New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1892-12-25
MIR. HENRY IRVING.
Mr.. GEORGE BARLOW'S CRITICISMS-TIIE
ENGLISH STAGE VERSUS THE FRENCH
MIR. IRVING AND MNiE SARAH
RFP\HAPDT
IL
London. Dccemher ].

Englishman who ventures to prefer French act
ing 10 English. and when lac is attacked and
rebuked by the greatest of English actors he
does rot even then renounce lis faith. nor shrink
from the rrassertion of IT, II NAV 10 OILY acct
dent, but it may be something else az any rate
one notes with interest that the review which
published his first article does rot publish ms
rejoinaer to Mr. Irving. The reoindcr appears
in "The New Review the periodical which Mr.
Archibald Grove started some Years at SIX
pence, and now finds public for at shilling.
Mr.. Barlow discusses a variety Of questions
with the most astonishing freedom; or with a
freedom which would b. astonishing were II to
be found in the daily press. Whoc"er Is infer
ested in the English STAGE viii find mm worth
reading 1t is not necessary always TO a2lce
with him. Do any two men ever agree entirely
about everything? But Mr. Barlow, whether
right or wrong writes with more knowledge OF
ore branch of his subject than most Engllshin"n
have. lie does not belong TO the good Ola
naval school which held it axiom that one
Englishman could always whip three Frnchmen'
He is. ] think. substantially right in his notion
of the relative merit of the English stage and
the French stage and the superiority OF the
latter If he is wrong why is it that the marked
improvement in English acting dates from the
frst visit of the Coincide Franchise TO LONDON
in 1902 And why is it that most good pieces
On the English stage are borrowed from the
French Do the rich borrow from the poor?
There are half dozen French dramatists OF
this generation--I purposely take moderate NUM-
ber-whose plays rank. and will continue TO RANK
On Eterature-as part OF French literature. Is
there one Fnglishman9 Or is there one whose
PLAYS are at the same time both dramatic ana
literary put the second question in case any
body should be disposed 70 ask whether Kenny
sons plays are not literary. and should answer
by asking whether they are PLAYS.
The English playwlights provide says Mr. Bar
low. what one may call literary grocery lie
names Mr.. Buchanan, Mr.. George Sims and Sir
Anoustus Harris as caterers for the pubhc I'D
.hos. s;roular warcs Later he includes the
hotter names of Mr. Pinero Mr.. Henry AitKih
ZONES. and admitting their popular sncceSs. asks
Has any one Of them written single line 'ha'
will live? Has any of them written sing"
play that can I've read that can endure as li''l',
ture - Mr. Pinero evidently thinks ne ht9' anu
is printing his plays or some of them but
don't know that this proof cf Mr. Flnero a''ec"'"
for the children Of his brain Is a proof Oh any
ching else Mr. Sydney Grundy. Mr.. Ontram
Tristain-or is il Tristram OutIain Mr. carton
Mr.. Oscar Wilde-who of these. any more than oil
,ba other LOT is 70 bo ranked with Hugo. WIN
s;tbor Dnmos with Alfred de MusSet. with Enhle
Anoier-nay even with Sardou. in whom the
plavwrirht is a much more considerable perSo'iaHc
than the writer?
What Mr.. Barlow saws of Mr.. Irving Is anoa-
MONS in the extreme. The question - however,
not whether IT be audaciour. bnt whether " W.
true Mr. Irving's testimony, aud even ms "P'',-
IONS about the delivery Of verse on '"c ri'nD'
stace. must ! fear. he dismissed as rieieN"'' io'
a very simple reason which his adversary o'i'O'
In state: he does not know French. lie Sen''
10 suppose that the sing song method Is SUN Al
vague II went ont at tue end of the last
century, or perhaps at the beginning oil uliS.
In no case could it have survived the breakup OF
the classical Alexundrne by Hugo and the other
Romanticiss in 1880 and onward
Mr. Irving ought TO be an authority on the
recitation of English verse. but is he Mr..
Barlow thinks not, and some of the greatest an
mirers of his acting have always felt themselves
unable to admire his cocution except with re-
serve or except in certain passages, and tnose
mostly in prose. His critic USES language of some
violence
"Mr. Irving says that the march of Shake
speare's verse should he most dcicately preserved"
In this l am entirely at one with him, but my
whole contention is that Mr. Irving docs not
most delicately preserve the march OF shake
speare's verse, but on the contrary introduces lho
II a most discordant march of his own. II it
speare as the French rccite Racine, to rectc him
in the Lyceum manner is worse than BURGLARY !;
IT. is arson murder. and mutilation all IN one
II NAV be doubted whether Mr.. Barlow
strengthens his case by tins strong language
The chief use of strong language is TO weaken
ease Nor do these metaphors from the criminal
law help us on our way. Nor IS the question OF
Mr. Irving's elocutOn the real question, except
in so far as Mr.. Irving being. beyond dispute
th, leading actor on the English stage, ought t.
be shining example OF good delivery. Ii IS. III
fact, his weakest point. He shovel us the other
night in King Lear how he thought Shakespeare
verse ought to be spoken on the stage. Some OF
his best friends and admirers were distrc Sc by
it. lie was al times inarticulate and inaudibic.
and at least one English critic of authority, Mr..
Joseph Knight, said 80 plainly. Mr. knight s
criticism is not only Of very great acutenes AMI
Judgment, il is also honest; / take him to be a
man incapable of saying what he does not think.
He is never ffippant and never knew him TO be
unfair or TO betray any other bias than that Of
good nature and unwilngncss to wound. When
such a man speaks out. when he warns Mr.. Irving
lof the danger he il in, the must lie serious.
The nervousness of a first ni1nt performance was
thought TO account for much Of Mr.. lrvings in
srticuatencss, AMI the prediction was heard that.
alter the first week so. he would bc himself
Whether he is so or not | cannot say Of my own
knowledge. | have not seen him again. But
have seen peopl3 who have seen it. and | regret
20 say they ali give much the same account.
lie is still, at times, uninell9ible.
Now Mr.. Irving can, when he chooses, be some
thiny more than articulate. Leaving one
side the question Of bis methods with verse, he
can deliver and often does deliver, passages Of
. prose in the most finished audible, ana alto
gether admirable manner. Why, then. should he
ever choose to deliver them otherwise? He can
not complain if ne is compared with himself; if
We Judge Mr. Irving at his worst by Mr.. Irving
at his best Is il an element of wilfulncss whi"h
comes in Does il give him cynical pleasure
TO see his audiences accept-fOr they sometimes
ID both accent and applaud-his least lcfensible