As You Like It:
  Two Reviews

  1967

      I doubt whether directors will ever run out of reasons for a new approach to Shakespeare.  In the current Midsummer Night’s Dream we have a programme note on mirror-imagery.   Now Clifford Williams, who has directed As You Like It for the National Theatre at the Old Vic, writes about dreams and modern semblances, going on to a last paragraph which really must be quoted:  “The examination of the infinite beauty of Man in love—which lies at the very heart of As You Like It—takes place in an atmosphere of spiritual purity which transcends sensuality in the search for poetic sexuality.  It is for this reason that I employ a male cast; so that we shall not—entranced by the surface reality—miss the interior truth.”
      Quite.  One can hear a conversation as the Old Vic audience moves into the autumn drizzle of Waterloo Road.  “Did you get the interior truth?”—“Indeed, yes.  What a relief it is not to be entranced by a surface reality!  We cross here.  Mind that car.”  A few people, guilty creatures sitting at a play, may remember enjoying another experiment, a performance of As You Like It with actresses; but that was long ago.  It must be more intelligent to accept Celia as somebody who looks like an actor in a miniskirt and tortoiseshell spectacles, even though one is too distracted by her aspect to notice what she is saying.
      Mr. William denies that he is demonstrating the specific ideas in Professor Jan Kott’s essay, “Bitter Arcadia,” which is also cited for this collector’s piece of a programme.  Even so, Kott, can prophesy, is going to cause a lot more trouble in Shakespeare production before somebody else arrives to displace him.
      It seems to me that somebody at the National must have said, some time ago, “Better have another Shakespeare, daresay, Now what can we do with As You Like It?”  One answer would have been:  “Do it as excitingly as possible.  The National has the resources and the cast.  No, there must be something different, and the present production is the result.  The pity of it all is that this is frequently a competent revival, with two performances that are more than just competent:  the sour Jaques as Robert Stephens, who speaks the Seven Ages more potently than I have heard it, and the Touchstone of Derek Jacobi.  Before this summer Touchstone, as a rule, had me despairing:  then Stratford offered Roy Kinnear’s shaking fool and now Mr. Jacobi flicks cheerfully through the part as a mercurial young man who happens to have dropped into Arden from the Carnaby Street end of Soho.  The idea, as we say now, works good:  there is nothing wrong with Jeremy Brett’s Orlando or the Duke Frederick of Frank Wylie, a dangerous neurotic who must have given to the old religious man a tough task in conversation.
                                                           --From Illus. London Times, 10/14/ 67

     Anthony Hopkins'  lady, sardonic and sharp and much more given to using feminine gesture and deportment as a means of comment.  Richard Kay’s Phoebe, on the other hand, veered much further in the direction of female impersonation, and begat in me the only stirrings of uneasiness felt during the performance;  all the same, I was much more aware of Phoebe as an intelligent and frustrated girl than I have ever been before.  Anthony Hopkins’ bumpkin Audrey was, reasonably enough, straight out of the music-hall and pantomime tradition, and very funny too.  All in all, the play, it seems to me, gained nothing by the device; but much light was thrown upon the possibilities of women’s acting. 
     
All this would have been very heavy going had not the performance as a whole achieved a delightful buoyancy.  I don’t understand why, in Ralph Koltai’s perspex sets, psychedelically lit with swirling blobs of color, the action needed to take place somewhere in outer space; but at least a sort of shimmer was imparted which did not positively lower the spirits—as did Timothy O’Brien’s threatening timber in this year’s unhappy Royal Shakespeare production.  Robert Stephens perhaps dwelt too lovingly upon his white-suited, donnish Jacques, a skillful though unfeeling study of disillusion—less fruitful in the spectator’s mind than Paul Chapman’s top-hatted raven in the Birmingham Repertory production which came to London during the summer.  But other supporting roles gave immense pleasure—first, Derek Jacobi’s Touchstone, the funniest I have ever seen, the essence of small-scale city knowingness; his scene with the aged Corin, marvelously warm and human in the unfailing hands of Gerald James, epitomized absolutely the conflict between the earthy and the urban which was not to become vital for another 250 years after the play was written.  Roderick Horn’s Amiens, too, sang with exactly the right weight of ability—neither an embarrassing quaver nor an overtrained sweep, out of place and out of character; and if Marc Wilkinson’s post-Beatle songs are records I can see no reason why they should not get into the Top Ten.  Lilting and catchy, they stand happily at the point where in today’s idiom pop music and real music have once again blended to please all tastes.

                                                            Drama, Winter 1967
 
Back to Articles Index