Truth & Resolution
Resolution: The A-Level Mathematics Exam
After returning to Swindon from London, Christopher's primary goal is to sit his A-level Mathematics exam. This matters intensely: Siobhan had told him he would be able to take it, but the disruption of his journey to London and the breakdown of his home life has thrown everything into uncertainty. The A-level exam represents more than academic achievement — it is proof that despite everything that has happened, Christopher can still function, still achieve, still be himself.
In Simon Stephens's play, the A-level exam is staged literally: Christopher sits down to take it onstage, with Reverend Peters (the school's vicar and invigilator) presiding over the examination. The audience watches Christopher work through a complex mathematical problem in real time. This is a bold theatrical choice: the play slows down to let mathematics take centre stage. Christopher achieves an A grade.
The A-level Mathematics exam is staged literally onstage, with Reverend Peters as invigilator. Christopher sits the exam and achieves an A grade. In the novel, this is narrated in prose — in Stephens's play, the audience watches it happen.
The Post-Curtain Maths Scene
One of the most distinctive features of Stephens's play-text is what happens after the main action concludes. After the curtain call, Christopher returns to the stage to solve his favourite question from the A-level Mathematics paper. This is a full, staged, theatrical event: music, lighting, mathematical projections, and — in some productions — confetti. The audience watches Christopher work through the problem with complete focus and joy.
This post-curtain maths sequence is unique to the play-text. It has no equivalent in performance. In Haddon's novel the proof is printed as an appendix at the back of the book. Stephens's choice to stage the mathematics as a performance transforms it into a celebration: not just of Christopher's intelligence, but of his way of engaging with the world. The theatrical staging treats mathematical problem-solving as something worth watching — as a form of beauty and competence as stageable as any other art form.
In Haddon's novel, there is a mathematical appendix printed at the back — a full proof that the reader can engage with as text. Stephens cannot reproduce a printed appendix on stage. Instead, he stages the mathematics as a live event: Christopher works through the problem in front of the audience, with theatrical support from the lighting, projections, and music. The effect is to show mathematics as Christopher experiences it — not as a dry academic exercise but as a place of clarity, certainty, and delight. Christopher says: 'Prime numbers is what is left when you have taken all the patterns away.' Mathematics is what remains when the noise of human confusion is removed — pure, reliable, beautiful. The post-curtain scene is a theatrical embodiment of that idea.
Christopher's Question: The Play's Final Lines
The play's ending is fundamentally different from the novel's — and this difference is crucial. In Haddon's novel, Christopher makes a declarative statement: 'And I know I can do this because I went to London on my own, and because I solved the mystery of Who Killed Wellington? And I found my mother and I was brave and I wrote a book and that means I can do anything.'
In Stephens's play, this becomes a question addressed directly to Siobhan: 'Does that mean I can do anything Siobhan?' This is a fundamental change. The novel's Christopher arrives at declarative certainty through a chain of reasoning: because I did these things, I can do anything. The play's Christopher arrives at the same point but frames it as an open question to his teacher. He needs Siobhan to confirm what he is beginning to believe about himself.
The play ends with Christopher asking Siobhan: 'Does that mean I can do anything Siobhan?' — a question. The novel ends with Christopher declaring 'I can do anything' — a statement. This tonal difference (aspiration vs certainty, question vs declaration) is one of the most important distinctions between the two texts. Never quote the novel's declarative ending in the exam.
The Significance of the Question Form
The shift from declarative to interrogative is a significant theatrical and thematic choice by Stephens. By ending on a question, the play creates a more open, uncertain, and aspirational ending than the novel. Christopher has not arrived at full confidence — he is reaching for it, through Siobhan. He needs his teacher's validation of what he is beginning to sense about himself.
This ending reinforces Siobhan's function throughout the play. She is not just a narrator — she is the person Christopher most trusts to tell him the truth about himself. The question 'Does that mean I can do anything Siobhan?' is directed at the one person who has consistently given him honest, accurate information about what is possible. Her potential answer is the last image the play offers: not certainty, but the opening of possibility.
For AO2 analysis, the question form is important: a question requires a response, whereas a declaration does not. By ending the play on an unanswered question, Stephens leaves the audience in the same position as Christopher — waiting for a confirmation that feels within reach but has not quite arrived. It is an emotionally open ending that treats the audience as participants rather than spectators.
Reverend Peters — the school's vicar — invigilates Christopher's A-level exam. His presence is more than logistical: he represents the institutional framework within which Christopher's achievement is validated. An A-level examination is a formal, public event; its result is certified and witnessed. By staging the exam with Reverend Peters present, Stephens creates a theatrical scene in which Christopher's intelligence is not just experienced privately but witnessed institutionally. The A* is not just something Christopher knows about himself — it is recognised by the structures of the world beyond his family.
The Arc of the Play: From Wellington to the A Grade
The play's two-act structure moves from a death — Wellington's murder — to a proof: Christopher's A-level result. The detective plot (who killed Wellington?) resolves into something much larger: who is Christopher, and what can he achieve? The answer is given not through dialogue but through theatrical action: a fifteen-year-old autistic boy, whose father lied to him, whose mother left, who travelled to London alone through overwhelming sensory chaos, sits an A-level Mathematics paper and achieves an A grade. Then he asks his teacher whether that means he can do anything.
Stephens's ending resists the false comfort of total resolution. Christopher and Ed are tentatively rebuilding their relationship. Christopher lives partly with Judy, partly with Ed. The family is not restored. But Christopher himself has expanded: he has discovered what he can do alone, in the world, when the need arises. The question to Siobhan is therefore not doubt — it is the first articulation of a new self-understanding.
Effective drama analysis requires attention to stagecraft — considering not just what happens but how the playwright shapes the audience's response through every element of performance and text. In your exam response, identify specific techniques and explain their effect precisely.
Effective drama analysis requires attention to dramatic tension — considering not just what happens but how the playwright shapes the audience's response through every element of performance and text. In your exam response, identify specific techniques and explain their effect precisely.