Pullman herald. [volume] (Pullman, W.T. [Wash.]) 1888-1989, 1890-04-19
ABOUT STAGE FEARS.
Madame Nodieska Gives Her Views on a
Very Interesting Subject.

Very Interesting Subject.
Among the many questions addressed
to actresses by interviewers or other in
quisitive persons, and which one hardly
knows how to answer, are the following:
''Do you shed real tears when you are
on the stage?'
els it right to do SOP
"Do you play better when you cry?"
"Don't tears spoil your make-up?'
'If you can not cry you can not feel
the emotions of the character you per-
senate, can your?
OF course the next question is: Does
Miss Y. or Mrs. X. really cry or not?
Are her tears genuine, CT stage trick?''
And so on. a8 tnfHitUHi.
To the latter you may safely reply
that, being of a less inquisitiye turn of
mind than the questioner you are in
complete ignorance as to the nature of
the lachrymose display of Miss H., or
Mrs. X. Speaking of Yourself you may
also briefly dismiss the physical fact of
tears by stating, which | think is most
often the case, that sometimes you do
cry, sometimes you do not, sometimes
NOu pay DttbNI N1bI genuine uNaA .
sometimes when your eyes are dry.
But, beneath and behind this rather
irrelevant and matter-of-fact question
of tears-which can be originated by
physical weakness, nervous indisposition
or other outside influences-there turks
another serious and important one,
which is more difficult TO solve, and yet
more difficult to explain.
How much a personator has to lose his
own individuality in the assumed char
acter; how much he has to feel its feel
ings, is problem most interesting to
the public and most essential to the per-
Torrance.
1t would be sheer conceit on my part
to decide a subject which has evoked so
many discussions by most competent
Judges. You are to be the master of
your part and not to be mastered by
it," says Talma; while Frederick
Lemaitre, if I am not mistaken, claims
that 1--WE ought not to perform the
character. but to live its life" In a
recent controversy in the magazines,
fresh in our minds, two actors, both of
the most exalted rank in the profession,
have expressed opinions on this very
subject entirely at variance with each
other.
The conclusion resulting from this
variety of views seems to be that there
is not such thing as general rule. The
state of mind of Talma in his highest
effort may have been quite different
from that of Rachel in an analogous
moment, and yet the effect obtained
may have been the same.
go further 1t seems to me that the
same rule can not even be applied to
the same performer on two different oc-
casions.
Judging by myself l can only say that
a certain disposition, excitement, or
whatever you call it. is at times help,
at times a hindrance to me. But then
is it possible for US to give an exact
ANALYSIS of our state of mind whilst we
are playing, to state the exact share of
our identity divided between our pri-
vate character and the one we assume?
To state accurately how much l feel
that / am my own self and how much
that l am the other person is psy-
Geological puzzle that | am unable to
solve or course, | know that | am
sometimes more in my part, sometimes
more out Of it, but why it is so and how
much it is so | can not say.
And what is more, strongly suspect
that only a very few among my brothers
and sisters in art could answer it in re-
gard to themselves. Modjeska,
in Arena.