The Savannah morning news., 1903-03-08

his story. is largely the criterion of
his ability and distinguishes him from
the novelist.
Even for the purpose of providing
atmosphere" to which the novelist
can devote page after page of descrip-
ton of dialogue, the dramatist must
confine himself to a few adroit
touches. OF course, the scene painter
saves him the necessity of those per-
ilously tedious chapters describing the
beauties of sea and land: and the
property man delivers his furniture to
the audience without a written inven-
tory.
In these two particulars the play
wright starts ahead of the novelist,
but the eternal mandate for action is
ever in his mind while he writes, and
he must always be feeling that his
story is acting and not telling itself.
This is a subtle thing, this action. 1t
does not necessarily mean visible
movement and hustle, although falling
over chairs or dashing in and out of
doors may afford a great deal OF
movement to a play that will lack
every essential of dramatic action.
Real action is progression of stage
pictures. In point of fact, it has been
argued that a good play should man
itest itself in pantomime. This is al
most true. If it is recalled that in one
of the most powerful plays ever placed
on the stage, THE Two Orphans" the
whole story can almost be told with
out words by the progression of it's
pictures. the pantomime theory is apt
to be accepted as correct.
A Real Stage Tragedy.
Here, again, the question of natural
ness obtrudes itself. One would sup
no IN iY11e the visible
manifestation of action, the actor
would be expected to do precisely that
which would be done in real life. But
it is not so. and an incident that took
place in a Western theater several
years ago, will serve as illustration.
1t was a sensational play. One Of
the characters had to make a leap for
life off a promontory. and in falling, he
had to be fired on by the soldiers. US
ually the scene of a man falling, shot
to death, on the. stage, was most thrill
ing. OF course the gun with which
the shot was fired was supposed to
contain only blank charge, and the
acting of the man Stimulating the
throes of death was intended to be ex-
tremely realistic.
On this particular occasion, the
property man whose duty it was to
load the gun, with criminal careless
ness had used a ball cartridge. The
shot was fired, as usual. The man
making the leap fell upon the stage,
but as he fell, a shout of derision went
up from the audience-in the very
scene that had always caused a shud-
der of intense excitement. In falling
the fatally wounded actor had INDUCED
in a series of Unexpectedly grotesque
evolutions that had caused the laugh.
AS he lay motionless on the stage aft
er the curtain had fallen, the stage
manager rushed to him. and in a fury
over his having spoiled the scene,
kicked him, only to discover that the
offender against art was really dead.
His agonized CONFUSION prior to death
was the grotesque pantomime of ma
ture-infinitely different from the stage
stimulation that had won applause and
enthusiasm for the scene.
Neither the languishing heroine who
faints gracefully on the sofa, nor the
hero who is shot from his charger in
battle, goes through the motions of
real life on the stage. He or she would
be apt to double up in the middle of
the most prosaic fasion outside of the
theater and simply Ego to pieces" in
defiance of every rule of Delsarte. But
behind the footlights anything so real
would be ridiculous, and only the priv
ilege of the comedian.
A Mistake of Nat Goodvin's.
Nat c. Goodwins magnetism, tenn
permanent and power of mimicry are
well known. Humor is his forte. 1t
is his birthright, and his greatest sue
cesses have been achieved in that
sphere without the least effort. Like
all humorists he aspires to serious
work, but, unlike most of them, he
has the ability to do it. Those who
have seen this arch fun-maker play
Nathan Hale" with all the authority
and pathos of serious artist, will be
willing to accredit him with the high
est degree of versatility.
One day Mr.. Goodwin, at a benefit
performance played the closing scenes
of Richard Ill" He read the part
finely. He acted it as well as it need
be acted, and the comedian was for
gotten in the earnestness of the
achievement. But when Richard was
run through the body with the sword
OF Richmond, he dropped to the stage
in such manner as to get the only
laugh of the evening. Who shall say
that ii was not reality of the death
scene that got the laugh? But it was
erotesque, and Mr.. Goodwin, through
lack of custom, had failed in the
methods of the tragedian, which, at
best, are not natural.
How much an actor should really
feel of the part he plays is subject
that has been discussed for many
years by the abiest thinkers and
practitioners in the profession. A
controversy on the subject was waged
for many months in the magazines be-
tween the famous French actor, Co
quelin. and the equally famous Eng
lishman, Irving, the former advocat-
ing the minimum, the latter the maxi