What do you think?
Rate this book
Jerusalem
"[A] startlingly brilliant new play. . . . A tragic and hilarious vision of life in an English country community. Butterworth’s new work was the most talked about new work of the season."� The London Paper
109 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 2009
47 people are currently reading
1,493 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 184 reviews
December 14, 2011
Notgettingenough and I went to this critically acclaimed play a couple of nights ago at the West End. I watched the whole thing with rapt attention; Not, as she sometimes does, took a short nap halfway through. I imagined this would give me an advantage during the post-mortem, but I should have known better.
"So what did you think it was about?" she asked as we left the theatre.
"Um, dunno," I said. "Maybe a metaphor for the current state of England? I mean, here we are, rotten to the core, served with an eviction notice and a few hours to vacate the property, but we think our charm and verbal brilliance will somehow let us sneak out of it..."
"Was he supposed to be a Christ-figure?" interrupted Not, impatient with my slow mental processes.
I hadn't been alert, and as usual I'd failed even to consider the possibility. Just because Rooster Byron is a drunk who's banned from every pub in town and supplies the local kids with illegal substances while telling them preposterous lies and getting a few of the prettier girls pregnant, it hadn't crossed my mind that he might also be Jesus. Verily, the Day of the Lord cometh as the thief in the night: maybe we wouldn't recognise Him this time either, a theme also took pleasure in exploring. So how strong is the case here?
There was certainly a lot of camouflage. You wouldn't necessarily expect Christ to put a glass of tea-and-vodka down the front of his stained pants, cheat at Trivial Pursuits or recount off-colour jokes about having sex with the whole of Girls Aloud. But, just as with , there were surprisingly many hints once you started looking for them. Why does everyone love the old reprobate so much, even the woman from the council who pins the eviction paperwork to the door of his grubby trailer? Why is he able to spread a mysterious joy and peace to so many people? (He drives a good many more mad with rage, but Jesus did that too). He claims to be a virgin birth, after an incident where a local philander is caught in flagrante and shot through the scrotum and the bullet, after multiple ricochets, ends up in his mother's panties. He's tortured and branded with a cross-shaped branding iron. But he rises again, and, at the end, he - maybe - summons heavenly assistance. And then of course there's the title.
It's a daring hypothesis, and Google turns up few other people who've had the same thought. Even though I still can't quite believe it, kudos to Not for lack of conventional religious prejudices. And whatever the message, it's definitely worth seeing.
"So what did you think it was about?" she asked as we left the theatre.
"Um, dunno," I said. "Maybe a metaphor for the current state of England? I mean, here we are, rotten to the core, served with an eviction notice and a few hours to vacate the property, but we think our charm and verbal brilliance will somehow let us sneak out of it..."
"Was he supposed to be a Christ-figure?" interrupted Not, impatient with my slow mental processes.
I hadn't been alert, and as usual I'd failed even to consider the possibility. Just because Rooster Byron is a drunk who's banned from every pub in town and supplies the local kids with illegal substances while telling them preposterous lies and getting a few of the prettier girls pregnant, it hadn't crossed my mind that he might also be Jesus. Verily, the Day of the Lord cometh as the thief in the night: maybe we wouldn't recognise Him this time either, a theme also took pleasure in exploring. So how strong is the case here?
There was certainly a lot of camouflage. You wouldn't necessarily expect Christ to put a glass of tea-and-vodka down the front of his stained pants, cheat at Trivial Pursuits or recount off-colour jokes about having sex with the whole of Girls Aloud. But, just as with , there were surprisingly many hints once you started looking for them. Why does everyone love the old reprobate so much, even the woman from the council who pins the eviction paperwork to the door of his grubby trailer? Why is he able to spread a mysterious joy and peace to so many people? (He drives a good many more mad with rage, but Jesus did that too). He claims to be a virgin birth, after an incident where a local philander is caught in flagrante and shot through the scrotum and the bullet, after multiple ricochets, ends up in his mother's panties. He's tortured and branded with a cross-shaped branding iron. But he rises again, and, at the end, he - maybe - summons heavenly assistance. And then of course there's the title.
It's a daring hypothesis, and Google turns up few other people who've had the same thought. Even though I still can't quite believe it, kudos to Not for lack of conventional religious prejudices. And whatever the message, it's definitely worth seeing.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
August 10, 2014
Absolutely loved it, I guarantee it'll be considered a masterpiece in years to come. It certainly deserves to be. Oh how I wish I could have seen the play performed when it was in London (it's currently on Broadway with Mark freaking Rylance) just to get the full impact of the story. Jez Butterworth's crafted a completely bonkers but highly enjoyable tale, equal parts hilarious and tragic and always very powerful. It's a vision of the real England of the 21st century in a small town that hangs onto tradition for the sake of tradition while everyone tries to cope with the changes. Rooster may not be a nice man, and sometimes he's very unlikeable, but he's a fascinating man, a complete powerhouse of tales, delusions and a fool-like clarity that reminded me of Shakespeare's most famous fool, Falstaff. A man viewed in equal parts with admiration and mockery by everyone around him, he has a view of the world nobody else has and he'll fight to the end to keep it that way. People lament the loss of the England of old but Butterworth questions whether that national identity ever existed. The teenagers that hang around his trailer hoping to score some drugs or alcohol enjoy his company and laugh at his increasingly ridiculous tales (the telling of stories is a key element of the play) but Rooster is also a cautionary tale, one that none of them want to end up like. He's the twisted daredevil Pied Piper, one they want to follow despite their common sense.
The first two parts of the play are hilarious, packed full of creatively profane language and pop culture references, painting a picture of an England more concerned with parties and drinking than any sense of patriotism. It's setting the story up for the inevitable fall, one that must and will happen. It's a strange play, often surreal and ridiculous and definitely not for everyone, but there's something undeniably fascinating about Jerusalem. Part parable, part social commentary, part updated Shakespearean tragi-comedy, it's a mish-mash of perfectly organised chaos. There's a cutting intelligence behind the Cheryl Cole jokes and frequent use of the 'c' word, one that exposes the hypocrisy of hanging onto old traditions whilst exposing the real England. Packed full of iconic English imagery and metaphors, it's one that definitely requires a reread (and a national tour please!)
Here's a trailer for the Broadway production:
The first two parts of the play are hilarious, packed full of creatively profane language and pop culture references, painting a picture of an England more concerned with parties and drinking than any sense of patriotism. It's setting the story up for the inevitable fall, one that must and will happen. It's a strange play, often surreal and ridiculous and definitely not for everyone, but there's something undeniably fascinating about Jerusalem. Part parable, part social commentary, part updated Shakespearean tragi-comedy, it's a mish-mash of perfectly organised chaos. There's a cutting intelligence behind the Cheryl Cole jokes and frequent use of the 'c' word, one that exposes the hypocrisy of hanging onto old traditions whilst exposing the real England. Packed full of iconic English imagery and metaphors, it's one that definitely requires a reread (and a national tour please!)
Here's a trailer for the Broadway production:
December 3, 2020
I go through phases of reading film or stage scripts from time to time as you get to see your own version of the performance in your mind’s eye. Besides, it’s the only way to read the works of, say, Arthur Miller, Harold Pinter or Tennessee Williams who did not write novels.
And so it is with Jez Butterworth, whose comedy, Jerusalem, was first performed to high acclaim in 2009 at the Royal Court Theatre in London with Mark Rylance in the lead role of Johnny ‘Rooster� Byron � a former fairground motorcycle ‘jumper� fallen on hard times, living in a derelict caravan in a Somerset forest and making ends meet with drug dealing whilst surrounded by local stragglers and teenage girls. Unsavoury to say the least. The story circles round his last-stance attempts to defend his sacred little piece of England against imminent Council eviction.
This is a clever, witty and learned script full of nuances that I think might be missed in live performance due to the speed of the dialogue. I cannot quite imagine Mark Rylance playing this rough character � for which he won a Tony Award � as I will forever see him as the charismatic Thomas Cromwell in Wolf Hall. He is, apparently, due to reprise the role in a revival of the play this summer in London’s West End (restrictions allowing) which will be worth looking out for.
And so it is with Jez Butterworth, whose comedy, Jerusalem, was first performed to high acclaim in 2009 at the Royal Court Theatre in London with Mark Rylance in the lead role of Johnny ‘Rooster� Byron � a former fairground motorcycle ‘jumper� fallen on hard times, living in a derelict caravan in a Somerset forest and making ends meet with drug dealing whilst surrounded by local stragglers and teenage girls. Unsavoury to say the least. The story circles round his last-stance attempts to defend his sacred little piece of England against imminent Council eviction.
This is a clever, witty and learned script full of nuances that I think might be missed in live performance due to the speed of the dialogue. I cannot quite imagine Mark Rylance playing this rough character � for which he won a Tony Award � as I will forever see him as the charismatic Thomas Cromwell in Wolf Hall. He is, apparently, due to reprise the role in a revival of the play this summer in London’s West End (restrictions allowing) which will be worth looking out for.
March 31, 2022
Unfortunately I didn't like this play as much as . Hard to symphatise with any character. Read on goodreads about the theory of Rooster as a parabel for Christ and it very well could be the case. Nonetheless not really my cup of tea.
June 3, 2018
After seeing Jez Butterworth's magnificent play, The Ferryman, in London recently, I asked the friend who had urged me to go to recommend another of his plays. Hence, I ordered Jerusalem, read it, read it again, and then forced myself to wait two long days to read it once more. It is quite simply stunning—achingly sad in places, and outrageously funny in others. Gorgeous writing.
August 16, 2019
I did enjoy this, but I think I would have got much more out of it if I'd seen the play.
May 3, 2022
what the fuck Julia
June 9, 2024
this book honestly hit me hard. it was extremely funny and witty, yet also devastating and sad. the exploration of isolation and relationships honestly really hit and affected me, there was definite deeper layer to this play which really resonated with me.
4⭐️
“The world turns. And it turns. And it moves and you don't. You're still here.�
4⭐️
“The world turns. And it turns. And it moves and you don't. You're still here.�
March 20, 2012
Jerusalem strains very hard for an effect it never manages to achieve, leaving us with the occasional amusing story, but far, far too much time spent with the sort of tedious drugheads whose presence in a play is meant to give us the feeling that what we are watching is 'edgy' and 'daring', but which can't help but be as boring as someone telling us "how out of it I was last night". The attempt to link the main character to the myths of old England never convinces and the play - which also tries very hard to be relevant to the moment by including many references to recent pop culture - will quickly become outdated. " England's green & pleasant Land" may, in many ways be a desperate place today but Butterworth fails to find the cry of its despair.
May 5, 2022
all fucking day
March 31, 2025
interesting but johnny is not a christ like or pied piper figure please that’s just a criminal bum living in the damm woods and no the blood donation does not redeem him
February 20, 2022
afresh afresh afresh a molotov cocaine cocktail shotputted from Lands End to Devizes
February 2, 2023
Jez Butterworth, amen.
November 5, 2017
‘Jerusalem� won best play of the year in 2009 but surely we’ve moved on? Isn’t there something hypocritical about middle-class theatre-goers laughing their heads off at the losers in society and feeling chuffed for not denigrating them - drug addicts whose every crass sentence includes a four-letter word and who wallow in chicken-shit - when in real life most people in the audience would shoo them away if they came anywhere near their homes? The scene is a gypsy drug-dealer’s caravan in a copse on the outside of town where teenagers can hang out and get high without complaint � and that’s the plot. I am grateful that Jez Butterworth has dropped Pinter’s influence with his newest and truly great play, The Ferryman.
February 13, 2020
I guess this needs to be seen on stage and not read.
As a text it's really hard to get through, the language is too colourful and the characters too unpleasant.
It's well crafted and pops off the page, but to what end? As I understand, it's meant as a state of the nation play, but whatever the deeper meanings are, it all went over my foreign head.
As a text it's really hard to get through, the language is too colourful and the characters too unpleasant.
It's well crafted and pops off the page, but to what end? As I understand, it's meant as a state of the nation play, but whatever the deeper meanings are, it all went over my foreign head.
November 26, 2022
not gonna lie, i didn’t jive with it as much as my class seemed to, but I have a feeling seeing it live would change my opinion (cause it seems like it could be a banger on stage)
January 9, 2023
Loud, crude and magical. A midsummer night's dream with a cast of drug dealers and wasters. Brilliant.
February 4, 2025
Last read this 11 years ago in college and it’s still as good as it was back then! Great play, one i’d love to see one day!
June 6, 2018
I love this play. Saw Rylance in it and he was superb. Brilliant opening scene. Looking forward to seeing it again at the Watermill, Newbury soon.
September 18, 2024
ive been studying this for english lit and we finally finished it!! i definitely would've enjoyed this more if id actually seen the play but it was still good and definitely has been very interesting to write about so far
September 3, 2015
An extraordinary play--big. bold, and beautiful. Butterworth is an extraordinary talent (his play "The River" is also a fine effort even if it does not rise to the level of this) who is particularly good at layering the quotidian world on top of a mythic, at times almost Jungia, subtext. I would have loved to have seen Mark Rylance in this play--as all reviews indicated, I'm sure he was amazing.
June 15, 2016
I read this book for university because it is a rather famous contemporary play and I expected something completely different than what the title promises. That didn't keep me from reading it within 2 days but that was more due to the pace of the story. It all happens so fast, so much information, so many characters and their stories and everything just on one day. You basically cannot stop reading because you think you might miss something.
September 3, 2017
4.5, rounded up. Had I not just read Butterworth's most recent play, 'The Ferryman', I might have been tempted to rate this a full 5; however, it does not QUITE reach the heights of that masterpiece, and I had a wee mite of difficulty with some of the lingo and references here that made it a slow go at times. I can still see why it was a huge success, and can just picture the award-winning Mark Rylance running away with the lead character.
December 9, 2022
Reread this because the glimmers of magic and supernatural haunt me. It’s an incredible piece of drama.
One of my favorite plays of all time. Reading it brought back Mark Rylance's brilliant performance.
One of my favorite plays of all time. Reading it brought back Mark Rylance's brilliant performance.
July 5, 2019
After reading THE FERRYMAN, I was looking forward to reading this play. Not as good, I'm afraid. Decent characters, but the protagonist is difficult to sympathize with.
March 24, 2020
This was decent, but the whole time I was reading I was thinking about how much more I would enjoy seeing this on the stage. It was so vivid and easy to imagine.
Read
November 16, 2023Hilarious and entertaining script that I'd love to see on the stage!
While principally hugely fun to read, Jerusalem taps into a lot of contemporary political binaries and debates. Critics have argued back and forth over whether Butterworth is left- or right-leaning on the political spectrum, and I'm not going to disclose my opinion on that here. The playwright, , that he intended for it to be about community and belonging. It's short-sighted to think that themes of community and belonging can ever be removed from politics. Brexit, in particular, is utterly tied up in the question of belonging. Hence this play has become forever interlinked in the Brexit discourse � do these characters represent the Britain that voted Brexit? They certainly fit the demographic. So, this is one of those art pieces that by attempting to omit parts of societal discourse, has by doing so, unintentionally, implicitly included them.
I found certain themes really interesting, such as anti-globalisation, anarchy, the deconstruction of family binaries, pagan mythology, and loyalty.
Jerusalem shows a side of England that bureaucracy finds embarrassing, and argues that it shouldn't, and can't, be smothered.
It's interesting that Johnny essentially provides a safe space for this side of England to express itself, yet it is also abundant with violence and abuse. The way he abandons his son, the way his friends abandon their loyalty for him when he becomes vulnerable, the way lies and drugs are glamorised, and the way women are ruthlessly sexualised. It's like a microcosm of anarchy. It represents the parts of Britain that aren't pretty, but inevitable. And Johnny and the gang refuse to progress with the rest of society, for better or for worse.
Unfortunately, especially for a play released in 2009, the representation of women is really poor. Female characters are stereotypes, props; not fleshed-out characters. The young girls have more voice than older women do, but only because they are heavily sexualised and can weaponise this. Fawcett is the only woman with any true agency and she has been forced to express herself with a lot of masculinity. It's no coincidence that she represents the state, the red tape.
While principally hugely fun to read, Jerusalem taps into a lot of contemporary political binaries and debates. Critics have argued back and forth over whether Butterworth is left- or right-leaning on the political spectrum, and I'm not going to disclose my opinion on that here. The playwright, , that he intended for it to be about community and belonging. It's short-sighted to think that themes of community and belonging can ever be removed from politics. Brexit, in particular, is utterly tied up in the question of belonging. Hence this play has become forever interlinked in the Brexit discourse � do these characters represent the Britain that voted Brexit? They certainly fit the demographic. So, this is one of those art pieces that by attempting to omit parts of societal discourse, has by doing so, unintentionally, implicitly included them.
I found certain themes really interesting, such as anti-globalisation, anarchy, the deconstruction of family binaries, pagan mythology, and loyalty.
Jerusalem shows a side of England that bureaucracy finds embarrassing, and argues that it shouldn't, and can't, be smothered.
"JOHNNY: (...) Kids love drinking. Always did. They either sit in the bus stop, shivering their b*llocks off, or they go to yours [the bar], or they come here. Everyone knows what they're up to, all the mums and dads. Why? Because they did the same f*ckin' thing, and younger. There's not one mum or dad round here could come here and say they weren't drinking, smoking, pilling and the rest when they was that and younger. And sh*gging too. Like cats in a sack."
It's interesting that Johnny essentially provides a safe space for this side of England to express itself, yet it is also abundant with violence and abuse. The way he abandons his son, the way his friends abandon their loyalty for him when he becomes vulnerable, the way lies and drugs are glamorised, and the way women are ruthlessly sexualised. It's like a microcosm of anarchy. It represents the parts of Britain that aren't pretty, but inevitable. And Johnny and the gang refuse to progress with the rest of society, for better or for worse.
Unfortunately, especially for a play released in 2009, the representation of women is really poor. Female characters are stereotypes, props; not fleshed-out characters. The young girls have more voice than older women do, but only because they are heavily sexualised and can weaponise this. Fawcett is the only woman with any true agency and she has been forced to express herself with a lot of masculinity. It's no coincidence that she represents the state, the red tape.
October 9, 2024
“So don’t ever worry, because anywhere you go. If you’re ever short. Back to the wall. Remember the blood. The blood.�
I watched the Sam Mendes-directed The Hills of California twice already on Broadway. Both times, I wept. The first viewing, I took advantage of the 2-for-1 ticket offer; second viewing, I scored some free tix through school! I tweeted about it after the first time, and then the show itself used my praise for sponsored content � I love that they did, I wouldn’t mind if they sent me a hat or a t-shirt or something :)
Anyway, that masterpiece of a show was written by the Tony-winning playwright Jez Butterworth. Separately, my Technique teacher Josh brought up the character Johnny “Rooster� Byron from Jerusalem in class as a firecracker role; a character that perhaps doesn’t learn anything. I don’t remember if that’s exactly what he said, but Johnny is such a tragic, sad character. But I suppose it depends? Maybe he really gets stuff more than us; but he numbs himself so much with the hard drugs and liquor, and while he has a natural empathy for the burnouts and outcasts of rural Britain (and is salvation for some young people who are most likely being abused in their family homes), it still takes a toll. Whatever Johnny needed to “learn� he simply knows already; and knowledge is a curse for him.
“School is a lie. Prison’s a waste of time. Girls are wondrous. Grab your fill. No man was ever lain in his barrow wishing he’d loved one less woman. Don’t listen to no one and nothing but what your own heart bids. Lie. Cheat. Steal. Fight to the death. Don’t give up. Show me your teeth.�
There are some rich, meaty dialogue exchanges here. Frequently funny, at times vicious. There are a few truly grounded moments, and the first time we meet Johnny’s ex-wife Dawn and his estranged six-year-old son, the whole idea of that scene, and how loaded & pissed Johnny was during it � it’s so sad. Would’ve been incredible to see Mark Rylance perform this role.
“I’m heavy stone, me. You try and pick me up, I’ll break your spine.�
Johnny’s a chaotic man, but at least he’s not a hypocrite. He’s been beaten down numerous times in life, but he’s got the spirit to keep rising up. However, it’s so sad to witness how used he is to being beaten down; he’s a masochist and wants the pain. His way of living is harming his body (from being a stuntman to then donating his special blood every six weeks). He’s posturing just as much as everyone else; he tries his best to be perceived as tough, hard, all-knowing. When people try to tear him down, it doesn’t really affect him, tragically. Maybe it’s because he’s drunk out of his mind, but I believe he already knows. And there’s nothing he can, or is willing to do to change that.
“And even if you gets us all killed today, at least we’ll all show up in Heaven pissed. Cheers!�
I watched the Sam Mendes-directed The Hills of California twice already on Broadway. Both times, I wept. The first viewing, I took advantage of the 2-for-1 ticket offer; second viewing, I scored some free tix through school! I tweeted about it after the first time, and then the show itself used my praise for sponsored content � I love that they did, I wouldn’t mind if they sent me a hat or a t-shirt or something :)
Anyway, that masterpiece of a show was written by the Tony-winning playwright Jez Butterworth. Separately, my Technique teacher Josh brought up the character Johnny “Rooster� Byron from Jerusalem in class as a firecracker role; a character that perhaps doesn’t learn anything. I don’t remember if that’s exactly what he said, but Johnny is such a tragic, sad character. But I suppose it depends? Maybe he really gets stuff more than us; but he numbs himself so much with the hard drugs and liquor, and while he has a natural empathy for the burnouts and outcasts of rural Britain (and is salvation for some young people who are most likely being abused in their family homes), it still takes a toll. Whatever Johnny needed to “learn� he simply knows already; and knowledge is a curse for him.
“School is a lie. Prison’s a waste of time. Girls are wondrous. Grab your fill. No man was ever lain in his barrow wishing he’d loved one less woman. Don’t listen to no one and nothing but what your own heart bids. Lie. Cheat. Steal. Fight to the death. Don’t give up. Show me your teeth.�
There are some rich, meaty dialogue exchanges here. Frequently funny, at times vicious. There are a few truly grounded moments, and the first time we meet Johnny’s ex-wife Dawn and his estranged six-year-old son, the whole idea of that scene, and how loaded & pissed Johnny was during it � it’s so sad. Would’ve been incredible to see Mark Rylance perform this role.
“I’m heavy stone, me. You try and pick me up, I’ll break your spine.�
Johnny’s a chaotic man, but at least he’s not a hypocrite. He’s been beaten down numerous times in life, but he’s got the spirit to keep rising up. However, it’s so sad to witness how used he is to being beaten down; he’s a masochist and wants the pain. His way of living is harming his body (from being a stuntman to then donating his special blood every six weeks). He’s posturing just as much as everyone else; he tries his best to be perceived as tough, hard, all-knowing. When people try to tear him down, it doesn’t really affect him, tragically. Maybe it’s because he’s drunk out of his mind, but I believe he already knows. And there’s nothing he can, or is willing to do to change that.
“And even if you gets us all killed today, at least we’ll all show up in Heaven pissed. Cheers!�
September 9, 2024
The story begins with Phaedra (echo from Greek Tragedy/Seneca - “ancient time�) singing the first stanza of Jerusalem. What she is also doing is asking whether or not Jesus walked on English soil. The entire play is, amongst other things, an interrogation of the stories we tell ourselves. Did Byron, as crazy as his namesake Romantic poet, really see a giant? Is his blood really special? Was he a daredevil who survived a medical death? Is the darkness in his eyes really some kind of magic? Is the kettle drum covered in times really the earring of a giant? Can it call the giants back? Or is Byron pathetic, a lying drug dealer living out about to be evicted, a sex pest who has far too many dealings with underage girls? The majesty and grandeur with which Byron tries to imbue his life’s tale is in some ways poetic, tragic, poignant. He doesn’t want change; his mobile home is ironically permanent. He is evidently knowledgable (or has a good memory, or has spent far too long memorising the answers) since he knows far too much trivia, and there is something charismatic about him, luring back even momentarily his ex girlfriend Dawn. The way he refuses to back down is in some ways heroic, in other ways very human, exposing his commitment to something greater, even if it isn’t true. The audience is left in the dark (literally) about whether or not the giants are real at the end. The listing of the Byron names, like some sort of pastiche of epic catalogue verse, hammers home the connection to “ancient time�, to knights and dragons, to something more long lasting than the mortal, fragile almost corpse of Johnny that is visually depicted on stage by the end. Byron almost echoes Macbeth’s great soliloquy. His is a tale, told by an idiot, full of sound and fury - signifying nothing?
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
January 14, 2025
"And did those feet in ancient time walk upon England's mountains green?"
A masterpiece of theatre. Better seen on stage but still an outstanding read.
I studied this at school for both my Drama & Theatre Studies and my English Literature A-Levels. As part of this I was lucky enough to see the "forbidden" recording of the original run at the V&A Archives in London.
Lamenting the fact that I missed the boat and would still never get to see it on stage in person, imagine my glee when Sonia Friedman Productions announced a limited return to the West End in 2022, with Mark Rylance and Mackenzie Crook reprising their roles as Johnny and Ginger. To this day I still feel honoured to have seen it with the original two, especially considering Butterworth wrote the character of johnny FOR Rylance.
I guess you could say I've now had the best of both worlds by seeing the original run via recording and the re-run in person.
Jerusalem is fundamentally "English". It takes place in England, has many references to the English zeitgeist, and incorporates spades of English folklore. The runs I saw had a giant St. George's flag as the stage background.
What exactly this translates to is a play that's both hilarious, with more comedy and swearing than the local pub on a Friday night, and yet is also deeper than an ocean. I was enthralled studying it because I was so drawn to the intrigue of "there's something more to this Johnny bloke" throughout.
This play is best read/watched knowing as little information as possible. If you ever get the chance to see it on stage (even if without Mark Rylance) then you should push it to the top of your list.
But if not - reading it will have to do. You won't regret it.
A masterpiece of theatre. Better seen on stage but still an outstanding read.
I studied this at school for both my Drama & Theatre Studies and my English Literature A-Levels. As part of this I was lucky enough to see the "forbidden" recording of the original run at the V&A Archives in London.
Lamenting the fact that I missed the boat and would still never get to see it on stage in person, imagine my glee when Sonia Friedman Productions announced a limited return to the West End in 2022, with Mark Rylance and Mackenzie Crook reprising their roles as Johnny and Ginger. To this day I still feel honoured to have seen it with the original two, especially considering Butterworth wrote the character of johnny FOR Rylance.
I guess you could say I've now had the best of both worlds by seeing the original run via recording and the re-run in person.
Jerusalem is fundamentally "English". It takes place in England, has many references to the English zeitgeist, and incorporates spades of English folklore. The runs I saw had a giant St. George's flag as the stage background.
What exactly this translates to is a play that's both hilarious, with more comedy and swearing than the local pub on a Friday night, and yet is also deeper than an ocean. I was enthralled studying it because I was so drawn to the intrigue of "there's something more to this Johnny bloke" throughout.
This play is best read/watched knowing as little information as possible. If you ever get the chance to see it on stage (even if without Mark Rylance) then you should push it to the top of your list.
But if not - reading it will have to do. You won't regret it.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 184 reviews
Can't find what you're looking for?
Get help and learn more about the design.