513

Things to do

Performance Review • Two literary greats at loggerheads – ‘The Visit’ is worth a visit

Lena Hunter
November 5th, 2021


This article is more than 3 years old.

★★★★★★

Peter Holst-Beck and Ian Burns as ‘frenemies’ H. C. Andersen and Charles Dickens (photo: That Theatre Company)

That Theatre Company’s celebrated ‘The Visit’ is back for another run at Krudttønden this November. Frolicsome, creative and loaded with history, this one’s worth a visit.

Written by and starring Barry McKenna and Peter Holst-Beck – who wrote and directed the ever-successful ‘Hamlet Live’ at Kronborg Castle – and co-starring That Theatre founder Ian Burns, ‘The Visit’ recounts the real events of HC Andersen’s overlong five-week stay at Charles Dickens’ family home in Kent in the summer of 1857.

On paper, the pair had the markings of a great friendship. Dickens was the pearl of 19th century British social commentary, while Anderson’s nine volumes of 156 fairy-tales have become touchstones of the collective literary consciousness in the West.

McKenna, Holst-Beck and Burns bring to life the authors’ tumultuous – and now notorious – comradeship in an arcing historical comedy that muses on the creative process of writing.

Familiarity breeds contempt
Burns and Holst-Beck’s chemistry on stage is nothing short of charming. The two go toe-to-toe, chatting, jesting, sparring and all-out clashing as equals in exchanges littered with humorous misunderstandings.

Holst-Beck’s Anderson toes a line between antagonising and pitiable, whilst Burns’ Dickens oscillates between short-fused and relatable.

McKenna – Dickens’ grouchy, whisky-swigging housewife – punctuates the battle with witty jibes. As the three navigate successive episodes of social-clanging microaggression, the roving finger of blame for the bad atmosphere never rests on one for too long.

Writers’ tears
It’s the swell and break of small tensions that prevents the prickly awkwardness from boiling over and, all said, an undercurrent of genuine regard between the two men is what comes out in the wash.

Near the end of his stay, Andersen breaks down in tears when he reads a literary review of his philosophical work ‘To Be or Not to Be’, in which it’s trashed as “confusing, meaningless and vulgar”.

It’s a touching moment, in which Dickens – by now offering nothing short of a cold front – drops his grudge and comforts Anderson with some well-chosen words of experience.

Literary boffs delight
Naturally, there are a wealth of Easter egg references to Dickens and Anderson’s collective oeuvre.

“Toodle pip! Wait … Pip … what an excellent name!” exclaims Dickens, from his writer’s desk. Later, Andersen wonders romantically whether a little girl selling matches might be wandering the streets of London.

Likewise, there is talk of Dickens’ newly-published ‘Little Dorrit’ flopping, and hints of Andersen’s ‘The Ugly Duckling’ peppered into the conversation on a country walk.

Split into ten ‘chapters’, the structure of the play also leans into the literary theme. At the outset, Burns introduces a large prop manuscript bearing the chapter names, the pages of which are turned throughout.

It’s one of a few visual gimmicks and creative props that succeeds in adding playfulness to the whole production without becoming kitsch.

A milestone production
When Anderson finally left, Dickens wrote on the mirror in the guest room “Hans Andersen slept in this room for five weeks – which seemed to the family ages!”, and his daughter Kate described him cruelly as “a bony bore”.

That said, the lasting impression of That Theatre’s visit is one of compassion, writerly influence and professional respect.

This is That Theatre Company’s 50th production – a fitting landmark for a performance that muses on the importance of artists supporting artists.


Share

Most popular

Subscribe to our newsletter

Sign up to receive The Daily Post

















Latest Podcast

A survey carried out by Megafon for TV2 has found that 71 percent of parents have handed over children to daycare in spite of them being sick.

Moreover, 21 percent of those surveyed admitted to medicating their kids with paracetamol, such as Panodil, before sending them to school.

The FOLA parents’ organisation is shocked by the findings.

“I think it is absolutely crazy. It simply cannot be that a child goes to school sick and plays with lots of other children. Then we are faced with the fact that they will infect the whole institution,” said FOLA chair Signe Nielsen.

Pill pushers
At the Børnehuset daycare institution in Silkeborg a meeting was called where parents were implored not to bring their sick children to school.

At Børnehuset there are fears that parents prefer to pack their kids off with a pill without informing teachers.

“We occasionally have children who that they have had a pill for breakfast,” said headteacher Susanne Bødker. “You might think that it is a Panodil more than a vitamin pill, if it is a child who has just been sick, for example.”

Parents sick and tired
Parents, when confronted, often cite pressure at work as a reason for not being able to stay at home with their children.

Many declare that they simply cannot take another day off, as they are afraid of being fired.

Allan Randrup Thomsen, a professor of virology at KU, has heavily criticised the parents’ actions, describing the current situation as a “vicious circle”.

“It promotes the spread of viruses, and it adds momentum to a cycle where parents are pressured by high levels of sick-leave. If they then choose to send the children to daycare while they are still recovering, they keep the epidemic going in daycares, and this in turn puts a greater burden on the parents.”