Welcome to a new Wildcard Wednesday, on a Tuesday! This week, I’m sharing the latest in my “potpourri” series on midcentury Broadway plays, specifically comedies, that I’m reading for (mostly) the first time. In this entry, I’ve selected three titles from the 1958-59 season!
THE PLEASURE OF HIS COMPANY (1958)
Logline: A worldly charmer sweeps his estranged daughter off her feet ahead of her wedding.
Author: Samuel Taylor with Cornelia Otis Skinner | Original Director: Cyril Ritchard
Original Broadway Cast: Cyril Ritchard, Cornelia Otis Skinner, Charles Ruggles, Dolores Hart, Walter Abel, George Peppard, Jerry Fujikawa
Thoughts: This sophisticated comedy about an estranged father who comes to town for his daughter’s wedding and sweeps her off her feet is a simply plotted character study that boasts well-defined leads who exist well in contrast. There’s even an intriguing air of mystery surrounding the inciting agent, the seeming man-of-the-world who disrupts his daughter’s steady life — coming between her relationships with both her practical fiancé and her cautious (remarried) mother, who still feels complicated things for her ex, sustaining the dramatic tension when it otherwise seems narratively slight. As a reader, I went on quite a journey; I was initially skeptical of the lead because of his prolonged absence and the simple basic facts of the story, but then I found my guard lowering when there was no major conflict or sense of anticipated doom. However, as his daughter progressively fell under his spell (while her mother almost does), I became increasingly skeptical again, wary of his personal manipulation and observant of his selfish disregard for the well-being of people whom he previously had disregarded — such that I was bracing myself to be sympathetic with her eventual disillusionment, as he tumbles from the pedestal on which she placed him. And then… the play zigs instead of zags, ending with mom reluctantly consenting to the daughter’s choice to call off her nuptials and travel the world with dad, whom she claims to see through — but in a way that still feels like he’s achieved an undeserving victory at her emotional expense. In other words, I found myself rooting against the father — worrying for what he’d do to anyone who got too close — and was surprised that the play let him “win.” Interestingly, the 1961 film adaptation — with Fred Astaire replacing Cyril Ritchard as the lead — totally rewrites the ending, building suspense about whether or not he’s successfully succeeded in charming either his just-married daughter or his remarried ex into escaping town with him, before the reveal that he’s poached their cook instead. It’s a funnier closer that makes more narrative sense to me, even though the picture itself is a bit dull and doesn’t capably bring to life the tensions of the play, which at any rate, isn’t a riot, but is well-crafted as a comedy, with a surprising, and perhaps imperfect, ending that nevertheless follows a compelling arc for well-drawn characters. It exceeded my expectations.
Jackson’s Verdict: Interesting character study, despite an odd ending.
THIRD BEST SPORT (1958)
Logline: A newlywed wife struggles to adapt to the culture of her husband’s business.
Author: Eleanor Bayer & Leo Bayer | Original Director: Michael Howard
Original Broadway Cast: Celeste Holm, Andrew Duggan, James Karen, Parker McCormick, William Prince, Joseph Boland, Irene Cowan, Jane Hoffman, Howard Wierum, Judson Laire, Spofford Beadle
Thoughts: This engagingly premised play about a newlywed who struggles to tow the corporate line at a retreat for the company where her husband works — chafing specifically against what’s required of her as “the wife of” — is pitch-perfect as a comedy with a clear dramatic arc, all built around well-defined characters who are drawn in contrast. There’s a lot of thematic richness here, not only in the gender politics of the late 1950s, but also in a critique of the impersonal collectivism in corporate capitalism. Indeed, the tension between the individual (literally and conceptually) and something larger is inherently compelling, and, again, with strong leads who are described well in the text and clearly poised to reveal differing attitudes and perspectives, there are many laughs as well… Unfortunately, the plotting lets down this idea with a simple structure that dumbly indulges a narrative thread that’s comedically misused and counterintuitive to the main arc. I’m referring to a misunderstanding where the newlywed, Helen, accidentally engages the wrong lecturer to speak at the convention. Rather than a pro-business Wall Street Journal scribe, she’s gotten a philosopher known for his anti-corporate magazine think pieces. Okay, that seems to promise a solid climax — an uncomfortable public display, following many frenzied efforts by Helen, once she learns of this error late in Act I, as she tries everything in her power to prevent it from happening. But instead, Act II is about her reluctant integration into the company ahead of a dinner with a client that inevitably goes awry when she insults his mean wife — where the threat of the critical speaker is therefore nullified both because the tension has been diverted, and ultimately, because it’s immaterial to the climax of the wife-on-wife drama… making it unnecessary and now, worse, a disappointment with no comic payoff. I think the play could have kept its form — wife refuses to integrate (Act I), wife tries to integrate (Act II), wife convinces husband to reject integration (Act III) — and zeroed in on it exclusively, with its comic jeopardy exclusively coming from Helen’s behavior, and not the threat of some outside critical speaker. She is the critical speaker. Accordingly, Third Best Sport is not quite the well-made play its ideas need it to be, even though I see the potential.
Jackson’s Verdict: A much better idea than execution!
A MAJORITY OF ONE (1959)
Logline: A Jewish-American widow befriends a Japanese businessman.
Author: Leonard Spigelgass | Original Director: Dore Schary
Original Broadway Cast: Gertrude Berg, Cedric Hardwicke, Michael Tolan, Ina Balin, Mae Questel, Marc Marno, and more
Thoughts: This sweet, sensitive play about a culture-clash romance between a Jewish-American widow and a Japanese businessman deftly combines elements of light comedy with stronger dramatic themes. It originally starred Gertrude Berg and reflects a tone similar to the iconic television series with which she was long associated, The Goldbergs, which also existed in a liminal space between comedy and drama. (Read more about that in my book.) It also has the same basic sensitivity — endeavoring to treat all peoples with dignity through a personalization that reiterates humanity, both shared and individualized. That said, A Majority Of One clearly comes from one perspective; the American characters, especially Berg’s Mrs. Jacoby, are the most complex, addressing personal prejudices while also exhibiting empathetic traits that enable layered depictions. Her Japanese counterpart Mr. Asano, on the other hand, is treated with relative kid gloves — spouting wisdom with a beautiful simplicity that urges mutual tolerance and understanding, even when it’s not shown to him. In other words, he’s too good — and I get why; in 1959, softening the Japanese image in this country probably required an overly flattering portrayal, and for an American audience, it makes sense that it would be tailored as such, catering to what they’d need in order for the play’s message to resonate. Also, with a white man donning yellow face to play the role — Cedric Hardwicke on the stage, Alec Guinness in the 1961 film (opposite a gruffer Rosalind Russell, who lacks Berg’s effortless charm) — I’m glad the text at least avoids many of the crude clichés that Asian characters would have been used to in the 1950s. However, in dramatic terms, Mr. Asano ends up not as dynamic or well-examined as Mrs. Jacoby — and because this is essentially about their relationship, I do consider that a weakness. Also, as for comedy, while there are jokes — and you can see where Berg would have added her own comic touch — this is certainly the most serious play of these three. So, it’s harder to classify — making this a script that isn’t top-tier on either comedic or dramatic terms… and yet, still has enough value in both columns to be considered worthwhile as a warm, well-meaning reflection of its era. In fact, a lot of it is charming, and I’m sure Berg was sublime.
Jackson’s Verdict: Not hilarious, but affable (and occasionally humane).
Come back next week for a new Wildcard! And stay tuned soon for Parks And Rec!