The Sun.
London, England, 1868-03-20 00:00:00

PAN TO LTIIMES.

Although one or two of the usual Christmas
entertainments still linger on the stage the season
of pantomimes has really terminated, and it may be
interesting, and not now out of place, to consider
them in their origin, their progress with us and
their future application. Pantomime, as its Greek
derivation conveys, is, or rather was, the art of
expressing the passions, sentiments, and ideas by
action and attitude, without having recourse to the
use of speech. With the Greeks it was never more
than an accessory to the dance, but with the
Romans it was highly esteemed and separately
cultivated. In their funeral ceremonies, the
manners and principal events in the life of the de-
ceased were thus represented. In the time of Cicero,
the famous Roscius portrayed, by an expressive
pantomime, the most eloquent discourses of that
Roman orator. In the reign of Augustus, Pylades
and Bathylles were celebrated—the one for tragic,
the other for comic, delineations ; each one estab-
lished a separate school, and public applause was
divided between them. Nero himself figured
amongst the pantomimists, and frequently the en-
thusiasm produced by celebrated actors gave rise to
rival factions, and the perpetration of deplorable
excesses. In the middle ages pantomime uas re-
vived in Italy, the celebrate) Scaramouche being
highly distinguished in this style of acting. From
Italy it passed to France, and ultimately to this
country.

The vulgar association of the word pantomime
with us is that of a harlequinade. We have had it
connected with the dance in manner of the Greeks,
which is also of Italian revival, but it has never
been really popular on our stage as the means of
representing a drama ; in fact, we believe that many
years have elapsed since its last essay. Formerly
the harlequinade occupied almost the entire length
of the performance—the burlesque being but its
brief prelude or introduction. In these days, how-
ever, the public taste appears to be growing weary
of its ceaseless noise and unmeaning bustle,—its
endless dancing, fighting, tumbling, and purloining,
and, year by year, burlesque has grown into greater
importance. It is now no longer a mere prelude.
[t is established as the most important part of the
performance, and the harlequinade, dwindling in
proportion, is but its adjunct, frequently most in-
artistically connected, The objects of burlesque
are manifold. It jumbles past and present manners
together, bringing them into immediate and hu-
morous contrast. It caricatures every station of
life, most especially monarchs and their courts—to
which we beg to draw the attention of the politi-
cian. It is made the vehicle of display-7-d splendid
scenery, gorgeous decorations and a most liberal
exposure of the female form under every variety of
light; but of morals it has none, and this is its
great defect. In this respect, it is as barren as the
harlequinade itself.
Such, then, is the state of pantomime at present,
and we, who hold to our ancient predilection for
clown, pantaloon, harlequin and columbine, would

be glad to see it placed in a position of better secu-
rity on our boards. We love the motley and are I
apprehensive about its future fate, fearing as we do
that each accession of fresh patrons of the stage will
be more and more set against its contortions and
grimaces, and, in our anxiety for its preservation,
suggest that a moral motive should be given to its
performance. We see no reason why the harlequi-
nade shoull not be placed, in respect to the stage,
in a situation analogous to that of the humorous
critic in respect to the ordinary writers of public
events, or of the caricaturist to the regular artists.
It might be made the means of impressing on the
public its follies, failings, and even faults. It might
exhibit the unscrupulous struggle fur political power,
the dishonest grasping after wealth,—either through
companies or by trade,—and the management of our
poor-law and other boards,—in short, represent all
that might make us better acquainted with ourselves,
and that in an attractive, yet whimsical, form. It
would then afford not only subjects for mirth but
for reflection, and would be useful—more beneficial,
perhaps, than many a well-intentioned sermon. It
is true the tumbler and the dancer would have to be
replaced by the burlesque performer, but we should
preserve the costume, and we must admit to have
' more affection for that than for the unmeaning
grimace and action it at present covers. Let us
have for each scene some worthy object—some hum-
bug of the day humorously represented, and if such
changes be deemed too sudden, let it alternate with
what is now extant on our boards. It is true two dis-
tinctsetsof performers would have then to be engaged
—the comic and the tumbling, but two sets of the
latter have frequently been employed, and managers
generally appear to be utterly regardless of the
number engaged in our pantomimes. In con-
clusion, were we not thoroughly convinced that
such alteration would be appreciated by the public,
and thereby prove lucrative to theatrical lessees, we
should not have ventured to make the suggestion.
Harlequinade might then trespass on burlesque,
instead of being quietly squeezed out of existence
by the latter ; and motley would continue the fa-
vourite amusement of our winter nights,—should
we be right in our conviction.—Racing Times and
Amateur Dramatic Chronicle.