The San Francisco call., 1908-03-22

IA
know san Francisco Florence Rob
erts IS that one. From the old
u days Of the Aicazar. when under
Lewis Morrison her talents were
oeEeloping. TO the present day, when
size Is serene in the possession of New
York's approval she has been the most
prominent figure in the history OF san
francisco theatricals. Many there are
here who prefer her Sapho 10 Olga
. Nethersole's, her Zazs 10 Mrs. Leslie
Carter's. and 50 on through the list Of
roles which have made Miss Roberts
name household In san Francisco. But
Florence Roberts admitted after all
that even she did not know what TO
make OF a san Francisco audience
Take shan for instance" she told
me last Wednesday; 1t has been
praised everywhere 1 have taken it;
but Sunday afternoon you sat through
il without sending 10 Us players the
slightest sign OF sympathy. The critics
who were there al the matinee thought
the play was q poor medium. but the
fault was not with the piece nor the
players The audience was TO blame,
Don't smile. I assure you II was the
audiences fault. No comedian can
play comedy IN q crowd which assumes
t1re TOW make me laugh attitude.
AIissourisns are not q comedy loving
tribe. and you were all Missourians
sunday afternoon But at night il was
different, and the proof Of il is that
the critics who saw the play in the
evening liked IL
= You yourself declared there was
little OF real Characterization in the
play and made fun Of the New York
society types represented. as well as
: OF Buck, the father, and Buck, the son
WHY. those are genuine characters. as
true 70 life as any ] have ever seen
personifcd on the stage; but, good
ness. how hard il was TO play when
there was no response from the audi
chce. I can tear my hair and have
emotional commissions and make an au-
dience take notice when play tragedy,
but no woman in a comedy role can
make an audience smile against its
viii. Which proves that Il IS easier
10 make people weep than it is TO
make them laugh. ana that is too bad"
But return, please. 10 the peculiar
ities Of san Francisco audiences"
Very wei. take the history OF John
Corts The Alaskan for instance. II
failed on the road; It failed in New
York; IL collapsed finally way up some
where IN the great northwest. and the
players struggled back 10 New York
in tsgos and threes. but at made lots
Of money here San Francisco liked it,
and no more cared for what New York
had said about II than what Odessa
might have said. You certainly know
what You like
That's one reason Why I begged
John Cort 70 bring out The Struggle
Everlasting But its eastern failure
frightened him. and. as it was very
expensive production, he wouldn't take
the chance. I feel certain san Fran
cisco would have approved il
..Why2 Well because. IN the nrst
place. il is q splendid piece Of work
Edward Milton Royle outdid himself in
the book, and the play has an appeal
ing power which the west would un-
cerstand and like. I feel sure. 1t is a
threetoid exploitation OF man-body.
mind and spirit-and it has action and
life ! was sadly disappointed by its
failure in New York.
New York refuses 10 indorse the
modern tendency toward making the
etage center and platform OF truth.
New York VIII only be amused Do I
think the stage should be made q sort
Of supplement to the pulpit2 why not2
More people go TO the theater regu-
larIy than 10 church; there is no more
Impressive way TO teach truth than
from the stage II the mass Of the
people ere not TO learn right from
wrong at the thester. where win they
learn it2
No. do not think it would be neces-
sary 70 have . stage censor. The
people themselves should be the judges
OF the good and bad in plays
But" ! urged seeing that the ques-
ton in dispute concerns the teaching Of
morals from the stage. would you make
the pupils the judges OF their own les
Sons2 wouldn't that be confusing the
5ssue2 You say that the stage should
be a forum for the teaching OF truth