Circa Theatre
September 1-October 6 | Reviewed by Kate Blackhurst

DIRECTORS often run the risk of ruining a play by trying too hard to stamp their mark upon it with unsubstantiated interpretations. Ross Jolly should be commended for avoiding this temptation and allowing the superbly well crafted The Winslow Boy to speak for itself. This production is well acted; set; costumed and lit to permit the audience to concentrate on the brilliance of the play itself.

Ronnie Winslow returns home after being accused of stealing a postal order and being ‘sacked’ from Osborne, a royal naval college. His father, Arthur, seeks to reinstate him and clear his name at great personal and financial cost, threatening the destruction of his family’s happiness in his stubborn quest. The story is based on the real case of George Archer-Shee whose complaint was brought before the Crown and, as in this dramatic depiction, forced questions to be asked in the House of Commons.

All the action takes place in the Winslow’s drawing room which is elaborately furnished in keeping with the Edwardian period. This is beautifully naturalistic drama; the lighting is so effective you hardly notice it, and even the rain runs down the windows in a realistic manner. There may be an argument for presenting the trial in the courtroom – court scenes can make excellent drama – but Rattigan was more interested in the human impact of the case than the legal cut and thrust of the courts, and the details are reported.

Arthur (Jeffrey Thomas) is clearly the head of the family. He has some of the funniest lines of the play, but his deadpan delivery occasionally muffled the words and could have benefited from more inflection. He completely inhabits the character, however, and his mannerisms and expressions are eminently credible.

Master Dickie (Simon Vincent) is wonderful and feckless. With his love of ragtime and careless disregard for his studies, his character could have been a mere stereotype, but Vincent plays his role with charm and a gentle candour.

Kate Prior in the role of Catherine (Kate) Winslow delivers the stand-out performance of the show. She is a strong woman who embodies the notion that the personal is political, working voluntarily as a secretary for a suffragette. Never cold or impersonal, she displays a deft wit and a keen sense of humour, and remains dignified throughout adversity.

Jude Gibson as Grace Winslow explores the nuances of her character to prevent it descending into caricature. She attends the court sessions to support her son, even though she doesn’t understand a word, and is more concerned with showing off her frocks. Who can blame her; Gillie Coxhill’s costume design is divine! With her whirlwind attributes and bemused expressions, Grace also has moments of great sensitivity. Both she and Kate are well aware that women have to rely on men – until they win the vote and consequent right to determine their own futures, husbands or fathers are their financial support.

Felix Sampson plays the part of Ronnie Winslow (alternating with Nick Fenton) with appealing innocence. When cross-examined by Sir Robert, Sampson’s bewilderment is well portrayed and his childishness is heightened when his eyes light up describing a train journey. The question is raised as to whom the trial is actually for, as Ronnie isn’t particularly interested in the case, sleeping through many of the details and even missing the verdict.

K C Kelly strikes a discordant note as Sir Robert Morton, the advocate hired to defend Ronnie. Originally intended by the writer to be “early 40s, tall, thin, cadaverous, immensely elegant”, he is also a political advocate against Trade Unions and Women’s suffrage. Morton’s portrayal is more of a shambling world-weary bigot, whose florid gestures seem inebriated rather than eccentric. There should be chemistry between him and Kate, a la Benedict and Beatrice, as they are intellectual equals from opposing ideological sides. She protests too much over her sense of indignation and mistrust over Sir Robert, but the relationship here is more paternalistic than romantic.

Kate’s suitor, John Watherstone is played with a delightful mix of decency and bafflement by Gavin Rutherford. Arthur’s interrogation of John is a cutting satire delivered with more than a touch of the Lady Bracknells about it. Arthur also disdainfully dismisses Kate’s other suitor, Desmond Curry (Stephen Gledhill), which seems somewhat inappropriate as Gledhill is venerable in this slight but significant role.

Danielle Mason’s breezy reporter is a far cry from the ‘rather untidily-dressed woman of about 40’ of the writer’s intentions. Indeed her obsession with glamour is her defining characteristic. Representing the class divide from another angle is Violet, the housemaid, excellently depicted by Emma Kinane. She is larger than life and a counterpoint to the potential stuffiness of the Edwardian household. Her final delivery of the verdict is a veritable coup de grace.

There has been some debate as to whether mounting this play is a good use of Circa’s resources. Naturalism may not be fashionable, but it is as valid a style of drama as any, and its value lies in more than simply its style as a period piece. The questions of what people really care about and to what lengths they will go to protect their beliefs is surely relevant.

When current newspapers focus on the disappearance of one child (undeniably traumatising for the immediate family), at the expense of natural and unnatural disasters affecting thousands of less photogenic subjects, the question raised in the paper at the time has resonant echoes; “There’s a European war blowing up, there’s a coal strike on, there’s a fair chance of civil war in Ireland, and there’s a hundred and one other things on the horizon at the moment that I think you genuinely could call important.”

Terrence Rattigan wrote the play 1946 and set it just before the First World War; the one that was supposed to end them all. He was well aware of the irony. The ‘real Ronnie’, George Archer-Shee, was finally reinstated and died of wounds received in the first battle of Ypres in 1914. The question, “Is there any hope for the world?” could still be posed over 60 years later. That is relevant theatre on any stage.

See also:
» The Winslow Boy (Reviewed by Melody Nixon)