Lemons, Lemons, Lemons, Lemons, Lemons

 

When: 11th February 2023 (Matinee)

Where: Harold Pinter Theatre, London

Writer: Sam Steiner

Director: Josie Rourke

After reading this play a few years ago, I was very excited when the production was announced at my favourite theatre of all places. I love this play, and whilst I don't think its anything particularly special it's definitely an enjoyable 85 minutes. 

Clearly once again we have stunt casting, however I do think Jenna Coleman and Aidan Turner were great choices for their respective roles. Both actors brilliantly navigate the light and fluffy whilst subtly political writing. I think they had great chemistry and the way in which they played off each other made the characters human. Similarly I felt Josie Rourke's directing was simple but effective, pulling out the highs and lows of each character and naturally exploring their emotions. My only criticism would perhaps be the amount of sitting to standing to sitting to standing. While I felt that when they were in the positions it worked and felt natural, with such a fast paced play the act of moving between each position felt like a waste of time. I also found it interesting how little the actors stood still, they were still whilst sitting or lying down, but when stood they were almost always moving in some way. This is not necessarily a criticism as it didn't annoy me but it did interest me having been told many times before when performing to stop moving and just stand still.

The story it's self is great, having read it previously I knew what was going on. Therefore I found it interesting how one of the people I was with struggled to understand what was going on for much of the first half hour of the production. In my mind I think that perhaps is the point, the play is not presented to us in a linear story, it is portrayed as a puzzle. A series of moments in time that we can piece together to understand the journey this couple has been on. The flashback style of this play is what keeps it interesting, in reality very little happens storywise. I think the production handled this flashback style really well, using different tones of lighting to show which period we are in. It was subtle adding/taking away very little from the performance as a whole but really clearly showing which pieces came before others, helping the audience to build a clearer picture in their mind of the order of the scenes.

One of my favourite things about Lemons is that it feels like an exploration of a concept more than a story. Yet, here lies my biggest criticism. The play started off as a fringe show and its a brilliant fringe show, but bringing it to a mainstream west end theatre, I was expecting/hoping that the concept may have been developed deeper. I have always had questions about the way in which this 'hush law' works in practice. We see the effect that it has on the characters and the way they navigate their lives with it, but for me there is much that is unanswered that I would think has a big impact on the way the characters/people in this world would live. Firstly, Are people physically stopped from talking after the limit? i.e  do they lose their voice, or do they simply have to keep track themselves and stop themselves talking. Both of these would have an impact on communication in different ways. Similarly the characters mention travelling (something I think was added for this production) but is this a loophole?, if they do travel can they talk with unlimited words in a different country? And less pressing as I think it creates a good story and so is not necessarily the point, but what is the intention of this law? What issue are they trying to solve by putting it in place? Possibly answering my own question, for me this play is effective in its aim, I definitely think it makes you think more about every word you speak, the meaning of words and how we can use them more effectively. 

I did hear in an interview with Josie Rourke that Rose Aylling-Ellis (who had previously worked with Rourke on As you Like It at the Soho Place) had thrown out interest in doing a BSL version of the play, and it think this would be a really interesting idea. With a play so focused on language and the way we use our words this could be interesting to explore with a language that often already only focuses on the most important words to explain meaning rather than necessarily using every single word.

Finally one of the biggest talking points at least for my group was the set. I liked it for the most part. I thought the rounded wall full of their 'stuff' helped to reflect the fast-paced nature of the piece, whilst leaving open space for the characters to explore. I also liked the symbolism of the door, particularly when it closed as the law was put in place, and the removal of the 'stuff'. My favourite part was the shooting lights representing the amount of words they had left, it was a nice touch representing the physical effect of losing their words. However there were many things that I felt were unnecessary and frustrating. Linking back to my previous point about the transfer from fringe to west end, they tried to satisfy this by showing off with the set, but it just felt like it was trying too hard. I didn't understand the constant boxing of the squares on the cyclorama, boxing in certain areas of the stage and yellow line bringing the height down. It was distracting at times and I didn't feel it had much relevance or added much to the performance at all. When the stuff was removed leaving a black wall it was really effective at showing how their lives would be lacking, but then more stuff appeared. Although I felt this was connected showing how they now had to pick out certain things about themselves, rather than holding on to everything, it just felt a bit annoying. The oval carpet was an interesting one, whilst I didn't hate it, I liked the fact that we could faintly see where they had been previously, there was something off about it. The people I was with didn't really like the set at all, arguing that the backdrop was massively busy and distracting throughout the performance as they were trying to figure out what things were. To some extent I agree, particularly as random objects started to light up at moments, which I was a little confused about as it again seemed to bare no connection to what was happening in front. 

Overall I did enjoy this performance, and am surprised by how critical this review has ended up. I think if you didn't know anything about it going in it would definitely excite you and explore something you may not have thought about. The concept of the play is brilliant and fun and whilst I wouldn't necessarily describe it as a rom-com I can see how that may draw in the right sort of audience. Maybe I wouldn't scream about it from the rooftops but if you asked me whether you should go, I would say yes. It's enjoyable and fun, and a good form of entertainment that doesn't take too much thinking.