"Their Majesties' Servants." Annals of the English Stage (Volume 2 of 3)Doran, Dr. (John)
History
"Their Majesties' Servants." Annals of the English Stage (Volume 2 of 3)
Doran, Dr. (John)
Actors -- Great Britain; Theater -- Great Britain -- History
That tale, Williams went and told in the green-room, where he waited
for Quin, who came off at the end of two scenes more, after uttering
the word "death." It was what he brought, without meaning it, to the
irascible Welshman, who attacked him on the not unreasonable ground
that Quin had rendered him ridiculous in the eyes of the audience;
and he demanded the satisfaction which gentlemen who wore swords were
in the habit of giving to each other. Quin treated the affair as a
mere joke, but the Welsh actor would not be soothed. After the play,
he lay in wait for the offender in the Covent Garden Piazza, where
much malapert blood was often spilt. There Quin could not refuse to
defend himself, however ill-disposed he was to accept the combat,
and after a few passes, Williams lay lifeless on the flag-stones,
and Quin was arrested by the watch. Ultimately, he was absolved from
blame, and no further harm came of it than the lasting regret of
having shed the blood of a fellow-creature.
At a later period, Quin was well-nigh slaying a more ignoble foe
than Williams, namely, Theophilus Cibber, whose scoundrelly conduct
towards his beautiful and accomplished wife, Quin alluded to, under
a very forcible epithet applied to her husband. Out of this incident
arose a quarrel, and swords were again drawn in the Piazza, where
Quin and Cibber slashed each other across the arm and fingers, till
they were parted by the bystanders.
In 1732, Quin, with the company from the "Fields," established
himself in the new theatre in Covent Garden, whence, after two
seasons, he passed to Drury Lane, where he continued till 1741;
after which, with some intervals, he again enrolled himself at the
"Garden," where he remained till he quietly withdrew, in 1751. Of
his rivalry with Garrick, I have already said something. If he was
vanquished in that contest, he was not humiliated, though I think he
was a little humbled in spirit. His great merit is, nevertheless,
incontestable. His Cato and Brutus were good; he was excellent
in Henry VIII., Volpone, Glo'ster, Apemantus, Ventidius, the Old
Batchelor, and "all the Falstaffs." He was happy only in a few
speeches of Pierre, especially, "I could have hugged the greasy
rogues, they pleased me so!" and his execration of the senate.
His Plain Dealer is commended, and the soliloquies of Zanga are
eulogised. His Macheath and some other operatic parts, he played
and sung extremely well. His failures were Macbeth, Othello,
Richard, Lear, Chamont, and Young Bevil. His continuing to play
these in opposition to Garrick and Barry censures his judgment.
Davies says, he often gave true weight and dignity to sentiment
by a well-regulated tone of voice, judicious elocution, and easy
deportment. The expression of the tender, as well as of the violent,
emotions of the heart was beyond his reach. The plain and the
familiar rather than the striking and the vigorous, became him
whose action was either forced or languid, and whose movements were
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