Interview with writer Toby Whithouse regarding his new play: Executioner Number One

This is not your first play to open at the Soho Theatre - what's it like to be back?

Fantastic. My first play at Soho in 2000 changed everything for me. It was an amazing experience. I was still finding me feet as a writer and their generosity and support was invaluable. I’m working with Jonathan Lloyd, who directed both my previous plays there. He’s a fantastic, rigorous collaborator. Soho is a great space with an incredible atmosphere. The variety of work they have there is jaw-dropping, I’m delighted to be part of it.

Executioner Number One covers a rather dark subject area: the death penalty. What inspired you to explore this topic?

I’m very anti-death penalty but I find it a fascinating subject. I think the problem with the death penalty, aside from the huge risk of getting it wrong, is that it’s lazy. It’s a kneejerk, rage-filled response. It’s far harder, and politically braver, to address the issues that lead to crime. There’s no evidence that a death penalty does anything to reduce crime. It’s not prevention, it’s revenge, and a civilised society has to be better than that.

Many years ago I worked on a play about the Holocaust, and one of the aspects I found most fascinating was the ordinary men and women who kept the machinery of mass murder going. The administrators and accountants, the secretaries and train drivers. It struck me that they would be workplaces like any other. There’d be complaints about hours and pay, rivalries and people vying for promotion - while they added up columns of fatalities and organised train timetables. I’ve always wanted to explore that workplace, where the peevish tensions of an office are played against a backdrop of murder and horror.

At present, from a sociopolitical standpoint, we seem to be living in quite an interesting time. Has this at all inspired Executioner Number One? What impact do you feel the current political climate will have on different forms of contemporary art?

Executioner Number One is set in a parallel present, where - following a referendum after the Guildford and Birmingham pub bombings - capital punishment has been reinstated. This has prompted a massive shift to the right, politically. It has allowed successive governments to bring in more draconian policies regarding surveillance and the restriction of civil liberties. Not to mention a deepening of suspicion and prejudice.
I finished the first draft in April 2015, and at the time it was just a vaguely high-concept flight of fancy. Of course there were elements of this (in fact one of the inspirations for the play was a comment under an article in the Daily Mail saying that all lorries coming from the continent should be pumped full of gas to kill any illegal migrants hiding inside), but I never thought humanity would embrace naked fascism again. But as time went on, I would find myself looking at the play and then looking at the news and being staggered by how closely the two were aligning. I’ve been tempted to rewrite sections of the play to reflect the news… but what would I change? I’ve tweaked elements, but the play has become far more topical than I had anticipated or wanted.

You've historically written a lot of works for film and television. Do you prefer writing for traditional or new media?

To be honest it all depends on the story. I first came up with the idea for Executioner Number One when I was looking to write a short film I could direct. I pursued that for a while, but I couldn’t really get any traction. So then I tried it as a traditional stage play, with other characters. But again, I couldn’t get past the first couple of pages. So then, purely as an exercise to get the idea flowing, I tried writing Ian’s monologue. And instantly the idea had found its voice. Sometimes you have to allow the story to tell itself in the way it wants.

Executioner Number One has been written as a one man show. What challenges did you face when writing the dialogue?

I did stand up comedy for a few years, and one of the first things I realised was that as you perform your material, you start editing it down. Finessing it and streamlining it. I’m writing this mid-way through rehearsals ad it’s been surprising how many cuts we’ve made, losing any extraneous lines or even just words. The thing about Ian is that he has absolutely no self-awareness. He doesn’t realise how peevish and cruel he is, how buffoonish and ridiculous. Those are my favourite characters to write, especially from a comedic point of view. I’ve always loved straight forward gag-writing, but making a character funny without them knowing it is much more fun.

You're stepping out of the writer's chair and performing in this show yourself. Can you tell us what this experience has been like for you?

I was an actor for 10 years before I became a writer, so this isn’t a completely vainglorious Florence-Foster-Jenkins type exercise. But it’s been wonderful to get back into performing. Obviously I’ve been through a thousand different emotions, from excitement to terror, from exhilaration to wanting to fake my own death. The first thing I had to do was get my voice back into shape, so I started doing voice classes again. Rediscovering those skills and exercising those muscles again was amazing, and reconnected me to my time at drama school and as an actor, genuinely happy periods. So it’s been a really lovely experience so far.

Have you considered adapting Executioner Number One for film or television in the future?

The first thing my brilliant producer Judith asked me when we first sat down to discuss the play many many months ago was what my ambition for the play was. I said it was simply this. I just wanted to do it at Soho. I know as an actor and as a writer I’ve occasionally done jobs not because I necessarily wanted to do them, but because of what they might lead to. Invariably they’ve led to sod all and I’ve just had a miserable time. So for this, my priority is simply the production at Soho. It would be great if it had a further life, but what I really want is for this run to be a success and for people to enjoy it.

What is your advice to aspiring writers?

Read everything. Literally everything. Novels, screenplays, non-fiction, articles, comics, poetry, anything you can get your hands on. And write every day. What will make you successful is your voice, so that’s what you have to develop. And the only way you’ll do that is by writing all the time. Don’t imitate other writers. Be inspired by them, but don’t try to ape their voices. I say this as someone who has notebooks full of scenes written in the style of Miller or Mamet that are, frankly, dreadful. Writing is a muscle. Build it.

How Did You Get Here?: 2015 Edition

So every now and then, I like to look at my blog statistics to see what people typically Google to find my blog, and I often keep track of some of the weirdest searches. Here are some of the weird things people have Googled and somehow ended up at my blog. Altogether, it looks like a really bad slam poem.

• bilbo film
• pinterest birdcage tattoo
• steve speros easy going
• angelina adoption
• lestat and jesse fanfiction
• gabrielle leimon goth
• elitism in the goth scene
• gamer nerds female
• only the face of akasha
• IT crowd Jen wardrobe 
• jerk off challenge
• fake friends n sluts but love game of thrones
• which is that famous actress in game of thrones?

and my personal favourite:

• welcome to the nerd club

Let's Get Frank About Feminism.

Okay, so the 'F' word has been culturally very prominent in 2017 and I think it's time to have a quick chat about it. I say this because when we discuss feminism, there is still a heavy backlash. You see it all across social media:

'You think you need feminism? You try looking at third world countries.... it's bad for women there so you shouldn't complain'

'I don't like feminism. I believe in equality for everyone'

'But what about issues facing MEN?'

'Yeah, I don't really like feminism because I think there are negative connotations about the word, so I've never really associated myself with it because people take it to the extreme'

'I don't support feminism because I'm a woman and have never experienced gender bias or sexism'

I shouldn't feel at all anxious at times to state that I'm a feminist, but so many of us do. Being a feminist seems natural, even necessary. Why wouldn't I support gender equality? Many people out there are opposed to the notion of feminism simply because they do not know what it is. Misinformation on the matter is a huge issue.

So let's straighten this out:


Feminism, noun, the advocacy of women's rights on the ground of equality of the sexes. 

Did you catch that? Feminism is about gender equality. It's about everyone being equal. Feminism is often confused with misandry. Misandry is defined as dislike of, contempt for, or ingrained prejudice against men (i.e. the male sex). If you think that feminism and misandry are the same thing then I'm sorry but you are mistaken. Also, feminism focuses on pulling up people regardless of their gender identity. Feminism is about calling out and ameliorating issues that men face in modern society too. 

But from the distance I hear the cry of "Why be a feminist? That focuses on women. I'm a better person because I believe in supporting everyone. Isn't it better to be a humanist?"

Humanism is about empathising with human beings collectively and as individuals and that's great. Humans are great. Well, some are a bit rubbish, but as a species we're not that bad. Feminists want gender equality. They want all people to be treated fairly and equally. The reason it's called feminism is because women have historically been ranked lower than men. There have been certain injustices women have had to face whereas men have not. Women are still facing sociocultural issues that men do not have to face. This is called sexism. I can assume this is a word that you've heard.

I've encountered plenty of people who say "Well men have never treated me badly so sexism can't be that bad, can it?"
How lucky for you to have never encountered sexism. You must live in a wonderful little bubble of joy. I can tell you now that not everyone has your experiences. Just because you've not experienced sexism doesn't mean that it doesn't exist. Just because you've not been murdered doesn't mean that murder doesn't happen every damn day. Your experiences, or lack of them, do not undermine the experiences of other people and in 2017 it's so important that we support people and listen to their stories.

Here's a quiz to tell if you're a feminist.
Are you a feminist?
Do you believe that men and women should be treated equally?
Do you feel that people should be held back, discriminated against or treated unfairly due to their sex/gender identity?

If you said yes to any of these questions then congratulations, you're a feminist!
If you said no... Are there women in your life? Are you a woman? Why don't you respect them? Do you want them to be seen as lesser beings? Are you comfortable explaining to the women in your life why they deserve to be treated differently and have less access to things men are entitled to?

Oh, and I've disabled the comments because of the old saying: "The comments on an article about feminism justifies feminism."

So if you were hoping to leave some comment against this article, it's probable that you're part of the problem. 

If you believe in equality, feminism is about pulling everyone up and providing equal opportunities in our society. Feminism is not a dirty word, it is a necessary fight. If you really feel against feminism, I just ask one thing of you: listen to the people fighting for it. Listen to their experiences. Listen to their concerns. Sure, some people may take things to an extreme. Some people may say things that you don't like. However, if people everywhere are discussing issues relating to feminism and you feel against it, I would caution you to just ask yourself why you're so afraid of feminism in the first place.

Writer Problem#11: INCOMING RANT - Entry Fees

Okay, so I've done a few of these 'Writer Problem' posts in the past just as little throwaway thoughts on things that impact us writers. One that bugs me is entry fees.

So you want to get your work out there, maybe you're considering entering a competition which could lead to your work being published. Okay, entry fees may cover some costs for the publisher, but can you imagine forking out money for all the competitions out there? It would be crazy. Some of them are almost £20. I don't want to pay just to not be published. Now okay, I get it. Sometimes the payment and the risk is worth it and it leads to good things, but I know some people who have paid a lottttt of money entering competitions and never winning, never being chosen. It's not something I've resorted to yet, but I'm sure I'll try to avoid it at all costs.

What I Do Is Not What I Am.

The milk steaming wand of the coffee machine begins to sputter tiny droplets of milk upwards as it froths into cappuccino foam. I have two and a half minutes to make three very different coffees, scoop two large tubs of popcorn, put together a hot-dog (after checking that it has reached a high enough temperature to be considered properly cooked) and take payment for the order. At the same time a colleague, one who is very new to the job, calls me over to ask for urgent assistance as it is my job to train her on how to use the tills and prepare food. The customer is giving me a look that suggests his impatience. He is already quite late to his film, having chosen to turn up when the twenty minutes worth of adverts and trailers are almost entirely over, and the film is due to start any minute. I am back by the till with all the items from his order prepared.
"Anything else I can get for you today? Any ice cream? Extra drinks?"
I have to ask such questions. We're graded on it via a mystery shopper system.
"A mortgage broker," he says looking at me exasperatedly as he eyes up the figure of his order. A common joke, because people always want to laugh at how expensive the cinema is these days. I smile it off. It is not my place to get into a debate with customers about pricing; this is stated in the handbook.

I do wonder, however, if this customer would treat me with more respect if he knew about my main job. As it turns out, I actually work for a highly respected law firm that often deals with the legal aspects of mortgages. But he doesn't know that. None of the customers do, the ones who yell and talk down to me and complain that there's too much foam in their latte like that's the worst thing they've experienced all week. Maybe if they saw me at my other job, or on my graduation day or at my book launch they would treat me with more respect. I've seen this in practice from friends, bosses, customers and clients alike. People who work in minimum wage, entry level jobs are seen as useless or without skills. It's like when you see the argument for raising the wages of people working in places at McDonalds and there are always people harping on about how working in the food/hospitality industries aren't hard or stressful and therefore aren't deserving of any more money than currently afforded. Performing a customer service role allows some members of society to think we are here just to serve you and therefore that makes you better. Spoiler alert: it doesn't. We are not here to be your personal servant or verbal punching bag. We are people with skills or access to resources that you do not have. We provide services that you want or require. It seems pointless to come to us for our services only whilst looking down your nose. We are working to make an honest wage and deserve respect.

I'm a millennial. You know - one of those lazy, entitled kids the media likes to blow hot air about. Yet I have spent the last two years working two jobs, often seven days a week. I'm always early at my desk at the law firm by 8:30am to start prepping files before the phones start to ring at 9am. Then I work like a dog til 5:30pm, walk across the river to the cinema where I scoop popcorn and clean up people's mess until almost midnight. Then back in the office the next morning. I am one of many of these 'lazy millennials' putting work before themselves because at this point in time, it feels impossible for most British young adults to even consider buying a house.

I worked in a cinema over three years. I needed to find a job when there weren't many going and, although it is only a 4 hour contract, I was lucky enough to be granted five shifts per week on average. I picked up the job not long after graduating from university. I was finding it hard to find a graduate job in my area. Working at the cinema allowed me a level of flexibility. It gave me time to work on my first book which has since been published. My family found it strange that, despite a good education and a publishing deal, I had never even had a salaried job beyond the minimum wage. I've never really felt like I had to justify myself to anyone however the way people have treated me based on my jobs. I then started working for a law firm, I kept my cinema job for a little while. I like getting to see movies for free and have so much love for my colleagues there. We're all in the same boat and therefore truly sympathise with the nonsense we all put up with on shift. I work, on average, six days a week now. Sometimes I work from 9am until 10:30pm or even midnight and I did this for two years. I feel a stark contrast in the way people treat me. Working in a food-serving, customer service role I've often found that people talk down to me and will be rude. It then feels weird to go into the office the next day to be greeted with respect for the same amount of effort I put into my job. Even in my personal life, friends and family members have acted differently towards me based on my employment.

The differences between both jobs are utterly strange. For my minimum wage job I have to be on time. To register my presence I have to clock in so I therefore work for every penny. You get a half hour break, but you should be back a minute or two before that break is over - just to be sure that the changeover of breaks goes swiftly. We have to clean everything ourselves. If I am more than four minutes late to work, my pay could be docked. If things are busy, and our shift runs over, we are only paid if it goes over by fifteen minutes and our manager has to sign off to this so we can be paid for our time. No authorisation? No pay.

At the law firm, things are very different. If anyone is late in my new office no one bats an eyelid. The company employs cleaners to clean up after us. At the law firm, we are provided with free tea and coffee to which we can help ourselves and we can eat or make a beverage whilst on the clock. At my minimum wage job, nothing is free. You can only eat or drink on your break period, which is allotted at some time during the shift by a member of management. You can drink water on shift, but you have to keep the cup around the back of the retail area, out of reach, and must dispose of the cup immediately when you are done. You cannot have a drink by your till, even when working in the middle of summer Blockbuster season when you're at your till serving hundreds of people for half an hour without rest. At my minimum wage job, if I were to stop and chat to a colleague for a moment, I can almost guarantee that a member of management will come over to break us up and give us work to do. Heaven forbid we let a moment go by where we're not earning every penny. When a job pays you minimum wage, I feel like they're saying that they pay you that amount because legally that's the lowest they can pay you and if they could pay you less for the same work, you bet your ass they would.

 In the office, people chat and experience those slumps of energy in the afternoon where you take a mental break for a second just to unwind. At my minimum wage job I'm expected to be working every second for every penny, often whilst multi-tasking and delivering perfect customer service regardless of my mood. I know many who work minimum wage, entry level jobs who find themselves policed and treated less than respectfully by the customers who think that their office jobs make them somehow better. It doesn't. Why are we building up this idea that some workers are worth less respect than others?

The other day I bumped into an old friend. I'd just come from the law firm to grab some lunch in town and he asked what I was up to these days as he pointed out my nice suit. I explained I was working for a law firm now and explained the kind of work I was doing. He then said, 'Well, I am so pleased for you. I mean, let's be honest - it's so much better than working at a cinema. I mean that must have been very degrading what with your degree and everything. It's good you've found something better to do with your time.' So I interjected and explained I still do the odd shift at the cinema. He realised he had made a huge mistake and back-pedalled saying that, as a film enthusiast, it was such a great job. It was too late. His opinion was already out there and reinforced what I knew to be true: people judge your job against you as if it is an indication of your worth. He's not the only person to have made such comments. We see good, salaried jobs as inherently better work to be doing and form our thoughts on the person around that over time.

What I do is not what I am. One would assume that in a salaried job in a 'respectable' field of work would require the kind of treatment I've experienced working for minimum wage, but this isn't what I've found thus far. My years of working myself to the point of death across two very different kinds of job have been eye opening. People will make assumptions about you based on your job which aren't necessarily correct. They will treat you differently. Sometimes those who are paid minimum wage have to deal with more stress than those with a comfy, salaried office job. As long as people are working hard for a living, they deserve respect, understanding and compassion - especially if you've never stood in their shoes.

Book Review: Perfume by Patrick Suskind

So it has been a while since I posted a book review and I thought I'd post a little something about a book I have recently read. This is a book that my partner bought for me and I initially felt quite excited by the premise: In the slums of eighteenth-century France, the infant Jean-Baptiste Grenouille is born with one sublime gift — an absolute sense of smell. As a boy, he lives to decipher the odors of Paris, and apprentices himself to a prominent perfumer who teaches him the ancient art of mixing precious oils and herbs. But Grenouille's genius is such that he is not satisfied to stop there, and he becomes obsessed with capturing the smells of objects such as brass doorknobs and fresh-cut wood. Then one day he catches a hint of a scent that will drive him on an ever-more-terrifying quest to create the "ultimate perfume" — the scent of a beautiful young virgin.

I thought I'd love this book. I love perfume. I love crime fiction and murder and dark characters. In all honesty, I was so let down by this book. I found the first 150 or so pages to be very slow and I hoped it would lead to a thrilling climax. Well, there is a climax but it's just bizarre. I won't spoil it for you but things go from 0 to 100 very quickly.

I think I'm mostly disappointed because the blurb and cover made it seem like it would be far more sensual, I somewhat envisaged a situation quite like the poem Porphyria's Lover, a poem about a man who loves his partner so much and feels so much for her that in a moment of passion he kills her so that, in a way, she is always his and always young and beautiful. It's messed up but it's one of my favourite poems. I somewhat expected something like that: that our unhappy protagonist, Grenouille, is harvesting the scents of these women to capture their innocence and that it would be more about his selection and pursuits of these women.

The book focuses a lot on the craft of extracting scents from natural substances and how perfume is made. We only really get to a lot of the murders near the end of the book and alas - most of it we don't get a lot of detail about.

What I can say is that the book has probably one of the best opening lines of any book I've ever read. It just wasn't what I expected. I've read it. I don't think I'd ever read it again.