One of the most exquisite enjoyments provided by the stage is the advent

of a new actor who is not only new but good. It is the pleasure of

discovery. It is the pleasure of contact with a rich mind hitherto

unexplored. The personal appearance, the power of the eye, the variety

of the facial expression, the tones of the voice, the carriage of the

person, the salient attributes of the individual character, the altitude

of the intellectual development, the quality of the spirit, the extent

and the nature of those artistic faculties and resources that constitute

the professional equipment,--all those things become the subject first

of interested inquiry and next of pleased recognition. Willard is

neither of the stately, the weird, the mysterious, nor the ferocious

order of actor. There is nothing in him of either Werner, Manfred, or

Sir Giles Overreach. He belongs not to either the tradition of John

Kemble or of Edmund Kean. His personality, nevertheless, is of a

distinctive and interesting kind. He has the self-poise and the exalted

calm of immense reserve power and of tender and tremulous sensibility

perfectly controlled. His acting is conspicuously marked by two of the

loveliest attributes of art--simplicity and sincerity. He conceals

neither the face nor the heart. His figure is fine and his demeanour is

that of vigorous mental authority informed by moral purity and by the

self-respect of a manly spirit. Goodness, although a quality seldom

taken into the critical estimate, nevertheless has its part in spiritual

constitution and in consequent effect. It was, for instance, an element

of artistic potentiality in the late John McCullough. It operated

spontaneously; and just so it does in the acting of Willard, who, first

of all, gives the satisfying impression of being genuine. A direct and

thorough method of expression naturally accompanies that order of mind

and that quality of temperament. Every movement that Willard makes upon

the stage is clear, free, open, firm, and of an obvious significance.

Every tone of his rich and resonant voice is distinctly intended and is

distinctly heard. There are no "flaws and starts." He has formed a

precise ideal. He knows exactly how to embody and to utter it, and he

makes the manifestation of it sharp, defined, positive, and cogent. His

meaning cannot be missed. He has an unerring sense of proportion and

symmetry. The character that he represents is shown, indeed, all at

once, as a unique identity; but it is not all at once developed, the

manifestation of it being made gradually to proceed under the stress of

experience and of emotion. He rises with the occasion. His feelings are

deep, and he is possessed of extraordinary power for the utterance of

them--not simply vocal power, although that, in his case, is

exceptional, but the rare faculty of becoming convulsed, inspired,

transfigured, by passion, and of being swept along by it, and of

sweeping along his hearers. His manner covers, without concealing, great

intensity. This is such a combination of traits as must have existed--if

the old records are read aright--in that fine and famous actor, John

Henderson, and which certainly existed in the late Benjamin Webster. It

has, however, always been rare upon the stage, and, like all rare

jewels, it is precious. The actor who, from an habitual mood of sweet

gravity and patient gentleness, can rise to the height of delirious

passion, and there sustain himself at a poise of tempestuous

concentration which is the fulfilment of nature, and never once seem

either ludicrous or extravagant, is an actor of splendid power and

extraordinary self-discipline. Such an actor is Willard. The blue eyes,

the slightly olive complexion, the compact person, the picturesque

appearance, the melodious voice, the flexibility of natural action, and

the gradual and easy ascent from the calm level of domestic peace to the

stormy summit of passionate ecstasy recall personal peculiarities and

artistic methods long passed away. The best days of Edwin L. Davenport

and the younger James Wallack are brought to mind by them.

In the drama of _The Middleman_ Willard had to impersonate an inventor,

of the absorbed, enthusiastic, self-regardless, fanatical kind. Cyrus

Blenkarn is a potter. His genius and his toil have enriched two persons

named Chandler, father and son, who own and conduct a porcelain factory

in an English town of the present day. Blenkarn has two daughters, and

one of them is taken from him by the younger Chandler. The circumstances

of that deprivation point at disgrace, and the inventor conceives

himself to have suffered an odious ignominy and irreparable wrong. Young

Chandler has departed and so has Mary Blenkarn, and they are eventually

to return as husband and wife; but Cyrus Blenkarn has been aroused from

his reveries over the crucible and furnace,--wherein he is striving to

discover a lost secret in the potter's art that will make him both rich

and famous,--and he utters a prayer for vengeance upon these Chandlers,

and he parts from them. A time of destitution and of pitiful struggle

with dire necessity, sleepless grief, and the maddening impulse of

vengeance now comes upon him, so that he is wasted almost to death. He

will not, however, abandon his quest for the secret of his art. He may

die of hunger and wretchedness; he will not yield. At the last moment

of his trial and his misery--alone--at night--in the alternate lurid

blaze and murky gloom of his firing-house--success is conquered: the

secret is found. This climax, to which the preliminaries gradually and

artfully lead, affords a great opportunity to an actor; and Willard

greatly filled it. The old inventor has been bowed down almost to

despair. Grief and destitution, the sight of his remaining daughter's

poverty, and the conflict of many feelings have made him a wreck. But

his will remains firm. It is not, however, until his last hope has been

abandoned that his success suddenly comes--and the result of this is a

delirium. That situation, one of the best in modern drama, has been

treated by the author in such a manner as to sustain for a long time the

feeling of suspense and to put an enormous strain upon the emotion and

the resources of an actor. Willard's presentment of the gaunt,

attenuated figure of Cyrus Blenkarn--hollow-eyed, half-frantic,

hysterical with grief and joy--was the complete incarnation of a

dramatic frensy; and this, being sympathetic, and moving to goodness and

not to evil, captured the heart. It was a magnificent exhibition, not

alone of the physical force that sometimes is so essential in acting but

of that fervour of the soul without which acting is a mockery.

The skill with which Willard reserved his power, so that the

impersonation might gradually increase in strength, was one of the best

merits of his art. Blenkarn's prayer might readily be converted into the

climax of the piece, and it might readily be spoken in such a way that

no effect would be left for the culmination in the furnace-room. Those

errors were avoided, and during three out of the four acts the movement

of the piece was fluent, continuous, and cumulative. In this respect

both the drama and the performance were instructive. Henry Arthur Jones

has diversified his serious scenes with passages of sportive humour and

he has freighted the piece with conventional didacticism as to the

well-worn question of capital and labour. The humour is good: the

political economy need not detain attention. The value of the play does

not reside in its teaching but in its dramatic presentation of strong

character, individual experience, and significant story. The effect

produced by _The Middleman_ is that of moral elevation. Its auditor is

touched and ennobled by a spectacle of stern trial, pitiable suffering,

and stoical endurance. In the purpose that presides over human

destiny--if one may accept the testimony equally of history and of

fiction--it appears to be necessary first to create strong characters

and then to break them; and the manner in which they are broken usually

involves the elements alike of dramatic effect and of pathos. That

singular fact in mortal experience may have been noticed by this author.

His drama is a forcible exposition of it. _The Middleman_ was set upon

Palmer's stage in such a way as to strengthen the dramatic illusion by

the fidelity of scenery. The firing-house, with its furnaces in

operation, was a copy of what may be seen at Worcester. The picture of

English life was excellent.

When Willard played the part of Judah Llewellyn for the first time in

America (December 29, 1890), he gained from a sympathetic and judicious

audience a verdict of emphatic admiration. Judah Llewellyn is a good

part in one of the most striking plays of the period--a play that tells

an interesting and significant story by expressive, felicitous, and

incessant action; affects the feelings by situations that are vital

with dramatic power; inspires useful thought upon a theme of

psychological importance; cheers the mind with a fresh breeze of

satirical humour; and delights the instinct of taste by its crisp and

pungent style. Alike by his choice of a comparatively original subject

and his deft method in the treatment of it Henry Arthur Jones has shown

a fine dramatic instinct; and equally in the evolution of character and

the expression of experience and emotion he has wrought with feeling and

vigour. Most of the plays that are written, in any given period, pass

away with the period to which they appertain. _Judah_ is one of the

exceptions; for its brilliantly treated theme is one of perennial

interest, and there seems reason to believe, of a work so vital, that

long after the present generation has vanished it still will keep its

place in the theatre, and sometimes be acted, not as a quaint relic but

as a living lesson.

That theme is the psychic force in human organism. The author does not

obtrude it; does not play the pedant with it; does not lecture upon it;

and above all does not bore with it. He only uses it; and he has been so

true to his province as a dramatist and not an advocate that he never

once assumes to decide upon any question of doctrine that may be

involved in the assertion of it. His heroine is a young woman who thinks

herself to be possessed of a certain inherent restorative power of

curing the sick. This power is of psychic origin and it operates through

the medium of personal influence. This girl, Vashti Dethick, has exerted

her power with some success. Other persons, having felt its good effect,

have admitted its existence. The father of Vashti, an enterprising

scamp, has thereupon compelled the girl to trade upon her peculiar

faculty; little by little to assume miraculous powers; and finally to

pretend that her celestial talent is refreshed and strengthened by

abstinence from food, and that her cures are wrought only after she has

fasted for many days. He has thus converted her into an impostor; yet,

as her heart is pure and her moral principle naturally sound, she is ill

at ease in this false position, and her mental distress has suddenly

become aggravated, almost to the pitch of desperation, by the arrival of

love. She has lost her heart to a young clergyman, Judah Llewellyn, the

purity of whose spirit and the beauty of whose life are a bitter and

burning rebuke to her enforced deceitfulness of conduct. Here is a woman

innocently guilty, suddenly aroused by love, made sensitive and noble

(as that passion commonly makes those persons who really feel it), and

projected into a condition of aggrieved excitement. In this posture of

romantic and pathetic circumstances the crisis of two lives is suddenly

precipitated in action.

Judah Llewellyn also is possessed of spiritual sensibility and psychic

force. In boyhood a shepherd, he has dwelt among the mountains of his

native Wales, and his imagination has heard the voices that are in rocks

and trees, in the silence of lonely places, in the desolation of the

bleak hills, and in the cold light of distant stars. He is now a

preacher, infatuated with his mission, inspired in his eloquence,

invincible in his tremendous sincerity. He sees Vashti and he loves her.

It is the first thrill of mortal passion that ever has mingled with his

devotion to his Master's work. The attraction between these creatures is

human; and yet it is more of heaven than of earth. It is a tie of

spiritual kindred that binds them. They are beings of a different order

from the common order--and, as happens in such cases, they will be

tried by exceptional troubles and passed through a fire of mortal

anguish. For what reason experience should take the direction of misery

with fine natures in human life no philosopher has yet been able to

ascertain; but that it does take that direction all competent

observation proves. To Vashti and Judah the time speedily comes when

their love is acknowledged, upon both sides--the preacher speaking

plainly; the girl, conscious of turpitude, shrinking from a spoken

avowal which yet her whole personality proclaims. Yielding to her

father's malign will she has consented to make one more manifestation of

curative power, to go through once more,--and for the last time,--the

mockery of a pretended fast. The scene is Lord Asgarby's house; the

patient is Lord Asgarby's daughter--an only child, cursed with

constitutional debility, the foredoomed victim of premature decline.

This frail creature has heard of Vashti and believes in her, and desires

and obtains her society. To Professor Dethick this is, in every sense, a

golden opportunity, and he insists that the starvation test shall be

thoroughly made. Lord Asgarby, willing to do anything for his idolised

daughter, assents to the plan, and his scientific friend, cynical

Professor Jopp, agrees, with the assistance of his erudite daughter, to

supervise the experiment. Vashti will fast for several days, and the

heir of Asgarby will then be healed by her purified and exalted

influence.

The principal scene of the play shows the exterior of an ancient, unused

tower of Asgarby House, in which Vashti is detained during the fast. The

girl is supposed to be starving. Her scampish father will endeavour to

relieve her. Miss Jopp is vigilant to prevent fraud. The patient is

confident. Judah, wishful to be near to the object of his adoration, has

climbed the outer wall and is watching, beneath the window, unseen, in

the warder's seat. The time is summer, the hour midnight, and the

irrevocable vow of love has been spoken. At that supreme instant, and

under conditions so natural that the picture seems one of actual life,

the sin of Vashti is revealed and the man who had adored her as an angel

knows her for a cheat. With a difference of circumstances that

situation--in the fibre of it--is not new. Many a lover, male and

female, has learned that every idol has its flaw. But the situation is

new in its dramatic structure. For Judah the discovery is a terrible

one, and the resultant agony is convulsive and lamentable. He takes,

however, the only course he could be expected to take: he must vindicate

the integrity of the woman whom he loves, and he commits the crime of

perjury in order to shield her reputation from disgrace.

What will a man do for the woman whom he loves? The attributes of

individual character are always to be considered as forces likely to

modify passion and to affect conduct. But in general the answer to that

question may be given in three words--anything and everything! The

history of nations, as of individuals, is never rightly read until it is

read in the light of knowledge of the influence that has been exerted

over them by women. Cleopatra, in ancient Egypt, changed the history of

Rome by the ruin of Marc Antony. Another heroine recently toppled

Ireland down the fire-escape into the back-yard. So goes the world. In

Judah, however, the crime that is done for love is pursued to its

consequence of ever-accumulative suffering, until at length, when it has

been expiated by remorse and repentance, it is rectified by confession

and obliterated by pardon. No play ever taught a lesson of truth with

more cogent dramatic force. The cynical, humorous scenes are

delightful.

Willard's representation of Cyrus Blenkarn stamped him as one of the

best actors of the age. His representation of Judah Llewellyn deepened

that impression and reinforced it with a conviction of marked

versatility. In his utterance of passion Willard showed that he has

advanced far beyond the Romeo stage. The love that he expressed was that

of a man--intellectual, spiritual, noble, a moral being and one

essentially true. Man's love, when it is real, adores its object;

hallows it; invests it with celestial attributes; and beholds it as a

part of heaven. That quality of reverence was distinctly conveyed by the

actor, and therefore to observers who conceive passion to be delirious

abandonment (of which any animal is capable), his ardour may have seemed

dry and cold. It was nevertheless true. He made the tempestuous torrent

of Judah's avowal the more overwhelming by his preliminary

self-repression and his thoughtful gentleness of reserve; for thus the

hunger of desire was beautiful with devotion and tenderness; and while

the actor's feelings seemed borne away upon a whirling tide of

irresistible impulse his exquisite art kept a perfect control of face,

voice, person, demeanour, and delivery, and not once permitted a lapse

into extravagance. The character thus embodied will long be remembered

as an image of dignity, sweetness, moral enthusiasm, passionate fervour,

and intellectual power; but, also, viewed as an effort in the art of

acting, it will be remembered as a type of consummate grace in the

embodiment of a beautiful ideal clearly conceived. The effect of

spiritual suffering, as conveyed in the pallid countenance and ravaged

figure, in the last act, was that of noble pathos. The delivery of all

the speeches of the broken, humiliated, haunted minister was deeply

touching, not alone in music of voice but in denotement of knowledge of

human nature and human suffering and endurance. The actor who can play

such a part in such a manner is not an experimental artist. Rather let

him be called--in the expressive words of one of his country's poets--

"Sacred historian of the heart

And moral nature's lord."

XXIII.

SALVINI AS KING SAUL AND KING LEAR.

Salvini was grander and finer in King Saul than in any other embodiment

that he presented. He seized the idea wholly, and he executed it with

affluent power. He brought to the part every attribute necessary to its

grandeur of form and its afflicting sympathy of spirit. His towering

physique presented, with impressive accuracy, the Hebrew monarch, chosen

of God, who was "lifted a head and shoulders above the people." His

tremulous sensibility, his knowledge of suffering, his skill in

depicting it, his great resources of voice, his vigour and fineness of

action, his exceptional commingling of largeness and gentleness--all

these attributes combined in that performance, to give magnificent

reality to one of the most sublime conceptions in literature. By his

personation of Saul Salvini added a new and an immortal figure to the

stage pantheon of kings and heroes.

Alfieri's tragedy of _Saul_ was written in 1782-83, when the haughty,

impetuous, and passionate poet was thirty-four years old, and at the

suggestion of the Countess of Albany, whom he loved. He had suffered a

bereavement at the time, and he was in deep grief. The Countess tried to

console him by reading the Bible, and when they came upon the narrative

of Saul the idea of the tragedy was struck out between them. The work

was written with vigorous impulse and the author has left, in his

autobiography, the remark that none of his tragedies cost him so little

labour. _Saul_ is in five acts and it contains 1567 lines--of that

Italian _versi sciolti_ which inadequately corresponds to the blank

verse of the English language. The scene is laid in the camp of Saul's

army. Six persons are introduced, namely, Saul, Jonathan, David, Michel,

Abner, and Achimelech. The time supposed to be occupied by the

action--or rather, by the suffering--of the piece is a single day, the

last in the king's life. Act first is devoted to explanation, conveyed

in warnings to David, by Jonathan, his friend, and Michel, his wife. Act

second presents the distracted monarch, who knows that God has forsaken

him and that death is at hand. In a speech of terrible intensity he

relates to Abner the story of the apparition of Samuel and the doom that

the ghost has spoken. His children humour and soothe the broken old man,

and finally succeed in softening his mind toward David--whom he at once

loves, dreads, and hates, as the appointed instrument of his destruction

and the successor to his crown. Act third shows David playing upon the

harp before Saul, and chanting Saul's deeds in the service and defence

of Israel--so that he calms the agonised delirium of the haunted king

and wins his blessing; but at last a boastful word makes discord in the

music's charm, and Saul is suddenly roused into a ghastly fury. Acts

fourth and fifth deal with the wild caprices and maddening agonies of

the frenzied father; the ever-varying phenomena of his mental disease;

the onslaught of the Philistines; the killing of his sons; the frequent

recurrence, before his mind's eye, of the shade of the dead prophet; and

finally his suicidal death. It is, in form, a classical tragedy,

massive, grand, and majestically simple; and it blazes from end to end

with the fire of a sublime imagination.

Ardent lovers of Italian literature are fond of ranking _Saul_ with

_Lear_. The claim is natural but it is not valid. In _Lear_--not to

speak of its profound revelations of universal human nature and its vast

philosophy of human life--there is a tremendous scope of action, through

which mental condition and experience are dramatically revealed; and

there is the deepest deep of pathos, because the highest height of

afflicted goodness. In _Saul_ there is simply--upon a limited canvas,

without adjuncts, without the suggestion of resources, without the

relief of even mournful humour, and with a narrative rather than a

dramatic background--the portraiture of a condition; and, because the

man displayed is neither so noble nor so human, the pathos surcharging

the work is neither so harrowing nor so tender. Yet the two works are

akin in majesty of ideal, in the terrible topic of mental disease that

shatters a king, and in the atmosphere of desolation that trails after

them like a funeral pall; and it is not a wonder that Alfieri's Saul

should be deemed the greatest tragedy ever originated in the Italian

language. It attains a superb height, for it keeps an equal pace with

the severe simplicity of the Bible narrative on which it is founded. It

depicts the condition of an imaginative mind, a stately and robust

character, an arrogant, fiery spirit, a kind heart, and a royal and

regally poised nature, that have first been undermined by sin and the

consciousness of sin, and then crazed by contact with the spirit world

and by a nameless dread of the impending anger of an offended God. It

would be difficult to conceive of a more distracting and piteous state.

Awe and terror surround that august sufferer, and make him both holy and

dreadful. In his person and his condition, as those are visible to the

imaginative mind, he combined elements that irresistibly impress and

thrill. He is of vast physical stature, that time has not bent, and of

great beauty of face, that griefs have ravaged but not destroyed. He is

a valiant and sanguinary warrior, and danger seems to radiate from his

presence. He is a magnanimous king and a loving father, and he softens

by generosity and wins by gentleness. He is a maniac, haunted by

spectres and scourged with a whip of scorpions, and his red-eyed fury

makes all space a hell and shatters silence with the shrieks of the

damned. He is a human soul, burdened with the frightful consciousness

of Divine wrath and poised in torment on the precipice that overhangs

the dark, storm-beaten ocean of eternity. His human weakness is frighted

by ghastly visions and indefinite horrors, against which his vain

struggle only makes his forlorn feebleness more piteous and drear. The

gleams of calm that fall upon his tortured heart only light up an abyss

of misery--a vault of darkness peopled by demons. He is already cut off

from among the living, by the doom of inevitable fate, and while we pity

him we fear him. His coming seems attended with monstrous shapes; he

diffuses dissonance; his voice is a cry of anguish or a wail of

desolation; his existence is a tempest; there can be no relief for him

save death, and the death that ends him comes like the blessing of tears

to the scorched eyelids of consuming misery. That is the Saul of the

Bible and of Alfieri's tragedy; and that is the Saul whom Salvini

embodied. It was a colossal monument of human suffering that the actor

presented, and no one could look upon it without being awed and

chastened.

Shadows of the Stage · 第 15 / 18 段