CHAPTER XVIII

_PERILS OF THE STAGE_

Easy to Make a Reputation—Difficult to Keep One—The Theatrical

Agent—The Butler’s Letter—Mrs. Siddons’ Warning—Theatrical

Aspirants—The Bogus Manager—The Actress of the Police

Court—Ten Years of Success—Temptations—Late Hours—An Actress’s

Advertisement—A Wicked Agreement—Rules Behind the Scenes—Edward

Terry—Success a Bubble.

Mankind curses bad luck, but seldom blesses good fate. It is

comparatively easy to make a reputation once given a start by kindly

fate; but extremely difficult to maintain one in any walk of life, and

this applies particularly to the stage.

Happening to meet a very pretty girl who had made quite a hit in the

provinces and was longing for a London engagement, I asked her what her

experience of theatrical agents had been.

“Perfectly horrible,” she replied, “and heart-breaking into the

bargain. For three whole months I have been daily to a certain office,

and in all this weary time I have only had five interviews with the

manager.”

“Is it so difficult to get work?”

“It is almost impossible. When I arrive, the little stuffy office is

more or less crowded; there are women seeking engagements for the

music halls, fat, common, vulgar women who laugh loud and make coarse

jokes; there are sickly young men who want to play lovers’ parts on the

legitimate stage, and who, according to the actors’ habit, never take

their hats off. It is a strange fact that actors invariably rehearse in

hats or caps, and sit in them on all occasions like Jews in synagogues.

“There are children who come alone and wait about daily for an

engagement, children who have been employed in the pantomime, and whose

parents are more or less dependent on their gains, and there is one

girl, she is between thirteen and fourteen, whom I have met there every

day for weeks and weeks. Seventy-four days after the pantomime closed

she was still without work, and I watched that child get thinner and

paler time by time as she told me with tears in her eyes she was the

sole support of a sick mother.

“When I go there, the gentleman who has the office makes me shrivel up.

“‘Do you specialise?’ he asks, peeping over the edge of his gold-rimmed

spectacles. He jots down my replies on a sheet of paper. ‘Character or

juvenile parts?’ he inquires. ‘What salary? Whom have you played with?’

And having made these and other inquiries he looks through a series

of books, turns over the pages, says, ‘I am sorry I have nothing for

you to-day, you might look in again to-morrow.’ And this same farce or

tragedy is repeated every time.”

“But is it worth while going?” I asked.

“Hardly; one wears out one’s shoe-leather and one’s temper; and yet

after all the theatrical agent is practically my only chance of an

engagement. This man is all right, he is not a bogus agent, but he

simply has a hundred applicants for every single post he has to fill.”

She went back day after day, and week after week, and each time

the same scene was enacted, but no engagement came of it. Finally,

brought to the verge of starvation, she had to accept work again in

the provinces, and so desert an invalid father. She happened to be a

lady, but of course many applicants for histrionic fame ought to be

kitchen-maids or laundry-maids: they have no qualifications whatever to

any higher walk of life.

Below is an original letter showing the kind of person who wants to go

on the stage. It was sent to one of our best-known actresses when she

was starring with her own company.

“... CASTLE

“_Oct 19th 1897_

“DEAR MADAM

“i writ you this few lins to see if you would have a opening for me

as i would be an Actor on the Stage for my hole thought and life

is on the stage and when i have any time you will always feind me

readin at some play i make a nice female as i have a very soft

voice Dear Madam i hop you will not refuse me i have got no frends

alive to keep me back and every one tells me that you would make

the best teacher that i could get Dear lady i again ask you not to

refuse me i will go on what ever termes you think best i have been

up at the theatre 4 times seeing you i enclose my Card to let you

see it plese to send it back again and i enclose 12 stamps to you

to telegraf by return if you would like to see me or if you would

like to come down to the Castle to see me No more at present

“but remans your

“Obedient servant

“Peter W——.”

This was a letter from a man with aspirations, and below is a letter

from Mrs. Siddons. If this actress, whose position was probably the

grandest and greatest of any woman on the stage, can express such

sentiments, what must be the experiences of less successful players?

“Mrs. Siddons presents her compliments to Miss Goldsmith, & takes

the liberty to inform her, that altho’ herself she has enjoyed all

the advantages arising from holding the first situation in the

drama, yet that those advantages have been so counterbalanced by

anxiety & mortification, that she long ago resolved never to be

accessory to bringing any one into so precarious & so arduous a

profession.”

The deterrent words of Mrs. Siddons had little effect in her day,

just as the deterrent words of those at the top of the profession

have little effect now. Consequently, not only does the honest agent

flourish, but the bogus agent and bogus manager grow rich on the

credulity of young men and women.

Speaking of the bogus manager, Sir Henry Irving observed:

“The actor’s art is thought to be so easy—in fact, many people deny it

is an art at all—and so many writers persistently assert no preparation

is needed for a career upon the stage, that it is little wonder deluded

people only find out too late that acting, as Voltaire said, is one of

the most rare and difficult of arts. The allurements, too, held forth

by unscrupulous persons, who draw money from foolish folk under the

pretence of obtaining lucrative engagements for them, help to swell

very greatly the list of unfortunate dupes. I hope that these matters

may in time claim the attention of serious-minded persons, for the

increasing number of theatrical applicants for charity, young persons,

too, is little less than alarming.”

This remark of Sir Henry’s is hardly surprising when below is a

specimen application received by the manager of a London suburban

theatre from a female farm servant in Essex:

“DEER SUR,—I works hon a farm but wants to turn actin. Would lik

ingagement for the pantomin in hany ways which you think I be fit

for. I sings in the church coir and plais the melodion. I wants to

change my work for the stage, has am sik of farm wark, eas last

tater liftin nigh finished me.”

Another was written in an almost illegible hand which ran:

“HONOURED SIR,—i wants to go on the staige i am a servent and my

marster sais i am a good smart made so i wod like to play act mades

parts untill i can do laidies i doant mind wages for a bit as i

like your acting i’d like to act in your theter so i am going to

call soon.”

Truly the assurance of people is amazing; to imagine they can enter the

theatrical profession without even common education is absurd. Only

lately another stage-struck servant appeared in the courts. Although an

honest girl, she was tempted to steal from her mistress to pay £3 7_s._

to an agent for a problematical theatrical engagement. She is only one

of many.

One day a woman stood before a manager. She had been so persistent for

days in her desire to see him, and appeared so remarkable, that the

stage door-keeper at last inquired if he might admit her.

“Please, sir, I wants to be an actress,” she began, on entering the

manager’s room.

“Do you? And what qualifications have you?”

“I’m a cook.”

“That, my good woman, will hardly help you on the stage.”

“And I’ve been to the the-a-ters with my young man—I’m keeping company

with ’im ye know, and——”

“Well, well.”

“And ’e and I thinks you ain’t got the right tone of hactress for them

parts. Now I’m a real cook I am, and I don’t wear them immoral ’igh

’eels, and tiny waists, I dresses respectable I do, and I’d just give

the right style to the piece. My pal—she’s a parlourmaid she is—could

do duchesses and them like—she’s the air she ’as—but I ain’t ambitious,

I’d just like to be what I am, and show people ’ow a real cook should

be played—Lor’ bless ye, sir, I don’t cook in diamond rings.”

That manager did not engage the lady; but he learnt a lesson in realism

which resulted in Miss FitzClair being asked to dispense with her rings

on the stage that night.

With a parting nod the “lady” said as she left the door:

“Your young man don’t make love proper neither, you should just see

’ow ’Arry makes love you should, he’d make you all sit up, I know, he

does it that beautiful he do—your man’s a arf-’arted bloke ’e is, seems

afraid of the gal, perhaps it’s ’er ’igh ’eels and diamonds ’e’s afraid

of, eh?”

The lady took herself off.

These are only a few instances to show how all sorts and conditions of

people are stage-struck. That delightful man Sir Walter Besant lay down

an excellent rule for young authors, “Never pay to produce a book”—it

spells ruin to the aspirant. The same may be said of the stage. _Never

part with money to get on the stage._ It may be advisable to accept a

little if one cannot get much; but never, never to pay for a footing.

Services will be accepted while given free or paid for, and dispensed

with when the time comes for payment to be received.

Among the many temptations of stage life is drink. The actor feels a

little below par, he has a great scene before him, and while waiting

in his dressing-room for the “call boy” he flies to a glass of whiskey

or champagne. He gets through the trying ordeal, comes off the boards

excited and streaming at every pore, flings himself into a chair, and

during the time his dresser is dragging him out of his clothes, or

rubbing him down, yields to the temptation of another glass. Many of

our actors are most abstemious, though more than one prominent star has

been known to mumble incoherently on the stage.

_Matinée_ days are always a strain for every one in the theatre, and

there are people foolish enough to think a little stimulant will enable

them to get through, not knowing a continuance of forced strength

spells damnation.

Yes. The stage is surrounded by temptations. Morally, extravagantly,

and alcoholically the webs of excess are ready to engulf the unwary,

and therefore, when people keep straight, run fair, and save their

pennies, they are to be congratulated, and deserve the approbation of

mankind. He who has never been tempted, is not a hero in comparison

with the man who has turned aside from the enticing wiles of sin.

There is a certain class of woman who continually appears in the police

courts, described as an “actress.” She is always “smartly dressed,”

and is generally up before the magistrate or judge for being “drunk

and disorderly”—suing her husband or some one else for maintenance—or

claiming to have some grievance for a breach of promise or lost

jewellery.

These “ladies” often describe themselves as actresses: and perhaps

they sometimes are; but if so they are no honour to their profession.

There is another stamp of woman who becomes an actress by persuading

some weak man to run a theatre for her. Sympathy between men and women

is often dangerous. She generally ends by ruining him, and he in

running away from her. These bogus actresses, with their motor cars and

diamonds, are more dangerous and certainly more attractive than the

bogus manager. They are the vultures who suck young men’s blood. They

are the flashy, showy women who attract silly servant-girls with the

idea the stage spells wealth and success; but they are the scourge of

the profession.

Good and charming women are to be found upon the stage. Virtue usually

triumphs; they are happy in their home life, devoted to their children,

sympathetic to their friends, and generous almost to a fault. The

leading actresses are, generally speaking, not only the best exponents

of their art, but the best women too. The flash and dash come to the

police courts, and end their days in the workhouse.

The stage at best means very, very hard work, and theatrical success

is only fleeting in most cases. It must be seized upon when caught

and treated as a fickle jade, because money and popularity both take

wings and fly away sooner than expected. In all professions men and

women quickly reach their zenith, and if they are clever may hold that

position for ten years. After that decline is inevitable and more

rapid than the ascent has been.

If a reputation is to be made, it is generally achieved by either

man or woman before the age of forty. By fifty the summit of fame is

reached, and the downward grade begun. One can observe this again and

again in every profession.

A great actor, doctor, lawyer, writer, or painter has ten years of

success, and if he does not provide for his future during those ten

years, ’tis sad for him. As the tide turns on the shore, so the tide

turns on the careers of men and women alike.

Public life is not necessarily bad. In the first place, it is only

the man with strong individuality who can ever attain publicity. He

must be above the ordinary ruck and gamut, or he will never receive

public recognition. If, therefore, he is stronger than his brother,

he should be stronger also to resist temptation, to disdain self-love

or vainglory. The moment his life becomes public he is under the

microscope, and should remember his influence is great for good or

ill. Popular praise is pleasant, but after all it means little; one’s

own conscience is the thing, that alone tells whether we have given

of our best or reached our ideal. The true artist is never satisfied,

therefore the true artist never suffers from a swelled head; it is the

minor fry who enjoy that ailment.

The temptations behind the footlights are enormous. It is useless

denying the fact. One may love the stage, and count many actors and

actresses among one’s friends; but one cannot help seeing that

theatrical life is beset by dangers and pitfalls.

Young men and women alike are run after and fawned upon by foolish

people of both sexes. Morally this is bad. Actors are flattered and

worshipped as though they were little gods. This in itself tends to

evoke egotism. The gorgeous apparel of the theatre makes men and

women extravagant in their dress; the constant going backwards and

forwards in all weathers inclines them to think they must save time or

themselves by driving; the fear of catching cold makes them indulge

in cabs and carriages they cannot afford, and extravagance becomes

their besetting sin. Every one wants to look more prosperous than his

neighbour, every recipient of forty shillings a week wishes the world

to think his salary is forty pounds.

Apart from pay, the life is exacting. The leaders of the profession

seldom sup out: they are tired after the evening’s work, and know that

burning the candle at both ends means early extinction, but the Tottie

Veres and Gladys Fitz-Glynes are always ready to be entertained.

The following advertisement appeared one day in a leading London paper:

“STAGE.—I am nearly eighteen, tall, fair, good-looking, have

a little money, and wish to adopt the stage as a profession.

Engagement wanted.”

What was the result? Piles of letters, containing all sorts of

offers to help Miss A—— to her doom. A certain gentleman wrote from

a well-known fashionable club, the letter being marked _Private_,

saying: “I should like if possible to assist you in your desire to

go on the stage, but I am not professional myself in any way. This

is purely a matter in which I might be happy to take an interest and

assist, if you think proper to communicate with me by letter, stating

exactly the circumstances, and when I can have an interview with you

on the subject.” This letter might be capable of many interpretations.

The gentleman might, of course, have been purely philanthropic in his

motives; we will give him the benefit of the doubt.

Others were yet more strange and suggestive of peril for the girl of

eighteen.

What might have been the end of all this? Supposing Miss A—— had

granted an interview to No. 1. Supposing further he had advanced the

money for the novice to buy an engagement, what might have proved

her fate? She would have been in his clutches—young, inexperienced,

powerless, in the hands of a man who, if really philanthropic, could

easily have found persons needing interest and assistance among his own

immediate surroundings, instead of going wide afield to dispense his

charity and selecting for the purpose an unknown girl of eighteen who

innocently stated she was good-looking.

Miss Geneviève Ward, a woman who has climbed to the top of her

profession, allows me to tell the following little story about herself

as a warning to others, for it was only her own genius—a very rare

gift—which dragged her to the front.

[Illustration:

_By permission of W. Boughton & Sons, Photographers, Lowestoft._

_Here I am_—

_my dear old friend!_

“_Gee Gee_”

MR. GEORGE GROSSMITH.]

When she first came to England, with a name already well established

in America, expecting an immediate engagement, she could not get work

at all. She applied to the best-known theatrical agents in London. Day

after day she went there, she a woman in her prime and at the top of

her profession, and yet she was unable to obtain work.

“Tragedy is dead, Miss Ward,” exclaimed Mr. B——. “Young women with fine

physical developments are what we want.”

It was not talent, not experience, that were required according to this

well-known agent, but legs and arms—a poor standard, truly, for the

drama of the country.

However, at last there came a day, after many weary months of waiting,

when some one was wanted to play tragedy at Manchester. It was only

a twelve weeks’ engagement, and the pay but £8 a week. It was a

ridiculous sum for one in Miss Ward’s position to accept, but she was

worn out with anxiety, and determined not to go back to America and own

herself vanquished; therefore she accepted the offer, paid the agent

heavily, and went to Manchester, where she played for twelve weeks as

arranged. Before many nights had passed, however, she had signed a

further engagement at double the pay. Her chance in England had come

and she had won.

If such delay, such misery, such anxiety can befall those whose

position is already established, and whose talents are known, what must

await the novice?

“I suppose I have kept more girls off the stage than any living woman,”

said Miss Ward. “Short, ugly, fat, common, hopeless girls come to me to

ask my advice. There is not one in twenty who has the slightest chance,

not the very slightest chance, of success. Servants come, dressmakers,

wives of military men, daughters of bishops and titled folk. The mania

seems to spread from high to low, and yet hardly one of them has a

voice, figure, carriage, or anything suitable for the stage, even

setting dramatic talent aside.”

“What do you say to them?”

“Tell them right out. I think it is kinder to them, and more generous

to the drama. ‘Mind you,’ I say, ‘I am telling you this for your own

good; if I consulted personal profit I should take you as a pupil and

fill my pocket with your guineas; but you are hopeless, nothing could

possibly make you succeed with such a temperament, or voice, or size,

or whatever it may be, so you had better turn your attention at once to

some other occupation.’”

I have known several cases in which Miss Ward has been most kind by

helping real talent gratuitously; many of the women on the stage to-day

owe their position to her timely aid.

“Warn girls,” she continued, “when asked for a bonus, _never_, NEVER to

give one.”

It is no uncommon thing for a bogus agent to ask for a £10 bonus, and

promise to secure an engagement at £1 a week. That engagement is never

procured, or, if it be, lasts only during rehearsals—which are not paid

for—or for a couple of weeks, after which the girl is told she does

not suit the part, and dismissed. Thus the matter ends so far as a

triumphal stage entry is concerned.

It may be well here to give an actual case of bonus as an example.

A wretched girl signed an agreement to the following effect. She was

to pay £20 down to the agent as a fee, to provide her own dresses and

travelling expenses, and to play the first four months without any

salary at all. At the expiration of that time she was to receive 10_s._

a week for six months, with an increase of £1 a week for the following

year.

On this munificent _want_ of salary the girl was expected to pay

rent, dress well for the stage, have good food so as to be able to

fulfil her engagements properly, attend endless rehearsals, and withal

consider herself fortunate in obtaining a hearing at all. She broke

the engagement on excellent advice, and the agent wisely did not take

action against her, as he at first threatened to do.

In the sixties Edward Terry essayed the stage. Seeing an advertisement,

the future comedian offered his services at a salary of 15_s._ a week.

Above the door was announced in grand style:

“Madame Castaglione’s Dramatic Company, taking advantage of the closing

of the Theatres Royal Covent Garden, Drury Lane, Lyceum, etc., will

appear at Christchurch for six nights only.”

It was an extraordinary company, in which several parts were acted by

one person during the same evening. There was only one play-book, from

which every actor copied out his own part, no one was ever paid, and

general chaos reigned. Edward Terry had fallen into the hands of one of

the most notorious bogus managers of his time. His next engagement was

more lucrative. He was always sure of playing eighteen parts a week,

and sometimes received 20_s._ in return. Matters are better now; but

strange stories of early struggle crop up occasionally, and the bogus

manager-agent, in spite of the Actors’ Association and the Benevolent

Fund, still exists.

Edward Terry had to fight hard in order to attain a position, and

thoroughly deserves all the success that has fallen to his lot; but all

stage aspirants are not Edward Terrys, and then their plight in the

hands of the bogus agent is sad indeed, especially in the provinces

where he flourishes.

Those who know the stage only from the front of the house little

realise the strict regulations enforced behind the scenes in our

first-class London theatres, the discipline of which is almost as

severe as that of a Government office. Each theatre has its code of

rules and regulations, which generally number about twenty, but are

sometimes so lengthy they are embodied in a handbook. These rules and

regulations have to be signed by every one, from principal to super,

and run somewhat in this wise:

“The hair of the face must be shaven if required by the exigencies of

the play represented.”

“All engagements to be regarded as exclusive, and no artiste shall

appear at any other theatre or hall without the consent in writing of

the manager or his representative.”

“All artistes engaged are to play any part or parts for which they may

be cast, and to understudy if required.”

“In the event of the theatre being closed through riot, fire, public

calamity, royal demise, epidemic, or illness of principal, no salary

shall be claimed during such closing.”

A clause in a comic opera agreement ran:

“No salary will be payable for any nights or days on which the artiste

may not perform, whether absenting himself by permission, or through

illness, or any other unavoidable cause, and should the artiste

be absent for more than twelve consecutive performances under any

circumstances whatever, this engagement may be cancelled by the manager

without any notice whatsoever.”

Thus it will be seen an engagement even when obtained hangs on a

slender thread, and twelve days’ illness, although an understudy may

step in to take the part, threatens dismissal for the unfortunate

sufferer.

Of course culpable negligence of the rules may be punished by instant

dismissal, but for ordinary offences fines are levied, in proportion

to the salary of the offender. Sometimes a fine is sixpence, sometimes

a guinea, but an ordinary one is half a crown “for talking behind the

scenes during a performance.” Some people are always being fined.

In the case of legitimate drama the actor is not permitted to “build

up” his part at his own sweet will; in comic opera, however, “gagging”

and “business” have often gone far to make success.

The upholder of law and order behind the scenes is the stage manager.

If power gives happiness he should be happy, but his position is such

a delicate one, and tact so essential, that it is often difficult

for him to be friendly with every one and yet a strict and impartial

disciplinarian.

Life is a strange affair. We all try to be alike in our youth,

and individual in our middle age. As we grow up we endeavour to

shake ourselves out of that jelly-mould shape into which school

education forces us, although we sometimes mistake eccentricity for

individuality. Just as much real joy comes to the woman who has

darned a stocking neatly or served a good dinner, as is vouchsafed

by public praise; just as much pleasure is felt by the man who has

helped a friend, or steered a successful bargain. In the well-doing is

the satisfaction, not in indiscriminate and ofttimes over-eulogistic

applause.

Stage aspirants soon learn those glorious press notices count for

naught, and they cease to bring a flutter to the heart.

Success is but a bubble. It glistens and attracts the world as the

soap globe glistens and attracts the child. It is something to strive

for, something to catch, something to run after and grasp securely;

yet, after all, what is it? It is but a shimmer—the bubble bursts in

the child’s hand, the glistening particles are nothing, the ball once

gained is gone. Is not success the same? We long for, we strive to

attain our goal, and then find nothing but emptiness.

If we are not satisfied with ourselves, if we know our best work has

not yet been attained, that we have not reached our own high standard,

worldly success has merely pricked the bubble of ambition, that bubble

we had thought meant so much and which really is so little. People

are a queer riddle. One might liken them to flowers. There are the

beautiful roses, the stately lilies, the prickly thorns and clinging

creepers; there are the weeds and poisonous garbage. Society is the

same. People represent flowers. Some live long and do evil, some live

a short while and do good, sweetening all around them by the beauty of

their minds. Our friends are like the blooms in a bouquet, our enemies

like the weeds in our path.

What diversified people we like. This woman excites our admiration

because she is beautiful, that one because she is clever, yon lady is

sympathetic, and the trend of the mind of the fourth stimulates our

own. They are absolutely dissimilar, that quartette, we like them all,

and yet they have no points in common. It does us good to be with some

people, they have an ennobling, refining, or softening effect upon

us—it does us harm to be with others.

And so we are all many people in one. We adapt ourselves to our friends

as we adapt our clothes to the weather. We expand in their sunshine and

frizzle up in their sarcasm. We are all actors. All our life is merely

human drama, and imperceptibly to ourselves we play many parts, and

yet imagine during that long vista of years and circumstances we are

always the same.

We act—you and I—but we act ourselves, and the professional player acts

some one else; but that is the only difference, and it is less than

most folk imagine.

Love of the stage is the fascination of the mysterious, which is the

most insidious of all fascinations.

Behind the Footlights · 第 18 / 19 章