Wurzel Flummery - Summary

In April 1917, a not particularly important but rather enjoyable thing happened: Wurzel-Flummery by A.A. Milne premiered in London.  It was his very first play, had absolutely nothing to do with the war going on, and started off a career that would establish him as one of the better-known playwrights of the time.  And most importantly, it is very, very funny.  During its initial run, the play was part of a trio of one-act plays (the other two by Milne’s friend and advocate J.M. Barrie) for eight weeks and was well-reviewed “with words such as ‘witty’, ‘delightful’, and ‘brilliant’ freely used”

The tale concerns two Members of Britain’s Parliament:  the first, Robert Crawshaw, a middle-aged conservative, the other, his friend Richard Meriton, who is a rival from across the aisle, a young liberal that just happens to be seeking the hand of the former’s daughter, Viola. The way they approach the dilemma is typical of their characters.  Dick, the younger, has been staying with Robert’s family and has fallen in love with Viola, the daughter of the house.  Their engagement is a secret one as the play begins, largely because they are concerned about how Robert will react.  He is, as Viola reminds her fiancé, not terribly keen on the younger man. An unexpected visit by a peculiar attorney Denis Clifton presents a dilemma to these successful politicians:  A mischievous old man Antony Clifton has left both M.Ps a fortune of 50,000 pounds for each in his will, conditional upon their agreement to change their names to a ridiculous name of his own invention: Wurzel-Flummery.  If Robert Crawshaw, M.P. or Richard Meriton, M.P. (or hopefully both) wants to inherit this legacy, they must immediately give up their surnames – the names under which they have won seats in Britain’s majestic House of Commons – to become Robert and Richard Wurzel-Flummery. They have a dilemma whether it will be right to refuse the money because of the shameful condition, or would it be wrong to reject such a legacy, considering the good it might do. The audience is reminded that wives and daughters are expected to give up their own names soon after entering adulthood, but the men are so horrified at the thought.  As a politician, the good name they gained so far is important, but that good name recognition costs money. A fortune might make them a better representative, more independent, more able to do the people’s will.  So, both Robert and Richard are deeply (and humorously) conflicted… and both take the money, and the name, in the end.