Bankhead Hysteria

Sun (Auckland), Volume II, Issue 508, 10 November 1928, Page 24

Bankhead Hysteria

Popular Actress and Her Undressing Parts TALLULAH AND HER FOLLOWERS For collective hysteria bordering upon madness commend me to the audience which attended the first performance of ”Her Cardboard Lover" says a London critic. It was adapted from the French of Jacques Deval by Valerie Wyngate and P. G. Wodehouse. Tallulah Bankhead and Leslie Howard play the leading parts at the Lyric Theatre. What an evening! What relief there was in escape to cool sanity of a summer’s night! Tallulah Bankhead is, of course, an extremely popular actress, and no one will grudge to a popular actress the applause of her admirers. But the premieres which bring M«*,--Bankhead to the stage breed a peculiar ecstasy in a very odd crowd of people. You feel the difference between her popularity and the popularity of other “stars” as you enter the theatre. Round the door a mob is clustered, principally composed of nervous, excited women. What they are staring at and why they are there it is hard to tell. They were staring at the theatre itself, at the bricks and mortar, I suppose, under the shelter of which Miss Bankhead was to appear. And they were uttering little breathless, squeaking ejaculations for all the world like mice in a bag. It seemed to be a case for experts in group psychology.

And inside the theatre it was worse. Looking up from the stalls at the circles and gallery one saw hundreds and hundreds of hot, shining women of all ages, pressing forward to stare at the curtain and emitting from time to time strange unexplained fragments of squealing, high-pitched laughter, hand-clapping and shrill cheery. “This,” I said to my neighbour, “must be very like the scene which the Christians saw when they looked up from the arena —the same morbid excitement, the same collective hysteria.” My neighbour, an older and wiser man than I, shook his head. “No,” he replied, “I think on the whole the Christians’ was probably a pleasanter sight.”

I think you probably know the play —the story of a girl who, in order to prevent herself from following her own fatal inclination to return to a worthless husband, employed a young man, Andre, to pretend to be her lover and act as her watch-dog. There

are two scenes in Simone’s bedroom, wherein, driven beyond reason by her lust for her husband, she adopts every device to enable her to escape to him, while Andre, who loves her himself, uses elaborate determination and skill to prevent her. It is, within the limits of farce, a lively, ingenious scene, and, if it had been treated with gaiety and lighthearted cynicism, as it would have been treated in France, it might not have been unpleasant. But it is made an excuse for the formula of ryidressing which has become a rule in the plays in which Miss Bankhead appears. Simone is alone in her bedroom, speaking on the telephone to a voice which she supposes to be hqy husband’s. Apparently in obedience to some instruction issued by him, she puts down the telephone and removes part of her clothing.

To a normal mind this woman’s actions appear to be merely silly; it is not in itself physically indecent, for the difference between a modern lady fully dressed and the same lady in her underclothes is scarcely perceptible. But the attitude of the audience toward it —that part of the audience of which I have already spoken—made the scene intensely uncomfortable. For all I care heroines may take off as many clothes as pleases them, but it is painful to hear a gallery of women hooting at the discarding of each garment. And it is even more painful to reflect that the play is obviously catering deliberately for this kind of approval. Miss Bankhead is an actress. But in the present piece, vigorous and energetic though she still is, she seems not to care very much for the finer points of character or delivery. She throws her part at the audience, trusting to her “personality” to win their approval, and she stoops to such a scene as I have described. If there were any reason in plot or character for the heroine’s undressing herself, if the scene were an integral part of the piece, it might be altogether justified and would certainly be tolerable; but when she undresses for no better reason than a supposed telephonic request the whole affair becomes worse than ridiculous.

Something out of the ordinary in entertainment will be presented by J. C. Williamson in New Zealand early next month. This will be a specially selected company, headed by the favourite comedians Edgeley and Dawe, who will stage ‘'The Midnight Frolics.” Always associated with the very best in musical comedy and attractions. J. C. Williamson have been responsible for some splendid productions, and the fact that they are sponsoring the coming Dominion tour of these noted artists should excite the itnerest of all theatre-goers. The exact composition of the company has not yet been finally determined on, but it will include some of the most clever and amusing artists ever seen in the Dominion. George Gee has been chosen as chief comedian in “Virginia.” the new’ Clayton and Waller musical comedy in London, and again he will have the American Emma Haig as partner in fun-making. Mr. Gee's years o£ Australian experience have been useful to him. Coming from England, he began iu( a Tivoli revue, with little to da except an eccentric. dance which found much favour and he stayed for some time in the productions of the Tivoli management of that period, which produced the musical comedy "The Lilac Domino.” The piece was taken over by the Williamson management, and afterwards Mr. Gee was given opportunities in a number of its musical comedies and revues. Appearing in London a year or two ago in “The Girl Friend,” he was variously described as from the provinces and from Australia, but the main point was that his particular style of “silly ass” comedy caught the public fancy.