"RETURN OF THE PRODIGAL"

Press, Volume LXIX, Issue 20987, 16 October 1933, Page 5

"RETURN OF THE PRODIGAL"

A SOCIETY COMEDY PERFORMANCE BY REPERTORY •SOCIETYThe chief delight of the performance of vSt. John Hankin's "The Return of the Prodigal" by the Canterbury Repertory Theatre Society on Saturday evening was the acting of Mr Claude Davies in the main part. The play—a society comedy which was first produced in 1904—contained little more than i this one part, and its point was merely to emphasise that no man is a ne'er-do-well lrom choice, but simply because some aefect in his make-up prevents him from being a "solid citizen." But because the piay was a society comedy 30 years old, it, offered special difficulties tor amateur actors. Nothing dates more quickly than the wit of a period, and the superficial view of the social problems of one generation is usually out of favour in the next. A play built on these things needs to be supremely well acted if it is to be convincing, for the acting must make up for what the play lacks—and through the eyes of IW3 "The Return of the Prodigal" lacks a great deal. That Saturday's performance was frequently far from convincing was not a reproach to. the actors—they would have shown up better in a play which had sufficient substance to carry the interest over minor technical deficiencies. Mr Davies certainly had the advantage over all his fellows in being awarded the "meatiest" part, but the zest With which he filled that part—dancing through it, as Gordon Craig once wrote of Irving—showed that he had studied his part as a whole, and not line by line, and that he had a vision of the rhythm of the play. He might be accused of pitching it in too high an artificial key, but the mainpoint was that he had chosen one key and schooled everything he did—voice, gesture, facial expression, and movement —to fit in with it. It was this sense of unity and continuity that was lacking in most of the other actors. Their performance was made up of a series of fragments, some of them good, and some not good. When, as in the first scene—the confusion of which was almost entirely the fault of the author—five and more persons were on the stage talking in turn — it was impossible to avoid the impression that each actor was holding himself (or herself) stiff and waiting for his cue. Miss Phyllis Wilkinson as Lady Faringford, Mr W. F. Slack as Dr Glaisher, and Mr Mervyn Bull as the elder brother of the prodigal, had something of the same understanding of the need for continuous development as Mr Davies, though none of them was so constantly in tune with the rest of the play. Mr Bull is acquiring some command of facial expression—a quality which, with bodily expression, is lacking in the performance of most amateur actors —but he is still too rigid, and the change from one mood to another is too mechanical. Miss Wilkinson cax-ried her part off with an air, as also did Mr Slack. Mrs Maud Buchanan, as Mrs Jackson, the wife of the climbing mill magnate, had to be artificial in her deference to Lady Faringford, but she illustrated another common fault — that though an actor must speak loudly if the words are to carry throughout a hall, they should not appear to the audience to be unnatural. Mr C. W. Collins, as the millowner, was most successful when.- in telling Eustace exactly what he thought of him, he adopted the manner of an election speech. Other Darts were taken as follows: Stella Faringford, Miss Jean Ashworth; Violet Jackson. Miss Mollie Wilson; Mrs Pratt. Mrs Marion Smail: Sir Jr>hn Farineford. Dr. Robinson HaTI; the Rev. Cyril Pratt, Colonel F. W. W. Dawson; Baines. M r C. Packer-Doust; Thomas. Mr W P. Harris. "The Return of th» Prodigal," which was oroduced by Miss Kiore King, will be nresented at the Radiant Hall aeain this evening and to-morrow j evening. :