A Touch of Danger is Francis Durbridge’s 6th play, and it was first performed on 21st of July 1987 at the Theatre Royal, Windsor. The Samuel French copy of the play, which is what I read, was published in 1989. The setting is limited to the living room of the protagonist’s London apartment and the action takes place over three days, 8 scenes across two acts. The setting might be domestically restricted, but looking at the synopsis and the cast list, the variety of characters suggested that the plot had a more global scope.
Synopsis
‘Max Telligan, a popular novelist, has returned to his London apartment from a business trip to Munich to find his evening newspaper containing a report of his violent death. He subsequently is greeted by a parade of mysterious visitors who seek a pocket sized calculator, threaten him with a poison tipped walking stick and display photographs of his wife in flagrante delicto. Max has, it seems, unwittingly become embroiled in the activities of an international terrorist group!’
Overall Thoughts
The play begins with Harriet, who is Max Telligan’s soon-to-be ex-wife and, his secretary Liz Ferber. Close upon the heels of Harriet arriving at Max’s apartment, they both hear the shocking announcement that Max has been killed whilst travelling in Europe. This information is delivered via the newspaper and a phone call. Yet this shock is followed by an even bigger one … Max is alive, which he proves by walking through his own front door. Given this is the ending of scene 1 I do not think it is intended as the key or main surprise, in the way that it might be if it occurred at the conclusion of a play. Instead, this plot element is the start of series of peculiar circumstances that Max faces. Moreover, it is very in keeping with Durbridge’s style to end each section with a cliff hanger. It is certainly something I have noticed in his TV series.
The second scene sees Max and Liz talking about his latest manuscript. Everything is surprisingly calm given the bombshell the first scene closed with. Their conversation suggests nothing dramatic has happened and instead this second scene contrasts with the first with its gentle almost situational comedy. This is exemplified when Liz tells Max that an upstairs neighbour needs them to take in a parcel for them:
Max: You know, this is getting out of hand, Liz! If it isn’t parcels, it’s flowers!
Liz: Yes, but she’s always terribly grateful, Max. And she did give you some after-shave, remember.
Max: You don’t have to remind me! I came out in a rash!
In a Durbridge story the protagonist is never sure who they can trust, whether it is a person close to them, or someone who is in authority, or at least says they are. This experience begins building up for Max from scene 2 and the viewer (or in my case reader), especially one who knows something of Durbridge’s work, is watching with eagle eyes to discern any clue as to which characters are the false ones. The writer is one I feel is very adept at creating mistrust.
The reason why Max was mistakenly thought dead seems to be cleared up quite quickly, yet there is a great deal of mystery surrounding the real victim, Terry Wilde. Why did he give Max a clock for his daughter, after all? Yes, there is an obvious answer, and Durbridge knows you know that, so all I can say is try again!
In the way that Max’s “return from the dead” is not overly played for shock, I think there are other surprising elements/mysterious plot aspects which are also underplayed. There are events which you think should generate quite a bit of mystery, but Durbridge doesn’t seem to let them escalate. I found this interesting, and I wonder if one of the reasons for this is that for a short play (59-page script) it has to pack in quite a complicated and intricate plot. Consequently, to make sure the audience do not get lost or confused, certain chunks of information do need to be relayed more succinctly.
Durbridge is creative when it comes to trapping his characters by a set or chain of circumstances, some of these are self-inflicted, but others are beyond the control of the protagonist. A lot of action is packed into this narrative, and the body count is ample. I think because this is a play of the 1980s, violence is more frequent and less classical. By classical I mean an attack which is very clean or neat, whereas in A Touch of Danger one character, without any warning signs, gets her face slashed. This is off stage, but it still feels a little more graphic. In addition, I would also say there is more occasional swearing and crude innuendo.
The weakest part of the play for me was the ending as the resolution felt rushed and the unmasking of the culprit was a little disappointing as the audience are not privy to the evidence of their guilt. Moreover, there is one character which I think we are supposed to view with suspicion, but I didn’t feel Durbridge was convincing in that regard. However, there is one snatch of dialogue that I found amusing:
Digby: […] Mr Telligan, forgive my mentioning this, but – if by any chance we bump into each other again […] please don’t be offended if I fail to recognise you.
Max: I shan’t be offended. The chances are I shan’t recognise you, Mr Digby. I once cut my daughter dead in a bus queue.
Digby: I shall look forward to receiving the same treatment.
Rating: 4/5
This is the second of five vintage mystery plays, which I received last summer that I have reviewed. The other play I reviewed was Tell Tale – A Play by Philip Weathers. To see the titles of the remaining three, here is a link to a summary post of the collection.