What do you think?
Rate this book
Mad Forest: A Play from Romania
"Bristles with the intelligence and insight of a major writer." - Financial Times
"Brilliantly ... evoke[s] the mood of a country through snapshot images." - Guardian
"An act of moral commitment as well as theatrical virtuosity." - London Sunday Times
Mad Forest explores the reactions of ordinary people to confused events, focusing in particular on two families. What emerges is the dreadful damage done to people's lives by repression and the painful difficulties of lasting change.
Caryl Churchill's play about the Romanian revolution was written after she, the director and a group of students from London's Central School of Speech and Drama went to Romania to work with acting students there. The play was first performed in 1990, only three months after their return.
Caryl Churchill has written for the stage, television and radio. A renowned and prolific playwright, her plays include Cloud Nine, Top Girls, Far Away, Drunk Enough to Say I Love You?, Bliss, Love and Information, Mad Forest and A Number . In 2002, she received the Obie Lifetime Achievement Award and 2010, she was inducted into the American Theater Hall of Fame.
"Brilliantly ... evoke[s] the mood of a country through snapshot images." - Guardian
"An act of moral commitment as well as theatrical virtuosity." - London Sunday Times
Mad Forest explores the reactions of ordinary people to confused events, focusing in particular on two families. What emerges is the dreadful damage done to people's lives by repression and the painful difficulties of lasting change.
Caryl Churchill's play about the Romanian revolution was written after she, the director and a group of students from London's Central School of Speech and Drama went to Romania to work with acting students there. The play was first performed in 1990, only three months after their return.
Caryl Churchill has written for the stage, television and radio. A renowned and prolific playwright, her plays include Cloud Nine, Top Girls, Far Away, Drunk Enough to Say I Love You?, Bliss, Love and Information, Mad Forest and A Number . In 2002, she received the Obie Lifetime Achievement Award and 2010, she was inducted into the American Theater Hall of Fame.
96 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1990
11 people are currently reading
221 people want to read
About the author
Caryl Churchill
88Ìýbooks217ÌýfollowersCaryl Churchill (born 3 September 1938) is an English dramatist known for her use of non-naturalistic techniques and feminist themes, dramatisation of the abuses of power, and exploration of sexual politics.[1] She is acknowledged as a major playwright in the English language and one of world theatre's most influential writers.
Her early work developed Bertolt Brecht's modernist dramatic and theatrical techniques of 'Epic theatre' to explore issues of gender and sexuality. From A Mouthful of Birds (1986) onwards, she began to experiment with forms of dance-theatre, incorporating techniques developed from the performance tradition initiated by Antonin Artaud with his 'Theatre of Cruelty'. This move away from a clear Fabel dramaturgy towards increasingly fragmented and surrealistic narratives characterises her work as postmodernist.
Prizes and awards
Churchill has received much recognition, including the following awards:
1958 Sunday Times/National Union of Students Drama Festival Award Downstairs
1961 Richard Hillary Memorial Prize
1981 Obie Award for Playwriting, Cloud Nine
1982 Obie Award for Playwriting, Top Girls
1983 Susan Smith Blackburn Prize (runner-up), Top Girls
1984 Susan Smith Blackburn Prize, Fen
1987 Evening Standard Award for Best Comedy of the Year, Serious Money
1987 Obie Award for Best New Play, Serious Money
1987 Susan Smith Blackburn Prize, Serious Money
1988 Laurence Olivier/BBC Award for Best New Play, Serious Money
2001 Obie Sustained Achievement Award
2010 Inducted into the American Theater Hall of Fame.
Plays
Downstairs (1958)
You've No Need to be Frightened (1959?)
Having a Wonderful Time (1960)
Easy Death (1960)
The Ants, radio drama (1962)
Lovesick, radio drama (1969)
Identical Twins (1960)
Abortive, radio drama (1971)
Not Not Not Not Not Enough Oxygen, radio drama (1971)
Owners (1972)
Schreber's Nervous Illness, radio drama (1972) � based on Memoirs of My Nervous Illness
The Hospital at the Time of the Revolution (written 1972)
The Judge's Wife, radio drama (1972)
Moving Clocks Go Slow, (1973)
Turkish Delight, television drama (1973)
Objections to Sex and Violence (1975)
Light Shining in Buckinghamshire (1976) [7]
Vinegar Tom (1976)
Traps (1976)
The After-Dinner Joke, television drama (1978)
Seagulls (written 1978)
Cloud Nine (1979)
Three More Sleepless Nights (1980)
Top Girls (1982)
Crimes, television drama (1982)
Fen (1983)
Softcops (1984)
A Mouthful of Birds (1986)
A Heart's Desire (1987)[18]
Serious Money (1987)
Ice Cream (1989)
Hot Fudge (1989)
Mad Forest (1990)
Lives of the Great Poisoners (1991)
The Skriker (1994)
Blue Heart (1997)
Hotel (1997)
This is a Chair (1999)
Far Away (2000)
Thyestes (2001) � translation of Seneca's tragedy
A Number (2002)
A Dream Play (2005) � translation of August Strindberg's play
Drunk Enough to Say I Love You? (2006)
Seven Jewish Children � a play for Gaza (2009)
Love and Information (2012)
Ding Dong the Wicked (2013)
Here We Go (play) (2015)
source:
Her early work developed Bertolt Brecht's modernist dramatic and theatrical techniques of 'Epic theatre' to explore issues of gender and sexuality. From A Mouthful of Birds (1986) onwards, she began to experiment with forms of dance-theatre, incorporating techniques developed from the performance tradition initiated by Antonin Artaud with his 'Theatre of Cruelty'. This move away from a clear Fabel dramaturgy towards increasingly fragmented and surrealistic narratives characterises her work as postmodernist.
Prizes and awards
Churchill has received much recognition, including the following awards:
1958 Sunday Times/National Union of Students Drama Festival Award Downstairs
1961 Richard Hillary Memorial Prize
1981 Obie Award for Playwriting, Cloud Nine
1982 Obie Award for Playwriting, Top Girls
1983 Susan Smith Blackburn Prize (runner-up), Top Girls
1984 Susan Smith Blackburn Prize, Fen
1987 Evening Standard Award for Best Comedy of the Year, Serious Money
1987 Obie Award for Best New Play, Serious Money
1987 Susan Smith Blackburn Prize, Serious Money
1988 Laurence Olivier/BBC Award for Best New Play, Serious Money
2001 Obie Sustained Achievement Award
2010 Inducted into the American Theater Hall of Fame.
Plays
Downstairs (1958)
You've No Need to be Frightened (1959?)
Having a Wonderful Time (1960)
Easy Death (1960)
The Ants, radio drama (1962)
Lovesick, radio drama (1969)
Identical Twins (1960)
Abortive, radio drama (1971)
Not Not Not Not Not Enough Oxygen, radio drama (1971)
Owners (1972)
Schreber's Nervous Illness, radio drama (1972) � based on Memoirs of My Nervous Illness
The Hospital at the Time of the Revolution (written 1972)
The Judge's Wife, radio drama (1972)
Moving Clocks Go Slow, (1973)
Turkish Delight, television drama (1973)
Objections to Sex and Violence (1975)
Light Shining in Buckinghamshire (1976) [7]
Vinegar Tom (1976)
Traps (1976)
The After-Dinner Joke, television drama (1978)
Seagulls (written 1978)
Cloud Nine (1979)
Three More Sleepless Nights (1980)
Top Girls (1982)
Crimes, television drama (1982)
Fen (1983)
Softcops (1984)
A Mouthful of Birds (1986)
A Heart's Desire (1987)[18]
Serious Money (1987)
Ice Cream (1989)
Hot Fudge (1989)
Mad Forest (1990)
Lives of the Great Poisoners (1991)
The Skriker (1994)
Blue Heart (1997)
Hotel (1997)
This is a Chair (1999)
Far Away (2000)
Thyestes (2001) � translation of Seneca's tragedy
A Number (2002)
A Dream Play (2005) � translation of August Strindberg's play
Drunk Enough to Say I Love You? (2006)
Seven Jewish Children � a play for Gaza (2009)
Love and Information (2012)
Ding Dong the Wicked (2013)
Here We Go (play) (2015)
source:
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 23 of 23 reviews
January 8, 2020
This is quite possibly my favourite play of all time and am I now crying because I get to be in it? Maybe.
July 8, 2021
Această piesă a fost foarte bine realizată. Oferă fragmente din viața de zi cu zi a cetățenilor români în ajunul revoluției. Aceste scurte momente sunt împletite cu sentimente de anxietate, frustrare și sfidare.
Churchill face o treabă extraordinară transmitând confuzia generală a evenimentelor rapide care au avut loc începând cu data de 18 la Timișoara, ducând la execuții pe data de 25.
În general, simt că Mad Forest oferă cititorului o perspectivă vie a emoțiilor generale ale oamenilor în această perioadă.
Churchill face o treabă extraordinară transmitând confuzia generală a evenimentelor rapide care au avut loc începând cu data de 18 la Timișoara, ducând la execuții pe data de 25.
În general, simt că Mad Forest oferă cititorului o perspectivă vie a emoțiilor generale ale oamenilor în această perioadă.
January 18, 2011
(5/10) Maybe this would have been better performed -- it's a funny thing, reading a stageplay instead of watching it, but given how rarely I go out to the theatre it's necessary to try and explore this area of literature. But this just left me cold and a bit confused. Churchill sets her play around the Romanian revolution that deposed the dictator Nicolae Ceausescu. The problem is that Churchill doesn't really seem to have much to say about the revolt other than the obvious trumpeting of liberty. At times she actively tries to write around historical fact, trying to push the Western image of the revolution as anti-communist over the fact that, when given a free vote, the Romanians chose to put the Communists back into power.
Structurally the play consists of two relatively conventional acts, set before and after the revolution, about two interlocked families, and a choral centrepiece which is a kind of "voice of the people" portrayal of the revolution. It's interesting to see such a socialistic technique -- Eisensteinian types collectively overthrowing the old order, each worker accorded his own opinion -- in an anti-communist play. Whether this is intentional irony or ideological undercutting and appropriation depends on your viewpoint and how much credit you're willing to give Churchill. As for the more conventional acts, the highlight is the super-realist dialogue, where characters will interrupt and talk over each other with no regard for the viewer. Unfortunately, the characters and plot in this section are one-dimensional and flat, and I never found a reason to care about any of it.
With some work the central choral section could have been expanded into a decent work, as contained within is a nascent sense of the chaos that all revolutions, even the most just, are filled with. But as a whole Mad Forest seems like a cautionary tale of trying to adapt current events for the stage.
Structurally the play consists of two relatively conventional acts, set before and after the revolution, about two interlocked families, and a choral centrepiece which is a kind of "voice of the people" portrayal of the revolution. It's interesting to see such a socialistic technique -- Eisensteinian types collectively overthrowing the old order, each worker accorded his own opinion -- in an anti-communist play. Whether this is intentional irony or ideological undercutting and appropriation depends on your viewpoint and how much credit you're willing to give Churchill. As for the more conventional acts, the highlight is the super-realist dialogue, where characters will interrupt and talk over each other with no regard for the viewer. Unfortunately, the characters and plot in this section are one-dimensional and flat, and I never found a reason to care about any of it.
With some work the central choral section could have been expanded into a decent work, as contained within is a nascent sense of the chaos that all revolutions, even the most just, are filled with. But as a whole Mad Forest seems like a cautionary tale of trying to adapt current events for the stage.
March 7, 2021
My 9th Churchill play, and certainly one of the better ones I've come across.
An inventive and slightly disturbing work that felt like an important political spectacle similar to that of Brecht. Here though instead of the Third Reich its Ceaușescu's communist Romania under the spotlight, and in three acts it portraits the before, during and after the street revolt that brought down the regime.
An inventive and slightly disturbing work that felt like an important political spectacle similar to that of Brecht. Here though instead of the Third Reich its Ceaușescu's communist Romania under the spotlight, and in three acts it portraits the before, during and after the street revolt that brought down the regime.
July 2, 2018
I enjoy plays, which is what this work is. I have a personal interest in Romania, and in the events surrounding its 1989 revolution, which I will not discuss here.
Through a play the reader is taken through scenes in Bucharest, Romania immediately prior to, and in the immediate aftermath of, the people's uprising and revolution of December 1989. The result of the revolution was the death by public execution of Nicolae and Elena Ceausescu (pronounced Char-ches-ku) for genocide by starvation and crimes against the Romanian people.
The scenes include a celebration of Christmas, (which occurred in 1989 in Bucharest for the first time in over twenty years), confusion in the hospitals over the revolution itself, the safety of the city's water, (at one point it was thought that the Ceausescu's had poisoned the water in Bucharest), the reuse of needles (shoddily sterilized with drinking alcohol where possible--leading to Romania's AIDS epidemic), and the attempted assimilation of Nicolae and Elena (under assumed names) into average Romanian society to save their own skins. This effort ultimately failed, and the two were executed by firing squad).
A square of chocolate is a Christmas luxury. People don't trust even children or intimate family members due to the infiltration of the Securitate (Gestapo-esque secret police) into every walk of life. Dogs and people starve all the same, and yet the hope, spirit, and heart of the Romanian people comes through. This play will break your heart. And it should be read by everyone.
Through a play the reader is taken through scenes in Bucharest, Romania immediately prior to, and in the immediate aftermath of, the people's uprising and revolution of December 1989. The result of the revolution was the death by public execution of Nicolae and Elena Ceausescu (pronounced Char-ches-ku) for genocide by starvation and crimes against the Romanian people.
The scenes include a celebration of Christmas, (which occurred in 1989 in Bucharest for the first time in over twenty years), confusion in the hospitals over the revolution itself, the safety of the city's water, (at one point it was thought that the Ceausescu's had poisoned the water in Bucharest), the reuse of needles (shoddily sterilized with drinking alcohol where possible--leading to Romania's AIDS epidemic), and the attempted assimilation of Nicolae and Elena (under assumed names) into average Romanian society to save their own skins. This effort ultimately failed, and the two were executed by firing squad).
A square of chocolate is a Christmas luxury. People don't trust even children or intimate family members due to the infiltration of the Securitate (Gestapo-esque secret police) into every walk of life. Dogs and people starve all the same, and yet the hope, spirit, and heart of the Romanian people comes through. This play will break your heart. And it should be read by everyone.
April 21, 2021
4.5/5
This play was so uniquely written and insightful that I literally couldn't stop thinking about it. I studied this for a 'Literature and Crisis' module in Uni and the way it speaks for revolution and life in times of chaos is impeccable. I loved it.
This play was so uniquely written and insightful that I literally couldn't stop thinking about it. I studied this for a 'Literature and Crisis' module in Uni and the way it speaks for revolution and life in times of chaos is impeccable. I loved it.
January 27, 2008
What's kind of pathetic is that I can't remember if I actually read this one for my Stoppard/Churchill class or not... but it looks really familiar. The problem is that we read one by Stoppard about Czechoslovakia, and I think they've melded in my brain. Dang.
November 21, 2024
3.5 stars
A play that has left me feeling desolate in the way that most Romanians feel upon interacting with the past, albeit not necessarily having it experienced directly. The history book on the shelf haunts us with that sort of lugubrious silence that mourns the fallen and the injustice imposed on people and land as ancient as the Roman Empire, it taunts contemporary witnesses like myself included, and forces us to beg the question � what was better?
Regardless of the answer, there is authenticity to Churchill's play but not to the extent of satisfying me completely. I appreciated the atmosphere she created but it did feel like there was more research to be done for the sake of legitimacy. The broken English in the second act made sense, but the culmination of the third felt rather foolish. I recognised the idea behind echoing the lines she had sprinkled throughout the play but having it done in a Romanian so poorly written hurled me out of the story before it could even come to its abrupt end.
Honestly, there isn't much else to say. Interesting touch to the cast with the Angel, the Priest, the Vampire, and the Dog. And the title makes sense. Just a bit confusing why she chose the etymology of Teleorman to discuss the events in Bucharest. They are not really one and the same place.
A play that has left me feeling desolate in the way that most Romanians feel upon interacting with the past, albeit not necessarily having it experienced directly. The history book on the shelf haunts us with that sort of lugubrious silence that mourns the fallen and the injustice imposed on people and land as ancient as the Roman Empire, it taunts contemporary witnesses like myself included, and forces us to beg the question � what was better?
Regardless of the answer, there is authenticity to Churchill's play but not to the extent of satisfying me completely. I appreciated the atmosphere she created but it did feel like there was more research to be done for the sake of legitimacy. The broken English in the second act made sense, but the culmination of the third felt rather foolish. I recognised the idea behind echoing the lines she had sprinkled throughout the play but having it done in a Romanian so poorly written hurled me out of the story before it could even come to its abrupt end.
Honestly, there isn't much else to say. Interesting touch to the cast with the Angel, the Priest, the Vampire, and the Dog. And the title makes sense. Just a bit confusing why she chose the etymology of Teleorman to discuss the events in Bucharest. They are not really one and the same place.
Read
January 8, 2021Definitely a play that significantly benefits from theatrical exploration and staging (typical Caryl). Language is used both to state points directly and dance around others. The triptych structure allows for an interesting linguistic game in which the limitations of free thought under a totalitarian regime are contrasted with suddenly being unmuzzled upon "liberation" but not knowing really what to do with it. Seemingly formal in structure with some elements of stylistic and structural experimentation - kinda expected more considering we are dealing with Caryl Churchill here, but maybe that's 21st century Churchill I'm thinking of. This piece was inspired very much directly by and explicitly references the events of the Romanian Revolution, but for something that was written based on a research trip directly after the revolution, it is both beholden to and transcends the specifics of the event - maybe more so the latter.
March 31, 2021
Pretty intense.
Act one introduces two fictional families in Romania and that the real regime of the time employs a not-so-secret police which keeps tabs on those critical of it. Mostly realistic, except for the ghost of a grandmother still dispatching wisdom, and an "angel" which haggles with a priest.
Act two is a series of actual testimonial accounts from interviews of real people who lived through the revolution of 1989, conveying the violent chaos and mostly confusion: simply not understanding everything that was happening.
Act three returns to the earlier two fictional families, but after the revolution, trying to piece the events all together, also now mistrustful of the new regime and neighboring Hungarians, while everyone is experiencing wild mood swings. The culmination is a wedding which quickly goes off the rails, asserting there is never a speedy recovery from a violent revolution. Although even more liberties are taken with realism, even introducing a "vampire" who talks to a dog as a bit of allegory, but it detracts from the work. While looking up the actual events on wikipedia, I read some excerpts of reviews of the play, and this one pretty succinctly captures all of my thoughts:
Act one introduces two fictional families in Romania and that the real regime of the time employs a not-so-secret police which keeps tabs on those critical of it. Mostly realistic, except for the ghost of a grandmother still dispatching wisdom, and an "angel" which haggles with a priest.
Act two is a series of actual testimonial accounts from interviews of real people who lived through the revolution of 1989, conveying the violent chaos and mostly confusion: simply not understanding everything that was happening.
Act three returns to the earlier two fictional families, but after the revolution, trying to piece the events all together, also now mistrustful of the new regime and neighboring Hungarians, while everyone is experiencing wild mood swings. The culmination is a wedding which quickly goes off the rails, asserting there is never a speedy recovery from a violent revolution. Although even more liberties are taken with realism, even introducing a "vampire" who talks to a dog as a bit of allegory, but it detracts from the work. While looking up the actual events on wikipedia, I read some excerpts of reviews of the play, and this one pretty succinctly captures all of my thoughts:
March 26, 2017
Certainly one of Churchill's more famous plays, if not one of her best. Sprawling, complex, maybe more interesting than compelling, it often feels more like a sketch than an in-depth exploration of Romania, its past, and its struggle to enter the modern world. The characters are plentiful and a little interchangeable, which makes them hard to latch onto individually or even collectively, and though their basic conflicts are human and relatable, they often seem to exist in large part due to the structure and focus of the play, which itself feels at the mercy of the playwright and her theme. A powerful and articulate piece of social-political theater, there is no doubt, but maybe not as entertaining or profound as it could be, or aspires to be, though almost worth the price of admission for Churchill's signature surrealism, which is present in spades.
June 17, 2023
Rating: 3.5/5 stars
There were so many layers to this story that made it really compelling and captured the confusion and elation of this period. I especially liked how she handled the revolution and think the additional perspectives were great. I also thought she captured the tone and dry wit really well. However, the second half of the play felt a little off to me. I think part of the issue was that it was written during this period of upheaval, so while she's good at emphasizing that, the conspiracy theories and prejudice against Hungarians felt like they came out of no where and didn't have a clear purpose or direction. I think had she waited a year to write this, or even a few months, it wouldn't have felt so abrupt and piecemeal at the end.
There were so many layers to this story that made it really compelling and captured the confusion and elation of this period. I especially liked how she handled the revolution and think the additional perspectives were great. I also thought she captured the tone and dry wit really well. However, the second half of the play felt a little off to me. I think part of the issue was that it was written during this period of upheaval, so while she's good at emphasizing that, the conspiracy theories and prejudice against Hungarians felt like they came out of no where and didn't have a clear purpose or direction. I think had she waited a year to write this, or even a few months, it wouldn't have felt so abrupt and piecemeal at the end.
February 23, 2025
For THE 344.
4.5 stars, rounded up.
My second Caryl Churchill play, and I liked this one better than Cloud 9. I like the overlapping dialogue. I can picture how talented actors can really breathe realistic life into this one. Makes me curious to learn more about the Romanian revolution.
4.5 stars, rounded up.
My second Caryl Churchill play, and I liked this one better than Cloud 9. I like the overlapping dialogue. I can picture how talented actors can really breathe realistic life into this one. Makes me curious to learn more about the Romanian revolution.
March 13, 2023
Didn't get it, I think I may be too obtuse to grasp it.
November 14, 2024
ugh i REALLY wanted to like this play because of the content and thematic material but???
December 4, 2024
lowkey maybe 5 stars idk but i can’t stop thinking about this play
February 25, 2016
This play was different from most Caryl Churchill plays I've read because the action does not take place in England. I thought this departure did not detract from Churchill's unique writing style and story telling ability. Using her characteristic scene structure and overlapping dialogue, she was able to create a snapshot of the Romanian Revolution through the eyes of two families and individual stories. The cyclical structure of the play (part 1 is a wedding before the revolution, part 2 is a series of stories the first night of the revolution in December 1989, and part 3 is another wedding post-revolution) provides interesting commentary on the nature of governments and the patter of revolution. The families reflect the generations, ideals, and lifestyles of those these revolutions impact and asks the audience through what is and isn't said to consider the consequences and benefits.
December 14, 2014
I loved the play! I have so many questions about everything... Like if Ianos's character was Hungarian, why his name was not written in Hungarian? Or what was happening really about the shootings? And so on, can't even write them down there's so many...
I got my hands on Mad Forest, after I choose to write the essay about Top Girls for my Modern Drama class. I really enjoyed Top Girls as well, and during my research I read about Churchill's other plays... Next in the line I'm gonna read is Cloud Nine. The funny thing is I never enjoyed reading plays, they belong to the stage, but since I can't see them, I am too interested...
I got my hands on Mad Forest, after I choose to write the essay about Top Girls for my Modern Drama class. I really enjoyed Top Girls as well, and during my research I read about Churchill's other plays... Next in the line I'm gonna read is Cloud Nine. The funny thing is I never enjoyed reading plays, they belong to the stage, but since I can't see them, I am too interested...
May 24, 2007
an exploration of the romanian revolution, stunning new use of language. a very sad play, exploring the cycle of revolution- from one dictator to the next.
October 4, 2024
In the beginning I was very skeptical of this play, but as I listen to my classmates act out this piece of dramatic literature it is a beautiful story of the history of the Romanian Revolution
August 22, 2014
Sucker for Caryl Churchill.
March 16, 2016
The middle section's a triumph. Interesting pair with Voices from Chernobyl.
Displaying 1 - 23 of 23 reviews
Can't find what you're looking for?
Get help and learn more about the design.