Advertisement
Kefi Chadwick: I contacted them through their barrister, and three of the eight women met with me, before two of them ended up being involved in the play over a good couple of years. It was very important to me that they, at the very least, were happy for me to do it and ideally were prepared to be involved. It took a long time to reach them because obviously they're anonymous—they don't want anyone to know who they are. From doing interviews and spending time with them, we've become good friends.
Advertisement
I didn't want to do it without the women's cooperation. One of the reasons why the women were interesting in talking to me was that I wanted to do a fictional version of the events that took specifically place in Nottingham. I wanted to tell a 30-year story, so in the end I chose to have a framing device: a hearing in 2011, where you have the women's stories being told and the Met trying to destroy them. Then you have a central story, set in Nottingham from 2004 to 2008. The job of a playwright is to imagine, so I had so much real material that building on that to create this vivid world for the play was much easier. I had all this reality to base it on.How did it feel, to use material this raw? Didn't you feel as though you were prying, or getting too close to the women?
I mean, to use people's lives… what I've tried to do is shift and fictionalize everything. It's interesting, because the women were worried about being exposed by the writing, but once they'd read the first draft they went, 'Ah, yes. I see now that this isn't identically my story, but it is my emotional truth.' I think that's what people engage with, and what makes the play powerful.
Absolutely. There was a lot I wanted to get in, and I feel as though it's all pretty much there. But it's about not having to give everything the same amount of airtime. There are the references to the Lawrence family, and the other women; the different campaigns, and the involvement protest movements in Scotland.What about tone? This could easily have turned into something really over-wrought, bashing the audience over the head with one perspective. How did you try to balance that out?
It was really important to me to make a good piece of theater. I think a lot of political drama is very valid but can be very worthy. If you're already on the side of its point of view, people won't go and see a show. I didn't want to write something that was really didactic or that hit you over the head. I wanted to write a piece with characters you connected with and went on a journey with—all the things that a really strong drama does, but with this emotional, political context at its core. You have to think: do I want to preach to the converted, or do I want people to come and see it, who might not be very politically engaged but will go away thinking, 'this is wrong, and I want to do something about it'? That's what I wanted to make.But what sort of place for this pseudo-activism is there in theater?
I've written the play so it can be adapted, should there be developments later on in the Pitchford inquiry. Of course, when I first started researching this three years ago or so, it wasn't so much known then. But more information just keeps coming and coming, and I think that's just going to continue, as more officers are exposed, as more relationships are discovered and as there's more corruption with police desperately trying to hide what they did. I think that's going to be really interesting.'Any Means Necessary' runs at Nottingham Playhouse through Saturday, February 20.Follow Tshepo on Twitter.