Tag Archives: pantomime

Oh yes it is

Pantomime is one of those British Christmas institutions as traditional as mince pies and the Doctor Who special (incidentally, did you see it yesterday? So good). It’s one of those things that’s a little bit difficult to explain to someone unfamiliar with the concept – it’s a play usually based on a fairy tale, but there are jokes and songs and you usually have a famous man dressed as a woman or a famous woman dressed as a man and at some point everyone is contractually obliged to shout “Oh no it isn’t!” followed by “Oh yes it is!” The whole thing should be very camp and self-aware and strive to avoid major innovation. Basically, it’s pretty much the opposite of conventional theatre. As I sit here with my Boxing Day breakfast (two slices of stollen, a Stilton sandwich, coffee festived-up with brandy butter), it might be nice to look into the history of this weird art.

And no, he wasn't short of work when he did this.

Although it’s come to be known as a peculiarly British phenomenon, the origins of pantomime go back to the ancient Greeks, who regarded it as something to keep the plebs happy. Lots of singing, dancing and vulgar humour, but Serious Dramatists considered it utterly beneath their contempt.

Similar forms of entertainment survived into Britain in the eighteenth century, which is when the story of modern pantomime really begins. To understand this early-modern panto, you have to understand a bit about theatre of that era.

You’d have more than one show on the bill. There would be a formal play (or ballet, or opera), what you or I would normally think of when we go to the theatre. But there would also be something more populist beforehand as a warm-up act, something with lots of jokes and songs to grab the audience’s attention and get them on the performers’ side. Audiences in those days would openly and loudly talk during the show, the wealthy would parade around, orange peel would be thrown, people would come and go as they pleased and it was not unknown for the performers to be heckled so much that they would change the bill right there and then. The opener was, yes, a pantomime.

Pantomimes were deliberately formulaic. They had to be instantly understandable to everyone. No matter what the story, they featured a stock set of characters and devices and – this was significant – no dialogue. Licensing laws were strict. Pantomime performers were not regarded as true actors and so, by that rather snobbish logic, could not be licensed to perform spoken drama. There were various cheats – you couldn’t speak, but you could sing, you could write on a big board, you could rhyme. And nobody paid much attention to a couple of words here and there. But really, it was down to instantly recognisable conventions and physical performers to carry the thing.

Mr Joseph Grimaldi

The inventor of the modern pantomime is often regarded as the legendary clown, Joseph Grimaldi, seen right. He was undoubtedly the first modern clown, and really deserves an entry in his own right. His father (of the same name) was also a brilliant clown, part-time dentist and utter bastard. Young Joey was raised by a father who was physically and emotionally abusive to the point of psychosis (for instance, Grimaldi pere once faked his own death just to see if his sons really loved him). Grimaldi Junior was plagued by depression and insecurity throughout his life – he would often joke that “I make you laugh at night, but I am grim-all-day.” He invented modern clown makeup, and it’s psychologically interesting that a man so uncomfortable with himself should transform himself so completely for the stage. In comedy, he found a means of feeding his insatiable need for affection, and so it’s no surprise that he became a popular and beloved performer.

His first great pantomime triumph was Mother Goose in 1806. To call him the “inventor” of modern pantomime is to unfairly deprive everyone else of well-deserved credit. It was actually created as a last-minute thing. Thomas Dibden was the usual author of Christmas pantomimes for Covent Garden Theatre, but that year, nobody had thought to approach him. It was only a few short weeks before curtain-up that the theatre’s management asked him, “So, how’s this year’s panto coming along?” Panicked, Dibden wrote a low-tech panto requiring no elaborate special effects or routines, tailored for a short rehearsal period.

The resulting show was far better than anyone could have hoped – helped by a clever script and Grimaldi’s naturalistic physical comedy. It was wildly popular, running right until the following Christmas. And so it became the standard model for the pantomimes that followed.

Quite apart from the actual merits of the show, pantomime became a far less restricted form of performance than conventional theatre. Being regarded as low art, the censors didn’t pay much attention. Satire and sexual innuendo were standard, the latter generally coming from the panto dame. The dame, being a man in drag, could get away with lewdness that an actual woman couldn’t. Similarly, the convention of having the principal boy played by a woman was largely so that you could legitimately have a woman showing her legs off.

Other traditions were added and removed over the years. The characters became less rigidly “stock” as the ban on spoken pantomime was abandoned, though the principal boy and the dame remained. The panto horse, two actors in a silly animal costume, became another standard element. The Theatre Royal, Drury Lane, pioneered the use of celebrities as a draw in the late 19th century.

These days, it’s regarded as something for the kids – innuendo is still an element, of course, but it goes straight over the children’s heads. If it doesn’t, well, they’re already corrupted anyway.

It’s also regarded as a means for keeping B-list celebs in the limelight, though lately a lot of really quite legit celebrities have been trying their hand, partly I suspect because it’s fun. The picture above is from the Wimbledon pantomime last year, which boasted Pamela Anderson, Paul O’Grady, Ruby Wax and BRIAN BLESSED! in its cast. Sir Ian McKellen enjoys a good panto, as seen up top there, and BRIAN BLESSED! and Christopher Biggins are well-known for hamming it up on an annual basis.

The big ones in London these days are Wimbledon and Hackney. Wimbledon tends to do the big star-studded shows, while Hackney aims for something resolutely traditional but critically acclaimed. However, most reasonably-sized theatres outside the West End will put a show on, and they do tend to do pretty well. The glory days of pantomime are certainly not… wait for it… behind us!

No? Oh, please yourselves. Merry Christmas, chums.

Leave a Comment

Filed under 18th century, 19th century, 20th Century, Arts, Current events, Fashion and trends, Hackney, History, London, Music, Notable Londoners, Politics, Regency, Sports and Recreation, Suburbia, Theatre, West End

Coincidence? Oh no it isn’t!

Yesterday was started with the noblest intentions – buy new shoes, go to Kensington and explore the vintage shops there. Unfortunately I rather stymied this by getting up late. But damned if I’m going to waste my Saturday entirely, so I bought my lovely new shoes and headed up to Waterloo.

See, I’m writing a short fantasy story set in a city with heavy elements of 19th century London and Paris, so I thought maybe exploring the Borough would be a good way to get some atmosphere. I took a stroll around, exploring the old, unredeveloped parts of Southwark and the various occult centres (not that I believe in that sort of thing, mark you). I strolled past the Old Vic and was surprised to see someone I was at school with in the cast of Six Degrees of Separation. The chap in question is Ilan Goodman, and if I’m honest we exchanged maybe three sentences during the time we were both at the school, so it’s not like I was about to burst in and cry out “Ilan, old chap!”

The Union TheatreThen, in a backstreet, I came across the Union Theatre. This is a strange venue, one of those makeshift little theatres you get in London outside of the West End. You know, used to be something else, the auditorium is painted black and the seats aren’t attached to the floor. I’d been here once before, when a work colleague was in Annie, Get Your Gun! a little while back.

I noted that the posters outside were advertising a show called Oh No It Isn’t!, an adult panto featuring a friend of mine, whom I shall call the Mottster. If I’m honest, I’m not a huge fan of anything that advertises itself as being “not for kids,” as it tends to involve lots of cheap sex jokes in that terribly British fashion. There’s only so many characters with innuendo names like ”Droopy Bumfondler,” “Cocky Arsefucker” or “Cunty Childrapist” I can take before my brain self-lobotomises. But the Mottster is a fine actress, and so I decided I would take my chances.

This is going to make me sound an awful person, but the trouble with knowing a lot of people involved in the theatre is that there are only so many times you can go to a play purely because someone you know is in it. In fact, I now have an official policy which states “No Midsummer Night’s Dream” due to the ridiculous number of times I have seen this show on the basis that someone I know has a minor role in it. I was once in a production of this myself, so I know whereof I speak. I played Bottom, thus meaning that should I ever get back into theatre, I can ask casting directors if they’d like to see my Bottom. There’s one of those cheap jokes I was complaining about.

I digress from my initial digression. I find it very hard to attend every show that someone I know is in, so I tend to restrict it to close friends, major roles or things that a large group of people I know are already attending. If any of you whose shows I have not seen are reading this with a mounting sense of outrage, I would ask you in return to name the last play I was in. Here’s a clue: it’s not one you saw.

Anyway, before I make myself look like an even worse person, I did drop into the box office and purchased a ticket. And Sweet Jesus but they need to do something about those toilets. I’m not sure what that crusty stuff is along the top of the urinal, but it upsets me at a primeval level. The bar was nice, though. As is appropriate to small theatres, it was painted red. The selection of music could not be faulted, and the paintings around the place made for a far more entertaining distraction than the dramaramas and hipsters.

Having no doubt alienated half the theatre scene of London as well as several friends, I should say that I actually quite enjoyed the show. The first half, I thought, spent far too much time trying to cram as many dirty jokes as possible, actually to the point where they cancelled each other out. For instance, if you have a character named “Felchmore,” that’s the joke. He has a name that, if it is appropriate to his character, implies that he greatly enjoys the act of slurping semen from the anus (though whether he is the giver or receiver of this act is outside the scope of his name). If you then have a character saying, “I wish he’d felch less!” and clutching at his buttocks, that’s hammering the joke into the ground.

In the second half, however, the plot really got going and I enjoyed the piece a lot more as it came together. In fact, many of the major plot elements were only established in the second half. I rather got the feeling that by trimming some of the unnecessary comedy routines and subplots that went nowhere from the first half and establishing plot elements and characters from the second half in their place, the piece would have been a lot more balanced. I also think the major theme of the plot, i.e. the modern phenomenon of instant, disposable celebrities spawned by reality TV, could have been more effectively explored – there were some funny jokes and some nice satirical points raised, but dammit I want more.

Script concerns aside, the cast were superb, with not a dud element among them. It’s quite hard to make broad caricatures (as is an essential part of the panto genre) appealing, but nonetheless this was something universally achieved. The panto dames in particular were superbly funny. The design and choreography, too, were hard to fault. All in all, an excellent show aside from the fact that it could have done with fewer jokes. That’s a weird thing to say about a comedy, but it’s true.

Having said that, the other reviews seem to have been pretty good, and the audience were all laughing uproariously throughout, so maybe I’m just boring.

Leave a Comment

Filed under Arts, Buildings and architecture, Current events, Geography, Literature, London, Psychogeography, Rambling on and on, Theatre, Waterloo and Southwark