There was something almost allegorical in the manner in which candles were used to convey the complex secrets, searing shame and inner corruption of aristocratic society in Les Liaisons Dangereuses at the Donmar Warehouse. Christopher Hampton’s excellent adaptation of Pierre Ambroise François Choderlos de Laclos’ 1782 novel of the same name is well known, not least due to the 1988 film Dangerous Liaisons, starring Glenn Close and John Malkovich. But the stage play is the better summation of de Laclos’ epistolary novel, conveying through its dialogue some of the sense of the letters that pass between its two main characters: Vicomte de Valmont and the Marquise de Merteuil. Sadly, this 30-year anniversary revival is a somewhat uneven production that failed to do justice to Hampton’s script and to a novel that is often considered to be one of the most scandalous and controversial of the eighteenth century.
Les Liaisons Dangereuses is about seduction and revenge, and its complex moral ambiguities made it notorious when it was first published in Paris in 1782. De Laclos, a career soldier, wrote only one piece of fiction, but it caused a sensation and continues to do so. Its main characters, Valmont and Merteuil, intelligent, beautiful and bored, form an unholy alliance that turns the seduction and corruption of innocence into a game of skill. Such cynical behaviour and the trail of devastation it leaves in its wake eventually lead to a battle in which there can be no victors and both guilty and innocent suffer despair and destruction.
At the Donmar Warehouse, an intimate 251-seat theatre, both set and lighting suggest a flaking façade of corruption. An elegant eighteenth-century townhouse interior had damaged plaster and spotted walls, peeling wallpaper giving way to exposed beams, bare brick and broken struts. A set lit almost entirely by real candlelight but for a few spotlights gave a gentle period air but also a hushed semi-darkness in which evil was done entirely for the amusement value it brought to a pair of jaded aristocrats. Candles were also used to demarcate spaces, bring drama to moments of humiliating intimacy and finally, as the female cast members extinguished chandeliers of candles hurriedly with their fingers, to simulate the ending of a peculiar relationship and the metaphorical and literal lights going out to usher in the darkness.
In Les Liaisons Dangereuses much depends on the casting and although the cast was in the main strong, the uneven nature of the performances made this a good, not a great production. Janet McTeer was a stellar Marquise de Merteuil, skipping lightly from gay vitality to the basest villainy but all with a likeable air which hammered home de Laclos’ original notion that the female of the species is more deadly than the male. The odd moment of genuine emotional fear and regret which occasionally showed only added to the pathos of her performance. In a similar vein, Elaine Cassidy was heartbreakingly affecting as the virtuous Madame de Tourvel, with her tortured journey from virtuous wife to pathetic death portrayed in painstaking detail. Her emotional range, from the highest happiness to the deepest despair, was formidable to behold.
By contrast however, Dominic West in the role of Vicomte de Valmont was underwhelming. Charming, likeable and one might even say camp, he pursued his amours lightly and never completely convincingly. His moment of triumph with the innocent Cécile Volanges (a delightfully fresh Morfydd Clark) and Madame de Tourvel failed to make us feel his triumph and his glee at trampling down conventions and corrupting virtuous women. There was decent chemistry between West and McTeer but the seamier, more deadly side of Valmont remained unexplored with no real air of menace emanating from him. Only when Valmont realised his genuine love for Madame de Tourvel, the start of a process of events which leads to both his and her death, did West really seem to find his way in the part. I saw this production on New Year’s Day and after several obvious manglings of his dialogue, I did begin to wonder if West had spent rather too long on the tiles during his New Year celebrations! Like Macbeth and Lady Macbeth, the characters of Merteuil and Valmont must be driven by both a physical lust for each other and an intellectual lust and deliberate desire to hurt those considered beneath them or on whom they wish to revenge themselves. This, although hinted at, was never fully realised here.
The seeming weakness in the male cast was also apparent in the character of Le Chevalier Danceny, played here by Edward Holcroft. Danceny should be shy but purposeful, quiet but gentlemanly, nervous but possessed of the correct moral compass and a good knowledge of it. His descent into corruption when fooled by Valmont, seduced by Merteuil and finally forced into exile is a character study of good gone bad and his mental torment is certainly worse than the physical seduction suffered by Cécile Volange. Here, his stuttering nervousness merely seemed weak and his betrayal of his values for lust arrogant. Again, only in the final stages of the play, during the climatic duel, did Holcroft appear to discover his true emotional range.
Madam de Volanges was played by a workmanlike Adjoa Andoh and Madame de Rosemonde by an underused Una Stubbs. The small ensemble provided solid support. There were strong performances from Theo Barklem-Biggs as Azolan (Valmont’s valet) and Jennifer Saayeng as the courtesan Émilie, showing that much life can be brought to small roles. However, Jennifer Saayeng’s frequent slips into a strong London accent lent more than a touch of Stratford-atte-Bow to some of Émilie’s lines.
The play was set fully in the period, so I will draw attention to small period touches that were simply not period, such as the use of plastic dust-sheets rather than drapes. This added a jarring touch for which there was no justification beyond intellectual pontification for chattering-class Islingtonions, for whom the Donmar is a much-loved second home. Other howlers included modern envelopes, an inkwell with no ink, architecturally incorrect doorframes (lacking the symmetrical opposite door/false door so beloved of Georgian architecture), elastic on a hat rather than a hatpin, elastic braces worn by the semi-dressed Danceny, oddly-tied cravats and even odder bowing, which owed more to an arthritic German parson than an elegant French flourish. In contrast, the costumes were excellent, with clever use of colour changes, in particular for Madame de Tourvel who moved from girlish pink to saintly ivory. Furthermore the hair of both men and women was absolutely excellent. The ladies’ hair was dressed in period style but entirely naturally, with no powder and none of the towering styles of mid-century, which was perhaps appropriate for the two settings of private Parisian apartments and relaxed country house, far from the hustle and bustle of public engagements. The men’s hair was also natural, without large powdered wigs, but natural hair arranged into beautiful confections of curls, which should have looked girlish, but actually looked entirely masculine. A strong bravo to the wig and hair team!
All in all, Artistic Director Josie Rourke produced a good performance of the play, which I am sure would be enjoyed by BSECS members. Sadly though, the sparkle of stardust which sends a tingle down every audience member’s spine was absent here. It was not so much Les Liaisons Dangereuses as Les Liaisons Malheureuses, I fear.
Les Liaisons Dangereuses is at the Donmar Warehouse until February 13th 2016. The run is sold-out but Barclays Front Row tickets (£10 each) are available every Monday. The production will also be shown live in cinemas from the 28th of January 2016.