Repertory Society Presents "Look Back In Anger”

Press, Volume XCVIII, Issue 29016, 3 October 1959, Page 17

Repertory Society Presents "Look Back In Anger”

The latest production of ’ the

Repertory Theatre Society will provide Christchurch audiences with many surprises. jVhen “Look Back in Anger” opened before a crowded house at the Repertory Theatre last evening, it was followed with the closest attention.

The tone of the play is set from the first lines of the dialogue at the rise of the curtain, and it would be hard to imagine anything more harsh and painful then the development of the drama. The theme of the angry young man is not very clear or credible; it might be interpreted in several ways. What saves the play is the interest of the scenes taken separately, and the occasional brilliance of Jimmy Porter’s asides, as distinguished from his more ambitious set speeches. The conclusion of the play is incredible; but perhaps there is seme horrid justice about Alison’s plight, which not everyone can understand. The denouement might conceivably give satisfaction to confirmed enemies of women or to discerning connoisseurs of the abject; and, although unusual, this is prob-

ably quite an achievement. It may not be what the playright had in mind, however, when he remarked. “Only if I make people angry, will they care—and maybe start thinking.”

Alan Shaw played the part of Jimmy Porter. It is an exhausting role, for Mr Shaw had to give some light and shade to a character marked by peevish self-pity masquerading as righteous indignation. Porter’s grievance against society was made very real, and Mr Shaw's interpretation was impressive in its sincerity. Another character admirably cast in this presentation was that of Cliff Lewis. Trevor Pitt entered into the oddity of Cliff's situation whole-heartedly. Cliff is a most interesting personality, and Mr Pitt showed real understanding in rounding out the part. The two girls in “Look Back in Anger” had to express dumb, patient suffering, not a very easy thing to do gracefully. It is, of course, the playright’s fault that both Alison Porter and Helena Charles seemed to assume an air of patient martyrdom, as they bent over the ironing-board. Judy Garland acted a most difficult part with great courage. Alison’s is a nature subjected to unnatural constraint, and Miss Garland suggested this very strongly. Irvine Lindsay, too, entered increasingly into her role as Act II progressed. When once she became a member of the family in Act 111, she acted with delightful spontaneity. John Partleton had only a small scene in this play, and he gave a pleasant performance as the subdued Colonel Redfern. Frank Newman’s production of this provocative play brings out the strength of each situation, and underlines the wit and the power of the dialogue. The one-room flat in which the play takes place is not exactly cheerful. It is, however, a clever adaptation of the setting of the London production, and is largely the work of Valerie Gould and Eric Craighead. —C.E.S.