Emma – Sheffield Lyceum

Ryan Craig’s adaptation is aptly contemporary in places and unapologetically Georgian in others. The best affectations of Austen’s linguistic prowess are set upon with great effect, creating a poetic environment for the audience to exist in. This shape is shared with characters that feel real, embellished only in earnest moderation. Ceci Calf’s set design is deliberately sparse, leaving director Stephen Unwin with a very minimal arena for the characters to wrestle in. It is adorned only by a backdrop of blue/grey British sky and a couple of trees planted in the recesses of the stage to evoke the abodes of well-off English country families. Despite not being a physically transformative piece either, this feels right for Theatre Royal Bath’s production. So verbose and linguistically remarkable, this very human tale invites us to sit in the chaos amidst the interaction. There is limited world-building done that relies on the visual, and this invitation renders large-scale, complex fixtures unnecessary. The empty space is for us, and it works to great effect. To Calf’s credit, this is of course also accentuated by the fantastic costume design which lends excellent to establishing the reality of this romantic comedy.

India Shaw-Smith’s Emma is sensational. Triumphant and electric. She is both fantastically mercurial and dazzlingly reliable. She embodies Emma with great enthusiasm and humour and delivers an enthralling performance that enchants. This leading role is rewardingly matched by Williams Chubb’s affluent portrayal of Emma’s father Mr Woodhouse and Ed Sayer’s excellent George Knightley (evoking much of Josh O’Connor’s Prince Charles in The Crown). There are bundles and bluster from the senior Woodhouse and his bold, broad theatrical strokes land with great aplomb in this Austen classic – it fits right in whilst vitally toeing the line and avoiding caricature. Equally, despite the ease to bestow comparison upon Sayer’s unromantic protagonist, the role is his own and he is in complete command of the character. He conducts emotion and drama with ferocious accuracy and intent, making a very enjoyable act for the audience by similarly never overdoing it but never neglecting the opportunity to ascend. The three leading actors offer incredibly focussed performances that many could learn from. 

Who also deserves a mention in that camp is Maya Louise Thapar. Her portrayal of the ditzy yet enormously endearing Harriet Smith is jovial and full of pathos. The clammer of Smith’s naive optimism in the face of the aspersions that are cast her way by many of the Highbury residents is something emotionally provocative and movingly penetrative. Thapar presents a great, earnest portrayal that is laugh out loud funny and candidly sympathetic.

The first act features the aforementioned four heavily, and (with the exception of some opening scenes that at times are heavily reliant on basic exposition and introductions) this act unravels at good pace. Characters are interesting, there is drama, there is suspense and consequence. Unfortunately, the second act doesn’t really bear its wings with as much confidence and competence as the first. This is partly due to the introduction of characters who, although completing the dramatic function of the work, do so out of necessity and necessity only. Craig’s adaptation doesn’t afford this second act and its newly bedded characters much responsiveness or appetite. The Fairfax’s and Churchill’s and wives of Elton’s are introduced as afterthoughts and even when we see them in the flesh, they feel like them. Sadly there is not enough dynamism or activity within the characters to make them compelling and engaging to follow with complete conviction. They are features of narrative essentialism. The plot thins and weakens with this, harbouring the hope that the climax will justify the plodding endured towards it. 

I concede that some of these greener roles were not left with a well of complex and nuanced interpretations to play with, but there was a slight clunkiness in their performances which truly saturated a dimming second half. Diction was sloppy in places and characters felt more wrung out and worn than the scintillating precision of some of the more experienced players. The second act becomes more concerned with itself than its audience. The characters become more concerned with themselves than their audience. Pertinently, some of these performers seem to be less concerned with their characters and so we, predictably, become less concerned with the show. These flustered relationships confuse and obscure what was so ardently laid out in the first act. 

Despite its dated class politics, this quintessentially British tale still warrants a place on this stage but would truly excel in a stronger reliance on drama and endurance. It’s quaint, sophisticated and lyrical – but occasionally distracted by the wayward stitching of their own swollen robes. 

Reviewer: Louis Thompson

Reviewed: 7th October 2025

North West End UK Rating: