Synopsis Crying in the Chapel is an inside account of the 25 days that were spent on the roof on Her Majesty's Prison, Strangeways, during the riots of April 1990. Like JFK's assassination for the 60's generation, the question 'where were you during the Strangeway's riot' is a question for anyone knocking about Manchester in the early 90's. Whilst people on the outside were getting loved up in the clubs of the city, the inmates of Manchester's Strangeway's were staging a party all of their own up on the roof...
Crying in the Chapel is a shamelessly manipulative piece of work. Although it moves the audience with the power of the performances and the skill of the direction, the arguments articulated are so blatantly one-sided as to almost insult your intelligence and provoke a reaction contrary to the one intended.
Transcript theatre often arises as the author is so moved by an unjust event that he/she uses dramatised transcripts of interviews to increase awareness. In this case, however, writers Pauline Stafford, Chris Coghill and director Nick Clarke have based the play upon interviews with only the prisoners who took over Strangeways gaol and staged a rooftop protest lasting some weeks, which resulted in reforms being made to the prison system.
It is debatable whether the writers were wise to put such faith in people who not only have a vested interest in telling the story from a single point of view.Some key elements of the story remain obscure including the actual cause of the riots. It is suggested that both the prisoners and the prison guards were bored and just fancied a fight but it is also possible that the motive was a desire to commit violence towards the sexual offenders who were segregated for their own safety.
But then the script makes clear that this was not the fault of the rioters but rather Margaret Thatcher whose policy of closing secure care homes under the Care in the Community initiative left those people incarcerated in prisons.
The script is a peculiar mixture of a Sociology textbook and a bad B Movie. It combines dry descriptions with unconvincing dialogue. Although the media are condemned for making mountains out of molehills, the authors are coy about the offences committed by the rioters. It is as if they want to define the characters by the conditions of the prison rather than the events that resulted in them being convicted.
There is not a single character in the play with any redeeming qualities. It is just as well, therefore, that the 17 strong cast are so very good. They take on a range of roles from rioters to prison guards but the play is dominated by a towering performance from Derek Barr who by sheer talent and physical presence makes you forget that much of what he is saying does not make a lot of sense.
The real success of the evening is the stunning direction by Nick Clarke. He puts the audience right in the middle of the violence. There is a tense atmosphere even before the play starts thanks to a prison guard audibly patrolling overhead. The rioters are situated within the audience so that their outbursts and reactions are deeply intimidating. Even when Clarke allows the pace to slow the tension does not evaporate. The black and white photographs of the actual event on display outside the theatre are captured in silent tableaux on-stage with Kevin Carroll and Bill Morley’s creepy background music giving the scenes the uneasy feel of a fever dream.
Fine acting and excellent direction are not really enough to make you forget that you have been manipulated and by the end of the evening the audience might end up feeling used.
I went to see the play and did not feel 'manipulated or used'. The play is unashamed in giving a voice to the prisoners who led the uprising and for that should be aplauded. It was clear from the play what the issues were that initiated the protest in the chapel and it was clear how the media deliberately lied to attempt to discredit the prisoners on the roof. Your reviewer does the play a diservice and clearly has his own agenda. All in all a highly reccomended play. - Bob
03 May 10
-
as an addendum; if the play had been about the French Revolution would the central characters have been the soldiers of Louis XV1 or Robespierre, Marat, Charlotte Corday and the Sans Culottes etc? Irrespective of their politics and the nature of their methods they were the central characters and had more to say than the soldiers who were paid to maintain the status quo... - Mo Riaz
02 May 10
as an addendum; if the play had been about the French Revolution would the central characters have been the soldiers of Louis XV1 or Robespierre, Marat, Charlotte Corday and the Sans Culottes etc? Irrespective of their politics and the nature of their methods they were the central characters and had more to say than the soldiers who were paid to maintain the status quo... - Mo Riaz
02 May 10
I am Sean Cernow, not only do I play Tony Bush in the production but I have also been the recipient of a totally jumped up assault charge which resulted in me being sentenced to two years at Her Maj's Pleasure. I think that you would do well to take into account the FACT that this play is a 'con's' point of view. Had it been a Prison Officer's Point of View, solely to hide the hate and racism still in the walls of the now renamed Manchester Prison, you sir, might have understood that the only people who could tell this story were the cons. I'm very iontersted to find out what you would have been party to print at the time of the riots. You say that the show is one sided, it is NOT. It takes into account the fear the screws were put through, a very small minor compared to over 100 years of unsound hangings, unsound prison sentences and miscarriages of justice that have been swept under the carpet by news papers such as the Daily Torygraph. Did you even listen to David Bowen's sentence, 13 years for being in a remand wing. I am very disappointed that a man of your so called intelligence has come to the theatre and insulted the story you watched. I suggest you stick to the RSC sunshine. - Sean Cernow.
01 May 10
So,the play would have been a towering success if the central characters had been ignored, or if their crimes had been highlighted as the press had done at the time?
"There is not a single character in the play with any redeeming qualities", even though there were a few who had been on remand and not convicted of any offence at the time? We can stand on our high moral pedestals because we are not the "enemy within".
This is a shockingly vapid and one sided review and would do credit to the Daily Mail.
The outcome of the Woolf Report vindicates the actions of the rioters, and the performances of the cast made me feel a sense of liberation in the face of the daily indignities of oppression, I nearly jumped out of my seat and joined them on the roof! - Mo Riaz
01 May 10
Massively disagree. All other media/accounts 'manipulate' the other way. Crying in the Chapel, like the book some of it was based on (Strangeways 1990 - a serious disturbance), just redress the balance the other way - Fay
Closed by fire, May98, after refurbishment, re-opened autumn 1999. The Times describes it as "A theatre refurbished beyond recognition: buzzing, youth-packed, noisy spaces are connected by metal stairways, and within is a wide, twin-aisled auditorium".
Whatsonstage.com - Discount London theatre tickets, theatre news and reviews, Theatre videos, Theatre discussion, National Theatre Listings. Covering London's West End, all of Theatreland and all UK theatre. The best
for London Theatre Ticket Discounts.