The Sun.
London, England, 1838-05-01 00:00:00

THEATRES.

CO VENT: ei A 111)E

iimiieo anti Juliet was produced at this Theatre last night, end most
sincerely do we Congtatulate the lover!' of Shakspeate upon the admi.
rebleieiannet iii Which this delightftil play hat beef) hnee More invested
with the tettilties Of Moat eepreSeiltatloh, sti etifittiiitely beautiful is
the poetry of this play—so touchingly pathetic the t;:w:y of " the star.
cross'd lovers"—now rejoicing in the raptures of a youthful and pure
affection, the bright sunshine of the morning of their love—then
clouded and dhrkello tl the Obtfittftes of ah ttnhatitiy fate—so harrowing
the catastrophe, which, in the glum or an inanely tJtiiieS " the
fearful passage of their death-marked love,"—that there are few poi!!!'
stories which possess such a powerful hold upoei our feelings, and so
strongly engage our sympathies. Romeo and Juliet is just that one of
Seakspeare's plays which we have read with deepest interest in our early
childhood; fer the touching pathos of the lover's history most na-
turally appeals to us at that period, when the warm freshness of
our young affections has not "run to waste" amidst the deadening and
contaminating influences of later days. We almost fear, therefore, lest
the pure conceptions which a youthful imagination has gathered from
the beautiful poetry of this love tragedy, should be injured or weakened
by viewing it through the medium of stage representation. Our appre
pensions were agreeably disappointed at Covent-garden last night.
Such was the ability with which the characters were supported, such the
taste, the care, displayed in representing with all the aids of scenic ar_
rangernent, and harmony of different portions, in order to the: general
effect of the whole, that it was impossible not to witness the perfor-
mance throughout, with feelings of unqualified delight. And such
were the feelings which a numerous and impartial audience
most unequivocally expressed. Without entering at length into
the merits of particular performances, we will remark that Mr.
Maeready's assuming the part of Friar Laurence—one so much
beneath his abilities—was the most impressive proof that could
be furnished of his sincere anxiety to do honour, by every means in his
power, to the genius of Shakspeare. Miss Helen Faucit's personation of
Juliet was such as must have satisfied all but a very severe hypercritic.
It was a fine portraiture of the ardent, enduring, fondness of female love,
with a thousand delicate touches of feeling, and graces of action, and
not unfrequently an energy of acting, almost electrical in its effects.
Mr. Anderson played Romeo in a manner throughout excellent, and in
many instances strikingly so. If he is not quite the Romeo of Shak-
spears, it is no ordinary praise to say that he is the best Romeo
now on the stage, and would be better if he at times infused more
passion into the too often rather monotonous tones of his voice. Mr.
Vining was not mercurial and graceful enough for Mercutio, but it was
nevertheless a respectable performance. Mrs. Clifford, as the Nurse,
Mr. Bennett, as Tybalt; and Mr. Diddear, as Benvolio, according to the
well-used phrase, "left nothing to be desired."