The evening telegraph. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1864-1918, 1870-03-08

esque element predominates, while poetry aud
intellect are unknown quantities We stated
above that Hamlet might probably be played as
melodrama merely for the sake OF its pic
turesqueness and its fine stage effects, and 1t Is
Just In this manner that Mr.. Fechter docs play
it. A person who had never read Hamlet and
who had never heard that the leading
role was one of the most profound and
intricate creations of the human intellect would
probably esteem MIR. Fechter's Hamlet very
interesting and entertaining performance,
although II he possessed q reasonable amount
of good taste he would object to the shoutings
and bellowings and furious gesticulations that
disfgure every scene and that turn some OF the
most impressive and poetical passages Of the
sublime tragedy into miserable buresque. Mr..
Fechter is a portly, woll-conditioned gentleman,
with a rather unpleasantly expressive face. He
dresses the part with great good taste, aud his
blond wig, which has been the subject of so
much controversy, we consider an attractive
innovation. The utterance of the first line of
his part
"a little more than kin and less than kind"
CRATES unpleasantly on the ear on account of
the foreign accent and the habit the actor has of
running his words together without any attempt
at emphasis. This unpleasant impression is in-
creased by the soliloquy which follows the exit
of the ''King" and Queen, when MIR. Fechter
shouts until he is hoarse, and gesticulates like
Bedlamite These characteristics of his acting
are continued through the entire play and are
only abandoned at times for jaunty, semi-face-
tious style that is even more disagreeable. Oc-
casonally there is a touch of genuine pathos
or CLEAN of humOr that is the more
grateful as they are unexpected, but for
the most part Mr. Fechters busterous manner
Is the very opposite not only of the popular
ideal of "Hamlet" but of the character which
Shakespeare has outlined with sufficient dis
tinctness that it Is impossible for any artist to
mistake it as Mr.. Fechter does except wilfully
and for the deliberate purpose of doing some
thing that will create q sensation on account of
its singularty and strangeness. After the play
scene "Hamet" is worked up to high pitch Of
excitement, and he raves with hysterical en-
ergy, and this is the point in the drama that
makes the largest demands upon the physical
powers of the actor. Here Mr.. Fechter out
herods Herod; he bellows not merely until he is
hoarse, but until he absolutely loses all COM
mand of his voice and becomes incapable of
uttering an Ineligible sound. We doubt
whether single person in the
audience could distinguish a dozen words
in this whole scene, and yet in the very same
act Mr.. Fechter speaks 'Hamlets" advice
to the player in charming manner, that seems
to indicate that he knows and has weighed the
value of the words he is uttering. 1t must
have struck every thoughtful person in the audi
ence astonishing that the actor could not
apply to himself the finest criticism on the art
of acting ever written. In this advice of Ham
let" to the player is contained the most exact
and perfect description of Mr.. Fechters style
that we Offer If Shakespeare had seen this
actor play Hamlet" he could have said with
even more propriely than he did, 80, 1t Offends
me to the soul TO hear robustious periwig-
pated fellow tear passion to tatters, to very
rags, to split the ears of the groundlings; who,
for the most part, are capable of nothing but in
explicable dumb shows and noise" or further
on in the same speech, 80 there be players,
that L have seen play-and heard others praise
and that hghly--not to speak it profanely,
that, neither having the accent of Christians nor
the gait of Christian, Pagan, nor man, have so
strutted and beloved, that have thought some
of natures journeymen had made men and not
made them well-they initiated nature 80 abomi-
nably." These words are q criticism and con.
demnation of Mr. Fechter's "Hamlet" more
emphatic than any we are able to pronounce.
1t would be unjust to this actor however, to
leave the impression that his personaton of this
part is wholly bad, or that there is nothing in 1t
| that cannot be praised In the warmest terms.
| In portions of the play he marks the peculiar
| mental condition of "Hamlet" with fine art that
| we have never seen equaed, apart from some
of the unpleasant peculiarities of style that are
| apparent in even the best portions of the per-
foTmance. The scene with "Ophelia" in the
third act, which most actors find difficult, IL
exquisitely played by Mr.. Fechter and the same
may BIZ said of his interview with the "Queen,
although here there is too evident striving fol
mere picturesqueness and stage effect. The
scene with "Ophelia" has never been better
played upon the Philadelphia stage within the
memory of the present generation of playgoers
| but the closet scene with the "Queen" has beer
done and much better done, in all essentia
particulars, by all the four great American
actors whose names we have mentioned in th
article.
AS work of art, Mr.. Fechters Hamlet
| may be compared to the wonderful production
of the pre- -Raphaelite artists who some ffteer
years ago, kicked against the conventionalitie
of the academies, and excited mingled feeling
| of amusement and disgust in the minds 0
| all beholders The works of the leading pre-
Raphaeltes possessed merit, very great merit
and some of them genius of no common order
They were so overladcn, however, with pal
pable absurdities and unnecessary extrava
gancies that many persons were unable to Sc
| any good in them at all 1t is thus with Mr.
Fechter's Hamlet" Our best actors can lear
something from it, for the man Is a true artist
If he does lay on his colors with whitewas
brush and cover up the metaphysical subtletie
of most exquisite poetlcal creation with tn
broad daubs of the scene painter.