DESIGN FOR LIVING
So ordinarily I wouldn’t accept an assignment to review a Coward play (though I do find him hysterically funny). But Design for Living, his scandalous 1933 hit about a bohemian trio moving through the art worlds of Paris, London, and New York, is something of an exception. His running motifs–the playful disregard for accepted sexual mores, the sexual independence of the “modern woman,” the titillating suggestion of a bisexual menage a trois, and the thinly veiled suggestion of homosexuality–are all issues that today send the NEA into a cold sweat. A drop-dead production of Design for Living could really ruffle some undies at the Halsted Theatre Centre. And those undies could use ruffling.
Best of Chicago voting is live now. Vote for your favorites »
At least this production doesn’t take itself too seriously–it doesn’t purport to be anything more than an evening’s entertainment. As Otto says, “We’re not doing any harm to anyone else. . . . The only people we could possibly mess up are ourselves and that’s our lookout.” But by missing Coward’s style Touchstone not only prevents the play’s sexual underpinnings from having any effect, it misses the humor as well. And a nearly three-hour production of Design for Living without scandal or humor can be a bit of a challenge to sit through.
