ROUNDABOUT BLOG

Man and Boy was not a critical success when it was first done in London and then New York in 1963. Why revive it?

I found the play in the London Library and was surprised there was a Rattigan play I hadn't ever heard of. Moreover, I discovered that Rattigan thought Man and Boy was his masterpiece and would bring him back into critical favor. A new wave of young dramatists like John Osborne seemed to have relegated him to the shelf. When I read the play I was both thrilled and disappointed. Thrilled both by it's darkness and by the fact that I found  the fulcrum of the plot truly shocking - a rare sensation with period plays - and disappointed with its structure. Then the biographer of Rattigan, Michael Darlow, contacted me to ask whether I was aware there were 10 drafts of the play in the British Museum - and the Rattigan estate gave me permission to tinker. I wrote not a word, but I did re-arrange, because each successive draft that Rattigan had written seemed less potent in certain areas. I think commercial pressures had been brought to bear. Also Rattigan said bitterly that the leading role was played by Charles Boyer "like a head waiter" - when what is required is an Iago-like villain of  true evil, buttressed by charm. Frank Langella is a rare American actor who embraces villainy (have you noticed the Brits play them mostly on film?), and he is a real reason to do the play here in New York.

... Read More →