CONTEMPORARY ARTS
THEATRE
Revudeville." (Windmill.)
THERE being nothing new .upon the London stage this week, and the Spectator having,.as far as I. can make out, consistently ignored the Windmill Theatre since it first began to entertain the citizens nineteen years ago, 1 visited the 231st edition of Revudeville. The programme said: " All performances today are by A Company," and a notice on the curtain pointed out, in a formula which would do very well for contemporary French Governments, that " there is no difference in the two companies or in the performance itself except as to personnel." At 21.00 hours, A Company, who had been continuously in action since noon, were still attacking strongly. Some of the ammunition with which they were supplied appeared to be of inferior quality, and there was no great originality about their tactics ; but on the whole they did very well, and I thought it rather unfeeling of the management to invite patrons to write down, on a form in the programme, " your confidential opinion as to which artistes you think we should retain," as though the whole company were perpetually on the verge of dismissal. The threat of being bowler-hatted must be peculiarly distressing to a nude. Nudes are, of course, really the object of the exercise, but the audience—ninety-five per cent. male and mostly rather elderly— enjoyed Mr.i Arthur English, a comedian of promise, and sat patiently through the other rather mediocre turns which were sandwiched between the inevitable "Studio in Paris," " Deep Sea Fantasy " and so on. I was mildly horrified to see a microphone sprouting now and then from the stage, for the Windmill is only about the size of the average village hall ; the audience is warned that " any additional artificial aid to vision is NOT permitted " ; but I should have thought that the case against artificial aids to hearing was a much stronger one. PETER FLEMING.
Previous page
