At the Adelphi Theatre Mr. Otho Stuart is scoring heavily with his
series of Shakesperian productions. Miss Lily Brayton and Mr. Oscar
Asche are the aptest pupils of the Benson school, and the immortal Bard
in their hands shows to very great advantage.
“The Taming of the Shrew” made a great hit, and “A Midsummer Night’s
Dream” was delighting the town when it was withdrawn to make room for
“Measure for Measure.” It seems rather a bold venture to put up this
play, as the original text makes it a play to which every young girl
might not like to take her mother. But as arranged and produced by Mr.
Oscar Asche there is slight risk, and the comedy runs along through its
ten scenes in the nicest way.
To Miss Lily Brayton belong the chief honours of the evening, and her
study of Isabella, sister of the guilty Claudio, is as charming as is
her appearance in the white uniform of the probationer. Mr. Oscar Asche
is as virile as ever in the part of Angelo, the demoralised deputy, with
a passion and beard happily reminiscent of Mr. Pinero’s Maldonato—who
gave the cheque book to Iris and finally smashed the furniture of the
flat. Who shall say that Maldonato was not a lineal descendant of the
determined Deputy of Vienna?
Mr. Walter Hampden presents a Duke full of dignity, considering that the
conduct of Vincentio in lurking about his city disguised as a friar,
when he is supposed to be out of town, is as undignified an act for a
potentate as one can well imagine.
Miss Frances Dillon makes the best of the ungrateful part of the
slighted Mariana, who in the gloomy shades of the “Moated Grange” brings
off a _coup_ of which Monte Carlo might well be proud.
“Measure for Measure,” written by Shakespeare, is undoubtedly strong
meat, as produced by Mr. Oscar Asche it is in every way a digestible,
and better still, a most palatable dish.
“The Beauty of Bath” at the new Aldwych Theatre is probably the most
successful show in London at the present time, and our thanks are due to
Mr. Seymour Hicks for a most delightful entertainment.
It is all against the canons of so-called musical comedy that either the
music or the comedy should be too fresh or original, and probably any
adventurous spirit who attempted to deal in such dangerous goods as an
entirely new and original comedy-opera would speedily find himself
amongst the registrars and receivers in Carey Street, W.C.
And Mr. Seymour Hicks is at the head of his profession, and knows what
his public wants. From the story of Cinderella he fashioned the
phenomenally successful “Catch of the Season,” and now from an idea in
“David Garrick,” and the marked resemblance in personal appearance of
his brother, Mr. Stanley Brett, to himself, Mr. Hicks has evolved the
story the “Beauty of Bath,” who comes to town, falls in love with a
prominent actor, and finds herself at the end of the play engaged to
marry his double, a dashing naval officer.
Miss Ellaline Terriss makes a perfect beauty from Bath, Mr. Stanley
Brett is the distinguished actor, and Mr. Seymour Hicks is breezy Dick
Alington the sailor hero of the story, with a large fortune and a long
and exacting and admirably played part. Mr. Hicks is at his best in a
pathetic scene between Dick and his mother upon the return of the former
from China. And in the second act his scene of pseudo-drunkenness _au_
David Garrick is very well done.
In “Bluebell” he was not on the stage nearly enough to satisfy his
admirers, who, in the present production, are delighted to see more
Hicks. Amongst other members of a long cast, that accomplished actress,
Miss Rosina Filippi, does wonders with a part which seems scarcely good
enough for her; and Master Valchera as a call-boy, adds to the
popularity he won as Bucket, the page-boy, in the “Catch of the Season,”
and Miss Barbara Deane sings as charmingly as ever.
Beautiful ladies in beautiful costumes form a prominent and most
attractive feature of the entertainment, and the Twelve Bath Buns, as
they are styled, might any of them challenge the “Judgment of Paris.”
The two scenes, representing the foyer of a theatre and a ballroom, are
very fine, and reflect the greatest credit upon Mr. W. Hann, the
painter: and altogether there seems to be nothing but praise for
everyone concerned in this handsome production.
Why the Comedy should not be a more lucky theatre is a problem which we
have never heard solved in a satisfactory way. It is very conveniently
placed and is a nice enough house, and yet a long run there is more or
less a rarity. Following the short run of “The Alabaster Staircase,” a
revival of “A Pair of Spectacles” presented those consummate artists,
Messrs. John Hare and Charles Groves, in their original parts, but even
this did not fill the bill for long, and upon April 5th, Mr. Chudleigh
reverted to an old-time method of his at the Court Theatre, and put up a
triple bill. The first piece is by Mr. Austin Strong, the author of “The
Little Father of the Wilderness,” which a few months ago afforded Mr.
Huntley Wright a good opportunity of displaying his ability as a
pathetic actor.
“The Drums of Oude” deals with an incident in the Indian Mutiny, where a
small body of English troops are in peril and it is a question of death
before dishonour when, at almost the last desperate moment
reinforcements spell rescue. The chief feature of this little drama was
the very telling performance of Mr. Matheson Lang as the resolute
Captain Hector Macgregor. The rest of the evening was devoted to two
pieces by Mr. J. M. Barrie—“Punch,” a toy tragedy in one act, and
“Josephine,” a _revue_ in three scenes.
“Punch” deals with the misfortunes and ruin of the senior dramatists
before the growth of Superpunch. Besides Punch and Judy, the other two
characters in the tragedy are ὁ χαριεις a fishmonger’s boy, who
announces that he represents the voice of the public. Mr. Barrie is such
a profound and elaborate jester that one looks closely for a joke in his
every word, but this ὁ χαριεις is too perplexing for us, unless, indeed,
the explanation offered by a super-Scotchman be the correct one, that a
fishmonger’s boy would, of course, carry ice. This is bad enough, but we
would rather adopt that view than believe Mr. Barrie to have put up a
fishmonger or butcher’s boy to represent δι χαριευτες the Attic “men of
culture and taste.” However that may be, the other character in the
tragedy is not so involved, and before Superpunch had come on the stage
we were prepared for the notorious Bernard Shaw beard, and for the
complete triumph of the new man. We should think it improbable that
“Punch” will enjoy such a long run as is usually the case with anything
from Mr. Barrie’s fertile pen.
“Josephine” is called on the programme “a Revue,” but this is unfair to
a distinguished institution which belongs to Paris, and we prefer to
call “Josephine” a political skit. The story is of the household of
sleepy Mr. Buller, where his three Scotch sons take it in turns to play
at being eldest son, and mismanaging everything, with flirtations with
Mavourneen Blarney to pass the time, and more serious engagements with
Josephine. Bunting is a youngest son, representative of the growing
Labour Party, and Fair and Free are two beautiful ladies who each claim
to assist in the housekeeping, with disastrous results.
The three scenes are made up of personalities at the expense of Lord
Rosebery, Mr. Balfour, Sir Henry Campbell-Bannerman, and, of course, Mr.
Joseph Chamberlain, who is represented in woman’s clothes by a male
actor. This might be regarded as an error of judgment, were it not that
Mr. Dion Boucicault plays this difficult part with the best of taste and
discretion; at the same time we see no reason why the part should not
have been played by a lady, as is the case with Mavourneen Blarney, who
is admirably represented by Miss Eva Moore. We cannot find much to say
in praise of “Josephine,” but there is much to be said in praise of the
company who play it.
As we have said, Mr. Dion Boucicault does wonders for the part of
Josephine. Mr. Graham Browne is excellent as James, whose golf-clubs and
dilettante attitudes proclaim him the late Prime Minister; and Mr.
Kenneth Douglas and A. G. Matthews are excellent respectively as C. B.
and Lord Rosebery.
Mr. Louis Calvert is nicely sleepy as John Bull, and Miss Grace Lane and
Miss Mabel Hackney, as Fair and Free, look very charming, and indulge in
some Grigolati work on a wire, although we cannot quite make out why
they should. It seems impossible that Mr. Barrie’s jokes should ever be
anything but successful, so probably these will enjoy a long vogue, but
personally we would prefer to see such an excellent company of actors
and actresses playing in something in which they have a chance of
showing to better advantage.
At the Haymarket Theatre the welcome revival of “The Man from
Blankley’s” is proving a great success, and eight times a week Lord
Strathpeffer has been dining with the Tidmarshes and their strange
acquaintances.
Mr. Anstey’s story of how his lordship found his way into the wrong
house in Bayswater, and being mistaken for the hired guest from
Blankley’s emporium, spent a perplexing evening amongst strangers, is
extremely funny. And it is made funnier still by the fine company
playing at the Haymarket. Mr. Charles Hawtrey is immense in his original
part of Strathpeffer, and Messrs. Henry Kemble and Aubrey Fitzgerald as
the pompous uncle, Gilwattle, and the brainless Poffley are inimitable.
Moreover, Mr. Arthur Playfair resumes his part of the hired butler, out
of which he extracts any amount of undignified fun. Mr. Weedon Grossmith
now plays the host, and fits the part to perfection. Of the ladies Miss
Fanny Brough is as humorous as ever in the _rôle_ of the worried
hostess, and Miss Dagmar Wiehe, a new-comer, is very charming and
natural as the Governess.
“The Man from Blankley’s” is just about the most amusing unmusical
entertainment in London nowadays, and is a very prominent example of the
success which can attend a revival of a popular play done by a
first-class company.
We were interested by the remark of a very wise woman who traced a great
similarity between “The Man from Blankley’s” and that great masterpiece,
“His House in Order.”
In each case there is a girl very much out of her element amongst the
strangest beings that imagination could depict, and in each case there
comes to her rescue a man of distinction. The Tidmarshes live in
Bayswater, and Mr. Jesson lives in the provinces. It was amusing to hear
the comparison of the two plays, but we have no space now to do more
than make a passing reference to the ingenuity of our wise friend.
At the Lyric Theatre, Mr. H. B. Irving is to be complimented upon his
good work as the adaptor, producer, and interpreter of a very
interesting play.
“Jeunesse” is the name of the work by Mr. André Picard, as produced at
the Odéon Theatre, but since the title “Youth” has already been
appropriated for an English play, Mr. Irving has been well advised to
call his production by the name of the heroine, “Mauricette,” for she is
the keynote of the whole composition.
It is a pathetic little story, this, which comes, unlike most French
successes, healthily enough into a London theatre without any excision
or operation of the scalpel of the censor.
Roger Dautran is a senator in the prime of life—that is, from the point
of view of a man of fifty—he has a most devoted wife, past the prime of
life—from the point of view of the man of fifty—and childless. Dautran
has a large heart and a great yearning for sympathy from the other sex,
and he frankly admits that if ever he has made a telling speech in
debate, his only inspiration has been the presence of a sympathetic
spirit in the ladies’ gallery. So the impressionable senator, finding
home-life somehow incomplete, has drifted into the habit of consistently
dining out, and leaving his devoted wife to the desert, of tedium of an
improving book to read in nice large print.
On the first night of our acquaintance with the restless Roger, he is
just off to dine at a restaurant, when his wife presents to him a girl
whom she suggests she shall retain in their household as companion for
them both, to lend a fragrance of youth to their dull, middle-aged
menage. Mauricette is a beautiful child, eighteen years of age, and so
soon as Dautran has seen her he elects to dine at home that very
evening, and for the next six weeks it would be good betting that he
never dined out.
After six weeks we find the party very much united at Dautran’s country
house; to the delight of his wife, the senator has become quite
redomesticated, but the pity of it is that this has only come about at
the expense of the heart of poor Mauricette, who has fallen in love with
her elderly admirer, who in his turn can think of nothing but her and
himself.
The second act is full of good things; a doctor, the type of youth in
the district, and a _protégé_ of Dautran, thinks it would be a very good
thing for Mauricette and himself if they married, and tells the girl so
with the full approbation of Mme. Dautran, who by this time is getting a
little tired and doubtful of her scheme for the re-domestication of her
husband. Mauricette has no room in her heart for the doctor, and asks
for time to consider his offer, but closely following upon this she is
exposed to an offer of a less honourable nature from a visitor to the
house, and in less time than it takes to tell there is a terrible storm
raging in the drawing-room, and Dautran is inadvertently but obviously
proclaiming his love for the girl. Mauricette, to put matters right,
agrees to marry the doctor, and forthwith leaves the house, to the
grievous distress of Dautran.
In the last act we find, six months later, Mauricette married to the
doctor and the best of friends, but Roger still holds her heart. He is
bent upon again seeing her, and so an interview is granted by permission
of the doctor.
At first Mauricette talks affectionately to Roger without looking at
him, until in a very dramatic moment she looks up, sees his grey hair
and careworn face, and recoils from the man who had taught her to love
him. And so youth mates with youth, and the doctor is made happy.
Miss Dorothea Baird is a charming Mauricette, and deserves the highest
praise for her performance. Since her great success as “Trilby,” she has
not, in our opinion, had such a good part, and she certainly makes the
most of it. Mr. H. B. Irving gives us an extremely clever study of Roger
Dautran, especially in the last act, where the senator is made to
realise that he is beaten by the clock.
Mr. Leslie Faber has an unsympathetic task in playing the doctor, who is
the representative of youth, but he succeeds in his difficult task. Miss
Marion Terry supplies a large share of the success of the evening, her
study of the loving wife, who, in her anxiety to please her husband,
introduces a very pronounced element of discord into the home, being
extremely clever.
“Mauricette” is altogether charming.