The evening telegraph. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1864-1918, 1871-06-19

chn only reply tnat the theory Oh the repre-
sentation absolutely requires completeness and
symmetry. II the chamber of Cardinal Richie
lieu in his house in Paris faithfully repre-
sented to the least characteristic detail, and
the observation has become so sensitive,
surely it is absurd to destroy the illusion by
emerging from the finished chamber upon a
pavement which is no pavement. If you
wish the imagination to transform the boards
of the stage into a street, 1t can do it.; but it
can just as easily transform few hints of
scenery into the Cardinals room; and, indeed,
if you leave it to do that, it will do the other
much more readily. Besides, if the imapina-
ton is equally sctivein both scenes, the effect
of the whole will be proportional and satisfac-
tory, as it cannot possibly be now.
And there is another obvious consequence
of the system of this exquisite accuracy in
detail. The last scene in Riche5Seu is a spa
cious salon in the palace. 1t is admirably
done. 1t is truly French, and as the scene
opens you are in royal France itself. It is
the finest picture, as in the scene of the Car
dinal's chamber. Suddenly into this royal
salon enter group of persons, estimable, the
spectator is fain TO believe, to the last degree,
but not in the least royal or courtly. Ger
tsinly no sport shall be made here of honest
gentlemen honestly earning a living; bat
the difficulty and danger are as with
the Cardinals familiarity with the Eng
lish language, and as with the board
pavements; or, indeed, they NAV be not
street but the royal gardens, for
boards are as much earth as stone and the
obedient imagination will follow either hint.
The fact is that if the scenery exactly repre-
sents royal palace, the actors must exactly
represent royal personages, or the impress
sion sought will be lost. Indeed, the prn-
ciple of this theory of mounting plays is not
that they are representations so much as re-
productions. And the peril is as in the kim
dred art of painting If a tin platter in a
| picture is painted with such skill of imitation
that you wish to thump it, it is certainly q
defect, because the other parts cannot be
brought to the same perfection.
So while in historical plays there must be a
certain regard for propriety of detail, it must
| not be excessive; it must not seek absolute
accuracy, or the harmony, which is essential
| to reality of effect will be lost. And this
modern method of perfect detail cannot
wisely be applied to purely imaginative plays
such as Lear, Macbeth, and Hamlet. They
are not of Britain and Scotland and Den
mark, nor of any particular century
they are of the world of imagination.
One of the most laughable of comedies
was the performance of Verdi's opera of
Aac6etto in Florence, when the persons of
the drama appeared in tartans and bare legs.
The ludicrous effort at reality instantly de-
stroyed the Illusion. 1t would not be safe,
| indeed, for an actor to come upon the stage
as ''Hamlet" in the costume of New York
| gentleman of to-day; and for the same reason,
but the same reason only, that we do not
| wish to see our friends masquerading in the
| costume of other times-that is, because we
do not wish our attention diverted from the
man to his clothes.
An English critic has recently published
some extracts from the correspondence of a
German gentleman in England a hundred
years ago, which are full of shrewdness and
ingenuity, and which give US most vivid
glimpses of the acting of Garrick. 1t seems
that even then, although, as we know, Gar
rick played ''Hamlet" in laced coat and tie
wig-the ordinary French full dress of his
time-it was a practice which was severely
criticized as an anachronism and solecism in
costume. But the German gentleman-Mr.
Lichtenberg-although he says that he often
heard Garricks taste in the matter blamed, it
was never at the time, never during the
entr'acte, nor at supper, nor just after the
play, but when the spell was dissolved, and
the mind began to speculate. He says that,
of course, Garrick, who had an ample collec-
ton of all kinds of costumes, must have had
good reasons for his choice, and, like true
German philosopher, he proceeds to prove
whether he can enter into the "interior con-
seriousness" of the actor 80 as 10 understand
the reason.
|
great actor that for the best effect of the
play the spectators seeing and feeling must
be identical; and, therefore, that whenever
familiar and customary costume can be
worn upon the stage without offending the
susceptible majesty of our erudition, it is the
best and the fittest for the actors purpose
Then he says, with the acuteness of Teufels
droeh, that to the sense of his time the French
coat has become a second skin. "It is a coat
with physiognomy. There is significance
in its slightest wrinkles, and every crease and
fold of it have human expression" And then
follows passage which is the very transcend
entalism of the clothes philosophy, and
which is also delightful glimpse of Garrick
''There is a scene of Hamlet" says Mr.
Lichtenberg, (which described in a former
letter. In that scene Garrick speaks with his
back to the audience. The effect of his utter
ance depends chiefly upon that of his atti
, tude. You can't see his countenance; you
can only see his coat. But the coat is fami-
liar to us, and experience has enabled us tC
attach, instinctively, particular mean
ings to particular changes in the ap
, pearance of it. At the moment am speak
ing of there was diagonal crease across the
back of this coat from the shoulder to the hip
which Enthusiastically indicated the effort made
by its wearer to repress some strong emotion
When l saw that crease in his coat l saw almos
as much of the inner workings of the man
mind as the face of him could have shown mi
, had it been visible. Suppose now that Hamlet
inky coat had been cnt according to antigua
rian prescription, shat should have seen il
! the crease of it? Nothing Ineligible. An acto
{ who has good fgure-and every tragic acto
3 ought to have good figure-cannot but los
: effect by acting in costume which strikingl
n differs from the dress in which our eye /