PHALLACY
ÒÉ not onlyinteresting but fully captivating. The play is similar in tone to plays such as
ÒÉ a smart black comedyÉ asearch for truth as well as the delving into what makes up a personÕs passion.Ó
ÒMr. Djerassi has theingredients for some funny stuff here, and when he seizes the opportunity thejokes land.Ó
NeilGenzlinger in New York Times (May25, 2007).
Òmultiple strains ofscholarship and streams of Shavian banterÉ impressive writing and livelyperformancesÓ
ÒÉ a portrait of the confrontationalrelationship between two experts, with their banter, some of it quite funny,defining the issues... amusing and edifying to watch them in action.Ó
ÒAs an expose of bias on both sides of thedivide, DjerassiÕs play is itself wonderfully unbiased.
ÒA comedy of academicmannersÉ keeps the proceedings lively, never allowing intellectuality to standin the way of a good joke. ThereÕs even a touch of animate-inanimate eroticism
TheNew Yorker (June 4, 2007)
ÒÉintriguing andthought-provoking stuff, and very well actedÓ
JuliaHickman in Theatreworld Internet Magazine (
ÒÉ a satirical blackcomedy about academic infightingÉ a happily satisfying mix of broad humour andthought-provoking comment.Ó
ÒPhallacy
ÒScience and arts instylish conflictÉ strongly played characters in an entertaining and jocularrelationshipÉ witty and light-heartedÉ anybody who fears intellectual overkillcan rest at ease. Like Tom StoppardÕs Arcadia, Phallacy
ÒWhat is the true value ofart? In Carl DjerassiÕs play, Viennese art historian Regina Leitner-Opfermann saysÒart is never necessary, simply indispensableÓÉ but the true fascination ofthis piece is the battle that rages on between Rex and Regina—played withgusto by Karen Archer and Jack Klaff.Ó
ÒBeyond the clash betweenscientific and artistic approaches to art, what holds the interest in AndyJordanÕs slick and expensive-looking production are the fascinating methodsdeployed by experts in attributing a work of artÕs origin. On this, Djerassiknows his stuff, giving the sense that both we and the play are in the hands ofa capable playwright and an expert scientist.Ó
JohnNathan in The JC Jewish Chronicle(London, April 22, 2005
ÒOneof the classic problems of story-telling is how to get across essentialinformation to the audience, and both the science and the art historicalinformation in the play is clearly transmitted and convincing. And a periodstorylineÉ serves to humanize the ultimate goals behind both academicdisciplines in question, and to put their grandiose debate into perspective.They also bolster director Andy JordanÕs intriguing staging before the openinglines, when modern and historical characters swirl through the set in an oddlytouching, timeless parade of museum-goers. Éfun, non-strenuous satire.Ó
JenniferRohn in LabLit.com (London, April23, 2005)
ÒA debate on what makesart original and whether science or art can best capture human realityÉ ItÕsall high-concept stuff, and there are plenty of thoughtful juxtapositions alongthe way.Ó
ÒThis is an unusual, lightand enjoyable play, recommended especiallyÉ Michael TaylorÕs set would do aWest End production proudÉ one of the most attractive and realistic set seenfor a long time.Ó
"Phallacyis an intriguingplay, well acted, fast moving and embracing a host of questions and humansituations that are rarely touched upon in modern theatreÉ an appealing andthought-provoking new production."
RobinClark in Nature (April 28, 2005)
ÒPhallacy
ÒPart detective story,part satire of academic infighting, the play rolls along enjoyably under AndyJordanÕs fluid direction, comfortably mixing broad comedy withthought-provoking debate.Ó
ÒPhallacy
JosieAppleton in Culture Wars—Institute of Ideas
ÒThis is gripping,intelligent theatreÉÓ
ÒDjerassi manages to makecomplex scientific, art historical and philosophical ideas accessible, evenentertaining, and Andy JordanÕs lively, slick production brings out the best inthe play.Ó
MelanieBranton in TheatreWorld (London,June 2005)
ÒÉ an elegantly crafteddrama about the conflicts of art and science... bracingly actedÓ
MarkShenton in Sunday Express