Alan Ayckbourn, the much-vaunted "Sage of Scarborough", is often hailed as England's greatest living dramatist.
Acclaimed (particularly by the London critics) he may be, but the problem with Ayckbourn is that he is trapped between a desire to be profound and the exigencies of light entertainment.
Even at his best (and Woman In Mind, presented here in an accomplished co-production by Dundee Rep and Birmingham Rep, is among his best), Ayckbourn is a tease. He takes us to the end of the lane, but no further. He gives us good reason to believe there is deeper, darker, more interesting material round the corner, but refuses resolutely to take us there.
In Woman In Mind we find ourselves in parallel worlds. The first is the dull, middle-class existence of Susan, whose marriage to Gerald, a vicar, is hopelessly broken, and whose son is embedded in a cult. The other is the fantasy - induced by unhappiness and a blow to the head - in which Susan belongs to a very rich, very loving, but increasingly sinister bourgeois family.
The shifts back-and-forth place particular demands on the actress playing the titular lead. Fortunately, director Marilyn Imrie's production boasts, in Meg Fraser, one of the finest Scottish actors of her generation. Whether it is Susan's moments of lucid, furious anguish or a sudden, fearful collapse into confusion, Fraser is absolutely captivating.
She receives strong support from a fine cast, not least Neil McKinven as Bill, Susan's perplexed and enamoured doctor. Whether the play, which, typically of Ayckbourn, swings between intriguing psychological drama and sometimes facile humour, deserves all this good work is a moot point.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article