Christopher Fry (1907–2005)

This is a relatively short one-act play written to be performed in a church (the first performance was in St. Mary's Church, Oxford).

The topic of the play is an initial struggle and then a succession of dreams by four English soldiers, prisoners of war, in a church which has been turned into a prison camp. Like Fry's other plays, it takes an essentially positive view of the possibilities of human nature, and for all its classification as a "religious" play it is more focussed on the show more capacities of the human spirit than on divine action.

The dreams present different perspectives shed on an essentially static set of figures chosen by Fry as types -- a man of action but little reflection (David); a man of reflection with little aptitude for action or "normal" interactions (Peter) (he's not obviously Autism spectrum but he could be played that way); a practical figure whose authority comes from his position (Corporal Joseph Adams); and an older man who has inherent authority as a result of experience and temperament (Tim Meadows). After an initial altercation in which the first attacks the second in a burst of temper, they dream of (in order the dreams appear): the Cain and Abel story; David and Absalom; Abraham and Isaac; and the three young men in the fiery furnace. In each dream the dreamer takes one role and projects other roles onto the others; in the last dream they seem to share some component of the dreaming.

The play is not quite static: there are little pivot points of perception during the last dream by Peter ("we can only stay and alter") and David ('to be strong beyond all action is the strength to have") which move them into at least the possibility of some different capacities. Whether the exposition by Meadows in that scene can be seen as transformative or merely expository is left ambiguous, especially as the characters show no clear sign of remembering their dreams.

The war in question has been "generalized", as Fry is more interested in war as a metaphor for living than as a literal thing. The original occurrence which inspired the play was during the English Civil War, and it's worth noting that at no time does Fry use anything to identify the enemy other than "towzers", a term which has a principal reference to a fictional dog in "Towzer's Advice to the Scriblers", a tract from 1681 and the Popish Plot. They speak some other language, unspecified, but not only have provided an English Bible but an English hymn book with a hymn by Mrs Alexander (i.e. of English origin) in it.

This is one of Fry's stronger plays, for all its short length. show less

Comedy written in the early 20th century but set in the early 15th. This leads to a few anachronisms, some references to information that would not have been known yet in the time of the play, but these are few, and probably would not be noticed by anyone who hasn't studied the history of science (or the history of religion - there are a couple of anachronisms there, as well). The work is a satirical take on witch hunts and the witch hunters, but more especially the bureaucrats who feathered show more their nests with the property of the condemned witches. The plot is simple: a man shows up at the home of the mayor demanding to be hanged, confessing to murders no one can verify have occurred. A mob is on a witch hunt for a young woman, claiming she has turned one of the purported murder victims into a dog. The man is poor. The woman is rich. The mayor maneuvers to try to get the man to admit he is innocent while getting the woman to admit her guilt. There are several twists and turns, love triangles, and philosophical musings, and the play ends in a not totally satisfying manner, either for those who like happy endings or those who find them facile. Overall, an interesting work that has enough strange goings ons to satisfy a demanding audience and one that can give pleasure in the reading. show less

In post-world war II Italy, a group of neighbors help each other to regain their families and their sense of self. I love Christopher Fry for two reasons. One is the language. The dialog is all in blank verse. It isn't natural, but it also isn't stilted. It flows beautifully from the tongue. The other reason is that his characters are always trying to do good, even when they don't always manage it. If you haven't read any of his plays, give them a try.

Fun play, quickly read. I'd love to see a production of this one. Mix in some superstition, a dash of misogyny, plenty of well turned phrase, a few deep observations, an abundance of wry humor and you have your basic recipe for a classic British comedy. Applause!