Set in 1930s London, Jane Morgan's Once in a While is a witty, romantic comedy that captures the elegance and charm of the golden age of British theatre - perfect for fans of Ivor Novello. Nöel Coward, Julian Slade and Sandy Wilson.
This production features a sparkling cast of ten, led by Greg Castiglioni (Phantom of the Opera, Titanic, Woman in White) and Jenny Perry (Phantom of the Opera, Rocky Horror Show), and helmed by acclaimed fringe director David Phipps-Davis.
This semi-staged concert performance is a world premiere not to be missed, coming to London's Union Theatre 1 - 2 June 2026.
We sat down with Jane Morgan (book, music and lyrics) and David Phipps-Davis (director and dramaturg) to learn more.
You began writing this in 1983. How has the show—and your relationship with Bernard and Nancy—evolved over four decades?
JANE: Until I met David Phipps-Davis, the dramaturg and director, I didn’t really know much about Bernard or Nancy – it was the other characters that sung out. So really, I can’t say my relationship with Bernard and Nancy evolved at all until I started developing it with Dave.
JANE: Until I met David Phipps-Davis, the dramaturg and director, I didn’t really know much about Bernard or Nancy – it was the other characters that sung out. So really, I can’t say my relationship with Bernard and Nancy evolved at all until I started developing it with Dave.
The show is described as a love letter to the likes of Ivor Novello and Noël Coward. What is it about that specific Golden Age sound that compelled you to spend half a lifetime composing in it?
JANE: It’s the emotion of the music. It’s the lyrical tunes. It’s the romantic nature or the fun nature and the innocence, I think, of that time. The pure escapism in a world where nothing horrible happens, unless you happen to be jilted for somebody else, which happens in our case, of course. And I certainly think that Ivor Novello’s tunes are really lovely, aren’t they? And Noël Coward’s tunes are realty lovely. And of course, I loved P. G. Wodehouse, and that kind of humour is my kind of humour very much.
JANE: It’s the emotion of the music. It’s the lyrical tunes. It’s the romantic nature or the fun nature and the innocence, I think, of that time. The pure escapism in a world where nothing horrible happens, unless you happen to be jilted for somebody else, which happens in our case, of course. And I certainly think that Ivor Novello’s tunes are really lovely, aren’t they? And Noël Coward’s tunes are realty lovely. And of course, I loved P. G. Wodehouse, and that kind of humour is my kind of humour very much.
How does it feel to be a debut musical theatre writer at 72, and what message do you hope that sends to other creatives who feel they might have missed their window?
JANE: I think retirement is a really important time because you don’t have a nine-to-five obligation. And so with retirement, you can afford the time and the headspace for the creativity to come. So I would say for people who have had an idea in their working life and they haven’t developed it, now’s the time! Now’s the time to go back into that world and rediscover it and adapt it for what you feel you can do now.
JANE: I think retirement is a really important time because you don’t have a nine-to-five obligation. And so with retirement, you can afford the time and the headspace for the creativity to come. So I would say for people who have had an idea in their working life and they haven’t developed it, now’s the time! Now’s the time to go back into that world and rediscover it and adapt it for what you feel you can do now.
Bernard and Nancy are the heart of the show. Is there a specific song in the score that represents the soul of their relationship?
JANE: Well, there’s two of them – Once in a While and In the Twinkling of an Eye. He met her and that was “in the twinkling of an eye.” And then as he taught her, he realised she was one in a million and it is only “once in a while” you meet somebody like that.
JANE: Well, there’s two of them – Once in a While and In the Twinkling of an Eye. He met her and that was “in the twinkling of an eye.” And then as he taught her, he realised she was one in a million and it is only “once in a while” you meet somebody like that.
Writing about 1930s London in the 1980s is very different from writing about it in 2026. Did you find yourself time traveling twice while refining the book and lyrics?
JANE: In the development stage, yes, we were transported back to that age because we were talking about use of language and social etiquette and spoken etiquette, so I suppose I was definitely time travelling. But this is a
constant – this story of this world spans all the decades that I’ve lived through with it.
JANE: In the development stage, yes, we were transported back to that age because we were talking about use of language and social etiquette and spoken etiquette, so I suppose I was definitely time travelling. But this is a
constant – this story of this world spans all the decades that I’ve lived through with it.
Over forty years, musical tastes and trends have shifted dramatically. How did you resist the urge to modernise the score and instead stay true to the 1930s aesthetic?
JANE: Well, I think in my mind the story dictates how I write it and respond to it. Obviously, attitudes have changed and I accommodated that, but I still rooted myself in that era. I mean, not that I lived through that era, but my perception of that era.
JANE: Well, I think in my mind the story dictates how I write it and respond to it. Obviously, attitudes have changed and I accommodated that, but I still rooted myself in that era. I mean, not that I lived through that era, but my perception of that era.
What is your writing process like for the show and how has that changed as technology has advanced through the decades?
JANE: Obviously, in the eighties I wouldn’t have been using a computer. I recorded the songs on a tape and my mum did a lot of the transcribing – everything was done by hand!
JANE: Obviously, in the eighties I wouldn’t have been using a computer. I recorded the songs on a tape and my mum did a lot of the transcribing – everything was done by hand!
Can you remember the very first melody or lyric you wrote for the show back in '83? Is it still in the production today?
JANE: It is! Once in a While, which has become the title of the show! The title was originally Dear Bernard, and there is a song to that – a new song. We changed the title because Dear Bernard sounds like a “Dear John” letter and so the emphasis of the whole musical would be we’re all galloping towards this desperate end, where Once in a While lifts it and makes it a positive all-round thing.
JANE: It is! Once in a While, which has become the title of the show! The title was originally Dear Bernard, and there is a song to that – a new song. We changed the title because Dear Bernard sounds like a “Dear John” letter and so the emphasis of the whole musical would be we’re all galloping towards this desperate end, where Once in a While lifts it and makes it a positive all-round thing.
 |
| Jane Morgan |
If you could go back to 1983 and tell your younger self that the show would premiere in 2026 with a cast of ten and West End leads, what do you think her reaction would be?
JANE: Really delighted, because in ’83 I had no how I was ever going to be able to find the right people to produce it. Actually, I was absolutely defeated by the idea of bringing it to the public. If I had been told, “Don’t worry, Jane – it’s going to happen.” I would have been thrilled but mystified as to how that was going to happen.
When you first encountered Jane’s material, what was the spark that convinced you this needed to be on a stage?
DAVE: It was two-fold for me. It was one, that I felt Jane needed guidance and she was willing to have guidance. And two, I thought there was a show in it. It would have been hard to do just for the money if I really didn’t believe there was a show in it.
JANE: Really delighted, because in ’83 I had no how I was ever going to be able to find the right people to produce it. Actually, I was absolutely defeated by the idea of bringing it to the public. If I had been told, “Don’t worry, Jane – it’s going to happen.” I would have been thrilled but mystified as to how that was going to happen.
When you first encountered Jane’s material, what was the spark that convinced you this needed to be on a stage?
DAVE: It was two-fold for me. It was one, that I felt Jane needed guidance and she was willing to have guidance. And two, I thought there was a show in it. It would have been hard to do just for the money if I really didn’t believe there was a show in it.
As a dramaturg, how did you approach polishing a piece that has been four decades in the making while ensuring Jane’s original 1930s-inspired voice stayed intact?
DAVE: I suppose it was addressing what I thought was wrong with the show, both plot and structure. Also addressing how these older style shows are done today with key changes and complicated dance music, etc. A modern audience would think Crazy for You is a 1930s musical. Well, of course, it’s a modern book, it’s modern arrangements in the style of the time, and that’s how we see those shows now. I think, otherwise it would seem very dated.
DAVE: I suppose it was addressing what I thought was wrong with the show, both plot and structure. Also addressing how these older style shows are done today with key changes and complicated dance music, etc. A modern audience would think Crazy for You is a 1930s musical. Well, of course, it’s a modern book, it’s modern arrangements in the style of the time, and that’s how we see those shows now. I think, otherwise it would seem very dated.
JANE: The thing is, if you want something to live, you don’t want it to be set in stone, for everything is for the time. Ivor was writing for the time, wasn’t he? Gilbert and Sullivan were writing for the time.
You’ve directed many established works. Does your approach change when you are the very first person to put a 40-year-old new script on its feet?
DAVE: Yes and no because I’ve also directed a lot of new works and been dramaturg on a lot of new works and this effectively is a new work because it’s never been produced. The difference is whether you’re allowed to change things or not. Because obviously an established, in copyright piece where you’re not working with the writer, you have to do as is. You don’t if it’s Shakespeare or something like that – you can fiddle around with it. But certainly, all the new stuff I’ve done with writers I’ve always made changes with their consent - even if they don’t really want to – in the hope that they think it’s an improvement.
DAVE: Yes and no because I’ve also directed a lot of new works and been dramaturg on a lot of new works and this effectively is a new work because it’s never been produced. The difference is whether you’re allowed to change things or not. Because obviously an established, in copyright piece where you’re not working with the writer, you have to do as is. You don’t if it’s Shakespeare or something like that – you can fiddle around with it. But certainly, all the new stuff I’ve done with writers I’ve always made changes with their consent - even if they don’t really want to – in the hope that they think it’s an improvement.
In a landscape often dominated by modern American imports, how important is it to premiere a show that feels so quintessentially, unapologetically British?
DAVE: Modern American imports? At the moment, it feels dominated by Andrew Lloyd Webber again – both sides of the Atlantic. It’s amazing what a resurgence he’s having in the last couple of years. Considering he’s been considered passe and out of fashion for so long. I think the modern equivalent of what were the Rodgers and Hammerstein audience are now the Lloyd Webber audience.
DAVE: Modern American imports? At the moment, it feels dominated by Andrew Lloyd Webber again – both sides of the Atlantic. It’s amazing what a resurgence he’s having in the last couple of years. Considering he’s been considered passe and out of fashion for so long. I think the modern equivalent of what were the Rodgers and Hammerstein audience are now the Lloyd Webber audience.
JANE: So it’s a kind of nostalgia in a way, isn’t it?
DAVE: Yeah. Just like Once in a While! And Operation Mincemeat, which is quintessentially and unapologetically British. Certainly, the comical stuff written in that style is popular still, I think.
JANE: Yes. I think the British humour is quite constant in a certain way, because we’re very good at sending ourselves up, aren’t we?
You’re working with a cast of ten—quite large for a fringe run. How are you utilising the sparkling ensemble to create the bustle of 1930s London?
DAVE: It’s a show that’s written for far more than ten people and some of those cast members are playing three roles. And everyone is doubling in the ensemble. It definitely is an old-fashioned show in the fact that there would be a chorus. If it was produced commercially now, the understudies would not be in the dressing rooms – they absolutely would be onstage as the ensemble. So, in actual fact this is a smaller scale show than it would be and certainly we felt that there was no way of doing it with less than ten people.
DAVE: It’s a show that’s written for far more than ten people and some of those cast members are playing three roles. And everyone is doubling in the ensemble. It definitely is an old-fashioned show in the fact that there would be a chorus. If it was produced commercially now, the understudies would not be in the dressing rooms – they absolutely would be onstage as the ensemble. So, in actual fact this is a smaller scale show than it would be and certainly we felt that there was no way of doing it with less than ten people.
 |
| David Phipps-Davis. |
Jane, you’ve lived with these characters since 1983. David, you are seeing them with fresh eyes. Was there ever a clash between the original vision and the modern staging, or did it feel like a natural fit?
JANE: Never a clash, no. It was a gentle development, actually. And I think Dave caught the inspiration really well and he got in the groove for me very well. It was a joy, actually, because we were made to work together on this, I think.
DAVE: I certainly felt I knew what needed to happen to the show. Even from the first read-through I knew fundamentally what needed to happen with the relationship between Bernard and Nancy, though at that point I didn’t know what was going to happen in act two, apart from there needing to be something that happened in act two. It was only gradually that the idea of Bernard writing a show reared its head, really to give him less of a negative ending in the show.
JANE: And I think Dave understood who he was better than I did. Or what Dave did was really guided me to make him less of a 2D character. And Dave was able to ignite something in me that was able to conjure that up.
DAVE: I think fundamentally the big thing that I changed, and that was supported by everyone at the table read, is the massive plot point about whether they end up together and whether Nancy’s husband survives or not.
JANE: I mean, I wasn’t absolutely wedded to “they live happily ever after.” I just hadn’t conceived of another ending, that’s all. And then having it come to life at the table made it much more a real story, because real stories don’t have happy endings very often, do they? But what I discovered, you know, was how adaptable I was to possibilities of where the plot was going to go. Because I felt what I was wedded to was the essence of the show not every detail of it, which means I was a flexible kind of writer. But I wouldn’t have agreed to something I thought was fundamentally wrong or would have taken it in a direction which was dark or not in keeping with the characters and the situations. But I was really open to lots of fun with it.
DAVE: Certainly, I think as a dramaturg I think my job is always to change the show for the better but never get the writers to write away from what they want. I think the worst thing you can do as a dramaturg is when you leave, they change everything back.
JANE: So Dave could work with me because I was open to change. And actually, what was really good is that Dave suggested something and then he’d be quiet and he’d let me write it. So that was a very new working experience. So the vibe was right to develop something and there aren’t many people you can work with like that in your life. But it all seemed to evolve with us working together and it was just magical!
Much of the Golden Age of British theatre was about escapism and elegance. Why do you think modern audiences still need that sense of charm today?
JANE: Trump. It’s the stock answer, isn’t it? But it’s true because life is particularly disappointing – certainly public life is very disappointing – and there’s so many scams and modern life dangers, so it’s very nice to retreat into what was perceived as a safer world.
JANE: Trump. It’s the stock answer, isn’t it? But it’s true because life is particularly disappointing – certainly public life is very disappointing – and there’s so many scams and modern life dangers, so it’s very nice to retreat into what was perceived as a safer world.
Many worry that the "Novello/Coward" style of musical is a dying art. Do you see Once in a While as a revival of that style, or a modern evolution of it?
JANE: A modern evolution of it. I mean, I don’t think the public would warm to the really heavy style of Ivor Novello now. I mean, it might be a great historical experience, but given the frothy, easy to digest musicals there are, I think Ivor’s original style wouldn’t go down well.
JANE: A modern evolution of it. I mean, I don’t think the public would warm to the really heavy style of Ivor Novello now. I mean, it might be a great historical experience, but given the frothy, easy to digest musicals there are, I think Ivor’s original style wouldn’t go down well.
DAVE: And of course, we must remember that however popular the songs were, the shows were critically panned. It was just the audiences that loved them.
JANE: So you could say our show is an adapted style for the modern age.
If this musical were a 1930s cocktail, what would be in it?
JANE: Well, we’ve got something sweet in Dickie and Poppy and Nancy and Bernard. We’ve got something sour in Aunt Miriam. We’ve got something spicy with Dickie and Sylvia.
JANE: Well, we’ve got something sweet in Dickie and Poppy and Nancy and Bernard. We’ve got something sour in Aunt Miriam. We’ve got something spicy with Dickie and Sylvia.
DAVE: Something fruity with Merrell.
JANE: I mean, there’s lots of flavours in there, aren’t there?
DAVE: From a fundamental point of view, we do mention two drinks in the show – three drinks including tea. I’m not sure we can make a whiskey and gin cocktail. So I think it has to be a gin-based cocktail, doesn’t it?
JANE: Yes, of course it does!
Beyond a standing ovation, what would success look like for Once in a While after this special four-performance run?
JANE: That we do it again somewhere, really.
JANE: That we do it again somewhere, really.
Once In A While runs at The Union Theatre in London on Monday 1st and Tuesday 2nd June 2026. For further information visit https://www.onceinawhilethemusical.com/
Post a Comment