Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1895-12-28
DICKENS AS 4 READER.

His Style Was in Striking Contrast
With That of Thnckerny.
From the London Daily News.
1t was a new thing for an author like
Dickens to read in public from his own
works, and there were many even among
his own friends who feared that the eX.
pertinent might be a failure. 1t was, in
fact, splendid success. The author of
the Christmas Carol had every possible
quality which could be needed to make a
great popular reader. He had a mag
nificent voice, capable of expressing every
mood of human emotion without any ap-
parent effort or strain. He had a strik-
ingly handsome face, with eyes that light
ed like stars. He was a natural-born
actor-probably the best amateur actor
ever known in England. AS an after-din-
ner speaker he had no equal in his own
time, and has had, so far as we know, no
equal since.
When sue a man came to read a story
like the christmas Caror' one can easily
imagine the effect upon a popular audience.
Or, indeed, it may be that We are not quite
right in this-perhaps no one who did not
hear Dickens read the story could imagine
how the reading went home TO the hearts
of all the listeners. 1t Is not likely that
we shall ever listen to such a performance
again. The reading was thoroughly dra-
matte in the best sense of the word. Dick
ems acted all the parts. In some of the
readings-especially in that from "Oliver
Twist" which told Of the murder of Nancy
by Bill Skies, the effect was almost too
terrible for the audience. People held
their breaths, some could hardly keep from
crying aloud. OF course, there was moth
ing of this kind in the christmas Carol"
and he was the only harsh note in the
whole performance, and his harsh note
came to be softened before the end.
1t was testimony to the genuneness
0f inke 1ra flo, hof
used to dispute about his impersonation
of some of his own characters. We all
had our own favorites and our own dis
paragings. Many, for example, were not
of Sam Weller. 1t was admirable comedy,
they. said, only it was not Dickens Sam
Weller: it was not the Sam Weller Dickens
himself had taught to expect. The very
criticism showed what reality there must
have been in the whole performance
Nothing could be less like the reading of
an ordinary lecture hall than this vivid
drama, which Dickens flashed upon his
admirers. Nothing could be less like
Dickens readings than Thackeray's lee
tues. Thackeray, although very poor
speaker in public, was a delightful reader.
His reading was effective, beautiful and
touching. The close of the lecture on
George III used to be listened to with a
rapt attention-every ore dreading lest the
slightest interruption should cause sem
tence a word to be lost. The delivery
of the two or three lines from King Lear
was perfect in its way.
But it was only an English gentleman of
culture reading from a manuscript. There
was no attempt whatever at characterize
ton; there was in that sense no life about
it, Thackeray very wisely kept to what
he could do well and easily, and made no
effort to stir his audiences to any such
emotions as those which were constantly
aroused by Dickens. If Thackeray had
given readings from his novels the result
would most certainly have been failure
We should only have heard Thackeray
reading; we should never have been led
for moment to believe that we were
listening to Rawdon. Crawley or Major
Pei dennis Henry Esmord. But with
Dickens all was alive, the figures seemed to
stand upon the stage before US. There
We're many fine public readers in Dickens
time and there have been many fine public
readers since his time, but nobody else has
done exactly what he did.