Fort Worth gazette. [volume] (Fort Worth, Tex.) 1891-1898, 1891-11-15
FR0CK AND BUSKIN.
Some Matters of Interest in
Things Theatrical.
ROSE COGHLAN ON HORSEBACK
Her New Play, Dorothy's Dilemma,
Tomorrow Night-Jim the Westerner.
The Little Tycoon-Last Days of
Pompeii-From the Prompt Side.

As one sits in the theater and watches the
play, how often the wish will present itself
that the crystlliZed opinion of every per
son in the house could be secured and be
merged INTO a complete whole ii
the shape of criticism. Opin,
ions Of the merits or dement's
of a performance are as widely divergent
as day and night: the man who will not en-.
Joy farce comedy would revel in a trag,
cdy, and he TO whom comic opera is tire,
some would be delighted with an opera
bouffe. The tastes of people in things
theatrical are as different as
the people themselves, but ali
seem 10 be dropping into one common error
that managers have united to force lot
OF rubbish upon the stage. But this is not
tie ease. \ theatrical venture is as much a
business enterprise as opening a grocery
Store, and the most successful managers are
those who give the public what it de-
mands. He who would run counter to the
popular taste is assured of taking
his soaupe home on their trunks.
For long time we have had run of
farce comedies; horse-play by the low
comedian has taken the place of the subtle
hlMar OF Raymond or Florence. Yet
this is now giving way, and the popular
taste seems tending to the romantic
cone 5y-Grama, and the shrewdest man
a-erS are laying their plans accordingly.
It's common TO look upon dramatic criti-
lrSm as one mans opinion. Technically
ms Is correct, but the man who would use
MS impressions or opinions in formulating
ii5 criticism alone. would be neither a just
or capable critic. There are several
things that must be taken into considera-
Ton and these carefully weighed-the ar
i,'c merit and moral worth of the
play; its action; the work of
Ige cast, and the diversity of public taste
Inf..Sc points must be added the condition
OIL 'he players, whether an understudy is
.nE part, or if another is not really
very Ill, the journey to the place, the
,e.a.a of the jump, all should be taken into
tpasiueralion and their effect should be
.y considered. This is not at
81 an easy task and frequently
Ena.s the critic to deal more leniently
".ih e. company than he would otherwise
oo. z his IS only justice to player and
--,h5"aa6e. \ play may be artistically bad,
morally harmless and yet popular enough to
H9&w crowded houses, and thus be sue
cess lhar deies criticism.
The old canons of dramatic art have little
% do with the modern play. The
student of Shakespeare is not
a competent critic of Hoyt.
"eari2a is he, the dramatic editor, may be
I8A succession of farce comedies and
horse.1lay. of acrobatic Dutch and Irish
SPECIALISTS, Of girls who can't sing but who
can get encores, there is yet wit enough and
muse enough tomake them popular and he
must act accordingly. The critic who
would criticize "A Hole in the Ground" by
Ia ne standard of Raymond's SIN
taradise" or For Congress-" or
a Tin Soldier with Sol Smith
Elssell's Peaceful Valley" would be
deemed idiotic, yet each of them is popular,
and each meritorious.
The ideal dramatic critic, who can please
everybody, has not been born. When he
Is IS ne will not stay long-he will become
little angel at once.