By Dr. Paul Turse-Bay Area Sports and Entertainment contributor

Last year, I had what I thought would be a foolproof plan to save a major magazine publishing company megabucks and, perhaps, secure a nice tidy reward for my enterprising idea.  My plan was the result of a scientific study revealing an interesting fact about readers and subscribers of Playboy:  All the readers of Playboy interviewed gave sworn testimony that the reason for their purchase was primarily for the articles.  So, based on my extensive survey and polling, I came to the conclusion that since everybody gets the magazine for the articles, Playboy publishers could remove the apparently superfluous photos and cartoons, thus saving megabucks by not having to pay cartoonists, photographers, and models.  They would also reduce substantially the size of the magazine, resulting in even a greater cost savings, especially with the elimination of the centerfold --an easy job because those two pages can be easily torn out . . . or so I have been told.

Should my unique idea--which, by the way, has been copyrighted--be implemented, from here on in, no readers of Playboy would have to take the Fifth or perjure themselves when asked why they buy Playboy.

So far, I have received no response from the publishers.  I did, however, receive a phone call from an insider, who wished to remain anonymous.  My source told me that in several communities, thousands of experimental copies, with the material in question removed by one of the copyboys, were distributed in accordance with my proposal.  Unfortunately, none of the copies could be sold or be given away.  On the other hand, the copyboy, who was tasked with removing the photos, made enough money to start his own publication by selling the pix to the highest bidder on eBay.  He has hence retired, after making a small fortune by distributing his own magazine, with just pictures, and no stories.  However, the accuracy of this information could not be verified at the time this article was published.

All kidding aside, Playboy does have some very fine and talented contributing writers and some excellent material, along with some very funny cartoons.  Of course, if the photos and cartoons were removed, it would not be Playboy.  The purpose of the introductory satire was to make the point that it might be rather difficult for this kind of a project, be it an adult literary work or adult theatrical production, to survive if stripped bare of the adult aspects.

However, Greg Thompson Productions (GTP) has managed to accomplish just such a theatrical feat and treat in Bareback, a rip-snortin’, old fashioned Wild West spectacular, which has been playing in Reno since its opening in May of 2005.  Starring Chelsea Thompson (no relation to Greg Thompson) and choreographed by Mistinguett, Bareback’s blend of theatrical techniques, not only bares some beautiful bodies, but also bears witness to an artistic show.  Bolstered by five engaging cowgirls, each with her own distinct “personality,” Chelsea Thompson sets the standard for showgirl performers.  Her sensuous dancing and kittenish expressions are enhanced by her long Rapunzel-like, flaxen hair.  But make no mistake; this is no fairy-tale beauty.  She is a real flesh and blood talent, capable of both dramatic and comedic artistry.  

In fact, all of the actors seem to be real-life, genuine personalities, especially when they relate to the patrons.  Perhaps, the most impressive theatrical technique employed by the cast is the spontaneous improvisation they engage in with the audience.  Aside from the comical repartee shouted across the “footlights” with some of the cast, a few lucky audience members become part of the show when escorted on stage, either by a curvaceous cowgirl or a buffed cowboy, in order to good-naturedly become the brunt of the hilarious, yet tasteful, tomfoolery.

When this technique is utilized by some other performing companies, the audience often wonders whether the cast is guilty of having shills, or cohorts, in the audience, to go along with the fun or to prompt the improvisation.  If this is the case in Bareback, it is not noticeable or obtrusive, but appears to flow quite naturally from the action on the stage.  Adding to the spontaneity of the show is the fact that the cast members of Bareback are skilled enough to know how to evoke the desired responses from the patrons, or to uniquely involve them in the action, even without planting them in the audience.

There was at least one purely spontaneous moment in the show, to which I can personally testify:

Courtesy of GTP, I had a great view from my aisle seat, which was next to the “runway” area.  From this vantage point, I was quite close to the performers as they smoothly and effortlessly sang and danced their way from the stage to the house in order to interrelate with the audience.

Although my seat was in a strategic location, it seems that it also put me in a position to be an easy mark for one quite stunning and gorgeous “Rhinestone Babe”:

 I was jotting down my notes for this story, when Tamara Evans, a talented performer and gifted vocalist, climbed the steps to get closer to the enthralled fans.  She suddenly stopped her rendition, looked down at what I was doing, and asked, "What?  Are you taking notes?  Before I could answer, and without missing a beat, she hopped on my lap, tousled what thinning hair I have left, and gave me a gracious hug.  She then stood up and retorted.  "Put that in your notes."  She then resumed her spirited singing as though nothing had happened.

After a few heart palpitations, I continued taking notes, although, I must admit, my concentration had waned a bit!  Thus, I cannot swear to the veracity of all the details that occurred during that moment.  (Or the rest of this review, for that matter!)  All I can say is that one elegant performer gave me a memory to take all the way back home to New Jersey.  And there is no way I can, regarding that theatrical thrill, “fuggetaboudit.”  But, then again, isn’t that what great theatre is all about?

Speaking of concentration, when you attend this magnificent show, if you can divert your gaze away from the unforgettable hunky guys and buxom babes, be sure to check out the unique set, stylishly created to resemble a honky-tonk saloon--quite apropos for the Reno venue!  The walls are adorned with hubcaps, license plates, beer advertisements, and holstered six-guns, all designed to suggest the tawdry barroom locale.  Moreover, the neatest touch of all is the numerous colored bras hanging over the mirror behind the bar.

The first revealing sequence displays the girls, standing on top of the bar ala Coyote Ugly, thrilling the audience by dancing and removing an article of clothing (or two) as the talented male performers in the show sing, “I like it, I love it, I want some more of it.”  And should you see this show, you too will not only like it and love it; you will want some more of it, since this scene is just a prelude, an intro--a little teaser--to the exciting renditions to come.  Moreover, you will definitely want more of the talented singing and dancing.

Perhaps the highlight of the show is the beautifully choreographed sequence that features Thompson and off-stage husband, Jim Pferschy.  In what can best be described as a sensuous ballet, a story is told of love found, love lost, and, ultimately, love found again.  The climax of the dance is when the couple mounts a mechanical bull and sustains the gyrations--the ups and downs--of their relationship.  

This sequence epitomizes the artistic components of the show.  In my opinion, if the performers had been dressed in ballet costumes, and two of the perhaps more blatant erotic moments, all of which happen quite quickly and artistically, had been eliminated, this scene could have been part of a family show.  (Certainly, even the most elegant and expressive professional ballets are not without their erotic elements, which are somewhat mitigated by the artistry of the form.)  Should the aforementioned “Mechanical Bull” sequence be included in a family show, youngsters would understand the love story and see the ride on the bull as a symbol of the "rough ride" that the lovers’ relationship entailed.  The adults, of course, would have “gotten the bull by the horns” and understood the Freudian ramifications of the erotic ride.  Even so, in the final analysis, as the scene is performed now in the adult version, the costuming, the lighting, the music, the smoke-like effects all work to subordinate the sexuality to the artistry.

While the Thompson/Pferschy performance was a study in individual performances, most of the sequences comprise the entire cast, with Thompson and the other cowgirls forming a colorful ensemble, such as in the sprightly “I like my girls on the trashy side” rendition, sung by the male performers.  (This scene, by the way could be toned down to be “girls on the sexy or wild side.”)  The artistic and energetic choreography, by dance-meister Mistinguett, allows each of the gals to play the “trashy side” to the hilt; yet, gives each girl a bit of individuality and thus not one is a carbon copy of the other.  At the conclusion of this sequence, as the cowgirls strut offstage, Mistinguett gives each one a unique flirtatious gaze and a sexy gait to beguile the audience.  It is in these sequences that the captivating attributes of each girl shine through, and her personality upstages her nudity.

Now, before all you gals out there take issue with the all-girl aspects of the show upstaging the guys in the cast.  Your objection will be sustained by the handsome male performers in the show.  Tim Tenhumberg and Jim Pferschy present evidence that this is a show for the gals in the audience, too.  Studly Tenhumberg’s resonant voice sets the tone for the spirited dancing of the girls.  The way he relates to the girls, with his singing and dancing, provides a vicarious delight to the crowd.  Pferschy, who strips down to reveal a ripped physique that would make some of the Chippendales envious, displays singing and dancing talent as polished as his physique.  It is the showmanship of the guys, along with the talent of the girls that makes the audience aware that this show is an honest art requiring no apology.

While many readers of Playboy give a sly grin when they tell you they buy it for the articles, none of the theatergoers I interviewed after the show smirked or chuckled when they said they would see the show for the singing and dancing alone.

Both Howard and Charles, from Lodi, out on the town in Reno, took time out from the Deuces Wild slots for the better odds that the show would provide more returns for their money.  Howard was impressed with the talent displayed, testifying that the show had more to offer than just nudity.  Charles had nothing but superlatives for the show.  Although he demurred for a second when he was asked if he would have come had the ribaldry been eliminated.  However, under cross-examination, he readily admitted that the show was successful basically because of the talent of the performers. 

Michael and Maria, from Sacramento, readily agreed that the show could simply stand on just the merits of the singing and dancing alone.  "Bareback was a great show,” Michael declared, “but you take away the adult part of it, and I think it can still be a great show for the family.  He readily agreed that any audience could “enjoy the dancing and the singing just for that, without all the adult stuff in it.”

Bareback will be playing through July 16, 2006.  Should you get a chance to see this rowdy, rollicking artistic romp, you will, as a star witness, be able to swear on a stack of Bibles that you went to see it for the singing and dancing.

Indeed, the verdict is in.  As “Judge” Charles, interviewed earlier, declared, Bareback is "classy."

Court is in session every Wednesday through Monday at 10:30 p.m., and you can join an enthralled jury/audience.  Tickets start at $29.95.  For more information on tickets and show times, call 1-800-HARRAHS, or log on to www.harrahs.com.