Written by Peter Arnott

Directed by Hannah Bradley Croall

Review by Dominic Corr

Hill Street Theatre

Peter Arnott’s Shall Roger Casement Hang? arrives at Hill Street Theatre with a clarity that cuts through its intellectual weight. A rare opportunity to catch a piece originally created for The Tron Theatre, this debut from Union Theatre Company proves the necessity of such companies – this one largely comprised of members from the now disbanded Arkle Theatre – with an intention to provide grassroots and fringe theatre throughout the year. This is a production rooted in language – precise, insistent and often unrelenting – yet it never loses sight of the human conflict at its centre. Under Hannah Bradley Croall’s direction, the play becomes less a historical retelling and more a tightly contained examination of power, persuasion and personal mythology.

Set during the final days before the execution of Sir Roger Casement in 1916, the play unfolds as a sustained interrogation between Casement and British naval intelligence officer Captain Reginald Hall. It is a framework that lends itself to both tension and introspection, allowing the narrative to move fluidly between political discourse and private reckoning. 

Delivering a precise, and intelligent performance, Paul Arendt’s Casement is a study in composure and contradiction. He presents as articulate, almost self-consciously refined, yet there is a consistent undercurrent of vulnerability in the performance. Arendt resists the temptation to simplify the figure into either martyr or opportunist, instead allowing the character’s inconsistencies to sit in full view. His delivery carries a measured rhythm, suggesting a man carefully constructing his own narrative even as it begins to unravel.

Opposite him, Adrian Moore’s Captain Hall offers a counterpoint built on restraint. Where Casement leans into expansive rhetoric, Hall responds with precision—controlled, watchful, and quietly strategic – though it isn’t until the latter moments of the play in which Moore really dials up these elements. Moore plays the role with an economy that proves effective in the long-run, allowing shifts in tone to register without overt signalling. The balance between the two is what sustains the production: a conversation that is both adversarial and, at times, unexpectedly reflective.

Arnott’s script is unapologetically dense, layering political context, personal history and philosophical questioning without dilution. It asks significant questions – about nationalism, loyalty, and the ethical limits of resistance – while resisting any easy conclusions. The figure of Casement himself becomes a prism through which these tensions are refracted: a former servant of empire now aligned against it, shaped as much by his experiences of colonial violence as by his own sense of identity. Bradley Croall’s understanding of the text is evident; and the choices to infuse so much of the contemporary in this piece do not go unnoticed, particularly during Pride month. It makes for a fire and ice clash of a production, where the humanity, for all its sins (from colonialism, to indoctrination, and self-hatred) can be peered beneath the performances.

The production’s design choices reinforce its focus on interiority. Michael Mulligan’s set is spare but purposeful, creating a confined environment that mirrors the claustrophobic nature of the interrogation. A single visual element – a suspended suggestion of the gallows – anchors the space with quiet inevitability. Lighting, designed by Rob Shields, sharpens this atmosphere further, isolating moments of confrontation and reflection with clean, deliberate focus.

Where the production expands beyond its central exchange, it does so with care. Projections by Gregor McElvogue, paired with the recorded voice of Paule Yimga Tchamdjou, introduce glimpses of Casement’s earlier work documenting atrocities in the Congo. These sequences broaden the scope of the narrative without disrupting its core, offering context that deepens rather than distracts.

There are, however, moments where the text’s density becomes a challenge. The dialogue-heavy structure occasionally leans towards stasis, with certain passages lingering longer than necessary. While Croall’s direction maintains clarity, the cumulative effect can slow the production’s pace in places, particularly as it navigates some of its more intricate political arguments, and movement begins to still as the focus homes in on wording and tone; but towards the end of the show? Where violence rears its face – the piece explodes with a visceral burst of energy which washes away much of the stillness from before.

Even so, the production remains consistently engaging, anchored by two finely judged performances and a clear sense of purpose. It trusts its audience to engage with complexity, to sit within ambiguity, and to consider history not as fixed narrative but as contested interpretation.

Shall Roger Casement Hang? is rigorous, intelligent theatre, demanding but ultimately rewarding. A production that understands the weight of its subject and meets it with equal precision. It’s a thunderously resolute choice and debut for Union Theatre Company; instantly placing them right at the centre of Edinburgh’s grassroots scene. A welcome addition, and a chance to spotlight some of Scotland’s works which other, bigger, less bold companies would turn from. Bravo.

---