Female theatre reviewers project: Maryam Philpott

Welcome to the next in a series celebrating female colleagues who engage with theatre as critics, reviewers, bloggers or content creators. I am using ‘theatre’ to encompass all live arts performances, and ‘reviewer’ to cover all those who add commentary on what they see.

The master list is at: https://loureviews.blog/spotlight-on-female-theatre-reviewers-bloggers-critics-and-content-creators/

If you would like to be profiled as part of this project, please get in touch.

Today, it’s the turn of Maryam Philpott, who writes for Cultural Capital, The Reviews Hub and Plays International & Europe.

Can you tell us a bit about yourself and how you came to be writing or creating content about theatre? 

My background is in social and cultural history, and like a lot of people studied theatre at school, although we couldn’t afford to go when I was growing up. I started attending regularly after I moved to London. I was working full-time and doing a PhD, but when that finished, I had free evenings and weekends again to write about theatre.

Fast forward a few years, and I now review professionally for a couple of sites, published a book on James Graham, which was shortlisted for the Society for Theatre Research Book Prize last year, and am a member of the Critics’ Circle.

If you have your own platform, when did it start and how did you come up with the name? If you write for one or many platforms, which was the first and how did you become involved with it? 

I started Cultural Capital in 2013 when a good friend suggested it. The name comes from Pierre Bourdieu’s sociological concept of ‘cultural capital’, meaning the quantity of a country’s cumulative intangible assets and, with a primary base in London theatre, I liked the double meaning, so that became the name.

As I found my own style of writing, the site evolved quite quickly into a place for long-form criticism, posting only one essay each week, looking at a production in-depth. Because no show exists in isolation, I try to place it in a broader cultural and performance history context – whether that’s the play itself, its writer or director’s body of work, or current themes in contemporary
performance.

I do write professionally for other sites, so from the start, Cultural Capital is almost entirely productions I have paid to see which allows a bit more freedom to write in an extended style which I enjoy, without having to limit myself with word counts or star ratings, and each essay usually comes out around 1800-2000 words, compared to c.500 for professional reviews.

After spending a year building Cultural Capital and improving my style, I began writing for the Reviews Hub in 2014 as part of their London team and have been there ever since. It provides truly nationwide theatre coverage with editors in all of the regions and a really strong and knowledgeable body of reviewers who really do see everything.

And this year I was also approached to do some writing for Plays International & Europe, so trying to fit in a few shows for them as well.

What kind of shows do you cover, and in which geographical areas?

I probably cover c.120-130 shows a year for the Reviews Hub, a handful so far for Plays International & Europe and another 50 for Cultural Capital, so I will see a lot of different things. I work primarily in London but when I can I’ll travel for something significant, and have been to Chichester, York, Dundee, Stratford-Upon-Avon, Edinburgh and Nottingham in the last few years – recognising the value of work that originates outside of London is vital and it is important to keep learning as a reviewer, keep searching for new talent and not just wait for it to come to London because seeing them with the audience they were made for is hugely insightful.

I see revivals, new plays, musicals, dance, mime and am open to trying most things. I am sent everywhere from the West End and Off West End to fringe, pub theatres and festivals, even once to someone’s flat near Manor House for an immersive piece, so it is valuable to see the whole ecosystem and not just the bits of the industry with bigger investment and star names.

I also like to see community and young company performances run by the major houses, which support future performers. There is so much creativity out there, and while a West End show might get 20 reviews, you might be the only critic who goes to the show above a pub who can give that company a bit of constructive feedback and support.

How would you describe yourself (reviewer, critic, content creator, YouTuber, influencer, other)? 

Either a reviewer or a critic. Both terms have lots of associations, but whichever one is used, the job is the same: to use our experience and judgement to critique a performance and act as a bridge between the performance and the audience, and most reviewers approach that in a positive, constructive way.

Why do you continue to engage with theatre? 

One of the joys of theatre is that it is both ephemeral, concerned with the now, the moment of immediate performance shared between creatives and audience that (largely) exists only in that room in that second before it’s gone forever, but it also much more solid place in the past and future, showing us how things have and could be, and through that we can consider what identities we hold, how we are connected and divided, and what nationhood, what society and what being an individual
is today.

I keep going back because theatre is always evolving, always seeing more and saying more, expanding how we see the world and each other, encouraging empathy and thoughtfulness about lives that are entirely different to mine. There is always new talent to find in every part of the creative process, new stories and perspectives to hear, new voices entering the industry and reshaping it in response to the socio-political, economic and cultural concerns of today.

At the same time, theatre is anchored in performance, institutional and national histories, as well as sitting above all of that to explore the consistent experience of being human, so we revive, rewrite and engage with Greek Tragedy, Shakespeare, Ibsen, Delaney and other classic playwrights because their characters and situations have universal experiences that give perspective and connection to our own.

So theatre is simultaneously old and new, looks backwards and forwards, and reminds us that in lots of ways people from everywhere and every time are the same; all complex, interesting, frustrating, lost, silly, fascinating, important and just doing the best they can.

What’s the one thing that would make the theatre reviewing/content creating space easier for you personally, and/or for your platform? 

There is still a huge amount of gatekeeping, so while much of the focus rightly looks at barriers for onstage and backstage talent, there are plenty of obstacles for critics as well. There are still perceived quality divisions between online and print journalism, between paid and unpaid writers that doesn’t reflect the dedication, knowledge and years of experience that these critics bring to their work.

Theatre writing has changed, and, as this series of interviews is showing, there are many kinds of reviewers now who all have their own voice, using different platforms to distribute their work through a huge variety of social media approaches, all bringing different and diverse audiences to theatre.

There is space for everyone, and the industry as a whole needs to open the door to that. The industry could also think about its audiences more carefully, respecting them by starting on time and being truthful about running times. Most people will have trains or tubes to catch, babysitters to pay and have to be up early for work the next day, probably working out complicated plans to come and see a show, so don’t take them for granted. And directors should try to block shows so that even people in restricted-view seats can see most of it.

Do you have a favourite show – and any you particularly dislike(d)? 

My favourite show is always the next one! You always hope the next great thing is just around the corner; that’s why we turn up. Generally, though, I look for innovation; I always want to see something new, new writing or a novel interpretation that sees something new in a familiar text.

I don’t have a single favourite show but there have been some really significant productions in the past dozen years that have been hugely influential both for performance history, modern British identity and understanding the state of the nation – Ivo van Hove’s A View from the Bridge at the Young Vic by Arthur Miller, the Death of England play cycle by Clint Dyer and Roy Williams, Ink by James Graham, Jamie Lloyd’s Pinter at the Pinter season and more recently Till the Stars Come Down by Beth Steel, The Years by Eline Arbo, Prima Facie by Suzie Miller and 1536 by Ava Pickett.

Alongside these, I’m always interested in new perspectives on classic writers like Ibsen, Rattigan, Pinter, Miller, Chekhov and Coward – his early work is incredibly radical, particularly in its depiction of women’s autonomy and freedoms from shame captured in some of the recent centenary productions – and there are lots of brilliant text-focused directors who are changing the way we see these plays.

The only thing I really dislike is a wasted opportunity. There are still so many barriers to getting work onstage – many talented people never get that chance – so use it, make it count and pave the way for others.

The theatre commentary space is wide and diverse – is there any other female reviewer/content creator you would recommend, and why? 

You Lou! Your work in supporting fringe productions and festivals, both in person and digital, is really needed. I really value Stacey Meadwell’s perspective; she runs the Rev Stan Theatre Blog, which has diversified into brilliant instant reaction videos which really engage viewers.

My colleagues at Reviews Hub are some of the best writers I know, particularly Jane Darcy, who is so knowledgeable and Helen Tope, who covers theatre, exhibitions and books in such an informed and accessible way.

I’d also recommend the excellent Julia Rank and Sarah Crompton’s reviews for What’s On Stage are a bit of a benchmark, although we don’t always agree.

What’s the biggest change you have noticed in the theatre space since you started contributing to it? 

There are certainly more women playwrights focusing on political subjects than a decade ago (and still nowhere near enough) – those plays almost certainly existed, just women were never commissioned to write them or were continually rejected, which Beth Steel has spoken about – so that has certainly started to reevaluate how we approach big topics about national governance, identity
and nationhood.

The other significant change has been a resurgence in Director’s Theatre, which really began around the time I started reviewing and is now one of our dominant forms of theatremaking. It started with Ivo van Hove but also now includes Jamie Lloyd, Marianne Elliott, Rebecca Frecknell and Robert Icke, who are all distinctive, very text-focused creatives, setting aside performance history to offer something innovative.

The approach doesn’t always succeed, but they’ve all delivered some spectacular and insightful work, so I find their continued influence on theatre really fascinating.

And which social networks are you most active on? If you are not on any, what is your opinion of their place in theatre reviewing/content creation? 

I’m on X (@culturalcap1), Facebook and LinkedIn.

Can you pinpoint one of your best reviews, features, or videos? 

That’s probably for others to say, but I love writing about theatre, possibly even more than seeing it, so any review really.

How can people contact you who want to promote a show? 

Contact The Reviews Hub using the Request a Review form, which will be filtered to the relevant regional editor or for Cultural Capital, you can use the comment box.

Thanks, Maryam!