Barron Scriptwriting Competition blows the competition away

As I sat in my seat, waiting for the Barron Scriptwriting Competition Showcase to begin, I was pleasantly delighted to be surrounded by such a warm community. People were chatting amongst themselves, with writers and directors hidden in plain sight alongside casual theatre enthusiasts. This crowd meant for an inviting and creative atmosphere that was my initial impression of this event and I had high hopes. Five short performances were to occur, each written, directed and performed by St Andrews students, that were to be judged by two judges and a collective audience vote. I was entirely unsure of what to expect in terms of performance structure, plot and style but equally open minded to the possibilities. With my theatre experience confined to my primary school days, I was excited to see the level of craftsmanship that St Andrews students could demonstrate. 

Picture from 4am, Hospital

The showcase started off with two dramatic works, 4am, Hospital by Buster Ratcliffe Van Der Geest and What You Left Behind by Karoline Foss. These were the only dramas of the evening and while both were different in topic they had similar forms. The two works illustrated conversation between two characters under unfortunate circumstances - 4am, Hospital depicted two patients talking about their respective visits, exploring deeper themes of trauma, while What You Left Behind presented a brother talking to his sister who committed suicide, highlighting the complicated aftermath of suicide. 4am, Hospital ultimately won second place, with its exploration of masculinity and use of the hospital as a setting being praised by the judges. This podium position was deserved because of its approach to characterisation, the clear contrast between its two characters. The use of a repeating motif is a favourite tactic of mine and the phrase ‘stay off the booze’ was significant upon every reiterance, competently illustrating one of the character’s changing relationship with himself. Comparatively, the staging of What You Left Behind  created a unique contrast between the characters and their setting, with the two facing the sister’s grave stone, and aided the honesty of their dialogue. The exploration of suicide is difficult under any circumstance but I think in this regard it lost some of its emotional depth due to being confined to a shorter performance. Within this time limit, we were faced with difficult questions that sadly did not have the opportunity to be developed entirely. Nevertheless, the premise was 

After these performances ended, the heavier atmosphere shifted as the comedic works came into play (no pun intended). The first of these performances was Sinking Feeling by Loulou Sloss, the eventual winner of the competition. Told through three snapshots, the story followed Peter and Rosie and the bumpy changes within their relationship with each other. This premise echoed my favourite film, When Harry Met Sally, as we watched them go from distant acquaintances with mutual attraction to former flings with lingering feelings for each other. This work basked in an odd, awkward humour that suited the pair’s clumsy reunion and was appreciated by the audience, with giggles galore as the two attempted to patch their relationship back together. Peter’s job as a camp counselor opened up puns about kids, playing upon the distinction between human children and baby goats. I enjoyed these little moments and they effectively set up an ease between the pair. Jokes about Peter’s peeing habits, his development from peeing his pants as a child to peeing in sinks in modern day (hence the name) lost momentum towards the end. Toilet humour aside, this work definitely had the warmest reception and deserved that £250 prize.

Picture from Sinking Feeling

Next up was Heath Row by India Kolb, ridiculously depicting the detainment of two holiday goers after one of them jokingly yells ‘Bomb!’ in the airport. The immediate familiar dynamic between the two detainees, the contrast of eccentric and moderate, sparked interest, and their bickering about the chaos they have gotten themselves introduced the scene very well, the in media res of it all was properly explained and did not leave room for confusion.The highlight of this work was its humour, particularly its British approach to conflict and misunderstanding. No yelling and crying about their predicament but rather the tense back and forth of two people who do not want to cause a scene more than they already have. Coming off the back of Sinking Feeling was a challenge, as that work was a clear fan favourite, yet this work was able to hold its own. Its humorous approach to misunderstanding and conflict played around with tension and its contrasting characterisation allowed for different forms of humour to be deployed. Ultimately this work kept spirits high amongst the crowd, arguably the most important factor in a showcase.

Picture from The Big Onion

Finally, the last performance of the evening was set to begin, The Big Onion by Gretchen Mills. When its title was announced faint chuckles were heard throughout the theatre and people’s intrigue was palpable. The play presented three farmers, each with a different approach to their craft, at an onion competition. One farmer brags about how obscenely big their onion is, another farmer shows off how much love was put into growing theirs and another talks about how this is purely a monetary exploit for them. After all this bragging and competitive spirit, the three must come together to haul in this humongous onion, portrayed as a person dressed as an onion. With a big final dance number involving the farmers jigging with the big onion itself, this play was a perfect end to the showcase. Eccentric, lighthearted and silly, the characters and setting encouraged you to dive into this world with ease. Its absurdism was delightful and highly praised by the judges, deservedly so. Feeling a little bit like improv, its love of the weird and wonderful transferred to the audience. Though it did not win a prize, it served a unique purpose in solidifying the success of the showcase as a whole, as it ended the entire thing on a high note. 

This was my first taste of student theatre at St Andrews and I was pleasantly enchanted by the fun that I had, especially once we reached the comedic performances. I tend to gravitate towards comedy more than drama, so I was glad that comedy was the majority in this showcase, though the dramatic works presented a unique view of their own. The passion of the performers, writers and directors was felt deeply by the audience and I was impressed by how whole-heartedly every performance was embraced by the audience, no matter its topic or genre. I didn’t feel the competitive atmosphere very much, as everyone involved was congratulating each other for their performances, chatting with other directors and performers during the voting process. The variety between the pieces meant that there was something for everyone, and each performance had its own appeal. The winners felt fair and the informal nature of the competition invited a warm atmosphere that put creativity at the forefront of this experience.