The evening telegraph. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1864-1918, 1870-03-08
MUSICAL AND DRAMATIC.
nIr. Rnnhter nn WIInmlet. .y

Almost any reasonably good actor, who would
fail altogether In such parts as macbeth"
''King Lear" "Shylock," "Richard ILL.," or
"Othello," might give pleasing aud popular
personation of "Hamlet, If his audience would
be content to forget the metaphysical subtleties
of the character, and accept plain, straight
forward, and unpoetical representation of an
interesting young prince who puts an "antic
disposition on" for the accomplishment of q
certain purpose, who plays the fool before those
whom he wishes to deceive, who never forgets
to be q gentleman and who is at all times in
terestingly melancholy Such performance as
this ought not to be very difficult in comparison
with the peculiar and strongly-markod
features of the other characters mentioned that
imperatively demand elaborate treatment If even
o measurable success Is to be achieved. The
play of Hamlet itself is intensely interesting; 1t
is eminently picturesque, and is full OF fine
stage effects that appeal in the strongest manner
to the popular fancy. 1t is owing to these char
acteristics that the most profoundly intellectual
and wonderfully subtle drama in the whole range
of literature is one of the most popular. Hamlet
would probably keep its place on the stage as
first-rate melodrama if there was not philoso-
phical or metaphysical idea connected with 1t;
and it would be even more popular than 1t is If
any pains were taken as general rule to pre-
sent 1t as drama, and not merely for sake of
the background and accessories it affords for
heightening the effect of a single figure. Upon
this single figure, however, Shakespeare has
exhausted all the resources of his
art In Hamlet" he has delineated a man, and
he has analyzed the soul of man. The hero
of this play is to a very large extent type, but
he is also an individual, in whom every man
can to greater or less degree detect his own
likeness, but in whom every man finds some
thing that does not belong to himself. The
suggestion in o barbarous old Morse tale-the
outlines of which Shakespeare has adhered to
with even unnecessary fidelity-in which the
hero affects madness for the purpose of deceiv-
ing his enemies and accomplishing a revenge
upon which his heart was set, furnished the
poet with the idea of delineating man of pecu
liarly susceptible temperament, strong in his
affections but weak in will who while making
pretense of insanity should be so unbalanced in
his mind that even his most intimate friends
could net decide with any degree of accuracy
| how far his madness was a pretense
or reality. This peculiar condition
of a mind trembling the verge of
insanity is comparatively easy to understand
but almost impossible to describe. 1t can only
be described accurately by poet in the deinea-
tion of such a character as that Of "Hamlet," or
acter upon the stage. If the actor is a thorough
artist the representation upon the stage ought
to throw light upon the written word and
reveal to the audience much that is inexpressible
In language. That the representations of Ham
let invariably fall far short of the ideal that
the student of the play gains from its perusal
shows how difficult it is to realize all that is in
the part and all that ought to be expressed.
Indeed, so difficult is it that most playgoers are
satisfied, after frequent disappointments, to set
it down as an impossibility. And yet there
have been and are actors upon the stage
who approximate very nearly to the true
ideal. The representations of "Hamlet"
| of late years by such men as Edwin Forrest,
James E. Murdoch, E. L. Davenport and Edwin
Booth all present large claims upon the con-
sideration of the public. Mr.. Forests Ham
let" is magnificent piece of reading, and if we
could be satisfied with it merely as reading 1t
would be an eminently successful performance.
Mr.. Murdoch, although his talents are best
shown in the line of high comedy, is an eloquent
and scholarly Hamlet" and Mr.. Davenport
plays the part with an intellectual power and
a poetical feeling that, in our estimation, enti-
tie him to the first rank among the representa-
tives of the character at the present day. Mr..
Booth, by entirely remodellng the business
has the claim of novelty, and that is intrinsi.
cally very beautiful and artistic representa-
ton least far its outward characteristics /,
concerned. We do not allude now to Mr.. Booth.
presumed personal fitness for the part, upor
which his admirers dwell particularly, bu
to his manner of performing it. Mr.. Booth il
net man of much intellectual depth, but he |,
thoughtful and studous artist His Hamlet
has the very great merit of being picturesqu,
and poetical. He does not bring out the grace
and beauty of Shakespeare's poetry iu manne
equal to Mr.. Forrest or Mr.. Davenport, but ht
does give pOetical personation that Is in ever,
way worthy of all the applause 1t has received
from the most judiciouS critics. Simply as /
piece of mechanism, it is superior TO the effort
of the other five actors we have named; ant
although it is within the range of possibilit,
that we may see greater 'Hamlet" when
greater actor than MIR. Booth arises it is doubt
full whether we shall see a representation of tn
character that will afford SO much real pleasur
to so large number of intelligent people O
that will in every respect, except the very hgh
!, est, be entitled to such hearty commentator
That Mr.. Fechter will succeed in unsettling tn
popular estimate of Mr.. Booth is extremel
doubtful, and it Is even more doubtful whethe
he will make as favorable an impression on th
more critical and thoughtful lovers of til
: drama.
The debut of an actor who promises to give
new conception of Hamlet" ia an event of gre,
interest and Mr.. Fechter was complimented la
evening by an audience that represented In a
eminent degree the culture and artistic Taste
!; Philadelphia. This artist comes to US with
4 | distin0uished renutation that entities him Tn