'Clouds' (play review)

Welcome back,

Today’s post is an unusual one, I will be reviewing the up and coming play ‘Clouds’. Me and my partner attended the second preview that Time & Again theatre company had put on at Altrincham Garrick Playhouse. Time & Again theatre company formed in 2017, and use history to highlight relevant issues our modern world has today. As a collective, they hope to draw attention to the lack of representation of women in the STEM industries. [STEM meaning Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics]. The play is "female directed, female written and female produced". It is the second play written by Laura Crow, the star of the show. If you like the sound of it, T&A are returning to Edinburgh Fringe Festival and Manchester this summer! ‘Clouds’ is set in Edwardian Britain (1913). This period had quite the tumultuous background. This was pre-war Britain, which was already struggling with uprisings of women called the Suffragettes. Luckily, it fits quite nicely with my last post about them. If you haven’t read that, it may help you with this!

Clouds explored Britain’s last summer with dark, dashing and daring characters. The audience meet five characters who are consistent throughout: Winifred Baxter (Freddie), Theodore Baxter (Teddy), Philip Brooks, Sylvia Lovejoy and Mrs Sara Fitz Morris. Initially, I admit I found it quite hard to like Freddie. I think my initial hesitation came from how serious, formal and quite dark her character is. But, I do believe that she was convincing. She was the rebel with a cause from start to finish. Strong, northern and stout: she intended to be the first female aviator in Britain! Most notably described as having: “nerves as strong as the sky, face like an angel”. Teddy portrays much softer and with charm. He is introduced as Mr. Baxter, and we know that he is Freddie’s brother. He has a stutter and so, he is looked among by others as a ‘simpleton’. He fascinated and obsessed over clouds, and we find the the link to the title of the play. Mr. Brooks was portrayed brilliantly. A dashingly, young aviator, excelling in his field. He takes Freddie on under his wing, although it is clear she knows more than he assumes. He asserts the expected casual misogyny, ‘but you’re only a… beginner’ (or woman). He is quite disagreeable as a character, but not unlikeable. He asserts his notions throughout, stating women are quite happy in their domestic sphere. This was among popular opinions in Edwardian Britain. A character like Freddie would be the hardest to come by in this period.

Sylvia Lovejoy was fantastic. My partner admits Sylvia was his favourite character and mine too. She was quite the sweetheart you would imagine. A new Suffragette, whose excited by all prospects involving this. Mentions of Pankhurst and Emily Davison, made me think someone stumbled when they called her a Suffragist. They are two distinguishable groups, so I was not sure if that was the right word. Suffragist’s were peaceful campaigners, and Sylvia Lovejoy mentioned militant tactics. Finally, Mrs Sara Fitz Morris. She is the upper-class woman who disproves of all activities. She surprises us throughout with her background and understanding. Noticeably, her outfit was gorgeous. White gloves, black hat, blue dress and a fur stole. Overall, I enjoyed each character’s output. They were interesting in their own ways, ranging from Freddie’s quite dark, captivating performance to Sylvia’s quite humbling one.

I won’t spoil too much, but the plot also surprised me. Initially, I knew it was focused around the story of a female aviator. This is quite unusual for the time. I think the combination of this with the Suffragette movement is new and unique. I do remember thinking, a female aviation story could be told without the Suffrage movement, as Freddie herself is not a Suffragette. But, it does add to the backdrop of inequality for women. I enjoyed very much the combination of an STEM industry (which is very much male-dominated) with a female focus. The females quite literally outnumbered the men. But also, it was written, directed and performed by females. I think this is so impressive, and added to why I wanted to write this piece. What I found interesting about this play was the contradiction between Freddie and Sylvia. In her desire, Freddie wanted to accomplish something that no woman had done before. This was most likely due to the lack of women in these male-dominated spheres, and the acceptance of a woman’s place at the time. Best believe it was in the home, and not in an Blackburn type D Monoplane. However, by defying this domestic sphere, it was a very modern, Suffragette action. Clearly, the first women to become an aviator would be for the history books. It is tongue-in-cheek because Freddie makes comments about Miss Lovejoy’s newly acquired group: ‘deeds not words and all that’. Yet, quite rightly as Miss Lovejoy says, Freddie could be a poster girl for strong, adventurous women. I appreciated the juxtaposition between them both. One newly devotes herself to the cause, but remains in her domestic sphere for society. The other, does not devote herself to the cause, but devotes herself to something that is historically strictly men. The rebellious nature of Freddie, and later Sylvia, is quite reminiscent of the Suffragettes.

As a historian, I appreciated many elements in the play. The historical context, music and costume design were all things I made note of. Throughout, there was not a lack of historical context. The subtle mentions of medals for valour and the death of Emily Wilding Davison (also in my last post) made it obvious they had done their research. I think this is important to have some of this in there, as it makes the context credible. After all, Time & Again theatre company say that they use history to relate to modern issues. It was held in a small venue, as expected for a preview. Thus, they had very limited space and use of background & props. But, this did not hold them back. I wondered why Sylvia’s ‘Votes for Women’ sash was teal (all sorts of blue), when they are not the historically correct colours. I assumed it was because maybe you could not directly copy them! These are all small things, but I guess you would notice them if you have an interest in the topics presented.

The lack of representation of women in these industries then was appalling, and still is now. Time & Again have described this is what they wanted to discuss: “how comes 100 years later, the rates are still appalling low for these occupations for women?” This is a question that I am unable to answer. However, these male-dominated industries are still not used to women in their field. Society needs to encourage women to enter these fields. Generally, it was worth the visit and watch. It went very quick, and it was very enjoyable. If you are in Manchester or Edinburgh this summer, it is worth seeing!