‘Jumpers’ at Court

Press, 24 February 1986, Page 4

‘Jumpers’ at Court

“Jumpers” by Tom Stoppard, directed by Alex Gilchrist at the Court Theatre; From February 22. Running time: 8 p.m. to 18.25 p.m. Reviewed by John Farnsworth. It was. Stoppard himself who said "Jumpers” breaks its neck to be entertaining. He was right, and this production, commendably, does likewise. Both play and production, however, are obliged to, because they face' a formidable obstacle in the shape of long, complicated and dense philosophical discussfons.ln itself, this is not a prospect many audiences face with relish, and/it says much for Stoppard’s skill and _this production’s standards,, that they can leave as amused as they do. The difficulty lies in a set - of intricate , ideas which, to some extent, may work better on paper than on stage. In essence, Stoppard juggles with the ways that people attempt to construct 'coherence and certainty in to their jumbled and contradictory , worlds, whether it concerns a murderer, or God. The play opens in fact with a murder at a party held by Dotty (Heather

Lindsay). The party disturbs her husband, George (Stuart Devenie), a professor of moral philosophy, who is trying to complete a paper on . the existence of. God. We are obliged to hear most of the paper as the play progresses while, simultaneously, an Inspector Bones seeks out a suspect in a parodied whodunnit Meanwhile, Dot distraught is variously tended by the multi-tal-ented Archie. George continues to wrestle remorselessly and sometimes very amusingly, with his philosophical conundrums. In this role, Stuart Devenie is excellent. It is a huge and awkward part with immensely long speeches but one which he Skilfully shapes and points,, with a fine sense of intonation, rhythm and gesture. It'can still develop .— leaving some unconvincing make-up aside — but already he has established “Jumpers” as very much his play. It is a fine performance. Heather s Ltadsaj has : good presence .but suffered, on opening night, from fitful vitalig and a noticeably hoar* voice. Generally, howeftr, this a is not a strong way for

women. In that respect, Lin Waldegrave deserves a medal for her patience in one of the dullest roles in modern theatre. In other supporting roles, Bill Le Marquandmade a credible Policeman Plod figure, and Paul Barrett produced a nicely sharp and calculating Archie.

Behind them, Tony Geddes’s set intelligently and deftly mimicked the play’s themes, converging in pieces from the wings to appear as a gay, neatly assembled jigsaw. Throughout the production a good sense both of pace and of direction allowed the actors room to play to each other, apart from Dotty’s clumsy dance sequence. The acrobatic “Jumpers,” however, would benefit from greater confidence before their routines will work effectively. Over all, this is a welldirected production of a deceptively difficult work. As such it has a charm and a sense of warmth which go a long way to lifting some otherwise potentially dull moments. The result is to give us a clear and worth-while view of this complex play’s considerable virtues and noticeable faults.