University Drama Society’s “Henry IV”

Press, Volume CII, Issue 30188, 20 July 1963, Page 13

University Drama Society’s “Henry IV”

The University of Canterbury Drama Society is to be congratulated on its enterprising production of what is possibly Shakespeare's most undeservedly neglected play —“Henry IV, Part I.” Rich comedy, exciting spectacle, moving personality clashes, and a gripping story which has close parallels with many modern political situations, make this play one with wide audience appeal. For entertainment value, it is worth anyone’s money. The production was. however. disappointing. As one would expect from Miss Ngaio Marsh, the production moved with professional polish, and the oast always knew exactly what they were doing. But to cast as Hotspur an actor who is so obviously older than his rival, the Prince of Wales, is to miss the central theme of the play. Shakespeare pits an impetuous, hot-headed adventurer against a calculating rather irresponsible young man to make the point that there is more than one way of preparing for leadership Hotspur’s flame was so intense that it was bound to

burn itself out. If Hotspur is older than Prince Hal. the parallel relationships with their fathers, and their elders is lost sight of. The setting was eye-catch-ing, and was used very clev-.. erly, but the modernity of its over-all lines, the construction with materials which were so obviously of our age, and the fact that ramp-setting did not blend with the forestage flats made the actors seem out of place on the stage. While the stage had dignity, almost nobility it remained cold and hard to fill Too often the set seemed underpopulated The tavern scenes might have been more intimate, more crowded, more of a contrast to the outdoor scenes. It was surprising to see a group of clowning soldiers allowed to steal a scene from Falstaff, provoking laughter certainly, but laughter which drowned Falstaff's words This was an unfortunate lapse of taste in a production which otherwise featured audibility from all the actors. Another controversial point of production was the decision to begin Prince Hal's

rejection of “that abominable m'sleader of youth.’’ Falstaff, half-way through the usually - comic playacting scene. This set the bone flor a relationship which had much less warmth than it might have had.

Gerald Lascelles played a brusque Falstaff with great skill, missing, perhaps, some of the fat man’s joviality and loveableness, but compensating by highlighting the pathos of a roue who is growing old. It is a performance worth seeing. Huntly Eliott spoke and moved with all the authority of a king, and sustained the conflicts of a man haunted by his past and fearful for the future. Prince Hal (lan Kirk) tended to work his fine voice too hard, but controlled well his madcap boyishness to lead easily to his reformation as a true prince. Hotspur (David Hindin) showed his considerable abilities as an actor, but lacked a little of the fiery impetuosity suggested by his name. He always commanded attention when he was on stage. His scene with Lady Percy was splendidly done. Among the smaller parts. Andrew Sharp as Mortimer was outstanding. He was relaxed and personable, and built up his character quickly and surely. Lady Percy (Lynley Hathorne) was

charmingly credible as the loving wife who had to compete with the battlefield for the attentions of her husband With a cast of more than 46, it is a comment on the talent available, and on the skilful direction of the producer, that everyone, from the bewildered Francis to the roguish Peto and the excitable Mistress Quickly, kept the play alive and interesting. The costuming helped in this. With bold use of reds and greens to point the rival families, and with an attention to detail that was quite remarkable (the accessories were a tour de force), the wardrobe mistresses added much to the spectacle of the play. “Henry IV” was a memorable night in the theatre, for, whatever its shortcomings, it brought to the stage a play which has all the ingredients of great drama—tension, spectacle, and laughter. • —P.R.S.