STARRING: ART VAN HARVEY, BERNARDINE FLYNN AND DAVID WHITEHOUSE
A hot sticky day; Sade's not in the mood for Mr. Buller's relatives to come stay with them until it comes to light that it's an orphan boy in question. - from notes compiled by Barbara Schwarz
According to author John T. Hetherington,
in an interview with Jimbo, published May 28, 2014, he states: The script merely explains that Russell is Mr. Bueller’s nephew and
that his parents were Chicago people. According to Vic, Bueller has
taken “temporary charge of him until he can form definite plans.” And
then he brought Russell there “because this is a medium size city with
green grass and fresh air.”
___________________
David Whitehouse, I think, gets a raw deal from
Vic and Sade fans. While most fans of the show, myself included, prefer Rush over Russell, I think he makes a hard case for anyone to legitimately complain about his overall performance. Though the characters were similar, they were in fact two different characters, with two different names, different friends, different enemies, different parents and different upbringings. Though similar (both boys were bright and somewhat egotistical) Russell was far more brash than Rush. Russell probably had more book smarts than Rush. Rush may have had more street sense than Russell and was probably more friendly and more popular.
Russell seemed unafraid of any task, even "adult" tasks. He was certainly more outspoken than Rush. Russell took on more of a Sade persona and Rush more of a
Vic role.
Vic, Sade and Fletcher seemed to have treated both boys equally. However, look at the boy characters and realize they both grew up in different environments. Rush may have grown up "unloved" or something close to it (we don't know all the particulars) while Russell probably grew up in a thriving relationship with his parents and then they suddenly died. Either way, both boys would need lots of love. Vic, Sade and Fletcher seemed to provide that for each.
The boy characters each play their parts well. As I have stated in the past, I do think Bill Idelson was the better, more experienced actor and David Whitehouse was what I would consider, "raw." But Whitehouse is a far better actor in 1944 than he was when he first got on the show; if you don't believe me, I ask you to listen to some of the first audio we have of him and then listen to him a year or so later. He grows into the part.
And though we compare the two, why do we do it?
They do not play the same part! While both are orphans, they are two separate people. In my opinion, the thing that makes the average
Vic and Sade fan somewhat
anti-Russell is the fact that we have a few re-used scripts where they say exactly the same lines. When we hear those episodes, we are forced to compare the two. For instance, a comparison of the two in the Teaching Cigar Smoking to Chinbunny (
Rush/
Russell) clearly show a difference in their acting careers. Idelson
reads his lines acts like an absolute professional and sounds like he's been acting for 20 years. On the other hand, Whitehouse sounds like a 12 year-old kid reading his lines. It's really that way with everything they do that is similar.
However, take away Rush and those re-used scripts and try looking at Russell as an individual. In the beginning, Whitehouse has natural acting ability but the deeper you go into the series, you can hear his confidence grow. Russell was the best when he took on the never-afraid, brash kid persona. Like
the time he offered to tell Mr. Overholt to vacate Mis' Harris' rooming house or
the time he talks like a thug on the phone to Irvin, the delivery boy. It's unfortunate that in the surviving episodes we have of Russell, he doesn't do the brash act more often, as this seems to have been his strength.
Russell also had a laugh that is fun to listen to. As silly as that sounds, it's true. Russell could sound like an innocent child and there he was, willing to go throw Mr. Overholt off of the roof.
