Welcome to a new Wildcard Wednesday! This week, I’m sharing the latest in our “potpourri” series on midcentury Broadway plays, specifically comedies, that I’m reading for (mostly) the first time. In this entry, I selected three funny offerings that were all first produced in 1942…
PRESENT LAUGHTER (1942)
Logline: A British comic actor is embroiled in several sticky situations ahead of his upcoming theatrical tour.
Author: Noël Coward | Original UK Director: Noël Coward
Original UK Cast: Noël Coward, Joyce Carey, Jennifer Gray, Molly Johnson, Billy Thatcher, Beryl Measor, James Donald, Gerald Case, Dennis Price, Judy Campbell, Gwen Floyd
Thoughts: One of Noël Coward’s most revived, Present Laughter is a total star vehicle, delectably depicting the plight of a middle-aged comic actor who commands the room, surrounded by a coterie of pals, staff, and eager worshippers who both aid and annoy him. There’s a lot of Coward himself in here, and indeed, he played it frequently. But others have had success with the show as well — recently Kevin Kline, and before him, great talents such as Victor Garber, Frank Langella, George C. Scott, and Douglas Fairbanks Jr. — which speaks to the main role’s comedic opportunities, especially for a headliner. However, I notice an underlying limitation in most Coward plays: almost all of his characters sound the same, which is helpful for evoking a precise sensibility and establishing a unique, shared world, but it doesn’t push forward dynamic, dimensional characterizations, because the plot loses personalized specificity with regard to action, relying instead on their sheer positional functionalities to generate story turns, which can thus make everything feel mannered. This is true of Present Laughter. The lead is well-defined and there are some jokey side nuisances, but both his ex-wife and loyal secretary read similarly on the page, as do his two colleagues — even though they obviously have different demands within the text. And, ultimately, no one gets the same opportunities to delight as much as the star. Even the flashy Joanna (once played notably by Eva Gabor), whose centricity in an extended second act scene makes her seem prominent, is never as comedically sharp as implied. So, it’s really up to a good production to ensure all the roles are both directed and cast in a way that enhances the illusion of well-drawn, distinct characters who can also assist in corroborating the piece’s desired humor beyond just the tone. Fortunately, I can say, having seen a broadcast of the Kline revival (which also featured Kate Burton and Cobie Smulders), this is a play that must be played, as it can certainly be elevated through performances that suggest characters — no, it’s never the riotous smash of Coward’s best efforts, lacking the narrative imagination of Blithe Spirit or the succinct tonal oneness of Private Lives, but the great star at its center focuses it, and the story has enough comedic ideas to entertain. It is indeed one of Coward’s best.
Jackson’s Rating: 7/10
THE SKIN OF OUR TEETH (1942)
Logline: The Antrobus family manages to survive every disaster known to man.
Author: Thornton Wilder | Original Broadway Director: Elia Kazan
Original Broadway Cast: Fredric March, Florence Eldridge, Tallulah Bankhead, Florence Reed, Montgomery Clift, E.G. Marshall, Frances Heflin, more here
Thoughts: Thornton Wilder’s allegory about humanity’s durability in the wake of regular hardship, The Skin Of Our Teeth has remained a formative example of convention-busing experimental theatre ever since its debut — even though, as time has elapsed, its rebellion is less shocking given how ordinary a lot of its more metaphorical and surreal choices have become. Initial comparisons were made to James Joyce’s Finnegans Wake, and it seemed — as with most experimental theatre — that the piece was trying hard, too hard, to be intellectual. It wasn’t easy to like. But I have always had an affinity for it — not just because of its strong debut cast (including Tallulah Bankhead) and for how it stands in relation to its contemporaries from 1942, but also because it still plays as thoughtful and amusing, and in fact, it’s easier understood by audiences now than in the 1940s, largely thanks to a clear construction that manages to proffer an ever-compelling central thesis where Wilder insists upon strength in the face of tragedy, with, even amidst darkness, plenty of good humor (much of it metatheatrical). This humor, when rendered by a fine cast, helps allay the high-concept, highfalutin sermonizing that can alternatively sound too smart and too redundant. The first act is, I think, the most interesting. Set during an Ice Age and featuring many references to prehistory and Old Testament Biblical stories, it suggests both the resilience of our species and the universality of man’s problems, physical and social. The second act, with allusions to more Biblical fare, occurs in Atlantic City and at a time that resembles a more-recent memory — the devil-may-care hedonism associated with the Roaring Twenties, with different threats (a flood symbolizing The Crash) all linked to man’s indulgence of temptation. And Three takes place after a seven-year-long war, when the characters we’ve been following, in every era, emerge from hiding to start the difficult but inevitable process of rebuilding. The last is the most didactic — speaking to a wartime population in need of reassurance that life will indeed go on — and, after the first two acts, that message becomes tiresome. But it’s deliberate, especially because Americans of 1942 needed it so. Accordingly, I think this is such a unique but revealing snapshot of its period, with enough charms and a permanence of theme to, as the play insists, persevere.
Jackson’s Rating: 8.5/10
THE DOUGHGIRLS (1942)
Logline: Three ex-chorines share a hotel room in D.C. as they wait for their various entanglements to sort out.
Author: Joseph Fields | Original Broadway Director: George S. Kaufman
Original Broadway Cast: Virginia Field, Arleen Whelan, Doris Nolan, Arlene Francis, Reed Brown Jr., Natalie Schafer, William J. Kelly, King Calder, Vinton Hayworth, Sydney Grant, Edward H. Robins, more here
Thoughts: This raucous wartime farce is about three former showgirls — and one eccentric Russian militant — who all end up sharing the same hotel room in Washington D.C. amidst assorted romantic mix-ups and a major housing shortage. With a complicated plot that weaves in the FBI, a jealous wife, and a bunch of crying babies, The Doughgirls wants to be fast-paced, loud, and chaotic. But that tonality isn’t consistently well-supported by the storytelling. In fact, when I first read the play, I thought it was hard to follow and gratuitously manic for the purposes of comedy that didn’t seem to reach its necessary heights. A big problem is that the three chorines tend to blend together, not reading as distinct enough from one another — something that always bothers me in a comedic text. However, my opinion slightly improved when I saw the starry but underrated 1944 film adaptation, which cleans up the script (ensuring all their intentions are marriage) and is easier to track simply through the visualization. Crucially, the screenplay also endeavors to reduce one of my overarching criticisms of the play, exaggerating the naïveté of one of the girls (Jane Wyman portrays her in the movie) to the point of silliness, thereby giving her an obvious characterization that can now be contrasted against her two pals (played by Ann Sheridan and Alexis Smith). This makes for many more laughs and indicates a smarter mind for character overall. Of course, it’s not a complete fix — those other two still need delineation, and although the plot looks better in performance than on the page, it’s still more raucous than it is hilarious. I ultimately do like the film a lot — especially because of Eve Arden’s joyful, goofy turn as the Russian (the role helmed by Arlene Francis on Broadway) — and it’s allowed me to appreciate the play more than I did initially, but neither iteration can overcome some of its central and underlying limitations by way of narrative (both with character and story), so while I consider it good — and, again, underrated in general — it definitely falls short of great, compared to the funniest comedic works of its era.
Jackson’s Rating: 6/10
Come back next week for a new Wildcard! And stay tuned Tuesday for more Curb!