The San Francisco call. [volume] (San Francisco [Calif.]) 1895-1913, 1904-10-16
&ZITd T1F1 p4AlERS ANR TIL E.,] kE{S1C FOLk2

Ny friend Austin Lewis has been
falling afoul OF the Hamlet" audience
mat gathered at Berkeley a couple Of
weeks ago. Even from far Oakland
the echo Of his protest reacheth us. Mr.
Lewis has been saying things about US
IN the Oakland ENQUIRER which il be-
moves US, an we may. TO refute.
What went we out for TO see?" Mr..
Lewis asks. And there's the rub.
What did the three thousand Of US
that gathered in the Greek Theater for
Ben Greet's Hamlet" go to see? What
We're the righteous limits Of our expec-
fancy, and in how far did the perform
snce OF Mr.. Greet and his players sat-
isfy them?
have before quoted Professor Armes
on the subject, but here again is his
opinion OF what We were to expect
from the Greet version OF the play:
Opposite Hamlet in the repertoire
that Mr.. Greet gave his advance agent
he wrote Universities only The rea-
son, I suppose, was his appreciation of
the fact that only in a university COM
munity could he find many who would
be interested in a serious attempt 10
give the play as il was prepared for
the stage by Shakespeare himself. and
IN some such manner as it was acted
at Oxford and Cambridge during his
life time"
The programme also preluded: The
present performance should not be
judged as an ordinary theatrical per
Torrance. No new readings will be at
tempted, the whole endeavor being TO
give the play, with the scenes usually
omitted, in a primitive manner, as
nearly as possible like that in which it
was produced just three hundred years
ago"
The scholastic nature Of the produc-
tion is here deliberately outlined. Not
IS medium for great player nor at
this late day as a new 'tragicall his
torie," was the play offered. Mr.. Greet
was not presented as a great Hamlet.
Humbly. even as with the Eliza bethan
hummer, his name. like the rest. was
programmed simply as "one Of the
players" And eminentiy Mr.. Greet's
attitude toward his part was the schol-
astic one II was actually a reading
IN costume. no more
True, there was a large diversity Of
joeal among the players. Mr. Crawley
seemed 70 consider that he was there
70 act and gave a notable Laertes. as
spirited in action as IL was perfect in
- ~, -
ouently sinned against the text, evoked
z charming illusion Of Ophelia. And a
strange, unique wizardry was that
Il the ghost All Of your "decorous
and unresponsive" audience that I
have seen. Nj Lewis. own to the alb
surd chill that grayed the morning
with the coming Of that sinister little
figure. Again. M. Shepherds king was
laboriously melOdramatic, and Miss
Heads queen. picturesque and emotion
ally ambitious. Ordinary theatrical
judgment too. would accept the Pc
icnius as ably convincing on any stage.
and the first gravedigger. Maurice Rob
inson, as a delightful rurality.
But above all. II anything. as hereto
fore set forth. the ideal Of the per
Torrance was a classic, textual pur-
ity. The scenes usually omitted. one
sat for Parsifalic length Of perform
ance 70 see. The precious poetry, lost
in the hurried play going OF to-day,
one here took the long leisure TO hear.
And this, in the majesty Of its
music, in the aphrasable wonder
OF its wording. I think was what we
went forth TO see"
The illuminate gesture one was Of
course grateful for, the light Of the
facial play. the inspiration OF the
lovely picture; but vitality, essen
italy. what We went for was the Word
IN all its glory Of color, its wonder OF
form.
But this. perdie. was vitality. essen
TALLY. what we did not get Acting.
sn the proportion above set forth. was
ours and an Incompatible picture
Music Of a rare and gracious sort
the concent Of lovely voices and an ex-
oUisite pronunciation aad enunciation
lent also their charm But the
phrase. alack and alas for IT, 1t
vas neither according TO Quarto the
First nor any other quarto: nor was it.
with sad frequency. according 10 any
known law Of sound or sense Words
were dropped. added, misplaced. mis-