The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1903-02-08
ONE VIEW OF GHOSTS"
THE IBsEN PROBLEM PLAY As SEEN
BY A WOMAN REVIEWER.
What Anna =. Richardson Thinks OF
ute to Mary shaw.

pursuance of a policy of regular Ibsen matt
noes by this brilliant actress, made a pro-
found impression upon most of her critics
by her finished performance. but, while
giving the actress credit for the excellence
of her acting, the newspaper reviewers. al
most without exception. found that Ibsen
was just as distasteful TO them of yore.
However, there is one writer on things
theatrical who upholds the Norwegian
philosopher and the lessons he has TO set
forth in his stage stories. Naturally enough.
this writer is woman-Anna s. Richard
son, of the New York Telegraph. She says
that Ibsen is so consistent in portraying
real men and women that the critics, not
accustomed to seeing real people on the
stage, fail TO recognize them when they do
see them This writer's review Of Ghosts
is so different from every other review
published in New York newspapers that it
is of especial interest. After declaring that
the average playwright juggles with his
characters, particularly the female roles.
until they are mere coats of many colors
in human form, Miss Richardson continues
as follows:
The criticisms of the play abound I'm the
humor which the drama lacks-humor OF
grim sort, naturally. Isn't II entertaining 10
listen TO the hysterical pleadings 10 dis
courage this sort of tning-to keep young
men and young women from wading
through lbsenesque mire?
And these same critics are meni
Had they been women, they might nave
said what one woman did the other day at
the Manhattan Theater. When the curtain
had fallen for the last time she leaned
over q had never seen her before) and
whispered
''Why-why haven't we been taught
this. the mighty responsibility vested with
in uS?
And what would Ibsen's critics offer the
budding mind of youth? Nice. wholesome
studies OF men like Philip Loring, as Guy
Bates Post portrays him in THE Bird In
the Cage" or the Mark Embury offered by
John Mason in Mice and Menu Types al
most as rare as the proverbial hens teeth?
Types that make matinee idols the ideals
of carefully reared young women?
And when the same young women drop
ideals for the sane realities OF matrimony,
what happens? Sometimes they adjust
themselves after the shock-and sometimes
they HE themselves to the divorce court.
The problems raised by ''Ghostsy are so
many and SO deep that they are beyond
casual discussion, but never lose sight OF
one fact-they are real problems-every-
day problems-not the mere Pigment of
clever piaywrights imagination.
New York is full of Mrs. Awnings, but
they are not building orphanages. As said
before. some of them are hunting for the
divorce court; some are trying TO find rec
ompense for the mortal hurt in purple and
nne linen, to drown IL In the social maek-
strom, and some. looking into the eyes OF
the Captain Awnings of their everyday life,
are saying. VERY good, sir. We will keep
up appearances before the world but In
reality-I live my own life"
And that life leads where?
Yes, the critics are right. 1t Is not
pleasant picture to look upon on or of the
stage. But then il comes as an answer TO
the cry for moral lessons in the drama
for the stage as an educator. In truth, IL
young women, as class. espoused the
he fnH
clear out of matrimony. Maybe that is why
men pronounce Ibsen morbid and unhealthy
-and-and other things not so nice by half.
Matrimony is not 10 be discouraged.
1t was a man who wrote that IL more
women verging on marriages of convent
ence could see Ghosts" they would hest
tate. Heavens, Are all the lessons OF the
drama for US poor women? Are men above
warnings and lessons? Being a mere wom-
an l may be biased. but think dose OF
Ghosts" might, with more justice. be adj
ministered TO our friends the men.
We women are beginning to think this
| out for themselves. much as poor Mrs. AL
wing did If you do not believe me, ask
dozens, scores, hundreds of women who
are working and planning their own inde-
pendent futures why they are doing so. Is
| workaday world, makes women cold and
unsympathetic? Is IL because they cling TO
their independence and their independent
purse strings?
Not at all, II is because their eyes are
opened. They are afraid-afraid of what the
future held for Mrs Alving. They look.
shudder and draw back. And they need no
Ibsen TO hold them back.
Ghosts" in the hands OF players less cap
able than Miss Shaw and her companions
might be vulgar. nauseating. They dignity
IT by the sincerity Of their art Miss Shaw
had the principal role. and she fairly IL
| lumined It, yet you carried away vivid
| recollection not Of that single. all essential
character study, but OF five distinct, we'll
balanced characteTiZations, each, In its
way. eminently satisfying. 1t was not a
question of liking" this role or that. as the
casual theater-goer puts IL, but OF feeling
them; of having them pressed upon your
mental vision; of carrying them home with
you and thinking of them far into the night.
and for days afterward. They were so real,
so instinct with life.
Ibsen wastes no dialogue. Every line.
every word, is stone in his dramatic edi-
flee. Your mental retina caught the I'm
press Of Regina, the real Regina, the
daughter of her mother before she had
| spoken half a dozen lines. The hand OF
Miss Shaw, as well the pen of Ibsen,
showed on the production He had reared
| the mansion, but she had provided the at
mosphere that made IL real and truthful.
| Every situation was artisticaily handled;
every line read with a sense akin TO rev.
erence Ii was the work of an artist-and
| an artist in love with her work.
MISS SHAw'S CONSISTENCY.
Miss Shaw makes Mrs. Alving a thor
| oughly consistent character. She never
rants; never entirely loses control of her
| self, even in the most melodramatic mo-
| ments of the play. The woman who had
/ borne the cross of repression and sacrifice
| for more than two decades would not
shrek, even in her bitterest moment-so
strong are the letters OF habit. She would
not wax hysterical in detailing to Pastor
Manders the domestic horrors through
which she had passed. She told 1t with the
bitterness OF woman who had given up
all for nothing. One needed no tuition in
| the Ibsen school to understand the Mrs.
| Aving Miss Shaw offered. IL was study In
| psychology, so distinct. simple yet SO
subtle that he who ran might read.
Aside from the convincing art OF the act
/ ors there was solid comfort 20 be ex-
tracted from the exquisite mechanism OF
| the play. Even those who cavil at the
| theme must bow TO the marvellous tech
: nique of the playwright mere crafts
/ man. The play developed so naturally, yet
| so dramatically IL Is much more worthy OK
| the title of THE Unforeseen" than its more
prosperous rival at the Empire. On and on
/ swept the tragedy. but 10 the last instant
| you were In doubt es to the climax. Would
| Mrs. Alving be brave enough 10 tell her
son the truth-to lift from him the burden
| of self-reproach? That the question
women asked each other between the acts.
and IL was not answered until IL had thun-
dered in their brains like the hoofs or mad
dened horses. And that Is Ibsens art.
/ to assist in Culinary Depart