The title says it all: Doll has no interest, reverence or affinity for Ibsen’s famous play. Theatre, however, has become a budding new second passion.

We enter the theatre and immediately encounter our host who grooves to the pre-show tunes while (almost) hidden under black fabric. They are gearing up for their first production at their first ever Fringe Festival. They eventually reveal their persona and attempt to convince us that they are an artist who’ll become the next serial killer sensation. Doll’s drip is a boyish and colourful one - complete with a nylon face-kini that is worn throughout. They appear to be feminine presenting but have deliberately chosen to dress like a male doll when at work.

They address the classic shortlist of famous vintage murderers (virtually all men), so I thought they might’ve touched on the theme of being a sexual minority in an ‘industry’ dominated by men. At one point they rant about the famously anti-establishment Dadaist art movement, so gendered power dynamics might’ve been an interesting thread to explore a bit. (A Doll’s House is the one famous for its proto-feminist themes, so perhaps I’ll stop trying to force that connection.)

Doll’s show is structured around a prepared portfolio slideshow, and they go down many a glorious rabbit hole and often indulge themselves in seemingly unplanned rants. They might knock themselves so far off track that they’ll sometimes ask the audience “where was I?” When someone in my audience offered an answer, Doll did not seem to appreciate the help. Though it felt like an opening for participation, I think the questions asked of us were meant to be more rhetorical.

Doll had some conflicting opinions and made some contradicting claims, but I couldn’t quite discern whether this was a flaw in the script, or an intentional landmine set forth by a mad person. Is Doll really the loser they claim to be? This show left me questioning a lot of things.

(And isn’t that a sign of successful art?)