Produced by Robert Maugham at the Yvonne Arnaud Theatre, Guilford. September-October, 1966
Character: Hugo Barrett
The story is set in Chelsea, London. Present day.
The Story
Tony Williams (Barry Justice), a prosperous resident of London, claims to be involved in a project aimed at constructing cities in Brazil. He moves into his newly acquired townhouse in Chelsea and employs Hugo Barrett (Peter Wyngarde) as his manservant. Although Tony possesses wealth, he lacks resolve, discipline, and a true understanding of his own life, a fact that Barrett perceives within moments of their introduction.
Barrett seems to adapt effortlessly to his new role, and a subtle bond forms between him and Tony, while they maintain their respective social positions. However, the dynamics begin to change when Tony’s girlfriend, Sally Grant (Jennifer Daniel), meets Barrett, who she dislikes immediately..She grows suspicious of him and urges her fiancé to terminate Barrett’s employment, but he declines. This causes tension between the couple, and while they argue and their relationship begins to fall apart, Barrett is always in the background.I
In the meantime, Barrett organizes the household with a level of efficiency that flatters Tony, simultaneously fostering his dependence on Barrett.
Barrett presents Vera to the household as his sister, persuading Tony that a maid is necessary to help with housework. Tony accepts this explanation that they are siblings without question. Vera, being young and alluring, quickly initiates a calculated seduction of Tony. When the couple return from a foreign holiday unexpectedly and find Barret and Vera in bed together, Tony furiously dismisses the pair of them – but not before Vera makes known that she has been sleeping with Tony behind Sally’s back. Sally reacts by breaking of her engagement to Tony and leaves.
By this stage, Tony has grown dependent on both Barrett and Vera. He starts to drink excessively, a habit worsened by Sally’s refusal to take his calls. One day, Tony runs into Barrett at a pub, where Barrett weaves a story about Vera having deceived them both. He implores Tony to reinstate him as his manservant, and Tony agrees.
Once back in his old position, Barrett starts to drink openly and to introduces unsavory characters into the home. He speaks to Tony with a casual disrespect, occasionally showing little regard for politeness. Tony,, succumbing to alcohol and lethargy, endures every humiliation.
Slowly, the two characters begin to reverse their roles, with Barrett assuming greater control while Tony regresses into a state of infantilism. Barrett also subtly brings Vera back into the household. Sally arrives, attempting to persuade Tony to return to her. She discovers him completely reliant on Barrett, who provides him with alcohol and prostitutes. As she navigates through the grim scene, she unexpectedly kisses Barrett, who responds to her advances with force.
As his behavior becomes increasingly violent, Sally fights to escape his grasp, while Tony, emerging from his drunken haze, tries to step in. Unfortunately, he stumbles and falls to the floor, prompting laughter from Mabel (Edina Ronay), one of the prostitutes. In a fit of rage, Tony lashes out, leading Barrett to command everyone to leave. Before exiting, Sally strikes Barrett with the jeweled collar of her coat. Barrett, taken aback, quickly regains his composure and drapes her coat over her shoulder as she departs. He then ascends the stairs where Vera awaits him, passing by Tony, who is slumped on the floor, clutching a glass of whiskey.
After Thoughts
Barrett is a shrewd and sophisticated servant who gradually takes control of the household and its residents. He orchestrates the seduction of Vera and capitalizes on Tony’s vulnerabilities to disrupt the traditional master-servant relationship. As the balance of power changes, he remains eerily composed and turns the house into a venue for psychological manipulation.
Vera is Barrett’s fiancée, who becomes embroiled in the evolving power dynamics of the household. Although she appears to be an innocent bystander, she employs seduction to maneuver and influence the relationships surrounding her. Her involvement complicates allegiances and intensifies the moral complexity at the core of the narrative.
Susan is Tony’s girlfriend who perceives impending danger and confronts Barrett’s increasing dominance. She evaluates Tony’s connections and moral character, ultimately finding herself marginalized as the struggle for power escalates. Her exit signifies the disintegration of Tony’s previous alliances and the victory of manipulation over genuine affection.
The Servant delves into the true nature of control within a domestic environment. Barrett’s presence disrupts Tony’s sense of authority and gradually alters the power dynamics. Tony’s reliance intensifies as alcohol and submissiveness weaken his hold on independence. The interaction of control, skill, and societal roles fuels the primary conflict.
Barrett weaves a complex web of deceit that obscures the distinctions between servant, lover, and confidant. By creating false personas and exploiting Tony’s vulnerabilities, he transforms the household dynamics. Vera’s allure further complicates the situation, turning love into a means of exerting power. The domestic narrative evolves into a performance aimed at undermining stability.
As allegiances splinter, Susan’s skepticism and Tony’s desire for connection clash with Barrett’s dominance. The romance and camaraderie that once grounded the household disintegrate into manipulation and degradation. The film reaches a climax where vulnerability is weaponized, and the social structure unravels.
Barrett persuades Tony to employ a maid, allowing him to introduce Vera, his fiancée, into the home. His explicit intention is to have Vera seduce Tony as part of his strategy to gain leverage and control over his employer. By ensnaring Tony in a sexual liaison with Vera, Barrett establishes a secret that he can later exploit against him.
Some Background
Following the triumph of the 1963 film adaptation of ‘The Servant’, author Robin Maugham chose to adapt the narrative into a stage play. This production at the Yvonne Arnaud Theatre was regarded as a preliminary performance before its transfer to the Garrick Theatre West End.
At that time, director Ronald Hayman had limited experience in theatre, and, as was often the case with Peter, he found himself directing the director!
Hayman urged Peter to adopt an East London accent for his portrayal of Barrett, a task that proved challenging for him. He argued that if Peter were to pursue this endeavor, it would likely resemble Dick Van Dyke’s portrayal of Bert the chimney sweep in ‘Mary Poppins’, ultimately distracting the audience. This led to a clash between the director and the actor.
In the end, the cast became disillusioned by with Hayman and, inevitably the play inevitably didn’t move to the West End.
Above: From the Surrey Mirror and County Post – 2nd September, 1966
Broadcast: British Home Service – 25th February, 1959 at 20.00
Repeated: Under the title ‘National Theatre of the Air’ by the BBC Home Service on 20th August, 1961 at 20.30, and as ‘The Sunday Play’ by The BBC Home Service on 3rd April, 1966 at 14.30
Character: Master Wendoll
At the time of broadcast, the BBC had been presenting a series of revived plays by Mr. Raymond Raikes (British theatre producer, director and broadcaster) who appears determined to enlighten theatre-goers about what they have been missing.
‘A Woman Killed with Kindness’ is a domestic tragedy that illustrates the significant sophistication developed in English society since the era that began with ‘Arden of Faversham.’ This examination of manners and attitudes in 1603 highlights the final act of social upheaval that shaped the rural society we recognize today.
The Mountford’s stand as the sole aristocratic survivors, and while they engage in a delaying action, the Frankford’s, with their newfound wealth, advance with the tide of social change. New ideas regarding social morality emerge, and there is a contemporary aspect to Mr. Frankford’s (Norman Woodland) treatment of his unfaithful wife. Anne (Marjory Westbury), who embodies an almost innocent hedonism, and her relationship with Master Wendell (Peter WYngarde), while still rooted in the tradition of courtly love, is emotionally acceptable by today’s standards.
Wendoll resembles more of a correspondent than a rogue or a medieval vice. Although Frankford has the opportunity, he rejects violence as a means of addressing the wrongs inflicted upon him, opting instead for a more severe punishment by banishing his wife. She is remorseful and begins to starve herself, yet Frankford, adhering to his principles, forgives her on her deathbed.
This act of forgiveness provides the play with a tidy climax, which, it must be acknowledged, could verge on banality in the hands of less distinguished actors. A less skillful interpretation of Heywood’s couplets might have rendered the play akin to a poor pantomime, but Mr. Raikes ensured that the end rhymes were sometimes cleverly concealed and at other times deliberately emphasized to unveil a witty conceit.
Peter’s first ever cover feature! Here he is as Lionel Collins in ‘Love Her To Death’
TV Times (UK): 13th January, 1963.
Here Peteris pictured (top) in the role of Glenkin in the Associated-Redifusion production of ‘Darkness At Noon’, in which he starred alongside Albert Lieven, Ronald Adamson and Edward Rees.
On The Air (USA): January 1964
Article about the Esso World Theatre – a showcase of British theatre and performers. Features Petera nd Anna Massey on the cover.
Look Eastwards (UK): August 1964 Local TV listings magazine for the Bristol area of England.
TV Times (Australia): August 1969
Nova Antenna Magazine (Portugal): 1969
TV Week (Australia): September 27, 1969
Featuring Peteras Jason King from Department S. The strange thing about this cover was that Department S was not due to start on South Australian screens until the following year, but was showing Victoria and New South Wales. Due to the bulk of the magazine being printed in Melbourne and then distributed to state agencies for listing inclusions, they had to take whatever cover was featured. No articles are inside relating to Peter or Department S.
Flama (Portugal): January, 1970
Det Nye (Norway): March, 1970. ‘Department S’ reaches the continent and Jason captures the imagination of Europeans everywhere, as seen here on the cover of this Norwegian weekly, Det Nye. Peter became a regular in the magazine, appearing on an almost weekly basis, either in the form of an article or centre-page pin-up.
TV Times (UK): May 22, 1970. As the popularity of ‘Department S’ and its central character, Jason King, continues to grow, Peter is afforded the front page of this issue of the TV Times, along with a two-page interview entitled, “Love, Peter Wyngarde and an Eastern promise”.
Televizier (Holland): 1970 TV listings magazine.
Bild und Funk (West Germany): 1970.
Television and radio listings magazine.
Aktuell (Norway): June 1970. Norway’s most popular television magazine celebrates the arrival of Peter in Oslo. Surrounded by female bodyguards, all wearing Jason King T-Shirts, Peter goes out to meet some of the 20,000 fans who turned up to greet him in the Norwegian capital, and to visit a local hospital.
Bravo (West Germany): April 1971. .
Na (Norway): June 1970
Featuring a four-page article on Peter’s visit to the capital, Oslo.
Bravo (West Germany): April 1971
Tele (West Germany): June 10, 1971.
Veronica (Holland): 8th December, 1971
Teenage magazine. Three page feature on Peter and Jason King.
TV Expres (Belgium): 1972
3-Page interview, accompanied by photographs from the Jason King series.
Hor Zu (West Germany): July/August, 1971 Peter receives the star treatment with a three-page feature on the Department ‘S’ spin-off, Jason King.
Gong (West Germany): 1972
Det Nye (Norway): March 1972. Once again Peter features on the cover of Norway’s ‘Det Nye’, along with his girlfriend, model Elisabeth Skjortekjole, both of whom are seen kissing at Peter’s luxury London apartment, and holding hands together on the South Bank of the River Thames.
Freizeit Revue (West Germany): 1972. Two-page interview with photographs.
Petticoat (UK): April 1972
Gong (West Germany): May, 1973
Tros Kompass (Holland): TV listings magazine: 15-21 January, 1972
Kurier TV Magazine (Austria): 23rd September 1973
Where (South Africa): 1978
Flash Gordon Special Issue (USA): 1980
Action TV (UK): 2000
Five page interview with Peter, and in-depth feature on Department S.
Famous Monsters (USA): September 2016 (issue No. 283)
The Darkside (UK): March 2017
The Chap (UK): Spring 2005
The Mirror (UK): 19th January, 2018
Infinity (UK): October 2020
Camera Obscura: Issue No.23.
(USA): ‘Peter Wyngarde Special’.Published in 1996 by the Birmingham branch of the Prisoner appreciation society, ‘Six of One’. Includes articles on actors who had appeared in both The Prisoner and Department S; transcript of Peter’s 1993 appearance on Pebble Mill; biography and analysis of Peter portrayal of No.2 in Checkmate.
SUB magazine (UK): Issue 14 – March 1994
Orange Alert: Spring 2018 – Official magazine of ‘Six of One’ – The Official Prisoner Appreciation Society
Please click below for newspaper and magazine articles – 1950’s to the present day
Produced by The Richmond Theatre Reparatory Company, London.
July 1950
Character: Clem
Act I
Scene I: 10 pm on a Saturday evening in March
Scene II: Three hours later
Act III
The following evening about 7pm
Act III
Four hours later
The Story
The year is 1950, a period when television had not yet supplanted the Wireless. The Jukebox, dancing at the Palais, and frequent visits to the Cinema served as popular entertainment for the public, and the Death Penalty was still applicable in cases of Murder.
Madam Tic-Tac (Margaret St. Barbe-West), is so-called due to her dual disabilities of blindness and deafness, which limit her communication to hand signals* Attributing her condition to carelessness In a hospital, and harbouring resentment towards the significant physical isolation it has imposed on, her.she attempts to get her own back on society by embarking upon a life of crime. Nevertheless, she displays extraordinary kindness to Beth – a young girl who, as well as working in the cafe, acts as her eyes and ears.
*A traditional form of sign language utilized by bookmakers at British racecourses until the early 21st Century.
The gang begin to draw the attention of a local police in the person of Detective Segreant Harris – especially when, during a raid, a night watchman is fatally shot by Clem (Peter Wyngarde), a manipulative and dangerous young man who serves as the gang’s second-in-command.
Things start to take a turn when taxi driver, Rudge (Leslie Yeo) – a timid man by nature but who is also a member of the gang, becomes unnerved by Clem’s actions, believing that committing murder is crossing a moral line. He decides that he is going to surrender to the authorities, thereby revealing the Tic-Tac Gang’s operations. On discovering Rudge’s intentions, Clem takes measures to eliminate him and to create an alibi for himself by framing Madam Tic-Tac’s son, Luke..
When she realizes the situation, Madam Tic-Tac immediately understands that she must safeguard her son whom, until this point, she has successfully kept away from her illicit dealings. Utilizing both her connections in the criminal underworld and her own cleverness, she manages to outsmart Clem and rescue her son, while all time understanding that she will ultimately be killed by him.
Above: Peter (second from left) as Clem
In Retrospect
Written by Falkland L. Cary and Philip Weathers and staged globally, this work is acknowledged as a thriller characterized by robust character development and dramatic intensity, distinguishing it within mid-20th-century theatre.
The narrative centers on themes of loyalty, deception, and the ethical dilemmas faced by the central character, Madam Tic-Tac. Her protective nature towards Luke and Beth, despite her own limitations, stands in stark contrast to the nefarious ambitions of Clem and the fear-motivated actions of Rudge. This creates a gripping, morally intricate storyline set against a backdrop of criminality which lies at the heart of both the suspense and the emotional depth of the play. The interactions among these characters propel the tension and lead to the tragic conclusion of the story.
Press Comments
“Admirably proving their acting talent are Peter Wyngarde, almost unrecognisable as the super spiv, Clem, and Leslie Yeo. as Rudge, the get-away driver.”The Richmond Herald – 29th July, 1950
Reviewing the increasing menace of AI-generated ‘documentaries’ on the ‘net
Since the late summer of 2022, there has been an unprecedented public discourse surrounding artificial intelligence and ethics. This shift occurred when a select few technology companies released the first proprietary text-to-image AI art generators to the public. For those who may not be aware, the expanding domain of AI art involves machine learning systems that are trained on extensive collections of text and visual data sourced from the Internet. When integrated with text-to-image technology, these systems enable users to articulate any scene using natural languageto generate a multitude of stunning images based on these text prompts.
Aside from the fact that AI has already integrated into daily life, the rapid development of specific technologies that empower individuals to produce visuals in mere seconds through text prompts has sparked a significant and contentious debate within the art community and creative sectors. Critics label it a threat to the livelihoods of human artists, while proponents celebrate it as the most groundbreaking advancement in visual media since the advent of photography.
One of the most alarming facets of the various questionable applications of AI is the production of deepfakes and faux-documentaries. This hyper-realistic alternative representation prompts concerns regarding the integrity of future historical records, as seemingly “documentary” images can be fabricated in this manner. With the capability for anyone to create fictional historical documentaries with near-perfect precision, and considering the viral nature of image dissemination on the Internet, it is not difficult to conclude that, without robust critical media skills, it will become increasingly challenging for the general public, and even seasoned media professionals, to distinguish between reality and fabrication.
In this context, we examine some of the troubling “documentaries” primarily emerging from the United States that focus on Peter, claiming to offer privileged insights into his life and career.
Hollywood Confidential is a YouTube channel based in the United States that claims to “reveal the concealed homosexual lives of the most prominent male stars of Old Hollywood.” However, their sensationalized and largely inaccurate programs—particularly those centered on Peter—are hastily assembled using artificial intelligence and feature a monotonous text-to-speech narration reminiscent of a Kraftwerk album. Indeed, had such a track been accessible to the Gestapo in the 1940s, one might have divulged all necessary information just to bring the torment to an end!
It is likely not surprising to discover that ‘Hollywood Confidential’, which became a part of YouTube in December 2025, remains both anonymous and unreachable. Judging by their logo (refer to the top of this page), they seem to represent the more radical faction of the LGBTQ+ community, who believe it is their responsibility to ‘out’ deceased actors who cannot affirm or refute the claims made against them.
The visual material presented in the 50.13-minute documentary titled, ‘The Tragic Story of Alan Bates & Peter Wyngarde – The Gay Love Hollywood Destroyed’, appears to have been generated by artificial intelligence; a reality that has not escaped the attention of some viewers who have inadvertently encountered it. For example, to depict the well-known tale of Peter’s arrest in 1975, the image displayed below is presented on screen. The individual in the photograph resembles more of a detainee from Guantanamo Bay than a person apprehended at Gloucester Police Station.
Tut! Tut! Peter would never wear orange with handcuffs!
Presented below is the image; it’s uncertain who THIS person is supposed to be! It seems that the AI bot merely picked any image available online featuring a man with dark hair and a mustache to illustrate what Peter looked like for the casual observer. How disappointing!
Above: Any man with a moustache will do!
The creators of Hollywood Confidential assert the following: “During the Golden Age of Hollywood, being gay was not merely a private issue — it posed a significant threat to one’s career. Studios enforced a culture of silence. Relationships were erased from public view. Marriages were fabricated. Love was concealed behind legal agreements. Behind the glamorous facade, genuine relationships existed — shared homes, intertwined lives, and hidden secrets — all obscured to maintain the illusion of masculinity that America demanded. This serves as a historical account of the erasure of gay identities in classic cinema. For those seeking to comprehend Old Hollywood in its authentic form — rather than the facade it presented — this channel reveals the files that were intended to be destroyed. Hollywood Confidential — the gay history that Hollywood has denied.”
I would be keen to examine the “files” that these individuals claim to have uncovered to substantiate their assertions. As previously mentioned, they appear to have scoured the internet for any snippets of tabloid gossip and unverified online rumors, which are then presented as a thoroughly researched exposé. In truth, it is poorly constructed, entirely misleading, and painfully tedious in every regard. If it were a horse, one would hope that someone would show compassion and relieve it of its suffering!
While there will always be a small contingent of gullible individuals who will accept every word of this drivel, I would argue that no one possessing even a modicum of intelligence could be deceived by such sordid nonsense. Nevertheless, it is disheartening that the technology, which has become so widely accessible online, is being utilized to produce the kind of unrefined rubbish discussed herein.
In a similar manner, there is ‘Vintage Uncovered’, which is also an American YouTube channel established around the same period as Hollywood Confidential. They characterize themselves as “Your gateway to the forgotten world of Old Hollywood, classic cinema, and the golden age of film.”
They assert that they are guiding viewers on a nostalgic expedition to unveil rare narratives, unseen footage, iconic legends, vintage scandals, and the enduring allure of Hollywood’s history – particularly emphasizing the ‘scandal’ aspect. No long-deceased actor is spared from scrutiny. Among those whose reputations are tarnished are Richard Burton, Peter O’Toole, Sid James, Oliver Reed, Bill Maynard(!), Stewart Granger, and our own Peter Wyngarde.
They lure the inquisitive and the credulous to ‘hit that subscribe button and step back into a realm where style, drama, and artistry dominated the screen.’ Really? To anyone possessing a modicum of intelligence, this channel is simply a vehicle for tarnishing the names of deceased actors and actresses who can no longer defend themselves.
‘Pure Evil: 15 British Celebrities of the 70s Who Scandalized the World!’ is the title of the pseudo-documentary under scrutiny here, where, alongside notorious figures such as serial paedophiles Jimmy Saville and Rolf Harris, our own Peter Wyngarde is alleged to have coerced, abused, and generally driven his fellow actors, producers, and directors to the brink of suicide! All of this, it is claimed, is ‘well-documented,’ yet since none of these ‘documents’ are ever presented, we are simply expected to take their word for it.
Unsurprisingly, all these claims are fabrications upon fabrications; concocted by an individual or individuals unknown, who are so utterly convinced of their assertions that they opt to conceal their identities behind a username and remain unreachable.
In stark contrast to the allegations made by those behind ‘Vintage Uncovered’, Peter was, in fact, highly esteemed within the acting community, with many of his peers and producers extolling his virtues – both as an actor and as a person. Here are just a few of the commendations about him:
“I always felt that any success the show (Department ‘S’) had was due in no small part to Peter’s ability and imagination He was a fabulous actor and a good pal.” Joel Fabiani – Co-Star, Department S
“I remember working with Peter was always fun – he is such a stylish actor. He was a true gentleman..” Dame Diana Rigg – Actress
“Working with Peter was a scream – he’s such a hoot!”Felicity Kendal – Actress
“He was funny and quick and bright. I think the professionals are professionals, and he’s one of those. He hasn’t any inflated idea’s about himself. He’s completely unpompous, and I didn’t find him the least bit phoney.” David Bailey – Photographer
“Peter was always a very courteous man, easy to work with, and who behaved off screen with the same suave sophistication that some of his on-screen roles demanded.” Dennis Spooner– Producer, Department S/Jason King
“Peter Wyngarde played Langdale Pike – a Victorian Nigel Dempster in ‘The Three Gables’, which opened the 1994 season of ‘The Memoirs of Sherlock Holmes’. As always, Peter was distinguished by his rapier wit and style. A memorable performance.” June Wyndham-Davis – Producer, ‘The Three Gables’
The creators of this abomination should hang their heads in shame, ‘tho somehow I doubt they ever will!
Weird Showbiz History is yet another sensational scandal channel, and its brief film, ‘Peter Wyngarde: Public Image & Private Life Collide!’ (Runtime:11 minutes and 32 seconds), seeks to elucidate the reasons behind the alleged decline of Peter’s life and career following 1975.
The curator of this channel, who again opts not to substantiate his assertions by revealing his identity, also fails to offer avenues for those with more accurate information to question or contest his claims.
Although the host appears to be AI-generated, his objective is straightforward: “To resurrect these untold, or at the very least, significantly under-reported stories into the limelight. Illuminating the peculiar choices, public breakdowns, and unusual turns of events that influenced careers and solidified legacies – occasionally for entirely inappropriate reasons.”
It goes on: “From the enigmatic disappearances to the most spectacular acts of self-sabotage, ‘Weird Showbiz History’ is your go-to destination for the footnotes and forgotten chapters of the entertainment industry.
I Deep-Dive and research all of these fascinating tales bringing my genuine passion to each story.” Oh, pur-leez!
“For every carefully curated success story,” he/it waffles on, “there are a dozen tales that defy belief. Moments of madness, miscalculation, and sheer, jaw-dropping audacity that somehow got lost in the shuffle of fame. This is where Weird Showbiz History” steps in.If it’s a tale that makes you gasp, cringe, or burst out laughing, it probably belongs on this channel.“
Once more, it is merely the same recycled drivel that has been circulated for decades, with the host, whoever that may be, contributing his own perspective. The individuals behind these channels lack any genuine understanding of Peter’s life, yet they continue to chatter as if they are presenting something novel and innovative.”
Well, the next piece of hockum comes live and direct from Pakistan. Our host on this occasion is a chap by the name of Abud Buzdar (Asalam o Alaikum), who addresses his potential(and hopefully gullable) adience as follows:
Dear viewers Umeed krta hn khy ap theek aur khairiat sy hn gy, Yeah mra YouTube veloging channel hy, Please ap tmam viewers sy request hy khy channel ko subscribe krain aur mujy support krain, Shukriya (Note – this has been copied verbatum).
Mr. Buzdar professes to have had privileged access to Peter’s bank account – insisting that the actor died in abject poverty. In fact, Peter lived in a Grade II listed building in the Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea. Earls Terrace, where he had lived since 1958 had, over the years, was home to the likes of Madonna, Sir Ian McKellern and J.K. Rowling. It boasted an Olympic-sized swimming pool and private gardens for the sole use of residents, and a private road with gatehouse. Hardly a residence for someone who was living hand to mouth.
Above: Mr. Buzdar we presume – the keeper of Peter’s financial accounts
I would suggest that Mr. Buzdar has never been within a 4,000 -mile radius of Peter and, as is usual with these content producers, had AI trawl the Internet for any scrap of tittle-tattle it could find, including gossip posted on forums and online encyclopedias, which is latterly spat out as fact – to their mind at least.
If you choose to indulge, remember, this is 10 minutes and 12 seconds of your life you’ll never get back!
‘Ccelebrity Secrets’ is another bunch of busy-bodies that believe they had privileged access to Peter’s finances. Spouting almost the same rhubarb as the spiel peddled by Abud Buzda (see above).
Their statement to an eager world is as follows:
“Welcome to Celebrity Secrets – where the golden past of legendary stars comes alive! Here, you won’t just relive their dazzling performances, iconic stories, and cherished memories… but you’ll also step into the dark side behind the spotlight.
We bring you rare images, hidden details, and secrets never revealed before: from private struggles and shocking scandals, to bizarre truths and outrageous moments the public never saw. This isn’t just memory—it’s a journey that will leave you stunned, moved, and speechless.”
According to this the makers of this 12-minute piece, Peter was so broke that he had to resort to driving a red Routemaster for London Transport! Dear God! I’ve heard many fabrications about him in my time, but this one not only takes the cake, but the plate and doyley as well!
For the record, Peter lived in a Grade II listed building in the Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea, not in a crummy bedsit in Brixton! He worked continuously from the mid-1970’s onwards.
Oh, and by the way, did you know that Peter drove a Jaguar in both ‘Department S’ and ‘Jason King’? No, I didn’t either! Every day’s a school day!
“Gay Hollywood History,” we’re told, “explores the real love stories, hidden relationships, and personal lives of gay Hollywood icons in the 20th century. From secret romances and forbidden marriages to the social pressures that shaped their lives, we bring LGBTQ+ history to light through powerful storytelling and careful research.”
Let us examine this so-called “carefully researched” documentary….
It asserts that Peter was not “destroyed” due to a decline in viewership for ‘Jason King’. Instead, it claims that the British public chose to “punish” him for being “gay”! Is that truly the case? Furthermore, were you aware that prior to the infamous and unfounded prosecution in 1975, Peter was regarded as television’s “most profitable illusion”? Shock! Horror! Probe!
We are also informed that Peter, in his youth, had constructed a narrative around himself that ultimately “became a cage”. And these individuals claim to know him well enough to arrive at this conclusion? I find that hard to believe! The documentary continues by stating that throughout his life, Peter refrained from discussing his experiences in Lungha Civil Assembly Camp, where he was imprisoned as a child. This assertion is entirely false, as he frequently spoke about his time there in various magazine and newspaper interviews. Apparently, the British audience was not interested in a “damaged refugee with a peculiar voice”; they preferred chiseled cheekbones and glamour.
The fact that they cannot even spell his name correctly (Wingard and, ahem, Winyard) speaks volumes about this low-quality nonsense. As expected, the tired old myth regarding Peter and Alan Bates being lovers is resurrected for yet another round (refer to Peter’s own writings that disprove this), along with the now-overturned conviction from 1975. They attempt to juxtapose Bates’ image—depicting him as a more rugged individual—with Peter’s “flamboyant” and “polished” persona. In reality, they are comparing Alan Bates the individual to Jason King, the character, rather than to Peter Wyngarde.
They imply that this ‘relationship’ concluded when Bates married in 1970. In truth, Bates had moved out of the apartment he shared with Peter (as is common among actors) in the mid-1960s, after having lived with the American actor Rock Hudson in California for several years.
At least the biography, ‘Peter Wyngarde: A Life Amongst Strangers’, was mentioned—albeit only as a screen grab from the publisher’s website to illustrate the malice of the British press. While it was at least a complete used in completely the wrong context.
The next one up is from another all-knowing fellow from Pakistan, who professes the following:
“Welcome to British Icons TV – celebrating the greatest British and Hollywood celebrities of all time. Our channel features celebrity biographies, lifestyle stories, career journeys, net worth insights, rare facts, and entertainment news about legendary and modern stars. From classic Hollywood icons to today’s most popular actors, singers, and public figures, we cover the people who shaped entertainment history.” Blah! Blah!
Aren’t we just blessed to have these people who have probably never set foot in Britain, telling us what was what about our television heroes.
The first victim is poor old Norman Vaughan (as as his name is pronounced in this horrendous piece of trash, “Vairum”). As for Peter well, apparently, he became a “Wreckloose” from the mid-70’s onwards, and despite a “disastrous” marriage to actress, Dorinda Stevens, was “well known” for his “relationships with men”? Needless to say, the producer of this load of b*****ks declines to name a single one. No surprise there!
The person behind this claptrap clearly has both a fixation with, and an apparent hatred, of British actors based just on some of his/her other titles: ‘Died in Poverty’ and ‘Actors With Secret Diseases’.They’re obviously short of something to do!
Oh, and did you know that former Prime Minister, Harold Wilson, was gay? Well, according to this he was. I wonder if his wife, Mary, was aware of that. In that case, I wonder if Harold was…?!
Conclusion
The most detrimental action that technology companies could have taken was to grant the general public access to Artificial Intelligence – particularly given the nature of some existing online content. Now, every individual, whether named Joe or Joanna, perceives themselves to a talented journalist or documentary filmmaker,but who neglect to conduct even the most basic research. They simply regurgitate what they or, more likely, their AI bot has unearthed from the obscure corners of the internet; be it someone’s random thoughts on a forum or a piece of outdated tabloid sensationalism that has been repeatedly exaggerated over time. Conversations in pubs have now transformed into podcasts and ‘documentaries’ that, alarmingly, are often accepted by the misled and impressionable as absolute truth, which is then shared with others. They seem incapable of understanding that these podcasts and ‘documentaries’ are created by individuals who possess no more knowledge than a clothes peg, often improvised in someone’s spare room!
Generally, those who present such content prefer to remain anonymous—most likely because they are aware that their claims would not withstand scrutiny or challenge. Those who do provide an email address typically do not respond. Like the cartoon character Mr. Magoo, they wreak havoc and cause significant distress to those of us who actually knew the individuals they have chosen to disparage. They then ride off into the sunset without a second thought for the damage they’ve inflicted.
Regrettably, there will always be individuals who will exploit their newfound influence to inflict harm. We have witnessed social media devolving into a toxic environment. AI merely serves as another instrument for those who wish to amplify their own voices.
The two 38″x25″ posters of Peter published by Pace in 1970. Catalogue Numbers (Left) 114 and (Right) 115
Every self-respecting teenager in the 1970’s had a Pace poster on their bedroom wall. What then would cost you 35p from Woollies* in the Seventies, will now set you back upwards of £200 at film fairs and online– particularly if in the original box and poster itself is in mint condition.
Pace International Limited were a publishing company based in London, which produced a series of posters featuring both music and film stars of the day, and other “cool” bedroom wall fodder such as motor cycles and drag racers.
The two posters of Peter below were manufactured in 1970. The one on the right became the company’s top seller of that year, outstripping the likenesses of such luminaries as Roger Moore, Omar Sharif, Paul Newman, Robert Redford and Jimi Hendrix by some margin.
Left: Posters came boxed.
Below is an original 1970’s sales brochure from Pace International featuring the two posters they produced of Peterfrom 1970.
Taken from the NME (New Musical Express) – July 1970. Pace posters by mail order
Adorning the changing room of a ladies boutique changing room, Circa 1970
*Woolies (Woolworths): was a British high street retail chain.
Sandecor Marketing
Above: 30in x 25in Sandecor, 1972. Catalogue No. 6030
Established in 1967 by art students Bertil Hjert and Goran Huldtgren in Sweden as Scandecor International AB, publishing and selling posters and related goods. The name Scandecor is an invented composite word derived from ‘Scandinavian decor. Scandecor was to become one of the largest poster businesses in the world.
Like Pace, Scandecor produced posters featuring actors, film and TV characters, plus images of scenic views, sports cars and motorcycles. The poster of Peter above became a bestseller in the UK and across Europe.
The company continued to produce posters until 1997, when Hjert and Huldtgren went their separate ways in 1997.
Right: Scandecor posters were sold in a rolled in a Sellofane tube.
Looking at the missing scenes and dialogue involving General Klytus that was changed between script and screen.
Above: In the prison cell where Flash is being held before his execution. An angle that we don’t see in the finished film.
Despite the “Klytus, I’m bored” line being one of the most quotable in film history, in the original script, the immortal exchange between Emperor Ming and General Klytus didn’t exist. The opening was intended to be at Shea Stadium, New York, where the New York Jets – with Flash Gordon as their Quarterback – had just won the Superbowl which would lead to the opening titles.
Despite the “Klytus, I’m bored” line being one of the most quotable in film history, in the original script, the immortal exchange between Emperor Ming and General Klytus didn’t exist. The opening was intended to be at Shea Stadium, New York, where the New York Jets – with Flash Gordon as their Quarterback – had just won the Superbowl which would lead to the opening titles.
Inside the main palace hall when Flash, Dale and Zarkov are brought before Emperor Ming. There is an exchange between Klytus, Ming and Vultan regarding the latter’s 12-year old daughter, Rima, who is taken away and added to Ming’s harem.
After the scene between Aura and the Surgeon who revives Flash following his execution, Aura was supposed to be seen dropping her handkerchief which Klytus subsequently picks up . It’s the same handkerchief that he’d seen with as Flash is being executed. When Aura sees him with it, she was to desperately search her person for it before finally realising that Klytus knows of her treachery.
Above: The purpose-built set at EMI-Elstree for the arrest of Princess Aura by Klytus on her return to Mingo City from Arboria.
There has long been talk amongst fans about a scene involving the arrest of Princess Aura by General Klytus on her return to Mongo City after putting Flash Gordon in the care of Prince Barin in Arboria. Only a a handful of photographs and the inclusion of the sequence in both the first (12th June 1979) and final (July 1979) drafts of Lorenzo Semple’s script, and in the shooting schedules prove its existence, as it was inevitably to end up on the cutting room floor before the film was released in 1980.
A full-size set (see image above) was constructed was built on Soundstage 8 at EMI-Elstree, which was made up of Aura’s rocket ship, docking area, walls and pillars. The scene (154 in the shooting schedule), ran as follows:
ANGLE – THE ROCKET SHIP
As the canopy opens and AURA climbs out, smiling to herself. She stops short, her expression changing as she sees something.
KLYTUS appears in the foreground with THREE of his black-clad POLICE AGENTS.
KLYTUS Good evening, Princess — did you have a good flight back from Arboria? (and to the Men) Seize her.
In a later Shooting Schedule dated 31st July 1979, the above described scene was “cancelled”(see above) and replaced with the section in the Torture Chamber. This in itself is different to what we eventually see on screen, as the interrogation of Princess Aura was to have taken place in the same prison cell in which Flash was held captive earlier in the story. The cast for this sequence was to include Generals Klytis and Kala, Aura, 8 Prisoners and 2 of Klytus’s Secret Police men.
In the script, Aura is chained with her face to the wall, not on a table as in the final cut. On her head is a “metal crown crown-like device” with electrodes pressing on her temples. Her gown has been pulled down to her waist* so her back is naked*. Kala stands by with a “lizard-hide whip” as Klytus asks the questions.
In the first draft of the script, Klytus orders one of his henchmen to “Rip off her clothes”. Latterly, Klytus tears off the rest of her gown and“throws it to the ground”. The reason for this particular sequence being omitted from the final cut could be down the the Censors.
Getting nowhere with the interrogation, the first draft has Klytus instruct Kala to bring him the Bore Worms, but in the final script, his instructions are carried out by “Two Torturers” who appear carrying a glass jar containing the Worms, and a pair of tweezers. Klytus orders the two men to “Do as I told you”. The script describes what happens next:
Aura’s rage and indignation explodes; she fights tooth and nail inflicting some breaking scratches. But the two experienced men quickly overpower her. One twist both arms behind her in a double half-nelson; the other grabs her kicking feet and pushes them together. AURA is lifted bodily and carried to a metal bench on the other side of the room. AURA is lowered onto this. Her ankles are strapped apart. Her head is lowered into a black velvet-lined hollow, and a hand snaps around her throat. Her hands are raised level with her head, and the wrists are secure tight. She looks like a sacrificial victim.
On being handed the glass jar, Klytus asks Aura:
“Have you ever seen a Bore Worm? They are an almost extinct species from Cytheres. Their mouths contuct a faint electrical vibration that prevents the victim from trying to escape.”
Below is how the Bore Worms are described in the script:
156A CU of BORE WORMS in JAR.
They look like hairy caterpillars about 6 inches long. KLYTUS’S is finger appears against the glass. The nearest Worm tries to bite it. Against the glass we see a wide mouth with unhinged jaw,s so it can’t open 180 degrees. The teeth are like rows of tiny spikes. a little pointed red tongue tries to lap and thrust its way into the glass.
One particular sequence that was changed at least twice from the first draft of the script to what we eventually see in the finished film is onboard Klytus’s rocket ship. Initially, he was to be seen standing with the pilots, who he asks how long it will be before they reach the Hawkmen’s Sky City. When told, he advises that he’s going to sleep and that they should wake him “when it’s in sight’.
The second version sees Klytus sleeping in a ‘glass cylinder’. Latterly, this is changed to him in a chamber inside the wall of the ship.
According to both the first and second drafts of the script, General’s Klytus and Kala – rather than being lovers as suggested by the former’s touching of the latter’s chin in the Laboratory Scene (where Zarkov is having his mind purged), and his saying gentle, “I’ll return”, the two were actually brother and sister. This was supposed to have been revealed when Klytus arrives on Sky City to arrest Barin, Vultan and Gordon. He tells Barin that Aura had implicated him in treason under the influence of his and “my sister’s persuasion”.
White Robes?
There was an idea, both during the writing of the script, and kept during filming, that whenever General Klytus and Princess Aura shared a scene, Klytus would wear white robes as opposed to black.
In the ‘Final Script’ of July 1979, Peter has written in pencil in the top right-hand corner of the page: ‘In black here? Or in black when behind people?. Clearly, no definite decision had been made at this point. Peter said latterly on the subject: “Originally had two costumes; a black and a virgin white version – the latter of which I was to wear in the scenes with Princess Aura. I felt, though, that the white one looked a bit like something that had been worn in a pantomime, so I decided to stick with the black one throughout the film.“
Above: From Peter’s copy of the script.
A photographs do exist of Peter wearing all white, which were taken during while shooting the scene involving Aura’s return to Mongo City and her subsequent arrest (see below). This was most probably the only time the white robes were worn.
Above : Peter as General Klytus in white robes with with Ornella Muti as Princess Aura.
Dialogue Changes: From script to screen
Peter was well known for changing his characters dialogue in scripts, more often than not for the better. Here are some of the improvements he made – from script to screen:
SCENE
SCRIPT
SCREEN
Inside the great hall where Flash, Dale and Zarkhov are brought before Ming, Vultan and Barin draw their weapons.
“Put up your weapons. Nobody dies in the palace but by the Emperor’s command”
“Set down your weapons. No one, but no one dies in the palace without a command from the Emperor.”
Scene as above. Vultan initially refuses to follow Kytus’s instruction .
There is no dialogue at all from Klytus at this point.
“Vultan! You obey or you sacrifice your daughter.”
In the prison cell where Flash is awaiting execution.
(To Flash): “You refused your final meal. The chef is very upset.”
“Yes, you don’t look well. I heard you refused your final meal. The chef will be upset.”
Same scene as above.
“You were wise, actually — the gas works more quickly on an empty stomach. Have you any final requests?”
“Just as well. Gas works more quickly on an empty stomach. Any final requests?”
Inside the laboratory where Klytus and Aura are removing all Zarkov’s memories. The two General’s are watching the screen, when Klytus sees Hitler.
There is no dialogue here.
“Now he showed promise!”
Scene as above. The procedure has been done.
(To Kala): “I will return after reporting to the Emperor.” (Seen holding Aura’s handkerchief).
“I’ll return.” (No handkerchief. He touches Kala’s chin).
Torture Chamber. Aura demands to see her father,
(Klytus touches a button to reveal Ming). No dialogue
“With pleasure.”
Klytus has arrived at the Hawkmen’s Sky City.
“Agent Zarkov, you will be liquidated for treachery. As for you, Prince Vultan, you will surrender these fugitives at once or the Imperial Fleet will blast your kingdom to atoms.”
“Agent Zarkov, you will be liquidated for treachery.
Scene as above. Barin insists that Klytus address him as “Prince Barin”.
See below for page from original script
“No longer, I think. Princess Aura — under our persuasion — has implicated you of high treason. You are under arrest along with these Earthlings. A prison ship will be along shortly to take you away.”
“No longer. Princess Aura — under our persuasion — has implicated you of high treason. You are under arrest. A prison ship will be along shortly to take you away.”
Above: Page 84 (Scene 191). Changes to dialogue in Peter’s own hand.
Below: How Peter envisaged the character of General Klytus. Written by him inside the first draft of the script
Top: Klytus. He is electric electrically – verging on abysmal grandeur in his male violence.
(Under Title): Klytus: is an accomplished murderer as he is a sorcerer. An animal in agony because of his intelligence; a wretch whose heart has cracked and whose sole obsession is revenge. His is the fury of hell, no less than of a woman scorned. Hate Incarnate; misery broken out of all control; loathing unleashed until, hurricane wise, he sweeps everything and everyone before it.
He is blood and electricity mixed.
His death: The dreadful, hoarse groans of a wounded animal. They well out of a half human body, there has been clubbed by fate. They are sounds that speak as no words could, for a soul torn by horror, for a mind numbed by what it has been forced to comprehend. The horror at his isolation from humanity.
Above is Peter’s copy of the Shooting Schedule dated 31st July, 1979
Starling Productions Limited
”Flash Gordon”
MAIN UNIT SHOOTING SCHEDULE
BASED ON FINAL SCRIPT DATED JULY 1979
Notes:
(a) it is possible that 23rd August and 24th August will be switched to avoid an unnecessary move back to Shepperton whilst we are at Weybridge.
(b) This Schedule excludes all 2nd unit work and blue backing at Weybridge and all miniature and optical effects shooting.
(c) The 2nd unit will shoot all blue backing scenes as follows –
Presented by Paul Elliot at His Majesty’s Theatre, Aberdeen – 7th December 1984 – 5th January 1985.
Character: Abarnazar
Act One
Prologue: Abanazar’s Lair
Scene 1: In old Pekin
Scene 2: Outside Pekin
Scene 3: The Princess’s garden
Scene 4: Widow Twankey’s Launderette
Scene 5: Outside Pekin
Scene 6: A ravine in the mountains
Scene 7: Inside Abanaza’s cave
Act Two
Scene 1: The Festival of Lanterns
Scene 2: Widow Twankey’s Launderette
Scene 3: Outside Pekin
Scene 4: The Garden of Aladdin’s Palace
Scene 5: The Flight to Egypt
Scene 6: Aladdin’s palace in Egypt
Scene 7: Back home in Pekin
Scene 8: The Royal Wedding
The pantomime Aladdin is one that lends itself particularly to spectacular and colourful settings and costumes, and the 1985/85 Christmas season a spectacular production at His Majesty’s Theatre, Aberdeen, that left nothing to be desired.
In this respect with a first half finale inside up Abarnazar’s (Peter Wyngarde) cave, that glittered and sparkled with a delightful festival of lanterns and a lavish ‘Willow Pattern’ to close the evening. Only in magical effects did the presentation fall a little short of expectations. Add a multi-talented cast an eight-strong dancing chorus augmented by a group of lively youngsters from the Jessiman Shool of Dance, and the clever specialty act and there was all the ingredients for a successful show which was proven with every performance a sell-out.
While Peter was the target of hearty rounds of “Boo’s” from the audience, the children especially took to wishy Washy Washy, played by Scottish comedian, (Allan Stewart), who not only used his ability as an impersonator to excellent effect at many appropriate moments, but he also has a warmth of personality that makes the character irresistible, Denny Willis was his inimitable self as Widow Twanky – brilliantly funny at his best; his funny walk reminiscent of part of his Hunting Quartet but, alas, was been given too few opportunities to use his comic skills to the full.l
Peter Morrison in the role of the Emperor, was said to have made an impressive figure, and carried off the part with great style displaying equal poise and polish in his singing. Meanwhile, Louise English looked every inch a princess to win all hearts, and she too was an accomplished singer Edwina Lori .
Meanwhile, Peter ruled the stage as a splendidly evil looking magician, Abanaza. According to the Aberdeenshire Press and Journal, “He (Peter) needs more vocal bite to complete the characterization.” which was a strange comment to make given that Peter had one of the most powerful voices of the world stage.
The show was enhanced with a performance of the dancing skeletons by Dumarte et Denzar – one of the oldest specialty acts in the business, which provoked shrieks of delight and laughter from the children.
And that rakish fellow, Peter Wyngarde, must have regarded his reception as the dastardly Abanazar as a triumph.
I swear he almost brought the house down when he announced wickedly he had let all their dad’s car tyres down outside the theatre.
‘Turn Out the Lights’ was short-lived ITV sitcom series made by Granada Television, that was first broadcast from Monday 2 January to Monday 6 February 1967 by Associated Rediffusion and Tyne Tees Television,. The series was a spin-off of the sitcom, ‘Pardon The Expression’, which was itself a spin-off of Britain’s top-rated soap opera, ‘Coronation Street’.
Leonard Swindley and Wally Hunt had been fired from their jobs at Dobson and Hawks department store in the last episode of ‘Pardon the Expression’. Developing an interest in astrology Swindley travelled the country employed as professional speaker on the subject. Wherever they went Swindley and Hunt stumbled across supernatural mysteries and set about exploring them. The series was a mixture of comedy and light drama.
Six fifty-five minute-long episodes gained their first broadcast on ITV from Monday 2nd January to 6th February 1967 on Associated Rediffusion (London) and Tyne Tees Television (North East England) with all the other regions, including Granada Television, broadcasting the episodes on the following Friday from 9.10 to 10.05pm. The series was also broadcast in two ITV regions (Westward Television and Channel Television) where no single episode of ‘Pardon the Expression’ had ever been shown however it was not shown by Teledu Cymru. Though a smaller number of episodes were commissioned the double running time essentially meant this series lasted as long as the first season of ‘Pardon the Expression’.
The series was produced by Derek Granger, the second producer of ‘Coronation Street’ and later producer of ‘Brideshead Revisited;. Peter Eckersley and John Finch were two of the writers and the former co-wrote two of his episodes with Kenneth Cope, alias Jed Stone. Denis Parkin, the original designer of ‘Coronation Street’ designed three of the episodes.
Several ‘Coronation Street’ regulars made appearances in the series, although Leonard Swindley was the only character from the programme to appear. In addition to these cast members, several notable actors, including some who appeared on the Street made contributions.
The first episode of the series was critically panned by Nancy Banks-Smith in the 3rd January edition of The Sun when she said: “I say, that’s quick off the mark. Only the 2nd of January and yet last night ‘Turn Out the Lights’ put in a powerful claim to be the worst series of 1967. Let’s not be niggling in our tribute. Possibly the worst-written, worst-directed and worst-acted series of the year. You think I’m overstating the case about the new series…don’t you? So I started to make a list of the jokes to give you the flavour of it. But that didn’t work out as I had the greatest difficulty in spotting which were the jokes. Mark you, it’s not meant to be a comedy show, I gather. But I refuse to believe it is a serious one. I’m darned if I know what it is intended to be.
She went to describe the storyline as “confused”, and commented on the “loose ends” and the “sickly modulation to pathos and homespun philosophy at the end.”
John Finch has described his contribution as the “worst thing I ever wrote”. Although almost everyone seems to have hated the programme, Arthur Lowe for one is described as having thoroughly enjoyed it and a theory has been posited that he might have signed for another series if ongoing fame the following year in the role of Captain George Mainwaring in ‘Dad’s Army’ hadn’t beckoned.
The series performed favourably at first in the charts with the first episode achieving 7,250,000, more than either episode of ‘Coronation Street’ shown in the same week. After that, ratings dropped slightly but never fell below 6,100,000 homes.
Along with the dry runs and the inserts for the ‘All Star Comedy Carnival’, the two pilot programmes for Pardon the Expression, and Episode 1202 (24th July 1972), the six episodes of ‘Turn out the Lights’ are the only ‘Coronation Street’-related material missing from the Granada Television archives.
The Episode
‘The Boyhood Haunt’ was the first of just 5 episodes of ‘Turn Out The Lights’ to be screened by ITV.
Above (left to right): Peter as Richard Merlin, Robert Dorning as Walter Hunt and Arthur Lowe as Leonard Swindley
Leonard Swindley is shocked when his colleague Walter confesses that he is totally under the influence of his horoscope sign- Aries the Ram. In spite of Leonard’s mocking him, Hunt insists on introducing him to Richard Merlin (Peter Wyngarde) – a nationally famous astrologer.
All of the words below were written by Peter Wyngarde. No notes were left with regard to tempo, instrumentation, other music reference points, save for the words ‘Ballad’ and ‘To be sung as if drunk’ on two of the lyric sheets.
Please be reminded that all the lyrics below are copyrighted to Tina-Wyngarde-Hopkins and Bowington Management.
1 Colour TV
It’s so trendy to be a colour all that fuss about who’s in power No one knew who to love or hate but now it’s purple red and green Blood transfusions in on colour television
Mind you, it is a little confusing when Sammy Davis says he’s Jewish And looks more red than red Indian so does Pope Pius and being Yiddish Blood transfusions in on colour television
And then all these Vietnamese North or South seem none too pleased Their skins are greener than the trees and G.I. Joes browner than Heinz baked beans It is confusing since they call each other yellow in good ol’ Americanise Blood transfusions in in colour TV’s Of course the real joy’s to come
when they televise parliament and Georgie Brown looks blue to some in spite of Scotch and Murray mints And Barbara Castle’s a soft of magenta plum Blood transfusions in cool television
But it’s the revolutioning students that are by far the trendiest And change their colour the fastest from bloody blue, white and red To the grey sobriety of hospital bed as they slide from violence to passivity and silence Blood transfusions in on colour TV
2 D.J.
Roll your R’s to prove you’re no homo Add a pun to make it fun A voice more stereo than mono you’re bound to be a DJ on 1
Chat up the guys and dolls and talk of peace call them lad and lassies, of course peace is neece Add to this Scots whoo-hooI monotony a discombobulating cacophony
And you have Stewart Henry and the like Every morning, noon and night Telling us what is a hit or a miss what disc to buy and what to cross off your list I’m just hoping for the day they go on strike Praying they miss their bus, are late or break their mic Do let the music have an unadulterated run Cut out all the constipated fun on Radio 1 but then of course we won’t know the titles of anyone’s album because words don’t seem to count anymore Just the mixing, beat and backtracking on some so Stewart stay and save us from another one
3 Marie
Marie looks across her window above the trees the men all down below enjoy all they can see She’s a woman of nature that life brought into the world to play with And she looks so sad ’cause she’s lonely, Marie
She never hurries to put on her underwear her only real friend is a yellow teddy bear. Marie, Marie.
Marie, only you cannot see the more you have the less you will be free Butterscotch, acid drops, trips too with tea
Marie lies on a pillow next to a bed the men who visit her don’t see what’s in her head She’s going on a journey that’s kinder and faster than any they’ve made closed door, not alone anymore. Marie, Marie.
She never hurries to put on her underwear her only real friend is a yellow teddy bear. Marie, Marie.
Marie, only you cannot see
(Repeat this to end).
4 Merry Sexmas
(Spoken as if drunk)
What is all this fuss o’er Xmas s’cuse us is it to do with – love Why is everyone so sexless he must have had some fun above
After all it is his birthday no one’s born without someone’s horn Proclaiming it is a mirth day and the night is no time to mourn But time to have more jollity And practise his philosophy Turning to other cheek rapidly for kisses from the majority
Good will and love for all men let’s all have a cuddle and a drink Even that loner in No.10 Might make that cheek turn quite pink
All that matters is for us to love give the old world a piece of dove Have one another, sod givin’ (I’m drunk) a’int we all God’s chill’un
5 Robinson Crusoe’s Story
The night was thick and hazy When the ‘Piccadilly Daisy’ Carried down the crew and captain in the sea; And I think the water drowned ‘em For they never, ever found ‘em And I know they didn’t come ashore with me
Oh ‘twas very sad and lonely When I found myself the only Population on this cultivated shore; But I’ve made a little tavern In a rocky little cavern And I sit and watch for people at the door
I spent no time in looking For a girl to do my cooking As I’m quite a clever hand at making stews; Perhaps that fellow Friday Just to keep the tavern tidy And to put a Sunday polish on my shoes
I have a little garden That I’m cultivating lard in as the things I eat are rather tough and dry; For I live on toasted lizards Prickly pears and parrot gizzards And I’m really very fond of beetle pie
The clothes I had were furry And it made me fret and worry When I found the moths were eating off the hair; And I had to scrape and sand ‘em And I boiled ‘em and I tanned ‘em ’Till I got the fine Morocco suit I wear
I sometimes see diversions In family excursions With a few domestic animals you see; And we take along a carrot As refreshment for the parrot And a little can of jungleberry tea
Then we gather as we travel Bits of moss and dirty gravel And we chip off little specimens of stone; And will carry home the prizes Funny bugs of handy sizes Just to give the day of scientific tone
If the roads are wet and muddy We remain at home and study For the goat is very clever at a sum; And the dog instead of fighting Studies ornamental writing While the cat is taking lessons on the drum
We retire at eleven And we rise again at seven And I wish to call attention as I close; To the fact that all the scholars Are correct about their collars In particular in turning out their toes
6 Silent Thanks To Noisy Yanks
Why are Americans so demonstrative are they worried they won’t be noticed? That they have to be more remonstrative Than any other country listed
From juvenile delinquency to God is longer than any trip to Mars and back Why make all that fuss about the sod And the fairy brigade when all is black without the aid of any lease-lend pact
Maybe it’s because they’re worried about the state of violent destructive groups that have sprung from their roots of palsied need And feel the time is now to be reconstructive – in deed
If not invoice at least some gesture that democratic move presages failure to all the innocence that need blackmailers to excuse their greed With soldiers and sailors to guard that little countries shops and retailers?
Wouldn’t it be oh so much wiser to forget their noisy publicity And quietly reform (so much nicer) At home where all the trouble lies with love – no guns – so no one dies
7 To Call A Man A Man – Is A State of Grace
(Spoken): You may remember students demonstrating outside the White House with placards with the names of the fallen at Vietnam
A fence like sentinels in wait as names echo on the lawns of the House of white
The spikes like tombstones at dawn salute the old and the new that died Wasserman, Daniels and Cohen both Kennedy’s, King and Lincoln
All are on common ground they fought and died for freedom That cry out of sight and sound even to those who cannot see them Is this the place for that cry which says To call man a man is a state of grace no man can deny
8 Why Do Taxi Drivers Talk So Much?
Why do taxi drivers talk so much? Is it because they want to tax our nerves Chat, chat in between each move of the clutch to the boiling point of no reserve
Do they already know we’re far too late And nothing they say could possibly make or alter that important date?
Or is it because they are fed up too with traffic, price of living, taxes (The government informs are overdue like this fast becoming talking taxi)
Really, what is he going on about? Mind that truck! Wish I were walking Did you see that? He didn’t shout I would have done! He just went on talking
What was that? Oh yes, the Permissive Society yes I do agree with it What’s that? Wish your missus did Oh, I see (spoken quietly) (Maybe that would be a bit TOO permissive!)
No, no I don’t think age has anything… (Look out! The bus was nearly on us!) No, if your own thing is really jumping in and out of her bras it’s a gas (spoken quietly) I only hope for your sake they’re stretch proof! No, I don’t think that makes you a poofe (wish I could be as optimistic about my life on this endless trip). “Is she?” (definitely masochistic!) “Oh, when you jumped your wife did a flip” (Well, if you really jumped – sadistic). “No, I didn’t think she was in ‘em you prefer short ones to the linen?” (“I’m sure you do – wish you button up. Don’t really care what either of you do”) “She wants a what – a Pekinese pup?” What’s he going on about now? The last war! Oh no not that I’m late for the premiere. (I was a conscientious objector – that was until I met this taxi bore!).
“Where you? (I’m so glad) The Royal Pay Corps?” (I wish they’d paid you off). Open the door, I can’t stand anymore! “Drop me off cabby!” (No tip – lip. You’ve been too gabby) “How much?” Well, no, it’s a beautiful day I was should have walked all the way 16 bob? No, no, keep the change you deserve the tip” Never know – might give up bras, swap them for gymslips
(Sound of cab door banging).
Note: The album was also to include a reading of the poem, ‘If I Have Made, My Lady’, written by E.E. Cummings.
Click below for more information on Peter’s album…
PETER WYNGARDE: The Official Website 