English essays -- 19th century; Great Britain -- Social life and customs; London (England) -- Description and travel
“SIR,--I have just read in the Cornhill Magazine for January, the first
portion of a Tale written by you, and entitled Lovel the Widower.
“In the production in question you employ all your malicious spite (and
you have great capabilities that way) in trying to degrade the character
of the corps de ballet. When you imply that the majority of ballet-girls
have villas taken for them in the Regent's Park, I SAY YOU TELL A
DELIBERATE FALSEHOOD.
“Haveing been brought up to the stage from infancy, and though now an
actress, haveing been seven years principal dancer at the opera, I am
competent to speak on the subject. I am only surprised that so vile a
libeller as yourself should be allowed to preside at the Dramatic Fund
dinner on the 22nd instant. I think it would be much better if you
were to reform your own life, instead of telling lies of those who are
immeasurably your superiors.
“Yours in supreme disgust,
“A. D.”
The signatures of the respected writers are altered, and for the site
of their Theatre Royal an adjacent place is named, which (as I may
have been falsely informed) used to be famous for quarrels, thumps, and
broken heads. But, I say, is this an easy chair to sit on, when you are
liable to have a pair of such shillelaghs flung at it? And, prithee,
what was all the quarrel about? In the little history of “Lovel the
Widower” I described, and brought to condign punishment, a certain
wretch of a ballet-dancer, who lived splendidly for a while on
ill-gotten gains, had an accident, and lost her beauty, and died poor,
deserted, ugly, and every way odious. In the same page, other little
ballet-dancers are described, wearing homely clothing, doing their duty,
and carrying their humble savings to the family at home. But nothing
will content my dear correspondents but to have me declare that the
majority of ballet-dancers have villas in the Regent's Park, and to
convict me of “deliberate falsehood.” Suppose, for instance, I had
chosen to introduce a red-haired washerwoman into a story? I might get
an expostulatory letter saying, “Sir, in stating that the majority of
washerwomen are red-haired, you are a liar! and you had best not
speak of ladies who are immeasurably your superiors.” Or suppose I had
ventured to describe an illiterate haberdasher? One of the craft might
write to me, “Sir, in describing haberdashers as illiterate, you utter a
wilful falsehood. Haberdashers use much better English than authors.” It
is a mistake, to be sure. I have never said what my correspondents say
I say. There is the text under their noses, but what if they choose to
read it their own way? “Hurroo, lads! here's for a fight. There's a
bald head peeping out of the hut. There's a bald head! It must be Tim
Malone's.” And whack! come down both the bludgeons at once.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account