Plague Over England

Synopsis

In Autumn 1953, Sir John Gielgud, then at the height of his fame as an actor, was arrested in a Chelsea public lavatory. He pleaded guilty the following morning to the charge of persistently importuning men for immoral purposes. Poised to appear in the West End in a play he was directing and recently knighted, his conviction caused a national sensation - breaking the great taboo of public discussion of homosexuality. More than just a dramatisation of a scandalous event in one actor's life, this controversial new play shows how Gielgud's arrest played a small but distinct part in the battle to make homosexuality legal. It captures the spirit of Britain in the early 1950s when judges, politicians and the national press were describing homosexuality as a cancer, an epidemic and a threat to national life. It casts light on the political and social anxieties of the period and the witch-hunting of men who had sex with men. Framed by scenes of contemporary celebration at a civil partnership ceremony and ranging from close encounters in Hyde Park to a Gentlemen’s gay club in Piccadilly, from Scotland Yard where pretty policeman were taught how to seduce men in lavatories to the Home Secretary’s office in Whitehall, Plague over England offers an extraordinary insight into the dramatic changes in social attitudes to gay life in the last fifty years.

Latest User Review

Gareth James - 10 April 2009:

This first play by the Evening Standard’s vitriolic theatre critic is deeply old-fashioned, riddled with caricatures, clichés and stale jokes. Though the event at its core - John Gielgud’s arrest in a gent’s toilet - may not have been, the historical territory and the issues have been well covered before. This play doesn’t add or illuminate anything and cramming 28 scenes into two hours results in a complete lack of depth. I found Michael Feast’s Gielgud unbelievably camp, but I shall bow to his better judgement as he worked with him. The rest of the cast do the best they can with the material they’re provided with and the director and designer have served the play well. Why have Bill Kenright and this excellent cast chosen to get involved with it? I can only assume Celia Imrie’s post-show Q&A joke ‘in the hope that Nicholas De Jongh doesn’t pan her in the future’ is actually true! Despite most of his fellow critics rather shameful kid glove treatment, it clearly hasn’t found an audience - without the Whatsonstage.com crowd last night, it would have been very empty indeed and as the young actor charmingly said at the end of the Q&A ‘it was great to see so many people here tonight’. It seems all those dreadful bloggers might have more of a say than you think, Mr De Jongh. I've got used to the Standard censoring my comments, but I was disappointed to have my post-show question censored by WOS and even more disappointed that commenting on this led to the removal of this review first time round - shame on you!...

Read more and add your own review

Related Whatsonstage.com Articles

Review Round-up: Were Critics Affected by Plague? More»