William Mower Akhurst was born in London in 1822.  By the time he emigrated to Australia in his mid-twenties, he had already staged two plays at Cremorne Gardens (a London music hall in operation 1845-77).  In Australia, he worked for both The Herald and Argus newspapers as a journalist and as their music and drama critic, but he is best remembered for his work as a playwright.
 
Theatre was a popular form of entertainment in the Austrailian colonies. In The Pattern of Australian Culture, A. L. McLeod writes that "[t]he outstanding feature of Australian theatre in the 1860's was the apparently insatiable appetite for Shakespeare . . . But coeval with this was its antithesis – crude melodrama and vaudeville.  Lavishly staged but devoid of art" (322).  These lavish performances were well attended by the predominantly male population, and audience participation was expected. The Argus review of Akhurst's 1855 play about their gold rush reported "pungent allusions to passing events, the greater part of which were heartily taken up by the audience" (quoted in Serle 60). Another feature of these presentations is suggested in The Cambridge Encyclopedia of Australia:

the most popular way of avoiding censorship restrictions – and even baiting the censor – was with pantomime and burlesque, some adapting English pantomimes with local reference. ... The best-known authors of this genre were the British playwright and critic William Mower Akhurst … and Garnet Walch.  (Bambrick 317)

Add to that historian Geoffrey Serle's comment that "[t]he theatre in the early fifties was little more than a branch...

Read More

Read Less

William Mower Akhurst was born in London in 1822.  By the time he emigrated to Australia in his mid-twenties, he had already staged two plays at Cremorne Gardens (a London music hall in operation 1845-77).  In Australia, he worked for both The Herald and Argus newspapers as a journalist and as their music and drama critic, but he is best remembered for his work as a playwright.
 
Theatre was a popular form of entertainment in the Austrailian colonies. In The Pattern of Australian Culture, A. L. McLeod writes that "[t]he outstanding feature of Australian theatre in the 1860's was the apparently insatiable appetite for Shakespeare . . . But coeval with this was its antithesis – crude melodrama and vaudeville.  Lavishly staged but devoid of art" (322).  These lavish performances were well attended by the predominantly male population, and audience participation was expected. The Argus review of Akhurst's 1855 play about their gold rush reported "pungent allusions to passing events, the greater part of which were heartily taken up by the audience" (quoted in Serle 60). Another feature of these presentations is suggested in The Cambridge Encyclopedia of Australia:

the most popular way of avoiding censorship restrictions – and even baiting the censor – was with pantomime and burlesque, some adapting English pantomimes with local reference. ... The best-known authors of this genre were the British playwright and critic William Mower Akhurst … and Garnet Walch.  (Bambrick 317)

Add to that historian Geoffrey Serle's comment that "[t]he theatre in the early fifties was little more than a branch of the liquor industry" (362), and one gets the idea that these productions must have been raucous events!
 
Akhurst was central to the growth of the theater during the tumultuous years leading up to Australian independence.  The Oxford Companion to Australian Literature says "[d]uring the 1860s he was the life-force of Melbourne’s pantomime productions" (Wilde 20).  And, fortunately for us,

[t]he problem that besets so much delving into early Australian drama – that the texts have long since vanished – does not apply here, since the pantomime was usually printed in full as part of the theatre programme, with italics emphasizing the excruciating puns in which such pieces abounded, so that if one didn't see the joke at once, it could be worked out later at home. (Williams 64)

 
Two of Akhurst's plays deal with the Arthurian legend, and they are very similar. King Arthur, or, Launcelot the Loose, Gin-ever the Square, and the Knights of the Round Table, and other Furniture (performed in Australia in 1868) and Arthur the King, or, The Knights of the Round Table and Other Funny-ture (performed in England in 1871) have the same plot and characters, and even the same dialogue. Both mention Lord Tennyson's Idylls and Gustave Doré's Arthurian images. The same " excruciating puns" (Elaine on the barge is "a gal on a bier") appear in both. The essential difference is that the Australian version is heavily laden with references to local politicians and other characters. A political system in its infancy, a gold rush, and Akhurst's connection to the two major newspapers were all grist for the mill. An extreme example is given in this reference to Edward Langton, who had been appointed Treasurer of the newly formed government:
 
         Sir K.     That trash! Some who such trash have sold
                      Have risen to the trasherer, I'm told.
         Arthur.  That's la'n'g't on thick
 
Akhurst returned to London in 1871, where "he produced another sixteen pieces, including nine pantomimes and four dramas" (Wilde 20).  He was returning Australia in 1878, but died at sea.
 
Dr. Clay Djubal, founding contributor to the wonderful website The Australian Variety Theatre Archive, has written much about Austrailian theatre.  He has also written a wonderful biography of Akhurst:  http://ozvta.files.wordpress.com/2011/02/akhurst-wm-23122012.pdf.  I appreciate his help with my research. Biography written by: Rosemary Paprocki
Read Less

Text(s)