’s better. Perhaps that always just pulled focus away from what the scene is about – which was two men being unbelievably, mesmerically obscene to each other! So maybe time has balanced it for the better.’ Oliver Chris

14 Section 2: The Donmar’s Production

Rufus Sewell

15 CONTENTS BACKGROUNDPRODUCTIONRESOURCES

Cast and Creative Team

Cast (in order of speaking)

Alice ...... RACHEL REDFORD Dan ...... OLIVER CHRIS Larry ...... RUFUS SEWELL Anna ...... NANCY CARROLL

Production

Director ...... DAVID LEVEAUX Designer ...... BUNNY CHRISTIE Lighting Designer ...... HUGH VANSTONE Sound Designer ...... FERGUS O’HARE Video Designer ...... FINN ROSS Composer ...... CORIN BUCKERIDGE Movement ...... WAYNE MCGREGOR Casting Director ...... ALASTAIR COOMER CDG

Production Manager ...... KATE WEST Company Stage Manager ...... CLAIRE SIBLEY Deputy Stage Manager ...... MARY O’HANLON Assistant Stage Manager ...... CATHERINE PEWSEY Resident Assistant Director ...... ZOÉ FORD Costume Supervisor ...... DEBORAH ANDREWS Video Programmer and Interactive Content . . . . .JONATHON LYLE Production and Rehearsal Photographer ...... JOHAN PERSSON

16 CONTENTS BACKGROUNDPRODUCTIONRESOURCES

Rehearsal of the events that occur between these characters. Unavoidably, the nature of the piece results Diary in the team delving deep into their own personal experiences of relationship’s and it seems Resident Assistant Director Zoé Ford’s Rehearsal that everyone in the team has Diary experience of most of the events in the story. This is a play about the heart and therefore sharing experiences of love and loss is WEEK endlessly beneficial. Very quickly there is an air of trust and shared ONE understanding within the team. eek 1 of rehearsals for CLOSER began with a warm On our fourth rehearsal day and and welcoming meet and greet. The full Donmar for the remainder of the week, Wcontingent was present to welcome and introduce David gets scenes one to six up the CLOSER team, a wonderful meeting of all the different on their feet – this is a play which components that will create this exciting production. benefits from diving right in and the cast fearlessly approach the After everyone has been Days two and three consist of task. It is an exciting couple of introduced, we pop down to the table work on the scenes; we were days with innumerable discoveries rehearsal room and begin a first blessed to have Patrick Marber with and challenges which are tackled read of the script. It is immediately us, offering humorous and moving with both moments of intense evident that Rufus, Nancy, insight into the emotional world discussion, and a lot of laughter. Oliver and Rachel have a natural of the play. CLOSER is extremely chemistry; scenes are already emotionally complex and David We close the week feeling excited beginning to crackle. guides the actors through the and amazed at the progress made scenes, highlighting the emotional in six days, and hungry for next After the read through, there is a poignancy and universality of many week’s rehearsal. flurry of excitement as David starts to describe his vision for the piece. Although CLOSER is a well-known play (and subsequent film), this will be a new interpretation with innovative and exciting staging and projection. Designer Bunny Christie presents CLOSER is extremely her model box, emotionally complex which is punctuated and David guides the by gasps of actors through the excitement from the scenes, highlighting the team – it is no mean feat to design a play emotional poignancy and where the action universality of many takes place in offices, of the events that aquariums, hotels, occur between these restaurants and an characters. art gallery! David and Bunny have created a world that is fluid (without lacking specificity), allowing the actors to glide balletically from place to place. Oliver Chris

17 CONTENTS BACKGROUNDPRODUCTIONRESOURCES

distorted memories, clues to the characters past lives… it’s all WEEK subtly in there, breathing life into the story. Our one real obstacle of TWO the week was scene three. This is a technical scene, in which two e start week two where we left off on Saturday, of the characters communicate roughly staging the remainder of the play. The actors via an adult chat room on a split are eager to participate in this process, excited to be W stage, where they cannot see each creating a sketch of their character’s entire journey this early other nor the screen on which their on in the rehearsal process. David has created a relaxed and messages appear to the audience. warm environment for the actors, which really frees them up. How is a scene, in which the actors As the week progresses, bits and bobs of rehearsal furniture are so blindsided, rehearsed? After start to appear. Desks, swivelling chairs, a ‘bed’ and several much discussion it was decided incarnations of chaise lounge. that until the scene could be fully Mid-week we were pleased to be scene in the play – a physical first technically realised, Rufus and joined by Patrick again, who sat draft. We then begin the play from Oliver would mark through the in to watch one of the scenes as the top. It is at this point that David scene vocalising as they were it was developing. There’s always starts to include more detail by typing, to get a feel for their that slight trepidation in a rehearsal gently guiding the actors through characters intentions and reactions. room when the writer pops in, but the rhythm and emotional heart of Needless to say, with the nature of Patrick is a wonderfully supportive each scene. We all start realising the chatroom, it was an afternoon aspect of this process and seemed just how subtle and nuanced the filled with hilarity! The team thrilled by the progress being writing really is – there are links approach the end of the week with made! between speech and thought a clear grasp on the broad strokes patterns of the characters after By Thursday, David had finished of the play and looking forward to interacting with each other; directing the actors through every delving deeper next week.

Nancy Carroll

18 CONTENTS BACKGROUNDPRODUCTIONRESOURCES

subsequently respond to it. This discussion enlivens the actors and WEEK the scenes become instantly more THREE vivid and powerful. We reach an exciting and new development on e start the week working on scenes five and six Thursday as we approached the respectively. Scene five, set at the opening of hotel room scene. One of the tricky WAnna’s art exhibition, is the first scene in which aspects when staging CLOSER is all four characters appear, although not all of them speak that the scenes are presented as a to each other. David discusses with the actors the roles type of montage, jumping through that insecurity and jealousy play in this scene as each of time and travelling to different the characters vent in their own individual way. The cracks spaces. David was always clear created in this scene feed directly into scene six, when the that his vision was to achieve this two couples subsequently split up. through a surreal mix of minimal set move by the cast, abstract project These scenes provide an emotional As the week progresses, many and freshly composed music. Three drain on the actors, which they thematic elements crop up and weeks in we attempt the first valiantly overcome as they battle David discusses the intricacies of imaginings of this scene transition through the challenges they come what is happening in the characters’ language, seeing how it propels up against. What starts to emerge conversations. One of the key the story forward through time. It is is a beautiful synchronicity of elements of these conversations perfectly timed because the actors movement, especially in scene is the way that what one character now have a clear grasp of the six; the two couples both onstage hears/sees, is not necessarily what play’s narrative and respond to the but inhabiting two different living the other character is saying or physicality of the transitions with spaces. There are many vivid doing. As in life, the characters’ a depth of character which makes and poignant moments in which ability to understand other people them feel alive, instead of merely characters pass through another’s and behaviours is tainted by past functional. physical space although in different events and experiences, affecting ‘worlds’. how they digest information and A wonderful week, full of amazing progress!

Rufus Sewell and Nancy Carroll

19 CONTENTS BACKGROUNDPRODUCTIONRESOURCES

together, allowing the actors to start considering the jumps through WEEK time between scenes. It is a steady and gentle FOUR process which throws up The evolution of questions and revelations eek four begins with the amazing individual characters in choreographer Wayne McGregor which add to the richness certain moments has Wpopping in to have a look at of the individual scenes. a domino effect on scene seven, which is set in a strip club. We close the week Although we find out in scene one that all the actors, they with David inviting the Alice was stripping in New York, this is the are acutely aware creatives in for a stagger play’s first foray into that world. Wayne has of the slightest through of the play. a wonderful chat with Rachel and David dynamic shift which For the first time since about circles of energy and ‘tells’, which simultaneously excites day one of rehearsals are little gestures that may creep in through the entire creative and inspires them all. Alice’s poise as an exotic dancer – it adds an body are together to exciting new texture to the performance. watch and contribute As the week progresses, David in certain moments has a domino to the performance. The actors, and the actors discuss the effect on all the actors, they are understandably anxious, attack the shared feeling that they are at a acutely aware of the slightest stagger with gusto, giving the team breakthrough stage in the rehearsal dynamic shift which simultaneously a full and rounded image of the process, where the unnecessary/ excites and inspires them all. play. superficial starts to fall away and David slowly works and reworks A breakthrough week filled with new things come through. The throughout the week, running conquered challenges! evolution of individual characters scenes in sets of twos and threes

David spends time perfecting the scene transitions and on Thursday WEEK runs the play in its entirety, FIVE discussing it after with the actors. On Friday Jonathan pops in and avid begins week five with a debrief from last week’s sets up the system for scene three stagger through watched by the creative team; in which Larry and Dan meet in Dthey discuss the speed at which the characters turn the online adult chat room. He emotional corners in the play. The actors feel that they are has created a wonderful system at a stage where, whilst they are making steady decisions to by which the text, which will be act with their heads, their characters would be making these projected onto a screen for the decisions with the lightning speed of gut reactions. This audience to read, is triggered by assertion is part of the joy of working with these four actors the Assistant Stage Manager, who – they are in continual pursuit of realism. They want ‘to leave in turn takes visual ques from the their skin at the door’, a phrase David introduced on day one actors typing in real time. Although as the only way to approach this play as a performer. tricky to get a handle on, it is the We crack on with the week, appearance; the most dramatic first time the actors get to rehearse bolstering strong moments and change of which is Rachel’s. She the scene, as it will be performed. It needle working out any tricky has her hair cropped and shaved in is a hilarious morning! moments that need attention. David at the sides – this instantly gives On our final day in the rehearsal has no fear and boldly re-stages any her a fairy, lost boy-esque feel, room before moving to the theatre, moments he feels require it. giving a whole new personal spin to we run the play a final time for the her line ‘Men want a girl, who looks Around mid-week the wardrobe creative and the Donmar team. like a boy...’ department start to instigate The cast perform beautifully and physical change in the actor’s everyone is left feeling positive and excited for our move to the stage! 20 CONTENTS BACKGROUNDPRODUCTIONRESOURCES

An Interview with Playwright Patrick Marber

Patrick Marber is a writer, director and comedian who has worked extensively in theatre, film and television. His plays include Dealer’s Choice, After Miss Julie, and Don Juan in Soho. CLOSER is perhaps his best known work and the first production of CLOSER in 1997, which is directed, was met with widespread critical acclaim. His writing for film includes Notes on a Scandal and the screen adaptation of CLOSER. His new play, The Red Lion, will premiere at the National Theatre in 2015.

What’s it like seeing the play in rehearsals? The strange thing is, I really don’t know the play very well. I knew it exceptionally well in the late 90s when I wrote it and was directing it. I was so heavily involved in the life of CLOSER that, since then, I’ve rather excommunicated with the play. I see it occasionally in foreign productions. But I’m not familiar with the material. And when we arrived [at the Donmar] for the first day of rehearsals, I realized I hadn’t read the play for over fifteen years. The read-through was really the first time I’d heard the full play since 1999. So I’m a bit of a stranger to my own play. I think, perhaps, it’s because the play cost me four years of my life. I’m grateful, of course. But also resentful. Because it was a success and I was the director, instead of writing other things, or doing other things, my life was just… devoted to it. I think, in a way, I got too close. in conversation

Oliver Chris and Nancy Carroll

21 CONTENTS BACKGROUNDPRODUCTIONRESOURCES

Rufus Sewell and Nancy Carroll

The play hasn’t had a major revival since then. Given that you directed its previous incarnation, how is it watching David Leveaux working on it with the new cast? This is the first major London revival. I didn’t want the play to be done again for a long time. I wanted to write some more plays. I think there was a degree of fear, because it was such a hit. When you come back to a play all these years later will it stand up? Will it still work? The film had gone out there so that kept the piece somewhat present, although the film is very different [from the play]. I so don’t want to direct CLOSER that it’s an absolute pleasure watching David shoulder the load! But we’ve had lots of conversations. And, truthfully, he’s a director who really understands the play as well as I do. He is intimately engaged. Really from the moment I saw David’s production of THE REAL THING at the Donmar in 1999, I thought: ‘This is the guy who I would love to direct CLOSER.’ I’ve watched his work over the intervening years – he did a really good Betrayal on Broadway. He’s a director I follow. It’s lovely to see the characters re-embodied.

How did you come to write CLOSER? Do you have a particular writing process? It varies from play to play. I really have no set pattern. I do always have one mysterious situation that I don’t fully comprehend but I know has to be in the play. With this play it was the lapdance scene, which is right in the middle. I had a man and a woman. I didn’t know who they were or what they were called. That was the first scene I wrote – a dialogue between ‘man’/’woman’ in a club. Some of the dialogue I wrote in the summer of ‘96 is still in the play. I worked backwards and forwards from that scene. Originally, I thought it might be the first scene of a play. Then I realized, at a certain point, that it was in the centre. 22 CONTENTS BACKGROUNDPRODUCTIONRESOURCES

I think the second scene I wrote was scene one with Alice and Dan. I wanted to know who the girl from the club was. But I knew she wasn’t interacting [in this scene] with the guy who was in the lapdance club. At one time the play had six characters. There was another couple in the play, who were rather content. They were a stable couple commenting on their friends who were getting into all kinds of romantic scrapes. They were called Jake and Natalie. I didn’t write much for them. They were just there as comic relief from the agony. This may sound like a pretentious thing to say – it probably is – but at a certain point, a play assumes its own life. You become a channel for it rather than its creator. It just seems to have its own heart and you have to respond to that. So Jake and Natalie had to go. I had to accept that I was writing a somewhat bleak, austere play. Reducing it to four characters made it more difficult to write. But it became more classical in its shape. And that was quite a breakthrough – eliminating two characters. Recognising you could do it with four.

Do you feel that audiences always understand the show as you intended it? The thing to say about the play that isn’t immediately apparent – but is so obvious – is that really all you’re seeing is the beginning and the ending of all the possible permutations in relationships between the four characters. You see how they meet. And you see how they end. And there’s not that much in the middle. That was always part of my thinking with the play – the beginning of relationships are terribly interesting. We all want to know – ‘How did you meet? How did you fall in love?’ Then we all want to know – ‘How did it end?’ Nobody wants to know how about the middle, where it was just up-and-down and there were good times and bad times. So I thought: can you do this? Can you write a play that has the exciting bits without the boring bits? I think of it as a romantic play. For all its language. And for all its aggression at times, it’s a play with a soft heart… And a hard heart!

The internet scene in CLOSER is celebrated as an astonishing piece of prescience – you saw the internet coming… I wasn’t visionary, I was lucky. I had this idea for a fun scene. But it’s a Shakespearean idea – man disguised as woman, playing around. In Twelfth Night, woman disguises as man, finds love. It’s the oldest idea in the world – by being in disguise you might find yourself. Or find someone else. And I thought this was a pleasing modern variant. But I was in no way commenting on anything, really. Because back in ’96, nobody quite knew what was going to happen. I certainly didn’t – I just thought it was a fun scene. With dramatic potential. To be incredibly rude but incredibly distant in some odd way. I suppose I thought: ‘Well, it might go like this.’ I don’t buy the idea that people are different because of the internet. Life is a bit different. But it’s the same. If you write a love story, and you write one that catches some kind of fire, they generally survive – if they’re good. Because people love a love story, we all do. We need to understand about relationships and love. And one of the ways we do that is films, books and plays. So I don’t think CLOSER has survived because of its internet scene. I think it survives because actors want to play it, directors want to direct it. And its subject matter is universal. CLOSER is by far the most universally produced of my plays. I think that’s because of its subject.

23 CONTENTS BACKGROUNDPRODUCTIONRESOURCES

There’s some argument in the UK press about whether text-based, new writing theatre is under threat. What do you think? I’ve been working in the theatre since the mid-90s and this conversation has been recurring. I’m a playwright. I write plays. I hope I that will always write plays and people will want to do them. I like that you can take an old play off a shelf and find out about how people lived three hundred years ago. Or how a playwright said they did. I like plays. I like plays that are written by people. And I think there’s a difference if you see a play – I like a person’s vision of a thing. This is what the playwright wrote and here we are, doing this thing. But I would say that: I’m a playwright! I think it’s good to have the debate, but I don’t feel that playwriting is under threat. I think this is a fantastic era of playwriting. I’m rather optimistic about theatre.

Rachel Redford

24 CONTENTS BACKGROUNDPRODUCTIONRESOURCES

Because I think the more online we are, the more we crave live, communal activity. Sport and theatre seem to me to be thriving. People need to get together and watch people doing things. It’s a human need, I believe. And that’s what theatre does and I love it. It won’t happen again. This is it, this one night. You will see this. We are gathered here together. There it is. It’s beautiful.

This is your fourth time working at the Donmar – do you feel it’s a space that particularly suits your writing? I’ve been coming to the Donmar [as an audience member] since the 80s – when it was called The Warehouse. So I’ve always loved the building and the location. I’ve always wanted to have work on in this space. Because it’s a chance for the audience to be close and for the actors not to have to shout. For the subtleties and nuances to be appreciated. It’s fantastic. It’s not the only space I’m interested in, but I do love it. It feels right to be at the Donmar.

Nancy Carroll

25 CONTENTS BACKGROUNDPRODUCTIONRESOURCES

An Interview with the Cast of CLOSER

In Week 3 of rehearsals at Donmar Dryden Street, we sat down with the cast on their lunch break for an exclusive insight into the actors’ rehearsal processes.

How are rehearsals going? Rufus Sewell: Well, in about a week we go into the theatre. So we did our first run a few days ago. It went quite well. Today we’ve been picking it apart a bit and then we’ll do another run in a couple of days. Then we’ll be doing a run every day or every other day. And then twice a day. And then we’ll be doing the show… Oliver Chris: We’re at the stage now where you’ve glimpsed how it might work. Now it’s about bringing those discoveries forwards and honing it as a show.

Rachel Redford and Oliver Chris in conversation

26 CONTENTS BACKGROUNDPRODUCTIONRESOURCES

Rufus Sewell

Do you have any specific processes that you use? Nancy Carroll: I think this rehearsal process has been about connecting with the other actors really. Particularly with such an intensely, emotional, intimate play – it would be quite hard to rehearse it in any [externally focused] theatrical way. You have to just find the muscles to do it as honestly as you possibly can. Basically, having had the play for a while before we got into the room, it was – for me – just about doing it with everyone. Trying to find the voice of the four of us together and what that sounds like. Rufus Sewell: The process for me is the process of trying to find out what my process is. It always is. I don’t really know and I can’t really explain it. I struggle to talk about it, to be honest, because once you start talking about it, you start to make certain decisions. Rachel Redford: I think as well what’s great with this show – with any show – is that your process is shared. It’s a living thing. Nancy Carroll: It’s a chaotic thing! Rufus Sewell: I have certain things that I do. But they’re just things I do to make myself feel better. I buy a yellow marker. I highlight things! And sometimes I don’t even do that!

27 CONTENTS BACKGROUNDPRODUCTIONRESOURCES

How important is costume to you? Rufus Sewell: The interesting thing from my perspective about Larry is how his background is in tension with his [professional] position. When we first see him, I don’t think he’s gone all the way to posh-doctors-ville. I wanted him to have DM shoes – shoes that you could stub out a cigarette on because I think that at one point he was a punk. His aspiration wasn’t to be a posh boy. Nancy Carroll: Rufus just wants a biker jacket! Rufus Sewell: I do not! It’s important! It’s not going to be a biker jacket or a Barbour. It’s not going to be anything aspirational. It’s going to be a workmanlike jacket that a bloke would wear. I think that’s important. Then he kind of gravitates towards private medicine and after a while he starts to don that uniform. Actually, funnily enough, when he’s most in the depths of self-hatred and despair, he gets flasher. Then towards the end, I think he’s kind of found a medium between what he used to be and the flasher side. I like the idea of having a nice, sharp, well-made suit! That could be dangerously tempting! Oliver Chris: Count yourself lucky. I’m just going to have some old black jacket from a charity shop. I’ll just wear that the whole way through. Start depressed. Get slightly happier. End suicidal. One jacket does it. And a pair of Y-fronts, actually. Nancy Carroll: So much of it is instinct. You just have an instinct about things. Rufus Sewell: On a previous show I was trying stuff on with the costume designer. I put on a jacket and she said ‘Oh! There he is!’. And it was true. It was a great way of putting it. Nancy Carroll: Equally you can feel it with the wrong costume. It’s quite alarming. To try to continue the work that you’re doing. When you feel like you are, literally, in the wrong trousers or the wrong shoes. Rufus Sewell: The wrong feather boa… Nancy Carroll: That is a nightmare.

How conscious have you been, during rehearsals, of the unique demands of the Donmar space? Nancy Carroll: We all went to see the last production at the Donmar. Rachel Redford: Yeah! That’s when it got scary… Rufus Sewell: Especially sitting high up. I’ve never played there [the Donmar] before. I’ve always thought of it as incredibly intimate. Until I get in there I don’t really know. I was very curious to see a musical there. Because my tendency is always to be intimate – as if it were actually happening. I’ve always found it a real stretch to bring it up to some level where people at the back can hear it. It doesn’t come naturally to me. It’s always felt very awkward. I think even at the Donmar there will be an element of that [need to lift a performance to fill the space]. Because it goes up [to the circle] and vocally it still needs support. So that’s certainly something that I’m looking out for. Because it’s so cosseting, this little underground space we’re in [the Donmar rehearsal room]. It’s so tempting to just be incredibly intimate all the time – which is my favourite thing! 28 CONTENTS BACKGROUNDPRODUCTIONRESOURCES

Oliver Chris: For me, what always strikes me in any theatre – whether it’s the Donmar or the West End or the National Theatre – is that they carry with them such history – industry, cultural, personal history. I’ve never worked at the Donmar before. But I remember seeing Alan Cumming’s 1993 CABARET there and Tom Hollander’s THREEPENNY OPERA in 1994. I’ve not walked on the stage. I’m really thrilled about that moment when we step on it for the first time. Because it carries a real responsibility but also a real sense of pride and excitement. Just stepping onto the stage will feel like you’re entering a little part of history. For me – as a person and as a professional – that’s a really thrilling and wonderful thing. Nancy Carroll: It’s a buzzy space. But it is deceptive: it feels incredibly intimate but you do have to remain conscious of the circle or they feel left out. Rufus Sewell: I think you have to be vocally present. Diction is important. It would be quite easy to let the noise come out but for audiences not quite to catch it. Nancy Carroll: Perhaps… subtitles?

Rufus Sewrel and Nancy Carroll

29 Section 3: Resources

Rachel Redford

30 CONTENTS BACKGROUNDPRODUCTIONRESOURCES Sp tlight

Interview with Deborah Andrews, Costume Supervisor

‘This is a play in twelve scenes in twelve different locations. That’s a given of the piece. And that was always of its conception was that we would be somewhere different, every scene. We never return.

Therefore you have to have very minimal set. I’ve seen the play performed in theatres all over the world and there is always a limited amount of furniture. So costume is extremely important to define where we are and what’s happening. It’s a difficult to design but quite a pleasing challenge, I think.’ Patrick Marber

Deborah Andrews is the Costume Supervisor for CLOSER. Working closely with Designer Bunny Christie and the actors, it is Deborah’s job to find exactly the right clothes for each character and to make sure that they not only look right, but also work practically. We sat down with Deborah to learn more about her role.

Can you talk me through how the process actually works? We start with the actors. But slowly. There’s always a bit of getting to know the character. That’s as much for us as it is for the actors and the director. Sometimes you start at the very beginning [of the rehearsal process] but usually not. Instead, you have the first ‘costume chat’ after a week or so. On a bigger show you might have to be more decisive and have the chats earlier – simply because you have to start making things. The costume chat is between me [the Costume Supervisor], the designer [in this production, Bunny Christie] and the actor. The actor will say what they think and we’ll say what we think. Hopefully they’ll be similar!

For example, Rufus mentioned that he liked the idea of Larry wearing a specific jacket. Yes – very often actors come to the meeting with a backstory of how they see their character. So you incorporate their ideas. We might show what we buy to Rufus and he might say, for example, ‘Actually, it shouldn’t be a Barbour jacket because that makes him a certain type of person. It needs to be more like the kind of jacket you might wear on a motorbike.’ Costume is just another way of making and revealing a character. In the same way that when we see someone [in real life] we look at them and make judgements [on their appearances]. So it has to be a collaboration between the actor and the designer. You’re all just helping the audience recognise who the character is. The next step is to have a fitting. We tell stage management we need to see someone and they’ll give you a slot when it works for their rehearsal schedule. You get all the costume you think they need on a rail in the order [scene by scene] that you think they need it. Then you just work your way through [with the actor]. But the actor might say, ‘No. I don’t like that. No, I don’t think that’s right for him. Or he would wear cufflinks – his shirt would have double cuffs.’

31 CONTENTS BACKGROUNDPRODUCTIONRESOURCES

Or you’ll simply have practical things. Nancy might say, ‘Ollie’s really tall – I need to wear higher heels than I would normally wear.’ But, equally, most of her costume isn’t very dressy. So it’s a question of finding, for example, boots. Because she wears jeans quite a lot you might see that outfit with a slightly lower heel. So you’ve got to find a slightly higher heel that still looks like an everyday boot. It’s about experimentation. And nuance – which is what costume’s all about. For example, yesterday we bought shoes for Rufus. They looked beautiful off. But when he put them on they looked completely wrong. They were too flat. The toe was the wrong shape. They were a lovely, traditional English make so they should have been perfect but they simply didn’t have the right nuance.

Rachel Redford

32 CONTENTS BACKGROUNDPRODUCTIONRESOURCES

The play was written in 1996. Is this referenced in your costume design? The costume is very much contemporary – not specific to a period. I think, anyway, it’s hard to do comparatively recent stuff. Because people just look at it and think it looks a bit… odd! So you probably think you were wearing the same clothes twenty years ago [as today]. But when you look at pictures all the proportions are slightly different. In this case, anyway, it’s just about what’s right for these characters.

How does CLOSER, specifically, use costume to help tell the story and reveal the characters? Dan’s costume is in blues and browns. It’s softer – tweed or corduroy. His shirts are, perhaps, brushed cotton. He’s got quite traditional brown shoes – almost brogues. Larry is much more urban. He’s grey or navy blue. It’s sharper. His character changes more – when he starts off he’s a bit chippy. But then he does well for himself. He’s not flashy but he’s certainly well-dressed by the end.

Nancy Carroll

33 CONTENTS BACKGROUNDPRODUCTIONRESOURCES

Alice is the youngest and the flightiest. When we first see her, she’s just been out clubbing. So she probably shows more flesh. She’s more girly. She would go to Topshop, perhaps, or vintage shops. Anna is more refined. She’s more grown up, but she’s not boring, she’s elegant. And, to use an old-fashioned term, everything’s very well turned out. But she works hard to look cool and effortless.

Is working at the Donmar different from other theatres? If you work on a musical, for example, you have a much bigger budget. But there are lots of characters and you also have lots of understudies [all of whom need duplicates]. So suddenly that bigger budget doesn’t go far. So working on a play with four people is a delight. But then, having said that, probably everyone’s got six – eight – outfits. So you’ve got to squeeze all that out of not a large amount of money. More than the theatre, the big question is whether it’s a period show or something modern. If you’re doing a period piece you need to have things made – you need to choose the fabric, find the makers. It all takes much longer to come together. I suppose the other thing is, when you work in a theatre such as this and on a short run, that the theatre can’t afford to go dark [have nothing showing] for long. So the previous show finishes on Saturday night, we build the set to get on stage for Tuesday and then we only have Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday before we start previewing on Thursday night. So if you want to make any design changes – anything major – it’s very hard. So you have to, to some extent, plan ahead and treat your preview period as an extension of rehearsals.

How did you come to be a costume supervisor? Completely by mistake! I studied fashion. I went to what is now Central St. Martin’s – it was then just St. Martin’s – and did fashion design. I worked for John Galliano [a famous British fashion designer] – because they put second year students with a final year students. Through him I got to know people who’d worked at ENO [English National Opera] and the National. So I went to work at ENO for a couple of weeks doing a spot of buying and that was that, really. I can’t imagine doing anything else now. I’ve done both ever since. I’ve gone back into the fashion industry – done some fashion stuff. I’ve worked for ENO, I’ve done operas, I’ve done plays. I’ve done stuff in the West End. It’s not really been a masterplan. It’s more just been seeing an interesting side road and thinking, ‘I’ll try that for a bit!’

Any advice for people interested in working in costume? That boring old thing of doing work experience! When I was studying, I don’t think people realized what their job prospects were or how they went about it [building a career]. Everyone thought they were going to be a designer. But not everyone can be a designer and not everyone wants to be a designer. Some people are much better at being the team behind the designer. And that’s as important. Because otherwise it wouldn’t happen.

34 CONTENTS BACKGROUNDPRODUCTIONRESOURCES

Workshop exercises – CLOSER

Anna’s photos

ALICE: The people in the photos are sad and alone but the pictures make the world seem beautiful. So, the exhibition is reassuring, which makes it a lie, and everyone loves a Big Fat Lie.

The object of this exercise is to explore what the effect of photography is on performance – whether it naturally/automatically reveals a truth about the internal feelings of a character and to explore how the act of taking photos changes the relationship between two characters. Divide into groups of three. Each group should have access to a digital camera/camera phone. In your group, choose someone to be the Photographer, someone the Subject, and someone to be an Observer. The Subject should think of a real, personal memory that is extremely happy, extremely sad or extremely boring. They mustn’t tell the rest of their group what they are feeling. And they shouldn’t try to actively perform anything. They should just try to connect with the memory as if it happened recently but that it isn’t what the photoshoot is for. Try to remember the details of the event as specifically and clearly as you can. Keep this memory in the forefront of your mind. The Photographer should now take photos of the first member. Try to make the photos as aesthetically pleasing as you can, without worrying about how the Subject is feeling. Make the pictures cool. Show off. The Observer is not involved in the action. But should try to notice what is taking place in the act of taking the photo. Observe how the act of taking the photos is making the Subject and Photographer feel. Notice what the Photographer is missing/not revealing. Take photos for about two-three minutes. The Subject should try to follow the directions of the Photographer. Then switch roles without talking about what you’ve done (don’t let the Subject reveal what they were remembering/feeling). Have the Photographer now be the Subject, the Observer be the Photographer and the Subject be the Observer. Do the process again – take more photos. Join back together with the full workshop group. Show some of the photos and let the Subjects talk about what they were remembering/feeling at the time. Think about how the photos reveal/don’t reveal this. Discuss how the process of taking the photos changed the relationships in the room – how it altered the balance of power between the participants.

35 CONTENTS BACKGROUNDPRODUCTIONRESOURCES

Scene work

Divide into groups of three. Below is an extract of CLOSER. Read the lines aloud quickly – someone reading the part of Dan and someone else as Alice. The remaining participant will be the director/observer – they are to be the outside eye on how each exercise affects the performers.

Alice You’ll be late for work. Dan Are you saying you want me to go? Alice I’m saying you’ll be late for work. Beat. Dan Why were you at Blackfriars Bridge? Alice I’d been to a club near the meat market ... Smithfield. Do you go clubbing? Dan No, I’m too old. Alice How old? Dan Thirty-five. Alice Half-time? Dan Thank you very much. So, you were clubbing ... Alice Then I went for a walk, I went to see the meat being unloaded. Dan The carcasses, why? Alice Because they’re repulsive. Then I found this tiny park ... it’s a graveyard too. Postman’s Park. Do you know it? Dan No. Alice There’s a memorial to ordinary people who died saving the lives of others. It’s most curious. Then I decided to go to Borough - so I went to Blackfriars Bridge to cross the river. Dan That park ... it’s near here? Alice Yes. Dan Is there a ... statue? Alice A Minotaur. Dan I do know it. We sat there ... (my mother’s dead) my father and I sat there the afternoon she died. She died here, actually. She was a smoker. (Remembering.) My father ... ate ... an egg sandwich ... his hands shook with grief ... pieces of egg fell on the grass ... butter on his top lip. But I don’t remember a memorial.

36 CONTENTS BACKGROUNDPRODUCTIONRESOURCES

Make sure, as a wider group, that everyone understands all the language/words/places in the scene. You’re now going to quickly explore different approaches to playing this short scene. Run the scenes each time after each short exercise. Have the director make short notes each time – observe how each short exercise changes the way the scene works as a piece of theatre. A) Block the scene – sketch through the scene working out what/if might happen physically during the dialogue. Don’t take too long – it can be extremely simple. Run the scene. B) Memories – each of the characters recalls memories during this scene – the club, the meat market, Postman’s Park. Spend a couple of minutes alone trying to imagine these memories as concretely as possible. Run the scene – see if it changes. Run the scene. C) Listening – having talked about what the characters are doing, try now to focus each performers’ attention on listening to the other character. Don’t act listening, actually listen. Try to watch and follow what the other character is doing. This is extremely difficult – especially you’ll need to use the written script. Don’t worry if it means that there are pauses between the lines as the performers refocus to look at the text. Run the scene. Come back together and show each other the scenes as you think they are best performed. Talk about what you thought was effective, what worked for you – it’s absolutely right that different performers will respond to different approaches. Have the observer/directors talk about what was difficult and what yielded the best results.

Oliver Chris

37 CONTENTS BACKGROUNDPRODUCTIONRESOURCES

I’d hate anyone to think: ‘Oh God, this is all we’ve got to look forward to as we enter our twenties and thirties?’ It’s not a prescriptive play. It’s not aggressively saying, ‘This is how it is! And this is how it always will be.’ This is how it is in this specific situation with these four people I made up. It’s not a diatribe about the nature of love and the human heart. It was just how I felt at the time.

Patrick Marber

The Cast of CLOSER

38 CONTENTS BACKGROUNDPRODUCTIONRESOURCES

BIBLIOGRAPHY

‘In-yer-face Theatre: British Drama Today’ by Aleks Sierz– 5 Mar 2001 – Faber & Faber Modern British Playwriting: The 1990s: Voices, Documents, New Interpretations by Aleks Sierz – 30 May 2012 – Methuen Drama Modern British Drama: The Twentieth Century – 2nd Edition – 28 Nov. 2002 – Cambridge University Press Patrick Marber’s “Closer” (Modern Theatre Guides) – 28 Feb. 2008 – Continuum International Publishing Group Ltd. Thatcher’s Theatre: British Theatre and Drama in the Eighties by D. Keith Peacock – 30 Mar. 1999 – Praeger Publishers All Our Yesterdays – article by Michael Billington, Samuel Adamson and Stella Duffy – 3 August 2006 – The Guardian

Rufus Sewell

39 About the Donmar Warehouse

The Donmar Warehouse is an intimate not for profit 251 seat theatre located in the heart of London’s West End. Since 1992, under the Artistic Direction of Sam Mendes, Michael Grandage, and now Josie Rourke, the theatre has presented some of London’s most memorable theatrical experiences and has garnered critical acclaim at home and abroad. With a diverse artistic policy that includes new writing, contemporary reappraising of European classics, British and American drama and musical theatre, the Donmar has created a reputation for artistic excellence over the last 21 years and has won 43 Olivier Awards, 26 Critics’ Circle Awards, 28 Evening Standard Awards, two South Bank Awards and 20 Tony Awards from ten Broadway productions. Alongside the Donmar’s productions, we offer a programme of Education events, which includes subsidised tickets, introductory workshops and post show discussions, as well as special projects which give young people an opportunity to involve themselves more closely in the work of the theatre.

For more information about the Donmar’s education activities, please contact: Education Department Donmar Warehouse 41 Earlham Street London WC2H 9LX T: 020 7845 5820 F: 020 7240 4878 W: www.donmarwarehouse.com/discover