Sacramento daily record-union. [volume] (Sacramento [Calif.]) 1875-1891, 1881-04-23

Why: Because Mccullough aud Barrett we're
the managers and at tie same time actors.
Jhey were NOS mere spectators. Take the
managers nowadays. How many Of them
can judge of abiiity? How many know one
play feom another, to speak strongly? They
look only st the cost and the po.s;hls profit.
They want to cut boast ana out-bill and ont
advertise each other. 1t has got to be the
question with them, not who is the most able
actor, bat who has COED .'priutiug with
her, good dresses, ETC.. and VITO is best
advertised"
Q Has the star system tended to weaken
the stock" 20 discourage advancement and
ambition among stock actors:
A-Oh yes. indeed 1t has weakened the
love for art. Il has rendered it more diffi-
cult for stock actors to advance. They say
now, "Whats the use of studying and strug-
Cling? Isn't it better to go and bargain for q
piece 60 it, get together company, have a
lot OF printing done and so out starring our
selves?" And so they do by the hundreds,
and they swarm over the land with Especial
ties" and combinations They have no
title to be called stars, and are in fact only
common stock, and SOME of them very COM
mon. Well, they blaze ont in posters and
Newspaper puffs, and the public pays its dol
lar and goes to see them, ana comes away dis
gusted, and then up goes the cry, 'Oh, the
drama is on the decliHen' Why, that isn't
the drama.
Q-What was the origin Of the "star"
system?
At had legitimate origin. Great ar
fists, those Of marked ability and genius,
were so adjudged and the verdict was that
they deserved special prominence. The pict-
ures of their art were entitled to the best
light. So they were given special promi
nenoe and greater reward, and all the world
said that was right. 1t was what you MIGHT
say was the tribute to genius. But others
were eLvious Of their position, without the
ability to win their success, aud so they
sought to become stars by shorter methods,
you see, and SO the "star" system, which was
legitimate at first, fell into abuse. Why, sir,
I'd rather be one humble member OF fins
company Of artists whom / know to be bet
ter than myself, and playing the legitimate
and studying cur art, than be starring il ard
dragging around the country this way. I'd
be happier and better off every way.
INFLUENCE OF THE STAR"
Q.-Is it true that the methods and style
of presentation are largely controlled by the
star, to the destruction OF individuality or
independence of conception and action on the
part of the support?n TO illustrate Il is
now believed that the actor supporting a star
is required by the latter to present the subor-
dinate part according to the conception Of
the star" no matter what may be the idea
and thought OF the actor concerning the part !;
that ID such an extent has this grown that it
has become in effect the law Of the stage,
until it has become unfair to criticise, either
by approval or condemnation. the manner in
which the support read or enact the parts
committed to them.
A.-Ican'tunderstandh how any one educated
as an artist can interfere with the conception
Of another artist with whom he or she is play
ing. There may be occasions where the star
will point out an error to a new conner or one
wilifully wrong. Nov. by artists, remember,
don't mean the mere filling nor the super
numeraries such must be directed by some
one, and the stage business must be often
supervised by the star and especially where
the stage manager does not travel" But
I've played witn Phelps, Sotherp, Wallack.
and ever so many OF acknowledged stars, and
L never knew them to attempt to control or
suppress the individuality or originality of
any brother artist or attempt to make all
conform to their model. | don't think your
question implies fact. 1t may exist among
the specialists" and the mere :" travellers"
with plays written "to ft,n but not among
artists. The real artist will not be subordi-
mated. Within the limits of his part he will
be as supreme as the star in his. Why I've
known many tue "star" to seek the advice
Of old time stock actors as to the " trpe idea"
OF part, and as to their judgment of "busi-
nes,n etc Many of the old school stock are
thus counseled with by "stars," and their
judgment respected and received. Certainly
what you intimate is no law, no convention
atty of the stage. Because the modern plays
make one part supremely prominent, it don't
follow, sir, that the subordinstion of other
ne Is ba octor,c .I11t NJ s,r
ought to be held by reviewers individually
responsible for the manner of playing part
[ except largely the people in speculative
companies, and under their managers, and in
the plays that swallow up every one but the
greedy fellow who is after the money of the
public, and don't care how cruelty art is
crushed.
THE LITERARY CLASS
Is much to blame for all these things that
this conversation about ''stars " has EN-.
braced. The literary men produce these
things that so many go about in as stars.
If literature, or those who assume to be of it,
would not cater to the speculative managers
and the aspiring incompetents who can rake
up few dollars TO buy play in which to
appear as star" why things would be
different. These specialists" these so-called
stars, care only for notoriety and money.
Then there is another evil-that of debu-
tants. A lady buys lot of fine dresses,
commits part, gives manager $500 or $500
for the theater and company for night, and
blazes out as debutant. Generally that's
the last heard of her but she has done an
injury it takes long to repair. Now and
then one of these people turns out to have
some real ability, but never enough to more
than give them a fair starting-place in
stock company. [ mean, sir. that in the
tbaaIar anur.yhara o1s thara i
excellence without labor, and no true ad-
without growth, and it takes
years OF labor to grow, and the longer it takes
the more you learn and the better you love
the profession.
Q-To what extent do "stars copy. each
other? Is there any conventionality of the
stage which compels or leads one actor, after
witnessing the performance of one or two
leading artists in part, to follow them? To
what extent do artists borrow from each
other? For instance, a lady eminent in dra-
Shortly after another lady presented here the
same part Some one remarked she presents
it better than did Miss A. "Ab, yes" re.
Piled playgoer, "but remember that she
mas enjoyed the advantage of seeing Miss A. |
IN the part first, who created it, and while fol-
owing has improved upon her."
THE "MoDEL QUESTION.
Al think person of genius rarely |
copies. Some artists create, some copy. There
is greater originality in the profession than
you suppose. One may see her own errors in
another and thus correct them. That might |
be SO in the case you recite. never saw
either of those ladies play Forget Me Not.
saw Miss Genevieve Ward play it. l give !
t after my own idea. | can't understand |
how I could follow another. studied it in !
Portland recently 10 two days, and gave it
after one rehearsal. That was something
ike work, tell you. My experience is that
models do not influence each other to any APP
oreciable extent. There is decidedly little
copying on the stage, and the public very
quickly discovers that little and reproves it.
Q.-Has the social status of your profess
zion shown gain or loss in the public estina-
Jon in recent years
A.-Loss, l am grieved to say.
Q.-Why loss?
Al don't know. think so. The sem
,ational school is one and the chief cause,
1t has brought on class of peo-
i ] l.