What Does It Take to Slay a Dragon – 53two

The first rule of dramatic writing is to “show not tell”. Drama works best when the audience is engaged in the story, its characters and the conflict that lies within it. They are drawn in and become involved, developing a genuine care for the characters. That feeling may be love, or it may be hate, but they are interested because they are watching something dramatic unfold. It is disruptive, then, for people watching if the actors simply break the fourth wall and just tell them what is happening.

Structurally, this play was a mess. The writer, Rebekah Harrison, warned the audience that they were in for something different, and whilst it may be seen as a brave move to tell the story in the way she did, it simply did not work. It stopped you from caring about the characters and made itself appear to be a rather simplistic piece of theatre.

The premise of the play is that Billy (Simon Naylor), a van driver, is told by his boss to remove a St George’s flag from his van. He does not, and this leads him down the rabbit hole of social media racists and on the road to tragedy. When the play focused on the drama, it worked. There were elegant pieces of writing within it. The problem was that it was told like a story, narrated by the actors. Most of the time, they are telling us what is happening. They didn’t show us. It was like a live radio play. So, there was no flow, and the audience couldn’t get involved.

Also, the writer, who was sitting on a chair on stage, kept stopping the action and chipping in with the words “When I was writing this play…”. She would then give an anecdote about something on social media or a quote from a politician to illustrate the point she was making. The play should make that point. She shouldn’t have to tell us. It was extremely jarring, especially when some drama did take place between the characters and something was starting to build. Then it would just stop, and all the energy would be lost.

All the actors were excellent, but they didn’t have a lot to get their teeth stuck into. It reminded me a bit of community theatre, where an issue is chosen. It might be drugs one week or racism the next, and they create a simplistic play with stock characters which fails to deal with the complexities or nuance of the issue.

Interspersed through the play were patriotic songs, beautifully sung by members of the cast. As the narrative had been so disrupted, the power of these moments was lost because little dramatic tension or interest had been created. In a way, the play itself was like a protest song, full of confusion and anger, elegantly written, but ultimately ineffective.

At the end, the writer admitted she likes reading Guardian long-read articles. This is what this play was in essence. A newspaper article, interspersed with bits of drama. She said that she had no answers and accepted that her story was not able to deal with the problems of our polarised society. The play, she hoped, would prompt debate about the issues. As they say, if you have to explain a joke, you haven’t told it correctly.

There were some funny bits, and it is good to see that there are people who want to try and tackle important political issues in the theatre. However, political theatre is very difficult to do well, and unfortunately, this script wasn’t clever or nuanced enough to pull it off. A brave effort, nonetheless.

The play is on at 53Two, Manchester until Friday 20th June – https://www.ticketsource.co.uk/53two/e-kzrlzq.

Reviewer: Adam Williams

Reviewed: 12th June 2025

North West End UK Rating: