New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1891-07-09
LONDON NOTES.
ON SOME REMARKS BY TWO ACTORS-Two
BRITICISM5"- FRENCH PRINTING-THE
QUEEN AND THE FORTH BRIDGE.
IOndon June 20

London, June 30
Some Of the speeches at the Actors Benevolent
Fund dinner put in clear enough light some Of
the questions at Issue between the Stage and the
public, or portions Of the public. No doubt there
is a public and very respectable one, which
would near with surprise that there are any such
questions, or that any controversy is going on.
There is another publicalsO very respectable one
from different point Of view-wbich continues 10
regard the Stage domain Of the Devil blr
Irving. who could we'll afford 10 neglect a public
opinion OF this sort, turned sharply upon the
societies which exist for the regeneration Of the
theatrical sinner. There hire such societies They
call themselves, believe, missions. Their mem
bers have great desire, he tells U.s. TO lay hold
Of the humber members Of the profession and
convince them Of the sinfulness Of their calling.
Brands are to he snatched from the burning and
converted players exhibited in the animated wax
works Of the missionary stage"
Mr. Irving, you perceive-and you must have
perceived it before now-has very neat diction,
and is capable Of producing rhetorical effects as
we'll as dramatic 10 is quite impossible he
adds. that actors should regard with sympathy
tie efforts of some who invite people engaged in
the theatrical business TO Substantial tea, and
then lecture them on the imaginary horrors Of
their occupation" Quite / should say; even
the impartial outsider cannot sympathize with
such efforts or admire those who make them, no
matter how good their motives may he. Most OF
the foolish and many of the most wicked acts
in this world are done from good motives; II Ii
q commonplace to say so. The actor is right to
resent these efforts Whether it is worth while to
resent them publicly is another question. The
too pi0us souls who are engaged in the enter
prises which Mr.. Irving ridicules are insensbe
to ridicule, and have 50 long survived the con-
tempt Of the general public that they may very
probably think it unimp0rtant The approval
Of their own little circle is sufficient for them.
At the same time, they are aware of the com
pliment implied in any such reference to them
as Mr. IrvngS and rejoice to see that they attract
the attention of the world against which they
declaim.
Mr. Irving however, has a practical ann;
nobody is more practical than he. such missions
seem to him 10 stimulate the ignorant prejudice
against the theatre, while they induce some peo-
ple-the very weak -minded-to give up means
Of earning an honest livelihood. This, too, no
condenses into an epigram-they are missions
which propose to save the players sou! by point
ing the way to the workhouse.
If this protest be not needed, it is at least
dignfed. Mr. Hare's speech was much occupied
successful manager and an actor with his full share
of favor, who nevertheless addresses the public In
the tone Of a man bankrupt in pocket and popu-
laritv alike. lie has two grievances Of long
standing; society and the French theatre II cam
not be without a feeling of pride, he declares,
that the actor Of to-day compares his position with
that held by actors even 80 short time since
as when Mr. Hare entered the profession The
tonic is one on which he has often enlarged.
He NAV be proud of the social recognition which
the actor now enjoys but he clearly thinks 10
not complete 1t will not be complete so long AZ
actors themselves discuss its incomDleteness III
public. Mr.. Hares own position. both on tne
stage and in society, is 50 respectable that LIS
griefs cannot be personal; it is In behalf OF hAs
less favored colleagues that he again refers 10 a
subject so delicate. Now, aS before, there Is
note of bitterness in what he says. as II he 1eIs
that after all the relations which exist between
society and the stage are not quite the relations
of equality II he feels that, it were surely wiser
10 hide the feeling
So of his animosity to the French stage,-whas
can be gained by letting his public see that he IL
Jealous of his French rivals? " In Paris, says
Mr.. Hare which is supposed to be the very centre
of dramatic culture, there Is hardly one leading
theatre with perhaps the exception of the Theatre
L
boufYe of the grossest and coarsest type" Observe
the perhapso So angry is Mr.. Hare that he Is
not quite sure whether the House Of Moliere itself
is not devoted to farce and opera boune OF the
erossest type What harm have the French players
done him? They come TO London, some of them,
every YEAR They are here now, and am sorry
TO say playing 20 half empty houses. But they
have had in years past, and during those very
wears in which Mr. Hare notes an improvement In
the social position of actors, very great influence
on English taste. They have elevated it, They
have been Of real service TO Mr. Hare. They have
taught his audiences to appreciate what Is best
in his method for what Is best IS French. bu'
il seems Mr. Hare has never forgiven them, mol
forgiven that London society whose recognition
he coyets lie cannot forget nor forgive ther
early triumphs both social and dramatic Ills
account of the conditions OF dramatic life IN fars
is A caricature of the coarsest kind and nobody
who knows Paris need be told how far aStTay MI
Hare is in what he supposes to be his facts
"Icast understood of any artist resident in this
country" SAYS an evening paper OF Professor
Teoros. make Mr.. Brander Matthews present
AZ This CRITICISM None is more common. L
hone IT, is not common in America. A certain morn
iuG paper advcrtises itself day by day as having
the LARGEST circulation of any Liberal paper In the
world" The statement is perhaps no more accu
rate in fact than IN grammar, but 1t is only the
grammar which is now in question. There Ii
authority enough for the barbarism; some OF IL
not modern, but there are some loeutionS whlca
no authority can make English or American either'
This same morning paper has been discussing
Mr. Matthew's article; not without temper ah us
manner is. Sometimes 1t contradlcts him. IL Is
81 not aware that different TO" is commonly used
in ENGLAND instead Of different from II IS 80
cormonlv usrd that will undertake TO find ex'
onnes Of il in almost every issue Of almost very
imnortant newspaper in England. 1t occurs In
hooks as well as in the press. 1t occurs even IN
rbackeray. 1t is used by almost everybody In
everyday speech 1t is defended by peope VIVA
.orobt 70 know better. Not only is it deended'
but the English mind has to make an eror1 70
understand why it should be challenged, orwhy IL
is incorrect | once heard it from the lips OF one