REVIEW: The Boline Inn


Rating: 3 out of 5.


“A well realised aesthetic vision overcrowds the show’s insightful narrative”


A woman looking for her missing uncle stumbles upon a strange hotel run by witches—welcome to The Boline Inn. It’s a cool premise, and the periodic eighties setting is a fun addition, allowing it to be soundtracked by a mix of live folk songs and Madonna. There’s a lot of whimsy in this play, paired with an interesting storyline which could make it something that really appeals to a specific audience. Like many of the films of its eighties setting, it has the ornaments of a cult classic itself. With some work on the clarity of the narrative, the show could really have the potential to reach this kind of appeal. 

The design of the play is all-round wonderful to look at, especially considering the smallness of the space. The decor on the walls was intricate and brought the atmosphere of the room alive. There was some fabulous use of materials, which made for a spectacular display when assisted by some great lighting choices. The costuming too was impressive and fashionable without feeling out of place. There was clearly a very strong aesthetic put together for the play. The concept is rich and fun. However, it felt sometimes, as though the visual element of the play preceded the plot. 

Many of its key plot points felt missed by the dialogic cluster of very varied language uses. Regional variation is definitely an addition to the show, but it felt as though some of them were speaking from different time periods, which felt inconsistent at times. If this was the intention, it’s definitely an interesting one, but the challenge of being able to communicate a narrative through such varied uses of language requires some serious precision. If the script was edited with a little more of this in mind, I think it could make for a really attentive story. 

Whilst the set was very appealing, the space itself often felt misused. Having the audience sat on diagonals to the stage made the room feel larger, but also meant the space itself was more limited. A gap between the audience also was not big enough to accommodate the actors walking through it, and made for a slightly uncomfortable viewing experience for some of the audience members who were sat close to it. Discomfort is fine, sometimes brilliant, if used productively, but this felt like more of an oversight and something that could have been solved by either widening the gap or just using offstage space. On stage, there was an odd scene change where a table is slightly tilted to signify something, though what this signified I could not decipher. Keeping it static would have felt more appropriate, or its movement could have been more seamless if done during blackouts. 

The cast were distinct in their performances, and you could tell they had a real love and understanding of their characters. Notably, Marley Craze was commanding with her performance of Betty, and Grace Mia Harvey and Natasha Jobst brought a humorous chemistry as the duo Val and Caroline respectively. Sometimes the characters leant a little on regional stereotypes, never particularly offensive, just a little bit lacking in consideration. With the limited space though, a lot of scenes involved having them all on stage, making the space a bit crowded. Cutting down some of the appearances of the cast, perhaps even the cast number itself, would help with the show’s clarity. 
The Boline Inn was an enjoyable watch, clearly with a strong vision. The storyline it offers has some good twists and insightful societal observations—they just get a little lost in the crowd. It would be fantastic to see this fleshed out a little further, making clear exactly what has brought each of the characters to the Inn, and why we too should come in.

REVIEW: Beauty and the Beast: A Horny Love Story


Rating: 4 out of 5.

He’s Behind You! Strike gold again with another hilarious pantomime for all to see


Pantomimes are a cultural staple in the UK, marking the lead up to Christmas with family inclusive interactive theatre. In Beauty and the Beast: A Horny Love Story, that family-friendly appeal is similarly broad, perhaps though for a different kind of family. 

Targeted to a more gay (particularly male) audience along with all the staples of classic panto, the result is a relatively raunchy parody of the classic fairytale. One could argue that with the 18+ rating, they could afford to be even raunchier! But the story itself is actually quite fresh, replacing France for north Scotland, creating a setting that is actually quite vivid in its world-building. Its primary settings are a motorway service station, the Beast’s castle (of course), and an oil rig. It feels believable, not forced, whilst also transforming some of its more ordinary locations into something more fantastical. The adaptable set design by David Shields really helped bring this to life. 

The humour throughout is clever without being patronising. It works really well as a reflection on gay culture that generally doesn’t rely on simply calling out references, but working them further into the story and punchlines. There is a strong sense of gay men being the main demographic of the show, and diversifying the voices involved in making it somewhat might broaden the show’s appeal even more. Some jokes about lesbians felt a bit outdated and contradictory to our better contemporary understandings of lesbian relationships and sexuality. But still, there is a real effort made to capture a wider demographic, which is commendable.

The musical numbers are some of the highlights of the show, with tight choreography by Carole Todd and songs by Jon Bradfield that are musically brilliant and lyrically hilarious. They felt regularly fresh, considered and referential in all the right ways. 

He’s Behind You!

The cast were all an incredibly talented bunch, bringing a camp energy to their performances which put the audience at ease enough to actively participate in the show. Laura Anna-Mead and Dani Mirels were excellent at this, as well as Chris Lane, who played the classic panto villain in a brilliantly hateful fashion. Props must also be given to Keanu Adolphus Johnson, who played the beast with a great, consistent use of voice, and with a bit of genuine heart which made his character all that more appealing. Matthew Baldwin as the panto Dame was an absolute highlight of the night, and in no doubt held the reins of the show with ease. He made the show comically self aware, and if anything were to go wrong, Baldwin could play it off with hilarity, making it a moment of addition to the show’s appeal. Truly a class act, it is clear why this has been his role for nine of the company’s Pantomimes. 

With Beauty and the Beast: a Horny Love Story, you are guaranteed a good night. The script just never lets up. It is clear that not only did a lot of work and focus go into making the show, but also a great deal of love, which is felt and extended throughout the room to the audience.

REVIEW: Precipice


Rating: 2 out of 5.

“A very interesting premise is not expanded upon, only explained” 


A tower in Greenwich overlooking the Thames sits at the centre of Timelapse Company’s debut musical Precipice. Following two distinct timelines—pre- and post-apocalypse—and set to an “electro-folk” score, its premise promises something original, exciting and potentially innovative. Unfortunately, the originality begins and ends there, as the show spends much of its two-hour runtime explaining what has already been written in the programme.

After a sombre recording of a person tracking their own survival and stumbling upon the infamous tower block, the show begins on a slightly jarring note: it jumps straight into a makeshift living-room concert where we are somewhat introduced to our cast of the future—a cohort trying to live out of the tower block, giving us a ham-fisted rendition of the events that have come before. Some musical numbers include lyrics listing Monopoly pieces; another relies on a chorus repeated four times. It feels as though the show’s lyricism, especially in this first half, lacks precision.

The audience is initially addressed directly, giving the impression that we are part of the room—an interesting idea that is, unfortunately, abandoned immediately after this opening moment. What follows is an interweaving of this ensemble singing to explain the plot with a present-day timeline following a couple moving into the apartment.

This couple are believably unremarkable and comfortably middle-class, with one-liners about Waitrose and Pret subscriptions that seem intended to carry the weight of the show’s promised dark comedy. I must admit, when the setting was described—paired with the poster design—this was not what I imagined. We spend a large amount of time with these characters, meaning that a play with the potential to look to the future, to humanity, and to our present ultimately rests on the familiar laurels of contemporary life and contemporary musical theatre. The music, too, rarely leans into its “electro-folk” identity, instead gravitating toward well-tested, repetitive musical-theatre forms. Musical theatre is at its best when inner lives and worlds are revealed; here, attempts are made, but they feel underbaked, resulting in an unmemorable soundtrack.

The second half is stronger in most respects. The future ensemble experience conflict when the power goes out, and for the first time I found small moments where these characters resonated. This was largely due to performance: a brief moment where Eric Stroud’s character lifts a plant in a particular way tells us more about him as a greenhouse worker than much of the script does. The intimacy of these moments made me realise how much characterisation had been left unexplored.

Holly Freeman is the unquestionable standout. Her performance is understated, and her tentative approach to the difficult situation Emily faces makes her a character you can genuinely feel for and understand. Her singing is also incredibly smooth. The on-stage instrumentation, too, hints at what the show’s sound could have been. The cast are unquestionably multi-talented, playing multiple instruments and generally singing well; it’s a shame the material isn’t focused enough to make the subject matter of their songs as expansive as their abilities.

It feels as though the team came up with the concept of Precipice, and the result is an effort to fill in the blanks. I wanted to know who these characters were, what brought them to the tower, how they coped, whether Emily truly left the city. Some of the more questionable science of the post-apocalyptic scenario would be forgivable if the play spent less time justifying itself and more time fleshing out the characters and the world they inhabit.

This show runs at New Diorama Theatre until 13th December. Tickets here.

REVIEW: You at Seven Dials Playhouse


Rating: 3.5 out of 5.

“The direction is tight, and the acting impressive in Rosie Snell’s onstage adaptation of You”


Mark Wilson’s script for You tells a touching story of a mother being reunited with her son, who she was forced to give up for adoption at his birth. Rather than focusing on this reunion, the play focuses on all the events leading up to that moment. It’s an autopsy of a broken family that treats all its characters with an empathy that further complexes the story. This production at the Seven Dials Playhouse shows some serious promise, with great acting choices and some incredibly concise direction. 

Sarita Plowman commands the stage excellently, and her range is impressive. Her portrayal of Kathleen is heartening, but even more so are her performances as Kathleen’s mother and Charlie’s adoptive mother. The vocal switch between these characters is clear and poised, giving each character a fully realised story. This is well assisted by Rosie Snell’s direction. Particularly, the switch between playing Kathleen and her mother was incredibly smooth, conscious of space enough for us to picture exactly where each was standing in the argument sequence. Space is used very well in this production. The aisle between the audience was used well to transition scenes, accompanied by onstage audio to indicate what was happening outside of our field of vision. The direction of the play was consistently very tight, with a great focus and drive to it. 

James Dangerfield also delivered a good performance, especially as Kathleen’s father. There was perhaps a little less distinction between the characters he played, and sometimes his accent was a bit unclear. Nevertheless, the two brought to life a strong history of this unconventional family, bringing them up to the instigating moment of the play. There were some touching moments delving into the reasons Charlie’s adoptive parents couldn’t have children, and their pain in this was truly felt. 

The set and costume design for the play was more low-key, which felt appropriate for the two-hander. However, some choices felt confusing and unfocused, something which didn’t match the overall tone of the play. The set consisted of several cases and two blocks, with only one of the cases actually being used. Additionally, there was a large metal panel at the back of the stage which was never explained or explicitly used. The set lacked consistency, and would have benefitted from toning it down to a minimalist design (even just the two blocks would work) or committing to a period setting. The costumes were fine, but felt similarly unconsidered. There is a vivid world in the script of this older, small British town, and it felt like this production didn’t quite bring it all to life. The performances did this, which is the most important, but the lack of an explicit design vision and no use of sound to bring to life this world was a missed opportunity. That is, besides Andrew Stuart-Buttle’s composition, which assisted scenes nicely, especially when the orchestral hums became distorted and leaned into the electronic. 

The script, originally a radio drama, is written with great use of language, revealing the character’s inner lives and motivations. There is a strange sort of omission of the character of Charlie, Kathleen’s son—not a complete omission, but not much focus either. But regardless of this, the diagnosis is thorough in Rosie Snell’s direction of this story, and with a little more attention given to the world-building of the play, it will captivate audiences across the country when it hopefully tours in the future. 

REVIEW: Where have all our women gone?


Rating: 4.5 out of 5.

“Huskisson’s play deserves to be embedded in the cultural membrane” 


With Elizabeth Huskisson being the first playwright to be commissioned by the police, I was interested to see the kind of work she might create for an institution which has historically—and recently—been criticised as one riddled with systemic misogyny, racism, transphobia, homophobia and ableism. The public’s trust of policing in this country has been brought into question. Huskisson’s work is certainly a mechanism to resolve this.

This resolve is not brought through any affirmation of their services, but by interrogating this lack of trust precisely. Interrogative is the most appropriate word for Where have all our women gone?. The murder of Sarah Everard bookends the play with a plea to Everard herself. This alone, not mentioning her surname, thrusts us straight into our own recognition and acceptance of violence against women. We are so familiar with the story that we do not need much script at all to understand exactly which “Sarah” Huskisson is referring to. 

The story does not let up from here. As is repeated throughout, there is “no plot” to the story, essentially, just a laying bare of the extent of violence against women in this country. In this stylistic approach, it is truly felt as an epidemic. Huskisson’s play is relentless, repetitive and exhausting—which is exactly what makes it so effective. Statistics, quotes and the names of murdered women are thrown out constantly. The audience is not asked to process this, but rather to feel the lack of an ability to process this. Male violence against women is extensively damaging to our public consciousness—there is a real practical sense of this unacceptability in the performance. 

The set does an excellent job assisting Huskisson’s performance, which is undoubtedly excellent. Newspapers flood the space, so much so that at some points she is seen struggling to wade through all the violent, sensationalised headlines. The whole creative team deserves serious credit for this production. The sound and lighting assisted in creating a constantly unsettling atmosphere that forced us to pay attention on the edge of our seats. 

As Huskisson recites, this play is “trying to tell a true story”. Taking on the role of every woman is an insurmountable task, and this is thoroughly recognised. The intersections of misogyny are well addressed too, in a way that doesn’t feel like a box ticking exercise. My only critique of this, understanding how difficult it is to capture the excess of violence against women, is particularly in relation to trans women. One scene in particular focused on a man in a women’s bathroom. I was unsure exactly what the purpose of this scene was, being one of the most abstract parts of the play, but I did find that it flagged some of the transphobic  narratives we’ve heard. There’s something interesting about what (cis) men desire in women in being beyond possession, and I think this can still be explored sensitively. Importantly, it would bolster the message of the play further to critically include trans women in this story of femicide, as a group statistically targeted by violence at an exceptionally high rate. The murder of Brianna Ghey springs to mind as one that quite recently had a deep impact on the indicative safety of trans women in this country. 

Although the public’s trust in the police force has been waning, mainstream accounts rarely seek to address this. Perhaps the trust is seen as too important to keep us feeling safe and under control. But regardless of what one may think of the police as an institution, it is a reassuring thought that some of those who hold the most power in society may be confronted with Huskinson’s work, whose affective power has the potential to be truly transformative. 

REVIEW: The Institution of Failed Artists


Rating: 4 out of 5.

Chanel McKenzie’s script is impressive, bolstered by Ann-Isabel Olujohungbe’s performance


Chanel McKenzie’s The Institution of Failed Artists follows struggling rapper, Rubes, who enters a militant institution designed to give failing artists one final chance to succeed. 

The premise of Artists is very interesting, and the team’s execution of it does not disappoint. 

McKenzie, a Soho Writers lab alumni, interweaves rap and scripted dialogue to give us a view of Rubes’ inner world and potential as an onstage performer. Both aspects of this are delivered with grandeur and finesse by Ann-Isabel Olujohungbe, who brings every corner of Rubes’ world to life. Whilst there may have been some nerves at the start, once Olujohungbe established the space as one she domineered, her performance immersed us fully in the world of the play. There was an investment in character that wasn’t afraid to be both playful and painful. Olujohungbe is clearly a seasoned actor with the ability to hold a room. 

McKenzie’s script is impressively expansive. The characterisation of Rubes is incredibly detailed and humane, with our experience of her story feeling very intimate. Alongside this, the supporting characters are also given a fullness very rarely seen in such a short script. Notably, Rubes’ love interest and the guard she befriends are both very fleshed out characters. Even one liners from some of the fellow artists towards the end give us a fully realised idea of their personal stakes which have brought them to join the institution. The world building as a whole is strong, and it’s a testament to McKenzie’s skill that the play is able to do this all within an hour long slot. With a little more time, perhaps we could spend longer with the beginning and the end of the play, to further fully establish the institution, and to allow the resolution to build some more. 

© Sophie Giddens Photography

Props must also be given to the lighting, designed by Aran Baskar. This was by far a highlight of the show’s overall design. Similarly to McKenzie’s script, the lighting was diverse in tone, switching from concert style flashlights, to eerie washes which assisted the darker undertones of the play. 

With a specialised set designer, the show could be visually immaculate. Sometimes the set felt a little sparse and unfocused, and with some more specific choices, we would get an ever better sense of the space Rubes is confined to. Tightening the space, making it more restrictive, would compliment the limiting impression we get of the institution in the story. 

McKenzie’s The Institution of Failed Artists is a brilliant study of the artist’s struggle, that avoids being indulgent or pitying. There’s a real understanding and exploration of the sacrifices that have to be made not even to succeed, but simply to have a chance of doing so. Risk plays an enormous factor in the life of an artist. With a play so dynamic, invested, and thoroughly entertaining, that risk has certainly paid off.

REVIEW: Bog Witch


Rating: 5 out of 5.

“Kimmings commands the stage in this approachable piece of ecocriticism with an effective heart”


There was a truly buzzing atmosphere at Soho Theatre’s Walthamstow venue on Tuesday night, ahead of Bryony Kimmings’ performance of Bog Witch. With faces familiar and new, it’s clear there was an undeniable excitement around Kimming’s new show, drawing crowds from across the city to the new venue in East London.

For all it’s worth, it must be said that Bog Witch was worth the journey, and Kimmings’ work once again lives up to the hype. 

In her usual autobiographical style Kimmings traces a recent part of her life moving from her over-consumptive lifestyle in the city to live with her eco-warrior partner and their children in the countryside. She engages with the traits of modern day overconsumption with a humour that felt like a commonality in the room. Particularly noting the want to shop at all the middle class staples—TOAST, Selfridges and Waitrose are all name dropped—has the potential to isolate the play in its references, but ultimately it just admits Kimming’s positionality as the kind of person who finds pleasure indulging in these markets. Kimmings also makes an effort to educate audiences on the climate crisis in a way that is integrated with this humour, making its content far more accessible, which has incredible utility.

The comedy of the play is found in these more expected places, but the heart of it comes from somewhere more surprising. Without giving too much away, the darker moments do not beg to be heard, but happen incredibly naturally, making nature itself at once disturbing and familiar. Kimmings doesn’t deny that Bog Witch, at least narratively, is a relatively self-centred endeavour, but she makes it a piece that thoughtfully expands its understanding into its local community, both within the play and the theatre itself. This is something it does in spite of this proclaimed self-centredness. The wrestling of self-interest versus communal interest has historically, always been contested. Kimmings’ work suggests that both can exist simultaneously—a personal narrative and a communal one. 

It helps that Bog Witch is assisted by some stellar design choices. The lighting, designed by Guy Hoare, involved some great use of shadows to create a real looming sense on stage at some moments, and at others a sense of pace and dizziness. The sound, designed by Lewis Gibson, was incredibly attentive to Kimmings’ performance, with effects on her mic switching from phone calls to large echoes, as well as an excellent storm scene which really surrounded our hearing. The set, by Tom Rogers, was impressively fluid and utilised thoroughly. In fact, it is safe to say that this was the best use of the stage that Soho Theatre Walthamstow has seen so far. Considering its impressive interior and the popularity of Bog Witch, there is a clear case for more theatre like this to be put on at the venue. “I worry that I’m making it all about me, and then I think—I don’t care.” Kimmings says on stage surrounded by other people, all huddled together. Whether or not this is true isn’t the point. The image left upon the stage is one of empathy and togetherness, one which feels genuinely healing and, more importantly, invigorating.

Bog Witch is on at Soho Theatre Walthamstow until October 25th, with tickets available here.

REVIEW: Doomers


Rating: 3.5 out of 5.

Gasda’s AI play satirises the elite, but does little to challenge them


I went into Monday night’s performance of Doomers with a somewhat limited understanding of AI, hoping that Matthew Gasda’s new play would shed some light on the new tech industry that seems to be holding every other industry at gunpoint whilst simultaneously producing nothing but misinformation and dissociative slop. Played out in two distinct acts, each with their own casts, Doomers is a piece akin to kitchen sink realism, taking inspiration from the real life events of the attempted outsting of OpenAI CEO Sam Altman in 2023. It is a solitary window into the world of capitalist elites, making it a limited insight into what is actually going on up there in Silicon Valley. Shrouded in tech/business jargon and philosophic language, the play does not seek to demystify this industry for the audience, but play it out rather plainly, expecting us to get it. 

It does this with Gasda’s incredibly tight dialogue, with some excellent one liners. “If you believe in God, you have nothing to worry about.” spits Seth, a presumed stand-in for Altman, played by Sam Hyrkin. Hyrkin’s performance is thoroughly detestable and, more importantly, believable. There has, after all, been enough footage of narcissistic tech bros circulating our media in recent years to study for such a character, and Hyrkin plays Seth impeccably. This particular piece of vitriol is spat at Alina, played by Neetika Knight, potentially the most grounding character in the play, with a performance by Knight that stood out in particular. Knight plays Alina with a blunt insistence, whose constant challenging never becomes tiring, appearing incredibly genuine. Alina’s angry concern contains an underlayer of dread, making it a convincing depiction of a sentiment many people have expressed about AI. Amy Brangwyn also plays an excellent rendition of Myra, the mediator of this dining table argument. 

In Act two, we are in the board room of the investors, with a whole new cast of characters. By this point, the play is slightly more legible, which allowed for the characters to be enjoyed more thoroughly. In particular, James Holmes as Richard was a wonderful presence on stage, with a kind of campness only obscene wealth can buy. Paddy Echlin also played Eli with a meticulous irate sense about him, giving an honest impression of the character’s unique way of thinking. Mei, played by Yuii Minari, perhaps felt the most out of place character here. This is in no part due to Minari’s acting ability, but rather the way in which the character was written. As the flagship ‘Gen Z’ character, her portrayal felt a little hamfisted, with the Pinkpantheress song and generation specific references not coming off particularly authentic for the moment. She feels like a caricature of the aforementioned generation, rather than a character in her own right. 
Zsuzsa Magyar’s direction is otherwise very successful. Considering the play can feel, tonally, like one argument played twice, Magyar’s iteration makes it feel at least constantly moving. The traverse staging was also a very good theatrical choice, assisted by a very impressive set. For what it’s worth, this is what the show felt like for its duration—very impressive. It was as though even the show was aware of this itself. But there was a moment, as I struggled to understand the events happening in the first act, where I looked around me and realised this play was not made for people like me. It’s one thing to gesture to the crazy rich elites and point out their absurdities—there are plenty of stories doing exactly this—but it’s another to critique them. With little to add other than this satirical gesture, Doomers feels like a script proving its ability to write elites to the elites. It proves little to the rest of us whose lives, as Alina suggests, are tangibly on the line with the reckless acceleration of AI technology.

REVIEW: Buzzfest


Rating: 4 out of 5.

The ensemble in Marissa Landy’s new play provide some guaranteed belly laughs


Looking to witness your heterosexual friends crash out at a music festival, but for a fraction of the price and twice the fun? Marissa Landy’s new play Buzzfest has you covered, with guaranteed giggles and a good time. Following a full weekend at the titular fictional festival, the audience are introduced to a friendship group on the rocks, but nonetheless intent on having a good time. Whilst the story is told mainly through the eyes of couple Jason (Tafadzwa Phillip Madubek) and Daisy (Georgia Dye), the full ensemble make a real name for themselves in this energising production. Where the script offers some good structure and introspective moments, the actors breathe genuine energy and hilarity in between. 

Tom Feasby’s performance as Jordan has to be a standout of the night. His delivery is immaculate, capturing the full attention of the audience for every moment he spoke. This fits his role as Jordan, the kind of friend in a group who can go on rambles and tell long stories maintaining everyone’s attention. Whilst his boisterousness is clear, there’s also a tenderness to his performance seen in moments towards the latter half of the play. Marnie Yule and Alistair Rowley also played a very believable couple as Lisa and Marvin. Their rapport felt both unusual and completely sensical, helped by consistencies like every time Marvin sternly ordered her to pass him a beer, Lisa saying “no”, him responding meekly “okay.” Details like this made them feel familiar to one another. Yule’s performance was bold, and Rowley brought so much infectious enjoyment into his performance. 

The play merges film and theatre together, something which sometimes worked really well with some good directional choices. For example, having a video of Daisy and Jason inside their tent whilst Marvin pissed on their tent onstage was an excellent directional choice, and it is moments like these I wish to see more of. The films assisted with worldbuilding, although it would have been nice to see some vignettes of their time spent inside the main arena onstage. The set was good, gradually getting messier over the course of the weekend, though a different staging choice would perhaps allow for the space to be utilised a little more. With Joe’s tent and some dialogue taking place at the back of the room, it would have been nice to see this clearer and be positioned, as an audience member, to imagine the space more dynamically. The play would have a stronger ending too, if it happened on stage rather than on screen. 

Some of the films ran a little long too, a criticism I shared with the rest of the production. Several scenes, especially the ones between Daisy and Jason, need trimming where there is repetition or not enough expansion. Editing the play to make it more of a 90 minutes (or less) showing would make for a far more snappier piece, and with this I think Buzzfest has the potential to be a very strong showing with such an excellent ensemble. 

REVIEW: Brown girls do it too: Mama told me not to come


Rating: 4 out of 5.

Poppy Jay and Rubina Pabani create a hilarious show with an ethos of honesty


Poppy Jay and Rubina Pabani’s Brown Girls do it too podcast has garnered many podcasting awards, including Podcast of the year 2020, accolades warranted by their frank and funny conversations around navigating sex and relationships. This year, the pair have brought the podcast to the stage, interweaving their conversational style with sketches illustrating and satirising their experiences. Their staged show Brown Girls do it too: Mama Told me not to Come, toured the country, including a run at the Edinburgh Fringe, resulting in a final four night run at the Soho Theatre’s new venue in Walthamstow.

With this show, they strike at a cultural tap, openly discussing the sexual experiences of South Asian women, navigating family, clashing cultures, and the hegemonies of white people and men. The show casts a net wider than the sole identities of the pair on stage and in the process they catch out a lot of societal hypocrisies and embarrassments. The result is a show that critically analyses a misogynistic and racist society, encouraging the audience to take a more active role in the discomfort of that. Even if the podcast format meant for some slightly lingering conversations, this put the audience at ease. As they often reminded us, the show’s ethos was one of honesty. With this tone, engaging in Poppy and Rubina’s riotous conversations around sex never felt like a challenge, but an invitation. 

It must be pointed out that neither of the pair have been trained at acting school. This was a surprise to me, revealed during a very invigorating Q&A with Meera Syal after their Thursday performance. Considering this, the pair showcase some fantastic acting chops, performing a wide variety of roles which make for a rich portrait of modern Britain. The inspiration from Goodness Gracious Me was noted, and it was nice to see the pair pay homage to the iconic sketch show. What Brown Girls do it too suggests is a real potential for the pair’s storytelling ability to translate excellently to something fictionalised, or something on screen. 

With the throughline story of the ‘coconut crisis hotline’, the exact intersection of living between cultures was dissected thoroughly. When impressions were done of various stereotypes of South Asian people, it felt uncomfortable. Sometimes this discomfort was good—in a skit involving the so-called ‘brown fever’ white guy, the pair ridiculed racial kinks in a way that was shocking and humorous. Occasionally the discomfort arose from another place—is the audience laughing with the pair about the senselessness of stereotypes, or are they recycling their laughs at said racial stereotypes? This isn’t exactly a critique, but rather a note of the delicate line performers from the global majority often find themselves toeing when performing to a majority white crowd.

That being said, it was heartening to see what a diverse crowd the show brought in. People engaged with the work differently, which alone makes the show worthwhile. But particularly, the pair unashamedly tackle the stigma head on—this is naturally going to cause some discomfort. With Jay and Pabani, you felt in safe hands.