Modern scholars suggest that Homer’s Odyssey was originally more likely to be heard or performed than read by Ancient Greek audiences. So, therefore it is quite fitting that The Factory have decided to stick to this oral tradition and, in some ways, abandon the written text (which was thought to have been transcribed later) in favour of a fresh but in many ways faithful approach to the Odyssey. The production follows the Factory ensemble mixing traditional story elements and segments of poem with contemporary linguistics and monologues exploring the text itself. The performance of Odyssey is all woven together through a ‘24 book’ structure and then bound together by the most important element of them all in this production, improvisation.
The main focus of the Factory’s exercise was a bowl full of 24 shards, each dictating how a different book (i.e. scene) would be performed. The bowl of shards was then passed around the audience and, when each book began, whoever had the bowl chose a shard and read out to the performers what was written on it, thus dictating what they would have to do in that scene. Some shards easily fit into prepared and rehearsed narratives whereas others proved more tricky and relied a lot more on audience participation or the actor’s ability to perform under pressure. Book 11 for example required a Poem to be inserted at random at any point in the scene. This allowed the cast to play out a previously rehearsed scene with one actor quite simply interjecting at a random moment with Shakespeare’s Sonnet 109. However, in Book 24 a shard with ‘3 word speech’ was selected, which restricted the actors performing in the scene to only be able to speak 3 words in every sentence, completely throwing any potential for rehearsal out of the window. In all situations the ensemble performed strongly and amicably; the copious amounts of audience participation lending itself to an audience which gradually warmed to the show and the cast.
Despite this, some games worked much better than others, showing off the range of the actor’s abilities and their strength as a company. A personal favourite of mine was ’60 seconds’ in Book 22 where, under the time constraint being 
followed by the audience, the entire cast had to explain the plot of the entire book in under a minute. Not only did this dictate acting ability, it also demonstrated the Factory’s strong understanding of Homer’s poem and their ability to function as a cohesive unit. Unfortunately, the success of some shards was at the detriment of others; the theme of Book 7 of ‘Animals’, an absurdist shard where many of the ensemble became animals and came far too early, detracting from the plot and leaving much of the audience bewildered. As can often be the case with improvisation ‘Audience Advice in Book 19’, where the entire scene relies on audience participation for it to progress fell flat due to quite an unresponsive and unhelpful audience to what looked like the frustration of the actors on stage. Even so, for all its laughs and gags Odyssey was peppered with very poignant moments. The ‘monologue’ shards in particular illustrated the quite intimate motivations behind some of the writers, and the actors’ personal stories came to light through the ‘Tell a Group’ and ‘Parent’ shards.
On a scale from a fully improvised show devised entirely on stage, to completely scripted and rehearsed pieces, Odyssey slides in somewhere into the middle. It means that certain suggestions can often make scenes feel jaunty and maladjusted but it also has the power to captivate and immerse audience. There were sparks of real comedic brilliance and even fleeting glimpses of the Epicness that Homer himself would be proud of. But, often, these moments were cut short by an interjection, briskly moving the production onto the next book or awkwardness arising over actors talking over one another. Nonetheless, at its core, the Factory’s Odyssey feels like an experiment and a journey of sorts. I imagine that some nights it flies beyond expectation and is incredible, whilst other nights it’s equally at risk from falling flat. Such is the nature of improvisation. The fact that it showed both its brilliance and its capacity to be something truly great means that it’s definitely something worth seeing and an entirely unique experience every night. And that’s what Takeover is and should be about: trying something different and immersing yourself in unique non-traditionalist takes on theatre and the classics. It’s experimental, different and brilliant.