Wilde thing?
Narayani Menon imports your Earnest with Bailey Theatre Company…
genuinely pleasant | creative reach | glowing reputation

Genuinely pleasant
Usually, I’ll admit it, I hate Oscar Wilde. I find him pretentious, irritating and vapid; most of the time, I can barely stand to hear his name mentioned in passing. It annoys the hell out of me to hear him quoted with that careless, faux-intelligent smirk which seems to accompany any mention of him, as though proxy to a clever person might make the speaker clever… I could go on: the point is, I think – and have seen evidence that – it’s very easy to do Wilde badly. But a sold-out run at Leech Hall would suggest otherwise and, on the whole, I’m hugely grateful to Bailey Theatre Company for rendering a Wildean evening genuinely pleasant rather than merely palatable.
The evening was off to a strong start, from the excellent casting of Michael Umney, who delivered his Algernon Moncrieff with unabashed aplomb and panache – the only way to to Wildean characters. Umney’s loucheness was charming, though there were times when I wanted him to bring more precision to the role; he might have taken a leaf out of Patrick Neyman’s book, playing the scene-stealing manservant Lane with a delightfully quasi-Frankensteinian intensity. Neyman was utterly concentrated on the role, and his complete awareness of the humour in the lines – a necessity for any Wildean actor, I would think – was consistent. Sadly, he was not matched by all of the cast: most notably, Richard Earl’s Jack Worthing seemed quiet and somewhat unconvinced, often eclipsed by Neyman and Umney’s flair. At times it felt like the actors were allowing Wilde’s wit – which is based on saying very clever things in a very throwaway manner – to be, well, thrown away.
The entrance of Sophie Bicknell and Ashley Greenwood as Gwendolen Fairfax and Lady Bracknell provided a welcome change in pace, as the scene threatened to lull. Bicknell must be commended on a delightfully energetic performance that really shone through – her smouldering sexual chemistry with Earl instantly livened the scene. Greenwood proved herself an extremely skilled comic actor with an excellent sense of timing, but her sense of age felt, on the whole, a little too young for Lady Bracknell, exacerbated by a lack of maturity in her voice. Most of the time, her pitch was the same as the younger women’s, and she might have benefited by developing a graver tone to emphasise the grandeur established by her bearing (and sumptuous costuming).
Creative reach
It was disappointing to see that the chemistry between Greenwood and Earl in the marriage interview scene didn’t quite work; director Rebecca Udy introduced an element of ‘game show’ into their rapport, which in theory was innovative and fun, but came off as slightly stilted – never the desired effect in Wilde. The creative reach of Udy’s directorial innovation, however, was demonstrated in the entr’acte striptease. Exploiting Umney and Neyman’s skills as visually comic actors, Lane helped Algernon change clothes behind a screen. Neyman’s reactions were again meticulous, and the very nature of the scene was so highly theatrical as to maintain that delicious awareness of the audience. My only quibble is that the scene went on for too long – especially as a scene of a similar ilk was repeated later, in Nick Robson and Sarah Trotter’s servant naughtiness, which once again overstepped the boundary of vignette to full scene, fulfilling neither structural genre and coming off the worse for it.
The second act brought with it new characters, and several more star performances. Ben Salter’s Dr Chasuble was cringeworthily slimy and a pleasure to watch; Salter is possessed of a truly excellent sense of comic timing, put to full effect in his nervous flirtations with Lucy Mitchell’s Miss Prism, who completed the precarious sexual tension. Elizabeth Evans, as Cecily Cardew, played the role perhaps a little too young, but developed a profound sexual chemistry with Umney’s Algernon (or ‘Earnest’?) very quickly; together the pair could write the handbook for how to get lucky, 1890’s-style. Evans’ overly knowing barely-disguised sexuality was consistent and enchanting, without being too cloying.
Glowing reputation
The set for the country scenes was somewhat unnecessary: the trellis was a nice touch, but rendered the painted backdrop redundant. More set pieces like this might have been more effective, but on a student budget it was a smart way to suggest a garden from set designer Tom Bristow. The garden scene transformed into the interior by means of a beautifully choreographed set change (mentioned earlier) with the servants, though the turn around the audience from Lady Bracknell and Gwendolen was somewhat confusing. The final scene, I always find, drags somewhat, after the delightful twosomes preceding it. However, the acting was generally convincing and enjoyable to watch; excepting some uninspiring blocking (six people standing in a line onstage can become a little dull on the eyes), it maintained or improved on the energetic pace.
Overall, then, the I was impressed – it was obviously a very well-produced show; thankfully, no corners had been cut – this was not performed ‘easily’ just because of the seeming ‘ease’ of Wilde. With so many ideas evidently up her sleeve, it would be interesting to see Udy’s directorial hand light on a blanker canvas next time, to see perhaps a fuller exposition of her creative imagination. It was a consistently competent show, with moments of glorious comedy, leaving me with a sense that something more adventurous might have been possible with a more open script. But this production only served the strengthen the glowing reputation that Bailey Theatre Company have maintained this year.











I'm annoyed I missed this – I was told the Man Umney was splendid in the title role, and I can well believe it. He was born to Wilde (sorry).
Anyway, where's this Earnest being imported from?
I'm annoyed I missed this – I was told the Man Umney was splendid in the title role, and I can well believe it. He was born to Wilde (sorry).
Anyway, where's this Earnest being imported from?
I'm annoyed I missed this – I was told the Man Umney was splendid in the title role, and I can well believe it. He was born to Wilde (sorry).
Anyway, where's this Earnest being imported from?
Agree with the reviewer on the whole, but I think your coment on Mr Earl (who was in the title role, not Mr Umney, who we can all agree was fabby) was a little harsh – he may have been slightly awkward at points, but his character is not supposed to rival Algernon's in flamboyance. Credit should be due for what is a challenging part – requiring a feat of memory, and the ability to sing and play the piano when the scene calls for it!
Agree with the reviewer on the whole, but I think your coment on Mr Earl (who was in the title role, not Mr Umney, who we can all agree was fabby) was a little harsh – he may have been slightly awkward at points, but his character is not supposed to rival Algernon's in flamboyance. Credit should be due for what is a challenging part – requiring a feat of memory, and the ability to sing and play the piano when the scene calls for it!
Agree with the reviewer on the whole, but I think your coment on Mr Earl (who was in the title role, not Mr Umney, who we can all agree was fabby) was a little harsh – he may have been slightly awkward at points, but his character is not supposed to rival Algernon's in flamboyance. Credit should be due for what is a challenging part – requiring a feat of memory, and the ability to sing and play the piano when the scene calls for it!
… Surely the 'title role' is a somewhat contentious issue! But yes, point taken …
… Surely the 'title role' is a somewhat contentious issue! But yes, point taken …
… Surely the 'title role' is a somewhat contentious issue! But yes, point taken …
Leave your response!