George Ryegold's God-In-A-Bag

Without giving too much away, the "God in a bag" of the title is a half-baked idea; this is both true of the plot point in question, and the play itself. It feels unfinished and sketchy, as if it's trying to build a story around a few central character studies – which isn't surprising, as the eponymous protagonist existed a good while before this, as the alter-ego of comedian Toby Williams. Regrettably, this is to the play's detriment. It wants to be farcical, but never gives enough thought or attention to the situations that confront its carefully established cast of eccentrics, and subsequently never forces them to really engage.

George Ryegold is a doctor, currently under suspension from the hospital where he works for the latest in a string of ethical misdemeanors, all of which reflect his vain, arrogant, self-pitying nature. Somehow, despite all evidence to the contrary, we are supposed to believe that George isn't so bad and deserves our sympathy. We're supposed to root for his cringeworthy romantic entreaties to his ex-girlfriend, a primary school headmistress with profound sexual repression. The audience's credulity is further tested when presented with the idea that George is, occasionally, a ground-breaking intellectual whose last theory was stolen by a jealous colleague, thus robbing him of celebrity.

Ryegold is obviously intended to be the latest in an extensive pantheon of comic misanthropes in the Tony Hancock mould. But the anti-hero must hold our fascination, whereas Ryegold is too inconsistently funny and flat-out unpleasant to deserve our attention for long.