We were looking to create a drama about betrayal. Specifically, political betrayal – broken promises, trampled dreams. We looked for the myths, the big stories that explore the issue. We thought of Jason – a man who set off on a life-changing adventure with a ship-load of companions, who married a powerful princess and who then dumped them all when he got the chance to join the ruling elite.

Initially Euripides’ Medea was simply source material but we soon realised that the play is just too compelling a piece of drama to pass over. It contains what we want to talk about but with many extra dimensions. So we set about conceiving a version of Medea for just two performers.

Jason and Medea would present the story - and all the characters - between them. They were locked in limbo, perpetually replaying events, trying to justify themselves to their murdered children. We searched for images appropriate to this limbo-land as well as the world of the story. We settled on a lot of white material because it speaks to us of clinical institutions and padded cells as well as Greek cliffs and sails.

Our initial interest in political betrayal became subsumed into broader moral questions. Is compromise a sign of moral lassitude or of civilised sophistication? When does an implacable moral stand become dangerous fanaticism? Can there be a meeting point between diametric views of how the world should operate? And will it always be the innocents who suffer?

In rendering the text we’ve sought to preserve the twists and turns of the debate but to keep the language compact and the arguments as clear and concise as possible. We’ve placed an emphasis on the domestic nature of many of the interchanges – which we have reflected in the diction. We’ve tended to downplay the Ancient Greek cosmology. Indeed, we’ve gone further in denying the power of the gods than Euripides did. Euripides certainly displays an active scepticism about a divine order – we’ve pushed that scepticism further to reflect our more secular age.

At the same time, we’re well aware of the power that has accrued to the piece as it has matured over 2500 years. In our staging we have tried to find a style that reflects that weight without, we very much hope, becoming cumbersome or portentous.

What has pleased us more than anything else in presenting the play to very varied audiences over the last three years is the level of debate that it engenders. There are no easy answers in the play, only questions. And it is invigorating to hear people wrestling with these questions once the play has finished.

If you want to comment on the piece please find us after the performance or contact as on multistory@hotmail.com.