Daily inter mountain. [volume] (Butte, Mont.) 1881-1901, 1900-10-13
The Drama


W.
tives are not to be questioned; his as
piration cannot but be eulogized. If all
our successful actors had been as earn-
est as is this young mar the American
stage woul have more to which we
could point with pride.
Mr.. Sothern and his manager, M
Daniel Frohman, have provided a set
ting worthy of the tragedy. and sufti-
GENTLY ornate to be satisfying to the
modern eye, without being of such spec
tacular proportions as to make scenery,
costumes or mise en- scene un~pleasantly
obtrustive. The cast has been directed
with intelligence and zeal and the en-
semble is well mounted. In a word
Hamlet has been treated precisely as
a new play intended for extended pro-
duction would be treated. The outdoor
scenes are artistic and in keeping with
the plays spirit, the exterior in the
last act being one of the finest products
of scenic art l have ever seen, while the
interiors are rich and tasteful. The YER
sion of the play employed presents
some novelties, but one that startle by
their extremity, and there is no evidence
of a desire to create a sensation.
Mr.. Sothern's Hamlet, like the pro-
duction, is modern. This term is not ap-
Piled in condemnation. The drama mas
changed, is changing constantly. why
should not the methods of Interpretation
of his character change with 1t! COM
parsons hould be ignored. What has
Booths Hamlet, or Trees or
Haworth's Hamlet to do with that OF
Sothern? He can be called to STAND size
by side only with the Hamlet OF Snake
speare. How nearly does he realize the
ideal of that character? Possibly no
actor has ever realized completely the
ideal of even n man who has studied
the master creation of the master poet;
certainly none las ever satisfied all.
The sothern Hamlet is solid flesh and
ardent blood. There is little or nothing
of mysticism in it, Tradition has been
studied, but not servilely -obeyed in the
matter of stag business, and the in
stances of innovations likely to shock the
sensibilities of Shakespearean students
are not numerous. He was a handsome
Hamlet, and his poise and gestures were
admirable in grace and excellent in con-
ception. He read the lines we'll n his
emphasis, while sometimes departing
from generally accepted readings, at all
times betokened intelligent appreciation
of the text. He was not a mad Hamlet,
blu a sane, though distracted, one. He
was pleasing in. personality and
generally convincing.
"A great Hamlet, you ask! No. For
several reasons, this must be the am
swer. In the first place, he does not inns
press as the real Hamlet, the Hamlet
of the printed page impresses. He does
not command sympathy. You do not
suffer With him. His creation is not a,
complex whole, but rather a series OF
interesting studies of phases of the
character. Much of his effect is due UNI
doubtedly, to modern methods. In avoid
ing Scylla he strikes C~harybdis. In his
effort to avoid the eloucutionary in the
s%oliloquies he ecomes so c~olloquial that
sentence after sentence goes for naught
and intelligibility suffers. In moments
of passion he seeks the other extreme,
becomes melodramatic, tears passion to
taGters and throws distinct enunciation
to the winds. Hamlet is not a natural
role and cannot be played naturally.
This is the secret of the failure of
many modern actors who have essayed
the role. The Hamlet of Shakespeare
"a be presented only as he intended it
should be presented. Nevertheless, Mr..
Sothern's worst is the best acting he has
ever done, and his best is worthy of es-
TEEN for his ardor and intelligence.
Little space remains for consideration
of the company. Mss Virginia Harned's
Ophelia was hopelessly inadequate. She
is an excellent actress, but this role is
completely outside her abilities. Mr..
Edwin Varrey's Polonius was the most
S~hakespearean performance OF the even
ing, but at times seemed strangely out
of keeping with it's surroundings. MI.
Vincent Steraroyd's Laertes was crude,
distinction. Miss Charlotte Deane'e
Queen was intelligent but immature. Mr..
A. r. Lawrence as the King labored un-
der the disadvantage of an opera bouffe
makeup of wig. 1t should to the bar
ber's with his head Messrs. ROLAND
blackstone and John J. Collins We're
effective grave-diggers. The ghost of
William Harris was commendable. The
large audience. admired the new theater
and encouraged the star with earnest
appreciation.
Modern methods are now app,ied RI
Hamlet When will they extend to
such reduction of the play as will enable
a first performance to be concluded be-
lore midnight? And if the tragedy is to
be enllvened with bursts of malodrama.
VINO Will be the reckless i%nnovator to
prlng down the curtain upon them and
panlsh the present anti-clisnaX Of tragic
endings?"
THEATRICAL OTE