Submitted by Liz Rodie Jones

Our trip to Gettysburg for part of the G&S Festival was very enjoyable, and also a learning experience for me. We were able to see four performances: Ruddigore, by a group from Maine; a Triple Bill – The Zoo and Cox and Box, by the Charles Court Opera Co. from England, and Trial by Jury, by two Philadelphia-area groups, working together; The Sorcerer, by the “Nomads,” a sort of pick-up group of G&S professionals from England; and Iolanthe, by the Trent Opera Co. f/ England.

I’ve written before about the meanings of “amateur” and “professional,” and it seemed to me that the productions we were privileged to see quite clearly illustrated the difference between these two concepts. Let me add, as an aside, that it was wonderful to hear the “National Festival Orchestra,” from Buxton, England, playing the music so well (ie. “professionally?”); the Overtures were a joy!

“Amateur” means “love of the work,” and I have little doubt that that’s what we were seeing in the Ruddigore production, though the performers’ abilities seemed somewhat limited. Act I was quite good, with “Dick Dauntless” and “Sir Despard” outstanding. [How many times do we get to hear a really good tenor, who's also a strong actor?] However, the women were almost uniformly weak, with the exception of “Mad Margaret” (who I thought was better in Act II). “Rose Maybud” was described by a colleague as a “loose cannon,” and after she botched the lyrics in her first song, she kept getting shakier. But to be fair, she may have been the understudy, or someone called in rather “late in the game” – “Dame Rumour” has it that the original “Rose” got pregnant!

I was looking forward to the “Ghost Scene” in Act II, but I was disappointed. The men’s chorus was much weaker than in Act I, and “Sir Roderic” was less than imposing, both vocally and physically. He also counted wrong on the entrances of all three verses of his big song! [I also had problems with the “Little Flower” duet, which was presented as light comedy, and not romantic, but that's more debatable.] However, these people did take a bus down from Maine, and went back again, after their show, and if that’s not “love of the work,” I don’t know what is!

The last show we saw, Iolanthe, was almost the polar opposite, in terms of talent and production values. All the performers did well (though the “Fairy Queen” seemed a little “funky” – sort of a ditzy old lady), the style was good, but the scenery was drab, and the costumes … confusing. “Phyllis’s” costumes, particularly, infuriated me. In Act I she came out in an equestrian outfit – slacks, boots, and jacket (was she going for a “pre-Princess” “Lady Diana” look?), and in Act II she wore a little black cocktail dress.

The Peers all had nice robes in Act I, but wore tux jackets in Act II, which bothered Lee, because he would rather have seen them in tails. Confusing – not effective – but not necessarily “wrong,” if the costuming was supposed to be present-day. But it just wasn’t clear! And the “Lord Chancellor,” without his wig, just looked like everybody else.

The musical tempi were almost consistently too fast for me, and I got the weird impression that the cast was trying to hurry through the performance (a matinee), so they could go have supper, and do the evening show. Here was a good example, IMHO, of a company that had style/technique, but very little heart. Did they even really like the material?

Our two middle nights of performances had both heart and style, and were wonderful! On Monday evening, we saw the Triple Bill (The Zoo, Cox and Box, and Trial), and on Tuesday night, it was The Sorcerer.
The Zoo is a one-act opera, by Sullivan and Batton Rowe. The chorus had been eliminated from this production, and all the music was performed by the five principles. It was also done in modern dress, so I thought it had a “bare bones” quality about it. However, all the leads were excellent, and if they hadn’t been in modern dress, could the leading lady, who had a beautiful voice, have had the freedom to play such a delightful “female dweeb?”

I confess that I would have liked to see a more “splendid” production, with full chorus, period costumes, and a fancier set. It would have added to the ridiculousness of the plot, rather like “Much Ado About Nothing!” But, as I said, all the leads were excellent, and the three men went on to even greater heights.
Specifically, in Cox and Box, by Sullivan and F.C. Burnand, those three male leads from The Zoo did a fabulous job. It was also done in modern dress, with a minimal set, +++but was done with such energy, panache, and fun (and also talent) that the time period hardly mattered. They presented the “short version,” and thus, it moved very fast – but it was so enjoyable!

Trial was costumed and staged in a very traditional manner, but was very lively and fun. If these were indeed two different performing groups, working together, they meshed very well. The choreography was precise, as was the singing (with only very minor mistakes), and all the voices and characterizations were very strong. It was clear in all three of these shows that the material was being respected (I’ve always thought “professional” means “respectful”), but also enjoyed.
Tuesday night’s Sorcerer was the “piece de resistance.” The three Cox and Box leads played three of the leads in this show. “Box” became “Alexis” (a lovely voice, and a funny little guy); “Bouncer” became “Sir Marmaduke;” and “Cox” became an unbelievable good “J.W. Wells.” He was young, rather dramatic … and very tall! Thank goodness his costume didn’t include the traditional “stove-pipe” top hat – he would have towered over everyone too much! He played the part as a working-class salesman, but also a bit of a showman, and had a wonderful voice. Who says the Comic Lead can’t have a “fine” voice – just because George Grossmith didn’t have one?

“Dr. Daly” was another talented veteran, who performed his first song so beautifully, and with such tenderness, that we were mesmerized. “Constance” was gorgeous – both vocally, and as a lovely young woman. She was so good that “Aline,” who was quite good herself, looked a little dowdy by comparison. In contrast, “Lady Sangazure” was also quite beautiful, with a beautiful voice, and not made to look old enough, so “Mrs. Partlett,” who came off looking – shall we say, rather quirky, was the funnier of the two.

The “Notary” was also funny and good, and “Sir Marmaduke,” although not particularly dominant, was effective, and reminded me of Alan Rickman (one of my favorites). The chorus also did a very good job, though I confess to not really seeing a lot of the obvious mismatching I was expecting.

The set and costumes were lovely, and the special effects, though a little cheesy (aren’t they supposed to be?), worked fine. But it was the obvious affection the entire cast had for the show, combined with their considerable abilities, that totally won us over. A perfect blend of heart and technique.

I learned two facts about The Sorcerer that I hadn’t known before. The end of Act I and the opening of Act II were re-written for the revival they did between Ida and Mikado (hence, the confusion about how long it takes for the potion to work – ½ hour, or 12 hours). So, the wonderful chorus number, with the English country accents, was written for the revival! Also, the music for “Constance” was transposed down, to better suit Jessie Bond, the company mezzo-soprano, because it had originally been written for soprano. (I found this out from Ralph MacPhael, who led discussions each night, before the performances.) We learned lots of other interesting tid-bits from the symposium of speakers that we attended. Of course, my favorite was John Dreslin, who presented many of the little musical jokes that Sullivan put into his scores (yes, he included the “helmet” song from Ida!).

But my favorite little moment came when I whispered a quote from The Mikado to Lee, before one show, and a 19-year-old young man sitting in front of me turned around, grinning, and made an “okay” sign. It’s neat to be surrounded by other G&S aficionados (who, I might add, know just when to clap – and when NOT to!), but when one of them is a young person, it’s even better! To close, I’ll paraphrase “Rose Maybud” from Ruddigore: “In truth, I could pursue this [“painful” - NOT!] theme much further but, behold, I have said enough!”