Colm Summers tells me that “we make a lot of theatre, but not a lot of drama”, as we sit down to discuss the upcoming production Papini, in the Dublin Fringe Festival. Papini is the brainchild of Felicity, a brand-new, Dublin-based theatre collective. Directed by Summers and written by Colm Gleeson, this will be their first production in the Fringe Festival. The production focuses on the life of Claude, a 20-something-year-old who is coming to terms with the disappearance of a college housemate, while reflecting upon the similar disappearance of their younger brother at a magic show on their eighth birthday. The production deals with issues ranging from mental health, identitarian politics and bodily autonomy to the pressure of creative drive, all while creating a realistic, intimate, funny and frightening piece.
Gleeson and Summers discuss the process behind writing Papini, and how the issues in the play are dealt with. In an unusual process, Gleeson enlightens me, the idea behind the show came from a singular phrase that got stuck in his mind after falling asleep on a Luas commute home. The phrase was “M Papini disappears”, and it was from this that Gleeson started to write about two friends, Claude and Mongrel, who in some way have their lives impacted by the mysterious Papini. Through these characters, the themes of identity and loss are explored. In light of recent populism in society and the victory of identity over aesthetic in politics, this play could not be better timed to address audiences in their current situations.
Summers gives the piece a glowing account, saying that it “is one of the better contemporary plays written in the past ten years”. He elaborates, telling me that it is an incredible way to give young people a chance to “interact with actual drama”. Gleeson adds that it is interesting to compare Papini to the traditional Irish dramas known all over the world. Initially, he didn’t realise the “Irishness” of his piece. It was only when it was read by people from other literary nations, did the idea of it being a “glorified kitchen sink drama” come to light. Gleeson and Summers both agree that the piece has a basis in what is seen as traditional Irish drama. However, it completely subverts the canon with characters that have multi-faceted, “creative personality types”.
I question Gleeson about the production’s approach to mental health, and how he avoided romanticisation in an effort to ensure ethical treatment of such matters. On this point, Gleeson feels they have to appear to come from the characters themselves, rather than a desire to create an “issue play”. Gleeson continues: “Those things aren’t there because it’s an issue play, they are there because they belong to the characters in the play”. This is something that Gleeson is clearly passionate about: “When you don’t set out to ostensibly tell the audience something, they have the best chance of hearing something.”
This mindset also came to light when dealing with the issue of bodily autonomy, something that the members of Felicity feel very strongly about. Again, they try not to direct the play towards the issue, but to allow the issue to be dealt with by the characters as they would in their fictional universe. Summers discusses how the effort to remain neutral, while allowing the characters to form their own opinions on matters of bodily autonomy, resulted in some linguistic difficulties. As a result, the term “pregnancy” is used as a middle ground in the production, not to preach to the audience the views of the creators, but to accurately represent the views of the characters as young people in today’s society. Speaking through the themes and issues addressed, it is clear that the play wasn’t written with specific issues in mind, but that the themes developed as the production proceeded. This is a method that aims to ensure an accurate and realistic portrayal of hard-hitting issues, and to avoid romanticisng depression and bodily autonomy.
Speaking with the creators of Papini has certainly piqued my interest. The serious approach to themes of identity, loss and the struggle to reach our own self-conceptualisations allows a universal appeal, and Summers encourages audience members from all walks of life to experience their production: “It’s a fucking good story, with an enticing villain, wrapped around a series of events that are relatable in the lives of four young people, that doesn’t conform to archetypes we see in film and TV.” It’s about young people trying to exist in ways which are fulfilling, and will be edifying to a person from any background. This production combines terror and laughter, horrific reality and existential truth, to create what is rare in a theatre seat these days: actual fear. It is destructive to dramatic tradition and aims to do exciting and dynamic things with Gleeson’s text. This production sounds hugely refreshing, and I look forward to seeing how the talented members of Felicity breathe life into this piece.
