I had always known Fringe as either an excuse for bangs to cover a big forehead or an amazing sci-fi television show produced by Bad Robot. But I had always assumed Fringe Theatre meant a very small or intimate theatre. While being in London, I learned that can be the case but it has more to do with location than size.

I saw Heathers, which is considered a West End show, in a venue that has around 300 seats. While the theatre felt very intimate with the insane incline, which allowed a smaller distance between the front and back row, the show is not considered a fringe show. Funnily enough, Idiots Assemble: Spitting Image is a fringe show even though the theatre has over 1000 seats.

I have found, though, that just because a show is a fringe show, does not mean it’s any worse than a show on the West End. I personally thought some cast members of Heathers could have been cast differently or at least given more direction for their characters. Meanwhile, the absolute insanity that came with the skills required for Idiots Assemble astounded me. The cast members had blank faces but still created a very believable performance as the character they were portraying through a puppet! (That may be a very confusing sentence but just google the show, and it may make a little more sense.) No cast member spoke lines; they just performed the staging, following along with a recording of the voice actors. That is what shocked me the most. There was no room for error. Every puppet, every cast member, and every piece of choreography was perfectly placed in time with the pre-recorded track. It was very similar to The Burnt City by Punchdrunk in the talent of knowing cues.

As for How To Succeed In Business Without Really Trying, I have some opinions. I think the cast did an amazing job with the script they were given. They each found a lot of humor in the script that I know was not written. They also did a fantastic job adapting to the gender-bended roles. I do think the show itself is very outdated and created a small problem with the gender-bending. The roles themselves, I think would have been more interesting if the characters were gender bent, not just the actors playing them. But, after talking it over, I realize how many licensing issues that would have caused and I understand why they didn’t do that. But, the lead being cast as a female, but the character being a man didn’t change anything, which may have been the point. But, based on the poster that had the show advertised, I hoped the character itself became a woman so I could see the change in the dynamic of a woman trying to succeed in business which is a male-dominated field.

I do think it is very interesting how very popular or well-seasoned actors/celebrities can be cast in fringe shows! I love that it is a possibility because it allows people who may not get the chance to see the more popular shows to experience an actor that they may have encountered online (Ralph Fiennes in whatever show Shawn talked about – UGH I WISH). In HTSIBWRT, Tracie Bennet was cast as J.B. Biggley, the main businessman who was in charge of the whole business. I had never heard of them before, but I came to find out that they have had an extensive career! I was told to watch a video of them singing Somewhere Over the Rainbow as Judy Garland and let me just say… you should too. I would have never experienced an actor with that kind of resume and background without the fringe opportunity. That’s what I love about fringe, well that and it frames my face.

During our study abroad trip in London, we students have had the opportunity to view various kinds of theatre productions. One type of theatre that we have viewed is known as fringe theatre. Fringe theatre is theatre that is produced outside of the main theatre institutions, and that is often small-scale and non-traditional in style or subject matter. The second play that we viewed is actually in the category of fringe theatre. The play was called Jules and Jim and was performed at the Jermyn Street Theatre.

Jules and Jim tells of a love triangle. Jules (Samuel Collings), an Austrian writer, moves to Paris and through a shared love of the arts becomes close friends with Frenchman Jim (Alex Mugnaioni). This friendship is so close that it is suggested more than once that they may even be more than friends. On a trip to Greece, they become transfixed by a statue of a goddess, in particular her smile. So, when Jules meets Kath (Patricia Allison) and sees that same smile on her face, it is love at first sight. Unfortunately, Jim feels the same way. Over three decades and through World War I, the three remain connected in a triangle of friendship and romance.

I really enjoyed how the production crew of this performance did not try to do too much. It reminded me that in theatre, sometimes less is more. We don’t always have to show the audience every little thing. Sometimes we can even end up showing them too much. I enjoyed the lack of an official set or props. The play production truly left so much up to the imagination of its audience. This play sets out to captivate its audience with the close proximity between the seats and the stage and they succeed at doing just that in my opinion. I found myself not really needing a set. The actors used the space around them and the few props they had such as tables and chairs in such a creative way that I wasn’t pulled out of the story even once. Okay, that’s a bit of a stretch. I found it a little silly at one point when they showed Kath swimming by having her go behind a glass tank/window filled with bubbling water. It kind of felt like just an excuse to show off that this low budget theatre could afford such a cool technical device. Nevertheless, I still felt so enthralled by the romance and the telling of this beautiful story because of the how close I was to the actors. I could see every furrowed brow of concern or every wrinkle in a frightened forehead. I found it easier to pay attention to the story and become more connected with the story.

Besides seeing Les Mis, this is the only play that has made me cry on this trip. I thought the acting was superb; they really made the characters feel like real people to me. I was so close to the set, that I felt like I was just a ghost on the stage watching all of the drama unfold before me with no way to stop it. The actress who played Kath did a terrific job at making me despise her character, but also understand her plight. Kath can be very selfish, but it is very clear that as a woman in her time, she simply just wants to have control over her own life. I also really liked the actor who played Jim because I felt like he really brought the chemistry between him and Kath to life. He did things like play with the broken string from her pants that just showed that he was in love with her. The way he looked at her felt so real and raw. I almost got butterflies just by the way he would gaze at her or lean his head down, longing to kiss her. The tension between the two actors was so beautiful, yet tragic to see.

I think my favorite thing besides how close we were to the stage was the transitions between scenes. The production used lighting and sounds to transition from scene to scene in such a unique way. It made the play flow so smoothly and each scene fell into the next perfectly like dominos.

I was surprised by how much this play emotionally moved me, but then again, I am a sucker for a good romance. I am so happy that this production is making tremendous feats in fringe theatre by captivating its audience up-close. While, I can’t look up at a ceiling covered in naked angel baby butts holding trumpets in the heavens or have my bag checked by a security guard who didn’t actually look to see if I had a knife, my experience with fringe theatre may be better than any of the experiences I have had at the high end ones. The intimate audiences, the nontraditional theatre elements, and the creative liberty–fringe theatre just does something that main institutions can’t emulate. Dare I say fringe theatre is the finest of all theatre?

I saw Fury and Elysium at The Other Palace tonight and let me just fast forward to the second act before I even begin to delve into anything else. The play is set in Berlin, Germany and is centered around these queer Jewish artists and revolutionaries of their time. The second act begins with all the house lights still up and one of our main characters “The Writer” walks onstage. She stares menacingly at all of us. Everyone continues to talk, and she is still looking. Turning her head back and forth to make sure she is surveying everyone in that audience. After a while I realized what was going on; because why is everyone still talking when we have an actor on the stage? I begin to laugh to myself and then myself and “The Writer ” make long eye contact. I smile and she smirks. Everyone around us is still talking and the house lights are still on. This continued for what I imagined was five minutes, but it felt like fifteen. No one would be quiet, barely anyone looked at her, and it took an awfully long time to only hear a couple whisper to one another in the audience. I believe this was done to show how a woman’s presence is not as effective to silence a room as a man’s ability would be and is or a switch of a light cue to tell us to turn everything off. It was baffling. And comedic and so good, oh my goodness, it was so good. The play got us. The audience got- got!! This was probably the coolest part of the show to me, and I am so glad this is how the director chose to continue the play after intermission.  

To circle back though, this play follows the lives of these queer women in Berlin in between the two World Wars. There is The Writer, The Dada, The Madam, The Dancer, The Socialist, and The Drag King. All characters have a solo song that explains their story and why they must fight for their liberation, and each depicts a certain struggle that most women deal with in their lifetime. Abortion, supporting family but expecting to be married, sexual freedom, discontentment with society and politics, and even the dealing with an anti- semitic community. The show, although the story telling was a bit confusing at times, truly was a vignette play that had dance numbers that seamlessly transitioned one story to the next. The first song we get to hear is a story of hope from “The Writer” and how Berlin is her home. She describes how she is going to conquer this new city she has traveled to and make it her oyster. The penultimate song of the show is from the same character crying out to Berlin to let this still be her home, but alas the song ends with her taking a train ride somewhere she does not know.  

This show felt very similar to what I imagine Cabaret is. They entertain you with the sex and glamour in the first act and by the second act it is when you begin to hear the bellowing songs that are less hopeful than before. “The Dancer’s” song was my most favorite. She kept singing a very sensuous chorus that revolved around her and what she could provide to those that have fetishes and who wish to rent her for the night. She then has a beautiful dance number in the middle of her song and by the end of the choreography she walks through the audience to the bar, has a glass of water, and then sighs heavily and saunters herself back to the stage. She then begins the same chorus again with the final 2 verses changed to be much sadder and degrading to what she felt invigorated in before. She loves dancing and the dancing her clients want her to do is not satisfying for her soul anymore. Her 3rd and final lover left her, and she now performs the dance number again but does so in a more morbid and frantic tone.  

From what I understood about this play (and it ending with the cabaret style club being bombed by the Germans), it was about what liberating freedom can do for someone. How living moment to moment is all we can do. Society will always beat you down and hate you, so why even bother giving them a glimpse into your life? Certain characters would continually say they are not political and then go on and make a very politically charged statement. “The Dada” explains that nothing is supposed to make sense, and everything does not matter. A very genuine artist’s cry, ha-ha. But what I gained from this musical was even though these women were living through the harshest of times; they said fuck it. And were themselves. And they died happy; regardless of how society treated them. Regardless of how their friends treated them, or even how their fellow cabaret girls treated them, all were content in themselves and seeing that type of strength come from six femme presenting people onstage was really something special for me.  

Three is a magic number according to the great Schoolhouse Rock. I am inclined to agree with the educational musical shorts. Three is also the number of shows I have seen in London that constitute as Fringe Theatre. As of the writing of this blog post, I have seen thirteen plays in total which means just under a quarter of these performances are fringe shows.

Fringe Theatre performances are your off (off) Broadway level of shows: professional on smaller budgets and smaller stages. In order of viewing, I have seen Jules and Jim, The Curious Case of Benjamin Button, and How to Succeed in Business without really trying. The latter two were put on by the same theatre company, Southwark Playhouse, which, based on the quality of the performances is quite astounding.

“Benjamin Button” is easily in my top three for this trip while “How to Succeed” is duking it out with Dancing at Lughnasa for (un)lucky number thirteen. Granted the two shows are really only similar in that they are both musicals; however, I am astonished that this small theatre company provided me with two drastically different experiences.

Benjamin Button is a show I would recommend to anyone. I still think the actual story of a man who ages backwards is silly bordering on stupid, yet I cannot help but be absolutely in love with what I got to watch. The songs were magnificent. There was excellent blocking, and they used their space efficiently. The entire twelve-person ensemble was amazing. Due to the nature of the show, the actors double as the band. They play instruments, sing, and move in expert coordination all at once. All this to praise the incredible cast. I could not help but tear up in the end. It is a unique play that somehow pulled off what few others could. I will say as much as I did love Benjamin Button part of the reason it worked was the theatre it was in. I believe I would have been taken out of the play if the theatre had been bigger and therefore myself farther away.

Next up from Southwark Playhouse: How to Succeed in Business.The show is no new kid on the block when it comes to theatre. It first appeared on Broadway in 1961, and the story showed it. Southwark Playhouse’s version utilized a reduced cast. The stage was incredibly small, but I think how they used that space is one of the few things I enjoyed. I think the actors were good actors, I just also think I would have perhaps enjoyed the show more if the casting was shaken up differently. Southwark tried to make a statement by casting a woman in the lead role and a man as the love-interests. Although, the characters remained Mr. J. Pierrepoint Finch and Rosemary. It was a casting choice that fell flat for me especially since it hurt the musical. These two parts were written with specific vocal ranges in mind, and these actors did not have the vocal ranges to sing all their parts. Not to say they were bad singers, just to say they could not physically perform the material. It is also a very dated script. I do not typically look at entertainment as if it was written in 2023, but the rampant workplace sexual harassment and sexism is just very hard to ignore. This staging did not sweep me away from these discrepancies with the musical numbers. The lightning had some cool effects but also cast some horrible shadows. I felt as if actors were missing their marks for the spotlight particularly when they moved downstage to the left corner. It almost felt like a complete waste of my time aside from the banger of a final number. I think I would have enjoyed this in a bigger budget West End/Broadway setting especially if I was more charmed by the leads.

To wrap up Fringe, I will shortly mention Jules and Jim. We extensively hashed out our opinions about this early on in the trip (it was the second play we saw) sitting in a park by Buckingham Palace. For me, Jules and Jim was an experience I enjoyed even if I am still not sure how I truly feel about the play. There were probably somewhere around fifty seats in the theatre and at most thirty people in attendance the night we went. The play perfectly played to this kind of set up. Most of the play consisted of monologues from the characters Jules and Jim to the audience. The problem was the wildcard Cath. While kind of enjoyable to watch, there was no true redeeming quality to the character which is mainly why I struggle to formulate an opinion on the show as a whole. Overall, I enjoyed the show, but do not think I would recommend it to others.

Fringe theatre is as mixed a bag as any other professional theatre. Ultimately, it mostly comes down to the opinions of individuals. Fringe theatre often brings intimacy to theatre which can be a wonderful experience with the right script. For our group, opinions were split on both Jules and Jim as well as How to Succeed. Yet only one person who attended Benjamin Button did not enjoy it thoroughly. You can find some real gems in Fringe theatre if you look, or you can find some duds. But then again, that is true of even the highly funded West End productions. Budget and theatre size are the only markers of Fringe Theatre.

Yesterday was my birthday (yay!), and we kicked it off with a very interesting visit to Westminster Abbey. A grand cathedral that houses the graves of many well known individuals ranging from Shakespeare himself to Nelson Mandela. I would like to briefly talk about three of the people who were buried within Westminster. Of course I have to talk about the bard first, and there is some fun info too. Shakespeare is actually not buried in Westminster, but many people have called for him to be moved there. His actual body is buried within his hometown in Stratford Upon Avon, and, despite many people’s request, it hasn’t been touched since its original burial. Westminster acts instead as a memorial for the playwright. It gives him the recognition he earned, and adds a bit more flattery to his deceased name. To my suprise, another person buried within Westminster (for real this time) was Sir Issac Newton. He was a physicist and mathematician known for his work on the laws of motion, gravitation, classical mechanics, calculus, planetary motion, optics and more. I was just shocked because I have heard so much about the man, but I have never even stopped to consider where he died. His grave forever reminds us of the world we live in and the rules that always apply. I was also a little surprised because, along with Shakespeare, both were laying with giants. The whole cathedral was filled with dead kings, queens, saints, and cardinals, and here they were, just a poet and a scientist. Lastly, for the same reason as the last two, I found Charles Dickenson’s burial to be incredibly fascinating. An author of such talent is sleeping with men and women that started wars. All three of these men give proof to the power of art, science, and overall thinking. We can change the world, move hearts, and inspire people with more than just the power of a nation. We can use our words, writing, and ideas to create an influential masterpiece. I don’t know what I’m gonna do with my life, but I hope it causes me to be buried with President Barack Obama.