and check what had been selected for authenticity.
Finally Judy, Vi, Chris and myself had a meeting and went through each of the scenes where two or more of them appeared together. This was amazing. It ironed out any inconsistencies and also inspired new memories and therefore new words for the script.
JUDY: If you’re going to do an autobiographical play like this I think it’s best to use the person’s words to capture the way they speak, otherwise you can’t begin to understand what sort of person they are. This wasn’t a fairy tale to be messed around with… it’s something that actually happened and, anyway, I don’t think it would have had half the impact.
One rehearsal, just a week before the premiere of Quenchers, illustrates how close this method of writing had come to getting the script ‘right’.
We were having difficulty staging the section where Chris reveals to Judy that her sister had been killed. The words were fine but we couldn’t figure out how we should stage Chris. Should he be standing, kneeling beside her… how close should he be? I asked Chris to come in and add his comments. Chris watched but… his suggestions didn’t seem to work. Then I asked Chris to do the scene but of course he didn’t know the words.
“No problem!” I retorted, “Just improvise.”
Chris improvised and our Judy (Kim Baker) at that time, said the words from the script. Chris was able to show us how he broke the news and, with few exceptions he used the words we had in our script. For the record he knelt beside her and held her hand. I remember some time afterwards the police said they used this scene as an example of recommended police behaviour in this kind of situation.
Many who have seen the play say how powerful this approach was (it is now often referred to as Verbatim Theatre – this was written before that description was coined) and comment on the authenticity of the words. The success and effectiveness of Too Much Punch for Judy stems from the fact that it is true and “Judy” is real.
No attempt should be made in presenting the play to hide this fact, indeed by the use of slides of the real incident, the “reality” can be highlighted to the audience. This Brechtian approach was the one used by the Epping Youth Theatre when they presented the first version of the play as the end piece to Quenchers with the real Judy in the audience for the first time. It proved hugely successful.
JUDY: I breezed through getting ready. I breezed into Harlow Playhouse, got into the theatre and nearly lost control. I was flinching all the time and it made me sweat trying not to lose control. I didn’t know whether to cry and walk out or be sick and walk out. I remember there were some young blokes, they were about eighteen, across from us, and they were crying. I was surprised. I never thought it would genuinely upset people like that, I really didn’t.
Throughout the (long) run of Quenchers we picked up some tremendous reviews and also gained the interest and support of the Essex County Council Road Safety Department. A very fruitful relationship quickly developed and they sponsored our performances at the Edinburgh Fringe Festival. Everyone thought this would be a fitting end to this hugely successful project. I had other ideas. It was only the beginning!
I could see that the final section of Quenchers (sub-titled Too Much Punch for Judy, after a little-known national Christmas drink/drive campaign) had enormous potential, as yet unrealised… but it had only told half the story. I began to realise that, rather than the night of the fatal accident appearing on its own, out of context, I should tell the story of Joanna and Judy from childhood. Fortunately, Judy was more than willing to co-operate, so I organised an interview which, like the others before, would be taped and painstakingly transcribed by hand.
Judy talked openly about her childhood years and her relationship with Jo giving me plenty of material to work with. I combined these interviews with what her mother had said in her original interview and jigsawed together a new opening section telling of Judy’s early years and made a number of developments to the accident section.
Too Much Punch for Judy received its first public performance on Thursday 12th February 1987 in front of about forty people in the small drama studio at St. Johns School, Epping.
JUDY: I thought that it was better than the extract in Quenchers. I thought it had more effect. It’s not something I can enjoy. I switch off emotionally, otherwise I’d cry. When you’re not ready for it, it does give you a bit of a wallop.
The reviews following this performance were universally excellent.
Soon, Essex County Council were telling me that they wanted to sponsor a tour of the play. They would pay for the play to be performed in every school in Essex. I couldn’t believe it! Unfortunately, it was unrealistic to release the Youth Theatre from their studies for eight weeks, so as second choice, a professional TIE company were hired (Touchstone Theatre In Education Company) and the tour, much to my surprise, happened. The next thing I knew was that someone from Scotland had seen the play and they wanted it to tour Scottish schools. Since then it has toured across Britain (Ape Theatre Company) every year up until 2014 when government cutbacks led to the road safety departments who funded it being disbanded.
The next invitation was for the play to tour throughout Éire…then New Zealand. I was even invited out (paid for by the British Council… thanks!) to see the play and lead some workshops. Amazing! It became the most performed play in New Zealand with John Godber’s Bouncers coming in second!
It was subsequently performed by the critically acclaimed TESTO in Norway and Michelle Smith’s (one of the founder members of Paper Birds) Love Theatre in Jersey.
Throughout this time, school/college drama departments began to put on their own productions of the play. The ones that I have seen have been outstanding. It has won numerous One Act Play Festival awards.
When I was an examiner for GCSE Drama I often read students’ glowing reviews of Ape’s performances. More recently I have been approached for permission to use extracts for A-Level or audition speeches and to that end, I have adapted a monologue which will, I hope, prove useful to such students. All this from the smallest of small plays! It seemed that nothing could go wrong. But it did.
Late in the evening, shortly after the 5th October 1993, I received a phone call from Chris Caten. His tone immediately told me that something dreadful had happened. Nothing could prepare me for what he was about to say; Judy had been involved in a second drink/drive incident. Her car had collided with another and killed the twenty-one-year-old driver (Penny Jessup) immediately.
This tragedy defied belief. The emotional consequences for all involved, were more far reaching than I could ever imagine. The awful events (included in this version of the play with a fuller context than in any previous version) speak for themselves. A road safety officer shocked me further by saying that, sadly, this incident supported statistics: Once you have been convicted of drinking and driving… you are more likely, statistically, to offend again than someone who has never done so! Do people never learn? That has led me to pose the question to frame this version of the play…
If Judy didn’t learn from being involved in the incident, can we honestly expect people in an audience watching this play to allow their behaviour to be affected?
Despite this, I remain convinced that it can be a potent message for many. But of course I would say that, I guess. It’s certainly an interesting debate.
I sincerely hope that in continuing to promote this play we can all do our best to raise the issues and ensure that there are fewer tragedies around the corner.
It is estimated that Too Much Punch for Judy has been seen by nearly a million young people over the last thirty or so years. The powerful tool of live theatre has been well served by the many versions of the play and the message of ‘safe driving practices’ communicated effectively and imaginatively by many theatre groups. How many lives have been saved? No one can answer that. Originally the aim of this play was to help put the problem of drinking and driving ‘on the agenda’. I am certain that it has gone way beyond that.
It