The Washington herald., 1915-08-10
Personality IN Acting.
By JOHN d. BARRY.

] All persons who took part were experienced
/ playgoers and had decided views In their esti
4 mate of actors most of them placed emphasi!
on versatility. They seemed to think it was tn.
highest and the most important quality that could
be possessed by an actor. Several actors were
criticised for the that the minute they
came on the stage they could be recognized. Others
were praised for their skill in Disgusting themselves
Henry Irving was held up as illustration of a
man who, the minute he showed himself, was
known to be Henry Irving No disguise could
have made him unfamiliar. And the moment he
| spoke those who had seen him before even those
who had seen him once only, could not have failed
to detect him through the nasal tones and the
drawl
| As the talk went on was reminded of scene
that once happened to witness in a house where
Richard Mansfield, the actor, was guest. He was
surrounded with admirers questioning him about
| his work. One of them mentioned that as Baron
Chevrial in "The Partisan Romance" the part that
after performance, made him famous, he per-
fectly concealed his personality. Mansfield was
apparently pleased. "If stranger were to come to
my theater night after night" he asked zone who
had before and had never heard
of me- and to watch me in a new impersona-
tion each night, would he recognize me as the
| same mani"
From that group there rose an apparently spon-
taneous reply: "Oh no, Mr.. Mansfield"
At the time wondered how many of those
speakers were sincere. And among those who
were. | wondered how many thought they were
paying the actor great compliment
During the past few years it has become fash
ion among theatrical managers to cast plays ac-
cording to type Before selecting the actors they
decide just what kind of personality will suit each
part in looks bearing and speech. To many actors
! the practice is exceedingly irritating. They feel
that it degrades them artists, by putting their
work a basis largely physical. They believe
that, by means of their versatility, they can play
wide range of parts. They take pride in winning
characters very different from their own.
They sometimes ask if there can be anything left
in their art when they chosen to appear only
in those characters they happen to resemble, when
all they have to do is to go on and to be them
selves. And if they forced to keep on playing
themselves how arc they to grow in their work.
In this regard however, there are some excep-
tions among actors. One is Miss Ellen Terry, who
besides being full of talent is also a woman Of
fine intelligence and artistic understanding, diff
fercnt from many temperamental performers in
being able to take detached attitude toward her
work. and TO philosophize about it. She frankly
says that actors who, in looks in temperament,
unsuited to certain parts ought not to be given
those parts to play. According TO her view, the
important consideration is the art or the artistic
growth of the interpreter but the effect OF the in
depreciation on the audience. That actor should
be chosen who most closely realize the authors
conception. In other words, the plays the thing
not the actor.
In that delightful novel, "The Story of Play"
Mr.. w. D. Howells tells how his dramatist- hero
was disturbed because the personality OF the act
who played the chief part in his comedy, rub
bed off on the part" She probably not suited
20 play it. Another actress might have been found
who could have got nearer. But no matter what
actress might have been chosen, something of her
personality would have changed the qualities OF
the character.
Nowadays managers, in their desire for
effects in acting that shall to be natural dis
courage the of wigs and elaborate makeup. The
actors for young parts must be really young; the
old actors must play characters that old. When
actors apply for engagements they're inspected as
if they were cattle, ordeal sometimes humilat-
ing. But, the whole, the results are an improve
Inent in line with the effort to draw the thcater
closer to everyday life For the actor the only
consolation is that he is sacrificed in the cause of
art but this kind of circumstance is seldom rccog-
nized where there is involved the loss of advan-
tage
When personality in acting is discussed, one is
sure to hear the of John Drew He is re-
gardcd the ideal example of the actor who al
ways acts himself Those who criticse him for this
reason forget that it may be just difficult an
artistic feat, perhaps even more difficult to act
oneself as to act some else. The matter be-
comes palmer when we think how hard it is for
most people to seem unconscious under circum-
stances that make them self-conscious. There is
vast difference between being oneself in everyday
life and being oneself the stage In amateur the
atrcals refined and graceful women often seem
crude and awkward So John Drews being him
self on the stage, far from being the simple thing
that is rea1Iv artistic feb;eye,,e,t