Sir Henry Irving—A Record of Over Twenty Years at the LyceumFitzgerald, Percy
General
Sir Henry Irving—A Record of Over Twenty Years at the Lyceum
Fitzgerald, Percy
Irving, Henry, Sir, 1838-1905
not abide anything low. So much for the ignorant, ill-mannered section of
the audience.
It was argued, indeed, by critics that Irving’s Malvolio was somewhat
_too_ much in earnest, and therefore was liable to be accepted by the
audience as a serious person, actually in love with his mistress, which
with his eccentricities and oddities became an impertinence. Whereas,
as Lamb says, by imparting a quaint humorousness, the audience sees the
absurdity of the jest and is amused. Elia, indeed, always insists that
the actor of such “fantastical” parts should hint to the audience, slyly,
as it were, that he is only half in earnest.
A most delightful sense of pure natural comedy was induced by the
likeness between the Terrys, brother and sister, who had a sort of
Shakespearian elegance in their bearing. But this did not avail much
with the uncultured crowd. It was objected also that the play was set
forth somewhat pedantically and too much _au grand sérieux_, many of
the actors, not being comedians—witness Mr. Terriss—imparting a literal
tone to all they said and did. This was not without its effect on the
audience, who by the very promise of seriousness were beguiled into
expecting something serious. Irving himself was not wholly free from
this method; and in the strange scene of the imprisonment, so difficult
to “carry off,” he was deeply tragic, as if really suffering, and without
any underlying grotesqueness. His exit, too, with solemn menaces, had the
air of retributive punishment in store.
Now followed a second expedition to the States, as well as to Canada,
the details of which I pass over. On the reopening of his theatre on
his return a rather disagreeable episode occurred, connected with an
alteration he had made in the arrangement of his house. It was announced
that places in the pit might be reserved and secured in advance, which
gave rise to indignant protest and to cries of “_Give us back our Pit_.”
The question was warmly discussed in the newspapers.
The advantage of the debate was that it clearly established a true
theatrical principle—viz., that the pit and galleries are intended for
the crowd, and should be free and open to the “man in the street”: that
the best seats here must be the prize of the strongest and most patient.
The principle of numbering and booking, it was shown, would actually
abolish the pit. The judicious manager understood and recognised the
public discontent, and made announcement that on May 18 he would restore
the old custom.
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.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account