elmore, the production was done in Spring 73 at the University of Kentucky. It was my swan song there before I went out to the Globe of the Great Southwest that summer to do Shakespeare. The director was very strange and uncommunicative, so I basically had to fend for myself...which was fine. I usually like to be left alone as an actor until I feel I'm floundering, then I cry "help!". But this guy didn't give you any guidance at all. One of those: "Well, what do you think?" So I did the thinking and just let him move bodies around on stage." It seemed to work out okay:
" As for performances, we note two strong characters, a couple more who could be strong with a little more work, and a few cameos - set against a large and competent cast.
" Chuck Pogue as the Herald is far the more superior, though only slightly more than Hugh Duncan as Sade..."
- The Lexington Leader-
(but how can one be far the more superior, though only slightly more...either you're far the more or slightly more...which is it?)
"Chuck Pogue also must be mentioned for his fine portrayal of the rather sinister Herald who serves rather as a master of ceremonies"
--The Lexington Herald--
I "rather" find that a"rather" fine review. I really "rather" do. How many time is she going to use the word "rather" in one sentence? You can see these folks weren't exactly Walter Kerr.
And the school paper the Kentucky Kernel:
"It appeared to me the play revolved around "The Herald", the jester with the skull on a stick who seemed to be running the thing. With his poetic speeches, later used by Sade, he guided the audience through the rough waters of the play. Chuck Pogue is good in this role."
My jock brother, usually not known for his theatrical insights, had decided that I was actually deSade and deSade was merely another inmate I had chosen to run play me. An interesting interpretation, I thought.
