“While we do not take the controversy with undue seriousness, there
is an ethical aspect in the case, however, that invites discussion.
In commenting disparagingly on the professional ability of the
Chinese conjurer, in belittling his originality and his achievements
in the magic arts, Mr. Robinson (Chung Ling Soo) is really throwing
stones at his own crystal dwelling place. Despite the glowing
presentments of his press agent, one single naked truth shines out
as clearly as a frosty star in a turquoise sky. It is violating no
confidence to assert that had it not been for Ching Ling Foo, the
professional status of Mr. William E. Robinson, masquerading as a
Chinaman, and adopting the sobriquet of ‘Chung Ling Soo,’ would be
more or less of a negative quantity to-day. Ching Ling Foo, the
genuine Chinaman, is indisputably the originator, so far as the
Western hemisphere is concerned, at least, of this peculiar act, and
Robinson is merely an imitator. Robinson is shrewd and has a ‘head
for business.’ He doubtless realizes, as well as his critics, that
in the dress of the modern magician he would not be unqualifiedly
successful, despite his skill with cards and coins and his knowledge
of the art. The success of Ching Ling Foo in this country was his
opportunity. Adopting the dress and make-up of a Mongolian, and
appropriating the leading features of Ching’s act, he went to Europe,
where the act was a novelty, and scored a great success. Of course,
from a utilitarian point of view, this success is legitimate; but
in the light of what the American magician really owes to the great
Chinese conjurer, it is ridiculous for Robinson to pose as ‘the
original Chinese magician,’ and for him to say that Ching Ling Foo is
‘a performer of the streets,’ while he is the ‘court magician to the
Empress Dowager.’ This may be good showmanship, but it is not fair
play. The devil himself is entitled to his due; and, the question of
merit aside, the indubitable fact remains that it is Ching Ling Foo
who is the ‘original Chinese magician,’ while ‘Chung Ling Soo’ is an
imitator of his act and a usurper in the Oriental kingdom. {285} But
outside of the ethical nature of the controversy, we refuse to take
it seriously.”
[Illustration: A LONDON SIGN BOARD OF CHUNG LING SOO.]
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