CHAPTER XII

_SIR HENRY IRVING AND STAGE LIGHTING_

Sir Henry Irving’s Position—Miss Geneviève Ward’s

Dress—Reformations in Lighting—The most Costly Play ever

Produced—Strong Individuality—Character Parts—Irving earned

his Living at Thirteen—Actors and Applause—A Pathetic Story—No

Shakespeare Traditions—Imitation is not Acting—Irving’s

Appearance—His Generosity—The First Night of _Dante_—First night of

_Faust_—Two Terriss Stories—Sir Charles Wyndham.

Henry Irving is a name which ought to be revered for ever in stageland.

He has done more for the drama than any other actor in any other

country. He has tactfully and gracefully made speeches that have

commanded respect. He has ennobled his profession in many ways.

As Sir Squire Bancroft was the pioneer of “small decorations,” so Sir

Henry Irving has been the pioneer of “large details.” Artistic effect

and magnificent stage pictures have been his cult; but nothing is too

insignificant for his notice.

Miss Geneviève Ward told me that in the play of _Becket_ a superb

costume was ordered for her. It cost fifty or sixty guineas, but when

she tried it on she felt the result was disappointing. A little unhappy

about the matter she descended to the stage.

“Great Heavens, Miss Ward! what have you got on?” exclaimed the actor

manager.

“My new dress, sire, may it please you well,” was the meek reply,

accompanied by a mock curtsey.

“You look a cross between a Newhaven fish-wife and a balloon,” he

laughed; “that will never do. It is most unbecoming. As we cannot make

you thinner to suit the dress, we must try and make the dress thinner

to suit you.”

They chaffed and laughed; but finally it was decided alterations

would spoil the costume—which in its way was faultless—so without

any hesitation Henry Irving relegated it to a “small-part lady,” and

ordered a new dress for Miss Ward.

Perhaps the greatest reform this actor ever effected was in the matter

of stage lighting. No one previously paid any particular attention to

this subject, a red glass or a blue one achieved all that was thought

necessary, until he realised the wonderful effects that might be

produced by properly thrown lights, and made a study of the subject.

It was Henry Irving who first started the idea of changing the

scenes in darkness, a custom now so general, not only in Britain but

abroad. He first employed varied coloured lights, and laid stress on

illumination generally. It was he who first plunged the auditorium into

darkness to heighten the stage effects.

“Stage lighting and grouping,” said Irving on one occasion, “are of

more consequence than the scenery. Without descending to minute

realism, the nearer one approaches to the truth the better. The most

elaborate scenery I ever had was for _Romeo and Juliet_, but as I was

not the man to play _Romeo_ the scenery could not make it a success.

It never does—it only helps the actor. The whole secret of successful

stage management is thoroughness and attention to detail.”

To Sir Henry Irving is also due the honour of first employing

high-class artists to design dresses, eminent musicians to compose

music which he lavishly introduced. It is said that his production of

_Henry VIII._, a sumptuous play, cost £16,000 to mount, but all his

great costume plays have cost from £3,000 to £10,000 each.

Sir Henry Irving is famous for his speeches. Few persons know he reads

every word of them. Carefully thought out—for he wisely never speaks at

random—and type-written, his MS. lies open before him, and being quite

accustomed to address an audience, he quietly, calmly, deliberately

reads it off with dramatic declamation. His voice has been a subject of

comment by many. That characteristic intonation so well known upon the

stage is never heard in private life, and even in reading a speech is

little noticeable.

[Illustration:

_Photo by Window & Grove, Baker Street, W._

SIR HENRY IRVING.]

If there ever was a case of striking individuality on the stage it is

surely to be found in Henry Irving. People often ask if it is a good

thing for the exponents of the dramatic profession to possess a strong

personality. It is often voiced that it is bad for a part to have the

prominent characteristics of the actor noticeable, and yet at the same

time there is no doubt about it, it is the men and women of marked

character who are successful upon the stage. They may possess great

capability for “make-up,” they may entirely alter their appearance,

they may throw themselves into the part they are playing; but tricks of

manner, intonations of voice, and peculiarities of gesture appear again

and again, and very often it is this particular personality that the

public likes best.

In olden days it was the fashion—if we may judge from last century

books—to speak clearly and to “rant” when excited; in modern days it is

the fashion to speak indistinctly, and play with “reserved force.” The

drama has its fancies and its fashions like our dresses or our hats.

No man upon the stage has gone through a more severe mill than Sir

Henry Irving. Forty-six years ago he was working in the provinces at

a trifling salary on which he had to live. Board, lodging, washing,

clothes, even some of his stage costumes, had to come out of that

guinea a week. The success he has attained has been arrived at—in

addition to his genius and ability—by sheer hard work and conscientious

attempts to do his best, consequently at the age of sixty-five he was

able to fill a vast theatre like Drury Lane when playing in such a

trying part as _Dante_.

The first years of the actor’s life were spent at an office desk. He

began to earn his own living as a clerk at thirteen; but during that

time he memorised and studied various plays. He learnt fencing, and

at the age of nineteen, when he first took to the stage, he was well

equipped for his new profession.

For ten years he made little headway, however, and first came into

notice as a comedian. In his early days every one thought Irving ought

to play “character parts.”

“What that phrase means,” he remarked later, “I never could understand,

for I have a prejudice in the belief that every part should be a

character. I always wanted to play the higher drama. Even in my boyhood

my desire had been in that direction. When at the Vaudeville Theatre,

I recited _Eugene Aram_, simply to get an idea as to whether I could

impress an audience with a tragic theme. In my youth I was associated

in the public mind with all sorts of bad characters, housebreakers,

blacklegs, thieves, and assassins.”

And this was the man who was to popularise Shakespeare on the modern

English stage—the man to show the world that Shakespeare spelt Fame and

Success.

That acting is a fatiguing art Irving denies. He once played Hamlet

over two hundred nights in succession, and yet the Dane takes more out

of him than any of his characters. Hamlet is the one he loves best,

however, just as Ellen Terry’s favourite part is Portia.

In Percy Fitzgerald’s delightful _Life of Henry Irving_ we find the

following interesting and characteristic little story:

“Perhaps the most remarkable Christmas dinner at which I have ever

been present, was one at which we dined upon underclothing. Do you

remember Joe Robins—a nice, genial fellow who played small parts in

the provinces? Ah, no! that was before your time. Joe Robins was once

in the gentleman’s furnishing business in London city. I think he had

a wholesale trade, and was doing well. However, he belonged to one

of the semi-Bohemian clubs; associated a great deal with actors and

journalists, and when an amateur performance was organised for some

charitable object, he was cast for the clown in a burlesque called _Guy

Fawkes_.

“Perhaps he played the part capitally; perhaps his friends were making

game of him when they loaded him with praise; perhaps the papers

for which his Bohemian associates wrote went rather too far when

they asserted that he was the artistic descendant and successor of

Grimaldi. At any rate Joe believed all that was said to and written

about him, and when some wit discovered that Grimaldi’s name was also

Joe, the fate of Joe Robins was sealed. He determined to go upon the

stage professionally and become a great actor. Fortunately Joe was

able to dispose of his stock and goodwill for a few hundreds, which

he invested, so as to give him an income sufficient to prevent the

wolf from getting inside his door, in case he did not eclipse Garrick,

Kean, and Kemble. He also packed up for himself a liberal supply of

his wares, and started in his profession with enough shirts, collars,

handkerchiefs, and underclothing to equip him for several years.

“The amateur success of poor Joe was never repeated on the regular

stage. He did not make an absolute failure; no manager would trust

him with big enough parts for him to fail in; but he drifted down to

“general utility,” and then out of London, and when I met him he was

engaged in a very small way, on a very small salary, at a Manchester

theatre.

“His income eked out his salary; Joe, however, was a generous,

great-hearted fellow, who liked everybody, and whom everybody liked,

and when he had money, he was always glad to spend it upon a friend or

give it away to somebody more needy than himself. So piece by piece, as

necessity demanded, his princely supply of haberdashery diminished, and

at last only a few shirts and underclothes remained to him.

“Christmas came in very bitter weather. Joe had a part in the Christmas

pantomime. He dressed with other poor actors, and he saw how thinly

some of them were clad when they stripped before him to put on their

stage costumes. For one poor fellow in especial his heart ached. In the

depth of a very cold winter he was shivering in a suit of very light

summer underclothing, and whenever Joe looked at him, the warm flannel

under-garments snugly packed away in an extra trunk weighed heavily

on his mind. Joe thought the matter over, and determined to give the

actors who dressed with him a Christmas dinner. It was literally a

dinner upon underclothing, for most of the shirts and drawers which

Joe had cherished so long went to the pawnbrokers, or the slop-shop

to provide the money for the meal. The guests assembled promptly, for

nobody else is ever so hungry as a hungry actor. The dinner was to be

served at Joe’s lodgings, and before it was placed on the table, Joe

beckoned his friend with the gauze underclothing into a bedroom, and

pointing to a chair, silently withdrew. On that chair hung a suit of

underwear, which had been Joe’s pride. It was of a comfortable scarlet

colour; it was thick, warm, and heavy; it fitted the poor actor as if

it had been manufactured especially to his measure. He put it on, and

as the flaming flannels encased his limbs, he felt his heart glowing

within him with gratitude to dear Joe Robins.

“That actor never knew—or, if he knew, could never remember—what he

had for dinner on that Christmas afternoon. He revelled in the luxury

of warm garments. The roast beef was nothing to him in comparison with

the comfort of his under-vest: he appreciated the drawers more than

the plum-pudding. Proud, happy, warm, and comfortable, he felt little

inclination to eat; but sat quietly, and thanked Providence and Joe

Robins with all his heart.

“‘You seem to enter into that poor actor’s feelings very

sympathetically.’

“‘I have good reason to do so,’ replied Mr. Irving, with his sunshiny

smile, ‘_for I was that poor actor!_’”

Irving, like most theatrical folk, has a weakness for applause. It is

not surprising that hand-clapping should have an exhilarating effect,

or that the volley of air vibrations should set the actor’s blood

a-tingling. Applause is the breath in the nostrils of every “mummer.”

On one occasion the great Kean finding his audience apathetic, stopped

in the middle of his lines and said:

“Gentlemen, I can’t act if you can’t applaud.”

There is no doubt about it, a sympathetic audience gets far more out of

the actor than a half-hearted apathetic one.

“The true value of art,” once said Henry Irving, “as applied to the

drama can only be determined by public appreciation. It is in this

spirit that I have invariably made it my study to present every piece

in such a way that the public can rely on getting as full a return

for their outlay as it is possible to give. I have great faith in the

justice of public discrimination, just as I regard the pit audience of

a London theatre as the most critical part of the house.

“Art must advance with the time, and with the advance of other arts

there must necessarily be advance in art as applied to the stage. I

believe everything that heightens and assists the imagination in a play

is good. One should always give the best one can. I have lived long

enough to find how short is life and how long is art,” he once pithily

remarked.

“Have you been guided by tradition in mounting Shakespearian plays?”

“There is no tradition, nor is there anything written down as to the

proper way of acting Shakespeare,” the great actor replied, and

further added: “Imitation is not acting—there is no true acting where

individuality does not exist. Actors should act for themselves. I

dislike playing a part I have seen acted by any one else, for fear

of losing something of my own reading of the character. We all have

our own mannerisms; I never yet saw any human being worth considering

without them.”

There is no doubt that Irving’s personality is strong and his

appearance striking. He is a tall man—for I suppose he is about six

feet high—thin and well knit, with curiously dark and penetrating eyes

which are kindly, and have a merry twinkle when amused. The eyebrows

are shaggy and protruding, and, oddly enough, remained black after his

hair turned grey. He almost always wears eyeglasses, which somehow suit

him as they rest comfortably on his aquiline nose. His features are

clear-cut and clean-shaven, and the heavy jaw and slightly underhanging

chin give strength to his face, which is always pale; the lips are thin

and strangely pallid in colouring. Irving, though nearing seventy, has

a wonderfully erect carriage, his shoulders are well thrust back and

his chest forward, and somehow his movements always denote a man of

strength and character. The very dark hair gradually turned grey and is

now almost white; it was fine hair, and has always been worn long and

thrown well back behind the ears.

There is something about the man which immediately arrests attention;

not only his face and his carriage, but his manner and conversation

are different from the ordinary. He is the kind of man that any one

meeting for the first time would wish to know more about, the kind of

man of whom every one would inquire, “Who is he?” if his face were not

so well known in the illustrated papers. He could not pass unnoticed

anywhere. But after all it is not this personality entirely that has

made his fame, for there are people who dislike it as much as others

admire it; but as he himself says, any success he has attained is due

to the capacity for taking pains.

That Irving’s success has been great no one can deny. His reign at the

Lyceum was remarkable in every way. He acted Shakespeare’s plays until

he made them the fashion. He employed great artists, musicians, and a

host of smaller fry to give him of their best. He produced wondrous

stage pictures—he engaged a good company, and one and all must own he

was the greatest actor-manager of the last quarter of the last century.

Not only England but the world at large owes him a debt of gratitude.

With him mere money-making has been a secondary consideration, and

this, coupled with his unfailing generosity, has always kept him

comparatively a poor man. No one in distress has ever appealed to him

in vain. He has not only given money, but time and sympathy, to those

less fortunate than himself, and Henry Irving’s list of charitable

deeds is endless. But for this he would never have had to leave the

Lyceum, a theatre with which his name was associated for so many years.

When Irving opened Drury Lane at Easter, 1903, with _Dante_ he had an

ovation such as probably no man has ever received from an audience

before. It was a pouring wet night; the rain descended in torrents, but

the faithful pittites were there to welcome the popular favourite on

his return from America. It so chanced that the audience were entering

the Opera House next door at the same moment, and this, combined with

the rain, which did not allow people to descend from their carriages

before they reached the theatre doors, made the traffic chaotic. I only

managed to reach my stall a second before the house was plunged in

darkness and the curtain rose.

And here let me say how much more agreeable it is to watch the play

from a darkened auditorium such as Irving originally instituted than

to sit in the glaring illumination still prevalent abroad. When the

lights went down, the doors were closed, and half the carriage folk

were shut out for the entire first act, thus missing that wondrous

ovation. The great actor looked the very impersonation of Dante, and

as he bowed, and bowed, and bowed again he grew more and more nervous,

to judge by the tremble of his lips and the twitching of his hands. It

was indeed a stirring moment and a proud one for the recipient. As the

play proceeded the audience found all his old art was there and the

magnificent _mise-en-scène_ combined to keep up the traditions of the

old Lyceum. That vast audience at Drury Lane rose _en masse_ to greet

him, and literally thundered their applause at the end of the play. The

programme is on the following page.

_APRIL 30th, 1903._

Theatre Royal

[Illustration]

Drury Lane,

LIMITED.

Managing Director ARTHUR COLLINS.

Business Manager SIDNEY SMITH.

HENRY IRVING’S SEASON.

Every Evening, at 8.15.

Matinée Every Saturday, at 2.30.

DANTE

BY

MM. SARDOU & MOREAU.

Rendered into English by LAURENCE IRVING.

Persons in the Play:

Dante HENRY IRVING

Cardinal Colonna { _Papal Legate, Resident_ } Mr. WILLIAM MOLLISON

{ _at Avignon._ }

Nello della Pietra (_Husband to Pia_) Mr. NORMAN MCKINNEL

Bernardino { _Brother to Francesca da Rimini,_ } Mr. GERALD LAWRENCE

{ _betrothed to Gemma_ }

Giotto } { Mr. H. B. STANFORD

Casella } _Friends to Dante_ { Mr. JAMES HEARN

Forese } { Mr. VINCENT STERNROYD

Bellacqua } { Mr. G. ENGLETHORPE

Malatesta (_Husband to Francesca_) Mr. JEROLD ROBERTSHAW

Corso (_Nephew to Cardinal Colonna_) Mr. CHARLES DODSWORTH

Ostasio (_A Familiar of the Inquisition_) Mr. FRANK TYARS

Ruggieri (_Archbishop of Pisa_) Mr. WILLIAM LUGG

The Grand Inquisitor Mr. WILLIAM FARREN,

Junr.

Paolo (_Brother to Malatesta_) Mr. L. RACE DUNROBIN

Ugolino Mr. MARK PATON

Lippo } _Swashbucklers_ { Mr. JOHN ARCHER

Conrad } { Mr. W. L. ABLETT

Enzio (_Brother to Helen of Swabia_) Mr. F. D. DAVISS

Fadrico Mr. H. PORTER

Merchant Mr. R. P. TABB

Merchant Mr. H. GASTON

Townsman Mr. T. REYNOLD

Townsman Mr. A. FISHER

A Servant M. J. IRELAND

Pia dei Tolomei (_Wife to Nello della Pietra_) } Miss LENA ASHWELL

Gemma (_Her Daughter_) }

The Abbess of the Convent of Saint Claire Miss WALLIS

Francesca da Rimini Miss LILIAN ELDÉE

Helen of Swabia { _Daughter-in-law_ } Miss LAURA BURT

{ _to Ugolino_ }

Sandra (_Servant to Pia_) Miss ADA MELLON

Picarda } { Miss E. BURNAND

Tessa } { Miss HILDA AUSTIN

Marozia } _Florentine_ { Miss MAB PAUL

Cilia } _Ladies_ { Miss ADA POTTER

Lucrezia } { Miss E. LOCKETT

Julia } { Miss MARY FOSTER

Fidelia Miss DOROTHY ROWE

Maria Miss MAY HOLLAND

Nun Miss EMMELINE CARDER

Nun Miss E. F. DAVIS

Custodian of the Convent of Saint Claire Miss GRACE HAMPTON

A Townswoman Miss MABEL REES

_Nobles, Guests of the Legate, Pages, Jesters, Nuns, Townsfolk,

Artisans, Street Urchins, Catalans, Barbantines, Servants, etc._

Spirits:

The Spirit of Beatrice Miss NORA LANCASTER

Virgil Mr. WALTER REYNOLDS

Cain Mr. F. MURRAY

Charon Mr. LESLIE PALMER

Cardinal Boccasini Mr. F. FAYDENE

Cardinal Orsini Mr. W. J. YELDHAM

Jacques Molay (_Commander of the Templars_) Mr. J. MIDDLETON

_Spirits in the Inferno._

Sir Henry Irving certainly has great magnetic gifts which attract and

compel the sympathy of his audience. He always looks picturesque, he

avoids stage conventionalities, and acts his part according to his own

scholarly instincts. Passion with him is subservient to intellect.

One American critic in summing him up said:

“I do not consider Irving a great actor; but he is the greatest

dramatic artist I ever saw.”

The version of _Faust_ by the late W. G. Wills which modern playgoers

know so well was one of the most elaborate and successful productions

of the Lyceum days, and amongst the beautiful scenic effects some

exquisite visions which appeared in the Prologue at the summons of

Mephistopheles will always be remembered. On the first night of the

production I am told—for I don’t remember the occasion myself—owing to

a temporary break down in the lime-lights, these visions declined to

put in an appearance at the bidding of the Fiend. The great actor waved

his arm and stamped his foot with no result. Again and again he tried

to rouse them from their lethargy, but all to no avail. The visions

came not. As soon as the curtain fell Irving strode angrily to the

wing, even his stride foreboded ill to all concerned, and the officials

trembled at the outburst of righteous wrath which they expected would

break forth. The first exclamations of the irate manager had hardly

left his lips before they were interrupted by a diminutive “call boy,”

who rushed forward with uplifted hand, and exclaimed in a high treble

key to the great actor-manager fresh from his newest triumph:

“Bear it, bear it bravely! _I_ will explain all to-morrow!”

The situation was so ridiculous that there was a general peal of

laughter, in which Irving was irresistibly compelled to join.

The last part played at the Lyceum by the veteran actor Tom Mead was

that of the old witch who vainly strove to gain the summit of the

Brocken, and was always pushed downwards when just reaching the goal.

In despair the wretched hag exclaims, “I’ve been a toiler for ten

thousand years, but never, never reached the top.” On the first night

of _Faust_, the worthy old man was chaffed unmercifully at supper by

some of his histrionic friends who insisted that the words he used

were, “I’ve been _an actor_ for ten thousand years, but never, never

reached the top.”

Those who saw the wonderful production of _The Corsican Brothers_ at

the Lyceum will remember the exciting duel in the snow by moonlight,

between Irving and Terriss. At the last dress rehearsal, which at the

Lyceum was almost as important a function as a first night, Terriss

noticed that as the combatants moved hither and thither during the

fight he seemed to be usually in shadow, while the face of the great

actor-manager was brilliantly illuminated. Looking up into the flies,

he thus addressed the lime-light man:

“On me also shine forth, thou beauteous moon—there should be no

partiality in thy glorious beams.”

A friend relates another curious little incident which occurred during

the run of _Ravenswood_ at the Lyceum. In the last act there was

another duel between William Terriss and Henry Irving. For the play

Terriss wore a heavy moustache which was cleverly contrived in two

pieces. Somehow, in the midst of the scuffle, one side of the moustache

got caught and came off. This was an awkward predicament at a tragic

moment, but Terriss had the presence of mind to swerve round before the

audience had time to realise the absurdity, and finished the scene with

his hair-covered lips on show. When they arrived in the wings Irving

was greatly perturbed.

“What on earth do you mean spoiling the act by jumping round like

that?” he demanded. “You put me out horribly: it altered the whole

scene.”

Terriss was convulsed with laughter and could hardly answer; and it

was only when Irving had spent his indignation that he discovered

his friend was minus half his moustache. This shows how intensely

interested actors become in their parts, when one can go through a long

scene and never notice his colleague had lost so important an adjunct.

Sir Charles Wyndham is one of the most popular actor-managers upon the

stage. He is a flourishing evergreen. Though born in 1841 he never

seems to grow any older, and is just as full of dry humour, just as

able to deliver a dramatic sermon, just as quick and smart as ever he

was.

He began at the very beginning, did Sir Charles, and he is ending at

the very end. Though originally intended for the medical profession, he

commenced his career as a stock actor in a provincial company, is now a

knight, and manager and promoter of several theatres. What more could

theatrical heart desire? And he has the distinction of having acted in

Berlin in the German tongue.

Wyndham gives an amusing description, it is said, of one of his first

appearances on the American stage, when he had determined to transfer

his affections from Galen to Thespis. He was naturally extremely

nervous, and on his first entrance should have exclaimed:

“I am drunk with ecstasy and success.”

With emphasis he said the first three words of the sentence, and then,

owing to uncontrollable stage fright, his memory forsook him. After a

painful pause he again exclaimed:

“I am drunk.” Even then, however, he could not recall the context. He

looked hurriedly around, panic seemed to overpower him as he once more

repeated:

“I am drunk—”; and, amid a burst of merriment from the audience, he

rushed from the stage.

Behind the Footlights · 第 12 / 19 章