Amusing light comedy

Press, Volume CXVI, Issue 34097, 8 March 1976, Page 16

Amusing light comedy

“Time Out for Ginger,” by Ronald Alexander. Directed by Brian Deavoll for the Canterbury Repertory Society. Repertory Theatre, March 6 to 13. Running time: 8 p.m. to 10 p.m.

Many, many years ago, the entire North American continent was inhabited by a primitive humanoid sub-| species which enjoyed a; simple Utopian existence far] removed from the anxieties | and pressures of their des-i cendants. Neurosis, petu-l lance, citizenship, hooligan-i ism, diplomacy, and evangelism were as yet undiscovered; [ little did these creatures! guess that their line would! one day engender Marilyn Monroe, James Dean. Billy Graham, Billie Jean King, and Richard Nixon. Scientists call this life-form Homunculus prebellifrigidosus, but we know it better by its individual giants and heroes: Archie, Veronica, Betty, Jughead and the gang. All that needs to be said about Ronald Alexander’s plav is that it is an amusing light comedy set within this context, that it has been deservedly rescued from near-

oblivion by Brian Deavoll, and that the casting (intentionally or not) draws some hilarious parallels with the Archie comics.

The cast, by any local standards, is very, strong—particularly Pauline Huggins and Tony Chandler as the parents. Lynne Currie and Stephanie Sutton as their ' daughters, and John Vaughan land Michael Hurst as rival boyfriends. With the rest of I the cast, they romp through |a comedy in which the father (preaches permissiveness and equality, while the youngest (daughter puts these principles | to the test by becoming a [football champion. A reading of this play would leave me very doubtful as to whether it was worth reviving, and yet here it is, an unexpected highlight to what looked like being a very thin programme of Festival drama. Though all the performances are creditable, the central achievement is Brian Deavoll’s: this is, above all, the most thoroughly and cleverly rehearsed play that I can remember for a long time. Throughout, the cast, i the timing, inflections, and

accents are all extremely good, and every laugh is a strategic victory for Brian Deavoll.

This production is bound to be a big success with the general public. This must have been obvious from halfway through the rehearsal period, which makes me wonder why the Repertory administration did not see fit to expand the production budget slightly, injecting enough time and money to bring the costumes and properties up to the standard of the performances. It takes little clothes sense or design awareness to notice that both furniture and men’s clothes emphatically include items from the early fifties, early sixties, and early seventies; if the men will not have haircuts (and the performances are good enough for us to overlook absurdities like bearded bankers), then at least they could settle for a single period of costume.

This is a slight, but noticeable, imperfection to a produi tion which would still be very amusing if they did it in Napoleonic battledress — perhaps more amusing. — Howard McNaughton.