Lancaster daily intelligencer. [volume] (Lancaster, Pa.) 1864-1928, 1883-09-04
Adncaster fntrlIiqenrcr.
TUESDAY svENINo, SEPT a. 1899.
Dramatic Art and It's Critics.


ences. "She came," we are told, " was
seen and conquered" The applause
which always attended her here attend:
her likewise In England. This proof
that she is a great actress cannot bt
gainsaid. When she reaches the popular
heart and satisfies the popular und, r
standing she achieves the Only verdic,
by which fame is gained. The singular
thing in Mary Anderson's career
is that she has met the hoI
condemnation Of metropolitan critics
These men, who assume to know
all about the histrionic art, have
had numerous and grave faults to find
with Mary Anderson's presentations
and the more her audiences applauded,
the more the critics raved in opposition.
The gentlemen who are hired by the
New York newspapers to tell their
readers what plays and players are good
and bad unanimously declared, when
Mary Anderson, a few years ago, first
appeared on the boards of a New York
theatre after achieving provincial
reputation, that she was a very poor
actress indeed, and would never be any.
thing more unless she unlearned all she
had already learned and commenced
anew the study of her art. But the New
York audiences disagreed with the
critics and applauded the actress in spite
of them, welcoming her back with in
creased interest upon her stated reap
pearance. Still the critics condemned.
Trey would not be convinced against
their will. Their judgment went across
the water to the English critics who
stood ready to condemn. But they dared
not do so In view of the extreme enthu
siasm Of the reception awarded Mary
Anderson ny the London audiences.
Iustead they are silent. Before the
popular judgment they are dumb.
The question ui interest is, why the
jud Iment of the critics in the case of
this artist runs counter to the popular
Judgment. II is clear that the popular
Judgment is the correct one. 1t is that
alone which can give the palm to merit ;
and when it has been tested before the
English speaking people of both cont
nents its soundness is not TO be gainsaid,
Actors do not play to professional critics.
The judgment of their audiences is
what they have to satisfy, and when
that of the critics runs counter to that
of the masses, it Is so much the worse
for the critics the natural conclusion
from the failure Of these men to appre
ciate Mary Anderson IS that they do not
understand an art which they set them
selves up to judge. They are gener
ally most pretentious people, with no
conscience to speak Of. They are hired
TO do their work daily and need to do it
1t is easy TO cut and slash,
and nearly all new plays and players de
serve to be cut and slashed SO they do
1t. Most actors and plays succumb to
their power. Those first brought out in
New York must win the newspapers
verdict to succeed. Oscar Wilde's new
play has Just been slaughtered by the
New York critics. They damned it SO
literally that it did not have chance to
draw an audience. The judgment is
said to be unfair and due largely to
the critics personal dislike of Wilde.
The probability is that this is true.
If Wilde had tested his play outside of
New York the verdict would have been
favorable to him. if he had deserved it,
The audiences in the country are Impair.
tial in their judgments, and they are
quite as intelligent as metropolitan au-
diences and probably more so. Mary
Anderson was saved by establishing her
reputation and discovering her strength
before going to New York. There has
never been sOsavage and unintermittipg
an attack made upon any artist as was
leveled against her; but it was totally
harmless. The people appreciated the
great charm of her perfect naturalness,
and rejoiced to find a woman who could
portray on the stage in an unstilted and
unartiicial way the ordinary passions of
humanity. She had never been educated
in the art and that which was TO the
critics her great sin, was to the people
her great merit, She educated herself to
simulate emotions as her nature di-
rected her to exhibit them and the
truth and simplicity Of her representa-
tions were demonstrated by their uni.
versal impressions upon the audiences
who witness them.
The newspapers tell us of another case
in which the fallacy of the verdict of the
New York critics is demonstrated. MIR.
BARLEY Campbell, who for ten OF fifteen
years unsuccesSfully wrote plays for the
New York stage at last went to Ger
many, where he has been hailed as
dramatist of great genius. He is de-
clared to be natural, fresh and
vigorous" Such characteristics would
not gain him credit within New York,
for these are just the features which
secure d Miss Anderson's condemnation.
1t Is time that the metropolitan news
papers should consider the propriety of
dismissing their professional critics, and
content themselves with sending their
reporters to see new plays and players
and chronicle their reception by their
audiences. They will thus give truer
verdicts than they get from would.b
learned men whose learning teaches
them to divorce nature from art.