THEATER REVIEW : MAUGHAM ‘CIRCLE’ A BIT TOO SQUARE

Early in his career, when W. Somerset Maugham was more successful as a playwright than as a novelist (at one point, only George Bernard Shaw had more plays being produced simultaneously in London), he took two years off from the theater to write “Of Human Bondage.” Producers tried to talk him out of it, but Maugham was sure his genius lay in the novel, not the theater. Time and “The Circle,” a revival of his 1921 play, have proved him right.

“The Circle,” now playing at the newly opened Deane Theatre, is a tepid English comedy of manners, written and staged like a well-run clock--mechanically and predictably. Will Lady Elizabeth run away with Edward Luton, whom she loves, or will she stay with her husband, Arnold Champion-Cheney, whom she does not? The plot might have seemed daring, even racy, in the early 20th Century when it was written. Now the juice in the bottle has aged not into wine, but vinegar.

When the play opens, Arnold and Elizabeth are expecting Arnold’s mother for a visit. This was Elizabeth’s idea, and Arnold is convinced it is a dreadful one. Arnold’s mother deserted her husband and son 30 years ago for her husband’s then-friend, Lord Porteous. Arnold, who was 5 at the time, has not seen her since, nor has he cared to. But while Arnold disapproves of his mother and everything she stands for, Elizabeth finds it all too too romantic. She pictures a fragile, old woman who bears herself with the great, grave dignity of one who has loved and been loved. But poor Elizabeth is in for quite a shock when she finds out that Lady Kitty, like this play, hasn’t aged well at all.

Enter Complication One. Arnold’s father returns from Paris unexpectedly. What will he say when he finds out that his ex-wife, with Lord Porteous in tow, will be staying with his son and daughter-in-law? Complication Two. Doesn’t Elizabeth seem just a bit too attracted to that charming, broad-shouldered house guest who towers above the other men like a friendly football player? Question for the evening: Will Elizabeth make the same mistake her mother-in-law did 30 years before in the very same house, and was it indeed “a mistake”?

You don’t have to stay up for all three acts to figure it out.

The actors struggle valiantly at times to breathe life into their stereotypes, but one detects--projects?--the inevitable wince when the very pretty Nancy Titus as Elizabeth must go into one more gush about true romance or when Paul Eggington as Edward or “Teddy” has to describe one more thing as “ripping.”

None of the characters is all that likable--even Arnold’s father, Clive, turns out to be quite a rotter in his own little way--but, interestingly enough, the most engaging performance is turned in by the actor who plays the least sympathetic role of all--Paul L. Nolan as Arnold. The best thing about Nolan is the complete conviction and utter lack of apology with which he plays his part. He’s the kind of person who, when he hears that his wife may be running off with another man, notices with dismay that a cushion on a chair is out of place and adjusts it. From his slicked-back hair to his never-wavering presence of mind, everything about him stands for order. So what if he’s Felix Unger, a half-century before Neil Simon’s “invention”? At least Felix Unger’s values make more sense than anyone else’s in this vale of yawns.

The direction by Will Simpson seems precise enough to be wooden. One has a sense of cuckoos coming in and going out on the hour. Robert Earl’s setting is cozily apropos. Everything from the polished tables to the pictures on the walls suggests good upper class English taste. The best part is the backdrop of terrace doors which affords some nice entrances and exits and a way to show day and night.

Unfortunately, Matthew Cubitto’s lighting takes little advantage of this opportunity. The light varies little until the third act, when the “night sky” maintains an unnatural monotonic blue throughout.

The three acts in this play stand as a compelling argument for the inevitable evolution of the two-acter. The one advantage of the additional act is the opportunity to show a few more of Dianne Holly’s wonderfully opulent costumes. True, it seems rather a challenge for Titus to maneuver in a powder blue dress that gathers at the calf, but the sight is worth the wiggle.

Another highlight of the show is its larger setting--the new Deane Theatre, of which its donors can be justifiably proud. It is comfortable, well-appointed and acoustically sound, with much potential to be a pleasurable asset to the theatergoing community. One can only hope that in future, it and its audience will be treated to something less square than “The Circle.”

“THE CIRCLE”

By W. Somerset Maugham. Director is Will Simpson. Settings by Robert Earl. Lighting by Matthew Cubitto. Sound by John Hauser. Costumes by Dianne Holly. Company Manager is Jean Hauser. With Neil Ahern, Paul Eggington, Robert Harland, Rebecca Nachison, Paul L. Nolan, Navarre T. Perry, Nancy Titus and Jane Wenman. At 8 p.m. Wednesday-Saturday and Sunday matinees at 2. Closes March 28. At the Deane Theatre, 444 4th Ave., in downtown San Diego.