“Closely Draw the Cord of Virtue”: Instructive Plays and American Society, 1795 to 1825

On the night of December 9, 1812, patrons crowded into The Chestnut Street Theatre in Philadelphia to see the play Fontamville Forest by James Boaden. This play, a benefit for Mr. and Miss Holman, the featured actors, would bring in the most money of all of the performances that week (R. James 121). On stage, young Adeline, played by Miss Holman, flees the lascivious Marquis de Montault. Trapped within the gloomy ruins of the abbey, she cowers before the nobleman. As he slowly approaches her, he pronounces, "This lonely place will rather fix a gloom forever on your youth, that should be led to happier scenes of gay, voluptuous love." Poor Adeline understands his meaning only too well and cries, "I thank you, Sir, for thus at once displaying the glaring infamy design'd for me" (23). Fontamville Forest was an example of a Gothic play, described by some as the earliest form of melodrama, that sought to inspire a sense of mystery, gloom, and terror.1 Gothic plays proved very popular in American theaters between 1795 and 1825 and appeared regularly in the repertory of major theaters in each city. With their clear distinctions between good and evil characters and their particularly graphic ways of showing the consequences of sin, Gothic plays were particularly effective in offering moral instruction for patrons. Many believed that moral instruction was sorely needed at this time. The first appearance of Gothic plays coincided with a particularly turbulent time in the history of American society. Described as a period of "social disequilibrium," the years between 1795 and 1825 featured booming populations, growing inequality between rich and poor, mounting urban problems, and the impact of the second Great Awakening. All of these developments affected theaters, for then, as now, theaters had to please in order to survive, and theatrical managers had to determine which dramatic fare would appeal to changing audiences in the ever-expanding young country. Between 1795 and 1825, New York City and Boston more than tripled their populations, and Philadelphia and Charleston nearly doubled their sizes, according to the US Bureau of the Census (106). Economically, too, the nation was changing rapidly; by the 179Os, many large fortunes founded in "overseas trade and urban land speculation" had established America's "first truly wealthy urban elite." At the same time, the number of propertyless urban dwellers also increased, creating a "growing economic inequality" (Mohl 32). This disparity of wealth seemed to be reflected in theaters. For example, several new theaters sprang up in the major theatrical centers, particularly in the 182Os, to compete with the established ones; these new theaters often began as circuses and appealed directly to lower-class patrons. Though American society in this period saw increasing geographic segregation of economic classes, it simultaneously witnessed a relaxation of social distinctions between classes. With the economic shifts in America between 1795 and 1825 came a breakdown in ties to community and a breakdown in deference to an established elite; words like "gentleman" and "lady" were becoming "less socially precise and might be claimed by anyone" (Matthews 8). Such developments must have proved threatening to upper-class Americans, whose previously unquestioned superiority was now challenged. These changing standards soon affected the theater, particularly the usual patrons of the expensive box seats. One disgruntled patron observed in the Mirror of Taste and Dramatic Censor that "intruders" were moving into the boxes and that these new arrivals displayed "unmannerly and unjust conduct." The writer concluded that the theatrical experience would prove much more enjoyable if "every one who can afford to wear such a coat as gentlemen wear, could imitate the manners of gentlemen as well as they can ape their dress" (January 1810). During the early nineteenth century, too, Protestantism in America grew to be "uncommonly forceful," partially as a result of that series of revivals known as the second Great Awakening, and this development also affected theaters (Johnson 5). …