IT seems an extraordinary misjudgment of ambition to continue
advancing claims to the British throne when there is the alternative of
a perfectly comfortable life of dissipation in Florence.
Yet we find Charles Edward Stuart's twentieth century counterpart in
the gin-sodden exile of Edward VIII in the congenial Bahamas. And there
are interesting parallels between this revival of George Rosie's play
and Snoo Wilson's more recent new play, HRH, seen at the Citizens'
during Mayfest.
Given the thanklessness of the job of monarchy in today's world,
surely no one would be masochistic enough to want to to hang on to it.
Perhaps the point of both playwrights is to suggest that the wives of
wayward branches of the monarchy harbour most of the pretending. At any
rate, both attract an unwholesome level of intrigue.
Certainly, there is an uncomfortably misogynistic undertone to both
plays, though Rosie might be entitled to argue that this derives from
the attitudes of his 18th century milieu.
The viciousness of his piece is by no means restricted to debunking
the not so bonny Charles. And despite the physical grotesqueness of the
figure he cuts once again in Robert Carr's fine performance, he pleads
for that sympathy due the victimised; this despite his recriminatory,
foul-mouthed paranoia.
The significant demonstration in this transfer, from tiny Netherbow
stage to the Lyceum, is how commandingly it holds the bigger space. And
Michael Vale's duplex design, with its screen cyclorama effect, is an
important factor in the success. It proves that new Scottish work for
under-subsidised companies, in this case Fifth Estate, can upscale
comfortably.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article