“THE GIOCONDA SMILE”

Press, Volume XCVII, Issue 28660, 9 August 1958, Page 11

“THE GIOCONDA SMILE”

Repertory Players’ Success “The Gioconda Smile,” Aldous Huxley’s psychological thriller, held the attention of the audience through three intense acts at the Repertory Theatre last evening. It is not always easy to judge what may suit the taste of theatre-goers: but the Canterbury Repertory Theatre Society has had some real successes in recent years. In 1957 “The White Sheep in the Family” and “My Three Angels” were outstanding; the most interesting play of this season seems likely to be ‘‘The Gioconda Smile.”

Of course it is not a play which suggests a reassuring view of human nature. Cause and effect are linked witl| a logic that is unrelenting, and that threatens in act three to project itself into the spiritual plane. The dialogue is to match, though it is at its best at those times when it is somewhat embittered in tone.

Generally speakirig, the cast which presented the play last evening showed themselves to be very capable. There may nave been flaws in the performance; but the feeling of stress created and .maintained was too strong to allow of much attention being paid to them. A great deal of credit must go to the principal players, Mavis Reesby, Penny Giddens, Fred Masters and John Hendry. The part of Janet Spence is a highly emotional one, and the emotions besides being powerful are varied. The problem here is to convince the audience and yet to control the part. Mrs Reesby was very successful, and her performance was accomplished. It will be agreed that as Henry Huttpn, Mr Masters looked the part. Perhaps he lacked the studied detachment of* manner necessary to give the audience the full effect of Henry’s cynicism. His lines were not always clear. Nevertheless, he did convey the emotional force arising from the predicament in which the character found himself, and the difficult resolution of his agony was made to see'm possible. This, in itself, is quite an achievement.

Dr. Libbard, too, was good. The play might rather overestimate the dramatic effect of pure wisdom: the good doctor has all the answers. However, John Hendry brought him to life as a sympathetic and not too sententious person.

At first the role of Doris is a rather colourless one, but it develops at an alarming rate. Penny Giddens was equal to the demands it made, and her interpretation was felt to be at just the’correct level. Rosemary Mathias was forceful as Nurse Braddock, indeed in the first act she was perhaps a trifle more emphatic than was appropriate. It was, however, an admirable supporting performance. As for General Spence, his remarks were always unexpected, and Guy Hammond made the most of them.

Valerie Gould’s settings were artistic; the effects of light and sound, particularly the thunderstorm, were most discreetly managed. The whole production was in Frank Newman’s best style. C.E.S.