When I was all about music, kind of...

At times, a great band bursts out from the warm soft rock: overall, they play safe and do not build on the fiery interludes.
In spite of their name, Breaks Co-Op's live set is not hip-hop. Fleshing out the sparse sound with drummer, bassist and two guitarists, they trade on exquisite pastoral harmonies and anthemic rocking out. They create an atmospheric grandeur, yet fail to capture a consistent majesty or passion.

Their use of turntables and samples is unimaginative; many of their songs slip into a mid-tempo apathy. Hamish Clark's intermittent raps are pedestrian, distracting from the mellow cheerfulness of Andy Lovegrove's falsetto. On rockers like Question of Freedom they threaten and cajole convincingly as duelling guitars introduce urgency and tension. Their folky encores return the band to the middle of the road and send the audience away content but uninspired.

Before the start of the show, Beats Co-Op DJed their favourite tunes, challenging the audience to be impressed. They admitted that this is a dangerous strategy, and the subsequent performance did not surpass the excitement of the recorded selection. At times, a great band bursts out from the warm soft rock: overall, they play safe and do not build on the fiery interludes.

Fans of percussive rumba will enjoy the rhythms and the theatricality is stunning 

The 'Buena Vista Social Club' haunts this production: a cheer erupts when the nightclub is mentioned and the enthusiasm for Cuban music that made 'Havana Rumba' a sell-out stems from the film. This slick shows lacks the movie's personality: instead of legends performing signature songs, there is a proficient, anonymous band, supple dancers and a linking narrative.

The rambling narrative revolves around the life of a Barrio postman. His memories, and the letters he delivers, become introductions to passionate performances. The dancers upstage the musicians with sensuous acrobatics, choreographing the dramas hidden in the lyrics. The band are relegated to the rear, rarely given space to shine, letting loose only in the finale. The sound is murky, the solos perfunctory, the impact muted: the seated audience have no room to dance. This lively culture is reduced to spectacle.

There is little for the unconverted: fans of percussive rumba will enjoy the rhythms and the theatricality is stunning. In spite of the happy atmosphere generated by the persistent beat, 'Havana Rumba' is too polished and constrained by the venue.


St George's West, Until 28 (not 19), 20.45, Prices Vary

This is easy listening folk, smoothed and tamed, dealing in generalisation and rarely evoking

poignancy

Eric Bogle is a folk veteran: his songs have been covered and made famous by bands as diverse as the Furies, the Pogues and forgotten punks the Angelic Upstarts. Tony Blair cites Bogle as his favourite anti-war poet, an irony that is not wasted in Bogle's introduction to 'The Green Fields of France'.

Ably accompanied by fellow Scottish exile John Munroe, Bogle works his way through a series of undemanding, sentimental tunes: his song writing is neither flashy nor original and his guitar lines are solid. He ruminates on growing old, political activism and- the subject that he is known for- the First World War, without achieving much passion. His rhymes are functional: this is easy listening folk, smoothed and tamed, dealing in generalisation and rarely evoking poignancy.

Bogle takes his life's experiences and polishes them into serviceable numbers, but his songs feel too vague and calm. His politics and musical structures are rooted in the 1970s, and even his newest pieces lack immediacy and depth. He delivers on his audience's expectations but does little to inspire the unconverted.

Godliman and Lane

wISEMEN OF gOODLIMAN

EVENT REVIEW BY GARETH K VILE.

PUBLISHED 14 AUGUST 2006

Godliman and Lane are competent comedy actors, interspersing their show with video and audio clips and persistently attacking mindless television, manipulative advertising and patronising media personalities. If their targets are easy and caricatured, rather than closely observed and original, they still maintain energy and a rapid pace.

The most imaginative sketch is the self-referential finale, a video of celebrities endorsing their show, but too often Godliman and Lane exaggerate their satire, expanding solid ideas into absurdity until they lose their bite, or repeating a theme into predictability. A pair of female sloans eulogise working-class pastimes, a couple of dumb presenters sell increasingly useless products, and bursts of radio urge the purchase of mundane items to the lowest common denominator: all are performed with vigour but made wearisome by repetition.

There are plenty of belly-laughs and concise individual sketches. However, over an hour, the material is spread thin and only the variety of formats holds the attention. Godliman and Lane are promising, but this show feels like an audition rather than a fully-realised act, despite the savagery and bitterness beneath the amiable surface.

Devil's Advocate@ Assembly George Street

EVENT REVIEW BY GARETH K VILE.

PUBLISHED 14 AUGUST 2006

Exposing corrupt US policy in South America, 'Devil's Advocate' is hampered by a Freed's verbose script. Set in Noriega's final hours of freedom, when he was chased into a Catholic sanctuary and assaulted with loud rock music, it is a chamber piece revolving around the justifications given by the general for his brutal reign.

A Jesuit Archbishop becomes Noriega's mediator and confessor: they argue theology and American foreign policy to a soundtrack of machine gun fire and hard rock. Noriega comes across as victim, then genocidal maniac: the Archbishop is well-meaning but naive. Neither performance convinces. 

Ignatius Anthony's Noriega has an uncertain accent and over-emotes while Peter Dineen's Jesuit is mannered. The script sacrifices characterisation to polemic. When Noriega explains the drug war's economics, it is difficult to decide whether he is insane or the writing is incoherent.

This is a brave attempt at explicitly political theatre, recontextualising a notorious dictator. Unfortunately, the drama is overwhelmed by commentary: although the intention is clear, the reasoning never clarifies the background. Failing to innovate, the political passion is mismatched with conventional staging.

Sam Leith and Hugo Rifkind @ Fringe 2006

FEATURE BY GARETH K VILE.

PUBLISHED 14 AUGUST 2006

Paired at the Book Festival due to their shared backgrounds in journalism, Sam Leith and Hugo Rifkin have written very different books. Whereas Rifkind's novel, 'Over Exposure', is a thriller in the world of celebrity journalism, Leith trawls through anecdotes, history and trivia in 'Dead Pets'. Starting the evening with tentative readings from their respective books, they settle back into a short question and answer session with the surprisingly elderly audience.

Both authors have quick wits and claim that the egotism of the daily by-line - for Rifkind, immersed in the celebrity culture that he derides in his novel - prevents them from becoming full-time novelists. Leith modestly adds that his book is not really a novel, better approached as an extended column. Rifkind comments that his hero, a Jewish journalist from Edinburgh, is not entirely autobiographical: he took up the celebrity watch after completing the novel.

They appear far more comfortable as journalists than novelists: their awkward readings do not suggest that their prose is suited to extended descriptions. Leith has a dull, if sporadically humorous, style while Rifkind admits that 'Over Exposure's' structure was helped by his editors. 

When asked about the lightness of subject matter, which wilts against his satire, Rifkind replies that he would be loath to attack politicians, since he regards them as more intelligent and self-aware: a confession that may be based on his knowledge of his father Malcolm, the Conservative ex-minister. It also highlights the lack of ambition that limits both writers: while their self-depreciating banter is amusing, they do not take themselves seriously enough.

Sam Leith boasts that his work is 'highly sentimental and dark-hearted', but his most challenging passages insult Greyfriars Bobby and Rifkind's mockery strikes no higher target than Graham Norton. They create pleasant diversions rather than challenging literature.

Nomad: DNA Strings Fringe 2006

The gentle charisma of their leader Adriaan and Dani's fiendish violin captivates the mature audience

FEATURE BY GARETH K VILE.

PUBLISHED 14 AUGUST 2006

The DNA Strings merge Flamenco guitar, Irish fiddle and a distinctive African percussive pulse. They are polished, professional, and display a genuine enthusiasm for the traditions that they plunder, carrying a straightforward set to a frenetic climax through their enthusiasm and proficiency.

When the Spanish flourishes degenerate into soft rock or they attempt to evoke a sentimental and mystical Africa, they can be bland. But the gentle charisma of their leader Adriaan and Dani's fiendish violin captivates the mature audience, keeping hands clapping and feet stomping. When they break into a reel they are passionate and the slower numbers are genuinely moving. Unfortunately, too many of their instrumental tunes bounce along in mid-tempo without finding a challenging groove.

In the plush surrounds of St. Brides, they seem a little out of place- a rowdy bar would be a better venue- but they manage to tease the seated audience into polite excitement. By the end of their set, it is possible to imagine a raw, aggressive band emerging from their mannered fusion of global folk.

One Man Star Wars Trilogy (2006)

He never adds anything to the essentials.

EVENT REVIEW BY GARETH K VILE.

PUBLISHED 14 AUGUST 2006

Covering three films in an hour, this monologue is long on exposition but short on wit. A virtuoso performance and a remarkable feat of memory, it fails to connect emotionally.

Charlie Ross tears through the trilogy at break-neck pace, reducing the heroes into repeated gestures. With so much plot, there are few opportunities for humour beyond the obvious – jokes about the subsequent movies or Darth Vader's racial identity. Confused scenes of flapping arms and kitsch posturing are never more than mildly amusing. Luke Skywalker, recast as a petulant teenager, provides a rare running gag, but most laughs come from Ross' physical interpretations of non-human characters.

Relying on the audience's knowledge of the films, the interpretation lacks imagination: the most charming sequences happen when he stops acting and reveals sweet enthusiasm. By 'Return of the Jedi', he loosens up and considers absurdities and the movies' context, yet he never adds anything to the essentials.

The crowd are delighted by the energy and grateful for the humour: the successes are due more to Star Wars' popularity than any creativity or poignancy. 

The Unsinkable Clerk (Fringe 2006)

Working as a series of excellent sketches and a coherent narrative, the play brusquely reaches a conclusion that is ambiguously hopeful.

EVENT REVIEW BY GARETH K VILE.

PUBLISHED 14 AUGUST 2006

The Unsinkable Clerk gathers together fragments of the Old Testament, a stereotypical officer-worker and pagan sea-gods into a modern parable, charting the redemption of an ordinary man through an extraordinary adventure. The two actors take on a huge variety of roles, from a decrepit Poseidon through to the prophet Jonah, using mime, imagination and crisp dialogue. The story is simple- a clerk finds his routine of quiet conformity and emotional repression disrupted by the intrusion of a magical flood, and struggles to find paradise. It is told with charm and surreal cartoon humour.

Both playful and resonant, The Unsinkable Clerk sees the hero, Mr Pumley, enticed and tormented by visions of pleasure and desire, sustained by his love for a shop-girl and his companion Jonah. Much of the laughter comes from the people that Mr Plumley encounters, and the actors leap between roles with ease and alacrity, fleshing out characters in deft gestures. Working as a series of excellent sketches and a coherent narrative, the play brusquely reaches a conclusion that is ambiguously hopeful.

The script is tight and literary; the performances assured. The dynamic use of minimal props and set encourages suspension of disbelief. Although it lacks an epic scale, this is an excellent,immediate and profound show: deep but not heavy, witty but not relying on cheap gags.