Chris Ghaffari and Julian Gamble Photo by Carol Rosegg |
Farce and agendas are strange bedfellows. Farce is, by its
very nature, silly, a lighthearted romp, but when you also “have something to
say,” as the playwright Joe Orton did when he penned What the Butler Saw in the late 60s, you run the risk of working,
or writing, at cross purposes. The inclusion of “messages” in farce is not a
problem if they deal with eternal verities, but Orton’s concerns – the taking
of Freudian psychology to unsupportable conclusions and the repressed nature of
British society – now are covered in cobwebs. Thus, we have the “slamming door”
elements of farce bearing a burden they shouldn’t be asked to carry. Those not
cued into what was on Orton’s mind as he wrote What the Butler Saw may find themselves scratching their heads,
mumbling “Really?”
That there is an agenda is manifest in the play’s title, for
there is no butler in the play. The title refers to a device called a
mutoscope, a precursor of motion pictures. As soon as it was invented (late 19th
century) it was put to pornographic use. Those voyeuristically inclined could,
after dropping a coin in a slot, view a succession of pictures. In the case of
“What the Butler Saw,” it’s a keyhole view of the lady of the house stripping
down to her underwear. Not surprisingly, this particular offering was extremely
successful and profitable.
Then there’s the Freudian slant. From Orton’s diary (parts
of which are reprinted in the program): “I thought how fashionable madness is
at the moment…” Not just madness, however, but the whole concept of repressed
desires and the sexuality of children (real and imagined) that lurks in the
subconscious of their adult selves.
So, what’s the problem? Well, the characters in a farce, as
in all plays, must have believable motivations if the audience is to “buy in.”
In the case of Butler, that
motivation is suspect right from the start, for the early actions of one of the
lead characters serves Orton’s agenda rather than being intrinsic to the
character. As the curtain rises, we are in the office of Dr. Prentice (Robert
Stanton), a psychiatrist who runs a mental institution (again from Orton’s
diary: “…there isn’t a lunatic in sight – just the doctors and nurses.”). A
door opens and in walks Geraldine (Sarah Manton), an applicant for a secretarial
job. It soon becomes evident that she is woefully under-qualified, so the good
doctor’s reaction is to ask her to take off her clothes so he can “examine”
her. Surprisingly, Geraldine complies with this odd request…and we are off to
the races…and the head-scratching.
Of course, the good doctor’s wife, Mrs. Prentice (Patricia
Kalember) walks in on the proceedings, followed by a bell hop, Nicholas (Chris
Ghaffari) who has had a recent sexual encounter with the doctor’s wife (and has
pictures to prove it – ah, sweet blackmail). Next appears Dr. Rance (Paxton
Whitehead), a government official charged with evaluating Prentice’s institute,
and finally a police officer, Sergeant Match (Julian Gamble), who is
investigating claims that Nicholas has dallied with a group of schoolgirls.
What follows is a lot of cross-dressing and Freudian babble, mostly delivered
by the incomparable Whitehead, and a wrap-up that is part Dickens, part
Shakespeare with a bit of deus ex machina
thrown in for good measure and, oh yes, the idea that sex in a closet can save
a marriage.
This was all heady, even scandalous, stuff when it first
appeared – the rattling of the skeletons (and other items – or people) in the
British closet. Five decades on it seems, at best, inane. The production,
directed by John Tillinger, does have its moments, most of them compliments of
Whitehead, who has the unique ability to be both pompous and befuddled at the
same time. The rest of the cast members, many in various states of undress, do
their best to make what is going on believable, but it’s an up-hill battle.
Kalember, who for much of the evening is dressed as a dominatrix, has to fight
against her costuming to be taken seriously, while Manton has to sell that she
willingly disrobes for the doctor and then, with equal willingness, goes along
with Prentice’s desperate attempts to hide the fact that he tried to seduce
her. Why should she?
As the bell boy, Ghaffari has to sell that what he really
wants is to become Prentice’s secretary (go figure) or maybe he’s just into
blackmail, or…, Gamble is required to be oblivious to what is happening, and
Stanton must be the engine that drives this ill-conceived train as it rattles
and wobbles down the track.
All in all, Butler probably reads better than it plays, because with a reading you can ponder and savor much of Orton’s jabs at British society and Freudian excessiveness circa 1970 (if you care to), but a play is meant to be staged. Though there was much laughter on opening night, it was not uproarious, and looking around at the audience there were many who were silent, because much of what is happening up on the stage is simply no longer funny, if it ever was.
What the Butler Saw runs
through Sept. 10. For tickets or more information call 203-227-4177 or go to www.westportplayhouse.org.
No comments:
Post a Comment