Diana Bromley, the director, writes: “ 25 years ago I was inveigled into helping with Marion Greenwoods’s production of Entertaining Mr. Sloane, playing the part of Kath. On first reading I disliked that play, but ended up a convert, believing Orton to be a genius on a par with Wilde or Coward in delineating aspects of the period in which he lived and ahead of his time.
Our present production has a cast of splendid old hands and promising newcomers: Nick Vause, last seen as the father in Brighton Beach Memoirs, is the harassed Dr. Prentice, whose attempt at seducting his secretary, sets off a chain of outrageous misunderstandings. Colin Gregory plays Dr Rance, an inspector from HM Government, Prentice’s “immediate superiors in madness”.
Miriam Clark’s last appearance as the good Witch in the Wizard of Oz, did not adequately prepare us for her uncanny ability to capture the nymphomaniac Mrs Prentice, while Andy Farrer abjures Prospero’s rough magic to play Sergeant Match, a bemused policeman.
Meanwhile Alicia Crisp, who has delighted us with the grace of her dancing, most recently in Around The World, now gets to speak as the hapless Geraldine Barclay, who is applying to be Prentice’s secretary, while James Kelly, who has previously performed for us in a couple of rehearsed play readings completes the cast as a Nicholas Beckett, a dubious page-boy from the Station Hotel
The backstage crew is likewise a mixture of trusty old timers, with Jon Musker designing the set, Bernard Smith masterminding Sound, Joyce Jayes and Pauline Rosenthal, the team who most recently brought you the costumes in The Old Masters, together with Jeanne Solomons, manning Wardrobe, while Katka Stanclova makes her first appearance as SM for us, with Sybil Manel ( Mrs Eynesford- Hill in Pygmalion) and Cate Oates on Props, with Lighting by Kate Woff and Tim Solomons.
Here's what the GODA adjudictor thought:
GARDEN SUBURB THEATRE
APRIL 2008
WHAT THE BUTLER SAW by JOE ORTON
This was Orton’s last play, eclipsing Loot and showing a consummate wordsmith at
work. He also thoroughly understood the traditions of farce - mistaken identity,
many doors, sexual innuendo and trouser dropping., It is no accident that this was
written the year after the censorship of the Lord Chamberlain ended, even so, it
caused outrage among many of the first audiences. Farce is the most difficult genre
to direct and perform and this is no exception. The cast have to have their words
so well learnt that they come out by reflex, they also have to deal with around
150 exit s and entrances. The director must keep control of the overall pace and
move the crazy characters around the stage with some semblance of order and motivation
— a very tall order.
PRESENTATION:
Set : This was definitely a hospital
and the chosen colour scheme indicated that it was no ordinary National Health institution.
Choosing to break the walls with blocks of colour made the whole more interesting.
Doors are vital and yours were solid, swung both ways with ease — hanging doors
on a stage is always difficult, so well done. The circular ‘portholes’ complete
with ‘glass’ were an excellent touch, as were the finger plates. The air vents were
a creative solution to the final entrance of the Sergeant, another good idea. The
downstage right flat was at a slight angle which detracted from the overall picture.
The French doors looked out onto a brick wall, whilst this spoke of outdoors, maybe
a tallish plant on the right hand side would have enlivened that view. The doors
themselves had an unfinished look to the paintwork and given the ‘glass’ effect
inside, it was pity that this was not followed through. Nice detail of the splashback
behind the sink, but the tiles looked painted — real ones would have been better.
The bed and the desk were well placed to give maximum acting room and sensibly not
placed opposite each other. The descending bars sadly did not cut it — they waved
and wobbled when they should have thudded straight down. I know this is a hard trick
to pull off, but a base on the bars would have helped, that could have been weighted
and made for a swifter descent.
Props: Bed, screen, gurney all spot
on. Those trolley things usually have some form of brakes —at the risk of a tiny
break in the action — use them for safety of all concerned. (Rance seemed to mime
releasing a brake that had never been put on which struck an odd note) Prentice
produced a wonderful tome to check up on the hotel, but the scrapbook looked a touch
modern and should have been fatter, likewise the rubbish bin was too modern and
still had the label on it, a wicker version would have been better — picky I know;
but such details do matter, the people may be bizarre, but the world they inhabit
must look real. The vase was somehow too big — this is a key prop and has to be
exactly right — as it was — the second shoe would certainly have gone in and so
would the flowers — Prentice was forced to mime his attempt to ram them in and it
was not convincing enough to make that moment funny. It bothered me that the red
pill box and the alarm button looked exactly the same, the pill box could easily
have stayed white. Stage guns can be a nightmare, but they all fired on cue!
Costume: Wonderful page outfit and
loved the leopard print, dress! Whilst all the costumes worked, I was really looking
for more sense of period, specifically late sixties. The police uniform complete
with helmet was fine, but the rest of the cast could have come from the present
day. Think about turn ups for the men, broad tie for Prentice, maybe a bow tie for
Rance, period shoes for the girls, mini skirts etc etc. The strait jackets served
their purpose, I suspect some clever person made them, but again it would have been
worth hiring the real deal. Geraldine’s first wig was most realistic and
Nick’s blonde tresses were absolutely right. Given the difference in size between
the actresses, the transfer of the navy dress was well executed — or did you cheat
and have two? — either way it worked. The bloody injuries, applied at speed, worked
well. Sound: Bouncy, sixties style jazzy number to put us in the mood — good choice.
The alarm was a strange sequence of sounds and sounded like a modern car, think
about an intermittent siren. At the opening of Act II, it would have been good if
the music and the siren had overlapped to eliminate that awkward few seconds silence.
There was also a long pause after the ‘turn off your mobiles’ and the opening music
— both these may be due to the limitations of your kit.
Lights: the stage was well lit,
no nasty shadows, no problem here, particularly since I noticed you did not have
that many lights to play with.
DIRECTION
The genre is difficult and this particular play is a pig — not only does it have
the obligatory dressing, undressing and rushing through doors, it has complex witty
dialogue in the Oscar Wilde vein. This was, indeed, a brave attempt, but for me,
did not always come together successfully. The audience should leave with aching
ribs from laughing — on the night I was there that was not the case.
As indicated in the technical comments, the overall ‘packaging’ of the play was
inconsistent — policeman’s helmet and silver plastic bin do not sit easily in the
same era. Yes, you can play this in modern dress, but instinct tells me that the
play really belongs in the late sixties when it was written — references to Churchill,
who had only recently died (1965) — the whole debate about madness and sanity, the
questioning of the system, corrupt policemen and the sexual freedom of women — are
all issues that belong in that era.
Movement was motivated, but I wanted
more, movement provides an energy and keeps the audience on its toes. For example
bottom of p6l through to p62, Rance and Prentice never moved till Rance went off
for a capsule. Think about having Prentice break away on ‘I cannot agree to such
drastic action’ , if he then has his back to Rance, then Rance can advance and on
‘You’ll do as I say from now on’, forcibly turn Prentice to face him — they are
then pretty much nose to nose for the rest of the argument — see what I mean?
Positioning of the cast on stage
was not always as interesting as it could have been. There were some good pictures
— around the point in Act II when Nick is sedated and standing downstage with Rance
and the grouping after the fight towards the end of the play. The argument between
Prentice and wife about the orgasm with Nick in the middle worked well. However,
for the majority of the time, the cast worked across the centre of the stage, usually
equidistant. Actors instinctively space themselves evenly, it is the director’s
task to break them of this habit and give them somewhere else to be. Think about
using more diagonals, and having characters come right down stage, there seemed
to be some invisible barrier a foot before the apron line.(Given the position of
the front bar, I’m guessing that the angle of the light would be a bit steep to
work on the apron itself, but if this is not the case, then use it.)
The show kicked off at a good pace,
but left the cast with nowhere to go and never really varied. As one example, Mrs
P’s speech (p47) the text indicates that she speaks with unfamiliar tones of quietness
and sympathy, this did not come across. Obviously, there needs to be a sense of
urgency, cues need to be sharp, but work at finding points in the script when you
can change the intensity, thereby providing a contrast to the moments of panic and
frenetic activity.
Talking of frenetic activity, can we have more violence please! (p75) when Prentice
slaps his wife — there is no way to fudge this, you have to do it for real. Likewise
the fight sequence (p85) needed cleaner choreography and more precision, these moments
can take hours of rehearsal, I know, but the more violent and unpleasant the struggle,
the funnier the subsequent lines become.
I understand why you felt it necessary to cover the sergeant’s undressing routine
with music, but since music had not been used before, it jarred. With careful rehearsal,
this can be developed into a set routine that will hold our attention and become
more comedic. Slightly different situation, but remember the Morecambe and Wise
breakfast routine ? — that sort of slick execution.
So, as I said, a brave attempt,
much of the humour was captured, but do look at using more diagonal positioning,
use rehearsals to find the points to vary the pace and think hard about the details
that contribute to the overall look of the piece. Please don’t give up on farce,
but remember it is more science than art!
ACTING
It is not uncommon for a cast, even a whole company, to develop a single voice,
catching each other’s rhythm and cadence. This seemed to have happened here, consequently,
the characters blurred. A single voice is not the same as working as an ensemble.
The cast gave a sense of looking out for each other, particularly in Act II where
they got themselves into, and out of, a verbal loop — somewhere around ‘readily
to hand’, but they seemed to be concentrating so hard on their on their individual
performances that they never felt like a totally cohesive team. This personal focus
results in energy being projected inwards, rather than out to the audience. Each
of them had a grip on the words and projection was good. Diction was erratic and
some crucial lines were lost.
Dr Prentice: a confident portrayal
from an actor who moved well and had a good voice and facial expression. He hit
the stage with great energy, but found himself with nowhere to go. Nevertheless,
a strong performance.
Geraldine: started a touch quiet,
but got into her stride. This ingenue role is not easy and while there was much
good work here, think about pushing more energy into her moments of panic and fear.
Some lines were sacrificed to the speed of delivery.
Mrs Prentice: an actress with presence.
Good voice and clear diction, but look for points to find variation in pitch and
pace.
Dr Rance: a manic performance! Another
positive entrance, but as with Prentice, he began at such speed that heightening
his crazed demeanour was next to impossible. Be very careful not to swallow the
words, particularly when similar sounds come together — e.g. British sense.
Nick: Solid performance, liked the
change of accent and voice for his female alter ego. Would have liked a wider emotional
range, so more panic (p3 9) at the thought of being arrested and a clearer indication
of guilt (p76) before his confession.
Sergeant: a truthful, honest performance
— I enjoyed this and found the character totally believable. We had a real sense
of an down to earth copper struggling to deal with the unpredictable chaos. Terrific
abseil!
SUMMARY
My impression was that everyone knew this was a major challenge, that it was ‘difficult’,
this feeling then became an obstacle to a fluid performance. Farce has the aura
of fast cues, rapid delivery, this is not so, like any theatre a varied texture
is essential, and in farce, will result in more laughs. Nevertheless, I applaud
your choice of this difficult piece, if company that is never stretched, never learns.
Helen E Sharian
GoDA