Guardsmen,” and on October 19, that year, at the Herald Square Theatre,
she gave a notably fine performance,--splendidly effective in the
principal scene,--of _Hannah Jacobs_, in Israel Zangwill’s stage
synopsis of his novel of “The Children of the Ghetto.” A few weeks later
Belasco informed Miss Bates that if she were willing to begin in a farce
which he did not much esteem he was ready to undertake her management
preparatory to “giving her her chance.” “The Children of the Ghetto” had
proved a failure, and the actress joyfully accepted the manager’s
proposal.
Blanche Bates first acted under Belasco’s management, December 25, 1899,
at the Columbia Theatre, Washington, D. C., appearing as _Cora_, the
principal person in Belasco’s “Naughty Anthony”: on January 8, 1900, she
appeared in it at the Herald Square Theatre, New York. The title of that
farce is not altogether felicitous, because possibly suggestive of
impropriety, but there is nothing mischievous in the fabric itself. The
piece is incorporative of one scene, varied and rewritten, from an
unremembered farce of other days, and, with its freightage of old but
always effective stage subterfuges and comic “business,” it reminded
experienced observers of such plays, far and forgot now, as “Flies in
the Web,” “My Neighbor’s Wife,” “Playing with Fire,” “To Oblige Benson,”
etc. In it Belasco made use of one of the oldest theatrical expedients
for creating comic confusion and mirthful effect,--the expedient of a
mistaken identity. The chief male in it is _Anthony Depew_, a moral
professor of the Chautauqua brotherhood, who becomes enamoured of a
coquettish girl, in the hosiery business, and whose exploits in
osculation lead him into a troublesome dilemma, from which he endeavors
to escape by pretending to be somebody else. This kind of perplexity has
been common on the stage since the distant days of “The Three Singles;
or, Two and the Deuce.” Such themes do not require much comment. The
chief fact to be recorded in this case is the uncommon felicity of the
cast and the excellence of the stage direction. But such an actor as
Frank Worthing (who was essentially a light comedian, and, as such, the
most conspicuous local performer of the day, in his particular line) and
such an actress as Miss Bates were practically wasted in so ephemeral a
trifle. This was the cast in full:
_Cowley_ Albert Bruning.
_Adam Budd_ William J. LeMoyne.
_Zachary Chillinton_ William Elton.
_Jack Cheviot_ Charles Wyngate.
_Mr. Heusted_ Claude Gillingwater.
_Mr. Brigham_ E. P. Wilkes.
_Miss Rinkett_ Fanny Young.
_Cowley_ Albert Bruning.
_Knox_ Samuel Edwards.
_Ed_ Brandon Tynan.
_Mrs. Zachary Chillingham_ Maud Harrison.
_Rosy_ Mary Barker.
_Winnie_ Olive Redpath.
_Cora_ Blanche Bates.
Belasco’s serious purpose, in this play, underlying the quest of
laughter, was to satirize moral humbug, and that good purpose he
accomplished. _Anthony Depew_ is an amiable impostor, established at
Chautauqua, New York, to give lessons in moral conduct to persons who
deem themselves tempted to go astray. He goes astray himself, as far as
compromising osculation, and he causes all manner of disturbance, in
several households, by fixing the guilt of a kiss upon an innocent
booby, who is his landlord. Worthing embodied that humbug in an
admirable manner. His plan was definite, his execution firm and true,
his satire cumulative; and from first to last he never swerved from that
demeanor of perfect gravity which makes absurd proceedings irresistibly
amusing. Miss Bates, even more than usually beautiful as _Cora_, made
the tempter of _Anthony_ a compound of demure simplicity and arch,
piquant glee, and, in her complete frustration of the _Professor’s_
moral heroics, she was a delightful incarnation of honest, healthful,
triumphant woman nature. A colloquy of these two players, as preceptor
and pupil, has seldom been surpassed for pure fun. Specification of the
fantastic situations in which the _Professor_ involves himself and his
landlord, _Adam Budd_,--abundantly comical in the seemingly
unpremeditated humor, the soft, silky manner, and the grotesque
personality assumed by Le Moyne,--would be a tedious business. Good
acting, however, did not suffice to sustain the play in public favor.
Writing about this venture Belasco says:
“At the time I wrote ’Naughty Anthony’ the country was farce
mad,--but the public will not accept me as a farce writer, and it
was a failure. I believed, at the time, that had somebody else
produced my play it might have succeeded, and this actually proved
to be the case; for when I sold the piece and it was taken on the
road, with my name omitted from the programme, it made money,
although it had cost me a pretty penny. I soon saw that ’Naughty
Anthony’ must be withdrawn or something added to the bill in order
to keep it going.”
“MADAME BUTTERFLY.”
Some little while before the production of “Naughty Anthony” Belasco had
received from a stranger a letter in which he was urged to read a
story, called “Madame Butterfly,” by John Luther Long, with a view to
making it into a play. When anxiously casting about for some means of
providing required reinforcement for his farce he chanced to recollect
that suggestion, procured a copy of Long’s book containing his tragic
tale, read it and was so much impressed by the possibilities which he
perceived of basing on it a striking theatrical novelty that he entered
into communication with Long and arranged with him for the use of his
story. This proved, in several ways, a most fortunate occurrence: it led
to a valued and lasting friendship and, ultimately, to the writing of
two other memorable dramas,--“The Darling of the Gods” and “Adrea,”--as
well as to the composition of a beautiful and extraordinarily popular
opera, and it resulted, directly, in the making and production, by
Belasco, of one of the most effective short plays of the last
twenty-five years,--the success of which did much to sustain him under
the disappointment of failure and the burden of heavy loss.
Belasco’s tragedy of “Madame Butterfly” is comprised in one act, of two
scenes, which, connected by a pictorial intercalation, are presented
without a break, and it implicates eight persons, besides its heroine,
all of whom are merely incidental to depiction of her tragic fate. The
substance of its story is contained in Goldsmith’s familiar lines about
the sad consequences of lovely woman’s genuflexion to folly. A man
commits the worst and meanest of all acts, the wronging of an innocent
girl, and then deserts her. The case has often been stated--but it is
not less pathetic because it is familiar. In this instance the girl is a
Japanese, and in Japan, and thus the image of her joy, sorrow,
desolation, and death are investable with opulent color and quaint
accessories. Her name is _Cho-Cho-San_, and, by her lover, she is called
“_Madame Butterfly_.” Her family is one of good position, but her
father, a soldier of the emperor, having been defeated in battle, has
killed himself, and her relatives, being poor, have induced
_Cho-Cho-San_, in order that she may be able to provide maintenance for
them, to enter into the relation of housekeeping prostitute with an
officer of the United States Navy, _Lieutenant B. F. Pinkerton_ by name,
who is stationed for a few months at Higashi, Japan, and who feels
himself to be in need of female companionship and that “comfort other
than pecuniary” specified by Patrick Henry. According to the enlightened
and advanced customs of Japan (which various English-speaking exponents
of progress and free-everything, including free-“love,” are laboring to
establish in our benighted country) this relationship is not degrading
and despicable but respectable and, in circumstances which are of
frequent occurrence, to be desired. As _Butterfly_ expresses it, though
the naval officer is described by the Japanese as “a barbarian and a
beast,” “Aevery one say: ’yaes, take him--take him beas’--he’s got
moaneys,’ so I say for jus’ liddle while, perhaps I can stan’.”
_Pinkerton_, however, proves to be a delightful companion who wins the
love of the Japanese girl and, with the crass cruelty common among
viciously self-indulgent men, he assures that forlorn waif that her
marriage to him is not merely a temporary arrangement of convenience,
terminable, according to Japanese law, by the mere act of desertion, but
is a binding, permanent one, according to American custom and law and
that she is, in fact, _Mrs. B. F. Pinkerton_. Having led her to believe
this, the amiable _Pinkerton_ presently departs upon his ship, after
making _Butterfly_ a present of money, informing her that he has “had a
very nice time” and assuring her that he will come back “when the robins
nest again.” The girl, confidently awaiting the return of her lover,
whom she declares and believes to be her lawful husband, after a little
time becomes a mother by him. Two years pass--during which she refuses
many suitors--and the money given her by _Pinkerton_ has been all but
exhausted: _Butterfly_ is confronted by the alternative of beggary or
starvation, yet she contemptuously rejects all proffers of rich
alliances, serenely trusting in the faith of _Pinkerton_. Then, at last,
he comes back, and she is apprised that though for two weeks after
leaving her he was “dotty in love with her” he recovered from his
sublime passion and that he has married another woman (who magnanimously
offers to take away her child and rear it!)--whereupon _Madame
Butterfly_ kills herself.
The play is a situation, and, though some of its detail is trivial, it
reveals elemental extremes and contrasts of much human experience; in
its essential passages it possesses the cardinal merits of simplicity
and directness, and in representation its effect is tragic and
afflictingly pathetic. One feature of its performance, devised by
Belasco, was, in respect to execution, unique,--namely, the
intercalation whereby the two scenes of the tragedy are connected. When,
at evening, the forlorn _Butterfly_,--after two years “jus’
waitin’--sometimes cry in’--sometimes watchin’--but always
waitin’!”--sees the warship to which _Pinkerton_ is attached entering
the harbor of Higashi she believes that her “husband” will immediately
repair to their abode and she becomes almost delirious with joy. She
prepares for his
[Illustration:
Photograph by Byron. Belasco’s Collection.
“Too bad--those robin--never nes’--again!”
THE DEATH SCENE, BELASCO’S “MADAME BUTTERFLY”
BLANCHE BATES AS _CHO-CHO-SAN_. FRANK WORTHING AS _LIEUTENANT B. F.
PINKERTON_]
reception, attiring herself and their little child in fine array and
decking the house with flowers and lighted lanterns. Then, with the
child and a servant maid, she takes station at a window, to give him
welcome--and there she waits and watches through the night, until the
morning breaks. The lapse of time was, in the performance, skilfully and
impressively denoted,--the shades of evening darkening into night; stars
becoming visible, then brilliant, then fading from view; the lighted
lanterns one by one flickering out; the gray light of dawn revealing the
servant and the child prone upon the floor sunk in slumber, with the
deserted mother standing over them, pale and wan, still gazing fixedly
down the vacant road, while the rosy glow of sunrise grew into the full
light of day and the sweet sound of the waking songs of birds floated in
from a flowering grove of cherry trees. In the representation this
scene, during which no word was spoken and no motion made, occupied
_fourteen minutes_--and surely no tribute to Belasco’s resource and
skill in stage management and stage mechanics could be more significant
than the fact that during all that time never did the interest of his
audiences waver nor their attention flag.
At the end, when _Butterfly_ knows her lover faithless and her life
ruined and desolate, she takes her father’s sword,--on which is graven
his dying monition, “To _die_ with honor, when we can no longer live
with honor,”--and with it deals herself a mortal stroke. This desperate
deed is done out of the audience’s sight and as, with ghastly face and a
scarf bound round her throat to hide the wound, she staggers forward to
clasp her child to her breast, _Pinkerton_ enters the room and
_Butterfly_, holding the child in her arms, sinks at his feet, turning
on him a look of anguish as she murmurs “Too bad--those robin’--never
nes’--again!”--and so dies.
“Madame Butterfly” was first presented at the Herald Square Theatre,
March 5, 1900. The scenic habiliment in which Belasco attired that
tragedy was one of great beauty and perfect taste and it had never been
equalled by anything rightly comparable, excepting Augustin Daly’s
exquisite setting of “Heart of Ruby” (a play on a Japanese theme adapted
by Justin Huntly McCarthy from Mme. Judith Gautier’s “La Marchande de
Sourires”), produced at Daly’s Theatre, January 15, 1895,--which was a
complete failure: it cost Daly about $25,000 and it was withdrawn after
seven performances. Belasco’s Japanese venture, happily, was fortunate
from the first, creating a profound impression and achieving instant
success. A notably effective scenic innovation was the precedent use of
“picture drops,” delicately painted and very lovely pictures showing
various aspects of Japan,--a rice field, a flower garden, a distant
prospect of a snow-capped volcano in the light of the setting sun, and
other views,--by way of creating a Japanese atmosphere before the scene
of the drama was disclosed. Blanche Bates embodied the hapless
_Butterfly_ and animated the character with a winning show of woman’s
fidelity, with a lovely artlessness of manner and speech, and with
occasional flashes of that vivid emotional fire which was her supreme
attribute. Her personation at first caused laughter and at last touched
the source of tears,--but the predominant figure in the history of this
play, both at the first and now, was and is that of Belasco: more,
perhaps, in respect to “Madame Butterfly” than of any other of his
productions it may properly be said that his personality seemed to have
permeated every detail of this performance and its environment. This was
the original cast:
_Cho-Cho-San_ (_Madame Butterfly_) Blanche Bates.
_Suzuki_, her servant Marie Bates.
_Mr. Sharpless_, American Consul Claude Gillingwater.
_Lieutenant B. F. Pinkerton_ Frank Worthing.
_Yamadori_ Albert Bruning.
_Nakodo_ E. P. Wilks.
_Kate_, _Mrs. Pinkerton_ Katherine Black.
_Trouble_, the child Kittie ----.
_Attendant_ William Lamp.
_Attendant_ Westropp Saunders.
“ZAZA” ABROAD.
The Belasco season at the Herald Square Theatre was ended on March 24,
and on April 5, on board the steamship St. Paul, he sailed for England,
with Mrs. Leslie Carter and a numerous theatrical company, to present
that actress, in partnership with Charles Frohman, in “Zaza,” at the
Garrick Theatre, London. That project had been planned by the two
managers many months before and it was triumphantly fulfilled on April
16,--Belasco’s version of the French play and Mrs. Carter’s performance
in it being received in the British capital with rapturous applause and
remaining current there until July 28. The principal persons who seem to
have entertained seriously dissenting and dissatisfied views as to
Belasco’s treatment of the subject were the authors of the French
original, MM. Berton and Simon, whose conceit was great and whose
indignation was lively because their noxious drama had not been deemed
sacrosanct but had been freely altered.
[Illustration:
Photograph by Dupont. Belasco’s Collection.
GIACOMO PUCCINI
INSCRIPTION:
“_Al mio collaboratore e amico Sig. David Belasco: greato ricordo_
GIACOMO PUCCINI”]
VIEWS OF THE FRENCH DRAMATISTS.
Belasco, in his “Story,” gives some account of the attitude of the
French authors toward his adaptation of their play, to which,
undoubtedly, they were indebted for profit and reputation they would not
otherwise have obtained:
“During the summer of 1900 we took ’Zaza’ to London. Before opening
there I went to Paris to visit the authors, Berton and Simon. They
had been paid large sums for the American rights of ’Zaza,’ and as
the success of ’Zaza’ in America led to its revival in Paris their
profits were enormous. Naturally, I was a welcome guest and my
weekend visit was very agreeable, as it was made to the
accompaniment of a song of praise--of superlative gratitude. What I
had accomplished was remarkable! Superb! There was no other man,
etc., etc. In the meanwhile I was wondering what they would say
when they saw the manuscript of ’Zaza.’ They came to London for the
first night, preceded by a huge hamper of flowers for Mrs. Carter.
The opening was a brilliant function. The late King Edward, then
Prince of Wales, was present; also King George, then Duke of York.
I remember the military bearing of Clement Scott in his
scarlet-lined coat, and the rough and ready appearance of Bernard
Shaw, in his soft shirt and crush hat. What the latter thought of
Mrs. Carter found its caustic way into the columns of ’The Saturday
Review’; what the audience thought was told by the growing
enthusiasm as the play progressed; what Berton and Simon thought
was shown by a certain coolness in their attitude toward me. Their
enthusiasm died a natural death after the Second Act, and the more
demonstrative the audience the less pleased were they. At the close
of the Third Act they left the house, telling me in heated terms
that I had ruined their climax and it was not their play at all.
Curiously enough, they did not see the humor of the situation. My
version made their fortune because it made the woman possible to an
English-speaking audience. The authors were in the odd position of
quarreling with their bread and butter (an unusual situation for
playwrights). They grew angrier and angrier as the play gained
favor with the public, and their royalties were increased week
after week. Those were strenuous days. However, they calmed down,
and in the course of time Monsieur Berton asked me to forget the
letter of denunciation he wrote to me from Paris.”
“WITH SPEED FOR ENGLAND.”--ANOTHER SUCCESS IN LONDON.
The success which Belasco had gained with “Madame Butterfly” in New York
was so great that, had he chosen to do so, he could have successfully
prolonged his season there, at the Herald Square Theatre, throughout the
summer of 1900. But his plans for producing “Zaza” in London were
complete and he was bound “with speed for England”; he determined,
therefore, to carry his little Japanese tragedy with him, having it in
mind to show theatre-goers in the British capital, simultaneously, two
vividly contrasted specimens of his theatrical resource and power. At
first, he was disposed to transport the company, headed by Blanche
Bates, as well as the production,--that is, the scenery, dresses,
“properties” and effects. But when he sought to do this it proved to be
impracticable: the only arrangement that he found it feasible to make
was one with his partner in the “Zaza” venture, Charles Frohman, who, at
the time, was successfully presenting, at the Duke of York’s Theatre,
London, Jerome K. Jerome’s comedy of “Miss Hobbs.” With Frohman,
accordingly, Belasco arranged to bring forward “Madame Butterfly” as an
“afterpiece” to “Miss Hobbs,”--and as it was manifestly injudicious
unnecessarily to maintain two stars at one and the same theatre, Belasco
decided (to the lively disgust of Miss Bates) to cast the player of
_Miss Hobbs_, Miss Evelyn Millard, at that time a popular favorite in
London, for _Madame Butterfly_, depending on himself to train and guide
her through the performance of that part. This self-confidence was fully
justified,--the little tragedy being received with profound admiration
both by the press and the public. It was acted at the Duke of York’s,
April 28, with this cast:
_Cho-Cho-San_ (_Madame Butterfly_) Evelyn Millard.
_Mr. Sharpless_ Claude Gillingwater.
_Lieutenant B. F. Pinkerton_ Allan Aynesworth.
_Yamadori_ William H. Day.
_Nakado_ J. C. Buckstone.
_Suzuki_ Susie Vaughan.
_Kate, Mrs. Pinkerton_ Janet Evelyn Sothern.
PUCCINI AND BELASCO.
Belasco, as he told me, declined to attend the first London performance
of his “Butterfly.” “I didn’t know how it might go,” he said, “--and I
didn’t intend to be called out and ’boo-ed.’ Frohman was very confident
and kept telling me it would be all right, but I didn’t go ’round (I was
busy, too, at the Garrick) till right at the end and then I only went
’in front.’” At the end, however, the enthusiasm of the audience was so
great and the calls for him were so long and urgent that he was at last
compelled to go upon the stage and make his grateful acknowledgments. “I
sometimes feel,” said Belasco, “that the tribute of that English
audience, at first sitting in absolute silence, except for the sound of
some women crying, then calling and calling for me and waiting and
waiting, while Frohman came ’round in front and found me and insisted
upon my going to the stage, was the most gratifying I ever received.
Giacomo Puccini, the Italian composer, was in front that night and
after the curtain fell he came behind the scenes to embrace me
enthusiastically and to beg me to let him use ’Madame Butterfly’ as an
opera libretto. I agreed at once and told him he could do anything he
liked with the play and make any sort of contract he liked--because it
is not possible to discuss business arrangements with an impulsive
Italian who has tears in his eyes and both his arms round your neck! I
never believed he did see ’Madame Butterfly’ that first night; he only
heard the music he was _going_ to write. Afterward I came to know him
well, and found him the most agreeable and simple-hearted fellow in the
world,--a great artist without the so-called ’temperament.’”
“MADAME BUTTERFLY” AS AN OPERA.--A PROPOSAL BY LADY VALERIE MEUX.
Puccini’s opera, entitled “Madama Butterfly,” was first performed in New
York, in an English version, under the management of Henry Savage, at
the Garden Theatre, November 12, 1906. Elza Szamosy, an Hungarian, sang
_Cio-Cio-San_; Harriet Behne _Suzuki_; Joseph F. Sheehan _Pinkerton_,
and Winifred Goff _Mr. Sharpless_. The first performance of it in
Italian occurred in New York, at the Metropolitan Opera House, February
11, 1907, when,--with its composer among the audience--it was sung by
the following cast:
_Cio-Cio-San_ Geraldine Farrar.
_Suzuki_ Louise Homer.
_Kate, Mrs. Pinkerton_ Laura Mapleson.
_La Madre_ Josephine Jacoby.
_La Cugina_ ---- Shearman.
_La Zia_ ---- Moran.
_Lieutenant Pinkerton_ Enrico Caruso.
_Mr. Sharpless_ Antonio Scotti.
_Goro_ Albert Reiss.
_Yamadori_ ---- Paroli.
_Lo Zio Bonzo_ Adolf Mühlmann.
_Yakuside_ Giulio Rossi.
_Il Commissario Imperiale_ ---- Bégué.
_Un Ufficiale del Registro_ Francesco Navarini.
Referring to the production of this opera at the Metropolitan, Belasco
writes: “I loaned my models [for the scenery] and sent over my
electricians.”--I have not heard Puccini’s music. My old friend and
colleague Henry Edward Krehbiel has written of it:
“ ... Genuine Japanese tunes come to the surface of the
instrumental flood at intervals and tunes which copy their
characteristics of rhythm, melody, and color. As a rule this is a
dangerous proceeding except in comedy which aims to chastise the
foibles and follies of a people and a period. Nothing is more
admirable, however, than Signor
[Illustration:
Photograph by Aime Dupont. Belasco’s Collection.
GERALDINE FARRAR AS _CHI-CHI-SAN_, IN PUCCINI’S OPERA, “MADAMA
BUTTERFLY,” BASED ON BELASCO’S TRAGEDY]