Welcome to a new Wildcard Wednesday! This week, I’m sharing the latest in my monthly series on midcentury Broadway comedies. For this entry, we’re in the 1950s with Noël Coward!
RELATIVE VALUES (1951)
Logline: An English household panics when its nobleman son gets engaged to an American movie star who happens to be the estranged sister of his mother’s long-time personal maid.
Author: Noël Coward | Original Director: Noël Coward
Original West End Cast: Gladys Cooper, Richard Leech, Angela Baddeley, Simon Lack, Ralph Michael, Judy Campbell, Hugh McDermott, Renée Hill, Dorothy Batley, Charles Cullum
Thoughts: This comedy of manners about a British nobleman’s engagement to an American movie star was a moderate hit in 1951 London (and even spawned a 2000 film) but it’s never had a major production across the pond. This is because its plot is hinged on country-specific social mores. Its primary complication is that the lady of the house, the groom-to-be’s mom, has a long-time personal maid who’s actually the long-lost sister of said American movie star. That fact causes much embarrassment for the maid, and while the thought of one sibling serving another would be uncomfortable in any context, such rigid social hierarchies are far less clear in the U.S., where there’s more fluidity between economic brackets, and therefore less focus on class as a permanent marker of identity. More to the point, our social distinctions when it comes to that word — “class” — more exclusively revolve around current financial status, and less what we do or where we started. Accordingly, our buy-in to the unfolding farce is less strong. And indeed, I’m afraid I’ll show my Americanism here, for I do have trouble buying in — specifically, I think the butler’s plan to have the maid pretend that her station has been elevated via a recent inheritance that’s allowed her to stay in the house as a permanent guest has too many holes to seem like a good coverup (it’s too easy to pick apart). And I blanche at some of the inartful narrative beats, like the arrival of the movie star’s ex — a fellow big-screen sensation — which feels like an inevitability and yet doesn’t meaningfully contribute to the second-act climax where the maid abandons her ruse and tells off her phony, lying sister. As such, while I love a good comedy of manners — especially one with farcical elements — I don’t think Relative Values is a top-drawer effort, especially for Noël Coward, who nevertheless offers a fairly funny and jokey script with lots of little things to enjoy. In particular, I think this is one of his best in terms of individualizing the characters’ voices — not just the Americans versus the Brits, but all class distinctions are clear on the page as well. So, this is a fun mid-century comedy all told — it’s just not exceptional by the standards of this author or this subgenre.
Jackson’s Verdict: Has its charms, but not one of the author’s classics.
NUDE WITH VIOLIN (1956)
Logline: The mourning family of a French artist is shocked to learn that he was a fraud.
Author: Noël Coward | Original Director: John Gielgud & Noël Coward
Original West End Cast: John Gielgud, Gillian Webb, John Sterland, Joyce Carey, Ann Castle, Basil Henson, Patricia Raine, David Horne, Patience Collier, Kathleen Harrison, Douglas Robinson, Thomas Baptiste, Keith Green, Nicky Emmett
Thoughts: A lampoon of the disingenuous art world with a plot about a famous Parisian painter who posthumously reveals to his shocked family that all but one of his works are forgeries — that is, painted by others — Nude With Violin has a naturally comedic premise. But I’m afraid it really isn’t interesting beyond that central idea, and in particular, this reveal that occurs at the end of its first act (per the original text). Afterwards, the play becomes a parade of kooky artists who contributed to his catalogue during each of his different “periods” (aesthetic phases), as the family maneuvers to keep them from leaking this shocking news and destroying his reputation. Even the third act twist — where we’re led to believe that the man’s valet, Sebastien, was the culprit of a final painting (the eponymous “Nude With Violin”) before learning that the valet’s son did it — isn’t really a surprise, because the whole thing seemed too convenient in the first place. And that’s a weakness with the play overall — the plot just can’t sustain its one comedic idea. What’s more, while I think there’s a drollness to the text that’s at times appealing, I have to say I don’t think this is one of Coward’s cleverest, nor funniest, works. Although there are flashes of his trademark wit — particularly when it comes to cultured references — it doesn’t feel as steeped in his ethos as, say, Relative Values, or many of his other comedies that I’ve read. And with some of the major failings detailed above, I think this is ultimately a mediocre piece overall. It’s not unfunny, and it’s not without the hook of a solid premise, but it’s just never sublime in any pertinent way. (Incidentally, although the legendary John Gielgud led the original West End production as Sebastien, Coward himself played that central valet role on Broadway in 1957, touring with it thereafter.)
Jackson’s Verdict: One funny idea can’t sustain this whole play.
LOOK AFTER LULU (1959)
Logline: While her beau is away, a French coquette agrees to pose as a friend’s fiancée.
Author: Noël Coward, from a play by Georges Feydeau | Original Director: Cyril Ritchard
Original Broadway Cast: Tammy Grimes, George Baker, Roddy McDowell, Kurt Kasznar, Jack Gilford, Eric Christmas, Polly Rowles, Reva Rose, and more
Thoughts: Noël Coward offered an English adaptation of Georges Feydeau’s classic 1908 Occupe-toi d’Amélie!, blending his own trademark verbal wit with the madcap plotting of a delectable French bedroom farce. Critics at the time thought those two aesthetics didn’t come together well, but I, personally, think it’s a lot of fun, especially compared to the above-featured Relative Values, Coward’s own comedy of manners with farcical trappings. For while the latter had some plot holes and moments of obvious hand-of-writer maneuvering that made certain developments either predictable or unnecessary, everything is intentional and well-connected in Feydeau’s story — not a moment is wasted, and things that are capably planted lead to seamless pay-offs. And, of course, while the premise — of a French coquette who has a boyfriend leaving for a month of mandatory military service and thus pretends in the interim to be her friend’s lover’s fiancée so that he may inherit a fortune, all while being pursued by a foreign prince who desires a tryst — is outrageously silly, the piece makes no bones about it. It even calls attention to its genre-based intentions with a metatheatricality that only adds to the spirit, cementing Look After Lulu as a genuine romp, a tribute to the work it’s adapting and everything that exists in that vein. Now, I think there’s an element of camp here — of deliberate theatricality perhaps creating extra value where it otherwise wouldn’t be — and so for earnest lovers of mid-century comedies, and even farces, you might consider this a parody. But if it’s funny, and there are no glaring issues in the storytelling, I think it’s ultimately a success on the most fundamental terms. And perhaps that puts the rest of the burden onto production and performance to really make the case. Fast-paced farces like these especially have to be played well. Tammy Grimes, Roddy McDowell and others did it on Broadway, while Vivien Leigh led the cast of the original West End production. I’d like to see it get more contemporary attention.
Jackson’s Verdict: Fun classic farce.
Come back next week for another Wildcard! And stay tuned Tuesday for more Middle!