Chit Chat - Growing pains (Daniel Radcliffe in Equus)

Published Monday 26 February 2007 at 17:20 by Tabard

You may not have noticed but Daniel Radcliffe - better known as the boy wizard Harry Potter - is currently making his stage debut in Equus.

And in case you have been living on Mars, or maybe the far reaches of the Shetland Isles, he is going to be shedding his clothes in the name of art.

The unfortunate fact, though, is that you are probably only too aware of this thanks to the mountains of press coverage (oh, the trees which have died in the name of Harry Potter’s nudity) which his stage debut has garnered, with most of it focussing on whipping punters into a frenzy at the prospect of seeing the young lad’s manhood. Slightly poor taste, if you ask Tabard.

A new low was reached the other week however by a number of articles reporting that, shock horror, Radcliffe was showing early signs of facial hair. Hardly surprising one would think, as it happens to most males of his age, but apparently newsworthy.

If that weren’t enough it seems that despite the fact that, as The Stage went to press, the show still hadn’t been officially reviewed by any of the press, verdicts had already been passed in certain papers’ news pages.

“He has received rave reviews for playing a troubled young man who mutilates horses,” reported The Metro on February 23, meanwhile The Daily Mail, breaking the shocking news of Radcliffe’s beard, said: ” Harry Potter star Daniel Radcliffe is quickly maturing not just as an actor but also as a man. Here he is pictured leaving the Gielgud Theatre in London last night, sporting the first signs of a beard. The 17-year-old, who has won rave reviews for his performance in Equus, took time out to sign autographs for his fans and to be photographed with them outside the theatre on Shaftesbury Avenue.”

This was, in fact a day before The Metro, on February 22. It’s strange to note then that the play didn’t actually open to the critics until February 27. So, surely it couldn’t have actually received any reviews at all - good or bad - at least not in the official sense.

Actually, bearing those dates in mind, it might be worth returning to The Metro article, which reports, on February 23 mind you, that it is printing a picture from the final rehearsal “last night”, before it opens “today”, having received rave reviews. Surely the author must have wondered how something still in rehearsals had managed to be reviewed so well. Or maybe not.

One thing to look out for though, when the show is reviewed. I wonder if any of the critics will be brave (or perhaps foolhardy) enough to refer to Radcliffe’s performance as “theatrical viagra”, in the manner of Charles Spencer writing of Nicole Kidman in the Blue Room.