{"numero_id": "bm-bmtnaau-1926-04-01", "volume": "bmtnaau_1926-04_01", "ocr_sha256": "41ba48652ebd888f85b0a91e5ff78812f0749928b1fcde8ce71ebba9f00e243e", "source_tei": "https://github.com/Princeton-CDH/bluemountain-transcriptions/blob/main/periodicals/bmtnaau/issues/1926/04_01/bmtnaau_1926-04_01.tei.xml", "source_mets": "https://github.com/pulibrary/BlueMountain/blob/main/metadata/periodicals/bmtnaau/issues/1926/04_01/bmtnaau_1926-04_01.mets.xml", "url_numero": "https://bluemountain.princeton.edu/bluemtn/?a=d&d=bmtnaau192604-01", "articles": [{"article_id": "bm-bmtnaau-1926-04-01-c002", "article_bluemountain": "bmtnaau_1926-04_01#c002", "volume": "bmtnaau_1926-04_01", "ocr_source": "OCR Blue Mountain (ALTO), transcription TEI : lignes lb/@facs", "texte_sans_correction": true, "page_debut": "couv. 1", "page_fin": "couv. 1", "image_debut": 1, "image_fin": 1, "pages_selon": "pagination imprimée relevée dans le METS Blue Mountain (ORDERLABEL) ; [n] = page sans folio restituée", "url_article": "https://bluemountain.princeton.edu/bluemtn/?a=d&d=bmtnaau192604-01.2.2", "titre_corps": "[Sans titre]", "titre_sommaire": "[Sans titre]", "signature_source": "", "controle": "bornes données par la structure logique METS/ALTO de Blue Mountain (blocs ALTO de chaque constituant)", "pages": [{"page_pdf": 1, "page_imprimee": "couv. 1", "url_page": "https://bluemountain.princeton.edu/bluemtn/?a=d&d=bmtnaau192604-01.1.1", "debut_caractere": 436, "fin_caractere_exclue": 1066, "texte": "A REPRODUCTION OF HORWOOD'S\nCELEBRATED 18th CENTURY PLAN\nOF LONDON: {FIRST EIGHT PLATES).\nSOME FACTS JAND DATES ABOUT\nLONDON THEATRES AND THOSE\nASSOCIATED WITH THEM.\nGENTLEMEN AND PLAYERS by ASHLEY\nDukes.\n•-pHE INAUGURATION OF A DUCAL\n1 THEATRE IN MODENA, 1685, by\nBruno Brunelli.\nTHE COLOSSUS SPEAKS, A brilliant con-\ntribution from George Bernard Shaw on his\nown \" Colossiousness\" as treated of in THE\nMASK for January.\nMORE COTTONWOOL FOR THE IN-\nCOMPETENT, AND THE \" SAD-\nLER'S WELLS FUND.\nTECHNICAL DIRECTIONS FOR THE\nCONSTRUCTION OF STAGE SKIES\n1638. From the Handbook of a Theatrical Engineer.\nBOOK REVIEWS. j I\nEDITORIALS."}]}, {"article_id": "bm-bmtnaau-1926-04-01-c003", "article_bluemountain": "bmtnaau_1926-04_01#c003", "volume": "bmtnaau_1926-04_01", "ocr_source": "OCR Blue Mountain (ALTO), transcription TEI : lignes lb/@facs", "texte_sans_correction": true, "page_debut": "couv. 2", "page_fin": "couv. 2", "image_debut": 2, "image_fin": 2, "pages_selon": "pagination imprimée relevée dans le METS Blue Mountain (ORDERLABEL) ; [n] = page sans folio restituée", "url_article": "https://bluemountain.princeton.edu/bluemtn/?a=d&d=bmtnaau192604-01.2.3", "titre_corps": "LITERARY CONTENTS", "titre_sommaire": "LITERARY CONTENTS", "signature_source": "", "controle": "bornes données par la structure logique METS/ALTO de Blue Mountain (blocs ALTO de chaque constituant)", "pages": [{"page_pdf": 2, "page_imprimee": "couv. 2", "url_page": "https://bluemountain.princeton.edu/bluemtn/?a=d&d=bmtnaau192604-01.1.2", "debut_caractere": 519, "fin_caractere_exclue": 1335, "texte": "LITERARY CONTENTS.\nABOUT THESE PLANS OF LONDON, PARIS, ROMA. The Mask Publishers. . . Page 49\nPLAN OF THE CITIES OF LONDON AND WESTMIN*\nSTER : Foreword . . c. g. • e 52\nA FEW FACTS AND DATES ABOUT THEATRES AND\nTHOSE ASSOCIATED WITH THEM ... c. g. e. . . . . . . 53\nGENTLEMEN AND PLAYERS. . . . . . Ashley Dukes , . , . .66\nTHE INAUGURATION OF A THEATRE AT THE\nESIENSE COURT . Bruno Brunelli . . . . 71\nMR. GEORGE BUTLER, SHEFFIELD .... Frangois M. Florian . 74\nOLD LONDON AND MORE COTTONWOOL FOR THE j\nINCOMPETENT ; a Protest; « The Mask . . . . . 75\nSOME EXTRACTS FROM THE PRACTICE OF MAKING I I I 8 II |§ |j jf\nSCENES AND MACHINES IN THEATRES . . Nicola Sabbattini . . . .78\nTHE COLOSSUS SPEAKS . . . . . . George Bernard Shaw . . .81\nA WORD IN REPLY ....... Gordon Craig . . . . .82\nBOOK REVIEWS. EDITORIAL NOTES."}]}, {"article_id": "bm-bmtnaau-1926-04-01-c004", "article_bluemountain": "bmtnaau_1926-04_01#c004", "volume": "bmtnaau_1926-04_01", "ocr_source": "OCR Blue Mountain (ALTO), transcription TEI : lignes lb/@facs", "texte_sans_correction": true, "page_debut": "couv. 2", "page_fin": "couv. 2", "image_debut": 2, "image_fin": 2, "pages_selon": "pagination imprimée relevée dans le METS Blue Mountain (ORDERLABEL) ; [n] = page sans folio restituée", "url_article": "https://bluemountain.princeton.edu/bluemtn/?a=d&d=bmtnaau192604-01.2.4", "titre_corps": "ILLUSTRATIONS", "titre_sommaire": "ILLUSTRATIONS", "signature_source": "", "controle": "bornes données par la structure logique METS/ALTO de Blue Mountain (blocs ALTO de chaque constituant)", "pages": [{"page_pdf": 2, "page_imprimee": "couv. 2", "url_page": "https://bluemountain.princeton.edu/bluemtn/?a=d&d=bmtnaau192604-01.1.2", "debut_caractere": 1337, "fin_caractere_exclue": 1590, "texte": "ILLUSTRATIONS.\nREMAINS OF GIBBON'S TENNIS COURT as it appeared\nafter the Fire. 17 September 1809. .... Anon .... Face page 49\nFLAN OF LONDON 1792-1799 (The first eight sections) . R. Horword . . . ■ \" 64\nHead and Tail Pieces from old and modern Designs."}]}, {"article_id": "bm-bmtnaau-1926-04-01-c005", "article_bluemountain": "bmtnaau_1926-04_01#c005", "volume": "bmtnaau_1926-04_01", "ocr_source": "OCR Blue Mountain (ALTO), transcription TEI : lignes lb/@facs", "texte_sans_correction": true, "page_debut": "[48]", "page_fin": "[48]", "image_debut": 4, "image_fin": 4, "pages_selon": "pagination imprimée relevée dans le METS Blue Mountain (ORDERLABEL) ; [n] = page sans folio restituée", "url_article": "https://bluemountain.princeton.edu/bluemtn/?a=d&d=bmtnaau192604-01.2.5", "titre_corps": "[Illustration sans titre]", "titre_sommaire": "[Illustration sans titre]", "signature_source": "", "controle": "bornes données par la structure logique METS/ALTO de Blue Mountain (blocs ALTO de chaque constituant)", "pages": [{"page_pdf": 4, "page_imprimee": "[48]", "url_page": "https://bluemountain.princeton.edu/bluemtn/?a=d&d=bmtnaau192604-01.1.4", "debut_caractere": 15, "fin_caractere_exclue": 23, "texte": "Plate 6."}]}, {"article_id": "bm-bmtnaau-1926-04-01-c006", "article_bluemountain": "bmtnaau_1926-04_01#c006", "volume": "bmtnaau_1926-04_01", "ocr_source": "OCR Blue Mountain (ALTO), transcription TEI : lignes lb/@facs", "texte_sans_correction": true, "page_debut": "49", "page_fin": "51", "image_debut": 5, "image_fin": 7, "pages_selon": "pagination imprimée relevée dans le METS Blue Mountain (ORDERLABEL) ; [n] = page sans folio restituée", "url_article": "https://bluemountain.princeton.edu/bluemtn/?a=d&d=bmtnaau192604-01.2.6", "titre_corps": "ABOUT THESE PLANS : OF LONDON, PARIS, ROMA", "titre_sommaire": "ABOUT THESE PLANS : OF LONDON, PARIS, ROMA", "signature_source": "", "controle": "bornes données par la structure logique METS/ALTO de Blue Mountain (blocs ALTO de chaque constituant)", "pages": [{"page_pdf": 5, "page_imprimee": "49", "url_page": "https://bluemountain.princeton.edu/bluemtn/?a=d&d=bmtnaau192604-01.1.5", "debut_caractere": 24, "fin_caractere_exclue": 1425, "texte": "ABOUT THESE PLANS.\nOF LONDON, PARIS, ROMA.\nWHY is so much space given to plans of cities ?—is \" The\nMask\" taking up archeology—What have plans of cities\nto do with the Theatre? Many a time have we heard this\nasked; and we feel that there is time now for a word about why it\nis done.\n•3?\nLONDON, Paris and Roma have once been the three centres of\nthings Dramatic. The Dramatists, the Theatres, the Scenogra-\nphers and the performers of Roma, of Paris and of London did some-\nthing towards bringing these three cities into the condition in which we\nfind them in the 18th century Plans of Nolli, Turgot and Horwood.\nFor this reason alone it is impossible to over-look the value of\nsuch plans.\nAnd consider for a moment how great is the influence of a city\nupon these people of the Theatres, and how important to us looking\nfor them now to know the place they lived in. To be as impressio-\nnable as poets, as courageous as actors, is to be daily at the call of\nthe city. Environment, as a hundred essayists have pointed out, is a\npowerful factor in the shaping of the destiny of a man or woman.\nLa Gabrielli or Metastasio in Roma, Garrick or Sheridan in London,\nand Talma or Beaumarchais in Paris do not go about with eyes closed\nbut open: they draw into themselves and absorb into their system\nvery possible impression;—they must be forgiven for so often having\nooked on these three cities as set stages."}, {"page_pdf": 6, "page_imprimee": "50", "url_page": "https://bluemountain.princeton.edu/bluemtn/?a=d&d=bmtnaau192604-01.1.6", "debut_caractere": 0, "fin_caractere_exclue": 2284, "texte": "And so if we want to know more of these playwrights and actors\nwe must turn to these plans and we will find more.\nLook where they walked or rode .... see what it is they saw daily.\nWere it but for the sake of two such people in each city these\nplans would be well worth possessing. Imagine that you are writing\nthe life of La Gabrielli. By the aid of two of the plans you can\nfollow her whereabouts in Roma and in London. No longer is it\na mere dream for you when you read of her entering Roma by the Porta\ndel Popolo and driving to her rooms at the Hotel of Carlo Roland near\nSan Carlo in Corso: and when she comes to sing in London in 17 7 5\nyou need be no longer vague in your mind as to exactly where was\nthe Opera House at which she sang.\nWhen in the same year Signora Agujari is singing at the Pantheon\nwe can see where-abouts it was she sang and where she went when\nshe visited Dr. Burney at No. 36 St. Martin's Street which leads\nfrom Leicester Square.\nWhen we read of Talma we are not content to slither over the\nwords which tell us that he was born in the Rue des Menetriers,\nlater lived in Rue St. Georges No. 4: in 1821 came to live at\nNo. 9, Rue de la Tour des Dames and died there in 1827. We\nwant to see where these places were situated.\nWhen he comes to London we are curious to see his house,\n13 Old Cavendish Street where he lived in 1780; his school in\nManchester Square where he studied, and we shall turn to the Plan\nof London and place him.\nWhy all this to do ? you ask. What can be the good of it ?\nIt seems to us that it helps to make history live, and, until history\nis alive, history is a dull thing.\nAnd it also helps the imagination:... besides, some of us enjoy plans\nThat is why these plans are being reprinted. A fresher and livelie\ninterest will be taken in the doings of our old friends; and we an\nless likely to forget they were real beings.\nAnd the streets and quais and the houses planned and built s<\nwell by excellent architects, are we to forget these too ?\nWe even like to remember the able impresario Faliconti and t\nfollow his footsteps in 1 726 to and from the Teatro Capranica—i\n1 734 to and from the Argentina.\nThese theatrical things are not the least of things. We will k\nbold enough to say that they are some of the most important, beir"}, {"page_pdf": 7, "page_imprimee": "51", "url_page": "https://bluemountain.princeton.edu/bluemtn/?a=d&d=bmtnaau192604-01.1.7", "debut_caractere": 0, "fin_caractere_exclue": 1600, "texte": "D closely connected with the happiness of three peoples, the Romans,\nFrisians and Londoners.\nSuch records are accounted very little by some of the more diffi-\nult Historians of Europe, .... and that is the gravest of pities. No\nind can afford to forget the happiest hours of its people's existence;\nid in the past never were the peoples happier than when at the\nlayhouse.\nLet every possible record be treasured of these hours, which not\nily make the trials and hardships possible, but positively help a na~\n>n to exist.\nThese plans of cities, besides reviving in us the remembrance of\ne happiness of a people, serve as invaluable allies when you are\nird at work writing your Histories, making your yearly income.\nYou may not be a wealthy man and able to afford the originals\n.. you may not have enough room on your table to contain the three\nuge volumes of Turgot, Horwood and Nolli.\nSo that is another reason for giving so much space in 4' The Mask \"\n> these three plans: that you might have them to work from—easily\nt your elbow—at a fantastically low price.\nYou may be a Professor of English in some far off city in Ame-\nica or in Canada, in Africa or in some other English Colony.\nDo not ask people why 4 4 The Mask\" is trying to serve you and\nul your fellows: will you not see if you cannot them why.\nMore especially since there must always be one or two who will\neternally ask why a thing isn't other than it is, instead of discovering\nthe many good reasons for themselves.\nDo not be one of these, but be ever our kind supporters, even as\nwe remain.\nYour faithful servants,\nTHE MASK Publishers."}]}, {"article_id": "bm-bmtnaau-1926-04-01-c008", "article_bluemountain": "bmtnaau_1926-04_01#c008", "volume": "bmtnaau_1926-04_01", "ocr_source": "OCR Blue Mountain (ALTO), transcription TEI : lignes lb/@facs", "texte_sans_correction": true, "page_debut": "52", "page_fin": "52", "image_debut": 8, "image_fin": 8, "pages_selon": "pagination imprimée relevée dans le METS Blue Mountain (ORDERLABEL) ; [n] = page sans folio restituée", "url_article": "https://bluemountain.princeton.edu/bluemtn/?a=d&d=bmtnaau192604-01.2.7", "titre_corps": "LONDON AND WESTMINSTER : THE BOROUGH OF SOUTHWARK AND PARTS ADJOINING", "titre_sommaire": "LONDON AND WESTMINSTER : THE BOROUGH OF SOUTHWARK AND PARTS ADJOINING", "signature_source": "R. HORWOOD", "controle": "bornes données par la structure logique METS/ALTO de Blue Mountain (blocs ALTO de chaque constituant)", "pages": [{"page_pdf": 8, "page_imprimee": "52", "url_page": "https://bluemountain.princeton.edu/bluemtn/?a=d&d=bmtnaau192604-01.1.8", "debut_caractere": 0, "fin_caractere_exclue": 1929, "texte": "LONDON AND WESTMINSTER.\nTHE BOROUGH OF SOUTHWARK AND\nPARTS ADJOINING:\nBY R. HORWOOD 1792-1799.\nMr. HORWOOD is waiting for someone\nto do him a little justice, for so far\nas I have been able to ascertain (and\nI am rather far off to be quite fair about\nthis) very few people seem to have recog-\nnized his powers while he lived or for\nvery long after his death.\nFortunately he did his work so well\nthat the indifference of his contemporaries\nhardly matters to him : yet it would have\nbeen easily possible for Biographical Dic-\ntionaries and other such lists to mention\nhis name : but so rarely is Horwood\nmentioned that I do not find him even in\nthe Dictionary of National Biography (l).\nCunningham gives him one line. I am quite\nignorant of his career. And I cannot point\nto his dwelling in this plan of his.\nHis work, this plan alone, informs me\nof his abilities. The original double plates\neach measure 41 by 22 7 a inches. The\nwhole plan therefore measures 1 3 feet by\n7 feet 5 inches.\nAll I have been able to do is to\nadd for you a few theatrical facts and\ndates about the different houses of drama-\ntists and actors and actresses and critics\nand the like.\nSome of these facts and dates appear\nwith the first eight plates in the present\nnumber of The Mask; the remainder,\nwith the other eight plates, will appear\nin the July number.\nMy list has been made with the assis-\ntance of only too few books: amongst them\nthose by Timbs, Cunningham, Pennant,\nBrayley, H. Barton Baker, Sir E. K.\nChambers, Boaden, Miss Burney, Fitzgerald,\nAustin Dobson and some 30 or 40\nothers.\nBut this little labour had not even\nbegun if I had not been presented with\na copy of the great and costly plan by\na friend in Banbury, obviously your friend\nsince by an act of this kind he makes it\npossible for me to distribute to hundreds\nof today's students something needed by\nthem for over a hundred and twenty-fiv\nyears.\n(1) Smith Elder, & Co. 1885 1906."}]}, {"article_id": "bm-bmtnaau-1926-04-01-c010", "article_bluemountain": "bmtnaau_1926-04_01#c010", "volume": "bmtnaau_1926-04_01", "ocr_source": "OCR Blue Mountain (ALTO), transcription TEI : lignes lb/@facs", "texte_sans_correction": true, "page_debut": "52", "page_fin": "52", "image_debut": 8, "image_fin": 8, "pages_selon": "pagination imprimée relevée dans le METS Blue Mountain (ORDERLABEL) ; [n] = page sans folio restituée", "url_article": "https://bluemountain.princeton.edu/bluemtn/?a=d&d=bmtnaau192604-01.2.8", "titre_corps": "[Sans titre]", "titre_sommaire": "[Sans titre]", "signature_source": "c. g", "controle": "bornes données par la structure logique METS/ALTO de Blue Mountain (blocs ALTO de chaque constituant)", "pages": [{"page_pdf": 8, "page_imprimee": "52", "url_page": "https://bluemountain.princeton.edu/bluemtn/?a=d&d=bmtnaau192604-01.1.8", "debut_caractere": 1931, "fin_caractere_exclue": 2451, "texte": "c. g.\nBY the way, can someone tell me how it comes about th.\nKemble is said to have lived at 89 Great Russell Stre\n\" on the north side \" (Cunningham) when Fanny Kemb\nsays it was at 79 Great Russell Street. The house, si\nsays (J), was destroyed in 1747 to make way for t!\neastern wing of the British Museum. Where exactly d\nthis house, No. 79 or 89, stand ? No. 89 I see her<\nit faces Compton Street but what about Fanny Kembk\nstatement that it was 79?\n(i) \" Record of a Girlhood \" by Frances Ann Kembl\nVol. II, page 192."}]}, {"article_id": "bm-bmtnaau-1926-04-01-c012", "article_bluemountain": "bmtnaau_1926-04_01#c012", "volume": "bmtnaau_1926-04_01", "ocr_source": "OCR Blue Mountain (ALTO), transcription TEI : lignes lb/@facs", "texte_sans_correction": true, "page_debut": "53", "page_fin": "65", "image_debut": 9, "image_fin": 37, "pages_selon": "pagination imprimée relevée dans le METS Blue Mountain (ORDERLABEL) ; [n] = page sans folio restituée", "url_article": "https://bluemountain.princeton.edu/bluemtn/?a=d&d=bmtnaau192604-01.2.9", "titre_corps": "A FEW FACTS AND DATES : ABOUT THEATRES AND THOSE ASSOCIATED WITH THEM", "titre_sommaire": "A FEW FACTS AND DATES : ABOUT THEATRES AND THOSE ASSOCIATED WITH THEM", "signature_source": "c. g. e", "controle": "bornes données par la structure logique METS/ALTO de Blue Mountain (blocs ALTO de chaque constituant)", "pages": [{"page_pdf": 9, "page_imprimee": "53", "url_page": "https://bluemountain.princeton.edu/bluemtn/?a=d&d=bmtnaau192604-01.1.9", "debut_caractere": 0, "fin_caractere_exclue": 5482, "texte": "A FEW FACTS AND DATES\nABOUT THEATRES AND THOSE\nASSOCIATED WITH THEM.\n\nPLATE 1A\nST. MARY LE BONE.\nBAKER STREET.\n1817. Mrs Siddons lived in Siddons\nHouse, looking into the Regent's Park,\non the east side, at the top of the\nstreet; here she died, June Bth, 1831.\nThe house was destroyed in 1903-5 ;\na railway station was put up, the Com-\npany agreeing to set up a tablet to\ncommemorate the site.\nPLATE 1C\nBLOOMSBURY.\nQUEEN'S SQUARE.\nHere between 1770 and 1774 lived\nDr. Barney and his family. Here came\nDavid Garrick to visit them.\nGOWER STREET.\nMrs Jordan is living here in 1788.\nALFRED PLACE. Bedford Square.\nSheridan Knowles lived at No. 29.\nPLATE 1D\nBAGNIGGE WELLS.\nCOLD BATH FIELDS .\nA noted place of public entertainment,\na kind of minor Vauxhall.\nNell Gwynne is said to have had\na country-house near this spot, and her\nbust was here in 1789, when Waldron\nedited Downe's Roscius Anglicanus.\nSADLER'S WELLS.\n1683. A famous old place of public\namusement: first a music house, then\na theatre, and called Sadler's Wells\nfrom a spring of mineral water, disco-\nvered by one Sadler, in 1683, in the\ngarden of a house which he had\nnewly opened as a public music-room,\nand called by his own name as \" Sad-\nler's Music House.\"\nThe New River flowed past the\n* theatre, and on great occasions was\n■ even carried under the stage, and the\nflooring removed, for the exhibition of\naquatic performances. Here Grimaldi,\nthe famous clown, achieved his greatest\ntriumphs.\nIn 1844 this little theatre came\nunder the able management of Mr.\nPhelps, and for some years maintained\na well-deserved celebrity for the per-\nformance of the plays of Shakespeare,\nBeaumont and Fletcher, Massinger, &c.\nISLINGTON.\nCOLEBROOK-ROW.\nNear by lived Charles Lamb for a\nwhile, in Colebrook-row, close to\nDuncan Terrace, (64 Duncan Terrace)\nin what he calls 44 a detached whitish\n44 house close to the New River \". In\na letter to his friend R. Barton he writes :\n44 When you come Londonward you\n44 will find me no longer in Covent\n44 Garden ; I have a cottage in Colebrook\n44 Row, Islington; a cottage, for it is deta-\n-44 ched; a white house with six good\n44 rooms in it; the New River (rather\n44 elderly by this time) runs (if a mo-\n-44 derate walking pace can be so term-\n-44 ed) close to the foot of the house;\n44 and behind is a spacious garden with\n44 vines, (I assure you), pears, straw-\n-44 berries, parsnips, leeks, carrots, cab-\n-44 bages, to delight the heart of old\n44 Alcinous \".\nTHE RED BULL THEATRE\nThis theatre, built in 1606, stood\nat the upper end of St. John-street, west\nof St. John-street, on what is now called\n44 Red-Bull-yard \" or Wood Bridge street.\nPLATE 1E\nTHE NURSERY.\nThis was a school for the educa-\ntion of children for the stage in Gold-\ning-lane, Moorfields, established in the\nreign of Charles 11. by William Legge,\nancestor of the Earls of Dartmouth.\nThere is a view of it by J. T. Smith,\ncalled The Queen's Nursery.\nFORTUNE THEATRE.\nThis was built in 1600 by Peter\nStreet, a carpenter, for Philip Hen-\nslowe and Edward Alleyn, and stood\non the east side of Golding-lane in\nthe parish of St. Giles's, Cripplegate.\nIn Alleyn's Diary is the following\nentry:\n\" 1621. Dec. 9. Md. this night att\n12 of the Clock the Fortune was\nburnt\".\nCollier tells us that the original\nbuilding was a square construction of\nlath, plaster and timber. The new\ntheatre (for it was rebuilt immediately)\nwas circular, and built of brick and\ntile. The sign of the house was a\n* picture or figure of Fortune, In 1649,\nthe inside of this new theatre was des-\ntroyed by a company of soldiers set\non by the sectaries of those perilous\ntimes; and in 1661, the ground was\nadvertised 44 to be let to be built upon \".\nIt was from this theatre that Alleyn\nderived the larger portion of the funds\nfor the foundation of God's Gift Col-\nlege, at Dulwich. A passage, con-\nnecting Whitecross-street with Golding\nlane, is still called Playhouse-yard.\nBLACKFRIARS THEATRE.\nThis was built in 1576, by James\nBurbadge and his \" fellows servants\nof Dudley, Earl of Leicester, in con-\nsequence of an act of Common Council\npassed the preceding year, prohibiting\nthe erection of a playhouse within the\nlimits of the City jurisdiction.\nBLACKFRI ARS.\nSir Anthony Van Dyck lived in\nBlackfriars from the time of his coming\nto England in 1632 to his death in\n1641. The rent of his house, \" at a\nmoderate value \", was estimated, in\n1638, at £2O, and the tithe paid\n£1.6.3.\nBen Jonson dates his dedication of\nVolpone or The Fox \"from my house\nin the Blackfriars, this 1 Ith day of\nFebruary, 1607.\nALLEYN'S ALMS HOUSES.\nThree sets of alms-houses in London\n(each for ten poor people) were built\nand endowed by Edward Alleyn,\n(1626) the actor, and founder of God's\nGift College at Dulwich : /. in Lamb-\ncilley, (formerly Petty France), Bi-\nshopsgate-street; 2. in Bath-street, (for-\nmerly Pest-House-lane), Old-street, St.\nLuke's; 3. in Soap-yard, Deadman's-\nplace, Southwark. (This last we find\nin Plate 3, E.)\nThe first brick of the alms-houses\nin Bath-street was laid by Alleyn him-\nself on the 13 th of July, 1620 ; and\non the 29th of April, 1621, he re-\ncords his having placed three men and\nseven women in the ten houses.\nThey were rebuilt in 1707.\nBUNHILL FIELDS BURIAL GROUND.\nThis cemetary, near Finsbury Square,\nwas called \"the Campo Santo of\nthe Dissenters\".\nAmong the famous men buried here\nwas Daniel De Foe, (1661-1731),\nThe entry of his burial runs: \" 1731,\nApril 26. Mr. Dubow, Cripplegate \".\nHere too they buried William Blake,"}, {"page_pdf": 10, "page_imprimee": "54", "url_page": "https://bluemountain.princeton.edu/bluemtn/?a=d&d=bmtnaau192604-01.1.10", "debut_caractere": 0, "fin_caractere_exclue": 5679, "texte": "(I 757-1827), at the distance of about\ntwenty-five feet from the north wall.\nThere was no monument in 1850. I sup-\npose and hope there is some such little\nrecord now.\nThomas Stothard, R. A,, who died\nin 1834 and who is best known by\nhis 44 Canterbury Pilgrimage \", a deli-\nberate crib from Blake, lies close to the\nman who was so 44 good to steal from \".\nPLATE 1F\nSHOREDITCH.\nTHE THEATRE.\nIn Holywell Lane, Shoreditch. The\nearliest building erected in or near Lon-\ndon purposely for scenic exhibitions,\nstood on 44 certain howsing and void\ngrounds lying and being in Holywell,\nin the county of Middlesex, \" let\n(April 13th, 1576) by Giles Allein\nof Haseleigh, in Essex, gentleman, to\n44 James Burbadge, late of London\njoiner \", for twenty-one years, at the\nyearly rent of £l4.\nThe house was erected at the cost\nof John Brayne, the father-in-law of\nBurbadge, who advanced £6OO on\ncondition that Burbadge should assign\nto him a moiety of the theatre and\nits profits. That assignment does not\nseem to have been executed in the\nlifetime of Brayne, and his widow\nwas obliged to commence proceedings\nin equity, to compel a fulfilment of the\ncontract. The point in dispute v/as\nafterwards moved to the Star Chamber,\nAllein, the ground-landlord, complain-\ning to the Privy Council that the rent\nwas partly unpaid* and that Cuthbert\nBurbadge, the son, had, Dec. 28th,\n1598, 44 carried the wood to the\nBankside, and there erected a new\nplayhouse with the said wood\".\nAllein's bill was referred to Francis\nBacon, Esq., whose decision was that\n44 the said bill is very uncertain and\ninsufficient, and that no further answer\nneed to be made thereto.\" ...Another\nproof that Bacon was Shakespeare.\nThe 44 new playhouse\" was, it is\nbelieved, the Globe, then rebuilt or\nenlarged.\nTHE CURTAIN.\nIn Holywell Lane, Shoreditch. A thea-\ntre built, it is thought, in 1576, and so\ncalled from a house in Shoreditch,\n44 commonly called the Curtayne and\n44 sometime appertaining to the Priory\n14 of Haliwell now dissolved.\" The\nname survives in Curtain-road.\n44 And neare thereunto (Holywell\n44 Priory) are builded two publique-\n44 houses for the acting shewe of co-\n-44 medies, tragedies, and histories for\n44 recreation. Whereof one is called\n44 the Courtein, the other the Theatre.\n44 both standing on the south-west side\n44 towards the field \" (*).\nThe Curtain fell into disuse about\nthe commencement of the reign of\nCharles I.\nST. LEONARD'S.\n1588: 1618. Holy well-street for\nHoliwell) in this parish was in the\nreign of Queen Elizabeth and James L\ninhabited by players of distinction,\nconnected with the Curtain Theatre,\nthe Blackfriars Theatre and the Globe\non the Bankside.\nThe parish register records the in-\nterment of the following: Richard Tarl-\nton, (d. 1588): James Burbadge (d.\n1596): Richard Burbadge (d. 1618):\nGabriel Spenser, the player, regarding\nwhom, in the burial register of St. Leo-\nnard, Shoreditch, is the following en-\ntry:—44 1598. Gabrieli Spencer being\n44 slayne, was buryed ye xxiqth of\n44 September. Hogge Lane\n44 Hogge Lane \" denotes his residence.\nHe was a player in Henslowe's com-\npany of actors, and was killed in\nHoxton-fields in a duel with Ben\nJonson, rare Ben Jonson.\nThe burials of William Sly and\nRichard Cowley, two original perfor-\nmers in Shakespeare's plays, are also\nregistered here.\nAnother original performer in Sha-\nkespeare's plays who lived in Holy-\nwell-street, was Nicholas Tooley (2).\nHACKNEY.\nStrype, the historian, was lecturer\nat Hackney from 1689 till 1724, and\ndied in 1737, in his 97th year.\nPLATE 2A\nEDGEWARE ROAD.\nOliver Goldsmith once lived here for\na while.\nIn the Road from Uxbridge we see\na row of houses in front of St. Geor-\nge's Burying Ground. These I believe\nwere called St. George's Row, and\nabout 1837 became Hyde Park Place,\nIn 1895 or thereabouts, I remember\ncalling at the second house west of\nthe Chapel, No. 19, to see the dra-\nmatic critic Mr. Max Beerbohm. The\nhouse nearest to the Chapel was that\nof Rope the confectioner who supplied\nthe finest wedding breakfasts of the\ntime, even superior to those of Gunter.\nMANCHESTER SQUARE.\nThis is on the north side of Oxford-\nstreet and was begun in 1776 by the\nbuilding of 44 Manchester House ' on\nits north side. It was finished in 1788.\nHere it was that Mr. Prendergast\nhad a school about 1780 to which\nTalma went. (J)\nPORTMAN SQUARE.\nMontague House in the north-west\nangle of the square was built for Mrs.\nMontague, (1 720-1800), authoress of\nthe Vindication of Shakespeare against\nVoltaire. Here she had her blue-\nstocking parties.\nORCHARD STREET.\nSheridan and his young wife are\nliving here in February 1774: and\nhere Sheridan wrote 44 The Rivals \"\nand the 44 Duenna \". 44 The Rivals \\\nwas finished in six weeks.\nSOMERSET STREET.\nHere from 1791 till 1799 lived!\nMrs. Jordan on the north side in No. 14..\nSEYMOUR STREET.\nAt No. 12 Lived Balfe from 1861/\nto 1864.\nGROSVENOR SQUARE..\nPARK STREET.\nIn 1794 Miss Stephens.was boftrKerew\nPLATE 2B\nBOND STREET.\n44 Dear Street of London's charms the\n[centre,\nDear Street! where at a certain hour\nMan's follies bud forth into flower!\nWhere the gay minor sighs for fashion:\nWhere majors live that minors cash on;\nWhere each who wills may suit his wish,\nHere choose a Guido— there his fish\nLord Nelson is living at No. 141\nin 1797, after the Battle of Cape St.\nVincent.\nOLD BOND STREET.\nIn Old Bond Street is Long's Ho-\ntel, now No. 15, but I am told in\nthose days No. 16. Here in 1799 it\nis clearly numberless, both 15 and 16\nbeing further along.\n44 I saw Byron for the last time in\n44 1815. He dined or lunched with\n\n(1) Stow. ed. 1598. p. 349.\n(2) See Tooley-street, Southwark.\nPlate No, 3 E.\n(i) See 44 The Mask Vol. XII, No-\nh P* 3*"}, {"page_pdf": 11, "page_imprimee": "55", "url_page": "https://bluemountain.princeton.edu/bluemtn/?a=d&d=bmtnaau192604-01.1.11", "debut_caractere": 0, "fin_caractere_exclue": 6003, "texte": "44 me at Long's in Bond-Street. I\n44 never saw him so full of gaiety and\n44 good-humour, to which the presence\n44 of Mr. Mathews, the comedian, ad-\n-44 ded not a little. Poor Terry (the\n44 actor) was also present 0)\nAt No. 18 was once Stevens's Ho-\ntel, but not numbered here. Evidently\nHotels were skipped in 1799, for in\nTallis's Views No. 18 is marked\nclearly enough.\n44 During the first months of our\n44 acquaintance we (Byron and Moore)\n14 frequently dined together alone ; and\n44 as we had no club in common to\n44 resort to— the Alfred being the only\n44 one to which he at that period be-\n-44 longed, and I being then a member\n44 of none but Watier's—our dinners\n44 used to be at the St Alban's, or at\n44 his old haunt, Stevens's (2)\nIn 1793 and before Sir Thomas\nLawrence lived at No, 24 in 1794\nuntil 1804 at No. 29.\nAt No. 29 was the Library of\nMessrs Ebers & Co. at which boxes\nfor the Opera were booked. Mr. John\nEbers was for some years the manager\nof the King's Theatre in the Hay-\nmarket, losing £44,000 on the under-\ntaking. He died on Dec. Bth 1858\nat Notting Hill Terrace. Harrison\nAinsworth (Ebers's son-in-law) who\nbecame a publisher at No. 27, issued\nin 1828 an interesting book on this\nseven years venture.\nTo No. 30, corner of Stafford-street,\ncame John Mitchell the theatrical agent\nin 1834 when the number became 33.\nIn 1813 Lady Hamilton li ves at\nNo. 130.\nIn 181 1 Madame Catalani was at\n143 now occupied by Savory & Moore.\nIn September 1730 Lavinia Fenton,\nthe original Polly in the 44 Reggais*\nOpera \", came to live in Bond-street,\ntaking the house in which Lady Eli-\nzabeth Wentworth li 'ed.\nAbout 1780 Mrs Robinson (44 Per-\ndita \") was living in Cork-street off\nBond -street.\nSAVILLE STREET.\nIn 1816 Richard Brinslsy Sheridan\ndied in the front bedroom of No. 17.\nIn a short note to Mr. Rogers, May\n15th, 1836, six weeks before his death,\nhe says— :44 They are going to put the\n44 carpets out of window and break into\n44 Mrs . S.'s room and take me; for\n44 God's sake let me see you \".\nA present of £ 150 from Mr. Ro-\ngers arrived in time. Sheridan had\npreviously li/ed in No. 14.\nIn 1791 Lord Barry more has a pri-\nvate Theatre in Saville Street called\n44 Varies Amusantes \" ; and in No-\nvember Haydn visits it and writes\nin his Diary, 44 The Puppets were well\nmanaged, the singers bad, but the or-\nchestra tolerably good Boxes cost\n5/ ; Pit 3/ ; Doors open at 7\nbegins at 8.\nLOWER GROSVENOR STREET.\nIn 1730 Mrs. Nancy Oldfield, the\nactress, died here.\nUPPER AND LOWER BROOK\nSTREET.\nHandel lived at No. 57 (now 25)\nin the house which in 1850 became\nMr. Partington's 44 on the south side\nof Brook-street\", in 1799 three doors\nfrom Bond-street, now four doors I be-\nlieve. He died here April 14, 1759.\nCAVENDISH SQUARE.\n1782 (c) George Romney, the pain-\nter, lived in the house No. 32, after-\nwards Sir Martin Archer Shee's.\nNear by in No. 13 Old Cavendish\nStreet, in 1 770-80, the father of Talma\nis practising as dentist. (0\nHOLLES STREET.\nLord Byron (1788-1824) was born\nat No. 24 Hoilesstreet, which leads into\nthe square, and was christened in the\nsmall parish church of S . Marylebone.\nQUEEN ANNE STREET EAST now\nFoley Place.\nIn 1800 Malone, the Shakespeare\ncommentator, was living at No. 58.\nVERE STREET.\nSothern the actor died here at No.\nI, in 1881.\nGOLDEN SQUARE.\nIn 1746 Mrs Cibber, the actress, is\nliving here for she writes to Garrick\nin that year, 44 Direct to me at the\ncentre house in Golden-square, for I\nhave left Craven-street \".\nIn 1775 La Gabrieili takes a house\nhere and 44 has a brass plate put on\nthe door Mrs. Gabrielle \" says Miss\nBurney.\nHANOVER SQUARE.\n(c) 1760 The Concert Rooms on the\neast side were built by 44 Sir John \"\nGallini, formerly one of the managers\nof the Italian Opera in this country.\nST. GEORGE'S CHURCH.\nIn 1791 Sir William Hamilton was\nmarried in this church to Emma Lyons.\nIn 1849 Lola Monies was married\nin the same church to Mr. Heald.\nOXFORD STREET.\nGREAT MARLBOROUGH STREET.\nFrom 1790 to 1803 Mrs. Siddons\nlived at No. 49. It is the last but\none house on the south side and has\nno garden. In 1882 the number was\nchanged to 54.\nPANTHEON.\nIn Oxford-street itself, a stone's\nthrow from Mrs. Siddons's house was\nthe Pantheon, a theatre built by James\nWatt, and opened for the first time in\nJanuary 1 772. Dr. Johason went there in\ncompany with Bosweil, and both agreed\nin thinking it inferior to Ranelagh.\nThe entrance front in Oxford-street is\npart of Wyatt's original building.\nMiss Stephens, afterwards Countess\nof Essex, here made her first appea-\nrance on the stage in the character of\nBarbarina. It became the Opera\nHouse 1789 to 1792. It was burnt\nin 1 792 : there is a painting by Turner\nof the place in flames: rebuilt in 1795.\nPRINCESS'S THEATRE.\nIn 1829 the Princess's Theatre was\nbuilt; it was on the site of No. 73\nand on the north side of Oxford-street\nalmost directly opposite Poland-street.\nHere it was that Ellen Terry, aged\neight, first appeared with Charles Kean\nin 1856.\nPOLAND-STREET.\nClose by in Poland-street lived Dr.\nBurney, author of the 44 History of\nMusic \" with his family, between 1 768\nand 1770 when he moved to Queen\nSquare, Bloomsbury (q. v.). Here\nMiss Fanny Burney began her Diary.\nIn 1819 Shelley lodged at No. 15.\nHere too lived William Blake from\n1787 to 1793 at No. 28, the back\nwindows of which looked out into\na Timber-yard. The likeness of 44 The\nBabylonian Woman on the Seven\nheaded Beast \" to the Kemble family\nhas struck many people. The near-\nness of model and painter for three\nyears has occurred I believe to few.\nIn 1757 Blake was born at No. 28\nBroad-street, corner of Marshall-street,\nCamaby Market and lived there till\n1771. From 1803 to 1821 he lived\nat South Moulton-street No. 17.\nPICCADILLY.\nTHE ALBANY. From March 1814\nto March 3815 Lord Byron lived in\nSet No. 2A ; here he wrote his 44 Lara\".\n44 Albany, March 28, 1814. This\n44 night got into my new apartments,\n\n(1) Sir Walter Scott. (Moore's Life\nof Byron).\n(2) Moore. Life of Byron,\n(i) See 44 The Mask XII, I, p. 3."}, {"page_pdf": 12, "page_imprimee": "56", "url_page": "https://bluemountain.princeton.edu/bluemtn/?a=d&d=bmtnaau192604-01.1.12", "debut_caractere": 0, "fin_caractere_exclue": 5467, "texte": "44 rented of Lord Althorp, on a lease\n44 of seven years. Spacious, and rooms\n44 for my books and sabres\nByron's Journals.\nFrom March 1815 for about a\nyear Lord Byron is living at Piccadilly\nTerrace 13, now 139, (see Plate 3B).\nBERKELEY SQUARE.\nBuilt 1698, and so called from\nBerkeley House, the London residence\nof John, Lord Berkeley of Stratton,\n(d. 1678). Herein 1755 lived Colley\nGibber.\nDOVER STREET.\nHerefrom 1699 to 1706 lived and\ndied John Evelyn, (1620-1706) about\nnine doors up on the east side.\nST. JAMES'S CHURCH.\nHere is buried Tom d'Urfey, the\ndramatist (1653-1723): also James\nGillray, the caricaturist, (1757-1815)\nin the churchyard, beneath a flat stone\non the west side of the rectory,\nST. JAMES'S MARKET, JERMYN\nSTREET.\nFarquhar found Miss Nanny, after-\nwards Mrs. Oldfield, the actress, then\na girl of sixteen \", rehearsing the part\nof the Scornful Lady of Beaumont and\nFletcher behind the bar of her aunt\nMrs. Voss's tavern, the Mitre in St.\nJames's Market.\nGREAT TITCHFIELD STREET.\nDe Loutherbourg, the scenographer\n(1740-1812) lived at No. 45, from\n1774 to 1780. He had his small\nscenical Theatre in 4 Lisle street in\n1 781, afterwards in Old Exeter Change\nin 1786.\nIn 1797 Madame Vestris was born\nat a house in this street.\nTOTTENHAM STREET, Tottenham\nCourt Road.\nHere was built (c) 1790 \"The\nQueen's Theatre \", formerly Fiancis\nPasquale's \" King's Concert-room \".\nIt was afterwards purchased and en-\nlarged by the directors of the Concerts\nof Ancient Music, and subsequently\nconverted into a theatre and was run\nunder the names of (i) the Tottenham-\nstreet, (2) the Regency, (3) Royal\nWest London, (4) Queen's Theatre, (5)\nFitzroy Theatre. In 1802, when\ncalled The Regency, Colonel Greville\nstarted the 44 Pic-Nic Society \" of ama-\nteurs;—a caricature by Gillray greeted\ntheir first efforts. In 1865 it became\n44 The Prince of Wales's Theatre \"\nunder Mr and Mrs. Bancroft till 1879.\nDestroyed in 1882.\nIn 1905 The Scala Thealre was\nbuilt on the site.\nPLATE 2C\nBLOOMSBURY.\nBLOOMSBURY SQUARE was first\nformed by Thomas Wriothesley, Earl\nof Southampton, the son of Shakes-\npeare's patron.\nORANGE-STREET.\nHere R. W. Elliston was born in\n1774.\nGOWER-STREET.\nJack Bannister died here in 1836.\nIn 1817 Mr. Isaac Disraeli is li-\nving at No. 6, on the west side, the\nfirst house from Hart-street; here he\ncompiled his 44 Curiosities of Litera-\nture The house was built by Isaac\nWare (d. 1776), the editor of Palladio.\nCHARLOTTE STREET.\nIn Charlotte-street, later Bloomsbury-\nstreet, Theodore Hook, the novelist\n(1788-1841) was born in what was\nthen No. 3, and was still living here\nin the year 1800. He it was who\nwrote the 44 Reminiscences\" ascribed\nto Michael Kelly, 1826.\nWYAN'S COURT, GREAT RUSSELL-\nSTREET.\nIn this court, (it no longer exists)\nlived Lewis Theobald, the editor of\nShakespeare. 1 729.\nST. GEORGE'S.\nJoseph Shepherd Munden, the actor,\n(1758-1832) was buried in this church.\nST. GEORGE THE MARTYR, QUEEN\nSQUARE.\nNancy Dawson, the dancer, famous for\nhornpipe dancing (1730-1767) was bu-\nried here : there is a tombstone to her\nmemory in this church which states\n4 Here lies Nancy Dawson'.\nGREAT RUSSELL STREET.\nFrom 1800 to 1817 John Philip\nKemble is living in No. 89, on the\nNorth side. The house was destroyed\nin 1847, to make way for the eastern\nwing of the British Museum.\nCAROLINE STREET, BEDFORD\nSQUARE.\nFrom 1887 to 1795 Kemble was\nliving at No. 13.\nSOUTHAMPTON STREET.\n44 I was born in London on the\n6th of November, 1671, in Southampton\nStreet, facing Southampton House\".\nColley Gibber's Apology.\nCOVENT GARDEN.\nCOVENT GARDEN THEATRE.\nFirst theatre (0 opened Dec. 7.1732\nby John Rich, (1782-1761): destro-\nyed by fire Sept. 20. 1808. Second\ntheatre opened Sept. 18, 1809, (Smirke,\narchitect) : destroyed by fire March 5,\n1856. Third Theatre opened May 15,\n1858. (Barry architect). Even in 1847\nexpenses of Covent Garden Theatre\nwere found too costly to keep it up\nproperly. No sane solution to the\ndifficulty of running it has yet been\ndiscovered although some believe it\nlies right before us.\nBOW STREET,\nThis street was built in 1637.\nMohun, the famous actor, (1624-\n1680) lived in a house on the east\nside, from 1671 to 1676 inclusive,\nGrinling Gibbons (1648-1720) lived\nin a house on the east side (about the\nmiddle of the street), from 1678 to\n1720. The house was distinguished\nby the sign of 44 The King's Arms\".\nWilliam Wychedey, ilie dramatst\n(1640-1716), lived in lodgings, at Wi-\ndow Hilton's, on the west side, over\nagainst the Cock. King Charles 11. paid\nhim a visit here, when ill of a fever; and\nhere, when seventy-five and too unwell\nto attend the church, he was married.\nRobert Wilks, the actor, 44 Gentleman\nWilks\", (1665-1732), lived in the\nsixth house on the west side as you\nwalk to Long-acre.\nIn 1749 Spranger Barry, (1719-\n1777) lived for some years in the\ncorner house on the west side, for-\nmerly Will's Coffee-house.\nIn 1742 Charles Macklin (1697-\n1797) lived here, where Peg Wof-\nfington also had apartments.\nMARTLET COURT, BOW STREET.\nIn 1756 Edward Shuter, the actor,\n(1730-1776) was living at No. 2,\nwhen he advertised his benefit in the\nPublic Advertiser of March Bth. The\nCourt is not marked by Horwood but\nleads out of Crown-court, No. 2 being\nthe second house from the Bow-street\nend.\nTHE PIAZZA.\nBetween 1637 and 1643 Thomas\nKilligrew (1612-1683) was living in\nthe north-west angle; and between\n1660 and 1662 in the north-east angle.\n\n(i) See interesting plan in The Mask,\nVolume 8, page io."}, {"page_pdf": 13, "page_imprimee": "57", "url_page": "https://bluemountain.princeton.edu/bluemtn/?a=d&d=bmtnaau192604-01.1.13", "debut_caractere": 0, "fin_caractere_exclue": 6084, "texte": "Subsequent to 1762 Zoffany (1733-\n1810) the theatrical portrait-painter, li-\nved in what was later Robins's Auction-\nrooms, in the north-east wing of the\nPiazza. Here he painted Foote, in the\nparody of Major Sturgeon.\nST, PAUL'S.\nA parish church, on the west side of the\nmarket, built by Inigo Jones, circ. 1633.\nThe parish register records the mar-\nriage (1764) of Lady Susan Strang-\nways to O' Brien, the actor. Among the\neminent persons buried here are :\nSir Henry Herbert, (1 595-167 3),\nMaster of the Revels in the time of\nthe Stuarts: Dick Estcouit, (1668-\n1712), the actor-dramatist : Edward\nKynaston, (1640-1706), the celebrated\nactor of female parts at the Restora-\ntion: William Wycherley, (1640-1716),\nthe dramatist : and Charles Macklin,\n(1690-1797) who is buried in the\nvault under the communion table.\nBEDFORD COFFEE HOUSE.\nA celebrated coffee-house which once\nstood in the north-east corner near the\nstage entrance to the Theatre 44 under\nthe Piazza in Covent Garden\" and\nwas frequented by Garrick, Quin, Foote,\nMurphy and others.\n1815-19 Charles Kemble is living in\nCovent Garden-Chambers.\nPUNCHS THEATRE.\nIn 1711 it stood in the Little Piazza,\neast side, (so it is written on a\nplan I have seen), and belonged to\nMartin Powell. Boxes cost 2/6; Pit\n1/6. This Plan is called 44 Plan of\nBedford House, Covent Garden, etc.\ntaken about 1690. (1809)\".\nKING STREET.\nJames Quin, the actor, (1693-1766)\nwas born here,and christened in the\nadjoining church.\nGARRICK GLUB.\nThis Ciub was established in 1831\nat No. 35, King-street. (Timbs says\nat No. 29). Moved to Garrick-street\nin 1862.\nHENRIETTA STREET.\nThis was built in 1637.\nKitty Clive (1 71 1-1 785) was living\nhere in March, 1756, when she adver-\ntised her benefit.\nHere at the Castle Tavern, Sheri-\ndan in 1772 (?) fought and disarmed\nMathews, his rival.\nJAMES STREET.\nSir Henry Herbert, (1595-1673),\nthe last Master of the Revels, lived\nand died on the west side of this\nstreet, in the red-brick house, the last\nbut one before the street abuts upon\nHart-street; re. 23 or 26 of this plan.\nMAIDEN LANE.\n«•\nVoltaire lodged here at the White\nPeruke in December 1727.\nJ. M. W. Turner, R. A. lived with\nhis father in No. 26 on the north side\ncorner of Hand-court till the year 1800,\nwhen he was elected an associate of\nthe Royal Academy.\nTAVISTOCK ROW.\nAt No. 4, in the upper part of the\nhouse, died Charles Macklin, aged 107.\nYORK STREET.\nThis was built 1636.\nMrs. Pritchard, (171 1-1768) the\nactress, was living here when she adver-\ntised her benefit at Drury-lane, in the\nPublic Avertiser of March 13th, 1756.\nCHARLES STREET.\nBarton Booth, the actor (1681 -\n1733) died here.\nBRYDGES STREET.\nBuilt circa 1637, and so called after\nGeorge Brydges, Lord Chandos. Strype\ndescribes it as a 44 place well-built and\ninhabited, and of great resort for the\ntheatre there\". The Old Drury Ta-\nvern, the Sheridan Knowles public-house,\nthe Sir John Falstaff, and the Elysium\nmade it even up to 1850 a dramatic\nand a festive neighbourhood.\nRUSSEL STREET.\nThis street was built 1634, leading\nfrom the Piazza to Drury Lane.\nJoseph Taylor, one of the original\nperformers in Shakespeare's plays, lived\nhere from 1634 to 1641.\n44 But who should I meet at the\n44 corner of the Piazza, but Joseph\n44 Taylor; he tells me, there's a new\n44 play at the Friars today, and I have\n44 bespoke a box for Mr Wild and\n44 his brid *\". (4 The Parson's Wed-\nding'. Killigrew. 1663).\nJohn Evelyn also lived here:\n44 18 Oct. 1659. I came with my\n44 wife and family to London: took\n44 lodgings at the 3 Feathers in Russel -\n44 street, Covent-garden, for all the win-\n-44 ter, my son being very unwell\".\nMichael Mohun, the actor, (1620-\n1684) lived on the south side; in 1665\nhe was assessed at 10s., the highest rate\nlevied in the street.\nThomas Betterton (1635-1710) died\nhere in 1710; and here, 44 at his late\nlodgings, \" his books, prints, drawings,\nand paintings, were sold after his death.\nTom Davies, the actor-bookseller,\n(1712-1 785) had his shop on the south\nside. 44 Mr. Thomas Davies, the actor,\n44 who then kept a bookseller's shop in\n44 Russel-s-reet,, Co vent-garden, told me\n44 that Johnson was very much his friend,\n44 and came frequently to his house \".\nBoswell.\nWill's Coffee~House was No. 1.\nand on the west side of Bow-street at\nthe corner of Russel-street. Tom's\nCoffee-House was No. 1 7 Russel street,\nnorth side.\n44 After the Play, the best company\n44 go to Tom's and Will's Coffee House\n44 near adjoining, where there is playing\n44 at Picket, and the best of conversation\n44 till midnight. Here you will see blue\n44 and green ribbons and stars sitting\n44 familiarly, and talking with the same\n44 freedom as if they had left their qua-\n-44 lity and degrees of distance at home\".\n(De Foe's \" A Journey through Eng~\nland\", 1772).\nCharles Lamb lived here in 181 7 at\nNo. 20. 44 Drury Lane\", he writes,\n44 in sight from our front, and Covent\nGarden from our back room windows\".\nLEICESTER SQUARE.\nAt No. 47 Sir Joshua Reynolds\nlived from 1760 till his death in\n1892.\nIn 1733 at the Holden Head lived\nHogarth, (1697-1764).\nIn 1796 Charles Dibdin (1745-\n1814) built in twelve weeks his little\nSans Souci Theatre at No. 2 on the\neast side of Leicester Place.\nMARTIN STREET.\nIn Martin Street No. 36, just off\nLeicester Square, the Burney Family\nare living from 1774 onwards; and\nhere it was that the Agujari (La Ba-\nstardina) came to call on Dr. Burney\nin 1775. The house had previously\nbelonged to Sir Isaac New on, where\nhe had built a little observatory. Here\ntook places the tearing to pieces of La\nGabrielli by the kind of people She-\nridan was at the moment studying and\nrecording in his 44 School for Scandal\".\nIn 1793 Burford erects his Theatre\nfor Barker's 44 Panorama \" near the\nend of Cranburn street, behind the\nhouses here marked II and 12 Leicester\nsquare. It had its entrance by the east\nside of No. 12. It had been shown in\n1789 at No. 28 Haymarket, opposite\nthe Black Horse Inn. In 1791 it was\nshown at No. 28 Castle St. facing the\neast end of Bearstreet. It remained open\nin 3 793.\nLISLE STREET.\nIn 1781 de Loutherbourg opened"}, {"page_pdf": 14, "page_imprimee": "58", "url_page": "https://bluemountain.princeton.edu/bluemtn/?a=d&d=bmtnaau192604-01.1.14", "debut_caractere": 0, "fin_caractere_exclue": 6397, "texte": "his 44 Eidophusikon \" at 4 Lisle-street\non April 3. (see Great Titchfield-street).\nST. GILES'S IN THE FIELDS.\nGeorge Chapman (1559-1634) was\nburied in this church. lnigo Jones\nerected an altar-tomb to his memory,\nat his own expense, which is presu-\nmably still to be seen in the churchyard,\nagainst the south wall of the church.\nJames Shirley (1596 to 1666) was\nalso buried here; and Michael Mohun\n(1620-1684).\nHAYMARKET.\nTHE HAYMARKET THEATRES.\nThere have been three in this street.\nFirst the Opera House ; the big buil-\nding by Vanbrugh on the west side,\n1705: secondly a small playhouse,\nbuilt by John Potter, 1720, clearly\nmarked in this plan.\nThis was known at first as 44 The\nLittle Theatre in the Haymarket to\ndistinguish it from the theatre on the\nopposite side of the street. (see\nPlate 3 U\\) (1)\nThe 44 Little House \" was perma-\nnently closed October 14th 1820, and\na third Theatre, built by Nash, was\nopened July 4th, 1821. It stood on\na piece of ground immediately adjoin-\ning the former Theatre on the east\nside (12, 13, 14, of Horwood). It\nstill exists, but while it once dominated\nthat side of t]ie street, now it seems the\nleast noticeable building in the district.\nHAYMARKET No. 61.\nOn the opposite side of the road to\nthe playhouse and near 44 The Cock\nTavern\" was No. 61, where Sig. Mi-\ncheli lived in 1780 and sold tickets\nbetween the hours of 11. 30 and 6. 30\nfor his Theatre of Italian Fantoccini\n(or puppets) in Piccadilly No. 22.\nSee Plate 2 the last but one house\non the north side going down towards\nthe Castle Tavern or Inn.\nFrom 1714 to 1726 Mrs Oldfield\nthe actress (1683-1730) lived in the\nhouse, seventh door from the top,\neast side.\nJAMES STREET.\nThis has a stone inscribed on one\nof the houses, 44 Jarnes Street, 1673\".\nWrites Strype:— 44 James Street\n44 comes out of the Haymarket and fal-\n-44 leih into Hedge Lane, of chief note\n44 for its Tennis Court, which takes\n44 up the south side of the street ; the\n<4 north side being but ordinarily in-\n-4< habited \". It was above this Tennis\ncourt that Mrs. Charke, Colly Gibber's\ndaughter, had her Puppet Theatre in\nabout 1739.\nPANTON STREET.\nIn Panton-street, close by, and on\nthe south side, was Hickford's Great\nRoom, 1713, used as a Dancing School\nand as a Concert Room and as an Auction\nRoom ... a very fashionable centre.\nIn an announcement of 1729 we\nread the following:— 44 N. B. Such\n44 persons as design to be brought in\n44 chairs, are desired to come in at the\n44 back door of Mr. Hickford's Great\n44 Room, (which is on a ground floor),\n44 facing the Tennis Court in St. James's\n44 Street in the Haymarket; which is\n44 so large and convenient, that, without\n44 going up or down steps, the Chair\n44 may be carried in to the very room\n44 where the Pictures, &c., are shewed \".\nThe room was 50 feet long by 30\nin breadth. Mozart and his sister....\nhe was eight, and she thirteen.... gave\na concert there on May 13th. 1765.\nSUFFOLK STREET.\nThis was built circa 1664.\nHere dwelt Moll Davis, (flourished\n1645-1669) from 1667 to 1674, when\nshe removed to St. James's Square.\nA motion had been made in the\nHouse of Commons to 44 lay a tax on\n44 playhouses. The Court opposed the\n44 motion. The players, it was said,\n44 (by Sir John Birkenhead), were the\n44 King's servants, and a part of his\n44 pleasure. Coventry asked, 44 Whether\n44 did the King's pleasure lie among\n44 the men or the women that acted ? \"\n44 —perhaps recollecting more espe-\n-44 cially the King's visits to Moll Davis,\n44 in the street he himself lived in.\n44 The King determined to leave a\n44 mark upon Sir John Coventry, and\n44 he was watched on his way home.\n44 He stood up to the wall \", says\n44 Burnet, 44 and snatched the flam-\n-44 beau out of the servant's hands; and\n44 with that in one hand, and his sword\n44 in the other, he defended himself so\n44 well, that he got more credit by it\n44 than by all the actions of his life.\n44 He wounded some of them, but was\n44 soon disarmed, and then they cut\n44 his nose to the bone, to teach him\n44 to remember what respect he owed\n44 to the King \" (0,\nLINCOLN'S INN FIELDS.\nGIBBON'S TENNIS COURT, Vere\nStreet, Clare Market.\nSo called after Charles Gibbons, its\nowner or keeper, (d. 1668), it was ope-\nNed as a theatre by the King's Com-\npany under Killigrew, Thursday, No-\nvember Bth, 1660, with the play of\nKing Henry IV. On the Bth of April\n1663, this company of actors moved\nto the new house erected on the site\nof the present Drury-lane Theatre* (qv).\nDownes, in his 44 Roscius Angli-\ncanus\" tells us that: 44 The scattered\n44 remnant of several of these houses\"\n(or Theatres) 44 upon King Charles's\n44 Restoration, fram'd a company, who\n44 acted again at the (Red) Bull (in\n44 St. John's-street), and built them a\n44 new (?) house in Gibbons' Tennis-\n-44 court, in Clare-market, in which two\n44 places they continued acting all 1660,\n44 1661, 1662, and part of 1663\".\nPepys in 1660 asserts that: 44 .... it\n44 is the finest play-house, I believe,\n44 that ever was in England It was\nburnt down in 1809. (see Plate 6).\nOgilby, the poet, drew a lottery of\nbooks on Tuesday, June 2nd, 1668,\n44 at the Old Theatre, between Lin-\ncoln's-Inn-fields and Vere-street\nCLARE MARKET.\nClose to Vere street is Clare-market.\nAn actor, James Spiller, (1692-\n1720), becoming so popular with the\nbutchers that they changed the name\nof one of their Taverns \" The Bull\nand Butcher \"into the \"Spiller's Head\".\nSTANHOPE STREET.\nIn Stanhope-street, Clare-Market,\nJoseph Grimaldi, (1779-1837) was\nborn.\nPLATE 2C & D\nLINCOLN'S INN FIELDS THEATRE.\nThis was in Portugal-street : it seems\nnot to have stretched to the Fields\nOf the three distinct theatres of this\nname on the same site: The first was\noriginally \" Lisle* s Tennis Court\nPortugal Row, converted into a theatre\n(The Dukes Theatre) by Sir William\nDavenant, and opened in the spring of\n1662, 44 having new scenes and deco-\nrations,... \".\nIt then seems to have been turned\nback into a tennis court in 1671.\nThe second theatre on the same site\n(\" fitted up from a tennis court \"), was\nbuilt by Congreve, Betterton, Mrs.\nBarry, and Mrs. Bracegirdle, and opened\nApril 30th, 1695, with Congreve's co-\nmedy of 44 Love for Love\".\nThe third theatre on the same spot\nwas opened on December 18th. 1714.\nHere, on January 29th, 1727-8,\nThe Beggar's Opera was originally pro-\nduced, and with such success that it\n\n(i) To appear in the July number.\n(i) Burnet. (1823 Ed.)."}, {"page_pdf": 15, "page_imprimee": "59", "url_page": "https://bluemountain.princeton.edu/bluemtn/?a=d&d=bmtnaau192604-01.1.15", "debut_caractere": 0, "fin_caractere_exclue": 5663, "texte": "was acted on sixty-two nights in one\nseason.\nIn 1756 it was transformed into a\nbarrack for 1400 men. After this it\nbecame Copeland's China Repository.\nIn 1799 (as we see in the plan) it\nwas called Mr. Spode's Warehouse.\nFinally, in 1848, it is taken down to\nenlarge the Royal College of Surgeons\nwhich had been erected in 1835 in the\nLincoln's Inn Fields.\nPORTUGAL ROW,\nHere in 1668 lived The Lady Da-\nvenant, wife of Sir William Davenant;\nHere too John Wilmot, second Earl of\nRochester (1647-1680) lived in the\nhouse (circa 1673) \" next to the Duke's\nPlayhouse in Portugal Row \" he writes.\nNear by, in No. 1., New square,\nLincoln's Inn, resided for twenty-three\nyears Arthur Murphy, (1727-1805) the\ndramatist, and friend of Dr. Johnson.\nPLATE 2C\nGREAT QUEEN STREET.\nIn Great Queen Street the Freema-\nson's Hall and Tavern was built in\n1775-6.\nHere a fa'ewell dinner was given to\nJohn Philip Kemble (0 on his retiring\nfrom the stage in 1817.\nIn 1782 William Blake lodges at\nNo. 31, apprenticed to Bazire the en-\ngraver, whose studio was here.\nAbout 1733 Mrs. Kitty Clive lived\nhere.\nIn 1735 Ryan the comedian was\n•attacked here at midnight and severely\nwounded.\nAbout 1779 Sheridan lived at No. 54,\n55 or 56 for some years, (see Moore's\n\" Life ')', and Mrs Robinson, (Perdita),\nwas living there in 1773.\nLITTLE QUEEN STREET.\nHere, at No. 7, lived Charles Lamb\nin 1796.\nLONG ACRE.\nJohn Dryden, from 1682 to 1686\nlived in a house on the north side fa-\ncing Rose-street, or Rose-court. He\nis said to have lived in Gerard-street,\nand to have been on his way home\nthere when he was cudgelled in Rose-\nstreet, but Gerard-street was not built\nat that time.\nST. MARTIN'S IN THE FIELDS.\nA very early London parish. Here\nare buried : Lacy, the actor, 44 in the\nfarther churchyard (d. 1681): Nell\nGwynne, in the church, (1650-1687):\nFarquhar, the dramatist, (1678-1707):\nCharles Bannister, the actor, (1737-\n1804) in a vault under the communion\ntable : and Jack Sheppard in the burial\nground.\nST. MARTIN'S LANE.\nHere in 1784-5 lived Fuseli, (1741-\n1825) at No. 100.\nSir Joshua Reynolds (1723-1792)\nabout 1743 lived in a house almost\nfacing Mays Buildings. Later in Great\nNewport-street No. 5 until 1760.\nHere also in St. Martin's Lane was\nSlaughter's Coffee House, three doors\nfrom Newport-street on the west side,\nfrequented by Hogarth, Roubiliac and\nReynolds.\nSOHO .\nSOHO SQUARE.\nIn 1760 at the south corner of\nSutton street dwelt Madame Th£r£se\nCornelys, called by Walpole \" the\nHeidegger of the age \" in \" Car-\nlisle House \" here numbered 21. Here\nCasanova visited her in 1763. The\nfurniture etc. was sold by auction in\n1772. In- 1776 she returns here:\nclosed in 1 797.\nIn 1774 George Colman the elder\nlived at no. 28 in the left-hand corner\nof Bateman's-buildings and Frith-street\ncorner ; Samuel Beazley the architect\nlived in Bateman's buildings to the right.\nFRITH STREET.\nWilliam Hazlitt died in this street,\nand was buried in the churchyard of\nthe parish, St. Anne's, Soho.\nIn 1787-88 Jack Bannister is living\nhere.\nIn 1768 Sheridan is living here with\nhis father and elder brother.\nGERARD STREET,\nJohn Dryden lived here in the house\nmarked no. 43 in this plan. \"If\n\"either your lady or you shall at any\n\" time honour me with a letter, my\n\" house is in Gerard Street, the fifth\n\" door on the left hand coming from\n\" Newport Street \". (0\n\"Dryden lived in Gerard-street, and\nused most commonly to write in the\nground-room, next the street He\ndied here in 1700.\nCharles Kemble lived here about\n1819 in the house fronting Anne-street.\nGREEK STREET.\nSir Thomas Lawrence lived in this\nstreet from 1799 to 1804.\nIn 1764 Casanova lodged here for\na few weeks at the lodging house of\nMrs. Susanna Mercier.\nDRURY LANE.\nTHE PHOENIX THEATRE or COCK-\nPIT in Drury Lane.\nThis stood in the parish of St.\nGiles's-in-the-Fields, somewhere between\nOrange Court and Golden Place in\nour plan.\nBuilt for cock-fighting, it became a\ntheatre. Prynne says that the Theatre\ndemoralised the whole of Drury-Lane.\nIt was destroyed by the apprentices of\nLondon in 1617. In 1659 it was re-\nfitted for acting by Mr Rhodes.\nTake care not to confuse this Cockpit\nof Drury Lane with another Cockpit\nin Whitehall. They are easily confu-\nsed, for sometimes the Diaries and\nother reports of the time refer solely\nto 44 The Cockpit \" and omit to say\nwhich.\nDRURY LANE THEATRE, between\nBridges Street and Drury Lane.\nThe first theatre was opened on\nApril Bth, 1663, by the King's Com-\npany, under Thomas Killigrew. It\nwas often called the theatre in Covent\nGarden. Pepys gives a report of this\nbuilding. Destroyed by fire before Ja-\nnuary 1672. Rebuilt by Wren, it\nwas opened March 26th, 1674. Gib-\nber gives a report. The principal en-\ntrance to Wren's theatre was down\nPlayhouse-passage (not marked here).\nAfter changing masters many times,\nGarrick takes control of it, 1747, ad-\nding a new Front to it by the bro-\nthers Adam, and leaves it on retiring\nfrom the stage in 1776.\nA third house was built by Henry\nHolland, opened March 12th, 1794.\nBrayley says in 1793.\nIt is this building which Horwood\nshows us : it was destroyed by fire on\nthe night of February 24th, 1809,\nwhen the fourth building was erected,\nWyatt being the designer, and opened\nOctober 10th 1812. Restored in\n1822, it was added to in 1831, re-\nnovated in 1866 and reconstructed\nin 1922.\nDRURY LANE.\nSo called, says Stow, for that\nthere is a house belonging to the fa-\nmily of the Druries \".\nDRURY HOUSE, Drury Lane.\nIt was built by Sir William Drury.\nFrom the Drurys it passed into the pos-\nsession of the Craven family; and was\nthen distinguished as Craven House.\n\n(i) See \"The Actor \" and \"Scenes\".\n(i) Dryden to Elmes Steward Esq."}, {"page_pdf": 16, "page_imprimee": "60", "url_page": "https://bluemountain.princeton.edu/bluemtn/?a=d&d=bmtnaau192604-01.1.16", "debut_caractere": 0, "fin_caractere_exclue": 6059, "texte": "The OLYMPIC THEATRE.\nBuitt in 1805 on this site by Philip\nAstley of Astley's Amphitheatre, who\nopened it September 18th, 1806 as the\nOlympic Pavilion ; it was burnt to the\nground March 29th, 1849.\nThe first house was built of the\ntimbers of a French man-of-war, La\nVille de Paris, in which William IV.\nwent out as a midshipman. The masts\nof the vessel formed the flies, and\nwere se:n still erect long after the roof\nfell in. In 1813 it was sold to Elli-\nston, who rebuilt it in 1818: from\n1831 to 1839 it was under the di-\nrection of Madame Vestris. It was\ndestroyed in 1899.\nJohn Lacy (1616-1681) lived from\n1665 to his death at a house near\nCraven Alley at the top of Mapole\nAlley.\nNell Gwynne (1650-1687) was bom\nin Coal-yard on February 6th. 0) She\nlived the first part of her life in Drury\nLane: in Drury Court 44 the fashio-\nnable part \", ie, Mapole Alley ; (the\nAlley leading from Craven buildings\nand unmarked in our plan).\nPepys reports meeting her on May\nIst, 1667 44 at her lodgings door in\nDrury Lane She first sold oranges\nin the King's Playhouse; then she\nacted there. She is also said to have\nhad a Dairy in Exchange Court, Exe-\nter Change. Lastly she became, mo-\nther to the Duke of St. Albans.\nDRURY LANE STAGE DOOR.\nTheatrical Funds in 1849.\nThe Drury-Lane Theatrical Fund\nwas established by David Garrick in\n1766 for the relief and support of\naged and decayed persons of the Drury-\nlane company of players. The appli-\ncants for relief had to be subscribers\nto the society, or the widows and\nchildren of subscribers. The Office\nof the Fund was the stage-door, Drury -\nlane Theatre.\nThe Covent-garden Theatrical Fund\n(1760) was similarly constituted, with\nits stage-door as its offices.\nCROSS COURT, Drury Lane.\nThe unnamed court in Horwood\nwhich leads from Russell Court to\nMarquis Court.\n\"At the north end of Cross-court\n\" there yet stands (circa 1820) a por-\n\" tal, of soms architectural pretensions,\n\" though reduced to humble use, ser-\n\" ving at present for an entrance to a\n\" printing-office. This old door-way,\n\" if you are young, reader, you may\n\" not know was the identical pit en-\n44 trance to Old Drury—Garrick's\n44 Drury—all of it that is left. 1 never\n44 pass it without shaking some forty\n44 years from off my shoulders, recur-\n-44 ring to the evening when I passed\n44 through it to see my first play \". (0\nIn Lamb's youth the theatre was\nconnected with the houses on the east\nside and the south side, where was the\nentrance Lamb speaks of.\nRUSSELL COURT, The Black Lion.\nHere was an actors' agency in 1780.\nSTRAND.\nTHE NEW EXCHANGE.\nThe 44 New Exchange \", or Bri-\ntain's Burse as it was called by King\nJames I, was a kind of Bazaar on\nthe south side of the Strand, and was\nerected in 1608 on the site now covered\nby the Adelphi.\nIt was a favourite resort of the no-\nbility and gentry, especially during the\nRestoration. Many a reference is to\nbe found to it in the Restoration drama.\nIn 1737 it was taken down.\nHere, at the 44 Eagle and Child\nthe first edition of 44 Othello\" was sold\nby Thomas Walkley in 1622.\nAt the sign of the Fop's Head lived,\nin 1674, Will Cademan, the player\nand play publisher.\nTHE ADELPHI.\nDavid Garrick (1717-1779) lived\nin the centre house, No. 5 of the Ter-\nrace, (here not numbered), from 1772\ntill his death.\nWhen the Adelphi was building,\nBecket, the bookseller in the Strand,\nwas anxious to move his shop to the\ncorner house of Adam-street leadihg\nto the Adelphi; and Garrick was an ap-\nplicant by letter to the 44 dear Adelphi \"\nfor this east 44 corner blessing as he\ncalls it, for his friend. The applica-\ntion was successful, Becket obtaining\nthe house, No. 10 or 11, north-east\ncorner of Adam-street.\nADELPHI THEATRE, over against\nAdam-street, Adelphi, at 41 1 Strand.\nOriginally called The Sans Pareil,\nBuilt by Mr. John Scott, a colour-\nmaker, first in 1802 and then enlarged\nand reopened Nov. 27th 1806. It was\nrechristened 44 The Adelphi \" in 1820.\nThe old front towards the Strand\nwas a very pretty little house-front and\nwas erected in 1814: a later facade\nwas built in 1841. In 1858 it was\nrebuilt and improved (/. e., to hold more\nmoney).\nBEDFORD STREET.\nOn the East side Quin, (1693-\n1766) lived in a house rated at £42,\nfrom 1749 to 1752.\nOn the West side lived Kynaston,\n(1640-1706) in his old age, in the\nhouse of his son, an opulent mercer\nin tiTi2*\nThomas Sheridan, (1719-1788),\nfather of Richard Brinsley Sheridan\nlived here in a house opposite Henrietta\nStreet, down which he could see to\nCovent Garden.\nNow the centre of famous publishers\nincluding Dent, (10-13) and Heine-\nmann (21) both publishers of Thea-\ntrical works.\nVILLIERS STREET.\nJohn Evelyn lived here: 44 17 Nov.\n44 1683. I tooke a house in Villiers\n44 Streete, York Buildings, for the win-\n-44 ter, having many important causes to\n44 despatch, and for the education of\n44 my daughters —Evelyn.\nBUCKINGHAM STREET.\nFrom 1684 to 1700 Samuel Pepys\nlived at the last house on the west\nside (since rebuilt) looking on to Thames.\nJ. J. Rousseau stayed here when he\ncame to London\nJohn Henderson (1747-1785) died\nin a house in this street.\nSOCIETY OF ARTS, John Street,\nAdelphi.\nIt was established at a meeting held\nat Rawthmell's Coffee-house, Henrietta\nStreet, Covent-Garden, March 22nd,\n1 754. Their last remove was in 1 774, to\ntheir present apartments in the Adelphi,,\nbuilt for the Society by the brothers\nAdam, and of which the first stone was*\nlaid March 28th, 1772.\nSOUTHAMPTON STREET.\nCongreve (1670-1729) lived here..\nMrs. Oldfield (1683-1730) lived here.\nCirca 1743 David Garrick lived in-\nNo. 27 before he removed to the\nAdelphi.\nMrs Woffington also lived at No. 27.\nCECIL STREET.\nHere in 1814 lived Edmund Kean\n(1787-1833) in a garret when he first\nappeared as 4 Shylock ' at Drury Lane\nand saved the fortunes of the theatre\nand the entire Dramatic art of the age.\nFOUNTAIN COURT, \"near the Savoy.\nHere was (and is) a tavern called\n44 The Coal Hole\n44 Kean enjoyed a beef-steak at the\nCoal-hole\" writes Barry Cornwall his\nBiographer, 44 or a devil or a grill at\n\n(i) Oldys.\n(l) Charles Lamb. (1775-1834)."}, {"page_pdf": 17, "page_imprimee": "61", "url_page": "https://bluemountain.princeton.edu/bluemtn/?a=d&d=bmtnaau192604-01.1.17", "debut_caractere": 0, "fin_caractere_exclue": 6234, "texte": "14 one of the small taverns near the\n44 Theatre: but the dress and ceremony,\n44 and good behaviour incident to 4 com-\n-44 pany' overset him altogether \". Byron,\nwho was 4 4 company\" does not bear\nthis out.\nEXETER'CHANGE, in the Strand,\nStood where Burleigh-street now stands.\nIn Burleigh-street was the private en-\ntrance to the Lyceum Theatre used by\nSir Henry Irving, and, when they visi-\nted the theatre, Royalty. Sir Henry\nIrving's dressing-room looked out into\nBurleigh-street. Exeter' Change was\nused for many a small Theatrical per-\nformance, amongst the entertainments\nbeing Dibden and Stoppelear's Puppet\nShow in 1775, and De Louther-\nbourg's small scenic theatre in 1786.\nPidcock had his menagerie here until\n1820. 44 Your vulgar writer is always\n44 most vulgar the higher his subject; as\n44 the man who showed the menagerie\n44 at Pidcock's was wont to say, 'This,\n44 gentlemen, is the Eagle of the Sun,\n44 from Archangel in Russia: the otterer\n•4 it is, the igherer he flies\". (0\nSANS SOUCI THEATRE,\nIt was planned, painted and decorated\nby Charles Dibdinand opened Feb. 16th,\n1793. It was first erected in a room\nbehind Dibdin's music-shop, in the\nStrand, (opposite Beaufort-buildings),\nand in 1796 removed to Leicester-\nplace, Leicester-square, (qv).\nTHE LYCEUM THEATRE.\nBefore Burleigh-street or Wellington-\nstreet existed there was Catherine-street;\nIn Catherine-street the 4 Morning Post'\nwas established in 1772. In the same\nstreet and in the same year the Ly-\nceum came into existence.\nJames Paine (1725-1789) was the\narchitect and it was opened on May\n11th 1772 as an Academy for the\nSociety of Artists. As such it failed.\nIt then experimented and it was not\ntill 1790 that it was used for a theatric\nperformance when Mr. Flockton brought\nhis Italian Fantoccini there.\nThere was an entrance from the\nStrand, No. 350 and another from\nCatherine-street No. 6.\nCharles Dibdin followed Flockton.\n(Dibdin's warehouse was now No. 41 1\nStrand). As Dibdin wrote, composed,\nspoke and sung the whole of his play\ncalled 44 The Wags \" and accompanied\nhimself on the piano I take it that\neither Flockton's puppets were the per-\nformers or else those of Stoppelear\n(see Exeter9Change).\nIt was first converted into a theatre,\nsays Brereton, about the year 1794 by\nDr. Arnold into whose hands the place\nhad passed. He was refused a license.\nIt only became a regular theatre in 1809\nwhen the Drury Lane Fire compelled\nthe company to take shelter at the\nLyceum.\nIn 1816 Dr. Arnold secured the\nproperty on a 99 years lease and built\na fine theatre at a cost of £BO,OOO.\nIt was destroyed by fire in 1830. In\n1834 the new Lyceum Theatre was\nbuilt; architect, Samuel Beazley. This\nwas the building which Henry Irving\nmade famous from 1871 until 1903.\nThen instead of England insisting on\nit becoming the National Theatre and\nplacing Irving at its head, it was allow-\ned to become a Music-hall.\nThe Beefsteak Society and Club:\nwith entrance from Exeter Street. The\nrooms were on the first floor and here\nthe Club existed from 1838 until 1869.\nIn 1880 Irving restored the Dining-\nroom of the Club, using it to enter-\ntain his friends. The record of these\nevenings would fill a good-sized book.\nThe Club originated in 1735 and\nwas founded by George Lambert the\nscene painter of Covent Garden Theatre;\nits first place of meeting being in his\nstudio in that theatre, and afterwards\nin The Shakespeare Tavern in the\nCovent Garden Piazza.\nThere was an earlier Beefsteak Club,\n1709. Peg Woffington was a member:\nthe badge was a gold gridiron.\nSOMERSET HOUSE.\nH re died Inigo Jones (1573-1652).\nSURREY STREET, in the Strand.\nWilliam Congreve (1670-1729) was\nliving in Surrey-street when visited by\nVoltaire in 1725 and here he died\nfour years later.\nHOWARD STREET.\nHere in 1692 lived Mrs Bracegirdle.\nNORFOLK-STREET.\nIn 1776 Spranger Barry (1719-1777)\nlived here., and in 1787 Thomas Linley\n(1732-1795) Sheridan's father-in-law.\nWilliam Mountfort, (1664 - 1692),\nkilled by Captain Hill and Lord Mohun,\nhere lived on the east side, about two\ndoors beyond Howard-street.\nSamuel Ireland, the father of Wil-\nliam Henry Ireland (1777-1835) lived\nat No. 8 on the west side; and here,\non the 24th of December 1795, the\nforged Shakespeare papers were shown\nto George Chalmers, John Philip Kem-\nble and old Ireland, who all believed\nin their authenticity.\nTHE STRAND.\nAt No. 277, (opposite Norfolk Street\nwas in 1850 Wilson's the theatrical\nwig-maker. In the time of Queen Anne,\nit was the shop of Bat Pidgeon, known\nto every reader of 44 The Spectator\nARUNDEL STREET, Strand.\nBuilt in 1678, on the site of Arundel\nHouse. Mrs. Porter, the celebrated\nactress, lived here 44 over against the\nBlue Ball\".\nST. CLEMENT'S DANES, Strand.\nHere were buried three players and\none dramatic poet:\n[. John Lowin, (1576-1653) one\nof the original actors in Shakespeare's\nplayi, and, after Burbadge, one of the\nmost eminent.\n2. Thomas Otway, the poet, (1652-\n1685).\n3. William Mountfort, (1664-1692)\nkilled in Howard-street (qv.).\n4. James Spiller, (1692-1730). A\nbutcher in Clare Market wrote his\nepitaph in verse, 44 full of marrow-bones\nand cleavers\nGRECIAN COFFEE HOUSE. De-\nvereux Court, where Strand and Fleet\nStreet meet.\nClosed as a coffee-house in 1843.\nmuch frequented by Goldsmith; the\nmorning lounge of Foote; 44 occasio-\nnally the scene of a learned discussion \"\nwrites Timbs.\nSHIRE LANE, TEMPLE BAR.\nIn Shire-lane lived Sir John Sedley,\nand here his son, Sir Charles Sedley,\n(1639-1700?) was born.\nMIDDLE TEMPLE.\nJohn Ford was admitted Nov. 16th\n1602. John Evelyn was admitted\nFeb. 13th. 1636. Wycherley 1659,\nCongreve 1690-91, and R. B. She-\nridan in 1774.\nShakespeare's 44 Twelfth Night \" was\nperformed in the Old Hall in 1601.\nHere in 1 764 at No. 2. Brick Court on\nthe second floor lived Goldsmith (1 728-\n1774) and there he died on April 4th.\nAt Fountain Court No. 3 Blake\nand his wife came to dwell in 1821\nand there he died in 1837.\nLITTLE OR INNER TEMPLE LANE.\nDr. Johnson lived in No. 1., on the\nfirst floor, from 1760 to 1765. The\nhouse is inscribed 4 4 Dr. Johnson's Stair-\ncase\nCharles Lamb lived in No. 4.\n44 I have two rooms on the third\n44 floor, and five rooms above, with\n\n(i) Letter to Mr. Murray from Lord\nByron on Mr. Bowles's Strictures,"}, {"page_pdf": 18, "page_imprimee": "62", "url_page": "https://bluemountain.princeton.edu/bluemtn/?a=d&d=bmtnaau192604-01.1.18", "debut_caractere": 0, "fin_caractere_exclue": 6172, "texte": "\"an inner staircase to myself, and all\n\"new painted, &c., for £3O a-year.\n\" The rooms are delicious, and best\n44 look backwards into Hare Court,\n44 where there is a pump always going;\n44 just now it is dry. Hire Court's\n44 trees come in at the window, so\n44 that it's like living in a garden\".—\nCROWN OFFICE ROW.\nThis, a little below Hare Court, was\nthe birthplace of Charles Lamb.\n44 Cheerful Crown-office Row, place\nof my kindly engender\". (0\nTANFIELD COURT.\nHere by the Temple Church lived,\nat No. 3., Robert Keck, who bought\nthe Chandos Portrait of Shakespeare\nfrom Mrs. Barry (1658-1713).\nRAINBOW TAVERN.\nAt No. 115 Fleet-Street, corner of\nLittle Temple Lane. The Phoenix\nFire-office was located at the Rainbow\nTavern, in Fleet-street, as early as 1682.\nMichael Drayton, (1 563-1631) 44 lived\nat the bay-window house, next the east\nend of St. Dunstan's church in Fleet-\nstreet \".\nAt No. 189 Fleet-street was Mrs\nSalmon's celebrated wax-work exhibition.\nFALCON-COURT,\nThis was on the south side and\nexactly north of Temple Church bet-\nween the E T of the word FLEET.\n.... In the house above Falcon-court,\nwith the date 1667 upon it (No. 32\nin Fleet-street, and still a bookseller's),\nthe name not marked in the plan, but\nthe corner house, John Murray was li-\nving when he published Byron's 44 Childe\nHarold \" and all the early numbers of\nthe 44 Quarterly Review\nWHITEFRIARS THEATRE.\nThree of our early theatres were\nbounded by the Thames, Fleet-street\non the north and south and by the\nTemple and new Bridge-street on the\neast and west. The first was the Pri-\nvate play-house called The Whitefriars:\nthe second the Salisbury-court Theatre\n(1629), and the third the Dukes\nTheatre in Dorset-Gardens (1671).\nThe Whitefriars Theatre was built\nabout 1580 and lost sight of in 1596\n(Chambers's surmise).\nIt was an old hall or refectory\nwhich had belonged to the dissolved\nMonastery of Whitefriars, and was\noutside the garden wall of Dorset House,\nsomewhere betveen Sergeant's Inn and\nWater Lane, Chambers tells us, and\ntherefore not, as some suppose, on the\nsite occupied by the Salisbury Court\nTheatre, i.e., No. 49 Dorset-street, as\nshown in this plan.\nGOUGH SQUARE.\nHere at No. 17. Dr. Johnson pre-\npared his Dictionary from 1 748 to 1758.\nJOHNSON'S COORT.\nHere at No. 7. Dr. Johnson lived\nfrom 1765 to 1776.\nBOLT COURT.\nThis was on the north side of\nFleet-street. Here lived Dr. Johnson,\nin No. 8, on the right hand side, from\n1777 till his death in 1784. He died\nin the back room of the first floor.\nWINE OFFICE COURT, Fleet-street.\nGoldsmith (1728-1774) comes to\nlive at No. 6 in 1760 and stays until\n1762 when he goes to live at Islington.\nSALISBURY COURT.\nIn this Court was the Theatre of*\n1629 and here in 1660 Betterton,\nHarris, Cave Underhill and Sandford,\nthe actors, lived next to the Dune's\nTheatre; and Shadwell, Lady Dave-\nnant the widow of Sir William Da-\nvenant, and John Dryden ail lived\nhere.\nIn a Court near Salisbury Square\nlived Oliver Goldsmith in 1757.\nSALISBURY COURT THEATRE.\nIn Salisbury Court, Fleet Street. It\nwas built in 1629, by Richard Gunnell\nand William Blagrove, players, and was\noriginally the 44 barn \" or granary at\nthe lower end of the great back yard\nor court of Salisbury House.\n44 In the yere one thousand sixe\n44 hundred (and) twenty-nine, there was\n44 builded a new faire Play-house, near\n44 the white-Fryers. And this is the\n44 seauenteenth stage or common Play-\n-44 house which hath beene made within\n44 the space of three-score yeres within\n44 London and the suburbs \".\nIt was 44 pulled down by a company\nof souldiers\" in 1649.\nIn 1652 it was bought by William\nBeeston, a player, and rebuilt and re-\nopened by hi m in 1600. The Duke's\nCompany, under Davenant, played here\ntill their new theatre in Lincolns-Inn-\nfields was ready to receive them, and\nfor the time it became known as The\nDune's Theatre in Salisbury Court.\nThis Theatre was finally destroyed\nin the Great Fire, and not rebuilt\nDORSET GARDENS THEATRE,\nKnown also as \" The Duke's Theatre\nin Dorset Gardens it stood fronting the\nriver on the east or City side of Sa-\nlisbury-cowl, with an open place be-\nfore it for the reception of coaches,\nand public stairs to the Thames for the\nconvenience of those who came by\nwater. The site is shown in Horwood's\nplan and is marked New River Office\nand Yard. It was built from a design\nby Wren, and Gibbons is said to have\ndecorated it with his carvings.\n44 The new theatre in Dorset-garden\n44 being finished, and our company (the\n44 Duke's) after Sir William (Dave-\n-44 nant's) death, being under the rule\n44 and dominion of his widow, the\n44 Lady Davenant, Mr. Betterton, and\n44 Mr. Harris, (Mr. Charles Davenant,\n44 her son, acting for her), they rerno-\n-44 ved from Lincoln's Inn thither. And\n44 on the 9th day of November, 1671,\n44 there opened their new theatre with\nSir Martin Marral, which continued\n44 acting three days together, with a\n44 full audience each day notwithstan-\n-44 ding it had been acted thirty days\n44 before in Lincoln's inn-fields, and\n44 above four times at Court\". (0\nIn 1689 it came to be calle i the\n44 Queen's Theatre \" and is last heard\nof in 1706.\nIt was standing in 1720, when\nStrype published his continuation of\nStow, but was shortly after taken\ndown, and the site on which it stood\ntransformed into a wool-yard. The\nsituation is exactly marked in Mordan\nand Lea's large View of London, and\nin Strype's map of the ward of Far-\nringdon Without. There is a view of\nit in Settle's Empress of Morocco,\n(1673). There is another and some-\nwhat different view in the 44 Gentle-\nman's Magazine\" for July 1814; and\nanother (showing the surrounding hou-\nses) in a large View of London,\n44 Sutton Nicholls, delin. et sculp.\ncirc. 1710.\nSTRAND & FLEET STREET.\nST. BRIDE'S, or ST. BRIDGET'S\nCHURCH.\nThe widow of Sir William Dave-\nnant, the poet, and her son, Dr. Charles\nDavenant, were both buried here,\nThe FLEET PRISON.\nPrynne, for writing his 44 Histrio-\nmastix \" was confined here.\nWycherley, the dramatic poet, too,-\nand remained here seven years .... all\nfor debt .... which was a very unjust\nthing to do to any poet, especially to*\n\n(i) Elia's Essays.\n('I Downes's Roscius Angelicanus,-\n1708)."}, {"page_pdf": 19, "page_imprimee": "63", "url_page": "https://bluemountain.princeton.edu/bluemtn/?a=d&d=bmtnaau192604-01.1.19", "debut_caractere": 0, "fin_caractere_exclue": 5887, "texte": "a poet of whom Pope says 44 he never did\nan unjust thing to me in his whole life \".\nThe whole of Fleet-street would not\nbe, large enough to hold all those great\ndebtors who nowadays run Wembley\nExhibitions and Everyman Theatres,\nlosing other people's money. Seven\nyears, ....it seems incredible.\nGREEN ARBOUR COURT.\nHere from 1 758 to 1 760 lived Oliver\nGoldsmith, in what was then No. 12,\non the right hand corner as you ascen-\nded the steps from Fleet Market.\nPUDDLE DOCK, Blackfriars, in Castle\nBaynard Ward.\nThe house which Shakespeare bought\nin the Blackfriars, and which he be-\nqueathed to his daughter, Susannah\nHall, is described in the Conveyance\nas 44 abutting upon a streets leading\ndown to Puddle Wharffe 44 on the\neast part, right-against the King's Maie-\nsty's Wardrobe \".\nPREROGATIVE WILL OFFICE or Court,\nKnightrider Street, Doctors' Commons.\nHere was the original will of Shake-\nspeare, on three folio sheets of paper,\nwith his signature to each sheet, now\nat Somerset House. Here too were\nthe wills of Van Dyck the painter and\nof Inigo Jones.\nPLAYHOUSE YARD.\nHere was Blackfriars Theatre built in\n1 596. Here are 44 The Times \" newspa-\nper offices, (see Printing-house Square).\nST. PETER'S HILL, Doctors' Commons.\nHere the Master of the Revels had\nhis office, from 161 1 till the time of\nthe Civil War, when the public thea-\ntres were all closed.\nST. BENNET, Paul's Wharf.\nThe burial register records the fol-\nlowing interment: Inigo Jones, the ar-\nchitect, (June 26th, 1652). Inigo\nJones's monument (for which he left\n£ 100) was destroyed in the Great Fire.\nBELLE SAVAGE INN THEATRE.\nLudgate Hill, north side.\nFirst heard of in 1575, latest 1589.\nThe Inn was still here till 1873.(0\nPLATE 2D & E\nST PAUL'S CHURCHYARD,\nAt the sign of the White Grey-\nhound, in St. Paul's Churchyard, the\nfirst edition of Shakespeare's 44 Venus\nand Adonis \" and 44 Rape of Lu-\ncrece \" were published by John Har-\nrison ; at the Flower de Luce and the\nCrown appeared the first edition of\nthe 44 Merry Wives of Windsor \" ; at\nthe Green Dragon, the first edition of\n44 Richard II \" ; at the Angel, the\nfirst edition of 44 Richard 111 \" ; at\nthe Spread Eagle, the first edition of\n44 Troilus and Cressida \" ; at the Gun,\nthe first edition of 44 Titus Andro-\nnicus \"; and at the Red Bull, the\nfrst edition of 44 Lear\nTHE QUEEN'S ARMS TAVERN, St\nPaul's Churchyard.\nGarrick would appear about twice\nevery winter at Tom's Coffee House\nin Cornhill; he also 44 frequented a\n44 Club, established for the sake of\n44 his company at the Queen's Arms\n44 Tavern in St. Paul's Churchyard,\n44 where used to assemble Mr. Samuel\n44 Sharpe, the surgeon, Mr. Paterson\n44 the city solicitor, Mr. Draper the\n44 bookseller, Mr. Clutterbuck a mercer,\n44 and a few others ; they were none\n44 of them drinkers ; and in order to\n44 make a reckoning called only for\n44 French wine. These were Garrick's\n44 standing council in theatrical affairs \".\nDOLLY'S CHOP SHOP, Paterno-\nster Row, stands on the site of an or-\ndinary kept by Richard Tarlton.\nCITY OF LONDON.\nST. BARTHOLOMEW (The Less).\nThe parish register records the bap-\ntism of Inigo Jones (1573-1652).\nInigo's father lived near in the Cloth\nFair and was a cloth worker.\nBARTHOLOMEW FAIR.\nA famous fair held every year, ope-\nned on September 3rd, in Smithfield\nand so called because it was k£pt at\nBartholomew Tide, and held within\nthe precinct of St. Bartholomew in\nSmithfield. The first fair was held\nhere in the reign of Henry Ist. All\nkinds of entertainments were offered to\nthe public, from puppet shows to thea-\ntres, the public theatres of London\ninvariably closing at Fair time.\nThere is a Bartholomew Fair Bill\nof the time of Queeh Anne in the\nBritish Museum which tells of the exhi-\nbition at Heatley's Booth of 44 a little\nopera called the 'Old Creation of the\nWorld newly revived, with the addi-\ntion of the Glorious Battle obtained\nover the French and Spaniards by\nHis Grace the Duke of Marlborough ! \"\nThis was performed by puppets. (J)\nHenry Fielding (1707-1754) had\nhis booth here: Mrs. Pritchard, Yates,\nLee, Woodward and Shuter all played\nat the Theatre here. In 1721 a co-\nloured aquatint was published in the\nform of a fan, by F? F. Setchel, Co-\nvent Garden, which shows us a view\nof the Fair.\nIn 1715 a booth was erected for\nthe King's Players, and 44 the booth\nis the largest that ever was built \".\nPLATES 2 D & E, & 3 D & E\nRUTLAND HOUSE.\nThis stood at the upper end of\nAldersgate-street, near what is now\ncalled Charter-House-square.\nHere in 1656 in a room at the back\npart of the house the drama was revived\nunder Sir William Davenant, Cromwell,\nby the interposition of Whitelocke,\nconsenting to the performances.\nIt could seat 400 spectators; the\nstage was small, 1 1 feet in height and\n15 in depth and apparently II to 15\nfeet wide. Webb, (once Inigo Jones's\nassistant) had the control of the sceneries.\nHOLB O R N .\nBROWNLOW STREET.\nThe actor Michael Mohun died in\nthis street in 1684, as appears by an\nentry in the burial-register of St. Giles's-\nin-the-Fields.\nSTAPLE INN.\nAn Inn of Chancery, appertaining to\nGray's Inn.\nIsaac Reed (1742-1807) had cham-\nbers at No. 1 1 ; and here, (in Reed's\nchambers) Steevens corrected the proof\nsheets of his edition of Shakespeare.\nCASTLE STREET,\nHere died Lady Davenant, the first\nwife of Sir William Davenant, the poet.\nBROOKS MARKET. Leather Lane.\nHere was born J. S. Munden, (1758-\n1832).\nHATTON GARDEN.\n44 Mr. Wycherley (1640-1716) vi-\n-44 sited the Countess of Drogheda daily,\n44 at her lodgings, while she staid at\n44 Tunbridge, and after she went to\n44 London at the lodgings in Hatton\n44 Garden, where, in a little time, he\n44 got her consent to marry her\". (x)\nCHARLES STREET Hatton Garden.\nHere on October 16th 1802 died\nJoseph Strutt, author of 44 Sports and\n\n(i) See u The Marionnette \" Yol. I,\npg. 320.\n(1) See 44 The Mask n. Yol. VII. face\npage 64,\n(1) Dennis's Letters. 1721."}, {"page_pdf": 20, "page_imprimee": "64", "url_page": "https://bluemountain.princeton.edu/bluemtn/?a=d&d=bmtnaau192604-01.1.20", "debut_caractere": 0, "fin_caractere_exclue": 5568, "texte": "Pastimes\" &c. He is buried in the\nchurchyard of St. Andrew's, Holborn.\nELY PLACE.\nThis was the site of the town-\nhouse or 44hostell\" of the Bishops of\nEly, behind which is Bleeding Heart\nyard.\nThe last 44 Mystery \" represented in\nEngland (between 1613-1622, Cham-\nbers) was that of 44 Christ's Passion\nin the reign of King James 1., which\nPrynne tells us was 44 performed at\nElie-house in Holborne when Gundo-\nmar lay there, on Good Fiiday at\nnight, at which there were thousands\npresent\".\nST. ANDREW'S HOLBORN.\nIn the south aisle is a tablet to John\nEmery, the actor, (1777-1822).\nPLATE 2E\nCITY OF LONDON .\nThe MERMAID TAVERN, Bread\nStreet.\nIt is said to have stood in Friday-\nstreet, but Ben Jonson has settled its\nloeality in verse.\nAt Bread-street's Mermaid having\n[dined, and merry,\nProposed to go to Holborn in\n[a wherry.\nThe Tavern is first mentioned in 1603.\nMERCHANT TAILORS' SCHOOL.\nSuffolk Lane, Cannon Street.\nThis was founded in 1561. Among\nthe eminent men educated here were\ntli3 theatre men James Shirley, (1596-\n1666) disparaged by Dryden, upheld\nby Lamb; and Charles Matthews (1776-\n1835).\nST MARY'S, Aldermanbury, Bow Lane.\nAmong the eminent persons buried\nhere were Heminge, (d. 1630) and\nCondell (d. 1627) the first editors of\nShakespeare, and the fellow players\nremembered hy the poet in his will.\nLAWRENCE POULTNEY HILL. Can-\nnon Street, City.\nHere in 1677 lived William Van-\nderbergh, the father of Sir John Van-\nbrugh (1664-1724).\nSt PAUL'S SCHOOL.\nThis was founded in 1512. Among\nits scholars we find Samuel Pepys\n(1633- 1703) and R. W. Elliston\n(1774-1831).\nFISHMONGERS' HALL, by London\nBridge.\nThomas Dogget, (d. 1721) was a\nmember and in 1716) bequeathed a\nsum of money for the purchase of a\n\" coat and badge \" to be rowed for\nevery Ist of August from the Swan at\nLondon Bridge to the Swan at Bat-\ntersea, in remembrance ot George I.'s\naccession to the throne.\nFREEMAN'S YARD, or Freeman's\nCourt, Cornhill, behind the Royal\nExchange.\nHere Daniel De Foe (1661-1731)\ncarried on the business of a hosefactor:\nin 1702 he was owner of a brick and\npantile works near Tilbury Fort in\nEssex.\nGRACECHURCH STREET.\nHere lived Richard Tarlton, 1588.\nHe writes of himself that: 44 it chanced\n44 that one Fancy and Nancy, two mu-\n-44 sicians in London, used often with\n44 their boys to visit Tarlton when he\n44 dwelt in Gracious Street at the signe\n44 of the Saba, a taverne, he being\n44 one &c.\nGRUB STREET.\nFamous for its literary hacks. Speed,\nthe tailor, the historian and carto-\ngrapher, lived here (1552-1629). The\nhouses were wretched, the writers\nand booksellers who lived there poor,\n.... obvious reasons for calling them\nhack writers. It seems to have been\nPope who first thought of the notion,\nand soon 44 a grub-street author\" be-\ncame a term of reproach.\nIn Hanover Court lived General\nMonk; opposite the court was once the\nCity Chapel, in 1830 opened as the\nCity Theatre, destroyed in 1836 Here\nEdmund Kean played Shylock in May\n1831. Miss Smithson who later married\nHector Berlioz in Paris, was the chief\nattraction in 1832.\nAltogether Grub-street can afford to\ndisregard Pope's pleasantry.\nBETHLEHEM CHURCHYARD, St.\nBotolph, Bishopsgate.\nRobert Greene (1 560 1592) was\nburied here.\nBETHLEHEM HOSPITAL (i.e., Bed-\nam), in St. George's Fields.\nA hospital for insane people, foun-\nded in Bishopsgate Without, and for\na different purpose, in 1246, by Si-\nmon Fitz-Mary, one of the Sheriffs of\nLondon.\nNat Lee, the dramatic poet (1653-\n1692) was placed here for four years;\nthe Duke of York, afterwards James 11.,\npaying for the cost of his confinement:\nalso Hadfield, in 1800, for attempting\nto shoot King George 111 in Drury-\nLane Theatre.\nCARPENTERS* HALL, Carpenters'\nBuildings, south of Bethelem Hospital.\nHere is a portrait of William Por-\ntington, (d. 1628), Master Carpenter\nto the Crown in the reigns of Queen\nElizabeth and King. James I,; he was\nInigo Jones's assistant in his Masques\nat Court.\nGROCERS' HALL, in the Poultry,\nnext No. 35.\nHere was the Hall of the Gro-\ncers' Company, the second on the list\nof the Twelve Great Companies, in-\ncorporated by Edward 111., in 1345.\nJohn Hemynge (Hemynge and Con-\ndell) was a 44 Citizen and Grocer\".\nDryden's brother, Erasmus (a grocer\nin King-street, Westminster) is descri-\nbed in the Grocers' Books, under May\n14th, 1688, as one 44 who, for many\nyears, has used the mysterie of Gro-\ncerie\". Pope, being partial to a good\ntable, launched no shafts at the Gro-\ncers as he had done at the Grubs.\nSt STEPHEN'S, Walbrook.\nSir John Vanbrugh lies buried here\nin the family vault of the Vanbrughs.\nSILVER STREET.\nHere in 1604 William Shakespeare\n(1564-1617) was living at the house of\nChristopher Mountjoy, a French Hu-\nguenot, in the house at the corner of\nMonkwel-street or Mugle Streate as\nthey wrote it then. He may have\nbeen there as early as 1 598 says C. W.\nWallace, who in 1910 discovered the\npapers which revealed the fact about\nSilver-street.\nMAIDEN LANE, Wood Street.\nMessrs. Nevill (wholesale hosiers)\nhad a large warehouse with flat roof\nbehind in Wood-street c. 1820. John\nRe eve( 1799-1838) rehearses there in\nhis youth.\nBARBER-SURGEON'S HALL, Monk-\nwell Street, City.\nBuilt by Inigo Jones.\nThe Theatre, called by Walpole\n44 one of the best of his (Inigo Jones's)\nworks \", was pulled down in the latter\nend of the 18th century. Hatton tells\nus that \" The Theatre is commodiously\n44 fitted with four degrees of cedar seats,\n44 one above another, in elliptical form,\n44 adorned with the figures of the se-\n-44 ven Liberal Sciences, the twelve\n41 signs of the Zodiac, and a bust of"}, {"page_pdf": 37, "page_imprimee": "65", "url_page": "https://bluemountain.princeton.edu/bluemtn/?a=d&d=bmtnaau192604-01.1.37", "debut_caractere": 0, "fin_caractere_exclue": 3960, "texte": "\" King Charles I. The roof is an\n\" elliptical cupola\".\nAlthough not for play-acting, such a\ntheatre would have been well worth\nseeing today.\nST. BOTOLPH Without Bishopsgate.\nThe registers of the church record\nthe baptism of Edward Alleyn, the\nplayer, and founder of Dulwich College.\nCROSS KEYS INN THEATRE, next\nto Bell Inn. First heard of in 1579.\nBISHOPSGATE.\nTHE BULL INN THEATRE,\nThis was at the Bull Inn, next to\nthe Excise Office, on the west side of\nBishopsgate-street at No. 91. First heard\nof in 1575, still existing in 1164. One\nof W the most popular. *\nTHE BELL INN THEATRE,\nThis, at the Bell Inn, is on the\nwest of Grace church street Cross\nKeys. <2)\nGOODMAN'S FIELDS THEATRE.\nOriginally a throwster's shop in Le-\nman-street, or Ayliffe-street, Goodman's\nfields, was opened Oct. 31st, 1729,\nby Thomas Odell (1661 -1 749).\nAs usual a sermon was immediately\npreached against the theatre's existence\nin the church of St. Botolph, Aldgate,\nand Odell in consequence was induced\nto part with his property to a Mr.\nHenry Giffard.\nGiffard, who found sermons of that\nsort amusing, opened a new house on\nthe same spot, Oct. 20th, 1732. The\nclamour however increasing, and no\nauthority stopping the stupidity which\nwas called \" liberty\" of free speech\nat the time, Giffard was induced to\nremove in 1735 to Lincoln's-Inn-fields.\nHere he remained two seasons, then\nreturned to his old quarters (the two\nor five objectors obviously having\ngone to Heaven), and on the 19th\nof October, 1741, had the ho-\nnour to introduce to an Aldgate au-\ndience, David Garrick (1717-1779),\nwho made his first appearance on a Lon-\ndon stage in Goodman's-fields Theatre\nin the character of Richard HI. Gar-\nrick lodged in Mansfield-street at that\ntime.\nNow had the three or six objectors\ngone on objecting, the whole of Lon-\ndon might have been cheated of the\nliveliest mind in the 18th century\ntheatre.\nThe theatre in which Garrick ap-\npeared was pulled down about 1746.\nAnother theatre on the same spot, of\nwhich there are views by Capon, was\nburnt down in June 1802.\nROYALTY; THEATRE, Well Street\nWellclose Square,\nThis was built by Cornellius Dixon\nand J. Willmont (architect and buil-\nder) for John Palmer, the actor, and\nwas opened June 20th, 1870. It was\nburnt down in April, 1826.\nIt was originally intended for the\nperformance of five-act pieces, and\nopened with As You Like It; but\nthe patentees of the other theatres me-\nmorialising the Lord Chamberlain on\nthe subject, the new theatre was re-\nstricted to pantomimes and still smal-\nler entertainments, which seems a most\nunjustifiable thing to have done.\nIn 1810 it became the East London\nTheatre. Sixteen years later it was de-\nstroyed by fire.\nReopened under the name of the\nBrunswick Theatre, it fell to pieces\nthree days later, killing fifteen people\nand injuring twenty more.\nDANISH CHURCH. Wellclose Square,\nWhitechapel.\nWithin the church is a tablet to the\nwife of Caius Gabriel Gibber, (Jane\nColley), the mother of Colley Cibber.\nThe father and son are both interred\nin the vaults of this church.\nTOWER HILL.\nAt a public-house on Tower Hill,\nknown by the sign of The Bull, whither\nhe had withdrawn to avoid his cre-\nditors, Thomas Otway (1651-1685)\ndied.\nTo be continued.\nThere is no British Museum Library\nin Italy, so that many of these dates\nand facts are possibly incorrect. /\nhave not \\)et seen a book °f records\nthat was not incorrect. This is to\nsome a source of delight; they can\nthen show their learning, their notion\nof correctness now gets a chance.\nBut here I an reminded of old\nMacklin and Lee Lewes,\nLewes at the rehearsal said some-\nthing not in Macklin s play. \" Hoy\nhoy \" cried Macklin, \" what's that?\nwhat's that ? 99 €t Oh \" cried Lewes\n\" it's only a bit of my nonsense\n\"But \", said Macklin, I like\nmy nonsense, Mr Lewes, better than\nyours \".\nBut if it's sense you have, and are\nin the happy state of real generosity,\nsend me some.\n\n(1) Sir Edmund Chambers.\n(2) Sir Edmund Chambers.\n\nc. g. e."}]}, {"article_id": "bm-bmtnaau-1926-04-01-c022", "article_bluemountain": "bmtnaau_1926-04_01#c022", "volume": "bmtnaau_1926-04_01", "ocr_source": "OCR Blue Mountain (ALTO), transcription TEI : lignes lb/@facs", "texte_sans_correction": true, "page_debut": "66", "page_fin": "71", "image_debut": 38, "image_fin": 43, "pages_selon": "pagination imprimée relevée dans le METS Blue Mountain (ORDERLABEL) ; [n] = page sans folio restituée", "url_article": "https://bluemountain.princeton.edu/bluemtn/?a=d&d=bmtnaau192604-01.2.10", "titre_corps": "GENTLEMEN AND PLAYERS", "titre_sommaire": "GENTLEMEN AND PLAYERS", "signature_source": "ASHLEY DUKES", "controle": "bornes données par la structure logique METS/ALTO de Blue Mountain (blocs ALTO de chaque constituant)", "pages": [{"page_pdf": 38, "page_imprimee": "66", "url_page": "https://bluemountain.princeton.edu/bluemtn/?a=d&d=bmtnaau192604-01.1.38", "debut_caractere": 194, "fin_caractere_exclue": 2425, "texte": "GENTLEMEN AND PLAYERS.\nBY ASHLEY DUKES\n\n0)\nHHHE actor is an amateur. He plies a\nJ. trade that can be learned by all and\nis regularly practised by too many. The\nrules of his craft are simple, if indeed\nthe re be any rules. With less practice\nthan the drawing-room pianist or the\namateur cricketer, with one-tenth of the\nexpenditure of time and thought needful\nto play a tolerable hand at bridge, with\none-hundredth of the spiritual zest that\nturns a village blacksmith into a local\npreacher, an actor may stand upon the\nstage and interpret for us the things of\nthe imagination. His range of voice and\nmovement is seldom greater than that of\nthe practised political speaker; his sense of\npresence may be matched by any lady\nreceiving an afternoon call. His physical\nfitness, as shown in bright eyes and white\nteeth, a clear skin, a firm carriage and\nan elastic step, is hardly more remarkable\nthan that of a good average spectator.\nEven his tailor is seldom more accom-\nplished than the tailor of the best-dressed\noccupant of the stalls. By what right\ndoes this man walk divinely before his\nfellow-men? The actor is a representa-\ntive of his audience—a representative of\nthe finer type, maybe, but a representa-\ntive. He is not a different order of\nbeing, but one of ourselves. He stoops\nto our gestures, he employs our slang, he\ncondescends to our conventional tones, he\nbends to touch our commoner emotions.\nThe actor is the typical looker-on; he is\nthe man in the stalls brought on to the\nstage. The more nearly he represents us,\nthe more clearly is he self-confessed as\namateur. The end of naturalistic acting,\nwhether in tragedy or comedy or farce,\nis amateurism. When the actor's laughter no\nlonger shakes the theatre, when his figure\nno longer towers above us with gestures\nof antique greatness, then indeed he and we\ntogether are amateurs; for we deserve no\ntheatre and he deserves no audience.\nThe actor is a professional. He is a\nman with a calling, a man inspired, a\nman possessed. He is impelled to give\nform to a conception of character, he is\ndriven to enter another's spirit and laugh\nand weep with him. He is destined to\n\n(1) Reprinted from \" The London Mercury \" by kind\npermission of Mr Ashley Dukes and the Editor."}, {"page_pdf": 39, "page_imprimee": "67", "url_page": "https://bluemountain.princeton.edu/bluemtn/?a=d&d=bmtnaau192604-01.1.39", "debut_caractere": 0, "fin_caractere_exclue": 3632, "texte": "represent man in movement, \"in action\nhow like an angel, in apprehension how like\na god»\" He unfolds the meaning of action\nand discovers rhythm in the stumbling gait\nof events. He lends bodily vitality, the bloom\nof health and the spirit of energy to all the\ncreatures of his fancy. He animates the por-\ntrait of a sick man; we hang upon the\nlips of the imaginary bores and dullards\nwho are transfigured by his art. This\nprofessional pride of the actor sur-\nvives a decadence of the stage. It en-\ndures through period after period, classical\nand romantic, naturalistic, prosaic, poetic.\nBehind the amateurism that overspreads\nour theatre, behind the lifeless gestures\nof realistic habit and the meaningless\nmarch and countermarch of conventional\nmovement, we see the steadfast figure of\nthe interpreter. Behind the pretence of\nthe mirror we see the reality of the\nmask. The art of acting is greater than\nthe actor; it lifts him above the level of\namateurism to which our realists would\nreduce him. Among all the feeble im-\npulses of the stage we are conscious, here\nand there, of the swift intake of the\nbreath of inspiration. There is no other\nacting but inspired acting, whether it be\ntragic or comic or farcical; the rest is\nvanity of vanities.\nThe uninspired actor (otherwise the\namateur) does not play his part; he re-\npresents it with the help of an academic\nand superficial technique. At the best\nhe gives the mask of caricature to a figure\nthat he fails inwardly to comprehend, a\nfigure that may even be unworthy of\ncomprehension. He seeks for a fashionahle\ntype into which he can mould his own\npersonality. He goes from manager to\nmanager and from comedy to comedy with\nhis type ready-made; and each finds a\nuse for him, since the audience must have\nstyle at all costs, and caricature is a form\nof style. His mannerisms, which should\nbe the legitimate byplay of his art, be-\ncome in time his entire stock-in-trade.\nThe sound middle actor, without the gift\nof caricature or the instinct for original\nportraiture, chooses a sound middle per-\nformance from his wardrobe of experience\nas a man chooses a jacket. Authors and\nproducers do not bother him; the part\nfits him and that suffices. He is closely\nakin to the \" character actor,\" whose\naim is to portray everything but character\n—accent, appearance, gesture, habit, mari-\nner, all that is easy and unessential. For\nthese performers the (art of acting is akin\nto the painter's art in the academic or\nstory-telling picture. The author tells his\nstory and they assist him faithfully by tel-\nling theirs; here the matter begins and\nends. Of a conception of drama larger\nthan that of the \" dramatic \" scene, of\nan inner technique of acting deeper than\nthe outer technique of tone and gesture\nand facial play, they do not begin to think.\nTheirs is the small change of acting, con-\nvenient in the pocket, eloquent on the\ncounter, readily given, readily accepted.\nBut the capital of the actor is inspiration.\nThe everyday theatre pretends to re-\npresent actual experience. It tries to\nshow us \" by electric light, in a room\nwith three walls, how ordinary people\neat, drink, love, walk, and wear their\njackets.\" It stands or falls with the ve-\nrisimilitude of the life it reproduces; this\nis made the test of drama and acting\nalike. The advertisement of a monthly\nmagazine declares that \" there is no story\nso fascinating as a True Story.\" We\nmay smile at the crudity of the sentiment,\nbut it is widely approved. A dramatic\nmurder trial or a dramatic divorce suit\nwill momentarily play the theatre off the\nstage; and even Drury Lane is played\noff the stage by Ascot. But in effect"}, {"page_pdf": 40, "page_imprimee": "68", "url_page": "https://bluemountain.princeton.edu/bluemtn/?a=d&d=bmtnaau192604-01.1.40", "debut_caractere": 0, "fin_caractere_exclue": 3685, "texte": "actual experience remains the corner-stone\nof the realistic theatre. The actor repre-\nsents an emotional experience that he is\nsupposed to have undergone. Is he a\nbetter actor for having personally under-\ngone it? The realistic theory maintains\nthat he is, and realistic practice supports\nit, for the endeavour of the actor is to\nrepresent the experience as personal to\nhimself (i.e., personal to his sympathetic\naudience). An actress depicts the re-\nmorse of adultery. Is she a better actress\nfor having herself, at some time, been an\nunfaithful wife ? Here the de; ender of\nrealism protests publicly that the question\nis unfair, since it arouses irrelevant moral\nprejudices ; but privately and confidentially\nhe will assert that she is. Let us go a\nstep farther. An actor depicts the remorse\nof a murderer. Is he a better actor for\nhaving himself committed a murder? Doubt-\nless he would be, replies the realist, but\nwe must draw the line of logic somewhere;\nlife would be too dangerous if every stage\ncrime required a rehearsal in reality. The\nactor can go to a murder trial at the Old\nBailey (where, indeed, we often hear of\nhim as a spectator); he can pick up his\nbits of \" local colour \" on the Embank-\nment or in the alleys of Chinatown. He\ncan reproduce the reality of emotional\nexperience, though it be at second-hand.\nHe can defend the banality of the story\nhe tells by pleading that it is true. We\nare reminded of the conventional portraitist\nwho asks \" Do you know Lady B? \"or\n\"Do you know X? as he shows us\nround the canvases of his studio. We\nknow X. and Lady 8., and recognise their\nlikenesses at once, to the painter's obvious\npleasure. But is this recognition the object\nof the art of painting ? Is faithful por-\ntraiture, daubed with local colour, the aim\nof the art of acting ? It has been said\nthat a good portrait is one in which we\nrecognise the painter. A good piece of\nacting is one in which we recognise an\nactor (neither type nor individual, but ar-\ntist). The perception of this truth must\nprofoundly alter our point of view regar-\nding the theatre. The drama of realistic\npersonal experience, with all its elaborate\ntechnique of expression, falls to the ground,\nand in its place stand only a few symbols\nerected by the aspirations of the audience,\nthe imagination of the dramatist, and the\ninspiration of the player.\nThese symbols, however, are lasting,\nwhile the unwieldy structure of the theatre\nas we know it is visibly breaking down.\nThe symbols rest upon agreement between\npartners; the theatre of to-day rests upon\na disagreement that is becoming an open\nbreach. What is drama itself but an\neverlasting symbol ? Does anyone believe\nthat our theatre fifty years hence will re-\nsemble our theatre of to-day?—a stuffy\nlittle hall lined with plush seats, a trench\nfor the orchestra, a proscenium arch with\nrows of electric lights, a scene set with\nthree walls of painted canvas? The im-\nprovements in mechanical contrivance alone\nwill revolutionise that stage for us. The\nunchanging qualities of the stage are the\nsymbols that spring from passion, wit and\npoetry. The art of the inspired actor\nendures. Even in a physical sense he\npossesses, with Duse and Bernhardt and\nEllen Terry, the secret of lasting youth.\nHis body is disciplined and preserved by\na technique of acting that subordinates;\nevery muscle to the creative impulse.\nAlso the conscious will of the actor pre-\nserves the instrument and vessel of his\nart, as a ballerina preserves the suppleness\nof her limbs. This actor sees an inner\nworld. His parts are not pieced together\nfrom the rags of \" local colour \" and\npretended realism, but are created from\nan imagined experience; and the act of"}, {"page_pdf": 41, "page_imprimee": "69", "url_page": "https://bluemountain.princeton.edu/bluemtn/?a=d&d=bmtnaau192604-01.1.41", "debut_caractere": 0, "fin_caractere_exclue": 3556, "texte": "imagination transfigures his form, beautifies\nhis gestures, and gives rhythm to his\nwords.\nShow me your part, says the actor,\nand I will show you my inspiration. There\nis no making of bricks without straw. Even\na restoration of the theatrical spirit to the\ntheatre demands an imaginative groundwork,\na plan for the actor to build upon. A\nrestoration of melodrama calls for a me-\nlodramatist. A restoration of high comedy\ncalls for classic graces of dialogue. A\nrestoration of poetic drama must be in the\nfirst place the work of poets. What does\nour present-day theatre offer to the ambi-\ntious actor? It offers, as we know, a\nsuccession of modern parts in which the\nactor's vices, such as his emotional \" re-\nstraint,\" his natural conversational tones,\nhis accent of unimpeachable gentility, his\ntimid and ordinary gestures, will be ac-\ncounted virtues; while his real virtues,\nsuch as his ability to fill the stage, his\nskilful manipulation of his own natural\nmask, his bold exaggeration of outline in\nthe portrayal of character, his physical\n•domination of the audience, in a word his\ncreation of the part, are as likely as not\nto make him thoroughly ridiculous. He\nwill be praised for being \" natural \" and\nblamed (God save us!) for being \" ar-\ntificial.\"\nThe art that conceals art, in the smug\nohrase, is the only art that will be al-\nlowed him. He may, however, be per-\nmitted occasional brief incursions into the\nElizabethan theatre, or rather into the mo-\ndernized theatre of Shakespeare, where he\nhas barely time to unlearn the faults of\nelocution and carriage acquired in modern\ncomedy before the run of the play comes\nto an end and he reverts to the world of\nslang and back-chat.\nIt is said that we have few Shake-\nspearean actors, and none who can speak\nblank verse effectively. But how should\nany young actor be able to speak verse,\nhow should any young actor be able to\nplay Shakespeare, when the whole envi-\nronment of his art is prosaic ? If he\nwould bear himself like a Duke of Athens\nor Malvolio, he must betake himself to\nwatch the Russian Ballet in Petrouchka\nor Carnaval, for he will not capture the\nspirit of dignity in the stage drawing-room.\nIf he would speak his lines like a god and\nnot like an Oxfordian oracle, he must\nlisten to good music in the concert-room,\nfor he will not pick up the art at rehearsal.\nLet the actor watch the Guards at the\ntrooping of the Colour or the motionless\nLancers seated on their charges in White\nhall. Here is presence, here is plastique;\nbut how were they acquired ? By months\nin the barrack-yard and the riding-school;\nby grinding labour, by the daily perseve-\nrance that is itself a tyranny. Let the\nactor betake himself to the gymnasium,\nfor he will not capture presence or dignity\non the golf-links. It is not the loose-\nlimbed, easy gesture of the tweed-clad\nathlete that counts on the stage, but the\ntaut muscle and the poise of the discus-\nthrower. Work and again work, rehearsal\nand again rehearsal, health and physical\ndomination; these are the watchwords.\nTo be every inch a king is first of\nall to be every inch an actor. We hear\nof players who go into training for their\nparts, who walk or swim or ride so and\nso many miles a day for physical fitness*\nsake. They do well, but there is a\nmental training also. There is the plastic\nworld of Art to which the actor properly\nbelongs and with which he must himself\nbe in harmony.\nThese matters, it may be said, are\nfor schools of acting to consider. The\nschools instruct their pupils in dramatic\ntechnique; the schools distinguish carefully"}, {"page_pdf": 42, "page_imprimee": "70", "url_page": "https://bluemountain.princeton.edu/bluemtn/?a=d&d=bmtnaau192604-01.1.42", "debut_caractere": 0, "fin_caractere_exclue": 3611, "texte": "between Shakespearean and modern me-\nthods of representation. It is not their\nfault if their pupils neglect the sound\nadvice of the dramatic pedagogue. But\nin fact the schools fit novices to gain ex-\nperience ; they can do no more. They\nreflect the spirit of the theatre at large,\ntinged with a certain conservatism that is\nproper to academies. At a dramatic\nschool the actor will learn little that is\nfresh and much that is out of date. He\nwill be prepared for the stage as a man\nis prepared for life by the school or uni-\nversity ; the serious work then begins.\nThis is not to say that schools of acting\nare needless. On the contrary, they\nwere never more urgently needed than\nto-day, when the stage is overcrowded\nwith masquerading amateurs. As prepa-\nratory schools for the current theatre,\nunder the guidance of accomplished and\npainstaking actors, they have both their\nadvantages and their drawbacks; but as\nschools of gymnastics and elocution, music\nand rhythm, of all the humanities that\nare kindred to the classical art of acting,\nthey will be eventually the nursery and\nhope of the stage.\nAn actor speaks to us through sym-\nbols of reality, just as a poet speaks to\nus through images and metaphors. If the\nmetaphors be borrowed or worn-out, no\nresponsive image appears in the listener's\nmind. The voices that roll \" like distant\nthunder \" awaken no echo; the inky night\nand the rosy dawn fade into a neutral\nand muddy hue. There is a limit to the\nreceptivity of the human mind, where such\nfigures of speech are concerned; a moment\ncomes when even the name of dragon\nconjures up no picture of frightfulness. So\nit is, surely, with the symbols that the\nactor employs. He borrows from the\nworld of reality in order to create a world\nof appearance; there is the essence of his\nart. He seeks for enduring symbols that\nshall express the relation of appearance to\nreality—for style and gesture, tone and\npresence that shall maintain a just propor-\ntion between the actual and the imaginary.\nHe is confronted by a whole property\nroom of conventional symbols that are long\nago worn threadbare, like the phrases of\nthe novelette. For every emotional emer-\ngency, for every situation, for every turn\nand twist of character, the histrionic\nhang in readiness. There is a fitting for\nevery figure. The spectator, aware of the\nemptiness and banality of these symbols\nthat he has seen a hundred times, calls\nthem \" theatrical \" and thus lays the blame\nupon the theatre for what is in fact the\nplayer's want of imagination.\nBut the symbols of the theatre cannot\nbe other than theatrical. Every endea-\nvour to make them \" real \" reverses the\nactor's natural process by re-creating a\nworld of sham reality from that of ap-\npearance. The presence of real donkeys;\nor real water on the stage gives pleasure\nto large audiences, but it can scarcely be\nheld to diminish the \" theatricality \" of a\nperformance. The actors of the Grand\nGuignol smear themselves with red ochre\nto represent a bleeding wound, but the\nconvention does not bring them one step\nnearer to naturalism. Our quarrel should\nbe, not with the theatrical spirit that is\nproper to the theatre, but with the pre-\ntentious realism that marks a lack of any\nspirit at all. The enduring symbols of\nthe actor's art are artificial, like the en-\nduring monuments of the sculptor. To\ncover them with everyday rags and tat-\nters is to mistake their whole significance.\nIt is asked, how can the actor escape\nfrom realism? Is not he, of all artists,\nmost deeply committed to the portrayal of\nactual life in movement ? Is not he, of\nall artists, the one who needs most ur-"}, {"page_pdf": 43, "page_imprimee": "71", "url_page": "https://bluemountain.princeton.edu/bluemtn/?a=d&d=bmtnaau192604-01.1.43", "debut_caractere": 0, "fin_caractere_exclue": 1554, "texte": "gently to feel the firm rock of experience\nbeneath his feet? Are there not great\nplayers, like Duse, in whom the drama\nof the three-wailed room with its natu-\nralistic conventions has kindled an unexam-\npled flame of genius? Shall the actor,\nwhose task it is faithfully to play the part\nallotted to him, shatter the fabric of drama\non which he depends? The answer is\nthat the fabric is shattered and rebuilt by\nevery true actor's performance. Duse's\nHedda Gabler and Mrs. Alving and\nLady of the Sea were not the heroines\nknown to the reader of Ibsen, although\nafter her performance their memory may\nbe ineffaceable. They were successive\nincarnations of a passionate spirit who un-\nderstood them all, and, therefore, estab-\nlished an imperious right to play them in\nher own fashion.\nThe actor requires, indeed, to feel the\ncontact of experience, but it may very\nwell be a spiritual expet ience such as ani-\nmated this gifted woman. The actor is\nindeed committed to the portrayal of life\nas we know it, but if his work be well\ndone we should feel that we have never\nknow it before. It is in this act of\nreaching out to the unknown that the\nplayer makes his individual and sublime\ngestures. A single step out of the rut,\nand he is saved. A flash of perception\nthat the part he plays is created and not\nimitated, a touch of the selfless spirit that\nseeks expression and not repetition, and\nthe actor stands before us once more as\na figure significant and dominant, a sphinx\nand an interpreter, a priest and a worship-\nper, a player with a right to the stage."}]}, {"article_id": "bm-bmtnaau-1926-04-01-c023", "article_bluemountain": "bmtnaau_1926-04_01#c023", "volume": "bmtnaau_1926-04_01", "ocr_source": "OCR Blue Mountain (ALTO), transcription TEI : lignes lb/@facs", "texte_sans_correction": true, "page_debut": "66", "page_fin": "66", "image_debut": 38, "image_fin": 38, "pages_selon": "pagination imprimée relevée dans le METS Blue Mountain (ORDERLABEL) ; [n] = page sans folio restituée", "url_article": "https://bluemountain.princeton.edu/bluemtn/?a=d&d=bmtnaau192604-01.2.10.1", "titre_corps": "Boulevard du Temple 1833 on the day of the attempt on the life of Louis-Philippe by Fieschi", "titre_sommaire": "Boulevard du Temple 1833 on the day of the attempt on the life of Louis-Philippe by Fieschi", "signature_source": "", "controle": "bornes données par la structure logique METS/ALTO de Blue Mountain (blocs ALTO de chaque constituant)", "pages": [{"page_pdf": 38, "page_imprimee": "66", "url_page": "https://bluemountain.princeton.edu/bluemtn/?a=d&d=bmtnaau192604-01.1.38", "debut_caractere": 0, "fin_caractere_exclue": 192, "texte": "Boulevard du Temple 1833 on the day of the attempt on the life of Louis-Philippe by Fieschi. July 28th, showing the Cirque\nOlympic. Folies Dramatiques, Theâtre de la Gaieté and the Funambules."}]}, {"article_id": "bm-bmtnaau-1926-04-01-c025", "article_bluemountain": "bmtnaau_1926-04_01#c025", "volume": "bmtnaau_1926-04_01", "ocr_source": "OCR Blue Mountain (ALTO), transcription TEI : lignes lb/@facs", "texte_sans_correction": true, "page_debut": "71", "page_fin": "74", "image_debut": 43, "image_fin": 46, "pages_selon": "pagination imprimée relevée dans le METS Blue Mountain (ORDERLABEL) ; [n] = page sans folio restituée", "url_article": "https://bluemountain.princeton.edu/bluemtn/?a=d&d=bmtnaau192604-01.2.11", "titre_corps": "THE INAUGURATION OF A THEATRE AT THE ESTENSE COURT", "titre_sommaire": "THE INAUGURATION OF A THEATRE AT THE ESTENSE COURT", "signature_source": "BRUNO BRUNELLI", "controle": "bornes données par la structure logique METS/ALTO de Blue Mountain (blocs ALTO de chaque constituant)", "pages": [{"page_pdf": 43, "page_imprimee": "71", "url_page": "https://bluemountain.princeton.edu/bluemtn/?a=d&d=bmtnaau192604-01.1.43", "debut_caractere": 1556, "fin_caractere_exclue": 2766, "texte": "THE INAUGURATION OF A\nTHEATRE AT THE\nESTENSE COURT\nBY BRUNO BRUNELLI.\nFRANCESCO 11, Duke of Modena (,), fore-\nseeing a long truce from warfare, and\nhappy years of peace assured to the state\nby the treaty of the Pyranees, devoted him-\nself to ensuring prosperity to letters and the\narts. Not content with having protected\nartists and poets in the past, he conceived\nin 1 685 the idea of having a theatre erected\nto the east of the ducal palace, where alrea-\ndy, in the middle of the century, there had\nbeen constructed a little Court theatre which\nhad later disappeared. He entrusted the\ndirection of the works to the architect\nTomaso Brezzi and the painter Frances-\nco Stringa. Painters from Bologna, Reg-\ngio and Modena were summoned in large\nnumbers to contribute their work towards\nthe decoration of the theatre, the prepa-\nration of the scenes: among others who\nworked in the new Court theatre were\nthe two Bibienas, the Fleming Pietro Se-\nnau, Agostino Stringa, Jacopo Consetti,\nTomaso Costa and Antonio Fornasari.\nThe works, carried on with feverish in-\ntensity by troops of masons, carpenters\n\nThe above design is from the li Orlando innamorato\n(Boiardo). Venezia 1546-47.\n(1) Reigned from 1662 to 1694."}, {"page_pdf": 44, "page_imprimee": "72", "url_page": "https://bluemountain.princeton.edu/bluemtn/?a=d&d=bmtnaau192604-01.1.44", "debut_caractere": 0, "fin_caractere_exclue": 4385, "texte": "the interior of the theatre was entirely\nof wood—and gilders, were completed in\nthe following spring.\nI have discovered a letter of G. B.\nRuini, dated March 21 st 1686, in which\nhe describes with some detail the opening\nperformance. The \" Eritrea e gV inganni\ndella maschera \" of the Count G. B. Ro-\nselli was being staged, and sumptuous\ncostumes, embroidered in silver and gold,\nwere prepared for the actors, and machines\nconstructed for apparitions and flights\nsuch as to produce the sensation \" rather\nof the divine than of the human The\n6th of March 1686, the anniversary of\nthe Duke's birth, was fixed for the so-\nlemn inauguration, but just in those days\nFrancesco 11. was seized with an attack\nof gout. For this reason the opening was\nput off until the 13th of March.\nThis untoward circumstance produced\nsome disappointment among the numerous\nvisitors drawn to Modena by the bruit of\nthe preparations and by the solemnity of\nthe spectacle. Three gentlemen of the\nBolognese family of the Marsigli had\narrived with a following of seventy per-\nsons on horseback, and Donna Cristina,\n\" vanquisher of the most obdurate hearts \",\nhad made a solemn entry with a cortege\nof fifty cavaliers. It is calculated that the\nladies and gentlemen gathered for the\nevent numbered four hundred. But not\none of them departed when the postpone-\nment of the inauguration of the new\ntheatre became known.\nOn the morning of the 13 th all re-\nsorted to the ducal palace to form an\nescort to the Duke, who wished to repair\non foot to hear mass in the church of the\nJesuits. But the magnificent multitude\nwas again disappointed : the Duke, not\nyet recovered, had to go out in a car-\nriage, and thus the visitors, who would\nhave accompanied him on either hand and\nin the rear, were obliged to forego the dis-\nplay both to others and to themselves of\nthe unusual spectacle of a gorgeous cortege.\nBut, although deprived of the sight of the\nMost Serene Duke, the good Modenese\nwere able none the less to satisfy their\ncuriosity in admiring the group of magni-\nficent guests who followed the ducal car-\nriage at a distance, likewise making their\nway to the church of the Jesuits, as though\nthe mass were the first number on the pro-\ngramme prepared for the inauguration of the\nCourt theatre. The most brilliant among\nthem all was the Prince Luigi d'Este,\nwho, by the richness of his dress, \" left\nthe spectators for a good while in ecstasy\nIn the afternoon a touiney was given\nin the piazza, under the leadership of this\nsame Prince Luigi. These feats of arms\nwere the object of a certain citizen pride;\nand the spectators participated eagerly\nin a fine blow or in the disappointment\nover some thrust at the expense of its\nown champions. Thus, while the princes\nof the house of Este had proved themselves,\nby valour and grace of movements, \" Prin-\nces verily Estenese \", a Modenese cham-\npion, the marchese Bonifacio Rangoni,\ncaptain of the Duke's guard, \" while he\nwas intent on cutting off the head of a cer-\ntain Mermaid (l), or rather, as others more\ncertainly say, after having cut it \", slipped\nhis foot from one of his stirrups and let\nfall his sword. A very grave fault for a\n\n(l) We give here an explanation* of this quoted passage\nfrom Ruini's letter which has been received from the author\nof the article, in reply to a query whether the context in the\noriginal suggested the actual cutting oft of a head, or merely\ncutting at it. Ed.\n\" The phrase \" to cut off the head of a certain Mermaid\nor '1 after having cut off her head \" (it is a phrase quoted\nfrom the letter of Gr. B. Ruini, March 21, 1686), refers, accor-\nding to me, actually to the cutting off of the head; that is,\nto the decapitation of a mythological being such as is the\nMermaid. It must have been a Mermaid of papier-mache, of\nwood, or of some other material, moved perhaps by human\nbeings concealed in its interior. It was in fact one of those\nmany \" monsters n which appeared frequently in the tourneys\nof mythological theme, so frequent in the seventeenth century.\nThe victory of the knight over the Mermaid was evidently\ncompleted by this decapitation, which was thus a pretence,\nalthough the cutting off of the head.... of cardboard... may have\nreally taken place. And the theatrical climax was here spoi-\nled by the misadventure of the knight to whom it befell to\ntransgress the knightly rules which directed these spectacles"}, {"page_pdf": 45, "page_imprimee": "73", "url_page": "https://bluemountain.princeton.edu/bluemtn/?a=d&d=bmtnaau192604-01.1.45", "debut_caractere": 0, "fin_caractere_exclue": 3549, "texte": "champion fighting in a tourney, \" a shame-\nful thing in a cavalier \", and which pro-\nduced great bitterness in his fellow citizens.\nAfter the jousts were over, all the\nladies and the cavaliers repaired to the\ntheatre to witness the \" Eritrea perfor-\nmed by the gentlemen of the Estense\nCourt. \" Eritrea, queen of Cyprus \" was\nthe Conte Antonio Scapinelli, gentleman\nof the chamber to the Prince Cesare, and\nCelinda \" the cavaliere Nicolo Martelli.\nThose gentlemen who undertook female\nparts must have been very well made up\nas there was one who dared to assume\nthe scanty vestments of the goddess Ve-\nnus, and who was the conte Ippolito Ca-\nrandini.\nThe opera was followed by ballets.\nEverything contributed to render marvel-\nlous the spectacle in which one did not\nknow whether to admire most the splen-\ndours of the scenes, and costumes, and\nthe marvel of the machines, or the rich-\nness of the dresses, the headdresses, the\njewels, displayed by the crowd of elegant\nlady spectators.\nNor was there lacking a fresh proof of\nthe lordliness of the house of Este in the\nprofusion of refreshments and sweetmeats\nwhich were offered to the spectators in\nthe intervals of the performance, while the\nDuke himself was pleased to distribute to\nthe guests delicious candies brought in\nforty \" royal basins So that the guests,\nRuini assures us, went away bearing the\nindelibly impressed memory of the gene-\nrosity of the Duke.\nAfter this solemn inuauguration the thea-\ntre remained closed for some time. But\nthe Modenese long continued to discourse\nupon this unforgettable fete. We are,\nhowever, in the seventeenth century : the\ncentury of the academies and of disserta-\ntions. A little book was printed which\ndescribed tirelessly the marvels of the tour-\nney. And in the meantime there were\nresumed the usual gatherings of those Aca-\ndemicians known as the \" Dissonanti \",\nwho discoursed interminably upon subjects\nthe most arduous or the most trilling, ac-\ncording as one likes to consider them.\nSix days after the inauguration of the\nCourt theatre the academicians gathered\nto hold forth upon the following theme:\n\"If in Woman virtue may be found\ncompatible with vice \". The Duke, who\nwas evidently a person of wit, when he\nknew that such a theme was proposed,\nforeseeing that someone, in sustaining his\nown thesis, might launch some pointed\ndart at the fair sex, gave orders to the\nacademicians that they should not issue\nthe usual invitations to the ladies who\nwere accustomed to be present at those\nfashionable reunions as today they gather\nat live o'clock tea in some Lyceum. The\nDuke added, however, that if, although not\ninvited, some lady should repair to the\nacademy, she should not be sent away.\nCuriosity regarding the proposed theme\nnaturally attracted a large throng of ladies,\nmore numerous than had they been express-\nly invited. Some of them, hearing from\nthe orators such a succession of back-\nhanded compliments directed against them,\nwere unable to restrain fiery words, which\ndid not escape some of the academicians.\nThese then hastened to ask them by\nwhom they had been invited, to which\nthese indiscreet ladies did not know what\nto reply ;... such are the surprises which\neven today await certain imprudent per-\nsons who affect intellectuality so as to follow7\nthe fashion, and who lack good sense,\nthe most necessary endowment of a woman.\nIt seems to me that those ladies would\nhave acted better in taking part in the\nrepresentation of the \" Eritrea\" rather\nthan in pushing into the space reserved\nto the public in an academic sitting."}, {"page_pdf": 46, "page_imprimee": "74", "url_page": "https://bluemountain.princeton.edu/bluemtn/?a=d&d=bmtnaau192604-01.1.46", "debut_caractere": 0, "fin_caractere_exclue": 392, "texte": "Each in his own place: they should\nhave left to those cavaliers the illusion of\nphilosophising, even upon feminine virtues\nand vices,... no different from male ones,... ;\nand should, the rather, have prevented\nany of these from usurping their place,\ndaring even to represent on the stage the\npart of the mother of Love.\nVenus triumphant would have better\ntamed those disgruntled academicians."}]}, {"article_id": "bm-bmtnaau-1926-04-01-c027", "article_bluemountain": "bmtnaau_1926-04_01#c027", "volume": "bmtnaau_1926-04_01", "ocr_source": "OCR Blue Mountain (ALTO), transcription TEI : lignes lb/@facs", "texte_sans_correction": true, "page_debut": "74", "page_fin": "74", "image_debut": 46, "image_fin": 46, "pages_selon": "pagination imprimée relevée dans le METS Blue Mountain (ORDERLABEL) ; [n] = page sans folio restituée", "url_article": "https://bluemountain.princeton.edu/bluemtn/?a=d&d=bmtnaau192604-01.2.12", "titre_corps": "MR. GEORGE BUTLER : SHEFFIELD", "titre_sommaire": "MR. GEORGE BUTLER : SHEFFIELD", "signature_source": "FRANÇOIS M. FLORIAN", "controle": "bornes données par la structure logique METS/ALTO de Blue Mountain (blocs ALTO de chaque constituant)", "pages": [{"page_pdf": 46, "page_imprimee": "74", "url_page": "https://bluemountain.princeton.edu/bluemtn/?a=d&d=bmtnaau192604-01.1.46", "debut_caractere": 394, "fin_caractere_exclue": 2437, "texte": "MR. GEORGE BUTLER.\nSHEFFIELD\nBY FRANÇOIS M. FLORIAN. GRENOBLE\nJ was once in Pisa and being shaved at the\nlittle barber's in the Piazza Garibaldi. In\nthe next chair to mine sat an Englishman\ngrumbling graciously about his countrymen.\n1 had met him in the train. We had tra-\nvelled from Torino together.\nWe had spoken of my French playhouses,\nof Moliere, of Racine—and of his playhouses\nand of Shakespeare.\nHe had told me that, while there was a\nquite a large group of intelligent men and\nwomen who cared to hear Shakespeare if\nwell performed, the larger public as a whole\ndid not care.\n\" They read him then?... \" I had sug-\ngested.\n\" No, they ignore him. Go to Birming-\nham, Sheffield, Bradford, you'll not find\nanyone who has read a line of him\nAnd now we sat side by side being shaved:\nand I casually picked up a rasor out of a set\nof three which lay on the edge of the marble\nbasin before me.\nIt was rather heavy so I opened it to see\nwhat sort of blade it had.\nOn this blade was a quotation from\nShakespeare and the announcement that the\nrasor was made by George Butler, Trinity\nWorks, Sheffield, and marked No. 2.\nI forget the quotation, but I shall not for-\nget the gracious grumble with which my\nEnglish acquaintance received the news of\nthis find.\nIt seems that they do read their Shakes-\npeare in Sheffield \" 1 %aid.\n\" Only to use him for business purposes \"\nhe growled.\nWhich was quite unfair on Sheffield,\nespecially on Mr. George Butler, for I re-\ncall that the quotation was in no way one\nwhich played on the words rasor or steel or\nsharpness ; nothing like \" Here's metal more\nattractive \", or One pain is lessened by\nanother's anguish \", or \" My heart is true as\nsteel \". Nothing like these. I almost believe\nit was some such line as :\n\" The words of Mercury are harsh after\nthe songs of Apollo \". And 1 had meant\nsome time ago to say a word, not harsh,\neither, about this little fact: to stop for a\nmoment in these rattling noisy days and think\nonce, for a silent two minutes, of an almost\nunknown soldier ....Mr. George Butler."}]}, {"article_id": "bm-bmtnaau-1926-04-01-c030", "article_bluemountain": "bmtnaau_1926-04_01#c030", "volume": "bmtnaau_1926-04_01", "ocr_source": "OCR Blue Mountain (ALTO), transcription TEI : lignes lb/@facs", "texte_sans_correction": true, "page_debut": "75", "page_fin": "78", "image_debut": 47, "image_fin": 50, "pages_selon": "pagination imprimée relevée dans le METS Blue Mountain (ORDERLABEL) ; [n] = page sans folio restituée", "url_article": "https://bluemountain.princeton.edu/bluemtn/?a=d&d=bmtnaau192604-01.2.13", "titre_corps": "OLD LONDON : AND MORE COTTONWOOL FOR THE INCOMPETENT", "titre_sommaire": "OLD LONDON : AND MORE COTTONWOOL FOR THE INCOMPETENT", "signature_source": "", "controle": "bornes données par la structure logique METS/ALTO de Blue Mountain (blocs ALTO de chaque constituant)", "pages": [{"page_pdf": 47, "page_imprimee": "75", "url_page": "https://bluemountain.princeton.edu/bluemtn/?a=d&d=bmtnaau192604-01.1.47", "debut_caractere": 70, "fin_caractere_exclue": 3219, "texte": "OLD LONDON\nAND MORE COTTONWOOL\nFOR THE INCOMPETENT.\n\nTHE SADLER'S WELLS FUND.\nA PROTEST FROM \"THE MASK\"\nTHE enthusiasts for establishing Old Sad-\nler's Wells Theatre as a second Old Vic\nhave issued another prospectus asking for mo-\nney and stating the Object of the Fund.\nLet us consider this Prospectus a little.\nTHE OBJECT OF THE FUND.\nTO establish the historic theatre of Sad-\nler's Wells as an Old Vic for North\n\" London, putting it under the management\n\" of the existing Old Vic as a second\n\" theatre\nSo far the enthusiasts have persuaded the\nCarnegie United Kingdom Trust to provide\nthe whole of the £ 14,200 needed for the\npurchase of the building, and now another\n£ 40,000 is needed \" for its reconstruc-\ntion\nWhy has the Carnegie Fund found this\n£ 14,200 for this purchase ?\nThe Trustees of the Carnegie Fund be-\nlieve in the Drama \" as a definite factor in\nnational education \" ; that is why they have\nput down the £ 14,200 to buy the old\nplayhouse. A good and a safe bit of pur-\nchasing it seems to us; and should the\nTrustees of the Carnegie Fund later on wish\nto pull down the Theatre and put up a fac-\ntory for Biscuits, or for machinery, it can,\nwe suppose, do so.\nWhat else does the Fund get for its\nmoney ? What are the conditions imposed by\nthe Trustees of the Carnegie Fund ? That we\ndo not even guess at. That we are not told.\nAfter £ 40,000 more has been collected\nby the Committee, the immediate step is to\nconvert the older Sadler's Wells into a fairly\nOld Vic for North London.... and, adds the\nprospectus, this \"is in itself of the utmost\nvalue and importance \".\nBut we have serious doubts as, to its va-\nlue ; and as to its \" utmost value \", we find\nit ridiculous. \" Importance \" means of course\nbeing important \": important means \"of\ngreat consequence—momentous, pompous \".\n(■Oxford Dictionary).\nTHE Old Vic \", proceeds the prospec-\ntus, \" is not run for profit, but is a\n\" Foundation under the Charity Commis-\nii ♦*\nsioners .\nAdmittedly while fashionable to \" not\nrun for profits \", its all foolery to run for a\nfall if you come to consider it sensibly.\nAn artist, if he is not very popular, is\nnot found running his art for a profit—that\nis true, but obviously so ; yet when his art\nbegins to sell, say what we will he is pro-\nfitting ; and therefore he is running for profit\nas well as other things are. Why not? So\nwhy this statement in the prospectus belit-\ntling profits ? Miss Baylis doubtless would be\nonly too happy to see a profit; does she not\nalready concentrate a good deal on searching\nfor Funds ?—indeed she has a real knack in\nraising Funds. What does she raise funds\nfor, except for ultimate Profit ?\nWe forget all the sums that Miss Baylis\nhas managed to raise, but we congratulate\nher on every penny. In 1922 she raised\n£ 30,000 to start the structural alterations of\nthe Old Vic forced on her by the passionate\nlove for education of her late Aunt Emma\nCons. The story is always the same with\nthe Old Vjc. When it's money that's wan-\nted appeal to the educationalists: where\nthere's a blunder to absolve or a debt to\nmeet, put it all down to education. Anyhow\n£ 30,000 is, one would have thought, enough"}, {"page_pdf": 48, "page_imprimee": "76", "url_page": "https://bluemountain.princeton.edu/bluemtn/?a=d&d=bmtnaau192604-01.1.48", "debut_caractere": 0, "fin_caractere_exclue": 3921, "texte": "on which to start any Miss Baylis. Give\n£ 30,000 to an Edmund Kean or a Shakes-\npeare or even a modern playwright and it\nwould be enough to float him into immense\nsuccess if you let him work out his plan\nwithout interference. But perhaps lesser peo-\nple need more propping up. Still we should\nhave said that for Miss Lilian Baylis £ 30,000\nwas ample.\nSo Miss Baylis and the Old Vic—the\ntwo seem inseparable—do not look for profit.\nOn further consideration of the question\noerhaps this is quite as well: for when\nMr. Cochran presented Miss Baylis, the\nOld Vic and all its company in \" The Ta-\nming of the Shrew \" at the New Oxford\nTheatre in the west end of London, only\n£ 33 was taken in a night at the popular\nprices of 1/3 to 7/6.\nThat was in 1924. And it was one\nyear later, in 1925, that this failure to appeal\nto the real public was compensated by artificial\naid from the Trust which believes that the\nDrama is a definite factor in national educa-\ntion, and prefers to support Institutions rather\nthan Individualities.\nFor our part we feel that the work of\nHenry Irving, Sir Squire Bancroft, Sir John\nHare, Sir H. Beerbohm Tree and Sir George\nAlexander did more for national education,\nthan six Old Vies could ever dream of doing.\nAdd to these names the names of se-\nveral more successful managers whose appeal\nto the real public was answered by the real\npublic, and you have the theatre of 1880\nto 1910.\nCHARITY COMMISSIONERS.\nTHE Old Vic, says the Prospectus of the\nSadler's Wells Fund, is a large Theatre\nin Waterloo Road and is not run for profit,\nbut is a Foundation under the Charity Com-\nmissioners.\nDo you like the sound of that ?\nWe don't: and we don't know why; but\nwe don't like it.\nUnder the plea of providing Opera and\nDrama \" at prices which even the very poor\ncan afford \" this Old Vic claims and gets\nfirst £ 30,000, then £ 14,000, and is now\nbegging for another £ 40,000, and slowly\nthrusts out a white and very well nourished\nhand to take it.\n\" There is no sight in the world like\ncrowded house at the Old Vic \" says the\nprospectus : but there we think it exaggerates.\nWe have been in many dozen theatres\n\" in the world \" and seen sights as good—\npossibly better.\nIf it's a collection of poor people one is\nlooking for, anyone can see a hundred such\ncrowds in the Cinemas in the east end of\nFirenze or Paris, Roma or Stockholm : gloomy\ntired worried crowds it is true. In the thea-\ntres of Europe, we have seen better crowds\nof poor people, in Paris, in London, in\nVienna and in St. Petersburg; for the marks of\npoverty were not quite so emphasized and they\nwere a jollier crowd, a far more excited lot\nof people.\nTo exploit poverty in a Prospectus as a\nthing to see is strange : and we marvel to\nobserve on the Executive Committee of the\nSadler's Wells Fund names which ought not\nto be there.\nThey are there to help to do some good :\nwe are aware of that:—but good through\nthe theatre can only be done by supporting\nthe Theatre as it is—bettering it as it is—\nas a sound financial affair and as the home\nof the Dramatic art—the flag flying high.\nCLEARLY PROVED.\nFOLLOWING this plea, the Prospectus states\nthat \" the presentation of Shakespeare\nand other drama of high quality, and opera \"\nat these prices \" has clearly proved that if\nthe ordinary public is given the chance of\ngood mental fare it quickly learns to appre-\nciate it \". Which is not true if Mr. Coch-\nran's announcement is correct, that £ 34 was\nthe full sum \" the ordinary public \" would\npart with at the Oxford Theatre, London,\nwhen \" given a chance \" to witness \" a pre-\nsentation of Shakespearean Drama \", i.e.,\n\" The Taming of the Shrew \" by the Old\nVic Company; and remember, this same\n\" Taming of the Shrew \" is the most rollic-\nking farce Shakespeare ever penned, and very\npopular.\nROOM FOR REHEARSAL.\nTHE Prospectus proceeds to tell us how\nthe Sadler's Wells Theatre will benefit\nthe Old Vic : it will \" give sufficient room"}, {"page_pdf": 49, "page_imprimee": "77", "url_page": "https://bluemountain.princeton.edu/bluemtn/?a=d&d=bmtnaau192604-01.1.49", "debut_caractere": 0, "fin_caractere_exclue": 4135, "texte": "x Miss Baylis for rehearsal \". 60,000 for\nrehearsal room seems a little fantastic, for the\nspace we require for rehearsal can be easily\nprovided by any fairly big extra room.\nON AND ON AND ON.\nBESIDES space for rehearsals the Prospectus\nclaims other advantages. Amongst them\nthat \" it would give London what it has ne-\nver possessed, continuous opera played six\ntimes a week \" and so on. As though a\nbarrel organ, only because it can play on and\non and on and never stop till the crack of\ndoom is what the world asks from Art.\nWhat is asked is good work three times\na week rather than poor work four times a\nweek or trash for six times a week. And\nyou cannot call even competent Dramatic\nwork good work—it must be first class or\nnothing to be entitled to be called good.\nSTRANGE STATEMENT.\n*4 A LL excess of income over expenditure \"\n£~\\ coos the prospectus 44 must necessarily\ngo to the improvement of production \".\nThat is where the vision of these people\nis so limited: for not by any means must\nproduction be improved if there be £ 30,000,\nor even £ 100,000, profit to spend on that\nproduction. Genius alone can improve that,\nor immense talent, or great mother wit—call\nthe quality what you will.\nAnd this is not what Miss Baylis pos-\nsesses or ever spends a penny to procure.\nBut, pleads the Prospectus, \" Trams and\nbuses pass the doors \" of this New old\nplayhouse:—alas, there again is more trouble.\nThey do pass, these trams and buses.\n44 Countless thousands \" the pleading voice\ngoes on, growing weaker and weaker, will\nreceive \" knowledge and entertainment com-\nbined \". Shakespeare will have 14 a home\nworthy of him \", and there the voice dies away.\nNOW all this alone would not be sufficient\nto prove that the Old Vic group is an\nincompetent one: it would rather point to\na certain awful competence. Yes, an awful\ncompetence: but only for affairs, for mana-\nging an empty Theatre very very skilfully—\nfor that alone.\nMiss Baylis is not exactly an inspired\nperson. She is not a great actress—a great\nwriter—a great stage-manager. She is one of\nthe many people who, in these last sad twenty\nyears, has risen by her own abilities, and,\nrising, she has glided out of her own sphere\nand intruded on the theatrical preserves.\nAnd let there be no misunderstanding\nabout this. The stage is preserved especially\nfor those of theatrical talent; this old estate\nof ours is not to be the dumping ground of\nthe incompetent.\nMiss Baylis we find incompetent, for she\nhas not done the things expected of a sound\nmanager of a theatre which is \" not run for\nprofit \".\nSuch a manager must run it for something\npositive—the negative virtue of not selling\nenough tickets, so as to cover every expense,\nis really insufficient.\nHad the sole alternative flashed across\nher brain, had she said \" no profit but Ge-\nnius anyhow we could have praised her.\nAs a matter of fact the sole healthy idea\nof a theatre, is to run it for Genius a\nthundering profit too: aiming deliberately for\nboth, sniffing at neither.\nMiss Baylis has sniffed at both.\nShe was given an Honorary Degree of\nM.A. by Oxford University in 1924.\nWe know that in the England of today,\nit is the epoch for allowing domestic servants\nto rise from their splendid situation and go\non to the stage—into journalism —to become\nnovelists—to scratch with apen—to splutter\nwith a voice—and generally to make a hell\nof what was once our old heaven.\nMiss Baylis is of course no domestic ser-\nvant ; she is a nice kindly middle-aged lady\nwho could be of the truest service to any\nHospital, any Charity Institution; and even\nany accountant's office should feel proud to\nhave such a capable servant, provided she\ncould rid herself of the notion that business\nmust be purged of all commercialism before\nit can \" follow the gleam \" and men \" rise\non stepping stones of their dead selves \",\nand could restrain herself from quoting other\nsuch scraps of Tennyson to the clerks.\nBut Miss Bayl is has shown us what it is\nshe can do. The Old Vic represents the\nkindly spirit towards the poor of the Surrey\nside; and now this warm-hearted woman\nwishes to do the same to the poor of ano-\nther edge of London."}, {"page_pdf": 50, "page_imprimee": "78", "url_page": "https://bluemountain.princeton.edu/bluemtn/?a=d&d=bmtnaau192604-01.1.50", "debut_caractere": 0, "fin_caractere_exclue": 1219, "texte": "Well, why not ....why should not all the\nCharitable institutions of Greater Britain lend\ntheir aid to her in this second effort. If Eng-\nland believes in the sort of thing (and the\ndole to a lazy untrained pack of duffers seems\nto prove that England does believe in the\nsort of thing), then by all means full speed\nahead. But do not ask the sounder part of\nold London to tolerate the notion: do not\nexpect sensible men to countenance this folly\nof feeding the unwilling by forcing quasi in-\ntellectual food down their throats sugared with\nthe awful phrase, \" it will do you so much\ng00d.... really it will \". For every sensible\nman knows that really it won't.\nWHAT the Carnegie Trust wastes is of no\nimportance to anyone in his senses.\nWe look upon the £ 30,000 spent on\nthe Old Vic as money wasted. But this\nfurther £ 60,000 which is now being slowly\nextracted from Londoners' pockets is a grie-\nvous business, and that it will also be so much\nwaste is a little too bad.\nSumming it all up :—we think it a very\ngreat shame, as well as a silly thing to do.\nAnd one last word. Do not forget that\nour English Theatre suffers not from being over\nprofessional, but is already in danger of be-\ncoming not a little amateurish."}]}, {"article_id": "bm-bmtnaau-1926-04-01-c031", "article_bluemountain": "bmtnaau_1926-04_01#c031", "volume": "bmtnaau_1926-04_01", "ocr_source": "OCR Blue Mountain (ALTO), transcription TEI : lignes lb/@facs", "texte_sans_correction": true, "page_debut": "75", "page_fin": "75", "image_debut": 47, "image_fin": 47, "pages_selon": "pagination imprimée relevée dans le METS Blue Mountain (ORDERLABEL) ; [n] = page sans folio restituée", "url_article": "https://bluemountain.princeton.edu/bluemtn/?a=d&d=bmtnaau192604-01.2.13.1", "titre_corps": "DABIT FRUCTUM IN TEMPORE", "titre_sommaire": "DABIT FRUCTUM IN TEMPORE", "signature_source": "", "controle": "bornes données par la structure logique METS/ALTO de Blue Mountain (blocs ALTO de chaque constituant)", "pages": [{"page_pdf": 47, "page_imprimee": "75", "url_page": "https://bluemountain.princeton.edu/bluemtn/?a=d&d=bmtnaau192604-01.1.47", "debut_caractere": 0, "fin_caractere_exclue": 68, "texte": "DABIT FRUCTUM IN TEMPORE.\nYes!. but take care that the seed is good."}]}, {"article_id": "bm-bmtnaau-1926-04-01-c033", "article_bluemountain": "bmtnaau_1926-04_01#c033", "volume": "bmtnaau_1926-04_01", "ocr_source": "OCR Blue Mountain (ALTO), transcription TEI : lignes lb/@facs", "texte_sans_correction": true, "page_debut": "78", "page_fin": "81", "image_debut": 50, "image_fin": 53, "pages_selon": "pagination imprimée relevée dans le METS Blue Mountain (ORDERLABEL) ; [n] = page sans folio restituée", "url_article": "https://bluemountain.princeton.edu/bluemtn/?a=d&d=bmtnaau192604-01.2.14", "titre_corps": "SOME EXTRACTS FROM THE PRACTICE OF MAKING SCENES AND MACHINES IN THEATRES. (BOOK TWO)", "titre_sommaire": "SOME EXTRACTS FROM THE PRACTICE OF MAKING SCENES AND MACHINES IN THEATRES. (BOOK TWO)", "signature_source": "NICOLA SABBATTINI DA PESARO", "controle": "bornes données par la structure logique METS/ALTO de Blue Mountain (blocs ALTO de chaque constituant)", "pages": [{"page_pdf": 50, "page_imprimee": "78", "url_page": "https://bluemountain.princeton.edu/bluemtn/?a=d&d=bmtnaau192604-01.1.50", "debut_caractere": 1221, "fin_caractere_exclue": 2768, "texte": "SOME EXTRACTS FROM\nTHE PRACTICE OF MAKING\nSCENES AND MACHINES\nIN THEATRES.\n(BOOK TWO),\nBY NICOLA\nSABBATTINI DA PESARO\n\n(i) Published at Ravenna in 1638.\n\n(I)\nCHAPTER 37, METHOD OF MAKING\nTHE SECTIONAL SKY.\nWHEN it shall be necessary, in the\nIntermezzi, for the machines to rise\ninto the sky or to descend thence upon\nthe stage, the sectional sky must be used,\non account of the facility which it affords\nfor such operations, and also on account\nof the satisfaction and wonder which the\nspectators derive therefrom, not perceiving\nhow the machines, in rising from the\nground, disappear, nor how, emerging from\nthe sky, they descend to the earth.\nTo accomplish this one must first con-\nstruct a portion of the sky, beginning with\nthe section nearest to the front of the Stage\nand at the height most convenient, and\nfollowing on according to the slope, as\nwas stated in the First Book, Chapter 4.\nAnd this first piece must be made as wide\nas is the space from the front of the stage\nto the place where the Machines are to rise,,\nat which point this first section will finish.\nHaving done this, one will commence\nwith another section, set parallel to the\nedge of the first strip, but placed so much\nhigher than the edges of the first piece\nthat the spectators, seated in the first rows\nnear the stage-opening, may not see the\nspace which remains between the end of\nthe first piece and the beginning of the\nsecond. This space must also be made\nas wide as shall be necessary so that the\nmachines may easily issue thence and\nre-enter without obstruction."}, {"page_pdf": 51, "page_imprimee": "79", "url_page": "https://bluemountain.princeton.edu/bluemtn/?a=d&d=bmtnaau192604-01.1.51", "debut_caractere": 0, "fin_caractere_exclue": 2764, "texte": "By this method the other sections can\nalso be made, ....as many as are required.\nLet the floor of the Sala, or of the Thea-\ntre, be A, B. and that of the stage C. D.\nLet the first section of the sky be EF, and\nthe second GH, and let there be as much\ndistance from the back edge F to the begin-\nning of the second section at G as shall be\nrequired for the passage of the machines, as\nwas said above: and let the point G be set\nsufficiently above F to prevent the opening\nFG from being seen by the persons seated in\nthe front row at I, but so that the eye may\nbe fixed upon the point K, as is shown\nin IK. (I) These four lines have been drawn\nin profile so that the demonstration may\nbe more intelligible.\nCHAPTER 38. HOW PART OF THE\nSKY MAY BE LITTLE BY LITTLE\nCLOUDED OVER.\n* \"M 1 • 1 ■■■■■—■■■ , ■ , 1 ■ ■ Mill IIMIIWIWIIIHIIMII 111 ■IIIIIIIIH\nIT is customarily required that the sky\nshould cloud over little by little.\nWhen it is desired to do this, and\nthe sky having been first made in sections\nas was set forth in the preceeding chap-\nter, one will set up, in line with the aper-\ntures, and on one side of the Stage\nbehind the Houses, (2) a Telaro (3) corre-\nsponding to each aperture, which should\nbe made of laths of thin board, covered\nwith canvas painted to resemble clouds,\ntaking care that those to the front be\nmore boldly coloured than the others, as\nwas said in regard to the colouring of the\nScene : and these must be equal in size\nto the clouds one desires to show.\nWhen this shall have been done one\nwill fix in each Telaro one or two sup-\nports in the manner of tie-rods. Let\nthese be of light wood, but strong.\nThese will then be adjusted in line with\nthe sky-sections, behind the houses, sufficient-\nly low down not to be seen by those in front.\nWhen the time comes for producing\nthis effect, one or more men, placed above\nthe sky, facing the sectional pieces, must\nhold the tie-rods in their hands, so that\nwhen the signal is given them, they may\ncause the said Telari to run beneath the\nsky, halting them where it shall be needful,\nso that in this manner it shall seem as\nthough the Sky be clouding over.\nLet the profile of the first section of the\nsky be A. B. and of the second C. D., and\nthe Telaro E. F. be painted as a cloyd, as\nwas said above : and let this be placed\nbehind the Houses on one side, where ever it\nbe more convenient ; and let the tie-rod be\nG. H. ; and let the person who shall have\nto stand above the end of the first section be\nat B, holding in his hands the tie-rod G. H.\nat H. When wishing to perform this opera-\ntion, the person placed in H shall be able\nslowly to walk above the last sectional\npiece of the sky, holding, as has been\nsaid, the tie-rod in his hands, and gui-\nding the Telaro by its means to the des-"}, {"page_pdf": 51, "page_imprimee": "79", "url_page": "https://bluemountain.princeton.edu/bluemtn/?a=d&d=bmtnaau192604-01.1.51", "debut_caractere": 2777, "fin_caractere_exclue": 3279, "texte": "(1) K. is lacking on the original diagram, but is ob-\nviously the upper end of the dotted line which begins in I\nand cuts GH in K. Translator.\n(2) Case (houses) is the term used at that period for the\nside pieces of scenery, representing buildings, and erected 011\nwooden frames,\n(3) Telaro. The original technical word, so frequently\nrecurring in scenic works of the period, is retained. It means\nhere a wooden framework upon which canvas scenery is stret-\nched. It is sometimes used in another sense."}, {"page_pdf": 52, "page_imprimee": "80", "url_page": "https://bluemountain.princeton.edu/bluemtn/?a=d&d=bmtnaau192604-01.1.52", "debut_caractere": 0, "fin_caractere_exclue": 3164, "texte": "tined point, accomplishing in this manner\nwhat is desired. If the Telari be large,\ntwo or three persons must be set, with\ntwo or three tie-rods, following the afore-\nsaid method.\nCHAPTER 39. HOW IN ONE MOMENT\nTO CLOUD OVER THE SKY.\nON requiring to cloud over the sky in\na moment one will, if one wishes so\nto do, (albeit this is not a natural thing),\naccomplish it in the following manner.\nThe sections of the Sky having been\nmade by the method set forth above in\nthe other Chapters, one will make some\nTelari according to the number of the\nsections : and let these be of such length\nand breadth as one shall wish the Clouds\nto appear, painting them as was said in\nother places.\nWhen the said Telari are made, one\nwill set them in line with the openings\nof the sectional pieces, sufficiently far back\nthat they may not be seen by the spec-\ntators ; and let them be placed in grooves,\nwhich will have first to be made and\nplaced at either side, so that they can\nrun in these grooves in the manner of a\nportcullis ; and the said grooves must com-\nmence from the beginning of the Telari\nand correspond in length with all the\nparts of the sky, that is of the sectional\npieces ; and they must be painted of the\nsame colour as the sky itself.\nAll this being h accomplished, and the\nsaid Telari being adjusted, each in its\nplace, and when it is desired to perform\nthe said operation, one will place two,\nor three, men at each Telaro, and when\nthe time comes, let all run the said Te-\nlari in their grooves, so that in this manner\none will in an instant see that portion of\nthe sky clouded over; but the section\nnearest to the front must remain as it was\nbefore, since it is not possible to change\nit by this method.\nOne will be able, however, to ac-\ncomplish the change of this piece by ano-\nther method which will be related in the\nfollowing Chapter.\nLet the profile of the first section be A.\nB. and of the second C. D. which has to\nbe clouded over ; and let E. F. be the\nTelaro placed above the first piece of the\nsky A. B. on a level with C. D. and\nadjusted in the portcullis or groove E. F. G.\nin such wise that it can run in it easily.\nTo bring about, then, the clouding\nover of the section C. D., one will place\nthe men at E, from whence they can in\na- moment make the Telaro run in the\nline E. F., because when E shall have\narrived at F, F will be at the point G;\nand thus what was to be done will be\naccomplished.\nIn like manner one will be able to\ncause the other sections of the sky to be\nclouded over, with the exception, however,\nof the front one, as was stated above.\nCHAPTER 40. ANOTHER METHOD\nTO CLOUD OVER THE SKY IN\nANINSTANT.\nI NAWIIIIIIB MHIGIIAI«W>I 1118 lIMW N mm*,,, IN tm\\ mmmm HHII uuwmm WMWIWHIMTK\nTHIS other method of clouding over the\nsky will he almost similar to the one\nrelated in the preceeding Chapter, with,\nhowever, this difference : that whereas, jn\nthat one, Telari were placed at the edges\nof the sections of the sky, in this one\ncanvasses, coloured like clouds, must be\nplaced in those same positions : and these\ncanvasses must be equal in length and\nbreadth to the portions of the sky which\nare to be covered, adjusting one side of"}, {"page_pdf": 53, "page_imprimee": "81", "url_page": "https://bluemountain.princeton.edu/bluemtn/?a=d&d=bmtnaau192604-01.1.53", "debut_caractere": 0, "fin_caractere_exclue": 2167, "texte": "each canvas to the front edge of its sec-\ntion. To the other edges one will attach\ntwo or three ends of cord, or as many\nas shall be necessary according to the size\nof the canvas.\nThese cords have to be twice as\nlong as the length of the said canvasses,\nand run in pulleys, which must be placed\nat the extreme outer edge of each section\nof the sky which is to be clouded over.\nThe aforesaid Canvasses shall then be\nrolled up or gathered together in the po-\nsitions indicated above, in such wise that\nthey may not be seen by those out in front.\nWhen all these things have been pre-\npared and adjusted, one will, in the ap-\npointed places, set the men, each of whom\nmust hold in his hand his end of the\ncords ; and, at the moment when the\noperation has to take place, all will pull\nthe cords in unison, so that in that instant\nthe parts of the sky will be covered over\nwith the cloud-painted canvasses.\nShould one then wish the sky to re-\nturn as before, one can double the cords,\nand, pulling their other ends, one will see\nthe sections of the sky uncovering, and\nreappearing as they were before.\nIn this manner one will also be able to\ncloud over the foremost section of the sky,\nplacing a piece of canvas front edge of it.\nLet the first section of the sky be A. B.\nand the second C. D., which has to be in-\nstantaneously clouded over: and let the piece\nof cloud-painted canvas be rolled up and ga-\nthered together at E.; and let the rope be\nE. F. G.: and let the end E be sewn to the\ncanvas at E., passing through the pulley in\nF. and returning with its final end to G.\nThe person who is to operate will,\nthen, hold in his hands the end of the\ncord G. ; and at the appointed time will\ninstantly draw the cord towards him with\nspeed, so that the edge of the canvas E.\nwill arrive at F. In this manner one will\nhave caused the piece of sky C. D. to\nbe clouded over.\nOne will operate by the same method\nin regard to the other sections of the sky.\nOne will also be able to pull the other\nend of the cords, which are set above\nthe said canvas, and must be of such a\nlength that E., the front edge ,of the\ncanvas, when it was in F., may return\nto its former position in E."}]}, {"article_id": "bm-bmtnaau-1926-04-01-c034", "article_bluemountain": "bmtnaau_1926-04_01#c034", "volume": "bmtnaau_1926-04_01", "ocr_source": "OCR Blue Mountain (ALTO), transcription TEI : lignes lb/@facs", "texte_sans_correction": true, "page_debut": "79", "page_fin": "79", "image_debut": 51, "image_fin": 51, "pages_selon": "pagination imprimée relevée dans le METS Blue Mountain (ORDERLABEL) ; [n] = page sans folio restituée", "url_article": "https://bluemountain.princeton.edu/bluemtn/?a=d&d=bmtnaau192604-01.2.14.1", "titre_corps": "Figure 1", "titre_sommaire": "Figure 1", "signature_source": "", "controle": "bornes données par la structure logique METS/ALTO de Blue Mountain (blocs ALTO de chaque constituant)", "pages": [{"page_pdf": 51, "page_imprimee": "79", "url_page": "https://bluemountain.princeton.edu/bluemtn/?a=d&d=bmtnaau192604-01.1.51", "debut_caractere": 2766, "fin_caractere_exclue": 2775, "texte": "Figure 1."}]}, {"article_id": "bm-bmtnaau-1926-04-01-c035", "article_bluemountain": "bmtnaau_1926-04_01#c035", "volume": "bmtnaau_1926-04_01", "ocr_source": "OCR Blue Mountain (ALTO), transcription TEI : lignes lb/@facs", "texte_sans_correction": true, "page_debut": "79", "page_fin": "79", "image_debut": 51, "image_fin": 51, "pages_selon": "pagination imprimée relevée dans le METS Blue Mountain (ORDERLABEL) ; [n] = page sans folio restituée", "url_article": "https://bluemountain.princeton.edu/bluemtn/?a=d&d=bmtnaau192604-01.2.14.2", "titre_corps": "Figure 2", "titre_sommaire": "Figure 2", "signature_source": "", "controle": "bornes données par la structure logique METS/ALTO de Blue Mountain (blocs ALTO de chaque constituant)", "pages": [{"page_pdf": 51, "page_imprimee": "79", "url_page": "https://bluemountain.princeton.edu/bluemtn/?a=d&d=bmtnaau192604-01.1.51", "debut_caractere": 3281, "fin_caractere_exclue": 3290, "texte": "Figure 2."}]}, {"article_id": "bm-bmtnaau-1926-04-01-c036", "article_bluemountain": "bmtnaau_1926-04_01#c036", "volume": "bmtnaau_1926-04_01", "ocr_source": "OCR Blue Mountain (ALTO), transcription TEI : lignes lb/@facs", "texte_sans_correction": true, "page_debut": "80", "page_fin": "80", "image_debut": 52, "image_fin": 52, "pages_selon": "pagination imprimée relevée dans le METS Blue Mountain (ORDERLABEL) ; [n] = page sans folio restituée", "url_article": "https://bluemountain.princeton.edu/bluemtn/?a=d&d=bmtnaau192604-01.2.14.3", "titre_corps": "Figure 3", "titre_sommaire": "Figure 3", "signature_source": "", "controle": "bornes données par la structure logique METS/ALTO de Blue Mountain (blocs ALTO de chaque constituant)", "pages": [{"page_pdf": 52, "page_imprimee": "80", "url_page": "https://bluemountain.princeton.edu/bluemtn/?a=d&d=bmtnaau192604-01.1.52", "debut_caractere": 3166, "fin_caractere_exclue": 3175, "texte": "Figure 3."}]}, {"article_id": "bm-bmtnaau-1926-04-01-c037", "article_bluemountain": "bmtnaau_1926-04_01#c037", "volume": "bmtnaau_1926-04_01", "ocr_source": "OCR Blue Mountain (ALTO), transcription TEI : lignes lb/@facs", "texte_sans_correction": true, "page_debut": "81", "page_fin": "81", "image_debut": 53, "image_fin": 53, "pages_selon": "pagination imprimée relevée dans le METS Blue Mountain (ORDERLABEL) ; [n] = page sans folio restituée", "url_article": "https://bluemountain.princeton.edu/bluemtn/?a=d&d=bmtnaau192604-01.2.14.4", "titre_corps": "Figure 4", "titre_sommaire": "Figure 4", "signature_source": "", "controle": "bornes données par la structure logique METS/ALTO de Blue Mountain (blocs ALTO de chaque constituant)", "pages": [{"page_pdf": 53, "page_imprimee": "81", "url_page": "https://bluemountain.princeton.edu/bluemtn/?a=d&d=bmtnaau192604-01.1.53", "debut_caractere": 2169, "fin_caractere_exclue": 2178, "texte": "Figure 4."}]}, {"article_id": "bm-bmtnaau-1926-04-01-c039", "article_bluemountain": "bmtnaau_1926-04_01#c039", "volume": "bmtnaau_1926-04_01", "ocr_source": "OCR Blue Mountain (ALTO), transcription TEI : lignes lb/@facs", "texte_sans_correction": true, "page_debut": "81", "page_fin": "82", "image_debut": 53, "image_fin": 54, "pages_selon": "pagination imprimée relevée dans le METS Blue Mountain (ORDERLABEL) ; [n] = page sans folio restituée", "url_article": "https://bluemountain.princeton.edu/bluemtn/?a=d&d=bmtnaau192604-01.2.15", "titre_corps": "THE COLOSSUS SPEAKS", "titre_sommaire": "THE COLOSSUS SPEAKS", "signature_source": "", "controle": "bornes données par la structure logique METS/ALTO de Blue Mountain (blocs ALTO de chaque constituant)", "pages": [{"page_pdf": 53, "page_imprimee": "81", "url_page": "https://bluemountain.princeton.edu/bluemtn/?a=d&d=bmtnaau192604-01.1.53", "debut_caractere": 2180, "fin_caractere_exclue": 3564, "texte": "THE COLOSSUS SPEAKS.\n\nUNDER THIS HEADING MR. BERNARD\nSHAW ADDRESSES AN OPEN LETTER\nTO MR. GORDON CRAIG. (1)\n\nMy dear Gordon Craig.\nIn so far as my colossiousness is not a legitimate\nstage effect which you would be the last man to dispa-\nrage, it is something that I cannot help, I can only apo-\nlogize and plead that I was born so. How would you\nalter me if you could ?\nYou are quite right in saying that the contribution\nI and my followers (in the chronological sense) have made\nto the drama is not an artistic contribution. Wycherley\ncould say what he had to say as well as I, and could\nput it on the stage with as much art. Congreve was as\nfine an artist as Granville-Barker. The fact that Man and\nSuperman leaves The Country Wife so far behind that I\ncannot persuade people that the two authors belong to the\nsame species, and the stupendous superiority of The Ma-\ndras House to the Way of the World, is due wholly to\nthe difference in the subject matter and the mental ca-\npacity of the authors. Wycherley and Congreve thought\nwomen over thirty ridiculous, venereal disease funny,\nand the betrayal of an old husband by a young wife\nscreamingly laughable. That covers their entire recorded\nbody of thought. Ido not share these tastes; and if I\ndid, I have something more important to think about and\n\n(i) For Mr Gordon Craig's article. \" The Colossus \" see\nThe Mask. January 1926."}, {"page_pdf": 54, "page_imprimee": "82", "url_page": "https://bluemountain.princeton.edu/bluemtn/?a=d&d=bmtnaau192604-01.1.54", "debut_caractere": 0, "fin_caractere_exclue": 6814, "texte": "make an audience think about. I have nothing in common\nwith Wycherley and Congreve except our art, and an in-\ndefensible but irrisistible love of acting for its own sake.\nAnd I daresay Granville-Barker would say the same.\nBut this is not what has drawn a reply from me to\nyour sally. You have brought against me the unjust ac-\ncusation that I have thrust everybody else off the stage.\nYou specify our friend Henry Arthur Jones as a case in\npoint. Now the truth is that I could not get my last play\ninto the theatre until Henry Arthur gracefully made way\nfor me by suspending the performance of a play of his\nwhich was still unexhausted after a long run. When, long\nbefore the war, Mr Jones renounced his London vogue\nand withdrew to America, he did so, not because he was\ncrowded out, but because, like Shakespeare, he fell into a\nmood of disillusion with English society which he expressed\nin plays compared to which Timon of Athens seemed a\ngenial optimistic comedy, He went away because he could\nnot stand us any longer, not in the least because we could\nnot stand him. When he returned after the war he found\nhimself for a time excluded from the London West End\ntheatres ; but so were we all. The war had raised theatre\nrents to a figure which no serious author's following\ncould cover. When the situation was eased by the sub-\nstitution of the sharing system for the renting system he\nmade a triumphant return with the play that kept mine\nwaiting. Your sympathies are due to me, not to him : all\nthe more so as his misanthropy has taken a most unfor-\ntunate turn for me. He could not feel like Timon to-\nwards his country when the war smote it. He forgave\nit, but forgave it on the very unexpected ground that its\nfaults were the result of it? having been misled by two\nfiends in human shape, tri-initialled and one-syllabled, by\nname H. G. Wells and G. B. Shaw. What could we say\nbut that if the indictment he brought against his entire\nnation can be narrowed down to a gorgeous burst of his\nbest invective against two harmless individuals, we will\nsuffer meekly for of reconciling him to his own people ?\nThus Mr Jones's cause is not really your point.\nWhen next you are moved to accuse me of shutting the\ndoors of the theatre on my fellow playwrights just as Mr\nJones accuses me of shutting the gates of mercy on man-\nkind, pause and remember what the theatre was when I\nstormed it, and what it is now. As far as serious original\nwork was concerned there were two men in possession,\nPinero and Jones, and two new arrivals in the offing:\nBarrie and Carton. The others were translating from the\nFrench or writing comic operas, or complaining bitterly\nthat they were being kept out of the theatre by an ima-\nginary Ring. Today the first policeman you ask can, with-\nout mentioning Pinero, Jones, Carton, Barrie or myself,\nreel you off a list of twenty established West End London\nplaywrights, enjoying a liberty of subject and treatment,\nand a standing in literature (to say nothing of the fortunes\nthey have in their film rights) which drive the aforesaid\nP, J, B, C, and G. B. S. to shake their fists at the hea-\nvens and ask despairingly why they were not born fifty\nyears later. And you, Edward, have had a splendid\nshare in this triumph over the Philistines. In the nine-\nteenth century they did not know what you were talking\nabout: today they may not know much better; but you\nare the most famous theatre man in Europe. Twenty\nyears ago Charles Ricketts made a stage picture of the\nthird act of Man and Superman which neither he nor any\nother artist in Europe has surpassed or can surpass. No-\nbody took the slightest notice of it then. Today it would\nmake ten reputations. I am actually asked what would\nSt Joan have been without Ricketts: and I am obliged\nto confess that it would have been a mere sketch in black\nand white.\nAnd you have the face to tell me that I have closed\nthe theatre to everyone but myself! that its wide walls\nencompass but one man! Ungrateful Edward!\nBut I forgive you for the sake of your deftly im-\nplied flatteries.\nEver yours, a little the worse for wear.\n\nG. Bernard Shaw.\n\nA WORD FROM MR. GORDON CRAIG.\nGordon Craig.\nDear Mr. Shaw.\nWriting of you — of George Bernard Shaw — is\none thing. Writing to you is quite another — for then\nto me you are another being.\nI see that you allow me to print your letter in \" The\nMask \" for you send it almost as an article : you enclose a\ncard with George Bernard Shaw's compliments and the\nkind after thought This — if you care for it — shall\nremain exclusive to The Mask.\nThat, if you will allow me to say so* is typical of\nthe generous sort of thing I am told you do and most people\nwould forget to do ; it is also typical that you should\ntake the care to give a head line to your letter \" THE\nCOLOSSUS SPEAKS\". \"The Mask\" might other-\nwise have been so daring as to put as heading, \" THE\nCOLOSSUS REPLIES \", — thereby attempting to snatch at a\nchance of making itself more important than it is.\nHad you not made it clear to me that you wanted\nthe letter printed in \" The Mask \"# I should have been\ninclined to pocket it and write my word of thanks privately\nto you, instead of doing so through the little magazine.\nFor as you see, by writing before the public I have\nto give away an especially awkward fact which is that I\nhardly know you. Others who have met you six, ten,\ntwenty times and come to know you well, doubtless call\nyou Bernard or G> B. S.: whereas I, having met you\nbut thrice, and quite by chance, am perforce obliged by\nthe courtesy of our country to address you in my letter\nas Mr. Shaw, it being the first time I have heard from\nyou or written to you.\nThis is rather a come-down. It is true I might\nstart as you do, and address you by your professional\ntitle — your full name ; but I am not, alas, privileged to\ndrop ceremony when half through and plunge on you\nwith \" Look here, George, it won't wash \" ; and as I may\nnot do this I prefer to stick to ceremony.\nSo that this note must be the very briefest: — must\nbegin and end in thanking you for your letter, which will\nprove to be the most popular item \" The Mask has\never featured.\nBut as this brief note is not at all the sort of thing which\nmy own little public expects from me, allow 'me here to\nreassure them before you of my determination to return\nbefore long to a subject I feel sure they are not yet tired\nof, and seemingly never will be.... The subject—G. B. S.\nYours sincerely.\nGenova .\nCareful j-eaders of Mr. Gordon Craig's article \" 7he\nColossus \" published in the January number of \" The Mask \"\nand to which Mr. Bernard Shaw replies in this number will\nnote that Mr Henry Arthur Jones was not cited as one who\nwas thrust off the stae'e by Mr. Shaw. Mr. Jones was there\nlong before Mr. Shaw appeared and has a position fixed and\nenviable. Editor,"}]}, {"article_id": "bm-bmtnaau-1926-04-01-c040", "article_bluemountain": "bmtnaau_1926-04_01#c040", "volume": "bmtnaau_1926-04_01", "ocr_source": "OCR Blue Mountain (ALTO), transcription TEI : lignes lb/@facs", "texte_sans_correction": true, "page_debut": "81", "page_fin": "82", "image_debut": 53, "image_fin": 54, "pages_selon": "pagination imprimée relevée dans le METS Blue Mountain (ORDERLABEL) ; [n] = page sans folio restituée", "url_article": "https://bluemountain.princeton.edu/bluemtn/?a=d&d=bmtnaau192604-01.2.15.1", "titre_corps": "UNDER THIS HEADING MR. BERNARD SHAW ADDRESSES AN OPEN LETTER TO MR. GORDON CRAIG. (1)", "titre_sommaire": "UNDER THIS HEADING MR. BERNARD SHAW ADDRESSES AN OPEN LETTER TO MR. GORDON CRAIG. (1)", "signature_source": "G. Bernard Shaw", "controle": "bornes données par la structure logique METS/ALTO de Blue Mountain (blocs ALTO de chaque constituant)", "pages": [{"page_pdf": 53, "page_imprimee": "81", "url_page": "https://bluemountain.princeton.edu/bluemtn/?a=d&d=bmtnaau192604-01.1.53", "debut_caractere": 2202, "fin_caractere_exclue": 3564, "texte": "UNDER THIS HEADING MR. BERNARD\nSHAW ADDRESSES AN OPEN LETTER\nTO MR. GORDON CRAIG. (1)\n\nMy dear Gordon Craig.\nIn so far as my colossiousness is not a legitimate\nstage effect which you would be the last man to dispa-\nrage, it is something that I cannot help, I can only apo-\nlogize and plead that I was born so. How would you\nalter me if you could ?\nYou are quite right in saying that the contribution\nI and my followers (in the chronological sense) have made\nto the drama is not an artistic contribution. Wycherley\ncould say what he had to say as well as I, and could\nput it on the stage with as much art. Congreve was as\nfine an artist as Granville-Barker. The fact that Man and\nSuperman leaves The Country Wife so far behind that I\ncannot persuade people that the two authors belong to the\nsame species, and the stupendous superiority of The Ma-\ndras House to the Way of the World, is due wholly to\nthe difference in the subject matter and the mental ca-\npacity of the authors. Wycherley and Congreve thought\nwomen over thirty ridiculous, venereal disease funny,\nand the betrayal of an old husband by a young wife\nscreamingly laughable. That covers their entire recorded\nbody of thought. Ido not share these tastes; and if I\ndid, I have something more important to think about and\n\n(i) For Mr Gordon Craig's article. \" The Colossus \" see\nThe Mask. January 1926."}, {"page_pdf": 54, "page_imprimee": "82", "url_page": "https://bluemountain.princeton.edu/bluemtn/?a=d&d=bmtnaau192604-01.1.54", "debut_caractere": 0, "fin_caractere_exclue": 4115, "texte": "make an audience think about. I have nothing in common\nwith Wycherley and Congreve except our art, and an in-\ndefensible but irrisistible love of acting for its own sake.\nAnd I daresay Granville-Barker would say the same.\nBut this is not what has drawn a reply from me to\nyour sally. You have brought against me the unjust ac-\ncusation that I have thrust everybody else off the stage.\nYou specify our friend Henry Arthur Jones as a case in\npoint. Now the truth is that I could not get my last play\ninto the theatre until Henry Arthur gracefully made way\nfor me by suspending the performance of a play of his\nwhich was still unexhausted after a long run. When, long\nbefore the war, Mr Jones renounced his London vogue\nand withdrew to America, he did so, not because he was\ncrowded out, but because, like Shakespeare, he fell into a\nmood of disillusion with English society which he expressed\nin plays compared to which Timon of Athens seemed a\ngenial optimistic comedy, He went away because he could\nnot stand us any longer, not in the least because we could\nnot stand him. When he returned after the war he found\nhimself for a time excluded from the London West End\ntheatres ; but so were we all. The war had raised theatre\nrents to a figure which no serious author's following\ncould cover. When the situation was eased by the sub-\nstitution of the sharing system for the renting system he\nmade a triumphant return with the play that kept mine\nwaiting. Your sympathies are due to me, not to him : all\nthe more so as his misanthropy has taken a most unfor-\ntunate turn for me. He could not feel like Timon to-\nwards his country when the war smote it. He forgave\nit, but forgave it on the very unexpected ground that its\nfaults were the result of it? having been misled by two\nfiends in human shape, tri-initialled and one-syllabled, by\nname H. G. Wells and G. B. Shaw. What could we say\nbut that if the indictment he brought against his entire\nnation can be narrowed down to a gorgeous burst of his\nbest invective against two harmless individuals, we will\nsuffer meekly for of reconciling him to his own people ?\nThus Mr Jones's cause is not really your point.\nWhen next you are moved to accuse me of shutting the\ndoors of the theatre on my fellow playwrights just as Mr\nJones accuses me of shutting the gates of mercy on man-\nkind, pause and remember what the theatre was when I\nstormed it, and what it is now. As far as serious original\nwork was concerned there were two men in possession,\nPinero and Jones, and two new arrivals in the offing:\nBarrie and Carton. The others were translating from the\nFrench or writing comic operas, or complaining bitterly\nthat they were being kept out of the theatre by an ima-\nginary Ring. Today the first policeman you ask can, with-\nout mentioning Pinero, Jones, Carton, Barrie or myself,\nreel you off a list of twenty established West End London\nplaywrights, enjoying a liberty of subject and treatment,\nand a standing in literature (to say nothing of the fortunes\nthey have in their film rights) which drive the aforesaid\nP, J, B, C, and G. B. S. to shake their fists at the hea-\nvens and ask despairingly why they were not born fifty\nyears later. And you, Edward, have had a splendid\nshare in this triumph over the Philistines. In the nine-\nteenth century they did not know what you were talking\nabout: today they may not know much better; but you\nare the most famous theatre man in Europe. Twenty\nyears ago Charles Ricketts made a stage picture of the\nthird act of Man and Superman which neither he nor any\nother artist in Europe has surpassed or can surpass. No-\nbody took the slightest notice of it then. Today it would\nmake ten reputations. I am actually asked what would\nSt Joan have been without Ricketts: and I am obliged\nto confess that it would have been a mere sketch in black\nand white.\nAnd you have the face to tell me that I have closed\nthe theatre to everyone but myself! that its wide walls\nencompass but one man! Ungrateful Edward!\nBut I forgive you for the sake of your deftly im-\nplied flatteries.\nEver yours, a little the worse for wear.\n\nG. Bernard Shaw."}]}, {"article_id": "bm-bmtnaau-1926-04-01-c041", "article_bluemountain": "bmtnaau_1926-04_01#c041", "volume": "bmtnaau_1926-04_01", "ocr_source": "OCR Blue Mountain (ALTO), transcription TEI : lignes lb/@facs", "texte_sans_correction": true, "page_debut": "82", "page_fin": "82", "image_debut": 54, "image_fin": 54, "pages_selon": "pagination imprimée relevée dans le METS Blue Mountain (ORDERLABEL) ; [n] = page sans folio restituée", "url_article": "https://bluemountain.princeton.edu/bluemtn/?a=d&d=bmtnaau192604-01.2.15.2", "titre_corps": "A WORD FROM MR. GORDON CRAIG", "titre_sommaire": "A WORD FROM MR. GORDON CRAIG", "signature_source": "Gordon Craig", "controle": "bornes données par la structure logique METS/ALTO de Blue Mountain (blocs ALTO de chaque constituant)", "pages": [{"page_pdf": 54, "page_imprimee": "82", "url_page": "https://bluemountain.princeton.edu/bluemtn/?a=d&d=bmtnaau192604-01.1.54", "debut_caractere": 4117, "fin_caractere_exclue": 6814, "texte": "A WORD FROM MR. GORDON CRAIG.\nGordon Craig.\nDear Mr. Shaw.\nWriting of you — of George Bernard Shaw — is\none thing. Writing to you is quite another — for then\nto me you are another being.\nI see that you allow me to print your letter in \" The\nMask \" for you send it almost as an article : you enclose a\ncard with George Bernard Shaw's compliments and the\nkind after thought This — if you care for it — shall\nremain exclusive to The Mask.\nThat, if you will allow me to say so* is typical of\nthe generous sort of thing I am told you do and most people\nwould forget to do ; it is also typical that you should\ntake the care to give a head line to your letter \" THE\nCOLOSSUS SPEAKS\". \"The Mask\" might other-\nwise have been so daring as to put as heading, \" THE\nCOLOSSUS REPLIES \", — thereby attempting to snatch at a\nchance of making itself more important than it is.\nHad you not made it clear to me that you wanted\nthe letter printed in \" The Mask \"# I should have been\ninclined to pocket it and write my word of thanks privately\nto you, instead of doing so through the little magazine.\nFor as you see, by writing before the public I have\nto give away an especially awkward fact which is that I\nhardly know you. Others who have met you six, ten,\ntwenty times and come to know you well, doubtless call\nyou Bernard or G> B. S.: whereas I, having met you\nbut thrice, and quite by chance, am perforce obliged by\nthe courtesy of our country to address you in my letter\nas Mr. Shaw, it being the first time I have heard from\nyou or written to you.\nThis is rather a come-down. It is true I might\nstart as you do, and address you by your professional\ntitle — your full name ; but I am not, alas, privileged to\ndrop ceremony when half through and plunge on you\nwith \" Look here, George, it won't wash \" ; and as I may\nnot do this I prefer to stick to ceremony.\nSo that this note must be the very briefest: — must\nbegin and end in thanking you for your letter, which will\nprove to be the most popular item \" The Mask has\never featured.\nBut as this brief note is not at all the sort of thing which\nmy own little public expects from me, allow 'me here to\nreassure them before you of my determination to return\nbefore long to a subject I feel sure they are not yet tired\nof, and seemingly never will be.... The subject—G. B. S.\nYours sincerely.\nGenova .\nCareful j-eaders of Mr. Gordon Craig's article \" 7he\nColossus \" published in the January number of \" The Mask \"\nand to which Mr. Bernard Shaw replies in this number will\nnote that Mr Henry Arthur Jones was not cited as one who\nwas thrust off the stae'e by Mr. Shaw. Mr. Jones was there\nlong before Mr. Shaw appeared and has a position fixed and\nenviable. Editor,"}]}, {"article_id": "bm-bmtnaau-1926-04-01-c042", "article_bluemountain": "bmtnaau_1926-04_01#c042", "volume": "bmtnaau_1926-04_01", "ocr_source": "OCR Blue Mountain (ALTO), transcription TEI : lignes lb/@facs", "texte_sans_correction": true, "page_debut": "83", "page_fin": "86", "image_debut": 55, "image_fin": 58, "pages_selon": "pagination imprimée relevée dans le METS Blue Mountain (ORDERLABEL) ; [n] = page sans folio restituée", "url_article": "https://bluemountain.princeton.edu/bluemtn/?a=d&d=bmtnaau192604-01.2.16", "titre_corps": "BOOK REVIEWS", "titre_sommaire": "BOOK REVIEWS", "signature_source": "", "controle": "bornes données par la structure logique METS/ALTO de Blue Mountain (blocs ALTO de chaque constituant)", "pages": [{"page_pdf": 55, "page_imprimee": "83", "url_page": "https://bluemountain.princeton.edu/bluemtn/?a=d&d=bmtnaau192604-01.1.55", "debut_caractere": 0, "fin_caractere_exclue": 6284, "texte": "BOOK REVIEWS.\n\nSOPHOCLES; Loeb Classical Li-\nbrary. Heinemann Ltd. 2 Vols.\n10/6 per vol.\nMY LIFE AND WORK, Henry\nFord. Heinemann Ltd. Price not marked.\nTHE 'HELEN' OF EURIPIDES;\nTranslated by J. T. Sheppard. Cam-\nbridge University Press. 2j.\nMUSIC HALL NIGHTS by Dion\nClayton Calthrop. John Lane. 6/—\nTHE AUTOBIOGRAPHY OF AN\nATTITUDE by G. J. Nathan.\nKnopf. New York. Price not marked.\nI know very little about Mr. James\nLoeb except that he is a retired\nBanker and is a rich man—in this he\nresembles Mr. Henry Ford: I am\nhappy to say I possess many volumes\nof the Classics which Mr. Loeb had\nthe wit to spread around, the wisdom\nto «•••••\nBut I write here as though I knew\nall about Mr. Loeb. I wish I did.\nI know all about Mr. Ford. 1 wish\nI didn't.\nTwo rich men : the first distingui-\nshed, educated, and I don't doubt\ngifted: the second obviously gifted,\nundistinguished, and innocent of a great\nmany things.\nMr Ford's Life and Work both\nbore me to death. Otherwise he is\ndelightful. For he seems to be an\nactive, good-natured little man, and as\nan assistant to Mr. Loeb would have\ndone well. I mean by that would\nhave done well from my point of view;\nfor after all, to make or cause to be\nmade a Ford car is only to do well\nin a very limited way; to cause a\nmillion or two million cars to be made\nis to do less well and the way still\nnarrower : to amass millions of dollars\nin doing this is creditable, for it is\neasier to lose millions unless you are\ncareful. Careful Mr. Ford, believing\nthat to be careful is the full sum of\nexistence (and it is very much), asks\ncarelessly in his book in chapter 13\nthis very poor question: \" WHY BE\nPOOR ? \" He doesn't answer it be-\n\"'i\ncause the only approach to a reply is\ncontained in another question, 14 WHY\nNOT ? \"\nHad Mr. Ford been one of Mr.\nLoeb's assistants some of the faults of\nthe Loeb Classical Library would as-\nsuredly have been eliminated. First\nof all the little faults of production :\nthe translators would have been assis-\nted by one or two poet-scholars\nand the following passage would have\nbeen bettered :\nMessenger. Know that he took\nthee from my hands, a gift.\nCEdipus. Yet, if no child of his,\nhe loved me well.\nMessenger. A childless man till\nthen, he warmed to thee.\n(Edipus. A foundling or a pur-\nchased slave, this child ?\nMessenger. 1 found thee in Cithoe-\nron's wooded glens.\nCEdipus. What led thee to explore\nthose upland glades ?\nMessenger. My business was to\ntend the mountain flocks.\nCEdipus. A vagrant shepherd jour-\nneying for hire ?\nMessenger. True, but thy saviour\nin that hour, my son—and, so on.\n1 hold that Professor J T. Shep-\npard would have done this better.\nHe takes more liberties I suppose with\nhis Greek friends* work, but what of\nthat; he keeps us all alive. You can\nread his 44 Helen \" and not hate Euri-\npides or Loeb, or Sheppard, or your\nlibrary, or life itself. Mr. Ford would\nprobably have plumped for Sheppard\ntoo and he would have fitted out two\nor three romantic yachts and sought\nfor and found Sheppard.\nAgain Mr. Ford, as enthusiast and\nassistant, would have seen to it that in\neach volume we were told of Mr.\nLoeb and his intention in doing this\nexcellent work. This would have\nbeen made clear by a series of essays\nby the very best prose writers of the\nage. He would have added three or\nfour volumes of chronology and topo-\ngraphy by the finest scholars.\nThen in the difficult matter of dis-\ntribution how useful Henry Ford\ncould have been. He would have\nseen to it that we alt were enabled to\nget these lovely books, and for a more\nreasonable sum. He would have is-\nsued several million copies and forced\nthese into our hand :—willingly after\nsome delay (in fact till we began to\nappreciate the gift) we should have\npaid up our two or three shillings per\nvolume. As it is they cost much\nmore.\nI grieve that a man like Ford is\nallowed, is even forced, to waste his\nexceptional carefulness and his astoun-\nding energy on turning out useless cars.\nThere are enough cars already and\nenough car makers; whereas good as-\nsistants are rare, and Mr. Loeb lacked\njust such an assistant as Mr. Ford\nwould have made.\nOf Mr. Henry Ford's book it is\nneedless to say anything. He has\nbeen flattered by the press as only a\nfabulously rich man can be flattered,\nand it is Mr. Samuel Crowther, who\nhas written the book for him and done\nit amazingly well, that must be com-\nplemented.\nC| Lest it be supposed that 1 decry\nall the Loeb translations let me add\nthat they are often very good, but some-\ntimes it seems as though a tramway\nticket collector had pushed through\nand- got the job. Poets and fine\nprose writers should have been called\nto assist at this work. If Sir Edmund\nGosse or Prof. Gilbert Murray were\ntoo busy, another such man of taste\nand discernment could perhaps have\nbeen found to control the entire edi-\ntion. Why wasn't it done ? I believe\nthat the search broke down too early\nbecause Henry Ford was allowed to\nbecome a boss instead of remaining\nwhat he was born to be, a first-class\nassistant.\nI do regret that there are not more\npictures in the Loeb Library. Some\nPortraits of the Masters, only too often\nreproduced, do adorn the little vo-\nlumes ; but I miss the kind of thing\nwhich Dion Clayton Calthrop gives us\nin his 44 Music Hall Nights \", a rea-\ndable book with little classic touches\nabout the mouth-organ which is 44 full\not Pagan joys If only the Pagan\nliterature was allowed today to be\neven as Pagan as a mouth-organ, who\nwould ever feel as I feel towards\nE. Capps PH. D,, LLD.; T. E. Page,\nLitt. D. ; W. H. D. Rouse, Litt. D.\nthe able and scholarly editors of the\nLoeb Library, and the absent Mr.\nHenry Ford for shirking the whole\nbusiness. Mr. Loeb almost did a great\nthing, and would have done it had he\nenlisted under him not only scholarly\nbeings but living human men of ge-\nnius. Poets, prose-writers,... all the\nunemployed writers of real talent. With\nFord over them each would have been\nforced to supply his bit, and to trans-\nlate the Classics a whole little world\nis needed, one putting in bolts all day,\nanother spraying on the colour, a third\ngiving a wheel a shove, a fourth saying\n44 yes \", a fifth.... in short, the work\nof Ford, plus the incantation of the\nwitches in Macbeth, plus some scho-\nlarly agonies, and the thing couldn't\nhave gone wrong."}, {"page_pdf": 56, "page_imprimee": "84", "url_page": "https://bluemountain.princeton.edu/bluemtn/?a=d&d=bmtnaau192604-01.1.56", "debut_caractere": 0, "fin_caractere_exclue": 6769, "texte": "Although my whole life has been\nspent writing reviews of books seated in\nthe corner of the inner room in the\nold Inn of Wine Office Court, I too could\nhave helped Loeb. I could have help-\ned to steady the unemployed.\nI could have gone over to America\nto look for talent, for that is not where\nFord would have failed to look for, but\nonly failed to discover, talent. I should\nin those days fifteen years ago have\nspotted talented Mr. Nathan. I would\nhave taken him to Bedford Street.\nI should have done as I have said,\nand led him meekly round to Mr.\nHeinemann and he would soon have\nfixed him up, given him a good con-\ntract, and we should now both be hel-\nping Mr. Loeb (under Henry Ford);\ninstead of which there goes poor Na-\nthan philosophising, attitudinizing and\nkeeping Alfred A. Knopf far too busy.\nBut Nathan will write on, and I\nwill write on, and Calthrop will listen\nin, and Sheppard will be roped in to\nthe Greekeries at the Scala, and Ford\nwill fool away his time out of his right\nplace, and Loeb will do good things\nsomewhere else, and Sophocles will\nsuffer. And all because the twentieth\ncentury considers it a virtue that each\nman shall be out of his right place.\nNo, Mr. Loeb, finally no. I ad-\nmire and applaud your intentions and\nyou really have achieved a great deal;\nbut had you only perceived that it was\nin your power to make your Library\nblaze like the bush of Moses, you could\nhave reversed History. But are you\neven now going to sit down and allow\nlittle Mr. Ford to make rules for Life\nand Work,—even at the eleventh hour\nare you going to allow that ?\n\nTHE WAY TO SKETCH, Vernon\nBlaise. Oxford University Press. 7/6\nDRAWINGS FOR THE THEA-\nTRE, R. E. Jones; Theatre Arts Inc.\nU. S. A. $ 5.00\nPAUL SCHEURICH, Dr. Oskar\nFischel. Rembrandt Verlag, Berlin,\n(price not marked).\nMR. Blake, in telling us how to\nsketch, seems to me to enjoy\nhimself to the extent of forgetting those\nof us who would like to hear how to\nsketch.\n\" Some people \" he says, delibera-\ntely not looking in our direction, \"\npeople find a difficulty in throwing the\neye out of focus ' : and then he pro-\nceeds to explain how we fools can\nachieve the simple operation, and I am\nforcibly reminded of a recipe I once\nread for making Blue Sky. He says\n*' Hold the finger up about six inches\nfrom the eye and look at it ; then, ma-\nking up your mind not to change the\nstate of the accommodating muscles\nof the eye, suddenly remove the finger;\nyou will see all the objects before you,\nat a greater distance than six inches\nenveloped and without detail. I have\nfound this dodge most useful in \"\netc, etc, etc.\nHe gives us eight sketches by Corot,\nRenoir, Turner and others, and one of\nhis own as a colour plate.\nI like Mr. Blake for the thorough-\nhearted way he enjoys himself and\nhis own productions. He gives us in\nall nineteen of his own sketches.... and\nan extra one on the cover, ....perhaps\nthe least successful of the twenty, but\nhe forgets to show us how the great\nsketchers Van Gogh, Callot, or Daumier\ndid the business.\nI weary a little of Mr. Blake and\nturn with considerable pleasure the\npages of an admirable book of sketches\nby Mr. R. E. Jones.\nHere is someone who knows how\nto sketch, and, as is usual nowadays,\nhe is employed to do something else.\nAnd yet not always and not every-\nwhere is this so. In Germany men\nare sometimes put to the task they\nwere born for, and Paul Scheurich\nwas certainly born to draw, to paint\nand to sketch. Alas, Scheurich lures\nme away from Jones. He sketches\neverything, anything, ....theatres and\nactors sometimes; thank God not all\nthe time. Four of his designs are for\nVoltaire's \" Candide \", others for\n\" Hundschen der Marquise \" and these\ndelight me with their grace, a quality\nlacking entirely in the sketches cf\nR. E. Jones.\nBut then Paul Scheurich has not\ndeserted his Muse for the Theatre as\nMr. Jones has been forced to do. Mr.\nJones succeeds most admirably in\nsome sketches for a production of\n\" Richard 1111 think these represent\nhis best work for the stage, and. they\nare good as sketches.\nThere can be no comparison between\nthe work of the two men, Scheurich\nso cultured, so graceful, so far advanced,\nand Jones so immature although but\nfour years his junior: still one can com-\npare the fate of the two. And it says\nvery much for Germany and very little\nfor America.\n\nWHO'S WHO IN\nTRE, b\\) John Palmer. Pitman &\nSons. 255. net.\nMR. Parker's work is well known\nby now for this is the fifth edi-\ntion revised and enlarged, of the best\nbook on the subject, and very good\nat that.\nIt tells us who is who in the Thea-\ntre, but it also tells us who was who.\nAnd in the book's Theatrical Calendar\nhe tells us \" what was what \" as far\nback as the 16th centmy.\nAnd here most men would have\nstopped, and it is here that Mr. Pal-\nmer generously goes on. He gives us\nthe names of all the Dramatic Critics—\nor nearly all, for a few are omitted,\nincluding Mr. Horace Wyndham. He\ngives us ninety tables of Theatrical\nFamilies, Mr. J. M. Bulloch helping\nhim there. The longest \" runs \" are\nall listed, \" Chu-Chin-Chow \" with\n2,238 performances being well ahead\nof all others : \" Charley's Aunt\" being\nsecond with 1,466. Some only total-\nling 100, .... a long enough run one\nwould have thought.\nWe are then given a list of West-\nend Theatres, details about these pla-\nces, sizes, addresses, managers' names,\ntelephones, all very exact and excel-\nlent, and to me immensely instructive,\nA list of performers who have pas-\nsed away follows, in which we even\nfind Ristori and Siddons, the latter\ndying on June Bth 1831, aged seventy-\nsix. The date is correct, and I only\nmention it because the date of her\nbirth (also given) is I think incorrect.\nShe is down as having been born in\n1753 on June 13th and July sth, which\nis improbable.\nMr. Parker's list of Theatrical Wills\nis very interesting to study. Barnum\nheads it with £1,000,000. Lotta\nthe actress comes next with £BOO,OOO.\nSir Charles Wyndham comes tenth in\nthe list with £197,035, but is the\nactor who leaves the largest sum, Gar-\nrick being the next with £120,000.\nBut in Garrick's time £120,000 was\nworth more than it would be today.\nIrving leaves very little, £20,527, and\nis easily beaten in the art of saving\nmoney by his son H. B. Irving who\nleft £39,176. Last on the list comes\nStephen Phillips with £5 ; and one is\nsurprised to find that Charles Brook-\nfield left only £269.\nThe book ends with forty-four\npractical plans of the London Thea-\ntres showing how the seats in each are\narranged.\nBut who was Mary Raby ? She\nacted Mrs. Hawkins in \" Treasure\nIsland \" in 1924, was the only wo-\nman in the piece, and yet is excluded\nfrom the Biographies. Dreadful.\nOnly one serious fault I can find\nwith the book.\nIts title is insular and misleading.\nIt would have been more correct to"}, {"page_pdf": 57, "page_imprimee": "85", "url_page": "https://bluemountain.princeton.edu/bluemtn/?a=d&d=bmtnaau192604-01.1.57", "debut_caractere": 0, "fin_caractere_exclue": 6806, "texte": "call it \" Who's Who in the English\nTheatre\n\n1. THE MARINER'S MIRROR,\nVol. X. No. 2. Cambridge Uni-\nversity Press. 6/—.\n2. ADVENTURES BY SEA by\nBasil Lubbock and John Masejield.\n\" The Studio 3 guineas net.\n3. THE LAST DAYS OF MAST\nAND SAIL by Sir Alan Moore Bt.\nClarendon Press, Oxford. 21 /\n4. LADY ANNE BARNARD AT\nTHE CAPE by Dorothea Fair-\nbridge. Clarendon Press, Oxfoid.\n30!— net.\n5. JOHN CARY, 1754-1835, a\nBibliography, Sir H. G. Fordham;\nCambridge University Press. 1016.\n6. PICCADILLY, LEICESTER\nSQUARE AND SOHO by C. L.\nKingsford; Cambridge University\nPress. 1216.\n7. GROUP PSYCHOLOGY, Sig-\nmund Freud. Boni & Liveright.\n$ 2.00.\nIN the old days we theatre folk imi-\ntated the sea by a vast blue-green\ncloth, covering the entire stage, and\nunder it ten, twenty, or thirty boys\nwould roll or bend or move from side\nto side, thus delighting a simple-minded\nhappy race of unenlightened ladies and\ngentlemen who thrilled to be so de-\nceived.\nWe had other ways of suggesting\nthe sea, ....its waves, its breakers and\nits salt spray, but the main device\nwas the cloth which heaved up and\ndown.\nThis old device is almost gone, dri-\nven away not by better devices but by\na more enlightened and sceptical being,\nwho likes anything better than to be\ndeceived.\nI do not know what the first nine\nvolumes of \" The Mariners' Mirror \"\nmay contain, but I suppose it is too\nmuch to expect to find there a detai-\nled account of how to make a stage\nocean, how to cause a ship to sail over\nthe stage and to tack in sight of the\naudience.\nEven without it this Quarterly journal\nof the Society for Nautical Research\nwill do. Such quarterlies seem to me\nto be every whit as excellent as books.\nHere one gets 120 pages for six shil-\nlings, and every page of the utmost\nvalue to students,... and what seaman\nlis not a student. To go to sea, and,\nhaving seen and experienced, to return\nhome and, on dry land, find \" The\nMariners* Mirror \" waiting with your\ngrog and plenty of tobacco heavens,\nwhat a life.\nAnd the \" Mariners* Mirror \" will\nof course advertise the existence of\n\"Adventures by Sea \" a folio which\n\"The Studio Ltd \" have published\nfor the price of three guineas.\nThere are 22 magnificent colour-\nplates and I don't know which I like\nbest; and there are 79 full page\nplates,wonders in half-tone, ....the storm-\ning of this, the taking of that, one\nafter another; and not too much text,\nand this some of Masefield's best ;in\nshort, a book which everyone can enjoy\nand hardly anyone will be able to get\nunless he hurries up, for it has an\neloping look about it.\nAnd it is these ships, we are told\nby Sir Alan Moore, in his \" Last days\nof Mast and Sail\" that are all passing\naway: if they happen to have sails\nand masts they are useless.\nThe book that Sir Alan has writ-\nten is not likely to pass so quickly.\nNor am I persuaded that the days\nof the sail and mast are numbered.\nIs the horse-drawn carriage to go too?\nI should not care to prophesy about\nthese things. I have sometimes risked\nan optimistic guess about the Theatre,\nand its actors, plays, masks and the\nrest, because 1 have looked into pos-\nsible changes and betterment in the\nmanagement of this world of ours. 1\nhave no talent to despair as Sir Alan\nMoore despairs; I could only do it\ntheatrically ; he does it in the nearest\nto the true tragic manner—which is a\nthought too grave to please me.\nHe says that \" nothing less than the\nfailure of the race can revive that\nand mast which once produced such\nable individual men \".... The failure\nof the race, what race ? The race\nwhich cannot perceive all the values of\nthe best we have on earth is a race\nwhich may well fail, falling captive\nsuddenly to some race which can un-\nderstand each value and can put them\nin order once more. In those days\nSir Alan's last chapter to his beautiful\nbook will be prized, but the world I\ntrust will not wait placidly for that day\nto come.\nUnfortunate it is that it will mean,\nhere and now, sinking the twelve chap-\nters of Pirate Sigmund Freud's volume.\n\" Group Psychology and The Ana-\nlysis of the Ego \"is the flag flown, and\nI am reminded of the old skull and\ncrossbones.\nToo bad ... too bad.... for Freud is\na man of great qualities.... as was old\nMorgan : but his group is a group of\nPirates. We all love 'em, these pirates,\nroaming the wide seas and often\ndoing good; curing people of the\njumps, really gaining little for them-\nselves ; not altruists, not egoists, but just\nunaware of all the values.\nSir Alan's book breathes health,\npours it into you. Freud's book would\nkill you. It is the first and last I shall\nread by this remarkable being.\nAs I write this the wind is howling,\nand smashing trees, and playing havoc\nall around. The sea is in a fury....\nand I happen to re-open the Memoirs\nof \" Lady Anne Barnard at the Cape\nof Good Hope, 1797-1802 \" at the\npicture showing her in the Atlantic on\nboard the mast and sail ship \" Sir Ed-\nward Hughes \"; the picture is called\n\" General Hartley and I moralize on\ndeck \" and is drawn by Lady Anne.\nShe was a delightful lady with a real\ngift for painting vivid water colours.\nThis one shows us that the ship which\ntook her to Africa, was about as wide\nas a couple of good-sized cabins, with\nits deck level with the water. There\nare some advantages in living in 1926\nand I see it clearly when I look at\nthis General and Lady moralizing at\nthe edge.\nOne of the best antidotes to mora-\nlizing is a little bibliography, and the\nlittle bibliography, of •• John Cary, En-\ngraver, Map, Chart and Printseller and\nGlobe-maker \" is perfection.\nAs a piece of bookmaking it is de-\nlicious except for the rather rough\npaper on which it is printed. What\nhas put us all against that paper of\npolished surface once known as Art\nPaper ? Why do publishers use it so\nlittle today ? It pleased the touch and\nwent well with the half-tone plates.\nI am entirely in its favour ; a book is\nthinner and perhaps a little heavier,\nbut what of that; the smooth touch of\nit is so agreable. Or if ' Art * paper\nis too glossy, there is that ordinary\nsmooth paper used in books of refe-\nrence.... and what better ?\nThe six books reviewed here are all\nprinted on rough paper of a blotting-\npaper texture, and I for one detest\nthat: five of them have plates on\nsmooth paper, and the contrast is not\npleasant. What law binds the publi-\nshers to use such a combination; why\ncannot they escape from the situation?\nAs a rule the plates come unstuck,\nthough nowadays a new and good me-\nthod prevents that, and the plates in\nMr. Kingsford's excellent \" Early Hi-\nstory of Piccadilly, Leicester Square\nand Soho \" are clearly not going to\ncome out after the book has had hard\nuse. And that it will have hard use\nis certain, for it is a book that was\nneeded. The public all over the world\nwould no doubt like to see a good\nmany more such books on London, but"}, {"page_pdf": 58, "page_imprimee": "86", "url_page": "https://bluemountain.princeton.edu/bluemtn/?a=d&d=bmtnaau192604-01.1.58", "debut_caractere": 0, "fin_caractere_exclue": 754, "texte": "for itiy part I would that they dealt\nwith one district only, or even one\nsquare, 6r one street; and I would\nhave the entire history of that street,\nsquare or district, not alone that of one\ncentury of it. Limit the space of ground\ndealt with, not the facts.\nBoth these books from the Cam-\nbridge Press are delightfully bound,\nand the price of the John Gary book\nis astonishingly low, spite of it 3 expen-\nsive looking covers. I do not despair\nof some day seeing English publishers\ncutting the covers and coming to the\ncackle a little quicker and adopting the\ncontinental custom of issuing serious\nworks in paper covers. So much more\nsensible, especially in an age when a\nshilling or two off the price makes such\na great difference to the public's purse."}]}, {"article_id": "bm-bmtnaau-1926-04-01-c044", "article_bluemountain": "bmtnaau_1926-04_01#c044", "volume": "bmtnaau_1926-04_01", "ocr_source": "OCR Blue Mountain (ALTO), transcription TEI : lignes lb/@facs", "texte_sans_correction": true, "page_debut": "83", "page_fin": "84", "image_debut": 55, "image_fin": 56, "pages_selon": "pagination imprimée relevée dans le METS Blue Mountain (ORDERLABEL) ; [n] = page sans folio restituée", "url_article": "https://bluemountain.princeton.edu/bluemtn/?a=d&d=bmtnaau192604-01.2.16.2", "titre_corps": "SOPHOCLESMY LIFE AND WORK by Henry FordTHE 'HELEN' OF EURIPIDESMUSIC HALL NIGHTS by Dion Clayton CalthropTHE AUTOBIOGRAPHY OF AN ATTITUDE by G. J. Nathan", "titre_sommaire": "SOPHOCLESMY LIFE AND WORK by Henry FordTHE 'HELEN' OF EURIPIDESMUSIC HALL NIGHTS by Dion Clayton CalthropTHE AUTOBIOGRAPHY OF AN ATTITUDE by G. J. Nathan", "signature_source": "", "controle": "bornes données par la structure logique METS/ALTO de Blue Mountain (blocs ALTO de chaque constituant)", "pages": [{"page_pdf": 55, "page_imprimee": "83", "url_page": "https://bluemountain.princeton.edu/bluemtn/?a=d&d=bmtnaau192604-01.1.55", "debut_caractere": 15, "fin_caractere_exclue": 6284, "texte": "SOPHOCLES; Loeb Classical Li-\nbrary. Heinemann Ltd. 2 Vols.\n10/6 per vol.\nMY LIFE AND WORK, Henry\nFord. Heinemann Ltd. Price not marked.\nTHE 'HELEN' OF EURIPIDES;\nTranslated by J. T. Sheppard. Cam-\nbridge University Press. 2j.\nMUSIC HALL NIGHTS by Dion\nClayton Calthrop. John Lane. 6/—\nTHE AUTOBIOGRAPHY OF AN\nATTITUDE by G. J. Nathan.\nKnopf. New York. Price not marked.\nI know very little about Mr. James\nLoeb except that he is a retired\nBanker and is a rich man—in this he\nresembles Mr. Henry Ford: I am\nhappy to say I possess many volumes\nof the Classics which Mr. Loeb had\nthe wit to spread around, the wisdom\nto «•••••\nBut I write here as though I knew\nall about Mr. Loeb. I wish I did.\nI know all about Mr. Ford. 1 wish\nI didn't.\nTwo rich men : the first distingui-\nshed, educated, and I don't doubt\ngifted: the second obviously gifted,\nundistinguished, and innocent of a great\nmany things.\nMr Ford's Life and Work both\nbore me to death. Otherwise he is\ndelightful. For he seems to be an\nactive, good-natured little man, and as\nan assistant to Mr. Loeb would have\ndone well. I mean by that would\nhave done well from my point of view;\nfor after all, to make or cause to be\nmade a Ford car is only to do well\nin a very limited way; to cause a\nmillion or two million cars to be made\nis to do less well and the way still\nnarrower : to amass millions of dollars\nin doing this is creditable, for it is\neasier to lose millions unless you are\ncareful. Careful Mr. Ford, believing\nthat to be careful is the full sum of\nexistence (and it is very much), asks\ncarelessly in his book in chapter 13\nthis very poor question: \" WHY BE\nPOOR ? \" He doesn't answer it be-\n\"'i\ncause the only approach to a reply is\ncontained in another question, 14 WHY\nNOT ? \"\nHad Mr. Ford been one of Mr.\nLoeb's assistants some of the faults of\nthe Loeb Classical Library would as-\nsuredly have been eliminated. First\nof all the little faults of production :\nthe translators would have been assis-\nted by one or two poet-scholars\nand the following passage would have\nbeen bettered :\nMessenger. Know that he took\nthee from my hands, a gift.\nCEdipus. Yet, if no child of his,\nhe loved me well.\nMessenger. A childless man till\nthen, he warmed to thee.\n(Edipus. A foundling or a pur-\nchased slave, this child ?\nMessenger. 1 found thee in Cithoe-\nron's wooded glens.\nCEdipus. What led thee to explore\nthose upland glades ?\nMessenger. My business was to\ntend the mountain flocks.\nCEdipus. A vagrant shepherd jour-\nneying for hire ?\nMessenger. True, but thy saviour\nin that hour, my son—and, so on.\n1 hold that Professor J T. Shep-\npard would have done this better.\nHe takes more liberties I suppose with\nhis Greek friends* work, but what of\nthat; he keeps us all alive. You can\nread his 44 Helen \" and not hate Euri-\npides or Loeb, or Sheppard, or your\nlibrary, or life itself. Mr. Ford would\nprobably have plumped for Sheppard\ntoo and he would have fitted out two\nor three romantic yachts and sought\nfor and found Sheppard.\nAgain Mr. Ford, as enthusiast and\nassistant, would have seen to it that in\neach volume we were told of Mr.\nLoeb and his intention in doing this\nexcellent work. This would have\nbeen made clear by a series of essays\nby the very best prose writers of the\nage. He would have added three or\nfour volumes of chronology and topo-\ngraphy by the finest scholars.\nThen in the difficult matter of dis-\ntribution how useful Henry Ford\ncould have been. He would have\nseen to it that we alt were enabled to\nget these lovely books, and for a more\nreasonable sum. He would have is-\nsued several million copies and forced\nthese into our hand :—willingly after\nsome delay (in fact till we began to\nappreciate the gift) we should have\npaid up our two or three shillings per\nvolume. As it is they cost much\nmore.\nI grieve that a man like Ford is\nallowed, is even forced, to waste his\nexceptional carefulness and his astoun-\nding energy on turning out useless cars.\nThere are enough cars already and\nenough car makers; whereas good as-\nsistants are rare, and Mr. Loeb lacked\njust such an assistant as Mr. Ford\nwould have made.\nOf Mr. Henry Ford's book it is\nneedless to say anything. He has\nbeen flattered by the press as only a\nfabulously rich man can be flattered,\nand it is Mr. Samuel Crowther, who\nhas written the book for him and done\nit amazingly well, that must be com-\nplemented.\nC| Lest it be supposed that 1 decry\nall the Loeb translations let me add\nthat they are often very good, but some-\ntimes it seems as though a tramway\nticket collector had pushed through\nand- got the job. Poets and fine\nprose writers should have been called\nto assist at this work. If Sir Edmund\nGosse or Prof. Gilbert Murray were\ntoo busy, another such man of taste\nand discernment could perhaps have\nbeen found to control the entire edi-\ntion. Why wasn't it done ? I believe\nthat the search broke down too early\nbecause Henry Ford was allowed to\nbecome a boss instead of remaining\nwhat he was born to be, a first-class\nassistant.\nI do regret that there are not more\npictures in the Loeb Library. Some\nPortraits of the Masters, only too often\nreproduced, do adorn the little vo-\nlumes ; but I miss the kind of thing\nwhich Dion Clayton Calthrop gives us\nin his 44 Music Hall Nights \", a rea-\ndable book with little classic touches\nabout the mouth-organ which is 44 full\not Pagan joys If only the Pagan\nliterature was allowed today to be\neven as Pagan as a mouth-organ, who\nwould ever feel as I feel towards\nE. Capps PH. D,, LLD.; T. E. Page,\nLitt. D. ; W. H. D. Rouse, Litt. D.\nthe able and scholarly editors of the\nLoeb Library, and the absent Mr.\nHenry Ford for shirking the whole\nbusiness. Mr. Loeb almost did a great\nthing, and would have done it had he\nenlisted under him not only scholarly\nbeings but living human men of ge-\nnius. Poets, prose-writers,... all the\nunemployed writers of real talent. With\nFord over them each would have been\nforced to supply his bit, and to trans-\nlate the Classics a whole little world\nis needed, one putting in bolts all day,\nanother spraying on the colour, a third\ngiving a wheel a shove, a fourth saying\n44 yes \", a fifth.... in short, the work\nof Ford, plus the incantation of the\nwitches in Macbeth, plus some scho-\nlarly agonies, and the thing couldn't\nhave gone wrong."}, {"page_pdf": 56, "page_imprimee": "84", "url_page": "https://bluemountain.princeton.edu/bluemtn/?a=d&d=bmtnaau192604-01.1.56", "debut_caractere": 0, "fin_caractere_exclue": 1578, "texte": "Although my whole life has been\nspent writing reviews of books seated in\nthe corner of the inner room in the\nold Inn of Wine Office Court, I too could\nhave helped Loeb. I could have help-\ned to steady the unemployed.\nI could have gone over to America\nto look for talent, for that is not where\nFord would have failed to look for, but\nonly failed to discover, talent. I should\nin those days fifteen years ago have\nspotted talented Mr. Nathan. I would\nhave taken him to Bedford Street.\nI should have done as I have said,\nand led him meekly round to Mr.\nHeinemann and he would soon have\nfixed him up, given him a good con-\ntract, and we should now both be hel-\nping Mr. Loeb (under Henry Ford);\ninstead of which there goes poor Na-\nthan philosophising, attitudinizing and\nkeeping Alfred A. Knopf far too busy.\nBut Nathan will write on, and I\nwill write on, and Calthrop will listen\nin, and Sheppard will be roped in to\nthe Greekeries at the Scala, and Ford\nwill fool away his time out of his right\nplace, and Loeb will do good things\nsomewhere else, and Sophocles will\nsuffer. And all because the twentieth\ncentury considers it a virtue that each\nman shall be out of his right place.\nNo, Mr. Loeb, finally no. I ad-\nmire and applaud your intentions and\nyou really have achieved a great deal;\nbut had you only perceived that it was\nin your power to make your Library\nblaze like the bush of Moses, you could\nhave reversed History. But are you\neven now going to sit down and allow\nlittle Mr. Ford to make rules for Life\nand Work,—even at the eleventh hour\nare you going to allow that ?"}]}, {"article_id": "bm-bmtnaau-1926-04-01-c045", "article_bluemountain": "bmtnaau_1926-04_01#c045", "volume": "bmtnaau_1926-04_01", "ocr_source": "OCR Blue Mountain (ALTO), transcription TEI : lignes lb/@facs", "texte_sans_correction": true, "page_debut": "84", "page_fin": "84", "image_debut": 56, "image_fin": 56, "pages_selon": "pagination imprimée relevée dans le METS Blue Mountain (ORDERLABEL) ; [n] = page sans folio restituée", "url_article": "https://bluemountain.princeton.edu/bluemtn/?a=d&d=bmtnaau192604-01.2.16.3", "titre_corps": "THE WAY TO SKETCH by Vernon BlakeDRAWING FOR THE THEATRE by R.E. JonesPAUL SCHEURICH by Dr Oskar Fischel", "titre_sommaire": "THE WAY TO SKETCH by Vernon BlakeDRAWING FOR THE THEATRE by R.E. JonesPAUL SCHEURICH by Dr Oskar Fischel", "signature_source": "", "controle": "bornes données par la structure logique METS/ALTO de Blue Mountain (blocs ALTO de chaque constituant)", "pages": [{"page_pdf": 56, "page_imprimee": "84", "url_page": "https://bluemountain.princeton.edu/bluemtn/?a=d&d=bmtnaau192604-01.1.56", "debut_caractere": 1580, "fin_caractere_exclue": 4314, "texte": "THE WAY TO SKETCH, Vernon\nBlaise. Oxford University Press. 7/6\nDRAWINGS FOR THE THEA-\nTRE, R. E. Jones; Theatre Arts Inc.\nU. S. A. $ 5.00\nPAUL SCHEURICH, Dr. Oskar\nFischel. Rembrandt Verlag, Berlin,\n(price not marked).\nMR. Blake, in telling us how to\nsketch, seems to me to enjoy\nhimself to the extent of forgetting those\nof us who would like to hear how to\nsketch.\n\" Some people \" he says, delibera-\ntely not looking in our direction, \"\npeople find a difficulty in throwing the\neye out of focus ' : and then he pro-\nceeds to explain how we fools can\nachieve the simple operation, and I am\nforcibly reminded of a recipe I once\nread for making Blue Sky. He says\n*' Hold the finger up about six inches\nfrom the eye and look at it ; then, ma-\nking up your mind not to change the\nstate of the accommodating muscles\nof the eye, suddenly remove the finger;\nyou will see all the objects before you,\nat a greater distance than six inches\nenveloped and without detail. I have\nfound this dodge most useful in \"\netc, etc, etc.\nHe gives us eight sketches by Corot,\nRenoir, Turner and others, and one of\nhis own as a colour plate.\nI like Mr. Blake for the thorough-\nhearted way he enjoys himself and\nhis own productions. He gives us in\nall nineteen of his own sketches.... and\nan extra one on the cover, ....perhaps\nthe least successful of the twenty, but\nhe forgets to show us how the great\nsketchers Van Gogh, Callot, or Daumier\ndid the business.\nI weary a little of Mr. Blake and\nturn with considerable pleasure the\npages of an admirable book of sketches\nby Mr. R. E. Jones.\nHere is someone who knows how\nto sketch, and, as is usual nowadays,\nhe is employed to do something else.\nAnd yet not always and not every-\nwhere is this so. In Germany men\nare sometimes put to the task they\nwere born for, and Paul Scheurich\nwas certainly born to draw, to paint\nand to sketch. Alas, Scheurich lures\nme away from Jones. He sketches\neverything, anything, ....theatres and\nactors sometimes; thank God not all\nthe time. Four of his designs are for\nVoltaire's \" Candide \", others for\n\" Hundschen der Marquise \" and these\ndelight me with their grace, a quality\nlacking entirely in the sketches cf\nR. E. Jones.\nBut then Paul Scheurich has not\ndeserted his Muse for the Theatre as\nMr. Jones has been forced to do. Mr.\nJones succeeds most admirably in\nsome sketches for a production of\n\" Richard 1111 think these represent\nhis best work for the stage, and. they\nare good as sketches.\nThere can be no comparison between\nthe work of the two men, Scheurich\nso cultured, so graceful, so far advanced,\nand Jones so immature although but\nfour years his junior: still one can com-\npare the fate of the two. And it says\nvery much for Germany and very little\nfor America."}]}, {"article_id": "bm-bmtnaau-1926-04-01-c046", "article_bluemountain": "bmtnaau_1926-04_01#c046", "volume": "bmtnaau_1926-04_01", "ocr_source": "OCR Blue Mountain (ALTO), transcription TEI : lignes lb/@facs", "texte_sans_correction": true, "page_debut": "84", "page_fin": "85", "image_debut": 56, "image_fin": 57, "pages_selon": "pagination imprimée relevée dans le METS Blue Mountain (ORDERLABEL) ; [n] = page sans folio restituée", "url_article": "https://bluemountain.princeton.edu/bluemtn/?a=d&d=bmtnaau192604-01.2.16.4", "titre_corps": "WHO'S WHO IN THE THEATRE by John Palmer", "titre_sommaire": "WHO'S WHO IN THE THEATRE by John Palmer", "signature_source": "", "controle": "bornes données par la structure logique METS/ALTO de Blue Mountain (blocs ALTO de chaque constituant)", "pages": [{"page_pdf": 56, "page_imprimee": "84", "url_page": "https://bluemountain.princeton.edu/bluemtn/?a=d&d=bmtnaau192604-01.1.56", "debut_caractere": 4316, "fin_caractere_exclue": 6769, "texte": "WHO'S WHO IN\nTRE, b\\) John Palmer. Pitman &\nSons. 255. net.\nMR. Parker's work is well known\nby now for this is the fifth edi-\ntion revised and enlarged, of the best\nbook on the subject, and very good\nat that.\nIt tells us who is who in the Thea-\ntre, but it also tells us who was who.\nAnd in the book's Theatrical Calendar\nhe tells us \" what was what \" as far\nback as the 16th centmy.\nAnd here most men would have\nstopped, and it is here that Mr. Pal-\nmer generously goes on. He gives us\nthe names of all the Dramatic Critics—\nor nearly all, for a few are omitted,\nincluding Mr. Horace Wyndham. He\ngives us ninety tables of Theatrical\nFamilies, Mr. J. M. Bulloch helping\nhim there. The longest \" runs \" are\nall listed, \" Chu-Chin-Chow \" with\n2,238 performances being well ahead\nof all others : \" Charley's Aunt\" being\nsecond with 1,466. Some only total-\nling 100, .... a long enough run one\nwould have thought.\nWe are then given a list of West-\nend Theatres, details about these pla-\nces, sizes, addresses, managers' names,\ntelephones, all very exact and excel-\nlent, and to me immensely instructive,\nA list of performers who have pas-\nsed away follows, in which we even\nfind Ristori and Siddons, the latter\ndying on June Bth 1831, aged seventy-\nsix. The date is correct, and I only\nmention it because the date of her\nbirth (also given) is I think incorrect.\nShe is down as having been born in\n1753 on June 13th and July sth, which\nis improbable.\nMr. Parker's list of Theatrical Wills\nis very interesting to study. Barnum\nheads it with £1,000,000. Lotta\nthe actress comes next with £BOO,OOO.\nSir Charles Wyndham comes tenth in\nthe list with £197,035, but is the\nactor who leaves the largest sum, Gar-\nrick being the next with £120,000.\nBut in Garrick's time £120,000 was\nworth more than it would be today.\nIrving leaves very little, £20,527, and\nis easily beaten in the art of saving\nmoney by his son H. B. Irving who\nleft £39,176. Last on the list comes\nStephen Phillips with £5 ; and one is\nsurprised to find that Charles Brook-\nfield left only £269.\nThe book ends with forty-four\npractical plans of the London Thea-\ntres showing how the seats in each are\narranged.\nBut who was Mary Raby ? She\nacted Mrs. Hawkins in \" Treasure\nIsland \" in 1924, was the only wo-\nman in the piece, and yet is excluded\nfrom the Biographies. Dreadful.\nOnly one serious fault I can find\nwith the book.\nIts title is insular and misleading.\nIt would have been more correct to"}, {"page_pdf": 57, "page_imprimee": "85", "url_page": "https://bluemountain.princeton.edu/bluemtn/?a=d&d=bmtnaau192604-01.1.57", "debut_caractere": 0, "fin_caractere_exclue": 42, "texte": "call it \" Who's Who in the English\nTheatre"}]}, {"article_id": "bm-bmtnaau-1926-04-01-c047", "article_bluemountain": "bmtnaau_1926-04_01#c047", "volume": "bmtnaau_1926-04_01", "ocr_source": "OCR Blue Mountain (ALTO), transcription TEI : lignes lb/@facs", "texte_sans_correction": true, "page_debut": "85", "page_fin": "86", "image_debut": 57, "image_fin": 58, "pages_selon": "pagination imprimée relevée dans le METS Blue Mountain (ORDERLABEL) ; [n] = page sans folio restituée", "url_article": "https://bluemountain.princeton.edu/bluemtn/?a=d&d=bmtnaau192604-01.2.16.5", "titre_corps": "1. THE MARINER'S MIRROR2. ADVENTURES BY SEA3. THE LAST DAYS OF MAST AND SAIL4. LADY ANNE BARNARD AT THE CAPE5. JOHN CARY 1754-18356. PICADILLY, LEICESTER SQUARE AND SOHO7. GROUP PSYCHOLOGY", "titre_sommaire": "1. THE MARINER'S MIRROR2. ADVENTURES BY SEA3. THE LAST DAYS OF MAST AND SAIL4. LADY ANNE BARNARD AT THE CAPE5. JOHN CARY 1754-18356. PICADILLY, LEICESTER SQUARE AND SOHO7. GROUP PSYCHOLOGY", "signature_source": "", "controle": "bornes données par la structure logique METS/ALTO de Blue Mountain (blocs ALTO de chaque constituant)", "pages": [{"page_pdf": 57, "page_imprimee": "85", "url_page": "https://bluemountain.princeton.edu/bluemtn/?a=d&d=bmtnaau192604-01.1.57", "debut_caractere": 44, "fin_caractere_exclue": 6806, "texte": "1. THE MARINER'S MIRROR,\nVol. X. No. 2. Cambridge Uni-\nversity Press. 6/—.\n2. ADVENTURES BY SEA by\nBasil Lubbock and John Masejield.\n\" The Studio 3 guineas net.\n3. THE LAST DAYS OF MAST\nAND SAIL by Sir Alan Moore Bt.\nClarendon Press, Oxford. 21 /\n4. LADY ANNE BARNARD AT\nTHE CAPE by Dorothea Fair-\nbridge. Clarendon Press, Oxfoid.\n30!— net.\n5. JOHN CARY, 1754-1835, a\nBibliography, Sir H. G. Fordham;\nCambridge University Press. 1016.\n6. PICCADILLY, LEICESTER\nSQUARE AND SOHO by C. L.\nKingsford; Cambridge University\nPress. 1216.\n7. GROUP PSYCHOLOGY, Sig-\nmund Freud. Boni & Liveright.\n$ 2.00.\nIN the old days we theatre folk imi-\ntated the sea by a vast blue-green\ncloth, covering the entire stage, and\nunder it ten, twenty, or thirty boys\nwould roll or bend or move from side\nto side, thus delighting a simple-minded\nhappy race of unenlightened ladies and\ngentlemen who thrilled to be so de-\nceived.\nWe had other ways of suggesting\nthe sea, ....its waves, its breakers and\nits salt spray, but the main device\nwas the cloth which heaved up and\ndown.\nThis old device is almost gone, dri-\nven away not by better devices but by\na more enlightened and sceptical being,\nwho likes anything better than to be\ndeceived.\nI do not know what the first nine\nvolumes of \" The Mariners' Mirror \"\nmay contain, but I suppose it is too\nmuch to expect to find there a detai-\nled account of how to make a stage\nocean, how to cause a ship to sail over\nthe stage and to tack in sight of the\naudience.\nEven without it this Quarterly journal\nof the Society for Nautical Research\nwill do. Such quarterlies seem to me\nto be every whit as excellent as books.\nHere one gets 120 pages for six shil-\nlings, and every page of the utmost\nvalue to students,... and what seaman\nlis not a student. To go to sea, and,\nhaving seen and experienced, to return\nhome and, on dry land, find \" The\nMariners* Mirror \" waiting with your\ngrog and plenty of tobacco heavens,\nwhat a life.\nAnd the \" Mariners* Mirror \" will\nof course advertise the existence of\n\"Adventures by Sea \" a folio which\n\"The Studio Ltd \" have published\nfor the price of three guineas.\nThere are 22 magnificent colour-\nplates and I don't know which I like\nbest; and there are 79 full page\nplates,wonders in half-tone, ....the storm-\ning of this, the taking of that, one\nafter another; and not too much text,\nand this some of Masefield's best ;in\nshort, a book which everyone can enjoy\nand hardly anyone will be able to get\nunless he hurries up, for it has an\neloping look about it.\nAnd it is these ships, we are told\nby Sir Alan Moore, in his \" Last days\nof Mast and Sail\" that are all passing\naway: if they happen to have sails\nand masts they are useless.\nThe book that Sir Alan has writ-\nten is not likely to pass so quickly.\nNor am I persuaded that the days\nof the sail and mast are numbered.\nIs the horse-drawn carriage to go too?\nI should not care to prophesy about\nthese things. I have sometimes risked\nan optimistic guess about the Theatre,\nand its actors, plays, masks and the\nrest, because 1 have looked into pos-\nsible changes and betterment in the\nmanagement of this world of ours. 1\nhave no talent to despair as Sir Alan\nMoore despairs; I could only do it\ntheatrically ; he does it in the nearest\nto the true tragic manner—which is a\nthought too grave to please me.\nHe says that \" nothing less than the\nfailure of the race can revive that\nand mast which once produced such\nable individual men \".... The failure\nof the race, what race ? The race\nwhich cannot perceive all the values of\nthe best we have on earth is a race\nwhich may well fail, falling captive\nsuddenly to some race which can un-\nderstand each value and can put them\nin order once more. In those days\nSir Alan's last chapter to his beautiful\nbook will be prized, but the world I\ntrust will not wait placidly for that day\nto come.\nUnfortunate it is that it will mean,\nhere and now, sinking the twelve chap-\nters of Pirate Sigmund Freud's volume.\n\" Group Psychology and The Ana-\nlysis of the Ego \"is the flag flown, and\nI am reminded of the old skull and\ncrossbones.\nToo bad ... too bad.... for Freud is\na man of great qualities.... as was old\nMorgan : but his group is a group of\nPirates. We all love 'em, these pirates,\nroaming the wide seas and often\ndoing good; curing people of the\njumps, really gaining little for them-\nselves ; not altruists, not egoists, but just\nunaware of all the values.\nSir Alan's book breathes health,\npours it into you. Freud's book would\nkill you. It is the first and last I shall\nread by this remarkable being.\nAs I write this the wind is howling,\nand smashing trees, and playing havoc\nall around. The sea is in a fury....\nand I happen to re-open the Memoirs\nof \" Lady Anne Barnard at the Cape\nof Good Hope, 1797-1802 \" at the\npicture showing her in the Atlantic on\nboard the mast and sail ship \" Sir Ed-\nward Hughes \"; the picture is called\n\" General Hartley and I moralize on\ndeck \" and is drawn by Lady Anne.\nShe was a delightful lady with a real\ngift for painting vivid water colours.\nThis one shows us that the ship which\ntook her to Africa, was about as wide\nas a couple of good-sized cabins, with\nits deck level with the water. There\nare some advantages in living in 1926\nand I see it clearly when I look at\nthis General and Lady moralizing at\nthe edge.\nOne of the best antidotes to mora-\nlizing is a little bibliography, and the\nlittle bibliography, of •• John Cary, En-\ngraver, Map, Chart and Printseller and\nGlobe-maker \" is perfection.\nAs a piece of bookmaking it is de-\nlicious except for the rather rough\npaper on which it is printed. What\nhas put us all against that paper of\npolished surface once known as Art\nPaper ? Why do publishers use it so\nlittle today ? It pleased the touch and\nwent well with the half-tone plates.\nI am entirely in its favour ; a book is\nthinner and perhaps a little heavier,\nbut what of that; the smooth touch of\nit is so agreable. Or if ' Art * paper\nis too glossy, there is that ordinary\nsmooth paper used in books of refe-\nrence.... and what better ?\nThe six books reviewed here are all\nprinted on rough paper of a blotting-\npaper texture, and I for one detest\nthat: five of them have plates on\nsmooth paper, and the contrast is not\npleasant. What law binds the publi-\nshers to use such a combination; why\ncannot they escape from the situation?\nAs a rule the plates come unstuck,\nthough nowadays a new and good me-\nthod prevents that, and the plates in\nMr. Kingsford's excellent \" Early Hi-\nstory of Piccadilly, Leicester Square\nand Soho \" are clearly not going to\ncome out after the book has had hard\nuse. And that it will have hard use\nis certain, for it is a book that was\nneeded. The public all over the world\nwould no doubt like to see a good\nmany more such books on London, but"}, {"page_pdf": 58, "page_imprimee": "86", "url_page": "https://bluemountain.princeton.edu/bluemtn/?a=d&d=bmtnaau192604-01.1.58", "debut_caractere": 0, "fin_caractere_exclue": 754, "texte": "for itiy part I would that they dealt\nwith one district only, or even one\nsquare, 6r one street; and I would\nhave the entire history of that street,\nsquare or district, not alone that of one\ncentury of it. Limit the space of ground\ndealt with, not the facts.\nBoth these books from the Cam-\nbridge Press are delightfully bound,\nand the price of the John Gary book\nis astonishingly low, spite of it 3 expen-\nsive looking covers. I do not despair\nof some day seeing English publishers\ncutting the covers and coming to the\ncackle a little quicker and adopting the\ncontinental custom of issuing serious\nworks in paper covers. So much more\nsensible, especially in an age when a\nshilling or two off the price makes such\na great difference to the public's purse."}]}, {"article_id": "bm-bmtnaau-1926-04-01-c048", "article_bluemountain": "bmtnaau_1926-04_01#c048", "volume": "bmtnaau_1926-04_01", "ocr_source": "OCR Blue Mountain (ALTO), transcription TEI : lignes lb/@facs", "texte_sans_correction": true, "page_debut": "86", "page_fin": "86", "image_debut": 58, "image_fin": 58, "pages_selon": "pagination imprimée relevée dans le METS Blue Mountain (ORDERLABEL) ; [n] = page sans folio restituée", "url_article": "https://bluemountain.princeton.edu/bluemtn/?a=d&d=bmtnaau192604-01.2.17", "titre_corps": "EDITORIAL NOTES", "titre_sommaire": "EDITORIAL NOTES", "signature_source": "", "controle": "bornes données par la structure logique METS/ALTO de Blue Mountain (blocs ALTO de chaque constituant)", "pages": [{"page_pdf": 58, "page_imprimee": "86", "url_page": "https://bluemountain.princeton.edu/bluemtn/?a=d&d=bmtnaau192604-01.1.58", "debut_caractere": 756, "fin_caractere_exclue": 6090, "texte": "EDITORIAL NOTES.\n\nENGLISH COMMONSENSE.\nmmmmmmmmmemmmmmmmmmmmammmmßmmcmaamßmmmmmmmmrnmmmmMmmmmmmmm twmmmwmmmmmmmmmmam\nIT is seldom that the careful observer\n1 can find anything at all fundamen-\ntally wrong with the policy of the\nItalian Theatre. And if today we have\nnoticed something odd, may be it is\nonly a temporary hitch in a mechanism\nwhich formerly ran along very smoothly.\nOnce you smoked your cigar or ci-\ngarette during performances—only in a\nfew theatres was it disallowed. Now\nyou may not smoke in any real thea-\ntre, and only in a few Halls. This\nnew regulation may have some unex-\npected consequences.\nThe Facist Government, so sanely\nmasculine in most things, seems not to\nhave perceived that the prevention of\nsmoking in a theatre may in time ren-\nder the Italian stage effeminate.\nIt may not have occurred to them\nto look around Europe and America\nand see what kind of audience is\nbrought into being when smoking is\nforbidden.\nIt is seldom that the careful observer\ncan find much that is fundamentally\nright with the policy of the English\nTheatre.\nBut recently one of the best Thea-\ntres in London has done a very sen-\nsible thing. The order has gone out\nthat \" In the Gaiety Theatre by per-\nmission of the Lord Chamberlain smo-\nking of cigars and cigarettes is per-\nmitted in all parts of the house du-\nring performance \".\nIt is many a year since so sane, so\nordinary an innovation has been per-\nmitted.\nWith our excellent modern systems\nof ventilation the smoke annoys no\none, and the obvious pleasure derived\nby most men (and some ladies) who\nsmoke a good cigar or cigarette after\ndinner is not interfered with. The\nmood evoked by smoking a good smoke\nis the right mood to witness the per-\nformance of a play or a comic opera.\nIf the acting is so magnificent that it\ncan succeed in putting out the cigars\nit will be quite an achievement. But\na regulation should not.\nWe shall be much surprised if this\npermission to smoke does not very\ngreatly increase the popularity of the\nGaiety Theatre.\nAnd to think that London should\nbe the place where this little innova-\ntion has seen the light, and without\nany pain and with a lot of pleasure.\n\"We wish the Gaiety Theatre many\na long run and we look forward to\nits next commonsense reform.\n\n——p—asa—««—■g—iManacftf bwummKHH—aawia»,iwnBWßßßßWMneMßß«\nS TRA TFORD UPON A VON.\nTHIS TIME ENGLISH NOT AMERICAN.\nFATE, having been cruelly kind,\nburned down an inadequate theatre\nbuilt as a memorial to Shakespeare\nand used to utterly devastate his plays.\nThey propose to raise £lOO,OOO to\ndo this again. It seems sentimentally\nidiotic. What £lOO,OOO is needed for\nis not to pay for bricks and plaster\nbut to preserve genius. Around the\ngenius of Shakespeare could be as-\nsembled what remains of the same\nbrand in Great Britain.\nWhy isn't this the aim? Why is\nthis the pretended aim, and why is\nthis pretence tolerated by Englishmen?\nWe don't want Bernard Shaw in\nStratford, nor the Cinema, nor Mr.\nBridges Adams plus Sir Frank Benson\nand a theatrical wardrobe. There are\nthirty like things we don't want there.\nWhat is wanted by us all is Shake-\nspeare.\nWe are in favour of the notion we\nhear suggested of offering Mr. William\nPoel his place at last, It is a debt\ndue to him for at least twenty years\npast. It would cost a quarter of the\nsum it is intended to raise. Rather\nlay that spectre of a sum: raise £25,000\nor what it would need; invite Mr.\nPoei to design and see to the erection\nof a playhouse quite as Poelish as his\nfancy once dictated, that means Eli-\nzabethan. Avoid all modernish ways.\nGet back to the Elizabethans for\nthis one item. Then thank your stars\n*nat again the danger of genius has\nbeen avoided, and make the sole com-\nmon sense compromise worth making.\nAnd above all stop any American\ninterference: there are already too\nmany Americans in control of things\nShakespearean and at Stratford on Avon.\nIhe flower of Shakepearean. Drama\nis an English flower.\nRemember the lesson of those type-\nwriting machines and let us take a\nhint if we want to avoid having to\nobey an order,\nAmericans are perfection but in\nAmerica, It goes without saying that\nwe too are perfection but obviously\nnot at Stratford. Clear the Ameri-\ncans out of it.\n\n° mn o\nPg. Col. Line\n5 2 32 For: ''was in the back\nroom of Talma's house\"\nread \" was at the back of\nTalma's house \".\n22 2 G For: \" unfair on her to\nask more than sanctity\nfrom her\" read \"un-\nfair to ask of her more\nthan sanctity \".\n23 2 36 For: \" Kouslski \" read\n\" Koulski\n26 2 33 For: \"Go the Houses of\nLords \" read \" Go to\nthe Houses of Lords \",\n22 2 53 For: \"The Fairy Dell\"\nread \" The Fairy Doll \".\n29 1 14 For: \" (After I8IJ) read\n(After 1871).\n34 1 19 Delete the word \"today\".\n34 1 43 A comma should come\nafter \" be free \".\n34 2 42 For: \" Gaboraiu \" read\n\" Gaboriau \".\n35 1 12 For: \"eveo\" read uever\"\n39 1 41 For: \" Cooee \" read\n\" Come\n40 3 66 For: \" and be the result\"\nread \"and let them be\nthe result\".\n46 2 7 For: \"But\" read \"But\".\n47 2 14 For: \" Better than did\nMr. Rutherston\" read\n\" Better than he did \".\n\nAN ACKNOWLEDGEMENT.\nTHE designs on pages 71, 74 column\none, 78, are reproduced from the\nCollection of Commendatore Leo Oischki\nby his kind permission. The design on\npage 74, column two, (as also the one\non page 20 January number) is repro-\nduced by the courtesy of the Curator\nof the South Kensington Museum."}]}, {"article_id": "bm-bmtnaau-1926-04-01-c050", "article_bluemountain": "bmtnaau_1926-04_01#c050", "volume": "bmtnaau_1926-04_01", "ocr_source": "OCR Blue Mountain (ALTO), transcription TEI : lignes lb/@facs", "texte_sans_correction": true, "page_debut": "86", "page_fin": "86", "image_debut": 58, "image_fin": 58, "pages_selon": "pagination imprimée relevée dans le METS Blue Mountain (ORDERLABEL) ; [n] = page sans folio restituée", "url_article": "https://bluemountain.princeton.edu/bluemtn/?a=d&d=bmtnaau192604-01.2.17.2", "titre_corps": "ENGLISH COMMONSENSE", "titre_sommaire": "ENGLISH COMMONSENSE", "signature_source": "", "controle": "bornes données par la structure logique METS/ALTO de Blue Mountain (blocs ALTO de chaque constituant)", "pages": [{"page_pdf": 58, "page_imprimee": "86", "url_page": "https://bluemountain.princeton.edu/bluemtn/?a=d&d=bmtnaau192604-01.1.58", "debut_caractere": 774, "fin_caractere_exclue": 3006, "texte": "ENGLISH COMMONSENSE.\nmmmmmmmmmemmmmmmmmmmmammmmßmmcmaamßmmmmmmmmrnmmmmMmmmmmmmm twmmmwmmmmmmmmmmam\nIT is seldom that the careful observer\n1 can find anything at all fundamen-\ntally wrong with the policy of the\nItalian Theatre. And if today we have\nnoticed something odd, may be it is\nonly a temporary hitch in a mechanism\nwhich formerly ran along very smoothly.\nOnce you smoked your cigar or ci-\ngarette during performances—only in a\nfew theatres was it disallowed. Now\nyou may not smoke in any real thea-\ntre, and only in a few Halls. This\nnew regulation may have some unex-\npected consequences.\nThe Facist Government, so sanely\nmasculine in most things, seems not to\nhave perceived that the prevention of\nsmoking in a theatre may in time ren-\nder the Italian stage effeminate.\nIt may not have occurred to them\nto look around Europe and America\nand see what kind of audience is\nbrought into being when smoking is\nforbidden.\nIt is seldom that the careful observer\ncan find much that is fundamentally\nright with the policy of the English\nTheatre.\nBut recently one of the best Thea-\ntres in London has done a very sen-\nsible thing. The order has gone out\nthat \" In the Gaiety Theatre by per-\nmission of the Lord Chamberlain smo-\nking of cigars and cigarettes is per-\nmitted in all parts of the house du-\nring performance \".\nIt is many a year since so sane, so\nordinary an innovation has been per-\nmitted.\nWith our excellent modern systems\nof ventilation the smoke annoys no\none, and the obvious pleasure derived\nby most men (and some ladies) who\nsmoke a good cigar or cigarette after\ndinner is not interfered with. The\nmood evoked by smoking a good smoke\nis the right mood to witness the per-\nformance of a play or a comic opera.\nIf the acting is so magnificent that it\ncan succeed in putting out the cigars\nit will be quite an achievement. But\na regulation should not.\nWe shall be much surprised if this\npermission to smoke does not very\ngreatly increase the popularity of the\nGaiety Theatre.\nAnd to think that London should\nbe the place where this little innova-\ntion has seen the light, and without\nany pain and with a lot of pleasure.\n\"We wish the Gaiety Theatre many\na long run and we look forward to\nits next commonsense reform."}]}, {"article_id": "bm-bmtnaau-1926-04-01-c051", "article_bluemountain": "bmtnaau_1926-04_01#c051", "volume": "bmtnaau_1926-04_01", "ocr_source": "OCR Blue Mountain (ALTO), transcription TEI : lignes lb/@facs", "texte_sans_correction": true, "page_debut": "86", "page_fin": "86", "image_debut": 58, "image_fin": 58, "pages_selon": "pagination imprimée relevée dans le METS Blue Mountain (ORDERLABEL) ; [n] = page sans folio restituée", "url_article": "https://bluemountain.princeton.edu/bluemtn/?a=d&d=bmtnaau192604-01.2.17.3", "titre_corps": "STRATFORD UPON AVON", "titre_sommaire": "STRATFORD UPON AVON", "signature_source": "", "controle": "bornes données par la structure logique METS/ALTO de Blue Mountain (blocs ALTO de chaque constituant)", "pages": [{"page_pdf": 58, "page_imprimee": "86", "url_page": "https://bluemountain.princeton.edu/bluemtn/?a=d&d=bmtnaau192604-01.1.58", "debut_caractere": 3008, "fin_caractere_exclue": 4962, "texte": "——p—asa—««—■g—iManacftf bwummKHH—aawia»,iwnBWßßßßWMneMßß«\nS TRA TFORD UPON A VON.\nTHIS TIME ENGLISH NOT AMERICAN.\nFATE, having been cruelly kind,\nburned down an inadequate theatre\nbuilt as a memorial to Shakespeare\nand used to utterly devastate his plays.\nThey propose to raise £lOO,OOO to\ndo this again. It seems sentimentally\nidiotic. What £lOO,OOO is needed for\nis not to pay for bricks and plaster\nbut to preserve genius. Around the\ngenius of Shakespeare could be as-\nsembled what remains of the same\nbrand in Great Britain.\nWhy isn't this the aim? Why is\nthis the pretended aim, and why is\nthis pretence tolerated by Englishmen?\nWe don't want Bernard Shaw in\nStratford, nor the Cinema, nor Mr.\nBridges Adams plus Sir Frank Benson\nand a theatrical wardrobe. There are\nthirty like things we don't want there.\nWhat is wanted by us all is Shake-\nspeare.\nWe are in favour of the notion we\nhear suggested of offering Mr. William\nPoel his place at last, It is a debt\ndue to him for at least twenty years\npast. It would cost a quarter of the\nsum it is intended to raise. Rather\nlay that spectre of a sum: raise £25,000\nor what it would need; invite Mr.\nPoei to design and see to the erection\nof a playhouse quite as Poelish as his\nfancy once dictated, that means Eli-\nzabethan. Avoid all modernish ways.\nGet back to the Elizabethans for\nthis one item. Then thank your stars\n*nat again the danger of genius has\nbeen avoided, and make the sole com-\nmon sense compromise worth making.\nAnd above all stop any American\ninterference: there are already too\nmany Americans in control of things\nShakespearean and at Stratford on Avon.\nIhe flower of Shakepearean. Drama\nis an English flower.\nRemember the lesson of those type-\nwriting machines and let us take a\nhint if we want to avoid having to\nobey an order,\nAmericans are perfection but in\nAmerica, It goes without saying that\nwe too are perfection but obviously\nnot at Stratford. Clear the Ameri-\ncans out of it."}]}, {"article_id": "bm-bmtnaau-1926-04-01-c052", "article_bluemountain": "bmtnaau_1926-04_01#c052", "volume": "bmtnaau_1926-04_01", "ocr_source": "OCR Blue Mountain (ALTO), transcription TEI : lignes lb/@facs", "texte_sans_correction": true, "page_debut": "86", "page_fin": "86", "image_debut": 58, "image_fin": 58, "pages_selon": "pagination imprimée relevée dans le METS Blue Mountain (ORDERLABEL) ; [n] = page sans folio restituée", "url_article": "https://bluemountain.princeton.edu/bluemtn/?a=d&d=bmtnaau192604-01.2.17.4", "titre_corps": "ERRATA", "titre_sommaire": "ERRATA", "signature_source": "", "controle": "bornes données par la structure logique METS/ALTO de Blue Mountain (blocs ALTO de chaque constituant)", "pages": [{"page_pdf": 58, "page_imprimee": "86", "url_page": "https://bluemountain.princeton.edu/bluemtn/?a=d&d=bmtnaau192604-01.1.58", "debut_caractere": 4964, "fin_caractere_exclue": 5780, "texte": "° mn o\nPg. Col. Line\n5 2 32 For: ''was in the back\nroom of Talma's house\"\nread \" was at the back of\nTalma's house \".\n22 2 G For: \" unfair on her to\nask more than sanctity\nfrom her\" read \"un-\nfair to ask of her more\nthan sanctity \".\n23 2 36 For: \" Kouslski \" read\n\" Koulski\n26 2 33 For: \"Go the Houses of\nLords \" read \" Go to\nthe Houses of Lords \",\n22 2 53 For: \"The Fairy Dell\"\nread \" The Fairy Doll \".\n29 1 14 For: \" (After I8IJ) read\n(After 1871).\n34 1 19 Delete the word \"today\".\n34 1 43 A comma should come\nafter \" be free \".\n34 2 42 For: \" Gaboraiu \" read\n\" Gaboriau \".\n35 1 12 For: \"eveo\" read uever\"\n39 1 41 For: \" Cooee \" read\n\" Come\n40 3 66 For: \" and be the result\"\nread \"and let them be\nthe result\".\n46 2 7 For: \"But\" read \"But\".\n47 2 14 For: \" Better than did\nMr. Rutherston\" read\n\" Better than he did \"."}]}, {"article_id": "bm-bmtnaau-1926-04-01-c053", "article_bluemountain": "bmtnaau_1926-04_01#c053", "volume": "bmtnaau_1926-04_01", "ocr_source": "OCR Blue Mountain (ALTO), transcription TEI : lignes lb/@facs", "texte_sans_correction": true, "page_debut": "86", "page_fin": "86", "image_debut": 58, "image_fin": 58, "pages_selon": "pagination imprimée relevée dans le METS Blue Mountain (ORDERLABEL) ; [n] = page sans folio restituée", "url_article": "https://bluemountain.princeton.edu/bluemtn/?a=d&d=bmtnaau192604-01.2.17.5", "titre_corps": "AN ACKNOWLEDGEMENT", "titre_sommaire": "AN ACKNOWLEDGEMENT", "signature_source": "", "controle": "bornes données par la structure logique METS/ALTO de Blue Mountain (blocs ALTO de chaque constituant)", "pages": [{"page_pdf": 58, "page_imprimee": "86", "url_page": "https://bluemountain.princeton.edu/bluemtn/?a=d&d=bmtnaau192604-01.1.58", "debut_caractere": 5782, "fin_caractere_exclue": 6090, "texte": "AN ACKNOWLEDGEMENT.\nTHE designs on pages 71, 74 column\none, 78, are reproduced from the\nCollection of Commendatore Leo Oischki\nby his kind permission. The design on\npage 74, column two, (as also the one\non page 20 January number) is repro-\nduced by the courtesy of the Curator\nof the South Kensington Museum."}]}], "pages_ocr_originales": [{"page_pdf": 1, "page_imprimee": "couv. 1", "url_page": "https://bluemountain.princeton.edu/bluemtn/?a=d&d=bmtnaau192604-01.1.1", "texte": "m i%p :\nTHE MASK\nVOLUME TWELVE\nNUMBER TWO\nAPRIL\n19 2 6,\nANNUAL SUBSCRIPION | . l!TWk<'' LUXE EDITION\nTEN SHILLINGS Mv RIC E. sjk TWENTY SHILLINGS\n(POST FREE) g\\ /j\" V| (POST FREE)\nfi- J ißlf\n° %\\ °\nTWO & A HALF DOLLARS FIVE DOLLARS\nFOR AMERICA FOR AMERICA\nM ft Mk B. ~\n•'v •- V • • .. ... . ----- ' .' -' . ... '■ ' : -...'. , ■\" ~ . \" ,\nk -v;V-,-V: ... V -r • r - •; * ' .... ' . . ;■ ' - ■ : ; /'\nADDRESS: BOX. 444. FLORENCE. ITALY.\n\nA REPRODUCTION OF HORWOOD'S\nCELEBRATED 18th CENTURY PLAN\nOF LONDON: {FIRST EIGHT PLATES).\nSOME FACTS JAND DATES ABOUT\nLONDON THEATRES AND THOSE\nASSOCIATED WITH THEM.\nGENTLEMEN AND PLAYERS by ASHLEY\nDukes.\n•-pHE INAUGURATION OF A DUCAL\n1 THEATRE IN MODENA, 1685, by\nBruno Brunelli.\nTHE COLOSSUS SPEAKS, A brilliant con-\ntribution from George Bernard Shaw on his\nown \" Colossiousness\" as treated of in THE\nMASK for January.\nMORE COTTONWOOL FOR THE IN-\nCOMPETENT, AND THE \" SAD-\nLER'S WELLS FUND.\nTECHNICAL DIRECTIONS FOR THE\nCONSTRUCTION OF STAGE SKIES\n1638. From the Handbook of a Theatrical Engineer.\nBOOK REVIEWS. j I\nEDITORIALS."}, {"page_pdf": 2, "page_imprimee": "couv. 2", "url_page": "https://bluemountain.princeton.edu/bluemtn/?a=d&d=bmtnaau192604-01.1.2", "texte": "THE MASK. APRIL 1 926\nNOTICE TO CONTRIBUTORS. The Editor is always glad to consider articles and illustrations from\nexperts in theatre history and art, and which result from special research or personal experience. Where stamped\nand addressed envelopes are included, every effort will be made to return in due course rejected contributions\nbut in no circumstances can he hold himself responsible for safe custody or return. All articles should be\ntypewritten.\nAddress: The Editor: \" The Mask Box 444, Florence, Italy.\n\nLITERARY CONTENTS.\nABOUT THESE PLANS OF LONDON, PARIS, ROMA. The Mask Publishers. . . Page 49\nPLAN OF THE CITIES OF LONDON AND WESTMIN*\nSTER : Foreword . . c. g. • e 52\nA FEW FACTS AND DATES ABOUT THEATRES AND\nTHOSE ASSOCIATED WITH THEM ... c. g. e. . . . . . . 53\nGENTLEMEN AND PLAYERS. . . . . . Ashley Dukes , . , . .66\nTHE INAUGURATION OF A THEATRE AT THE\nESIENSE COURT . Bruno Brunelli . . . . 71\nMR. GEORGE BUTLER, SHEFFIELD .... Frangois M. Florian . 74\nOLD LONDON AND MORE COTTONWOOL FOR THE j\nINCOMPETENT ; a Protest; « The Mask . . . . . 75\nSOME EXTRACTS FROM THE PRACTICE OF MAKING I I I 8 II |§ |j jf\nSCENES AND MACHINES IN THEATRES . . Nicola Sabbattini . . . .78\nTHE COLOSSUS SPEAKS . . . . . . George Bernard Shaw . . .81\nA WORD IN REPLY ....... Gordon Craig . . . . .82\nBOOK REVIEWS. EDITORIAL NOTES.\n\nILLUSTRATIONS.\nREMAINS OF GIBBON'S TENNIS COURT as it appeared\nafter the Fire. 17 September 1809. .... Anon .... Face page 49\nFLAN OF LONDON 1792-1799 (The first eight sections) . R. Horword . . . ■ \" 64\nHead and Tail Pieces from old and modern Designs."}, {"page_pdf": 4, "page_imprimee": "[48]", "url_page": "https://bluemountain.princeton.edu/bluemtn/?a=d&d=bmtnaau192604-01.1.4", "texte": "THE MASK\n1926\n\nPlate 6."}, {"page_pdf": 5, "page_imprimee": "49", "url_page": "https://bluemountain.princeton.edu/bluemtn/?a=d&d=bmtnaau192604-01.1.5", "texte": "THE MASK\n19 0 8 19 2 6\n\nABOUT THESE PLANS.\nOF LONDON, PARIS, ROMA.\nWHY is so much space given to plans of cities ?—is \" The\nMask\" taking up archeology—What have plans of cities\nto do with the Theatre? Many a time have we heard this\nasked; and we feel that there is time now for a word about why it\nis done.\n•3?\nLONDON, Paris and Roma have once been the three centres of\nthings Dramatic. The Dramatists, the Theatres, the Scenogra-\nphers and the performers of Roma, of Paris and of London did some-\nthing towards bringing these three cities into the condition in which we\nfind them in the 18th century Plans of Nolli, Turgot and Horwood.\nFor this reason alone it is impossible to over-look the value of\nsuch plans.\nAnd consider for a moment how great is the influence of a city\nupon these people of the Theatres, and how important to us looking\nfor them now to know the place they lived in. To be as impressio-\nnable as poets, as courageous as actors, is to be daily at the call of\nthe city. Environment, as a hundred essayists have pointed out, is a\npowerful factor in the shaping of the destiny of a man or woman.\nLa Gabrielli or Metastasio in Roma, Garrick or Sheridan in London,\nand Talma or Beaumarchais in Paris do not go about with eyes closed\nbut open: they draw into themselves and absorb into their system\nvery possible impression;—they must be forgiven for so often having\nooked on these three cities as set stages."}, {"page_pdf": 6, "page_imprimee": "50", "url_page": "https://bluemountain.princeton.edu/bluemtn/?a=d&d=bmtnaau192604-01.1.6", "texte": "And so if we want to know more of these playwrights and actors\nwe must turn to these plans and we will find more.\nLook where they walked or rode .... see what it is they saw daily.\nWere it but for the sake of two such people in each city these\nplans would be well worth possessing. Imagine that you are writing\nthe life of La Gabrielli. By the aid of two of the plans you can\nfollow her whereabouts in Roma and in London. No longer is it\na mere dream for you when you read of her entering Roma by the Porta\ndel Popolo and driving to her rooms at the Hotel of Carlo Roland near\nSan Carlo in Corso: and when she comes to sing in London in 17 7 5\nyou need be no longer vague in your mind as to exactly where was\nthe Opera House at which she sang.\nWhen in the same year Signora Agujari is singing at the Pantheon\nwe can see where-abouts it was she sang and where she went when\nshe visited Dr. Burney at No. 36 St. Martin's Street which leads\nfrom Leicester Square.\nWhen we read of Talma we are not content to slither over the\nwords which tell us that he was born in the Rue des Menetriers,\nlater lived in Rue St. Georges No. 4: in 1821 came to live at\nNo. 9, Rue de la Tour des Dames and died there in 1827. We\nwant to see where these places were situated.\nWhen he comes to London we are curious to see his house,\n13 Old Cavendish Street where he lived in 1780; his school in\nManchester Square where he studied, and we shall turn to the Plan\nof London and place him.\nWhy all this to do ? you ask. What can be the good of it ?\nIt seems to us that it helps to make history live, and, until history\nis alive, history is a dull thing.\nAnd it also helps the imagination:... besides, some of us enjoy plans\nThat is why these plans are being reprinted. A fresher and livelie\ninterest will be taken in the doings of our old friends; and we an\nless likely to forget they were real beings.\nAnd the streets and quais and the houses planned and built s<\nwell by excellent architects, are we to forget these too ?\nWe even like to remember the able impresario Faliconti and t\nfollow his footsteps in 1 726 to and from the Teatro Capranica—i\n1 734 to and from the Argentina.\nThese theatrical things are not the least of things. We will k\nbold enough to say that they are some of the most important, beir"}, {"page_pdf": 7, "page_imprimee": "51", "url_page": "https://bluemountain.princeton.edu/bluemtn/?a=d&d=bmtnaau192604-01.1.7", "texte": "D closely connected with the happiness of three peoples, the Romans,\nFrisians and Londoners.\nSuch records are accounted very little by some of the more diffi-\nult Historians of Europe, .... and that is the gravest of pities. No\nind can afford to forget the happiest hours of its people's existence;\nid in the past never were the peoples happier than when at the\nlayhouse.\nLet every possible record be treasured of these hours, which not\nily make the trials and hardships possible, but positively help a na~\n>n to exist.\nThese plans of cities, besides reviving in us the remembrance of\ne happiness of a people, serve as invaluable allies when you are\nird at work writing your Histories, making your yearly income.\nYou may not be a wealthy man and able to afford the originals\n.. you may not have enough room on your table to contain the three\nuge volumes of Turgot, Horwood and Nolli.\nSo that is another reason for giving so much space in 4' The Mask \"\n> these three plans: that you might have them to work from—easily\nt your elbow—at a fantastically low price.\nYou may be a Professor of English in some far off city in Ame-\nica or in Canada, in Africa or in some other English Colony.\nDo not ask people why 4 4 The Mask\" is trying to serve you and\nul your fellows: will you not see if you cannot them why.\nMore especially since there must always be one or two who will\neternally ask why a thing isn't other than it is, instead of discovering\nthe many good reasons for themselves.\nDo not be one of these, but be ever our kind supporters, even as\nwe remain.\nYour faithful servants,\nTHE MASK Publishers."}, {"page_pdf": 8, "page_imprimee": "52", "url_page": "https://bluemountain.princeton.edu/bluemtn/?a=d&d=bmtnaau192604-01.1.8", "texte": "LONDON AND WESTMINSTER.\nTHE BOROUGH OF SOUTHWARK AND\nPARTS ADJOINING:\nBY R. HORWOOD 1792-1799.\nMr. HORWOOD is waiting for someone\nto do him a little justice, for so far\nas I have been able to ascertain (and\nI am rather far off to be quite fair about\nthis) very few people seem to have recog-\nnized his powers while he lived or for\nvery long after his death.\nFortunately he did his work so well\nthat the indifference of his contemporaries\nhardly matters to him : yet it would have\nbeen easily possible for Biographical Dic-\ntionaries and other such lists to mention\nhis name : but so rarely is Horwood\nmentioned that I do not find him even in\nthe Dictionary of National Biography (l).\nCunningham gives him one line. I am quite\nignorant of his career. And I cannot point\nto his dwelling in this plan of his.\nHis work, this plan alone, informs me\nof his abilities. The original double plates\neach measure 41 by 22 7 a inches. The\nwhole plan therefore measures 1 3 feet by\n7 feet 5 inches.\nAll I have been able to do is to\nadd for you a few theatrical facts and\ndates about the different houses of drama-\ntists and actors and actresses and critics\nand the like.\nSome of these facts and dates appear\nwith the first eight plates in the present\nnumber of The Mask; the remainder,\nwith the other eight plates, will appear\nin the July number.\nMy list has been made with the assis-\ntance of only too few books: amongst them\nthose by Timbs, Cunningham, Pennant,\nBrayley, H. Barton Baker, Sir E. K.\nChambers, Boaden, Miss Burney, Fitzgerald,\nAustin Dobson and some 30 or 40\nothers.\nBut this little labour had not even\nbegun if I had not been presented with\na copy of the great and costly plan by\na friend in Banbury, obviously your friend\nsince by an act of this kind he makes it\npossible for me to distribute to hundreds\nof today's students something needed by\nthem for over a hundred and twenty-fiv\nyears.\n(1) Smith Elder, & Co. 1885 1906.\n\nc. g.\nBY the way, can someone tell me how it comes about th.\nKemble is said to have lived at 89 Great Russell Stre\n\" on the north side \" (Cunningham) when Fanny Kemb\nsays it was at 79 Great Russell Street. The house, si\nsays (J), was destroyed in 1747 to make way for t!\neastern wing of the British Museum. Where exactly d\nthis house, No. 79 or 89, stand ? No. 89 I see her<\nit faces Compton Street but what about Fanny Kembk\nstatement that it was 79?\n(i) \" Record of a Girlhood \" by Frances Ann Kembl\nVol. II, page 192."}, {"page_pdf": 9, "page_imprimee": "53", "url_page": "https://bluemountain.princeton.edu/bluemtn/?a=d&d=bmtnaau192604-01.1.9", "texte": "A FEW FACTS AND DATES\nABOUT THEATRES AND THOSE\nASSOCIATED WITH THEM.\n\nPLATE 1A\nST. MARY LE BONE.\nBAKER STREET.\n1817. Mrs Siddons lived in Siddons\nHouse, looking into the Regent's Park,\non the east side, at the top of the\nstreet; here she died, June Bth, 1831.\nThe house was destroyed in 1903-5 ;\na railway station was put up, the Com-\npany agreeing to set up a tablet to\ncommemorate the site.\nPLATE 1C\nBLOOMSBURY.\nQUEEN'S SQUARE.\nHere between 1770 and 1774 lived\nDr. Barney and his family. Here came\nDavid Garrick to visit them.\nGOWER STREET.\nMrs Jordan is living here in 1788.\nALFRED PLACE. Bedford Square.\nSheridan Knowles lived at No. 29.\nPLATE 1D\nBAGNIGGE WELLS.\nCOLD BATH FIELDS .\nA noted place of public entertainment,\na kind of minor Vauxhall.\nNell Gwynne is said to have had\na country-house near this spot, and her\nbust was here in 1789, when Waldron\nedited Downe's Roscius Anglicanus.\nSADLER'S WELLS.\n1683. A famous old place of public\namusement: first a music house, then\na theatre, and called Sadler's Wells\nfrom a spring of mineral water, disco-\nvered by one Sadler, in 1683, in the\ngarden of a house which he had\nnewly opened as a public music-room,\nand called by his own name as \" Sad-\nler's Music House.\"\nThe New River flowed past the\n* theatre, and on great occasions was\n■ even carried under the stage, and the\nflooring removed, for the exhibition of\naquatic performances. Here Grimaldi,\nthe famous clown, achieved his greatest\ntriumphs.\nIn 1844 this little theatre came\nunder the able management of Mr.\nPhelps, and for some years maintained\na well-deserved celebrity for the per-\nformance of the plays of Shakespeare,\nBeaumont and Fletcher, Massinger, &c.\nISLINGTON.\nCOLEBROOK-ROW.\nNear by lived Charles Lamb for a\nwhile, in Colebrook-row, close to\nDuncan Terrace, (64 Duncan Terrace)\nin what he calls 44 a detached whitish\n44 house close to the New River \". In\na letter to his friend R. Barton he writes :\n44 When you come Londonward you\n44 will find me no longer in Covent\n44 Garden ; I have a cottage in Colebrook\n44 Row, Islington; a cottage, for it is deta-\n-44 ched; a white house with six good\n44 rooms in it; the New River (rather\n44 elderly by this time) runs (if a mo-\n-44 derate walking pace can be so term-\n-44 ed) close to the foot of the house;\n44 and behind is a spacious garden with\n44 vines, (I assure you), pears, straw-\n-44 berries, parsnips, leeks, carrots, cab-\n-44 bages, to delight the heart of old\n44 Alcinous \".\nTHE RED BULL THEATRE\nThis theatre, built in 1606, stood\nat the upper end of St. John-street, west\nof St. John-street, on what is now called\n44 Red-Bull-yard \" or Wood Bridge street.\nPLATE 1E\nTHE NURSERY.\nThis was a school for the educa-\ntion of children for the stage in Gold-\ning-lane, Moorfields, established in the\nreign of Charles 11. by William Legge,\nancestor of the Earls of Dartmouth.\nThere is a view of it by J. T. Smith,\ncalled The Queen's Nursery.\nFORTUNE THEATRE.\nThis was built in 1600 by Peter\nStreet, a carpenter, for Philip Hen-\nslowe and Edward Alleyn, and stood\non the east side of Golding-lane in\nthe parish of St. Giles's, Cripplegate.\nIn Alleyn's Diary is the following\nentry:\n\" 1621. Dec. 9. Md. this night att\n12 of the Clock the Fortune was\nburnt\".\nCollier tells us that the original\nbuilding was a square construction of\nlath, plaster and timber. The new\ntheatre (for it was rebuilt immediately)\nwas circular, and built of brick and\ntile. The sign of the house was a\n* picture or figure of Fortune, In 1649,\nthe inside of this new theatre was des-\ntroyed by a company of soldiers set\non by the sectaries of those perilous\ntimes; and in 1661, the ground was\nadvertised 44 to be let to be built upon \".\nIt was from this theatre that Alleyn\nderived the larger portion of the funds\nfor the foundation of God's Gift Col-\nlege, at Dulwich. A passage, con-\nnecting Whitecross-street with Golding\nlane, is still called Playhouse-yard.\nBLACKFRIARS THEATRE.\nThis was built in 1576, by James\nBurbadge and his \" fellows servants\nof Dudley, Earl of Leicester, in con-\nsequence of an act of Common Council\npassed the preceding year, prohibiting\nthe erection of a playhouse within the\nlimits of the City jurisdiction.\nBLACKFRI ARS.\nSir Anthony Van Dyck lived in\nBlackfriars from the time of his coming\nto England in 1632 to his death in\n1641. The rent of his house, \" at a\nmoderate value \", was estimated, in\n1638, at £2O, and the tithe paid\n£1.6.3.\nBen Jonson dates his dedication of\nVolpone or The Fox \"from my house\nin the Blackfriars, this 1 Ith day of\nFebruary, 1607.\nALLEYN'S ALMS HOUSES.\nThree sets of alms-houses in London\n(each for ten poor people) were built\nand endowed by Edward Alleyn,\n(1626) the actor, and founder of God's\nGift College at Dulwich : /. in Lamb-\ncilley, (formerly Petty France), Bi-\nshopsgate-street; 2. in Bath-street, (for-\nmerly Pest-House-lane), Old-street, St.\nLuke's; 3. in Soap-yard, Deadman's-\nplace, Southwark. (This last we find\nin Plate 3, E.)\nThe first brick of the alms-houses\nin Bath-street was laid by Alleyn him-\nself on the 13 th of July, 1620 ; and\non the 29th of April, 1621, he re-\ncords his having placed three men and\nseven women in the ten houses.\nThey were rebuilt in 1707.\nBUNHILL FIELDS BURIAL GROUND.\nThis cemetary, near Finsbury Square,\nwas called \"the Campo Santo of\nthe Dissenters\".\nAmong the famous men buried here\nwas Daniel De Foe, (1661-1731),\nThe entry of his burial runs: \" 1731,\nApril 26. Mr. Dubow, Cripplegate \".\nHere too they buried William Blake,"}, {"page_pdf": 10, "page_imprimee": "54", "url_page": "https://bluemountain.princeton.edu/bluemtn/?a=d&d=bmtnaau192604-01.1.10", "texte": "(I 757-1827), at the distance of about\ntwenty-five feet from the north wall.\nThere was no monument in 1850. I sup-\npose and hope there is some such little\nrecord now.\nThomas Stothard, R. A,, who died\nin 1834 and who is best known by\nhis 44 Canterbury Pilgrimage \", a deli-\nberate crib from Blake, lies close to the\nman who was so 44 good to steal from \".\nPLATE 1F\nSHOREDITCH.\nTHE THEATRE.\nIn Holywell Lane, Shoreditch. The\nearliest building erected in or near Lon-\ndon purposely for scenic exhibitions,\nstood on 44 certain howsing and void\ngrounds lying and being in Holywell,\nin the county of Middlesex, \" let\n(April 13th, 1576) by Giles Allein\nof Haseleigh, in Essex, gentleman, to\n44 James Burbadge, late of London\njoiner \", for twenty-one years, at the\nyearly rent of £l4.\nThe house was erected at the cost\nof John Brayne, the father-in-law of\nBurbadge, who advanced £6OO on\ncondition that Burbadge should assign\nto him a moiety of the theatre and\nits profits. That assignment does not\nseem to have been executed in the\nlifetime of Brayne, and his widow\nwas obliged to commence proceedings\nin equity, to compel a fulfilment of the\ncontract. The point in dispute v/as\nafterwards moved to the Star Chamber,\nAllein, the ground-landlord, complain-\ning to the Privy Council that the rent\nwas partly unpaid* and that Cuthbert\nBurbadge, the son, had, Dec. 28th,\n1598, 44 carried the wood to the\nBankside, and there erected a new\nplayhouse with the said wood\".\nAllein's bill was referred to Francis\nBacon, Esq., whose decision was that\n44 the said bill is very uncertain and\ninsufficient, and that no further answer\nneed to be made thereto.\" ...Another\nproof that Bacon was Shakespeare.\nThe 44 new playhouse\" was, it is\nbelieved, the Globe, then rebuilt or\nenlarged.\nTHE CURTAIN.\nIn Holywell Lane, Shoreditch. A thea-\ntre built, it is thought, in 1576, and so\ncalled from a house in Shoreditch,\n44 commonly called the Curtayne and\n44 sometime appertaining to the Priory\n14 of Haliwell now dissolved.\" The\nname survives in Curtain-road.\n44 And neare thereunto (Holywell\n44 Priory) are builded two publique-\n44 houses for the acting shewe of co-\n-44 medies, tragedies, and histories for\n44 recreation. Whereof one is called\n44 the Courtein, the other the Theatre.\n44 both standing on the south-west side\n44 towards the field \" (*).\nThe Curtain fell into disuse about\nthe commencement of the reign of\nCharles I.\nST. LEONARD'S.\n1588: 1618. Holy well-street for\nHoliwell) in this parish was in the\nreign of Queen Elizabeth and James L\ninhabited by players of distinction,\nconnected with the Curtain Theatre,\nthe Blackfriars Theatre and the Globe\non the Bankside.\nThe parish register records the in-\nterment of the following: Richard Tarl-\nton, (d. 1588): James Burbadge (d.\n1596): Richard Burbadge (d. 1618):\nGabriel Spenser, the player, regarding\nwhom, in the burial register of St. Leo-\nnard, Shoreditch, is the following en-\ntry:—44 1598. Gabrieli Spencer being\n44 slayne, was buryed ye xxiqth of\n44 September. Hogge Lane\n44 Hogge Lane \" denotes his residence.\nHe was a player in Henslowe's com-\npany of actors, and was killed in\nHoxton-fields in a duel with Ben\nJonson, rare Ben Jonson.\nThe burials of William Sly and\nRichard Cowley, two original perfor-\nmers in Shakespeare's plays, are also\nregistered here.\nAnother original performer in Sha-\nkespeare's plays who lived in Holy-\nwell-street, was Nicholas Tooley (2).\nHACKNEY.\nStrype, the historian, was lecturer\nat Hackney from 1689 till 1724, and\ndied in 1737, in his 97th year.\nPLATE 2A\nEDGEWARE ROAD.\nOliver Goldsmith once lived here for\na while.\nIn the Road from Uxbridge we see\na row of houses in front of St. Geor-\nge's Burying Ground. These I believe\nwere called St. George's Row, and\nabout 1837 became Hyde Park Place,\nIn 1895 or thereabouts, I remember\ncalling at the second house west of\nthe Chapel, No. 19, to see the dra-\nmatic critic Mr. Max Beerbohm. The\nhouse nearest to the Chapel was that\nof Rope the confectioner who supplied\nthe finest wedding breakfasts of the\ntime, even superior to those of Gunter.\nMANCHESTER SQUARE.\nThis is on the north side of Oxford-\nstreet and was begun in 1776 by the\nbuilding of 44 Manchester House ' on\nits north side. It was finished in 1788.\nHere it was that Mr. Prendergast\nhad a school about 1780 to which\nTalma went. (J)\nPORTMAN SQUARE.\nMontague House in the north-west\nangle of the square was built for Mrs.\nMontague, (1 720-1800), authoress of\nthe Vindication of Shakespeare against\nVoltaire. Here she had her blue-\nstocking parties.\nORCHARD STREET.\nSheridan and his young wife are\nliving here in February 1774: and\nhere Sheridan wrote 44 The Rivals \"\nand the 44 Duenna \". 44 The Rivals \\\nwas finished in six weeks.\nSOMERSET STREET.\nHere from 1791 till 1799 lived!\nMrs. Jordan on the north side in No. 14..\nSEYMOUR STREET.\nAt No. 12 Lived Balfe from 1861/\nto 1864.\nGROSVENOR SQUARE..\nPARK STREET.\nIn 1794 Miss Stephens.was boftrKerew\nPLATE 2B\nBOND STREET.\n44 Dear Street of London's charms the\n[centre,\nDear Street! where at a certain hour\nMan's follies bud forth into flower!\nWhere the gay minor sighs for fashion:\nWhere majors live that minors cash on;\nWhere each who wills may suit his wish,\nHere choose a Guido— there his fish\nLord Nelson is living at No. 141\nin 1797, after the Battle of Cape St.\nVincent.\nOLD BOND STREET.\nIn Old Bond Street is Long's Ho-\ntel, now No. 15, but I am told in\nthose days No. 16. Here in 1799 it\nis clearly numberless, both 15 and 16\nbeing further along.\n44 I saw Byron for the last time in\n44 1815. He dined or lunched with\n\n(1) Stow. ed. 1598. p. 349.\n(2) See Tooley-street, Southwark.\nPlate No, 3 E.\n(i) See 44 The Mask Vol. XII, No-\nh P* 3*"}, {"page_pdf": 11, "page_imprimee": "55", "url_page": "https://bluemountain.princeton.edu/bluemtn/?a=d&d=bmtnaau192604-01.1.11", "texte": "44 me at Long's in Bond-Street. I\n44 never saw him so full of gaiety and\n44 good-humour, to which the presence\n44 of Mr. Mathews, the comedian, ad-\n-44 ded not a little. Poor Terry (the\n44 actor) was also present 0)\nAt No. 18 was once Stevens's Ho-\ntel, but not numbered here. Evidently\nHotels were skipped in 1799, for in\nTallis's Views No. 18 is marked\nclearly enough.\n44 During the first months of our\n44 acquaintance we (Byron and Moore)\n14 frequently dined together alone ; and\n44 as we had no club in common to\n44 resort to— the Alfred being the only\n44 one to which he at that period be-\n-44 longed, and I being then a member\n44 of none but Watier's—our dinners\n44 used to be at the St Alban's, or at\n44 his old haunt, Stevens's (2)\nIn 1793 and before Sir Thomas\nLawrence lived at No, 24 in 1794\nuntil 1804 at No. 29.\nAt No. 29 was the Library of\nMessrs Ebers & Co. at which boxes\nfor the Opera were booked. Mr. John\nEbers was for some years the manager\nof the King's Theatre in the Hay-\nmarket, losing £44,000 on the under-\ntaking. He died on Dec. Bth 1858\nat Notting Hill Terrace. Harrison\nAinsworth (Ebers's son-in-law) who\nbecame a publisher at No. 27, issued\nin 1828 an interesting book on this\nseven years venture.\nTo No. 30, corner of Stafford-street,\ncame John Mitchell the theatrical agent\nin 1834 when the number became 33.\nIn 1813 Lady Hamilton li ves at\nNo. 130.\nIn 181 1 Madame Catalani was at\n143 now occupied by Savory & Moore.\nIn September 1730 Lavinia Fenton,\nthe original Polly in the 44 Reggais*\nOpera \", came to live in Bond-street,\ntaking the house in which Lady Eli-\nzabeth Wentworth li 'ed.\nAbout 1780 Mrs Robinson (44 Per-\ndita \") was living in Cork-street off\nBond -street.\nSAVILLE STREET.\nIn 1816 Richard Brinslsy Sheridan\ndied in the front bedroom of No. 17.\nIn a short note to Mr. Rogers, May\n15th, 1836, six weeks before his death,\nhe says— :44 They are going to put the\n44 carpets out of window and break into\n44 Mrs . S.'s room and take me; for\n44 God's sake let me see you \".\nA present of £ 150 from Mr. Ro-\ngers arrived in time. Sheridan had\npreviously li/ed in No. 14.\nIn 1791 Lord Barry more has a pri-\nvate Theatre in Saville Street called\n44 Varies Amusantes \" ; and in No-\nvember Haydn visits it and writes\nin his Diary, 44 The Puppets were well\nmanaged, the singers bad, but the or-\nchestra tolerably good Boxes cost\n5/ ; Pit 3/ ; Doors open at 7\nbegins at 8.\nLOWER GROSVENOR STREET.\nIn 1730 Mrs. Nancy Oldfield, the\nactress, died here.\nUPPER AND LOWER BROOK\nSTREET.\nHandel lived at No. 57 (now 25)\nin the house which in 1850 became\nMr. Partington's 44 on the south side\nof Brook-street\", in 1799 three doors\nfrom Bond-street, now four doors I be-\nlieve. He died here April 14, 1759.\nCAVENDISH SQUARE.\n1782 (c) George Romney, the pain-\nter, lived in the house No. 32, after-\nwards Sir Martin Archer Shee's.\nNear by in No. 13 Old Cavendish\nStreet, in 1 770-80, the father of Talma\nis practising as dentist. (0\nHOLLES STREET.\nLord Byron (1788-1824) was born\nat No. 24 Hoilesstreet, which leads into\nthe square, and was christened in the\nsmall parish church of S . Marylebone.\nQUEEN ANNE STREET EAST now\nFoley Place.\nIn 1800 Malone, the Shakespeare\ncommentator, was living at No. 58.\nVERE STREET.\nSothern the actor died here at No.\nI, in 1881.\nGOLDEN SQUARE.\nIn 1746 Mrs Cibber, the actress, is\nliving here for she writes to Garrick\nin that year, 44 Direct to me at the\ncentre house in Golden-square, for I\nhave left Craven-street \".\nIn 1775 La Gabrieili takes a house\nhere and 44 has a brass plate put on\nthe door Mrs. Gabrielle \" says Miss\nBurney.\nHANOVER SQUARE.\n(c) 1760 The Concert Rooms on the\neast side were built by 44 Sir John \"\nGallini, formerly one of the managers\nof the Italian Opera in this country.\nST. GEORGE'S CHURCH.\nIn 1791 Sir William Hamilton was\nmarried in this church to Emma Lyons.\nIn 1849 Lola Monies was married\nin the same church to Mr. Heald.\nOXFORD STREET.\nGREAT MARLBOROUGH STREET.\nFrom 1790 to 1803 Mrs. Siddons\nlived at No. 49. It is the last but\none house on the south side and has\nno garden. In 1882 the number was\nchanged to 54.\nPANTHEON.\nIn Oxford-street itself, a stone's\nthrow from Mrs. Siddons's house was\nthe Pantheon, a theatre built by James\nWatt, and opened for the first time in\nJanuary 1 772. Dr. Johason went there in\ncompany with Bosweil, and both agreed\nin thinking it inferior to Ranelagh.\nThe entrance front in Oxford-street is\npart of Wyatt's original building.\nMiss Stephens, afterwards Countess\nof Essex, here made her first appea-\nrance on the stage in the character of\nBarbarina. It became the Opera\nHouse 1789 to 1792. It was burnt\nin 1 792 : there is a painting by Turner\nof the place in flames: rebuilt in 1795.\nPRINCESS'S THEATRE.\nIn 1829 the Princess's Theatre was\nbuilt; it was on the site of No. 73\nand on the north side of Oxford-street\nalmost directly opposite Poland-street.\nHere it was that Ellen Terry, aged\neight, first appeared with Charles Kean\nin 1856.\nPOLAND-STREET.\nClose by in Poland-street lived Dr.\nBurney, author of the 44 History of\nMusic \" with his family, between 1 768\nand 1770 when he moved to Queen\nSquare, Bloomsbury (q. v.). Here\nMiss Fanny Burney began her Diary.\nIn 1819 Shelley lodged at No. 15.\nHere too lived William Blake from\n1787 to 1793 at No. 28, the back\nwindows of which looked out into\na Timber-yard. The likeness of 44 The\nBabylonian Woman on the Seven\nheaded Beast \" to the Kemble family\nhas struck many people. The near-\nness of model and painter for three\nyears has occurred I believe to few.\nIn 1757 Blake was born at No. 28\nBroad-street, corner of Marshall-street,\nCamaby Market and lived there till\n1771. From 1803 to 1821 he lived\nat South Moulton-street No. 17.\nPICCADILLY.\nTHE ALBANY. From March 1814\nto March 3815 Lord Byron lived in\nSet No. 2A ; here he wrote his 44 Lara\".\n44 Albany, March 28, 1814. This\n44 night got into my new apartments,\n\n(1) Sir Walter Scott. (Moore's Life\nof Byron).\n(2) Moore. Life of Byron,\n(i) See 44 The Mask XII, I, p. 3."}, {"page_pdf": 12, "page_imprimee": "56", "url_page": "https://bluemountain.princeton.edu/bluemtn/?a=d&d=bmtnaau192604-01.1.12", "texte": "44 rented of Lord Althorp, on a lease\n44 of seven years. Spacious, and rooms\n44 for my books and sabres\nByron's Journals.\nFrom March 1815 for about a\nyear Lord Byron is living at Piccadilly\nTerrace 13, now 139, (see Plate 3B).\nBERKELEY SQUARE.\nBuilt 1698, and so called from\nBerkeley House, the London residence\nof John, Lord Berkeley of Stratton,\n(d. 1678). Herein 1755 lived Colley\nGibber.\nDOVER STREET.\nHerefrom 1699 to 1706 lived and\ndied John Evelyn, (1620-1706) about\nnine doors up on the east side.\nST. JAMES'S CHURCH.\nHere is buried Tom d'Urfey, the\ndramatist (1653-1723): also James\nGillray, the caricaturist, (1757-1815)\nin the churchyard, beneath a flat stone\non the west side of the rectory,\nST. JAMES'S MARKET, JERMYN\nSTREET.\nFarquhar found Miss Nanny, after-\nwards Mrs. Oldfield, the actress, then\na girl of sixteen \", rehearsing the part\nof the Scornful Lady of Beaumont and\nFletcher behind the bar of her aunt\nMrs. Voss's tavern, the Mitre in St.\nJames's Market.\nGREAT TITCHFIELD STREET.\nDe Loutherbourg, the scenographer\n(1740-1812) lived at No. 45, from\n1774 to 1780. He had his small\nscenical Theatre in 4 Lisle street in\n1 781, afterwards in Old Exeter Change\nin 1786.\nIn 1797 Madame Vestris was born\nat a house in this street.\nTOTTENHAM STREET, Tottenham\nCourt Road.\nHere was built (c) 1790 \"The\nQueen's Theatre \", formerly Fiancis\nPasquale's \" King's Concert-room \".\nIt was afterwards purchased and en-\nlarged by the directors of the Concerts\nof Ancient Music, and subsequently\nconverted into a theatre and was run\nunder the names of (i) the Tottenham-\nstreet, (2) the Regency, (3) Royal\nWest London, (4) Queen's Theatre, (5)\nFitzroy Theatre. In 1802, when\ncalled The Regency, Colonel Greville\nstarted the 44 Pic-Nic Society \" of ama-\nteurs;—a caricature by Gillray greeted\ntheir first efforts. In 1865 it became\n44 The Prince of Wales's Theatre \"\nunder Mr and Mrs. Bancroft till 1879.\nDestroyed in 1882.\nIn 1905 The Scala Thealre was\nbuilt on the site.\nPLATE 2C\nBLOOMSBURY.\nBLOOMSBURY SQUARE was first\nformed by Thomas Wriothesley, Earl\nof Southampton, the son of Shakes-\npeare's patron.\nORANGE-STREET.\nHere R. W. Elliston was born in\n1774.\nGOWER-STREET.\nJack Bannister died here in 1836.\nIn 1817 Mr. Isaac Disraeli is li-\nving at No. 6, on the west side, the\nfirst house from Hart-street; here he\ncompiled his 44 Curiosities of Litera-\nture The house was built by Isaac\nWare (d. 1776), the editor of Palladio.\nCHARLOTTE STREET.\nIn Charlotte-street, later Bloomsbury-\nstreet, Theodore Hook, the novelist\n(1788-1841) was born in what was\nthen No. 3, and was still living here\nin the year 1800. He it was who\nwrote the 44 Reminiscences\" ascribed\nto Michael Kelly, 1826.\nWYAN'S COURT, GREAT RUSSELL-\nSTREET.\nIn this court, (it no longer exists)\nlived Lewis Theobald, the editor of\nShakespeare. 1 729.\nST. GEORGE'S.\nJoseph Shepherd Munden, the actor,\n(1758-1832) was buried in this church.\nST. GEORGE THE MARTYR, QUEEN\nSQUARE.\nNancy Dawson, the dancer, famous for\nhornpipe dancing (1730-1767) was bu-\nried here : there is a tombstone to her\nmemory in this church which states\n4 Here lies Nancy Dawson'.\nGREAT RUSSELL STREET.\nFrom 1800 to 1817 John Philip\nKemble is living in No. 89, on the\nNorth side. The house was destroyed\nin 1847, to make way for the eastern\nwing of the British Museum.\nCAROLINE STREET, BEDFORD\nSQUARE.\nFrom 1887 to 1795 Kemble was\nliving at No. 13.\nSOUTHAMPTON STREET.\n44 I was born in London on the\n6th of November, 1671, in Southampton\nStreet, facing Southampton House\".\nColley Gibber's Apology.\nCOVENT GARDEN.\nCOVENT GARDEN THEATRE.\nFirst theatre (0 opened Dec. 7.1732\nby John Rich, (1782-1761): destro-\nyed by fire Sept. 20. 1808. Second\ntheatre opened Sept. 18, 1809, (Smirke,\narchitect) : destroyed by fire March 5,\n1856. Third Theatre opened May 15,\n1858. (Barry architect). Even in 1847\nexpenses of Covent Garden Theatre\nwere found too costly to keep it up\nproperly. No sane solution to the\ndifficulty of running it has yet been\ndiscovered although some believe it\nlies right before us.\nBOW STREET,\nThis street was built in 1637.\nMohun, the famous actor, (1624-\n1680) lived in a house on the east\nside, from 1671 to 1676 inclusive,\nGrinling Gibbons (1648-1720) lived\nin a house on the east side (about the\nmiddle of the street), from 1678 to\n1720. The house was distinguished\nby the sign of 44 The King's Arms\".\nWilliam Wychedey, ilie dramatst\n(1640-1716), lived in lodgings, at Wi-\ndow Hilton's, on the west side, over\nagainst the Cock. King Charles 11. paid\nhim a visit here, when ill of a fever; and\nhere, when seventy-five and too unwell\nto attend the church, he was married.\nRobert Wilks, the actor, 44 Gentleman\nWilks\", (1665-1732), lived in the\nsixth house on the west side as you\nwalk to Long-acre.\nIn 1749 Spranger Barry, (1719-\n1777) lived for some years in the\ncorner house on the west side, for-\nmerly Will's Coffee-house.\nIn 1742 Charles Macklin (1697-\n1797) lived here, where Peg Wof-\nfington also had apartments.\nMARTLET COURT, BOW STREET.\nIn 1756 Edward Shuter, the actor,\n(1730-1776) was living at No. 2,\nwhen he advertised his benefit in the\nPublic Advertiser of March Bth. The\nCourt is not marked by Horwood but\nleads out of Crown-court, No. 2 being\nthe second house from the Bow-street\nend.\nTHE PIAZZA.\nBetween 1637 and 1643 Thomas\nKilligrew (1612-1683) was living in\nthe north-west angle; and between\n1660 and 1662 in the north-east angle.\n\n(i) See interesting plan in The Mask,\nVolume 8, page io."}, {"page_pdf": 13, "page_imprimee": "57", "url_page": "https://bluemountain.princeton.edu/bluemtn/?a=d&d=bmtnaau192604-01.1.13", "texte": "Subsequent to 1762 Zoffany (1733-\n1810) the theatrical portrait-painter, li-\nved in what was later Robins's Auction-\nrooms, in the north-east wing of the\nPiazza. Here he painted Foote, in the\nparody of Major Sturgeon.\nST, PAUL'S.\nA parish church, on the west side of the\nmarket, built by Inigo Jones, circ. 1633.\nThe parish register records the mar-\nriage (1764) of Lady Susan Strang-\nways to O' Brien, the actor. Among the\neminent persons buried here are :\nSir Henry Herbert, (1 595-167 3),\nMaster of the Revels in the time of\nthe Stuarts: Dick Estcouit, (1668-\n1712), the actor-dramatist : Edward\nKynaston, (1640-1706), the celebrated\nactor of female parts at the Restora-\ntion: William Wycherley, (1640-1716),\nthe dramatist : and Charles Macklin,\n(1690-1797) who is buried in the\nvault under the communion table.\nBEDFORD COFFEE HOUSE.\nA celebrated coffee-house which once\nstood in the north-east corner near the\nstage entrance to the Theatre 44 under\nthe Piazza in Covent Garden\" and\nwas frequented by Garrick, Quin, Foote,\nMurphy and others.\n1815-19 Charles Kemble is living in\nCovent Garden-Chambers.\nPUNCHS THEATRE.\nIn 1711 it stood in the Little Piazza,\neast side, (so it is written on a\nplan I have seen), and belonged to\nMartin Powell. Boxes cost 2/6; Pit\n1/6. This Plan is called 44 Plan of\nBedford House, Covent Garden, etc.\ntaken about 1690. (1809)\".\nKING STREET.\nJames Quin, the actor, (1693-1766)\nwas born here,and christened in the\nadjoining church.\nGARRICK GLUB.\nThis Ciub was established in 1831\nat No. 35, King-street. (Timbs says\nat No. 29). Moved to Garrick-street\nin 1862.\nHENRIETTA STREET.\nThis was built in 1637.\nKitty Clive (1 71 1-1 785) was living\nhere in March, 1756, when she adver-\ntised her benefit.\nHere at the Castle Tavern, Sheri-\ndan in 1772 (?) fought and disarmed\nMathews, his rival.\nJAMES STREET.\nSir Henry Herbert, (1595-1673),\nthe last Master of the Revels, lived\nand died on the west side of this\nstreet, in the red-brick house, the last\nbut one before the street abuts upon\nHart-street; re. 23 or 26 of this plan.\nMAIDEN LANE.\n«•\nVoltaire lodged here at the White\nPeruke in December 1727.\nJ. M. W. Turner, R. A. lived with\nhis father in No. 26 on the north side\ncorner of Hand-court till the year 1800,\nwhen he was elected an associate of\nthe Royal Academy.\nTAVISTOCK ROW.\nAt No. 4, in the upper part of the\nhouse, died Charles Macklin, aged 107.\nYORK STREET.\nThis was built 1636.\nMrs. Pritchard, (171 1-1768) the\nactress, was living here when she adver-\ntised her benefit at Drury-lane, in the\nPublic Avertiser of March 13th, 1756.\nCHARLES STREET.\nBarton Booth, the actor (1681 -\n1733) died here.\nBRYDGES STREET.\nBuilt circa 1637, and so called after\nGeorge Brydges, Lord Chandos. Strype\ndescribes it as a 44 place well-built and\ninhabited, and of great resort for the\ntheatre there\". The Old Drury Ta-\nvern, the Sheridan Knowles public-house,\nthe Sir John Falstaff, and the Elysium\nmade it even up to 1850 a dramatic\nand a festive neighbourhood.\nRUSSEL STREET.\nThis street was built 1634, leading\nfrom the Piazza to Drury Lane.\nJoseph Taylor, one of the original\nperformers in Shakespeare's plays, lived\nhere from 1634 to 1641.\n44 But who should I meet at the\n44 corner of the Piazza, but Joseph\n44 Taylor; he tells me, there's a new\n44 play at the Friars today, and I have\n44 bespoke a box for Mr Wild and\n44 his brid *\". (4 The Parson's Wed-\nding'. Killigrew. 1663).\nJohn Evelyn also lived here:\n44 18 Oct. 1659. I came with my\n44 wife and family to London: took\n44 lodgings at the 3 Feathers in Russel -\n44 street, Covent-garden, for all the win-\n-44 ter, my son being very unwell\".\nMichael Mohun, the actor, (1620-\n1684) lived on the south side; in 1665\nhe was assessed at 10s., the highest rate\nlevied in the street.\nThomas Betterton (1635-1710) died\nhere in 1710; and here, 44 at his late\nlodgings, \" his books, prints, drawings,\nand paintings, were sold after his death.\nTom Davies, the actor-bookseller,\n(1712-1 785) had his shop on the south\nside. 44 Mr. Thomas Davies, the actor,\n44 who then kept a bookseller's shop in\n44 Russel-s-reet,, Co vent-garden, told me\n44 that Johnson was very much his friend,\n44 and came frequently to his house \".\nBoswell.\nWill's Coffee~House was No. 1.\nand on the west side of Bow-street at\nthe corner of Russel-street. Tom's\nCoffee-House was No. 1 7 Russel street,\nnorth side.\n44 After the Play, the best company\n44 go to Tom's and Will's Coffee House\n44 near adjoining, where there is playing\n44 at Picket, and the best of conversation\n44 till midnight. Here you will see blue\n44 and green ribbons and stars sitting\n44 familiarly, and talking with the same\n44 freedom as if they had left their qua-\n-44 lity and degrees of distance at home\".\n(De Foe's \" A Journey through Eng~\nland\", 1772).\nCharles Lamb lived here in 181 7 at\nNo. 20. 44 Drury Lane\", he writes,\n44 in sight from our front, and Covent\nGarden from our back room windows\".\nLEICESTER SQUARE.\nAt No. 47 Sir Joshua Reynolds\nlived from 1760 till his death in\n1892.\nIn 1733 at the Holden Head lived\nHogarth, (1697-1764).\nIn 1796 Charles Dibdin (1745-\n1814) built in twelve weeks his little\nSans Souci Theatre at No. 2 on the\neast side of Leicester Place.\nMARTIN STREET.\nIn Martin Street No. 36, just off\nLeicester Square, the Burney Family\nare living from 1774 onwards; and\nhere it was that the Agujari (La Ba-\nstardina) came to call on Dr. Burney\nin 1775. The house had previously\nbelonged to Sir Isaac New on, where\nhe had built a little observatory. Here\ntook places the tearing to pieces of La\nGabrielli by the kind of people She-\nridan was at the moment studying and\nrecording in his 44 School for Scandal\".\nIn 1793 Burford erects his Theatre\nfor Barker's 44 Panorama \" near the\nend of Cranburn street, behind the\nhouses here marked II and 12 Leicester\nsquare. It had its entrance by the east\nside of No. 12. It had been shown in\n1789 at No. 28 Haymarket, opposite\nthe Black Horse Inn. In 1791 it was\nshown at No. 28 Castle St. facing the\neast end of Bearstreet. It remained open\nin 3 793.\nLISLE STREET.\nIn 1781 de Loutherbourg opened"}, {"page_pdf": 14, "page_imprimee": "58", "url_page": "https://bluemountain.princeton.edu/bluemtn/?a=d&d=bmtnaau192604-01.1.14", "texte": "his 44 Eidophusikon \" at 4 Lisle-street\non April 3. (see Great Titchfield-street).\nST. GILES'S IN THE FIELDS.\nGeorge Chapman (1559-1634) was\nburied in this church. lnigo Jones\nerected an altar-tomb to his memory,\nat his own expense, which is presu-\nmably still to be seen in the churchyard,\nagainst the south wall of the church.\nJames Shirley (1596 to 1666) was\nalso buried here; and Michael Mohun\n(1620-1684).\nHAYMARKET.\nTHE HAYMARKET THEATRES.\nThere have been three in this street.\nFirst the Opera House ; the big buil-\nding by Vanbrugh on the west side,\n1705: secondly a small playhouse,\nbuilt by John Potter, 1720, clearly\nmarked in this plan.\nThis was known at first as 44 The\nLittle Theatre in the Haymarket to\ndistinguish it from the theatre on the\nopposite side of the street. (see\nPlate 3 U\\) (1)\nThe 44 Little House \" was perma-\nnently closed October 14th 1820, and\na third Theatre, built by Nash, was\nopened July 4th, 1821. It stood on\na piece of ground immediately adjoin-\ning the former Theatre on the east\nside (12, 13, 14, of Horwood). It\nstill exists, but while it once dominated\nthat side of t]ie street, now it seems the\nleast noticeable building in the district.\nHAYMARKET No. 61.\nOn the opposite side of the road to\nthe playhouse and near 44 The Cock\nTavern\" was No. 61, where Sig. Mi-\ncheli lived in 1780 and sold tickets\nbetween the hours of 11. 30 and 6. 30\nfor his Theatre of Italian Fantoccini\n(or puppets) in Piccadilly No. 22.\nSee Plate 2 the last but one house\non the north side going down towards\nthe Castle Tavern or Inn.\nFrom 1714 to 1726 Mrs Oldfield\nthe actress (1683-1730) lived in the\nhouse, seventh door from the top,\neast side.\nJAMES STREET.\nThis has a stone inscribed on one\nof the houses, 44 Jarnes Street, 1673\".\nWrites Strype:— 44 James Street\n44 comes out of the Haymarket and fal-\n-44 leih into Hedge Lane, of chief note\n44 for its Tennis Court, which takes\n44 up the south side of the street ; the\n<4 north side being but ordinarily in-\n-4< habited \". It was above this Tennis\ncourt that Mrs. Charke, Colly Gibber's\ndaughter, had her Puppet Theatre in\nabout 1739.\nPANTON STREET.\nIn Panton-street, close by, and on\nthe south side, was Hickford's Great\nRoom, 1713, used as a Dancing School\nand as a Concert Room and as an Auction\nRoom ... a very fashionable centre.\nIn an announcement of 1729 we\nread the following:— 44 N. B. Such\n44 persons as design to be brought in\n44 chairs, are desired to come in at the\n44 back door of Mr. Hickford's Great\n44 Room, (which is on a ground floor),\n44 facing the Tennis Court in St. James's\n44 Street in the Haymarket; which is\n44 so large and convenient, that, without\n44 going up or down steps, the Chair\n44 may be carried in to the very room\n44 where the Pictures, &c., are shewed \".\nThe room was 50 feet long by 30\nin breadth. Mozart and his sister....\nhe was eight, and she thirteen.... gave\na concert there on May 13th. 1765.\nSUFFOLK STREET.\nThis was built circa 1664.\nHere dwelt Moll Davis, (flourished\n1645-1669) from 1667 to 1674, when\nshe removed to St. James's Square.\nA motion had been made in the\nHouse of Commons to 44 lay a tax on\n44 playhouses. The Court opposed the\n44 motion. The players, it was said,\n44 (by Sir John Birkenhead), were the\n44 King's servants, and a part of his\n44 pleasure. Coventry asked, 44 Whether\n44 did the King's pleasure lie among\n44 the men or the women that acted ? \"\n44 —perhaps recollecting more espe-\n-44 cially the King's visits to Moll Davis,\n44 in the street he himself lived in.\n44 The King determined to leave a\n44 mark upon Sir John Coventry, and\n44 he was watched on his way home.\n44 He stood up to the wall \", says\n44 Burnet, 44 and snatched the flam-\n-44 beau out of the servant's hands; and\n44 with that in one hand, and his sword\n44 in the other, he defended himself so\n44 well, that he got more credit by it\n44 than by all the actions of his life.\n44 He wounded some of them, but was\n44 soon disarmed, and then they cut\n44 his nose to the bone, to teach him\n44 to remember what respect he owed\n44 to the King \" (0,\nLINCOLN'S INN FIELDS.\nGIBBON'S TENNIS COURT, Vere\nStreet, Clare Market.\nSo called after Charles Gibbons, its\nowner or keeper, (d. 1668), it was ope-\nNed as a theatre by the King's Com-\npany under Killigrew, Thursday, No-\nvember Bth, 1660, with the play of\nKing Henry IV. On the Bth of April\n1663, this company of actors moved\nto the new house erected on the site\nof the present Drury-lane Theatre* (qv).\nDownes, in his 44 Roscius Angli-\ncanus\" tells us that: 44 The scattered\n44 remnant of several of these houses\"\n(or Theatres) 44 upon King Charles's\n44 Restoration, fram'd a company, who\n44 acted again at the (Red) Bull (in\n44 St. John's-street), and built them a\n44 new (?) house in Gibbons' Tennis-\n-44 court, in Clare-market, in which two\n44 places they continued acting all 1660,\n44 1661, 1662, and part of 1663\".\nPepys in 1660 asserts that: 44 .... it\n44 is the finest play-house, I believe,\n44 that ever was in England It was\nburnt down in 1809. (see Plate 6).\nOgilby, the poet, drew a lottery of\nbooks on Tuesday, June 2nd, 1668,\n44 at the Old Theatre, between Lin-\ncoln's-Inn-fields and Vere-street\nCLARE MARKET.\nClose to Vere street is Clare-market.\nAn actor, James Spiller, (1692-\n1720), becoming so popular with the\nbutchers that they changed the name\nof one of their Taverns \" The Bull\nand Butcher \"into the \"Spiller's Head\".\nSTANHOPE STREET.\nIn Stanhope-street, Clare-Market,\nJoseph Grimaldi, (1779-1837) was\nborn.\nPLATE 2C & D\nLINCOLN'S INN FIELDS THEATRE.\nThis was in Portugal-street : it seems\nnot to have stretched to the Fields\nOf the three distinct theatres of this\nname on the same site: The first was\noriginally \" Lisle* s Tennis Court\nPortugal Row, converted into a theatre\n(The Dukes Theatre) by Sir William\nDavenant, and opened in the spring of\n1662, 44 having new scenes and deco-\nrations,... \".\nIt then seems to have been turned\nback into a tennis court in 1671.\nThe second theatre on the same site\n(\" fitted up from a tennis court \"), was\nbuilt by Congreve, Betterton, Mrs.\nBarry, and Mrs. Bracegirdle, and opened\nApril 30th, 1695, with Congreve's co-\nmedy of 44 Love for Love\".\nThe third theatre on the same spot\nwas opened on December 18th. 1714.\nHere, on January 29th, 1727-8,\nThe Beggar's Opera was originally pro-\nduced, and with such success that it\n\n(i) To appear in the July number.\n(i) Burnet. (1823 Ed.)."}, {"page_pdf": 15, "page_imprimee": "59", "url_page": "https://bluemountain.princeton.edu/bluemtn/?a=d&d=bmtnaau192604-01.1.15", "texte": "was acted on sixty-two nights in one\nseason.\nIn 1756 it was transformed into a\nbarrack for 1400 men. After this it\nbecame Copeland's China Repository.\nIn 1799 (as we see in the plan) it\nwas called Mr. Spode's Warehouse.\nFinally, in 1848, it is taken down to\nenlarge the Royal College of Surgeons\nwhich had been erected in 1835 in the\nLincoln's Inn Fields.\nPORTUGAL ROW,\nHere in 1668 lived The Lady Da-\nvenant, wife of Sir William Davenant;\nHere too John Wilmot, second Earl of\nRochester (1647-1680) lived in the\nhouse (circa 1673) \" next to the Duke's\nPlayhouse in Portugal Row \" he writes.\nNear by, in No. 1., New square,\nLincoln's Inn, resided for twenty-three\nyears Arthur Murphy, (1727-1805) the\ndramatist, and friend of Dr. Johnson.\nPLATE 2C\nGREAT QUEEN STREET.\nIn Great Queen Street the Freema-\nson's Hall and Tavern was built in\n1775-6.\nHere a fa'ewell dinner was given to\nJohn Philip Kemble (0 on his retiring\nfrom the stage in 1817.\nIn 1782 William Blake lodges at\nNo. 31, apprenticed to Bazire the en-\ngraver, whose studio was here.\nAbout 1733 Mrs. Kitty Clive lived\nhere.\nIn 1735 Ryan the comedian was\n•attacked here at midnight and severely\nwounded.\nAbout 1779 Sheridan lived at No. 54,\n55 or 56 for some years, (see Moore's\n\" Life ')', and Mrs Robinson, (Perdita),\nwas living there in 1773.\nLITTLE QUEEN STREET.\nHere, at No. 7, lived Charles Lamb\nin 1796.\nLONG ACRE.\nJohn Dryden, from 1682 to 1686\nlived in a house on the north side fa-\ncing Rose-street, or Rose-court. He\nis said to have lived in Gerard-street,\nand to have been on his way home\nthere when he was cudgelled in Rose-\nstreet, but Gerard-street was not built\nat that time.\nST. MARTIN'S IN THE FIELDS.\nA very early London parish. Here\nare buried : Lacy, the actor, 44 in the\nfarther churchyard (d. 1681): Nell\nGwynne, in the church, (1650-1687):\nFarquhar, the dramatist, (1678-1707):\nCharles Bannister, the actor, (1737-\n1804) in a vault under the communion\ntable : and Jack Sheppard in the burial\nground.\nST. MARTIN'S LANE.\nHere in 1784-5 lived Fuseli, (1741-\n1825) at No. 100.\nSir Joshua Reynolds (1723-1792)\nabout 1743 lived in a house almost\nfacing Mays Buildings. Later in Great\nNewport-street No. 5 until 1760.\nHere also in St. Martin's Lane was\nSlaughter's Coffee House, three doors\nfrom Newport-street on the west side,\nfrequented by Hogarth, Roubiliac and\nReynolds.\nSOHO .\nSOHO SQUARE.\nIn 1760 at the south corner of\nSutton street dwelt Madame Th£r£se\nCornelys, called by Walpole \" the\nHeidegger of the age \" in \" Car-\nlisle House \" here numbered 21. Here\nCasanova visited her in 1763. The\nfurniture etc. was sold by auction in\n1772. In- 1776 she returns here:\nclosed in 1 797.\nIn 1774 George Colman the elder\nlived at no. 28 in the left-hand corner\nof Bateman's-buildings and Frith-street\ncorner ; Samuel Beazley the architect\nlived in Bateman's buildings to the right.\nFRITH STREET.\nWilliam Hazlitt died in this street,\nand was buried in the churchyard of\nthe parish, St. Anne's, Soho.\nIn 1787-88 Jack Bannister is living\nhere.\nIn 1768 Sheridan is living here with\nhis father and elder brother.\nGERARD STREET,\nJohn Dryden lived here in the house\nmarked no. 43 in this plan. \"If\n\"either your lady or you shall at any\n\" time honour me with a letter, my\n\" house is in Gerard Street, the fifth\n\" door on the left hand coming from\n\" Newport Street \". (0\n\"Dryden lived in Gerard-street, and\nused most commonly to write in the\nground-room, next the street He\ndied here in 1700.\nCharles Kemble lived here about\n1819 in the house fronting Anne-street.\nGREEK STREET.\nSir Thomas Lawrence lived in this\nstreet from 1799 to 1804.\nIn 1764 Casanova lodged here for\na few weeks at the lodging house of\nMrs. Susanna Mercier.\nDRURY LANE.\nTHE PHOENIX THEATRE or COCK-\nPIT in Drury Lane.\nThis stood in the parish of St.\nGiles's-in-the-Fields, somewhere between\nOrange Court and Golden Place in\nour plan.\nBuilt for cock-fighting, it became a\ntheatre. Prynne says that the Theatre\ndemoralised the whole of Drury-Lane.\nIt was destroyed by the apprentices of\nLondon in 1617. In 1659 it was re-\nfitted for acting by Mr Rhodes.\nTake care not to confuse this Cockpit\nof Drury Lane with another Cockpit\nin Whitehall. They are easily confu-\nsed, for sometimes the Diaries and\nother reports of the time refer solely\nto 44 The Cockpit \" and omit to say\nwhich.\nDRURY LANE THEATRE, between\nBridges Street and Drury Lane.\nThe first theatre was opened on\nApril Bth, 1663, by the King's Com-\npany, under Thomas Killigrew. It\nwas often called the theatre in Covent\nGarden. Pepys gives a report of this\nbuilding. Destroyed by fire before Ja-\nnuary 1672. Rebuilt by Wren, it\nwas opened March 26th, 1674. Gib-\nber gives a report. The principal en-\ntrance to Wren's theatre was down\nPlayhouse-passage (not marked here).\nAfter changing masters many times,\nGarrick takes control of it, 1747, ad-\nding a new Front to it by the bro-\nthers Adam, and leaves it on retiring\nfrom the stage in 1776.\nA third house was built by Henry\nHolland, opened March 12th, 1794.\nBrayley says in 1793.\nIt is this building which Horwood\nshows us : it was destroyed by fire on\nthe night of February 24th, 1809,\nwhen the fourth building was erected,\nWyatt being the designer, and opened\nOctober 10th 1812. Restored in\n1822, it was added to in 1831, re-\nnovated in 1866 and reconstructed\nin 1922.\nDRURY LANE.\nSo called, says Stow, for that\nthere is a house belonging to the fa-\nmily of the Druries \".\nDRURY HOUSE, Drury Lane.\nIt was built by Sir William Drury.\nFrom the Drurys it passed into the pos-\nsession of the Craven family; and was\nthen distinguished as Craven House.\n\n(i) See \"The Actor \" and \"Scenes\".\n(i) Dryden to Elmes Steward Esq."}, {"page_pdf": 16, "page_imprimee": "60", "url_page": "https://bluemountain.princeton.edu/bluemtn/?a=d&d=bmtnaau192604-01.1.16", "texte": "The OLYMPIC THEATRE.\nBuitt in 1805 on this site by Philip\nAstley of Astley's Amphitheatre, who\nopened it September 18th, 1806 as the\nOlympic Pavilion ; it was burnt to the\nground March 29th, 1849.\nThe first house was built of the\ntimbers of a French man-of-war, La\nVille de Paris, in which William IV.\nwent out as a midshipman. The masts\nof the vessel formed the flies, and\nwere se:n still erect long after the roof\nfell in. In 1813 it was sold to Elli-\nston, who rebuilt it in 1818: from\n1831 to 1839 it was under the di-\nrection of Madame Vestris. It was\ndestroyed in 1899.\nJohn Lacy (1616-1681) lived from\n1665 to his death at a house near\nCraven Alley at the top of Mapole\nAlley.\nNell Gwynne (1650-1687) was bom\nin Coal-yard on February 6th. 0) She\nlived the first part of her life in Drury\nLane: in Drury Court 44 the fashio-\nnable part \", ie, Mapole Alley ; (the\nAlley leading from Craven buildings\nand unmarked in our plan).\nPepys reports meeting her on May\nIst, 1667 44 at her lodgings door in\nDrury Lane She first sold oranges\nin the King's Playhouse; then she\nacted there. She is also said to have\nhad a Dairy in Exchange Court, Exe-\nter Change. Lastly she became, mo-\nther to the Duke of St. Albans.\nDRURY LANE STAGE DOOR.\nTheatrical Funds in 1849.\nThe Drury-Lane Theatrical Fund\nwas established by David Garrick in\n1766 for the relief and support of\naged and decayed persons of the Drury-\nlane company of players. The appli-\ncants for relief had to be subscribers\nto the society, or the widows and\nchildren of subscribers. The Office\nof the Fund was the stage-door, Drury -\nlane Theatre.\nThe Covent-garden Theatrical Fund\n(1760) was similarly constituted, with\nits stage-door as its offices.\nCROSS COURT, Drury Lane.\nThe unnamed court in Horwood\nwhich leads from Russell Court to\nMarquis Court.\n\"At the north end of Cross-court\n\" there yet stands (circa 1820) a por-\n\" tal, of soms architectural pretensions,\n\" though reduced to humble use, ser-\n\" ving at present for an entrance to a\n\" printing-office. This old door-way,\n\" if you are young, reader, you may\n\" not know was the identical pit en-\n44 trance to Old Drury—Garrick's\n44 Drury—all of it that is left. 1 never\n44 pass it without shaking some forty\n44 years from off my shoulders, recur-\n-44 ring to the evening when I passed\n44 through it to see my first play \". (0\nIn Lamb's youth the theatre was\nconnected with the houses on the east\nside and the south side, where was the\nentrance Lamb speaks of.\nRUSSELL COURT, The Black Lion.\nHere was an actors' agency in 1780.\nSTRAND.\nTHE NEW EXCHANGE.\nThe 44 New Exchange \", or Bri-\ntain's Burse as it was called by King\nJames I, was a kind of Bazaar on\nthe south side of the Strand, and was\nerected in 1608 on the site now covered\nby the Adelphi.\nIt was a favourite resort of the no-\nbility and gentry, especially during the\nRestoration. Many a reference is to\nbe found to it in the Restoration drama.\nIn 1737 it was taken down.\nHere, at the 44 Eagle and Child\nthe first edition of 44 Othello\" was sold\nby Thomas Walkley in 1622.\nAt the sign of the Fop's Head lived,\nin 1674, Will Cademan, the player\nand play publisher.\nTHE ADELPHI.\nDavid Garrick (1717-1779) lived\nin the centre house, No. 5 of the Ter-\nrace, (here not numbered), from 1772\ntill his death.\nWhen the Adelphi was building,\nBecket, the bookseller in the Strand,\nwas anxious to move his shop to the\ncorner house of Adam-street leadihg\nto the Adelphi; and Garrick was an ap-\nplicant by letter to the 44 dear Adelphi \"\nfor this east 44 corner blessing as he\ncalls it, for his friend. The applica-\ntion was successful, Becket obtaining\nthe house, No. 10 or 11, north-east\ncorner of Adam-street.\nADELPHI THEATRE, over against\nAdam-street, Adelphi, at 41 1 Strand.\nOriginally called The Sans Pareil,\nBuilt by Mr. John Scott, a colour-\nmaker, first in 1802 and then enlarged\nand reopened Nov. 27th 1806. It was\nrechristened 44 The Adelphi \" in 1820.\nThe old front towards the Strand\nwas a very pretty little house-front and\nwas erected in 1814: a later facade\nwas built in 1841. In 1858 it was\nrebuilt and improved (/. e., to hold more\nmoney).\nBEDFORD STREET.\nOn the East side Quin, (1693-\n1766) lived in a house rated at £42,\nfrom 1749 to 1752.\nOn the West side lived Kynaston,\n(1640-1706) in his old age, in the\nhouse of his son, an opulent mercer\nin tiTi2*\nThomas Sheridan, (1719-1788),\nfather of Richard Brinsley Sheridan\nlived here in a house opposite Henrietta\nStreet, down which he could see to\nCovent Garden.\nNow the centre of famous publishers\nincluding Dent, (10-13) and Heine-\nmann (21) both publishers of Thea-\ntrical works.\nVILLIERS STREET.\nJohn Evelyn lived here: 44 17 Nov.\n44 1683. I tooke a house in Villiers\n44 Streete, York Buildings, for the win-\n-44 ter, having many important causes to\n44 despatch, and for the education of\n44 my daughters —Evelyn.\nBUCKINGHAM STREET.\nFrom 1684 to 1700 Samuel Pepys\nlived at the last house on the west\nside (since rebuilt) looking on to Thames.\nJ. J. Rousseau stayed here when he\ncame to London\nJohn Henderson (1747-1785) died\nin a house in this street.\nSOCIETY OF ARTS, John Street,\nAdelphi.\nIt was established at a meeting held\nat Rawthmell's Coffee-house, Henrietta\nStreet, Covent-Garden, March 22nd,\n1 754. Their last remove was in 1 774, to\ntheir present apartments in the Adelphi,,\nbuilt for the Society by the brothers\nAdam, and of which the first stone was*\nlaid March 28th, 1772.\nSOUTHAMPTON STREET.\nCongreve (1670-1729) lived here..\nMrs. Oldfield (1683-1730) lived here.\nCirca 1743 David Garrick lived in-\nNo. 27 before he removed to the\nAdelphi.\nMrs Woffington also lived at No. 27.\nCECIL STREET.\nHere in 1814 lived Edmund Kean\n(1787-1833) in a garret when he first\nappeared as 4 Shylock ' at Drury Lane\nand saved the fortunes of the theatre\nand the entire Dramatic art of the age.\nFOUNTAIN COURT, \"near the Savoy.\nHere was (and is) a tavern called\n44 The Coal Hole\n44 Kean enjoyed a beef-steak at the\nCoal-hole\" writes Barry Cornwall his\nBiographer, 44 or a devil or a grill at\n\n(i) Oldys.\n(l) Charles Lamb. (1775-1834)."}, {"page_pdf": 17, "page_imprimee": "61", "url_page": "https://bluemountain.princeton.edu/bluemtn/?a=d&d=bmtnaau192604-01.1.17", "texte": "14 one of the small taverns near the\n44 Theatre: but the dress and ceremony,\n44 and good behaviour incident to 4 com-\n-44 pany' overset him altogether \". Byron,\nwho was 4 4 company\" does not bear\nthis out.\nEXETER'CHANGE, in the Strand,\nStood where Burleigh-street now stands.\nIn Burleigh-street was the private en-\ntrance to the Lyceum Theatre used by\nSir Henry Irving, and, when they visi-\nted the theatre, Royalty. Sir Henry\nIrving's dressing-room looked out into\nBurleigh-street. Exeter' Change was\nused for many a small Theatrical per-\nformance, amongst the entertainments\nbeing Dibden and Stoppelear's Puppet\nShow in 1775, and De Louther-\nbourg's small scenic theatre in 1786.\nPidcock had his menagerie here until\n1820. 44 Your vulgar writer is always\n44 most vulgar the higher his subject; as\n44 the man who showed the menagerie\n44 at Pidcock's was wont to say, 'This,\n44 gentlemen, is the Eagle of the Sun,\n44 from Archangel in Russia: the otterer\n•4 it is, the igherer he flies\". (0\nSANS SOUCI THEATRE,\nIt was planned, painted and decorated\nby Charles Dibdinand opened Feb. 16th,\n1793. It was first erected in a room\nbehind Dibdin's music-shop, in the\nStrand, (opposite Beaufort-buildings),\nand in 1796 removed to Leicester-\nplace, Leicester-square, (qv).\nTHE LYCEUM THEATRE.\nBefore Burleigh-street or Wellington-\nstreet existed there was Catherine-street;\nIn Catherine-street the 4 Morning Post'\nwas established in 1772. In the same\nstreet and in the same year the Ly-\nceum came into existence.\nJames Paine (1725-1789) was the\narchitect and it was opened on May\n11th 1772 as an Academy for the\nSociety of Artists. As such it failed.\nIt then experimented and it was not\ntill 1790 that it was used for a theatric\nperformance when Mr. Flockton brought\nhis Italian Fantoccini there.\nThere was an entrance from the\nStrand, No. 350 and another from\nCatherine-street No. 6.\nCharles Dibdin followed Flockton.\n(Dibdin's warehouse was now No. 41 1\nStrand). As Dibdin wrote, composed,\nspoke and sung the whole of his play\ncalled 44 The Wags \" and accompanied\nhimself on the piano I take it that\neither Flockton's puppets were the per-\nformers or else those of Stoppelear\n(see Exeter9Change).\nIt was first converted into a theatre,\nsays Brereton, about the year 1794 by\nDr. Arnold into whose hands the place\nhad passed. He was refused a license.\nIt only became a regular theatre in 1809\nwhen the Drury Lane Fire compelled\nthe company to take shelter at the\nLyceum.\nIn 1816 Dr. Arnold secured the\nproperty on a 99 years lease and built\na fine theatre at a cost of £BO,OOO.\nIt was destroyed by fire in 1830. In\n1834 the new Lyceum Theatre was\nbuilt; architect, Samuel Beazley. This\nwas the building which Henry Irving\nmade famous from 1871 until 1903.\nThen instead of England insisting on\nit becoming the National Theatre and\nplacing Irving at its head, it was allow-\ned to become a Music-hall.\nThe Beefsteak Society and Club:\nwith entrance from Exeter Street. The\nrooms were on the first floor and here\nthe Club existed from 1838 until 1869.\nIn 1880 Irving restored the Dining-\nroom of the Club, using it to enter-\ntain his friends. The record of these\nevenings would fill a good-sized book.\nThe Club originated in 1735 and\nwas founded by George Lambert the\nscene painter of Covent Garden Theatre;\nits first place of meeting being in his\nstudio in that theatre, and afterwards\nin The Shakespeare Tavern in the\nCovent Garden Piazza.\nThere was an earlier Beefsteak Club,\n1709. Peg Woffington was a member:\nthe badge was a gold gridiron.\nSOMERSET HOUSE.\nH re died Inigo Jones (1573-1652).\nSURREY STREET, in the Strand.\nWilliam Congreve (1670-1729) was\nliving in Surrey-street when visited by\nVoltaire in 1725 and here he died\nfour years later.\nHOWARD STREET.\nHere in 1692 lived Mrs Bracegirdle.\nNORFOLK-STREET.\nIn 1776 Spranger Barry (1719-1777)\nlived here., and in 1787 Thomas Linley\n(1732-1795) Sheridan's father-in-law.\nWilliam Mountfort, (1664 - 1692),\nkilled by Captain Hill and Lord Mohun,\nhere lived on the east side, about two\ndoors beyond Howard-street.\nSamuel Ireland, the father of Wil-\nliam Henry Ireland (1777-1835) lived\nat No. 8 on the west side; and here,\non the 24th of December 1795, the\nforged Shakespeare papers were shown\nto George Chalmers, John Philip Kem-\nble and old Ireland, who all believed\nin their authenticity.\nTHE STRAND.\nAt No. 277, (opposite Norfolk Street\nwas in 1850 Wilson's the theatrical\nwig-maker. In the time of Queen Anne,\nit was the shop of Bat Pidgeon, known\nto every reader of 44 The Spectator\nARUNDEL STREET, Strand.\nBuilt in 1678, on the site of Arundel\nHouse. Mrs. Porter, the celebrated\nactress, lived here 44 over against the\nBlue Ball\".\nST. CLEMENT'S DANES, Strand.\nHere were buried three players and\none dramatic poet:\n[. John Lowin, (1576-1653) one\nof the original actors in Shakespeare's\nplayi, and, after Burbadge, one of the\nmost eminent.\n2. Thomas Otway, the poet, (1652-\n1685).\n3. William Mountfort, (1664-1692)\nkilled in Howard-street (qv.).\n4. James Spiller, (1692-1730). A\nbutcher in Clare Market wrote his\nepitaph in verse, 44 full of marrow-bones\nand cleavers\nGRECIAN COFFEE HOUSE. De-\nvereux Court, where Strand and Fleet\nStreet meet.\nClosed as a coffee-house in 1843.\nmuch frequented by Goldsmith; the\nmorning lounge of Foote; 44 occasio-\nnally the scene of a learned discussion \"\nwrites Timbs.\nSHIRE LANE, TEMPLE BAR.\nIn Shire-lane lived Sir John Sedley,\nand here his son, Sir Charles Sedley,\n(1639-1700?) was born.\nMIDDLE TEMPLE.\nJohn Ford was admitted Nov. 16th\n1602. John Evelyn was admitted\nFeb. 13th. 1636. Wycherley 1659,\nCongreve 1690-91, and R. B. She-\nridan in 1774.\nShakespeare's 44 Twelfth Night \" was\nperformed in the Old Hall in 1601.\nHere in 1 764 at No. 2. Brick Court on\nthe second floor lived Goldsmith (1 728-\n1774) and there he died on April 4th.\nAt Fountain Court No. 3 Blake\nand his wife came to dwell in 1821\nand there he died in 1837.\nLITTLE OR INNER TEMPLE LANE.\nDr. Johnson lived in No. 1., on the\nfirst floor, from 1760 to 1765. The\nhouse is inscribed 4 4 Dr. Johnson's Stair-\ncase\nCharles Lamb lived in No. 4.\n44 I have two rooms on the third\n44 floor, and five rooms above, with\n\n(i) Letter to Mr. Murray from Lord\nByron on Mr. Bowles's Strictures,"}, {"page_pdf": 18, "page_imprimee": "62", "url_page": "https://bluemountain.princeton.edu/bluemtn/?a=d&d=bmtnaau192604-01.1.18", "texte": "\"an inner staircase to myself, and all\n\"new painted, &c., for £3O a-year.\n\" The rooms are delicious, and best\n44 look backwards into Hare Court,\n44 where there is a pump always going;\n44 just now it is dry. Hire Court's\n44 trees come in at the window, so\n44 that it's like living in a garden\".—\nCROWN OFFICE ROW.\nThis, a little below Hare Court, was\nthe birthplace of Charles Lamb.\n44 Cheerful Crown-office Row, place\nof my kindly engender\". (0\nTANFIELD COURT.\nHere by the Temple Church lived,\nat No. 3., Robert Keck, who bought\nthe Chandos Portrait of Shakespeare\nfrom Mrs. Barry (1658-1713).\nRAINBOW TAVERN.\nAt No. 115 Fleet-Street, corner of\nLittle Temple Lane. The Phoenix\nFire-office was located at the Rainbow\nTavern, in Fleet-street, as early as 1682.\nMichael Drayton, (1 563-1631) 44 lived\nat the bay-window house, next the east\nend of St. Dunstan's church in Fleet-\nstreet \".\nAt No. 189 Fleet-street was Mrs\nSalmon's celebrated wax-work exhibition.\nFALCON-COURT,\nThis was on the south side and\nexactly north of Temple Church bet-\nween the E T of the word FLEET.\n.... In the house above Falcon-court,\nwith the date 1667 upon it (No. 32\nin Fleet-street, and still a bookseller's),\nthe name not marked in the plan, but\nthe corner house, John Murray was li-\nving when he published Byron's 44 Childe\nHarold \" and all the early numbers of\nthe 44 Quarterly Review\nWHITEFRIARS THEATRE.\nThree of our early theatres were\nbounded by the Thames, Fleet-street\non the north and south and by the\nTemple and new Bridge-street on the\neast and west. The first was the Pri-\nvate play-house called The Whitefriars:\nthe second the Salisbury-court Theatre\n(1629), and the third the Dukes\nTheatre in Dorset-Gardens (1671).\nThe Whitefriars Theatre was built\nabout 1580 and lost sight of in 1596\n(Chambers's surmise).\nIt was an old hall or refectory\nwhich had belonged to the dissolved\nMonastery of Whitefriars, and was\noutside the garden wall of Dorset House,\nsomewhere betveen Sergeant's Inn and\nWater Lane, Chambers tells us, and\ntherefore not, as some suppose, on the\nsite occupied by the Salisbury Court\nTheatre, i.e., No. 49 Dorset-street, as\nshown in this plan.\nGOUGH SQUARE.\nHere at No. 17. Dr. Johnson pre-\npared his Dictionary from 1 748 to 1758.\nJOHNSON'S COORT.\nHere at No. 7. Dr. Johnson lived\nfrom 1765 to 1776.\nBOLT COURT.\nThis was on the north side of\nFleet-street. Here lived Dr. Johnson,\nin No. 8, on the right hand side, from\n1777 till his death in 1784. He died\nin the back room of the first floor.\nWINE OFFICE COURT, Fleet-street.\nGoldsmith (1728-1774) comes to\nlive at No. 6 in 1760 and stays until\n1762 when he goes to live at Islington.\nSALISBURY COURT.\nIn this Court was the Theatre of*\n1629 and here in 1660 Betterton,\nHarris, Cave Underhill and Sandford,\nthe actors, lived next to the Dune's\nTheatre; and Shadwell, Lady Dave-\nnant the widow of Sir William Da-\nvenant, and John Dryden ail lived\nhere.\nIn a Court near Salisbury Square\nlived Oliver Goldsmith in 1757.\nSALISBURY COURT THEATRE.\nIn Salisbury Court, Fleet Street. It\nwas built in 1629, by Richard Gunnell\nand William Blagrove, players, and was\noriginally the 44 barn \" or granary at\nthe lower end of the great back yard\nor court of Salisbury House.\n44 In the yere one thousand sixe\n44 hundred (and) twenty-nine, there was\n44 builded a new faire Play-house, near\n44 the white-Fryers. And this is the\n44 seauenteenth stage or common Play-\n-44 house which hath beene made within\n44 the space of three-score yeres within\n44 London and the suburbs \".\nIt was 44 pulled down by a company\nof souldiers\" in 1649.\nIn 1652 it was bought by William\nBeeston, a player, and rebuilt and re-\nopened by hi m in 1600. The Duke's\nCompany, under Davenant, played here\ntill their new theatre in Lincolns-Inn-\nfields was ready to receive them, and\nfor the time it became known as The\nDune's Theatre in Salisbury Court.\nThis Theatre was finally destroyed\nin the Great Fire, and not rebuilt\nDORSET GARDENS THEATRE,\nKnown also as \" The Duke's Theatre\nin Dorset Gardens it stood fronting the\nriver on the east or City side of Sa-\nlisbury-cowl, with an open place be-\nfore it for the reception of coaches,\nand public stairs to the Thames for the\nconvenience of those who came by\nwater. The site is shown in Horwood's\nplan and is marked New River Office\nand Yard. It was built from a design\nby Wren, and Gibbons is said to have\ndecorated it with his carvings.\n44 The new theatre in Dorset-garden\n44 being finished, and our company (the\n44 Duke's) after Sir William (Dave-\n-44 nant's) death, being under the rule\n44 and dominion of his widow, the\n44 Lady Davenant, Mr. Betterton, and\n44 Mr. Harris, (Mr. Charles Davenant,\n44 her son, acting for her), they rerno-\n-44 ved from Lincoln's Inn thither. And\n44 on the 9th day of November, 1671,\n44 there opened their new theatre with\nSir Martin Marral, which continued\n44 acting three days together, with a\n44 full audience each day notwithstan-\n-44 ding it had been acted thirty days\n44 before in Lincoln's inn-fields, and\n44 above four times at Court\". (0\nIn 1689 it came to be calle i the\n44 Queen's Theatre \" and is last heard\nof in 1706.\nIt was standing in 1720, when\nStrype published his continuation of\nStow, but was shortly after taken\ndown, and the site on which it stood\ntransformed into a wool-yard. The\nsituation is exactly marked in Mordan\nand Lea's large View of London, and\nin Strype's map of the ward of Far-\nringdon Without. There is a view of\nit in Settle's Empress of Morocco,\n(1673). There is another and some-\nwhat different view in the 44 Gentle-\nman's Magazine\" for July 1814; and\nanother (showing the surrounding hou-\nses) in a large View of London,\n44 Sutton Nicholls, delin. et sculp.\ncirc. 1710.\nSTRAND & FLEET STREET.\nST. BRIDE'S, or ST. BRIDGET'S\nCHURCH.\nThe widow of Sir William Dave-\nnant, the poet, and her son, Dr. Charles\nDavenant, were both buried here,\nThe FLEET PRISON.\nPrynne, for writing his 44 Histrio-\nmastix \" was confined here.\nWycherley, the dramatic poet, too,-\nand remained here seven years .... all\nfor debt .... which was a very unjust\nthing to do to any poet, especially to*\n\n(i) Elia's Essays.\n('I Downes's Roscius Angelicanus,-\n1708)."}, {"page_pdf": 19, "page_imprimee": "63", "url_page": "https://bluemountain.princeton.edu/bluemtn/?a=d&d=bmtnaau192604-01.1.19", "texte": "a poet of whom Pope says 44 he never did\nan unjust thing to me in his whole life \".\nThe whole of Fleet-street would not\nbe, large enough to hold all those great\ndebtors who nowadays run Wembley\nExhibitions and Everyman Theatres,\nlosing other people's money. Seven\nyears, ....it seems incredible.\nGREEN ARBOUR COURT.\nHere from 1 758 to 1 760 lived Oliver\nGoldsmith, in what was then No. 12,\non the right hand corner as you ascen-\nded the steps from Fleet Market.\nPUDDLE DOCK, Blackfriars, in Castle\nBaynard Ward.\nThe house which Shakespeare bought\nin the Blackfriars, and which he be-\nqueathed to his daughter, Susannah\nHall, is described in the Conveyance\nas 44 abutting upon a streets leading\ndown to Puddle Wharffe 44 on the\neast part, right-against the King's Maie-\nsty's Wardrobe \".\nPREROGATIVE WILL OFFICE or Court,\nKnightrider Street, Doctors' Commons.\nHere was the original will of Shake-\nspeare, on three folio sheets of paper,\nwith his signature to each sheet, now\nat Somerset House. Here too were\nthe wills of Van Dyck the painter and\nof Inigo Jones.\nPLAYHOUSE YARD.\nHere was Blackfriars Theatre built in\n1 596. Here are 44 The Times \" newspa-\nper offices, (see Printing-house Square).\nST. PETER'S HILL, Doctors' Commons.\nHere the Master of the Revels had\nhis office, from 161 1 till the time of\nthe Civil War, when the public thea-\ntres were all closed.\nST. BENNET, Paul's Wharf.\nThe burial register records the fol-\nlowing interment: Inigo Jones, the ar-\nchitect, (June 26th, 1652). Inigo\nJones's monument (for which he left\n£ 100) was destroyed in the Great Fire.\nBELLE SAVAGE INN THEATRE.\nLudgate Hill, north side.\nFirst heard of in 1575, latest 1589.\nThe Inn was still here till 1873.(0\nPLATE 2D & E\nST PAUL'S CHURCHYARD,\nAt the sign of the White Grey-\nhound, in St. Paul's Churchyard, the\nfirst edition of Shakespeare's 44 Venus\nand Adonis \" and 44 Rape of Lu-\ncrece \" were published by John Har-\nrison ; at the Flower de Luce and the\nCrown appeared the first edition of\nthe 44 Merry Wives of Windsor \" ; at\nthe Green Dragon, the first edition of\n44 Richard II \" ; at the Angel, the\nfirst edition of 44 Richard 111 \" ; at\nthe Spread Eagle, the first edition of\n44 Troilus and Cressida \" ; at the Gun,\nthe first edition of 44 Titus Andro-\nnicus \"; and at the Red Bull, the\nfrst edition of 44 Lear\nTHE QUEEN'S ARMS TAVERN, St\nPaul's Churchyard.\nGarrick would appear about twice\nevery winter at Tom's Coffee House\nin Cornhill; he also 44 frequented a\n44 Club, established for the sake of\n44 his company at the Queen's Arms\n44 Tavern in St. Paul's Churchyard,\n44 where used to assemble Mr. Samuel\n44 Sharpe, the surgeon, Mr. Paterson\n44 the city solicitor, Mr. Draper the\n44 bookseller, Mr. Clutterbuck a mercer,\n44 and a few others ; they were none\n44 of them drinkers ; and in order to\n44 make a reckoning called only for\n44 French wine. These were Garrick's\n44 standing council in theatrical affairs \".\nDOLLY'S CHOP SHOP, Paterno-\nster Row, stands on the site of an or-\ndinary kept by Richard Tarlton.\nCITY OF LONDON.\nST. BARTHOLOMEW (The Less).\nThe parish register records the bap-\ntism of Inigo Jones (1573-1652).\nInigo's father lived near in the Cloth\nFair and was a cloth worker.\nBARTHOLOMEW FAIR.\nA famous fair held every year, ope-\nned on September 3rd, in Smithfield\nand so called because it was k£pt at\nBartholomew Tide, and held within\nthe precinct of St. Bartholomew in\nSmithfield. The first fair was held\nhere in the reign of Henry Ist. All\nkinds of entertainments were offered to\nthe public, from puppet shows to thea-\ntres, the public theatres of London\ninvariably closing at Fair time.\nThere is a Bartholomew Fair Bill\nof the time of Queeh Anne in the\nBritish Museum which tells of the exhi-\nbition at Heatley's Booth of 44 a little\nopera called the 'Old Creation of the\nWorld newly revived, with the addi-\ntion of the Glorious Battle obtained\nover the French and Spaniards by\nHis Grace the Duke of Marlborough ! \"\nThis was performed by puppets. (J)\nHenry Fielding (1707-1754) had\nhis booth here: Mrs. Pritchard, Yates,\nLee, Woodward and Shuter all played\nat the Theatre here. In 1721 a co-\nloured aquatint was published in the\nform of a fan, by F? F. Setchel, Co-\nvent Garden, which shows us a view\nof the Fair.\nIn 1715 a booth was erected for\nthe King's Players, and 44 the booth\nis the largest that ever was built \".\nPLATES 2 D & E, & 3 D & E\nRUTLAND HOUSE.\nThis stood at the upper end of\nAldersgate-street, near what is now\ncalled Charter-House-square.\nHere in 1656 in a room at the back\npart of the house the drama was revived\nunder Sir William Davenant, Cromwell,\nby the interposition of Whitelocke,\nconsenting to the performances.\nIt could seat 400 spectators; the\nstage was small, 1 1 feet in height and\n15 in depth and apparently II to 15\nfeet wide. Webb, (once Inigo Jones's\nassistant) had the control of the sceneries.\nHOLB O R N .\nBROWNLOW STREET.\nThe actor Michael Mohun died in\nthis street in 1684, as appears by an\nentry in the burial-register of St. Giles's-\nin-the-Fields.\nSTAPLE INN.\nAn Inn of Chancery, appertaining to\nGray's Inn.\nIsaac Reed (1742-1807) had cham-\nbers at No. 1 1 ; and here, (in Reed's\nchambers) Steevens corrected the proof\nsheets of his edition of Shakespeare.\nCASTLE STREET,\nHere died Lady Davenant, the first\nwife of Sir William Davenant, the poet.\nBROOKS MARKET. Leather Lane.\nHere was born J. S. Munden, (1758-\n1832).\nHATTON GARDEN.\n44 Mr. Wycherley (1640-1716) vi-\n-44 sited the Countess of Drogheda daily,\n44 at her lodgings, while she staid at\n44 Tunbridge, and after she went to\n44 London at the lodgings in Hatton\n44 Garden, where, in a little time, he\n44 got her consent to marry her\". (x)\nCHARLES STREET Hatton Garden.\nHere on October 16th 1802 died\nJoseph Strutt, author of 44 Sports and\n\n(i) See u The Marionnette \" Yol. I,\npg. 320.\n(1) See 44 The Mask n. Yol. VII. face\npage 64,\n(1) Dennis's Letters. 1721."}, {"page_pdf": 20, "page_imprimee": "64", "url_page": "https://bluemountain.princeton.edu/bluemtn/?a=d&d=bmtnaau192604-01.1.20", "texte": "Pastimes\" &c. He is buried in the\nchurchyard of St. Andrew's, Holborn.\nELY PLACE.\nThis was the site of the town-\nhouse or 44hostell\" of the Bishops of\nEly, behind which is Bleeding Heart\nyard.\nThe last 44 Mystery \" represented in\nEngland (between 1613-1622, Cham-\nbers) was that of 44 Christ's Passion\nin the reign of King James 1., which\nPrynne tells us was 44 performed at\nElie-house in Holborne when Gundo-\nmar lay there, on Good Fiiday at\nnight, at which there were thousands\npresent\".\nST. ANDREW'S HOLBORN.\nIn the south aisle is a tablet to John\nEmery, the actor, (1777-1822).\nPLATE 2E\nCITY OF LONDON .\nThe MERMAID TAVERN, Bread\nStreet.\nIt is said to have stood in Friday-\nstreet, but Ben Jonson has settled its\nloeality in verse.\nAt Bread-street's Mermaid having\n[dined, and merry,\nProposed to go to Holborn in\n[a wherry.\nThe Tavern is first mentioned in 1603.\nMERCHANT TAILORS' SCHOOL.\nSuffolk Lane, Cannon Street.\nThis was founded in 1561. Among\nthe eminent men educated here were\ntli3 theatre men James Shirley, (1596-\n1666) disparaged by Dryden, upheld\nby Lamb; and Charles Matthews (1776-\n1835).\nST MARY'S, Aldermanbury, Bow Lane.\nAmong the eminent persons buried\nhere were Heminge, (d. 1630) and\nCondell (d. 1627) the first editors of\nShakespeare, and the fellow players\nremembered hy the poet in his will.\nLAWRENCE POULTNEY HILL. Can-\nnon Street, City.\nHere in 1677 lived William Van-\nderbergh, the father of Sir John Van-\nbrugh (1664-1724).\nSt PAUL'S SCHOOL.\nThis was founded in 1512. Among\nits scholars we find Samuel Pepys\n(1633- 1703) and R. W. Elliston\n(1774-1831).\nFISHMONGERS' HALL, by London\nBridge.\nThomas Dogget, (d. 1721) was a\nmember and in 1716) bequeathed a\nsum of money for the purchase of a\n\" coat and badge \" to be rowed for\nevery Ist of August from the Swan at\nLondon Bridge to the Swan at Bat-\ntersea, in remembrance ot George I.'s\naccession to the throne.\nFREEMAN'S YARD, or Freeman's\nCourt, Cornhill, behind the Royal\nExchange.\nHere Daniel De Foe (1661-1731)\ncarried on the business of a hosefactor:\nin 1702 he was owner of a brick and\npantile works near Tilbury Fort in\nEssex.\nGRACECHURCH STREET.\nHere lived Richard Tarlton, 1588.\nHe writes of himself that: 44 it chanced\n44 that one Fancy and Nancy, two mu-\n-44 sicians in London, used often with\n44 their boys to visit Tarlton when he\n44 dwelt in Gracious Street at the signe\n44 of the Saba, a taverne, he being\n44 one &c.\nGRUB STREET.\nFamous for its literary hacks. Speed,\nthe tailor, the historian and carto-\ngrapher, lived here (1552-1629). The\nhouses were wretched, the writers\nand booksellers who lived there poor,\n.... obvious reasons for calling them\nhack writers. It seems to have been\nPope who first thought of the notion,\nand soon 44 a grub-street author\" be-\ncame a term of reproach.\nIn Hanover Court lived General\nMonk; opposite the court was once the\nCity Chapel, in 1830 opened as the\nCity Theatre, destroyed in 1836 Here\nEdmund Kean played Shylock in May\n1831. Miss Smithson who later married\nHector Berlioz in Paris, was the chief\nattraction in 1832.\nAltogether Grub-street can afford to\ndisregard Pope's pleasantry.\nBETHLEHEM CHURCHYARD, St.\nBotolph, Bishopsgate.\nRobert Greene (1 560 1592) was\nburied here.\nBETHLEHEM HOSPITAL (i.e., Bed-\nam), in St. George's Fields.\nA hospital for insane people, foun-\nded in Bishopsgate Without, and for\na different purpose, in 1246, by Si-\nmon Fitz-Mary, one of the Sheriffs of\nLondon.\nNat Lee, the dramatic poet (1653-\n1692) was placed here for four years;\nthe Duke of York, afterwards James 11.,\npaying for the cost of his confinement:\nalso Hadfield, in 1800, for attempting\nto shoot King George 111 in Drury-\nLane Theatre.\nCARPENTERS* HALL, Carpenters'\nBuildings, south of Bethelem Hospital.\nHere is a portrait of William Por-\ntington, (d. 1628), Master Carpenter\nto the Crown in the reigns of Queen\nElizabeth and King. James I,; he was\nInigo Jones's assistant in his Masques\nat Court.\nGROCERS' HALL, in the Poultry,\nnext No. 35.\nHere was the Hall of the Gro-\ncers' Company, the second on the list\nof the Twelve Great Companies, in-\ncorporated by Edward 111., in 1345.\nJohn Hemynge (Hemynge and Con-\ndell) was a 44 Citizen and Grocer\".\nDryden's brother, Erasmus (a grocer\nin King-street, Westminster) is descri-\nbed in the Grocers' Books, under May\n14th, 1688, as one 44 who, for many\nyears, has used the mysterie of Gro-\ncerie\". Pope, being partial to a good\ntable, launched no shafts at the Gro-\ncers as he had done at the Grubs.\nSt STEPHEN'S, Walbrook.\nSir John Vanbrugh lies buried here\nin the family vault of the Vanbrughs.\nSILVER STREET.\nHere in 1604 William Shakespeare\n(1564-1617) was living at the house of\nChristopher Mountjoy, a French Hu-\nguenot, in the house at the corner of\nMonkwel-street or Mugle Streate as\nthey wrote it then. He may have\nbeen there as early as 1 598 says C. W.\nWallace, who in 1910 discovered the\npapers which revealed the fact about\nSilver-street.\nMAIDEN LANE, Wood Street.\nMessrs. Nevill (wholesale hosiers)\nhad a large warehouse with flat roof\nbehind in Wood-street c. 1820. John\nRe eve( 1799-1838) rehearses there in\nhis youth.\nBARBER-SURGEON'S HALL, Monk-\nwell Street, City.\nBuilt by Inigo Jones.\nThe Theatre, called by Walpole\n44 one of the best of his (Inigo Jones's)\nworks \", was pulled down in the latter\nend of the 18th century. Hatton tells\nus that \" The Theatre is commodiously\n44 fitted with four degrees of cedar seats,\n44 one above another, in elliptical form,\n44 adorned with the figures of the se-\n-44 ven Liberal Sciences, the twelve\n41 signs of the Zodiac, and a bust of"}, {"page_pdf": 21, "page_imprimee": "n. p.", "url_page": "https://bluemountain.princeton.edu/bluemtn/?a=d&d=bmtnaau192604-01.1.21", "texte": "THE MASK\n1926"}, {"page_pdf": 23, "page_imprimee": "n. p.", "url_page": "https://bluemountain.princeton.edu/bluemtn/?a=d&d=bmtnaau192604-01.1.23", "texte": "r/ZiS MASK\n1926"}, {"page_pdf": 25, "page_imprimee": "n. p.", "url_page": "https://bluemountain.princeton.edu/bluemtn/?a=d&d=bmtnaau192604-01.1.25", "texte": "THE MASH\n1926"}, {"page_pdf": 27, "page_imprimee": "n. p.", "url_page": "https://bluemountain.princeton.edu/bluemtn/?a=d&d=bmtnaau192604-01.1.27", "texte": "THE MASK\n192 6"}, {"page_pdf": 29, "page_imprimee": "n. p.", "url_page": "https://bluemountain.princeton.edu/bluemtn/?a=d&d=bmtnaau192604-01.1.29", "texte": "T HE MA SK\n1026"}, {"page_pdf": 31, "page_imprimee": "n. p.", "url_page": "https://bluemountain.princeton.edu/bluemtn/?a=d&d=bmtnaau192604-01.1.31", "texte": "THE MASH\n1926"}, {"page_pdf": 33, "page_imprimee": "n. p.", "url_page": "https://bluemountain.princeton.edu/bluemtn/?a=d&d=bmtnaau192604-01.1.33", "texte": "THE MASK\n1026"}, {"page_pdf": 35, "page_imprimee": "n. p.", "url_page": "https://bluemountain.princeton.edu/bluemtn/?a=d&d=bmtnaau192604-01.1.35", "texte": "T HE MA SK\n1026"}, {"page_pdf": 37, "page_imprimee": "65", "url_page": "https://bluemountain.princeton.edu/bluemtn/?a=d&d=bmtnaau192604-01.1.37", "texte": "\" King Charles I. The roof is an\n\" elliptical cupola\".\nAlthough not for play-acting, such a\ntheatre would have been well worth\nseeing today.\nST. BOTOLPH Without Bishopsgate.\nThe registers of the church record\nthe baptism of Edward Alleyn, the\nplayer, and founder of Dulwich College.\nCROSS KEYS INN THEATRE, next\nto Bell Inn. First heard of in 1579.\nBISHOPSGATE.\nTHE BULL INN THEATRE,\nThis was at the Bull Inn, next to\nthe Excise Office, on the west side of\nBishopsgate-street at No. 91. First heard\nof in 1575, still existing in 1164. One\nof W the most popular. *\nTHE BELL INN THEATRE,\nThis, at the Bell Inn, is on the\nwest of Grace church street Cross\nKeys. <2)\nGOODMAN'S FIELDS THEATRE.\nOriginally a throwster's shop in Le-\nman-street, or Ayliffe-street, Goodman's\nfields, was opened Oct. 31st, 1729,\nby Thomas Odell (1661 -1 749).\nAs usual a sermon was immediately\npreached against the theatre's existence\nin the church of St. Botolph, Aldgate,\nand Odell in consequence was induced\nto part with his property to a Mr.\nHenry Giffard.\nGiffard, who found sermons of that\nsort amusing, opened a new house on\nthe same spot, Oct. 20th, 1732. The\nclamour however increasing, and no\nauthority stopping the stupidity which\nwas called \" liberty\" of free speech\nat the time, Giffard was induced to\nremove in 1735 to Lincoln's-Inn-fields.\nHere he remained two seasons, then\nreturned to his old quarters (the two\nor five objectors obviously having\ngone to Heaven), and on the 19th\nof October, 1741, had the ho-\nnour to introduce to an Aldgate au-\ndience, David Garrick (1717-1779),\nwho made his first appearance on a Lon-\ndon stage in Goodman's-fields Theatre\nin the character of Richard HI. Gar-\nrick lodged in Mansfield-street at that\ntime.\nNow had the three or six objectors\ngone on objecting, the whole of Lon-\ndon might have been cheated of the\nliveliest mind in the 18th century\ntheatre.\nThe theatre in which Garrick ap-\npeared was pulled down about 1746.\nAnother theatre on the same spot, of\nwhich there are views by Capon, was\nburnt down in June 1802.\nROYALTY; THEATRE, Well Street\nWellclose Square,\nThis was built by Cornellius Dixon\nand J. Willmont (architect and buil-\nder) for John Palmer, the actor, and\nwas opened June 20th, 1870. It was\nburnt down in April, 1826.\nIt was originally intended for the\nperformance of five-act pieces, and\nopened with As You Like It; but\nthe patentees of the other theatres me-\nmorialising the Lord Chamberlain on\nthe subject, the new theatre was re-\nstricted to pantomimes and still smal-\nler entertainments, which seems a most\nunjustifiable thing to have done.\nIn 1810 it became the East London\nTheatre. Sixteen years later it was de-\nstroyed by fire.\nReopened under the name of the\nBrunswick Theatre, it fell to pieces\nthree days later, killing fifteen people\nand injuring twenty more.\nDANISH CHURCH. Wellclose Square,\nWhitechapel.\nWithin the church is a tablet to the\nwife of Caius Gabriel Gibber, (Jane\nColley), the mother of Colley Cibber.\nThe father and son are both interred\nin the vaults of this church.\nTOWER HILL.\nAt a public-house on Tower Hill,\nknown by the sign of The Bull, whither\nhe had withdrawn to avoid his cre-\nditors, Thomas Otway (1651-1685)\ndied.\nTo be continued.\nThere is no British Museum Library\nin Italy, so that many of these dates\nand facts are possibly incorrect. /\nhave not \\)et seen a book °f records\nthat was not incorrect. This is to\nsome a source of delight; they can\nthen show their learning, their notion\nof correctness now gets a chance.\nBut here I an reminded of old\nMacklin and Lee Lewes,\nLewes at the rehearsal said some-\nthing not in Macklin s play. \" Hoy\nhoy \" cried Macklin, \" what's that?\nwhat's that ? 99 €t Oh \" cried Lewes\n\" it's only a bit of my nonsense\n\"But \", said Macklin, I like\nmy nonsense, Mr Lewes, better than\nyours \".\nBut if it's sense you have, and are\nin the happy state of real generosity,\nsend me some.\n\n(1) Sir Edmund Chambers.\n(2) Sir Edmund Chambers.\n\nc. g. e."}, {"page_pdf": 38, "page_imprimee": "66", "url_page": "https://bluemountain.princeton.edu/bluemtn/?a=d&d=bmtnaau192604-01.1.38", "texte": "Boulevard du Temple 1833 on the day of the attempt on the life of Louis-Philippe by Fieschi. July 28th, showing the Cirque\nOlympic. Folies Dramatiques, Theâtre de la Gaieté and the Funambules.\n\nGENTLEMEN AND PLAYERS.\nBY ASHLEY DUKES\n\n0)\nHHHE actor is an amateur. He plies a\nJ. trade that can be learned by all and\nis regularly practised by too many. The\nrules of his craft are simple, if indeed\nthe re be any rules. With less practice\nthan the drawing-room pianist or the\namateur cricketer, with one-tenth of the\nexpenditure of time and thought needful\nto play a tolerable hand at bridge, with\none-hundredth of the spiritual zest that\nturns a village blacksmith into a local\npreacher, an actor may stand upon the\nstage and interpret for us the things of\nthe imagination. His range of voice and\nmovement is seldom greater than that of\nthe practised political speaker; his sense of\npresence may be matched by any lady\nreceiving an afternoon call. His physical\nfitness, as shown in bright eyes and white\nteeth, a clear skin, a firm carriage and\nan elastic step, is hardly more remarkable\nthan that of a good average spectator.\nEven his tailor is seldom more accom-\nplished than the tailor of the best-dressed\noccupant of the stalls. By what right\ndoes this man walk divinely before his\nfellow-men? The actor is a representa-\ntive of his audience—a representative of\nthe finer type, maybe, but a representa-\ntive. He is not a different order of\nbeing, but one of ourselves. He stoops\nto our gestures, he employs our slang, he\ncondescends to our conventional tones, he\nbends to touch our commoner emotions.\nThe actor is the typical looker-on; he is\nthe man in the stalls brought on to the\nstage. The more nearly he represents us,\nthe more clearly is he self-confessed as\namateur. The end of naturalistic acting,\nwhether in tragedy or comedy or farce,\nis amateurism. When the actor's laughter no\nlonger shakes the theatre, when his figure\nno longer towers above us with gestures\nof antique greatness, then indeed he and we\ntogether are amateurs; for we deserve no\ntheatre and he deserves no audience.\nThe actor is a professional. He is a\nman with a calling, a man inspired, a\nman possessed. He is impelled to give\nform to a conception of character, he is\ndriven to enter another's spirit and laugh\nand weep with him. He is destined to\n\n(1) Reprinted from \" The London Mercury \" by kind\npermission of Mr Ashley Dukes and the Editor."}, {"page_pdf": 39, "page_imprimee": "67", "url_page": "https://bluemountain.princeton.edu/bluemtn/?a=d&d=bmtnaau192604-01.1.39", "texte": "represent man in movement, \"in action\nhow like an angel, in apprehension how like\na god»\" He unfolds the meaning of action\nand discovers rhythm in the stumbling gait\nof events. He lends bodily vitality, the bloom\nof health and the spirit of energy to all the\ncreatures of his fancy. He animates the por-\ntrait of a sick man; we hang upon the\nlips of the imaginary bores and dullards\nwho are transfigured by his art. This\nprofessional pride of the actor sur-\nvives a decadence of the stage. It en-\ndures through period after period, classical\nand romantic, naturalistic, prosaic, poetic.\nBehind the amateurism that overspreads\nour theatre, behind the lifeless gestures\nof realistic habit and the meaningless\nmarch and countermarch of conventional\nmovement, we see the steadfast figure of\nthe interpreter. Behind the pretence of\nthe mirror we see the reality of the\nmask. The art of acting is greater than\nthe actor; it lifts him above the level of\namateurism to which our realists would\nreduce him. Among all the feeble im-\npulses of the stage we are conscious, here\nand there, of the swift intake of the\nbreath of inspiration. There is no other\nacting but inspired acting, whether it be\ntragic or comic or farcical; the rest is\nvanity of vanities.\nThe uninspired actor (otherwise the\namateur) does not play his part; he re-\npresents it with the help of an academic\nand superficial technique. At the best\nhe gives the mask of caricature to a figure\nthat he fails inwardly to comprehend, a\nfigure that may even be unworthy of\ncomprehension. He seeks for a fashionahle\ntype into which he can mould his own\npersonality. He goes from manager to\nmanager and from comedy to comedy with\nhis type ready-made; and each finds a\nuse for him, since the audience must have\nstyle at all costs, and caricature is a form\nof style. His mannerisms, which should\nbe the legitimate byplay of his art, be-\ncome in time his entire stock-in-trade.\nThe sound middle actor, without the gift\nof caricature or the instinct for original\nportraiture, chooses a sound middle per-\nformance from his wardrobe of experience\nas a man chooses a jacket. Authors and\nproducers do not bother him; the part\nfits him and that suffices. He is closely\nakin to the \" character actor,\" whose\naim is to portray everything but character\n—accent, appearance, gesture, habit, mari-\nner, all that is easy and unessential. For\nthese performers the (art of acting is akin\nto the painter's art in the academic or\nstory-telling picture. The author tells his\nstory and they assist him faithfully by tel-\nling theirs; here the matter begins and\nends. Of a conception of drama larger\nthan that of the \" dramatic \" scene, of\nan inner technique of acting deeper than\nthe outer technique of tone and gesture\nand facial play, they do not begin to think.\nTheirs is the small change of acting, con-\nvenient in the pocket, eloquent on the\ncounter, readily given, readily accepted.\nBut the capital of the actor is inspiration.\nThe everyday theatre pretends to re-\npresent actual experience. It tries to\nshow us \" by electric light, in a room\nwith three walls, how ordinary people\neat, drink, love, walk, and wear their\njackets.\" It stands or falls with the ve-\nrisimilitude of the life it reproduces; this\nis made the test of drama and acting\nalike. The advertisement of a monthly\nmagazine declares that \" there is no story\nso fascinating as a True Story.\" We\nmay smile at the crudity of the sentiment,\nbut it is widely approved. A dramatic\nmurder trial or a dramatic divorce suit\nwill momentarily play the theatre off the\nstage; and even Drury Lane is played\noff the stage by Ascot. But in effect"}, {"page_pdf": 40, "page_imprimee": "68", "url_page": "https://bluemountain.princeton.edu/bluemtn/?a=d&d=bmtnaau192604-01.1.40", "texte": "actual experience remains the corner-stone\nof the realistic theatre. The actor repre-\nsents an emotional experience that he is\nsupposed to have undergone. Is he a\nbetter actor for having personally under-\ngone it? The realistic theory maintains\nthat he is, and realistic practice supports\nit, for the endeavour of the actor is to\nrepresent the experience as personal to\nhimself (i.e., personal to his sympathetic\naudience). An actress depicts the re-\nmorse of adultery. Is she a better actress\nfor having herself, at some time, been an\nunfaithful wife ? Here the de; ender of\nrealism protests publicly that the question\nis unfair, since it arouses irrelevant moral\nprejudices ; but privately and confidentially\nhe will assert that she is. Let us go a\nstep farther. An actor depicts the remorse\nof a murderer. Is he a better actor for\nhaving himself committed a murder? Doubt-\nless he would be, replies the realist, but\nwe must draw the line of logic somewhere;\nlife would be too dangerous if every stage\ncrime required a rehearsal in reality. The\nactor can go to a murder trial at the Old\nBailey (where, indeed, we often hear of\nhim as a spectator); he can pick up his\nbits of \" local colour \" on the Embank-\nment or in the alleys of Chinatown. He\ncan reproduce the reality of emotional\nexperience, though it be at second-hand.\nHe can defend the banality of the story\nhe tells by pleading that it is true. We\nare reminded of the conventional portraitist\nwho asks \" Do you know Lady B? \"or\n\"Do you know X? as he shows us\nround the canvases of his studio. We\nknow X. and Lady 8., and recognise their\nlikenesses at once, to the painter's obvious\npleasure. But is this recognition the object\nof the art of painting ? Is faithful por-\ntraiture, daubed with local colour, the aim\nof the art of acting ? It has been said\nthat a good portrait is one in which we\nrecognise the painter. A good piece of\nacting is one in which we recognise an\nactor (neither type nor individual, but ar-\ntist). The perception of this truth must\nprofoundly alter our point of view regar-\nding the theatre. The drama of realistic\npersonal experience, with all its elaborate\ntechnique of expression, falls to the ground,\nand in its place stand only a few symbols\nerected by the aspirations of the audience,\nthe imagination of the dramatist, and the\ninspiration of the player.\nThese symbols, however, are lasting,\nwhile the unwieldy structure of the theatre\nas we know it is visibly breaking down.\nThe symbols rest upon agreement between\npartners; the theatre of to-day rests upon\na disagreement that is becoming an open\nbreach. What is drama itself but an\neverlasting symbol ? Does anyone believe\nthat our theatre fifty years hence will re-\nsemble our theatre of to-day?—a stuffy\nlittle hall lined with plush seats, a trench\nfor the orchestra, a proscenium arch with\nrows of electric lights, a scene set with\nthree walls of painted canvas? The im-\nprovements in mechanical contrivance alone\nwill revolutionise that stage for us. The\nunchanging qualities of the stage are the\nsymbols that spring from passion, wit and\npoetry. The art of the inspired actor\nendures. Even in a physical sense he\npossesses, with Duse and Bernhardt and\nEllen Terry, the secret of lasting youth.\nHis body is disciplined and preserved by\na technique of acting that subordinates;\nevery muscle to the creative impulse.\nAlso the conscious will of the actor pre-\nserves the instrument and vessel of his\nart, as a ballerina preserves the suppleness\nof her limbs. This actor sees an inner\nworld. His parts are not pieced together\nfrom the rags of \" local colour \" and\npretended realism, but are created from\nan imagined experience; and the act of"}, {"page_pdf": 41, "page_imprimee": "69", "url_page": "https://bluemountain.princeton.edu/bluemtn/?a=d&d=bmtnaau192604-01.1.41", "texte": "imagination transfigures his form, beautifies\nhis gestures, and gives rhythm to his\nwords.\nShow me your part, says the actor,\nand I will show you my inspiration. There\nis no making of bricks without straw. Even\na restoration of the theatrical spirit to the\ntheatre demands an imaginative groundwork,\na plan for the actor to build upon. A\nrestoration of melodrama calls for a me-\nlodramatist. A restoration of high comedy\ncalls for classic graces of dialogue. A\nrestoration of poetic drama must be in the\nfirst place the work of poets. What does\nour present-day theatre offer to the ambi-\ntious actor? It offers, as we know, a\nsuccession of modern parts in which the\nactor's vices, such as his emotional \" re-\nstraint,\" his natural conversational tones,\nhis accent of unimpeachable gentility, his\ntimid and ordinary gestures, will be ac-\ncounted virtues; while his real virtues,\nsuch as his ability to fill the stage, his\nskilful manipulation of his own natural\nmask, his bold exaggeration of outline in\nthe portrayal of character, his physical\n•domination of the audience, in a word his\ncreation of the part, are as likely as not\nto make him thoroughly ridiculous. He\nwill be praised for being \" natural \" and\nblamed (God save us!) for being \" ar-\ntificial.\"\nThe art that conceals art, in the smug\nohrase, is the only art that will be al-\nlowed him. He may, however, be per-\nmitted occasional brief incursions into the\nElizabethan theatre, or rather into the mo-\ndernized theatre of Shakespeare, where he\nhas barely time to unlearn the faults of\nelocution and carriage acquired in modern\ncomedy before the run of the play comes\nto an end and he reverts to the world of\nslang and back-chat.\nIt is said that we have few Shake-\nspearean actors, and none who can speak\nblank verse effectively. But how should\nany young actor be able to speak verse,\nhow should any young actor be able to\nplay Shakespeare, when the whole envi-\nronment of his art is prosaic ? If he\nwould bear himself like a Duke of Athens\nor Malvolio, he must betake himself to\nwatch the Russian Ballet in Petrouchka\nor Carnaval, for he will not capture the\nspirit of dignity in the stage drawing-room.\nIf he would speak his lines like a god and\nnot like an Oxfordian oracle, he must\nlisten to good music in the concert-room,\nfor he will not pick up the art at rehearsal.\nLet the actor watch the Guards at the\ntrooping of the Colour or the motionless\nLancers seated on their charges in White\nhall. Here is presence, here is plastique;\nbut how were they acquired ? By months\nin the barrack-yard and the riding-school;\nby grinding labour, by the daily perseve-\nrance that is itself a tyranny. Let the\nactor betake himself to the gymnasium,\nfor he will not capture presence or dignity\non the golf-links. It is not the loose-\nlimbed, easy gesture of the tweed-clad\nathlete that counts on the stage, but the\ntaut muscle and the poise of the discus-\nthrower. Work and again work, rehearsal\nand again rehearsal, health and physical\ndomination; these are the watchwords.\nTo be every inch a king is first of\nall to be every inch an actor. We hear\nof players who go into training for their\nparts, who walk or swim or ride so and\nso many miles a day for physical fitness*\nsake. They do well, but there is a\nmental training also. There is the plastic\nworld of Art to which the actor properly\nbelongs and with which he must himself\nbe in harmony.\nThese matters, it may be said, are\nfor schools of acting to consider. The\nschools instruct their pupils in dramatic\ntechnique; the schools distinguish carefully"}, {"page_pdf": 42, "page_imprimee": "70", "url_page": "https://bluemountain.princeton.edu/bluemtn/?a=d&d=bmtnaau192604-01.1.42", "texte": "between Shakespearean and modern me-\nthods of representation. It is not their\nfault if their pupils neglect the sound\nadvice of the dramatic pedagogue. But\nin fact the schools fit novices to gain ex-\nperience ; they can do no more. They\nreflect the spirit of the theatre at large,\ntinged with a certain conservatism that is\nproper to academies. At a dramatic\nschool the actor will learn little that is\nfresh and much that is out of date. He\nwill be prepared for the stage as a man\nis prepared for life by the school or uni-\nversity ; the serious work then begins.\nThis is not to say that schools of acting\nare needless. On the contrary, they\nwere never more urgently needed than\nto-day, when the stage is overcrowded\nwith masquerading amateurs. As prepa-\nratory schools for the current theatre,\nunder the guidance of accomplished and\npainstaking actors, they have both their\nadvantages and their drawbacks; but as\nschools of gymnastics and elocution, music\nand rhythm, of all the humanities that\nare kindred to the classical art of acting,\nthey will be eventually the nursery and\nhope of the stage.\nAn actor speaks to us through sym-\nbols of reality, just as a poet speaks to\nus through images and metaphors. If the\nmetaphors be borrowed or worn-out, no\nresponsive image appears in the listener's\nmind. The voices that roll \" like distant\nthunder \" awaken no echo; the inky night\nand the rosy dawn fade into a neutral\nand muddy hue. There is a limit to the\nreceptivity of the human mind, where such\nfigures of speech are concerned; a moment\ncomes when even the name of dragon\nconjures up no picture of frightfulness. So\nit is, surely, with the symbols that the\nactor employs. He borrows from the\nworld of reality in order to create a world\nof appearance; there is the essence of his\nart. He seeks for enduring symbols that\nshall express the relation of appearance to\nreality—for style and gesture, tone and\npresence that shall maintain a just propor-\ntion between the actual and the imaginary.\nHe is confronted by a whole property\nroom of conventional symbols that are long\nago worn threadbare, like the phrases of\nthe novelette. For every emotional emer-\ngency, for every situation, for every turn\nand twist of character, the histrionic\nhang in readiness. There is a fitting for\nevery figure. The spectator, aware of the\nemptiness and banality of these symbols\nthat he has seen a hundred times, calls\nthem \" theatrical \" and thus lays the blame\nupon the theatre for what is in fact the\nplayer's want of imagination.\nBut the symbols of the theatre cannot\nbe other than theatrical. Every endea-\nvour to make them \" real \" reverses the\nactor's natural process by re-creating a\nworld of sham reality from that of ap-\npearance. The presence of real donkeys;\nor real water on the stage gives pleasure\nto large audiences, but it can scarcely be\nheld to diminish the \" theatricality \" of a\nperformance. The actors of the Grand\nGuignol smear themselves with red ochre\nto represent a bleeding wound, but the\nconvention does not bring them one step\nnearer to naturalism. Our quarrel should\nbe, not with the theatrical spirit that is\nproper to the theatre, but with the pre-\ntentious realism that marks a lack of any\nspirit at all. The enduring symbols of\nthe actor's art are artificial, like the en-\nduring monuments of the sculptor. To\ncover them with everyday rags and tat-\nters is to mistake their whole significance.\nIt is asked, how can the actor escape\nfrom realism? Is not he, of all artists,\nmost deeply committed to the portrayal of\nactual life in movement ? Is not he, of\nall artists, the one who needs most ur-"}, {"page_pdf": 43, "page_imprimee": "71", "url_page": "https://bluemountain.princeton.edu/bluemtn/?a=d&d=bmtnaau192604-01.1.43", "texte": "gently to feel the firm rock of experience\nbeneath his feet? Are there not great\nplayers, like Duse, in whom the drama\nof the three-wailed room with its natu-\nralistic conventions has kindled an unexam-\npled flame of genius? Shall the actor,\nwhose task it is faithfully to play the part\nallotted to him, shatter the fabric of drama\non which he depends? The answer is\nthat the fabric is shattered and rebuilt by\nevery true actor's performance. Duse's\nHedda Gabler and Mrs. Alving and\nLady of the Sea were not the heroines\nknown to the reader of Ibsen, although\nafter her performance their memory may\nbe ineffaceable. They were successive\nincarnations of a passionate spirit who un-\nderstood them all, and, therefore, estab-\nlished an imperious right to play them in\nher own fashion.\nThe actor requires, indeed, to feel the\ncontact of experience, but it may very\nwell be a spiritual expet ience such as ani-\nmated this gifted woman. The actor is\nindeed committed to the portrayal of life\nas we know it, but if his work be well\ndone we should feel that we have never\nknow it before. It is in this act of\nreaching out to the unknown that the\nplayer makes his individual and sublime\ngestures. A single step out of the rut,\nand he is saved. A flash of perception\nthat the part he plays is created and not\nimitated, a touch of the selfless spirit that\nseeks expression and not repetition, and\nthe actor stands before us once more as\na figure significant and dominant, a sphinx\nand an interpreter, a priest and a worship-\nper, a player with a right to the stage.\n\nTHE INAUGURATION OF A\nTHEATRE AT THE\nESTENSE COURT\nBY BRUNO BRUNELLI.\nFRANCESCO 11, Duke of Modena (,), fore-\nseeing a long truce from warfare, and\nhappy years of peace assured to the state\nby the treaty of the Pyranees, devoted him-\nself to ensuring prosperity to letters and the\narts. Not content with having protected\nartists and poets in the past, he conceived\nin 1 685 the idea of having a theatre erected\nto the east of the ducal palace, where alrea-\ndy, in the middle of the century, there had\nbeen constructed a little Court theatre which\nhad later disappeared. He entrusted the\ndirection of the works to the architect\nTomaso Brezzi and the painter Frances-\nco Stringa. Painters from Bologna, Reg-\ngio and Modena were summoned in large\nnumbers to contribute their work towards\nthe decoration of the theatre, the prepa-\nration of the scenes: among others who\nworked in the new Court theatre were\nthe two Bibienas, the Fleming Pietro Se-\nnau, Agostino Stringa, Jacopo Consetti,\nTomaso Costa and Antonio Fornasari.\nThe works, carried on with feverish in-\ntensity by troops of masons, carpenters\n\nThe above design is from the li Orlando innamorato\n(Boiardo). Venezia 1546-47.\n(1) Reigned from 1662 to 1694."}, {"page_pdf": 44, "page_imprimee": "72", "url_page": "https://bluemountain.princeton.edu/bluemtn/?a=d&d=bmtnaau192604-01.1.44", "texte": "the interior of the theatre was entirely\nof wood—and gilders, were completed in\nthe following spring.\nI have discovered a letter of G. B.\nRuini, dated March 21 st 1686, in which\nhe describes with some detail the opening\nperformance. The \" Eritrea e gV inganni\ndella maschera \" of the Count G. B. Ro-\nselli was being staged, and sumptuous\ncostumes, embroidered in silver and gold,\nwere prepared for the actors, and machines\nconstructed for apparitions and flights\nsuch as to produce the sensation \" rather\nof the divine than of the human The\n6th of March 1686, the anniversary of\nthe Duke's birth, was fixed for the so-\nlemn inauguration, but just in those days\nFrancesco 11. was seized with an attack\nof gout. For this reason the opening was\nput off until the 13th of March.\nThis untoward circumstance produced\nsome disappointment among the numerous\nvisitors drawn to Modena by the bruit of\nthe preparations and by the solemnity of\nthe spectacle. Three gentlemen of the\nBolognese family of the Marsigli had\narrived with a following of seventy per-\nsons on horseback, and Donna Cristina,\n\" vanquisher of the most obdurate hearts \",\nhad made a solemn entry with a cortege\nof fifty cavaliers. It is calculated that the\nladies and gentlemen gathered for the\nevent numbered four hundred. But not\none of them departed when the postpone-\nment of the inauguration of the new\ntheatre became known.\nOn the morning of the 13 th all re-\nsorted to the ducal palace to form an\nescort to the Duke, who wished to repair\non foot to hear mass in the church of the\nJesuits. But the magnificent multitude\nwas again disappointed : the Duke, not\nyet recovered, had to go out in a car-\nriage, and thus the visitors, who would\nhave accompanied him on either hand and\nin the rear, were obliged to forego the dis-\nplay both to others and to themselves of\nthe unusual spectacle of a gorgeous cortege.\nBut, although deprived of the sight of the\nMost Serene Duke, the good Modenese\nwere able none the less to satisfy their\ncuriosity in admiring the group of magni-\nficent guests who followed the ducal car-\nriage at a distance, likewise making their\nway to the church of the Jesuits, as though\nthe mass were the first number on the pro-\ngramme prepared for the inauguration of the\nCourt theatre. The most brilliant among\nthem all was the Prince Luigi d'Este,\nwho, by the richness of his dress, \" left\nthe spectators for a good while in ecstasy\nIn the afternoon a touiney was given\nin the piazza, under the leadership of this\nsame Prince Luigi. These feats of arms\nwere the object of a certain citizen pride;\nand the spectators participated eagerly\nin a fine blow or in the disappointment\nover some thrust at the expense of its\nown champions. Thus, while the princes\nof the house of Este had proved themselves,\nby valour and grace of movements, \" Prin-\nces verily Estenese \", a Modenese cham-\npion, the marchese Bonifacio Rangoni,\ncaptain of the Duke's guard, \" while he\nwas intent on cutting off the head of a cer-\ntain Mermaid (l), or rather, as others more\ncertainly say, after having cut it \", slipped\nhis foot from one of his stirrups and let\nfall his sword. A very grave fault for a\n\n(l) We give here an explanation* of this quoted passage\nfrom Ruini's letter which has been received from the author\nof the article, in reply to a query whether the context in the\noriginal suggested the actual cutting oft of a head, or merely\ncutting at it. Ed.\n\" The phrase \" to cut off the head of a certain Mermaid\nor '1 after having cut off her head \" (it is a phrase quoted\nfrom the letter of Gr. B. Ruini, March 21, 1686), refers, accor-\nding to me, actually to the cutting off of the head; that is,\nto the decapitation of a mythological being such as is the\nMermaid. It must have been a Mermaid of papier-mache, of\nwood, or of some other material, moved perhaps by human\nbeings concealed in its interior. It was in fact one of those\nmany \" monsters n which appeared frequently in the tourneys\nof mythological theme, so frequent in the seventeenth century.\nThe victory of the knight over the Mermaid was evidently\ncompleted by this decapitation, which was thus a pretence,\nalthough the cutting off of the head.... of cardboard... may have\nreally taken place. And the theatrical climax was here spoi-\nled by the misadventure of the knight to whom it befell to\ntransgress the knightly rules which directed these spectacles"}, {"page_pdf": 45, "page_imprimee": "73", "url_page": "https://bluemountain.princeton.edu/bluemtn/?a=d&d=bmtnaau192604-01.1.45", "texte": "champion fighting in a tourney, \" a shame-\nful thing in a cavalier \", and which pro-\nduced great bitterness in his fellow citizens.\nAfter the jousts were over, all the\nladies and the cavaliers repaired to the\ntheatre to witness the \" Eritrea perfor-\nmed by the gentlemen of the Estense\nCourt. \" Eritrea, queen of Cyprus \" was\nthe Conte Antonio Scapinelli, gentleman\nof the chamber to the Prince Cesare, and\nCelinda \" the cavaliere Nicolo Martelli.\nThose gentlemen who undertook female\nparts must have been very well made up\nas there was one who dared to assume\nthe scanty vestments of the goddess Ve-\nnus, and who was the conte Ippolito Ca-\nrandini.\nThe opera was followed by ballets.\nEverything contributed to render marvel-\nlous the spectacle in which one did not\nknow whether to admire most the splen-\ndours of the scenes, and costumes, and\nthe marvel of the machines, or the rich-\nness of the dresses, the headdresses, the\njewels, displayed by the crowd of elegant\nlady spectators.\nNor was there lacking a fresh proof of\nthe lordliness of the house of Este in the\nprofusion of refreshments and sweetmeats\nwhich were offered to the spectators in\nthe intervals of the performance, while the\nDuke himself was pleased to distribute to\nthe guests delicious candies brought in\nforty \" royal basins So that the guests,\nRuini assures us, went away bearing the\nindelibly impressed memory of the gene-\nrosity of the Duke.\nAfter this solemn inuauguration the thea-\ntre remained closed for some time. But\nthe Modenese long continued to discourse\nupon this unforgettable fete. We are,\nhowever, in the seventeenth century : the\ncentury of the academies and of disserta-\ntions. A little book was printed which\ndescribed tirelessly the marvels of the tour-\nney. And in the meantime there were\nresumed the usual gatherings of those Aca-\ndemicians known as the \" Dissonanti \",\nwho discoursed interminably upon subjects\nthe most arduous or the most trilling, ac-\ncording as one likes to consider them.\nSix days after the inauguration of the\nCourt theatre the academicians gathered\nto hold forth upon the following theme:\n\"If in Woman virtue may be found\ncompatible with vice \". The Duke, who\nwas evidently a person of wit, when he\nknew that such a theme was proposed,\nforeseeing that someone, in sustaining his\nown thesis, might launch some pointed\ndart at the fair sex, gave orders to the\nacademicians that they should not issue\nthe usual invitations to the ladies who\nwere accustomed to be present at those\nfashionable reunions as today they gather\nat live o'clock tea in some Lyceum. The\nDuke added, however, that if, although not\ninvited, some lady should repair to the\nacademy, she should not be sent away.\nCuriosity regarding the proposed theme\nnaturally attracted a large throng of ladies,\nmore numerous than had they been express-\nly invited. Some of them, hearing from\nthe orators such a succession of back-\nhanded compliments directed against them,\nwere unable to restrain fiery words, which\ndid not escape some of the academicians.\nThese then hastened to ask them by\nwhom they had been invited, to which\nthese indiscreet ladies did not know what\nto reply ;... such are the surprises which\neven today await certain imprudent per-\nsons who affect intellectuality so as to follow7\nthe fashion, and who lack good sense,\nthe most necessary endowment of a woman.\nIt seems to me that those ladies would\nhave acted better in taking part in the\nrepresentation of the \" Eritrea\" rather\nthan in pushing into the space reserved\nto the public in an academic sitting."}, {"page_pdf": 46, "page_imprimee": "74", "url_page": "https://bluemountain.princeton.edu/bluemtn/?a=d&d=bmtnaau192604-01.1.46", "texte": "Each in his own place: they should\nhave left to those cavaliers the illusion of\nphilosophising, even upon feminine virtues\nand vices,... no different from male ones,... ;\nand should, the rather, have prevented\nany of these from usurping their place,\ndaring even to represent on the stage the\npart of the mother of Love.\nVenus triumphant would have better\ntamed those disgruntled academicians.\n\nMR. GEORGE BUTLER.\nSHEFFIELD\nBY FRANÇOIS M. FLORIAN. GRENOBLE\nJ was once in Pisa and being shaved at the\nlittle barber's in the Piazza Garibaldi. In\nthe next chair to mine sat an Englishman\ngrumbling graciously about his countrymen.\n1 had met him in the train. We had tra-\nvelled from Torino together.\nWe had spoken of my French playhouses,\nof Moliere, of Racine—and of his playhouses\nand of Shakespeare.\nHe had told me that, while there was a\nquite a large group of intelligent men and\nwomen who cared to hear Shakespeare if\nwell performed, the larger public as a whole\ndid not care.\n\" They read him then?... \" I had sug-\ngested.\n\" No, they ignore him. Go to Birming-\nham, Sheffield, Bradford, you'll not find\nanyone who has read a line of him\nAnd now we sat side by side being shaved:\nand I casually picked up a rasor out of a set\nof three which lay on the edge of the marble\nbasin before me.\nIt was rather heavy so I opened it to see\nwhat sort of blade it had.\nOn this blade was a quotation from\nShakespeare and the announcement that the\nrasor was made by George Butler, Trinity\nWorks, Sheffield, and marked No. 2.\nI forget the quotation, but I shall not for-\nget the gracious grumble with which my\nEnglish acquaintance received the news of\nthis find.\nIt seems that they do read their Shakes-\npeare in Sheffield \" 1 %aid.\n\" Only to use him for business purposes \"\nhe growled.\nWhich was quite unfair on Sheffield,\nespecially on Mr. George Butler, for I re-\ncall that the quotation was in no way one\nwhich played on the words rasor or steel or\nsharpness ; nothing like \" Here's metal more\nattractive \", or One pain is lessened by\nanother's anguish \", or \" My heart is true as\nsteel \". Nothing like these. I almost believe\nit was some such line as :\n\" The words of Mercury are harsh after\nthe songs of Apollo \". And 1 had meant\nsome time ago to say a word, not harsh,\neither, about this little fact: to stop for a\nmoment in these rattling noisy days and think\nonce, for a silent two minutes, of an almost\nunknown soldier ....Mr. George Butler."}, {"page_pdf": 47, "page_imprimee": "75", "url_page": "https://bluemountain.princeton.edu/bluemtn/?a=d&d=bmtnaau192604-01.1.47", "texte": "DABIT FRUCTUM IN TEMPORE.\nYes!. but take care that the seed is good.\n\nOLD LONDON\nAND MORE COTTONWOOL\nFOR THE INCOMPETENT.\n\nTHE SADLER'S WELLS FUND.\nA PROTEST FROM \"THE MASK\"\nTHE enthusiasts for establishing Old Sad-\nler's Wells Theatre as a second Old Vic\nhave issued another prospectus asking for mo-\nney and stating the Object of the Fund.\nLet us consider this Prospectus a little.\nTHE OBJECT OF THE FUND.\nTO establish the historic theatre of Sad-\nler's Wells as an Old Vic for North\n\" London, putting it under the management\n\" of the existing Old Vic as a second\n\" theatre\nSo far the enthusiasts have persuaded the\nCarnegie United Kingdom Trust to provide\nthe whole of the £ 14,200 needed for the\npurchase of the building, and now another\n£ 40,000 is needed \" for its reconstruc-\ntion\nWhy has the Carnegie Fund found this\n£ 14,200 for this purchase ?\nThe Trustees of the Carnegie Fund be-\nlieve in the Drama \" as a definite factor in\nnational education \" ; that is why they have\nput down the £ 14,200 to buy the old\nplayhouse. A good and a safe bit of pur-\nchasing it seems to us; and should the\nTrustees of the Carnegie Fund later on wish\nto pull down the Theatre and put up a fac-\ntory for Biscuits, or for machinery, it can,\nwe suppose, do so.\nWhat else does the Fund get for its\nmoney ? What are the conditions imposed by\nthe Trustees of the Carnegie Fund ? That we\ndo not even guess at. That we are not told.\nAfter £ 40,000 more has been collected\nby the Committee, the immediate step is to\nconvert the older Sadler's Wells into a fairly\nOld Vic for North London.... and, adds the\nprospectus, this \"is in itself of the utmost\nvalue and importance \".\nBut we have serious doubts as, to its va-\nlue ; and as to its \" utmost value \", we find\nit ridiculous. \" Importance \" means of course\nbeing important \": important means \"of\ngreat consequence—momentous, pompous \".\n(■Oxford Dictionary).\nTHE Old Vic \", proceeds the prospec-\ntus, \" is not run for profit, but is a\n\" Foundation under the Charity Commis-\nii ♦*\nsioners .\nAdmittedly while fashionable to \" not\nrun for profits \", its all foolery to run for a\nfall if you come to consider it sensibly.\nAn artist, if he is not very popular, is\nnot found running his art for a profit—that\nis true, but obviously so ; yet when his art\nbegins to sell, say what we will he is pro-\nfitting ; and therefore he is running for profit\nas well as other things are. Why not? So\nwhy this statement in the prospectus belit-\ntling profits ? Miss Baylis doubtless would be\nonly too happy to see a profit; does she not\nalready concentrate a good deal on searching\nfor Funds ?—indeed she has a real knack in\nraising Funds. What does she raise funds\nfor, except for ultimate Profit ?\nWe forget all the sums that Miss Baylis\nhas managed to raise, but we congratulate\nher on every penny. In 1922 she raised\n£ 30,000 to start the structural alterations of\nthe Old Vic forced on her by the passionate\nlove for education of her late Aunt Emma\nCons. The story is always the same with\nthe Old Vjc. When it's money that's wan-\nted appeal to the educationalists: where\nthere's a blunder to absolve or a debt to\nmeet, put it all down to education. Anyhow\n£ 30,000 is, one would have thought, enough"}, {"page_pdf": 48, "page_imprimee": "76", "url_page": "https://bluemountain.princeton.edu/bluemtn/?a=d&d=bmtnaau192604-01.1.48", "texte": "on which to start any Miss Baylis. Give\n£ 30,000 to an Edmund Kean or a Shakes-\npeare or even a modern playwright and it\nwould be enough to float him into immense\nsuccess if you let him work out his plan\nwithout interference. But perhaps lesser peo-\nple need more propping up. Still we should\nhave said that for Miss Lilian Baylis £ 30,000\nwas ample.\nSo Miss Baylis and the Old Vic—the\ntwo seem inseparable—do not look for profit.\nOn further consideration of the question\noerhaps this is quite as well: for when\nMr. Cochran presented Miss Baylis, the\nOld Vic and all its company in \" The Ta-\nming of the Shrew \" at the New Oxford\nTheatre in the west end of London, only\n£ 33 was taken in a night at the popular\nprices of 1/3 to 7/6.\nThat was in 1924. And it was one\nyear later, in 1925, that this failure to appeal\nto the real public was compensated by artificial\naid from the Trust which believes that the\nDrama is a definite factor in national educa-\ntion, and prefers to support Institutions rather\nthan Individualities.\nFor our part we feel that the work of\nHenry Irving, Sir Squire Bancroft, Sir John\nHare, Sir H. Beerbohm Tree and Sir George\nAlexander did more for national education,\nthan six Old Vies could ever dream of doing.\nAdd to these names the names of se-\nveral more successful managers whose appeal\nto the real public was answered by the real\npublic, and you have the theatre of 1880\nto 1910.\nCHARITY COMMISSIONERS.\nTHE Old Vic, says the Prospectus of the\nSadler's Wells Fund, is a large Theatre\nin Waterloo Road and is not run for profit,\nbut is a Foundation under the Charity Com-\nmissioners.\nDo you like the sound of that ?\nWe don't: and we don't know why; but\nwe don't like it.\nUnder the plea of providing Opera and\nDrama \" at prices which even the very poor\ncan afford \" this Old Vic claims and gets\nfirst £ 30,000, then £ 14,000, and is now\nbegging for another £ 40,000, and slowly\nthrusts out a white and very well nourished\nhand to take it.\n\" There is no sight in the world like\ncrowded house at the Old Vic \" says the\nprospectus : but there we think it exaggerates.\nWe have been in many dozen theatres\n\" in the world \" and seen sights as good—\npossibly better.\nIf it's a collection of poor people one is\nlooking for, anyone can see a hundred such\ncrowds in the Cinemas in the east end of\nFirenze or Paris, Roma or Stockholm : gloomy\ntired worried crowds it is true. In the thea-\ntres of Europe, we have seen better crowds\nof poor people, in Paris, in London, in\nVienna and in St. Petersburg; for the marks of\npoverty were not quite so emphasized and they\nwere a jollier crowd, a far more excited lot\nof people.\nTo exploit poverty in a Prospectus as a\nthing to see is strange : and we marvel to\nobserve on the Executive Committee of the\nSadler's Wells Fund names which ought not\nto be there.\nThey are there to help to do some good :\nwe are aware of that:—but good through\nthe theatre can only be done by supporting\nthe Theatre as it is—bettering it as it is—\nas a sound financial affair and as the home\nof the Dramatic art—the flag flying high.\nCLEARLY PROVED.\nFOLLOWING this plea, the Prospectus states\nthat \" the presentation of Shakespeare\nand other drama of high quality, and opera \"\nat these prices \" has clearly proved that if\nthe ordinary public is given the chance of\ngood mental fare it quickly learns to appre-\nciate it \". Which is not true if Mr. Coch-\nran's announcement is correct, that £ 34 was\nthe full sum \" the ordinary public \" would\npart with at the Oxford Theatre, London,\nwhen \" given a chance \" to witness \" a pre-\nsentation of Shakespearean Drama \", i.e.,\n\" The Taming of the Shrew \" by the Old\nVic Company; and remember, this same\n\" Taming of the Shrew \" is the most rollic-\nking farce Shakespeare ever penned, and very\npopular.\nROOM FOR REHEARSAL.\nTHE Prospectus proceeds to tell us how\nthe Sadler's Wells Theatre will benefit\nthe Old Vic : it will \" give sufficient room"}, {"page_pdf": 49, "page_imprimee": "77", "url_page": "https://bluemountain.princeton.edu/bluemtn/?a=d&d=bmtnaau192604-01.1.49", "texte": "x Miss Baylis for rehearsal \". 60,000 for\nrehearsal room seems a little fantastic, for the\nspace we require for rehearsal can be easily\nprovided by any fairly big extra room.\nON AND ON AND ON.\nBESIDES space for rehearsals the Prospectus\nclaims other advantages. Amongst them\nthat \" it would give London what it has ne-\nver possessed, continuous opera played six\ntimes a week \" and so on. As though a\nbarrel organ, only because it can play on and\non and on and never stop till the crack of\ndoom is what the world asks from Art.\nWhat is asked is good work three times\na week rather than poor work four times a\nweek or trash for six times a week. And\nyou cannot call even competent Dramatic\nwork good work—it must be first class or\nnothing to be entitled to be called good.\nSTRANGE STATEMENT.\n*4 A LL excess of income over expenditure \"\n£~\\ coos the prospectus 44 must necessarily\ngo to the improvement of production \".\nThat is where the vision of these people\nis so limited: for not by any means must\nproduction be improved if there be £ 30,000,\nor even £ 100,000, profit to spend on that\nproduction. Genius alone can improve that,\nor immense talent, or great mother wit—call\nthe quality what you will.\nAnd this is not what Miss Baylis pos-\nsesses or ever spends a penny to procure.\nBut, pleads the Prospectus, \" Trams and\nbuses pass the doors \" of this New old\nplayhouse:—alas, there again is more trouble.\nThey do pass, these trams and buses.\n44 Countless thousands \" the pleading voice\ngoes on, growing weaker and weaker, will\nreceive \" knowledge and entertainment com-\nbined \". Shakespeare will have 14 a home\nworthy of him \", and there the voice dies away.\nNOW all this alone would not be sufficient\nto prove that the Old Vic group is an\nincompetent one: it would rather point to\na certain awful competence. Yes, an awful\ncompetence: but only for affairs, for mana-\nging an empty Theatre very very skilfully—\nfor that alone.\nMiss Baylis is not exactly an inspired\nperson. She is not a great actress—a great\nwriter—a great stage-manager. She is one of\nthe many people who, in these last sad twenty\nyears, has risen by her own abilities, and,\nrising, she has glided out of her own sphere\nand intruded on the theatrical preserves.\nAnd let there be no misunderstanding\nabout this. The stage is preserved especially\nfor those of theatrical talent; this old estate\nof ours is not to be the dumping ground of\nthe incompetent.\nMiss Baylis we find incompetent, for she\nhas not done the things expected of a sound\nmanager of a theatre which is \" not run for\nprofit \".\nSuch a manager must run it for something\npositive—the negative virtue of not selling\nenough tickets, so as to cover every expense,\nis really insufficient.\nHad the sole alternative flashed across\nher brain, had she said \" no profit but Ge-\nnius anyhow we could have praised her.\nAs a matter of fact the sole healthy idea\nof a theatre, is to run it for Genius a\nthundering profit too: aiming deliberately for\nboth, sniffing at neither.\nMiss Baylis has sniffed at both.\nShe was given an Honorary Degree of\nM.A. by Oxford University in 1924.\nWe know that in the England of today,\nit is the epoch for allowing domestic servants\nto rise from their splendid situation and go\non to the stage—into journalism —to become\nnovelists—to scratch with apen—to splutter\nwith a voice—and generally to make a hell\nof what was once our old heaven.\nMiss Baylis is of course no domestic ser-\nvant ; she is a nice kindly middle-aged lady\nwho could be of the truest service to any\nHospital, any Charity Institution; and even\nany accountant's office should feel proud to\nhave such a capable servant, provided she\ncould rid herself of the notion that business\nmust be purged of all commercialism before\nit can \" follow the gleam \" and men \" rise\non stepping stones of their dead selves \",\nand could restrain herself from quoting other\nsuch scraps of Tennyson to the clerks.\nBut Miss Bayl is has shown us what it is\nshe can do. The Old Vic represents the\nkindly spirit towards the poor of the Surrey\nside; and now this warm-hearted woman\nwishes to do the same to the poor of ano-\nther edge of London."}, {"page_pdf": 50, "page_imprimee": "78", "url_page": "https://bluemountain.princeton.edu/bluemtn/?a=d&d=bmtnaau192604-01.1.50", "texte": "Well, why not ....why should not all the\nCharitable institutions of Greater Britain lend\ntheir aid to her in this second effort. If Eng-\nland believes in the sort of thing (and the\ndole to a lazy untrained pack of duffers seems\nto prove that England does believe in the\nsort of thing), then by all means full speed\nahead. But do not ask the sounder part of\nold London to tolerate the notion: do not\nexpect sensible men to countenance this folly\nof feeding the unwilling by forcing quasi in-\ntellectual food down their throats sugared with\nthe awful phrase, \" it will do you so much\ng00d.... really it will \". For every sensible\nman knows that really it won't.\nWHAT the Carnegie Trust wastes is of no\nimportance to anyone in his senses.\nWe look upon the £ 30,000 spent on\nthe Old Vic as money wasted. But this\nfurther £ 60,000 which is now being slowly\nextracted from Londoners' pockets is a grie-\nvous business, and that it will also be so much\nwaste is a little too bad.\nSumming it all up :—we think it a very\ngreat shame, as well as a silly thing to do.\nAnd one last word. Do not forget that\nour English Theatre suffers not from being over\nprofessional, but is already in danger of be-\ncoming not a little amateurish.\n\nSOME EXTRACTS FROM\nTHE PRACTICE OF MAKING\nSCENES AND MACHINES\nIN THEATRES.\n(BOOK TWO),\nBY NICOLA\nSABBATTINI DA PESARO\n\n(i) Published at Ravenna in 1638.\n\n(I)\nCHAPTER 37, METHOD OF MAKING\nTHE SECTIONAL SKY.\nWHEN it shall be necessary, in the\nIntermezzi, for the machines to rise\ninto the sky or to descend thence upon\nthe stage, the sectional sky must be used,\non account of the facility which it affords\nfor such operations, and also on account\nof the satisfaction and wonder which the\nspectators derive therefrom, not perceiving\nhow the machines, in rising from the\nground, disappear, nor how, emerging from\nthe sky, they descend to the earth.\nTo accomplish this one must first con-\nstruct a portion of the sky, beginning with\nthe section nearest to the front of the Stage\nand at the height most convenient, and\nfollowing on according to the slope, as\nwas stated in the First Book, Chapter 4.\nAnd this first piece must be made as wide\nas is the space from the front of the stage\nto the place where the Machines are to rise,,\nat which point this first section will finish.\nHaving done this, one will commence\nwith another section, set parallel to the\nedge of the first strip, but placed so much\nhigher than the edges of the first piece\nthat the spectators, seated in the first rows\nnear the stage-opening, may not see the\nspace which remains between the end of\nthe first piece and the beginning of the\nsecond. This space must also be made\nas wide as shall be necessary so that the\nmachines may easily issue thence and\nre-enter without obstruction."}, {"page_pdf": 51, "page_imprimee": "79", "url_page": "https://bluemountain.princeton.edu/bluemtn/?a=d&d=bmtnaau192604-01.1.51", "texte": "By this method the other sections can\nalso be made, ....as many as are required.\nLet the floor of the Sala, or of the Thea-\ntre, be A, B. and that of the stage C. D.\nLet the first section of the sky be EF, and\nthe second GH, and let there be as much\ndistance from the back edge F to the begin-\nning of the second section at G as shall be\nrequired for the passage of the machines, as\nwas said above: and let the point G be set\nsufficiently above F to prevent the opening\nFG from being seen by the persons seated in\nthe front row at I, but so that the eye may\nbe fixed upon the point K, as is shown\nin IK. (I) These four lines have been drawn\nin profile so that the demonstration may\nbe more intelligible.\nCHAPTER 38. HOW PART OF THE\nSKY MAY BE LITTLE BY LITTLE\nCLOUDED OVER.\n* \"M 1 • 1 ■■■■■—■■■ , ■ , 1 ■ ■ Mill IIMIIWIWIIIHIIMII 111 ■IIIIIIIIH\nIT is customarily required that the sky\nshould cloud over little by little.\nWhen it is desired to do this, and\nthe sky having been first made in sections\nas was set forth in the preceeding chap-\nter, one will set up, in line with the aper-\ntures, and on one side of the Stage\nbehind the Houses, (2) a Telaro (3) corre-\nsponding to each aperture, which should\nbe made of laths of thin board, covered\nwith canvas painted to resemble clouds,\ntaking care that those to the front be\nmore boldly coloured than the others, as\nwas said in regard to the colouring of the\nScene : and these must be equal in size\nto the clouds one desires to show.\nWhen this shall have been done one\nwill fix in each Telaro one or two sup-\nports in the manner of tie-rods. Let\nthese be of light wood, but strong.\nThese will then be adjusted in line with\nthe sky-sections, behind the houses, sufficient-\nly low down not to be seen by those in front.\nWhen the time comes for producing\nthis effect, one or more men, placed above\nthe sky, facing the sectional pieces, must\nhold the tie-rods in their hands, so that\nwhen the signal is given them, they may\ncause the said Telari to run beneath the\nsky, halting them where it shall be needful,\nso that in this manner it shall seem as\nthough the Sky be clouding over.\nLet the profile of the first section of the\nsky be A. B. and of the second C. D., and\nthe Telaro E. F. be painted as a cloyd, as\nwas said above : and let this be placed\nbehind the Houses on one side, where ever it\nbe more convenient ; and let the tie-rod be\nG. H. ; and let the person who shall have\nto stand above the end of the first section be\nat B, holding in his hands the tie-rod G. H.\nat H. When wishing to perform this opera-\ntion, the person placed in H shall be able\nslowly to walk above the last sectional\npiece of the sky, holding, as has been\nsaid, the tie-rod in his hands, and gui-\nding the Telaro by its means to the des-\n\nFigure 1.\n\n(1) K. is lacking on the original diagram, but is ob-\nviously the upper end of the dotted line which begins in I\nand cuts GH in K. Translator.\n(2) Case (houses) is the term used at that period for the\nside pieces of scenery, representing buildings, and erected 011\nwooden frames,\n(3) Telaro. The original technical word, so frequently\nrecurring in scenic works of the period, is retained. It means\nhere a wooden framework upon which canvas scenery is stret-\nched. It is sometimes used in another sense.\n\nFigure 2."}, {"page_pdf": 52, "page_imprimee": "80", "url_page": "https://bluemountain.princeton.edu/bluemtn/?a=d&d=bmtnaau192604-01.1.52", "texte": "tined point, accomplishing in this manner\nwhat is desired. If the Telari be large,\ntwo or three persons must be set, with\ntwo or three tie-rods, following the afore-\nsaid method.\nCHAPTER 39. HOW IN ONE MOMENT\nTO CLOUD OVER THE SKY.\nON requiring to cloud over the sky in\na moment one will, if one wishes so\nto do, (albeit this is not a natural thing),\naccomplish it in the following manner.\nThe sections of the Sky having been\nmade by the method set forth above in\nthe other Chapters, one will make some\nTelari according to the number of the\nsections : and let these be of such length\nand breadth as one shall wish the Clouds\nto appear, painting them as was said in\nother places.\nWhen the said Telari are made, one\nwill set them in line with the openings\nof the sectional pieces, sufficiently far back\nthat they may not be seen by the spec-\ntators ; and let them be placed in grooves,\nwhich will have first to be made and\nplaced at either side, so that they can\nrun in these grooves in the manner of a\nportcullis ; and the said grooves must com-\nmence from the beginning of the Telari\nand correspond in length with all the\nparts of the sky, that is of the sectional\npieces ; and they must be painted of the\nsame colour as the sky itself.\nAll this being h accomplished, and the\nsaid Telari being adjusted, each in its\nplace, and when it is desired to perform\nthe said operation, one will place two,\nor three, men at each Telaro, and when\nthe time comes, let all run the said Te-\nlari in their grooves, so that in this manner\none will in an instant see that portion of\nthe sky clouded over; but the section\nnearest to the front must remain as it was\nbefore, since it is not possible to change\nit by this method.\nOne will be able, however, to ac-\ncomplish the change of this piece by ano-\nther method which will be related in the\nfollowing Chapter.\nLet the profile of the first section be A.\nB. and of the second C. D. which has to\nbe clouded over ; and let E. F. be the\nTelaro placed above the first piece of the\nsky A. B. on a level with C. D. and\nadjusted in the portcullis or groove E. F. G.\nin such wise that it can run in it easily.\nTo bring about, then, the clouding\nover of the section C. D., one will place\nthe men at E, from whence they can in\na- moment make the Telaro run in the\nline E. F., because when E shall have\narrived at F, F will be at the point G;\nand thus what was to be done will be\naccomplished.\nIn like manner one will be able to\ncause the other sections of the sky to be\nclouded over, with the exception, however,\nof the front one, as was stated above.\nCHAPTER 40. ANOTHER METHOD\nTO CLOUD OVER THE SKY IN\nANINSTANT.\nI NAWIIIIIIB MHIGIIAI«W>I 1118 lIMW N mm*,,, IN tm\\ mmmm HHII uuwmm WMWIWHIMTK\nTHIS other method of clouding over the\nsky will he almost similar to the one\nrelated in the preceeding Chapter, with,\nhowever, this difference : that whereas, jn\nthat one, Telari were placed at the edges\nof the sections of the sky, in this one\ncanvasses, coloured like clouds, must be\nplaced in those same positions : and these\ncanvasses must be equal in length and\nbreadth to the portions of the sky which\nare to be covered, adjusting one side of\n\nFigure 3."}, {"page_pdf": 53, "page_imprimee": "81", "url_page": "https://bluemountain.princeton.edu/bluemtn/?a=d&d=bmtnaau192604-01.1.53", "texte": "each canvas to the front edge of its sec-\ntion. To the other edges one will attach\ntwo or three ends of cord, or as many\nas shall be necessary according to the size\nof the canvas.\nThese cords have to be twice as\nlong as the length of the said canvasses,\nand run in pulleys, which must be placed\nat the extreme outer edge of each section\nof the sky which is to be clouded over.\nThe aforesaid Canvasses shall then be\nrolled up or gathered together in the po-\nsitions indicated above, in such wise that\nthey may not be seen by those out in front.\nWhen all these things have been pre-\npared and adjusted, one will, in the ap-\npointed places, set the men, each of whom\nmust hold in his hand his end of the\ncords ; and, at the moment when the\noperation has to take place, all will pull\nthe cords in unison, so that in that instant\nthe parts of the sky will be covered over\nwith the cloud-painted canvasses.\nShould one then wish the sky to re-\nturn as before, one can double the cords,\nand, pulling their other ends, one will see\nthe sections of the sky uncovering, and\nreappearing as they were before.\nIn this manner one will also be able to\ncloud over the foremost section of the sky,\nplacing a piece of canvas front edge of it.\nLet the first section of the sky be A. B.\nand the second C. D., which has to be in-\nstantaneously clouded over: and let the piece\nof cloud-painted canvas be rolled up and ga-\nthered together at E.; and let the rope be\nE. F. G.: and let the end E be sewn to the\ncanvas at E., passing through the pulley in\nF. and returning with its final end to G.\nThe person who is to operate will,\nthen, hold in his hands the end of the\ncord G. ; and at the appointed time will\ninstantly draw the cord towards him with\nspeed, so that the edge of the canvas E.\nwill arrive at F. In this manner one will\nhave caused the piece of sky C. D. to\nbe clouded over.\nOne will operate by the same method\nin regard to the other sections of the sky.\nOne will also be able to pull the other\nend of the cords, which are set above\nthe said canvas, and must be of such a\nlength that E., the front edge ,of the\ncanvas, when it was in F., may return\nto its former position in E.\n\nFigure 4.\n\nTHE COLOSSUS SPEAKS.\n\nUNDER THIS HEADING MR. BERNARD\nSHAW ADDRESSES AN OPEN LETTER\nTO MR. GORDON CRAIG. (1)\n\nMy dear Gordon Craig.\nIn so far as my colossiousness is not a legitimate\nstage effect which you would be the last man to dispa-\nrage, it is something that I cannot help, I can only apo-\nlogize and plead that I was born so. How would you\nalter me if you could ?\nYou are quite right in saying that the contribution\nI and my followers (in the chronological sense) have made\nto the drama is not an artistic contribution. Wycherley\ncould say what he had to say as well as I, and could\nput it on the stage with as much art. Congreve was as\nfine an artist as Granville-Barker. The fact that Man and\nSuperman leaves The Country Wife so far behind that I\ncannot persuade people that the two authors belong to the\nsame species, and the stupendous superiority of The Ma-\ndras House to the Way of the World, is due wholly to\nthe difference in the subject matter and the mental ca-\npacity of the authors. Wycherley and Congreve thought\nwomen over thirty ridiculous, venereal disease funny,\nand the betrayal of an old husband by a young wife\nscreamingly laughable. That covers their entire recorded\nbody of thought. Ido not share these tastes; and if I\ndid, I have something more important to think about and\n\n(i) For Mr Gordon Craig's article. \" The Colossus \" see\nThe Mask. January 1926."}, {"page_pdf": 54, "page_imprimee": "82", "url_page": "https://bluemountain.princeton.edu/bluemtn/?a=d&d=bmtnaau192604-01.1.54", "texte": "make an audience think about. I have nothing in common\nwith Wycherley and Congreve except our art, and an in-\ndefensible but irrisistible love of acting for its own sake.\nAnd I daresay Granville-Barker would say the same.\nBut this is not what has drawn a reply from me to\nyour sally. You have brought against me the unjust ac-\ncusation that I have thrust everybody else off the stage.\nYou specify our friend Henry Arthur Jones as a case in\npoint. Now the truth is that I could not get my last play\ninto the theatre until Henry Arthur gracefully made way\nfor me by suspending the performance of a play of his\nwhich was still unexhausted after a long run. When, long\nbefore the war, Mr Jones renounced his London vogue\nand withdrew to America, he did so, not because he was\ncrowded out, but because, like Shakespeare, he fell into a\nmood of disillusion with English society which he expressed\nin plays compared to which Timon of Athens seemed a\ngenial optimistic comedy, He went away because he could\nnot stand us any longer, not in the least because we could\nnot stand him. When he returned after the war he found\nhimself for a time excluded from the London West End\ntheatres ; but so were we all. The war had raised theatre\nrents to a figure which no serious author's following\ncould cover. When the situation was eased by the sub-\nstitution of the sharing system for the renting system he\nmade a triumphant return with the play that kept mine\nwaiting. Your sympathies are due to me, not to him : all\nthe more so as his misanthropy has taken a most unfor-\ntunate turn for me. He could not feel like Timon to-\nwards his country when the war smote it. He forgave\nit, but forgave it on the very unexpected ground that its\nfaults were the result of it? having been misled by two\nfiends in human shape, tri-initialled and one-syllabled, by\nname H. G. Wells and G. B. Shaw. What could we say\nbut that if the indictment he brought against his entire\nnation can be narrowed down to a gorgeous burst of his\nbest invective against two harmless individuals, we will\nsuffer meekly for of reconciling him to his own people ?\nThus Mr Jones's cause is not really your point.\nWhen next you are moved to accuse me of shutting the\ndoors of the theatre on my fellow playwrights just as Mr\nJones accuses me of shutting the gates of mercy on man-\nkind, pause and remember what the theatre was when I\nstormed it, and what it is now. As far as serious original\nwork was concerned there were two men in possession,\nPinero and Jones, and two new arrivals in the offing:\nBarrie and Carton. The others were translating from the\nFrench or writing comic operas, or complaining bitterly\nthat they were being kept out of the theatre by an ima-\nginary Ring. Today the first policeman you ask can, with-\nout mentioning Pinero, Jones, Carton, Barrie or myself,\nreel you off a list of twenty established West End London\nplaywrights, enjoying a liberty of subject and treatment,\nand a standing in literature (to say nothing of the fortunes\nthey have in their film rights) which drive the aforesaid\nP, J, B, C, and G. B. S. to shake their fists at the hea-\nvens and ask despairingly why they were not born fifty\nyears later. And you, Edward, have had a splendid\nshare in this triumph over the Philistines. In the nine-\nteenth century they did not know what you were talking\nabout: today they may not know much better; but you\nare the most famous theatre man in Europe. Twenty\nyears ago Charles Ricketts made a stage picture of the\nthird act of Man and Superman which neither he nor any\nother artist in Europe has surpassed or can surpass. No-\nbody took the slightest notice of it then. Today it would\nmake ten reputations. I am actually asked what would\nSt Joan have been without Ricketts: and I am obliged\nto confess that it would have been a mere sketch in black\nand white.\nAnd you have the face to tell me that I have closed\nthe theatre to everyone but myself! that its wide walls\nencompass but one man! Ungrateful Edward!\nBut I forgive you for the sake of your deftly im-\nplied flatteries.\nEver yours, a little the worse for wear.\n\nG. Bernard Shaw.\n\nA WORD FROM MR. GORDON CRAIG.\nGordon Craig.\nDear Mr. Shaw.\nWriting of you — of George Bernard Shaw — is\none thing. Writing to you is quite another — for then\nto me you are another being.\nI see that you allow me to print your letter in \" The\nMask \" for you send it almost as an article : you enclose a\ncard with George Bernard Shaw's compliments and the\nkind after thought This — if you care for it — shall\nremain exclusive to The Mask.\nThat, if you will allow me to say so* is typical of\nthe generous sort of thing I am told you do and most people\nwould forget to do ; it is also typical that you should\ntake the care to give a head line to your letter \" THE\nCOLOSSUS SPEAKS\". \"The Mask\" might other-\nwise have been so daring as to put as heading, \" THE\nCOLOSSUS REPLIES \", — thereby attempting to snatch at a\nchance of making itself more important than it is.\nHad you not made it clear to me that you wanted\nthe letter printed in \" The Mask \"# I should have been\ninclined to pocket it and write my word of thanks privately\nto you, instead of doing so through the little magazine.\nFor as you see, by writing before the public I have\nto give away an especially awkward fact which is that I\nhardly know you. Others who have met you six, ten,\ntwenty times and come to know you well, doubtless call\nyou Bernard or G> B. S.: whereas I, having met you\nbut thrice, and quite by chance, am perforce obliged by\nthe courtesy of our country to address you in my letter\nas Mr. Shaw, it being the first time I have heard from\nyou or written to you.\nThis is rather a come-down. It is true I might\nstart as you do, and address you by your professional\ntitle — your full name ; but I am not, alas, privileged to\ndrop ceremony when half through and plunge on you\nwith \" Look here, George, it won't wash \" ; and as I may\nnot do this I prefer to stick to ceremony.\nSo that this note must be the very briefest: — must\nbegin and end in thanking you for your letter, which will\nprove to be the most popular item \" The Mask has\never featured.\nBut as this brief note is not at all the sort of thing which\nmy own little public expects from me, allow 'me here to\nreassure them before you of my determination to return\nbefore long to a subject I feel sure they are not yet tired\nof, and seemingly never will be.... The subject—G. B. S.\nYours sincerely.\nGenova .\nCareful j-eaders of Mr. Gordon Craig's article \" 7he\nColossus \" published in the January number of \" The Mask \"\nand to which Mr. Bernard Shaw replies in this number will\nnote that Mr Henry Arthur Jones was not cited as one who\nwas thrust off the stae'e by Mr. Shaw. Mr. Jones was there\nlong before Mr. Shaw appeared and has a position fixed and\nenviable. Editor,"}, {"page_pdf": 55, "page_imprimee": "83", "url_page": "https://bluemountain.princeton.edu/bluemtn/?a=d&d=bmtnaau192604-01.1.55", "texte": "BOOK REVIEWS.\n\nSOPHOCLES; Loeb Classical Li-\nbrary. Heinemann Ltd. 2 Vols.\n10/6 per vol.\nMY LIFE AND WORK, Henry\nFord. Heinemann Ltd. Price not marked.\nTHE 'HELEN' OF EURIPIDES;\nTranslated by J. T. Sheppard. Cam-\nbridge University Press. 2j.\nMUSIC HALL NIGHTS by Dion\nClayton Calthrop. John Lane. 6/—\nTHE AUTOBIOGRAPHY OF AN\nATTITUDE by G. J. Nathan.\nKnopf. New York. Price not marked.\nI know very little about Mr. James\nLoeb except that he is a retired\nBanker and is a rich man—in this he\nresembles Mr. Henry Ford: I am\nhappy to say I possess many volumes\nof the Classics which Mr. Loeb had\nthe wit to spread around, the wisdom\nto «•••••\nBut I write here as though I knew\nall about Mr. Loeb. I wish I did.\nI know all about Mr. Ford. 1 wish\nI didn't.\nTwo rich men : the first distingui-\nshed, educated, and I don't doubt\ngifted: the second obviously gifted,\nundistinguished, and innocent of a great\nmany things.\nMr Ford's Life and Work both\nbore me to death. Otherwise he is\ndelightful. For he seems to be an\nactive, good-natured little man, and as\nan assistant to Mr. Loeb would have\ndone well. I mean by that would\nhave done well from my point of view;\nfor after all, to make or cause to be\nmade a Ford car is only to do well\nin a very limited way; to cause a\nmillion or two million cars to be made\nis to do less well and the way still\nnarrower : to amass millions of dollars\nin doing this is creditable, for it is\neasier to lose millions unless you are\ncareful. Careful Mr. Ford, believing\nthat to be careful is the full sum of\nexistence (and it is very much), asks\ncarelessly in his book in chapter 13\nthis very poor question: \" WHY BE\nPOOR ? \" He doesn't answer it be-\n\"'i\ncause the only approach to a reply is\ncontained in another question, 14 WHY\nNOT ? \"\nHad Mr. Ford been one of Mr.\nLoeb's assistants some of the faults of\nthe Loeb Classical Library would as-\nsuredly have been eliminated. First\nof all the little faults of production :\nthe translators would have been assis-\nted by one or two poet-scholars\nand the following passage would have\nbeen bettered :\nMessenger. Know that he took\nthee from my hands, a gift.\nCEdipus. Yet, if no child of his,\nhe loved me well.\nMessenger. A childless man till\nthen, he warmed to thee.\n(Edipus. A foundling or a pur-\nchased slave, this child ?\nMessenger. 1 found thee in Cithoe-\nron's wooded glens.\nCEdipus. What led thee to explore\nthose upland glades ?\nMessenger. My business was to\ntend the mountain flocks.\nCEdipus. A vagrant shepherd jour-\nneying for hire ?\nMessenger. True, but thy saviour\nin that hour, my son—and, so on.\n1 hold that Professor J T. Shep-\npard would have done this better.\nHe takes more liberties I suppose with\nhis Greek friends* work, but what of\nthat; he keeps us all alive. You can\nread his 44 Helen \" and not hate Euri-\npides or Loeb, or Sheppard, or your\nlibrary, or life itself. Mr. Ford would\nprobably have plumped for Sheppard\ntoo and he would have fitted out two\nor three romantic yachts and sought\nfor and found Sheppard.\nAgain Mr. Ford, as enthusiast and\nassistant, would have seen to it that in\neach volume we were told of Mr.\nLoeb and his intention in doing this\nexcellent work. This would have\nbeen made clear by a series of essays\nby the very best prose writers of the\nage. He would have added three or\nfour volumes of chronology and topo-\ngraphy by the finest scholars.\nThen in the difficult matter of dis-\ntribution how useful Henry Ford\ncould have been. He would have\nseen to it that we alt were enabled to\nget these lovely books, and for a more\nreasonable sum. He would have is-\nsued several million copies and forced\nthese into our hand :—willingly after\nsome delay (in fact till we began to\nappreciate the gift) we should have\npaid up our two or three shillings per\nvolume. As it is they cost much\nmore.\nI grieve that a man like Ford is\nallowed, is even forced, to waste his\nexceptional carefulness and his astoun-\nding energy on turning out useless cars.\nThere are enough cars already and\nenough car makers; whereas good as-\nsistants are rare, and Mr. Loeb lacked\njust such an assistant as Mr. Ford\nwould have made.\nOf Mr. Henry Ford's book it is\nneedless to say anything. He has\nbeen flattered by the press as only a\nfabulously rich man can be flattered,\nand it is Mr. Samuel Crowther, who\nhas written the book for him and done\nit amazingly well, that must be com-\nplemented.\nC| Lest it be supposed that 1 decry\nall the Loeb translations let me add\nthat they are often very good, but some-\ntimes it seems as though a tramway\nticket collector had pushed through\nand- got the job. Poets and fine\nprose writers should have been called\nto assist at this work. If Sir Edmund\nGosse or Prof. Gilbert Murray were\ntoo busy, another such man of taste\nand discernment could perhaps have\nbeen found to control the entire edi-\ntion. Why wasn't it done ? I believe\nthat the search broke down too early\nbecause Henry Ford was allowed to\nbecome a boss instead of remaining\nwhat he was born to be, a first-class\nassistant.\nI do regret that there are not more\npictures in the Loeb Library. Some\nPortraits of the Masters, only too often\nreproduced, do adorn the little vo-\nlumes ; but I miss the kind of thing\nwhich Dion Clayton Calthrop gives us\nin his 44 Music Hall Nights \", a rea-\ndable book with little classic touches\nabout the mouth-organ which is 44 full\not Pagan joys If only the Pagan\nliterature was allowed today to be\neven as Pagan as a mouth-organ, who\nwould ever feel as I feel towards\nE. Capps PH. D,, LLD.; T. E. Page,\nLitt. D. ; W. H. D. Rouse, Litt. D.\nthe able and scholarly editors of the\nLoeb Library, and the absent Mr.\nHenry Ford for shirking the whole\nbusiness. Mr. Loeb almost did a great\nthing, and would have done it had he\nenlisted under him not only scholarly\nbeings but living human men of ge-\nnius. Poets, prose-writers,... all the\nunemployed writers of real talent. With\nFord over them each would have been\nforced to supply his bit, and to trans-\nlate the Classics a whole little world\nis needed, one putting in bolts all day,\nanother spraying on the colour, a third\ngiving a wheel a shove, a fourth saying\n44 yes \", a fifth.... in short, the work\nof Ford, plus the incantation of the\nwitches in Macbeth, plus some scho-\nlarly agonies, and the thing couldn't\nhave gone wrong."}, {"page_pdf": 56, "page_imprimee": "84", "url_page": "https://bluemountain.princeton.edu/bluemtn/?a=d&d=bmtnaau192604-01.1.56", "texte": "Although my whole life has been\nspent writing reviews of books seated in\nthe corner of the inner room in the\nold Inn of Wine Office Court, I too could\nhave helped Loeb. I could have help-\ned to steady the unemployed.\nI could have gone over to America\nto look for talent, for that is not where\nFord would have failed to look for, but\nonly failed to discover, talent. I should\nin those days fifteen years ago have\nspotted talented Mr. Nathan. I would\nhave taken him to Bedford Street.\nI should have done as I have said,\nand led him meekly round to Mr.\nHeinemann and he would soon have\nfixed him up, given him a good con-\ntract, and we should now both be hel-\nping Mr. Loeb (under Henry Ford);\ninstead of which there goes poor Na-\nthan philosophising, attitudinizing and\nkeeping Alfred A. Knopf far too busy.\nBut Nathan will write on, and I\nwill write on, and Calthrop will listen\nin, and Sheppard will be roped in to\nthe Greekeries at the Scala, and Ford\nwill fool away his time out of his right\nplace, and Loeb will do good things\nsomewhere else, and Sophocles will\nsuffer. And all because the twentieth\ncentury considers it a virtue that each\nman shall be out of his right place.\nNo, Mr. Loeb, finally no. I ad-\nmire and applaud your intentions and\nyou really have achieved a great deal;\nbut had you only perceived that it was\nin your power to make your Library\nblaze like the bush of Moses, you could\nhave reversed History. But are you\neven now going to sit down and allow\nlittle Mr. Ford to make rules for Life\nand Work,—even at the eleventh hour\nare you going to allow that ?\n\nTHE WAY TO SKETCH, Vernon\nBlaise. Oxford University Press. 7/6\nDRAWINGS FOR THE THEA-\nTRE, R. E. Jones; Theatre Arts Inc.\nU. S. A. $ 5.00\nPAUL SCHEURICH, Dr. Oskar\nFischel. Rembrandt Verlag, Berlin,\n(price not marked).\nMR. Blake, in telling us how to\nsketch, seems to me to enjoy\nhimself to the extent of forgetting those\nof us who would like to hear how to\nsketch.\n\" Some people \" he says, delibera-\ntely not looking in our direction, \"\npeople find a difficulty in throwing the\neye out of focus ' : and then he pro-\nceeds to explain how we fools can\nachieve the simple operation, and I am\nforcibly reminded of a recipe I once\nread for making Blue Sky. He says\n*' Hold the finger up about six inches\nfrom the eye and look at it ; then, ma-\nking up your mind not to change the\nstate of the accommodating muscles\nof the eye, suddenly remove the finger;\nyou will see all the objects before you,\nat a greater distance than six inches\nenveloped and without detail. I have\nfound this dodge most useful in \"\netc, etc, etc.\nHe gives us eight sketches by Corot,\nRenoir, Turner and others, and one of\nhis own as a colour plate.\nI like Mr. Blake for the thorough-\nhearted way he enjoys himself and\nhis own productions. He gives us in\nall nineteen of his own sketches.... and\nan extra one on the cover, ....perhaps\nthe least successful of the twenty, but\nhe forgets to show us how the great\nsketchers Van Gogh, Callot, or Daumier\ndid the business.\nI weary a little of Mr. Blake and\nturn with considerable pleasure the\npages of an admirable book of sketches\nby Mr. R. E. Jones.\nHere is someone who knows how\nto sketch, and, as is usual nowadays,\nhe is employed to do something else.\nAnd yet not always and not every-\nwhere is this so. In Germany men\nare sometimes put to the task they\nwere born for, and Paul Scheurich\nwas certainly born to draw, to paint\nand to sketch. Alas, Scheurich lures\nme away from Jones. He sketches\neverything, anything, ....theatres and\nactors sometimes; thank God not all\nthe time. Four of his designs are for\nVoltaire's \" Candide \", others for\n\" Hundschen der Marquise \" and these\ndelight me with their grace, a quality\nlacking entirely in the sketches cf\nR. E. Jones.\nBut then Paul Scheurich has not\ndeserted his Muse for the Theatre as\nMr. Jones has been forced to do. Mr.\nJones succeeds most admirably in\nsome sketches for a production of\n\" Richard 1111 think these represent\nhis best work for the stage, and. they\nare good as sketches.\nThere can be no comparison between\nthe work of the two men, Scheurich\nso cultured, so graceful, so far advanced,\nand Jones so immature although but\nfour years his junior: still one can com-\npare the fate of the two. And it says\nvery much for Germany and very little\nfor America.\n\nWHO'S WHO IN\nTRE, b\\) John Palmer. Pitman &\nSons. 255. net.\nMR. Parker's work is well known\nby now for this is the fifth edi-\ntion revised and enlarged, of the best\nbook on the subject, and very good\nat that.\nIt tells us who is who in the Thea-\ntre, but it also tells us who was who.\nAnd in the book's Theatrical Calendar\nhe tells us \" what was what \" as far\nback as the 16th centmy.\nAnd here most men would have\nstopped, and it is here that Mr. Pal-\nmer generously goes on. He gives us\nthe names of all the Dramatic Critics—\nor nearly all, for a few are omitted,\nincluding Mr. Horace Wyndham. He\ngives us ninety tables of Theatrical\nFamilies, Mr. J. M. Bulloch helping\nhim there. The longest \" runs \" are\nall listed, \" Chu-Chin-Chow \" with\n2,238 performances being well ahead\nof all others : \" Charley's Aunt\" being\nsecond with 1,466. Some only total-\nling 100, .... a long enough run one\nwould have thought.\nWe are then given a list of West-\nend Theatres, details about these pla-\nces, sizes, addresses, managers' names,\ntelephones, all very exact and excel-\nlent, and to me immensely instructive,\nA list of performers who have pas-\nsed away follows, in which we even\nfind Ristori and Siddons, the latter\ndying on June Bth 1831, aged seventy-\nsix. The date is correct, and I only\nmention it because the date of her\nbirth (also given) is I think incorrect.\nShe is down as having been born in\n1753 on June 13th and July sth, which\nis improbable.\nMr. Parker's list of Theatrical Wills\nis very interesting to study. Barnum\nheads it with £1,000,000. Lotta\nthe actress comes next with £BOO,OOO.\nSir Charles Wyndham comes tenth in\nthe list with £197,035, but is the\nactor who leaves the largest sum, Gar-\nrick being the next with £120,000.\nBut in Garrick's time £120,000 was\nworth more than it would be today.\nIrving leaves very little, £20,527, and\nis easily beaten in the art of saving\nmoney by his son H. B. Irving who\nleft £39,176. Last on the list comes\nStephen Phillips with £5 ; and one is\nsurprised to find that Charles Brook-\nfield left only £269.\nThe book ends with forty-four\npractical plans of the London Thea-\ntres showing how the seats in each are\narranged.\nBut who was Mary Raby ? She\nacted Mrs. Hawkins in \" Treasure\nIsland \" in 1924, was the only wo-\nman in the piece, and yet is excluded\nfrom the Biographies. Dreadful.\nOnly one serious fault I can find\nwith the book.\nIts title is insular and misleading.\nIt would have been more correct to"}, {"page_pdf": 57, "page_imprimee": "85", "url_page": "https://bluemountain.princeton.edu/bluemtn/?a=d&d=bmtnaau192604-01.1.57", "texte": "call it \" Who's Who in the English\nTheatre\n\n1. THE MARINER'S MIRROR,\nVol. X. No. 2. Cambridge Uni-\nversity Press. 6/—.\n2. ADVENTURES BY SEA by\nBasil Lubbock and John Masejield.\n\" The Studio 3 guineas net.\n3. THE LAST DAYS OF MAST\nAND SAIL by Sir Alan Moore Bt.\nClarendon Press, Oxford. 21 /\n4. LADY ANNE BARNARD AT\nTHE CAPE by Dorothea Fair-\nbridge. Clarendon Press, Oxfoid.\n30!— net.\n5. JOHN CARY, 1754-1835, a\nBibliography, Sir H. G. Fordham;\nCambridge University Press. 1016.\n6. PICCADILLY, LEICESTER\nSQUARE AND SOHO by C. L.\nKingsford; Cambridge University\nPress. 1216.\n7. GROUP PSYCHOLOGY, Sig-\nmund Freud. Boni & Liveright.\n$ 2.00.\nIN the old days we theatre folk imi-\ntated the sea by a vast blue-green\ncloth, covering the entire stage, and\nunder it ten, twenty, or thirty boys\nwould roll or bend or move from side\nto side, thus delighting a simple-minded\nhappy race of unenlightened ladies and\ngentlemen who thrilled to be so de-\nceived.\nWe had other ways of suggesting\nthe sea, ....its waves, its breakers and\nits salt spray, but the main device\nwas the cloth which heaved up and\ndown.\nThis old device is almost gone, dri-\nven away not by better devices but by\na more enlightened and sceptical being,\nwho likes anything better than to be\ndeceived.\nI do not know what the first nine\nvolumes of \" The Mariners' Mirror \"\nmay contain, but I suppose it is too\nmuch to expect to find there a detai-\nled account of how to make a stage\nocean, how to cause a ship to sail over\nthe stage and to tack in sight of the\naudience.\nEven without it this Quarterly journal\nof the Society for Nautical Research\nwill do. Such quarterlies seem to me\nto be every whit as excellent as books.\nHere one gets 120 pages for six shil-\nlings, and every page of the utmost\nvalue to students,... and what seaman\nlis not a student. To go to sea, and,\nhaving seen and experienced, to return\nhome and, on dry land, find \" The\nMariners* Mirror \" waiting with your\ngrog and plenty of tobacco heavens,\nwhat a life.\nAnd the \" Mariners* Mirror \" will\nof course advertise the existence of\n\"Adventures by Sea \" a folio which\n\"The Studio Ltd \" have published\nfor the price of three guineas.\nThere are 22 magnificent colour-\nplates and I don't know which I like\nbest; and there are 79 full page\nplates,wonders in half-tone, ....the storm-\ning of this, the taking of that, one\nafter another; and not too much text,\nand this some of Masefield's best ;in\nshort, a book which everyone can enjoy\nand hardly anyone will be able to get\nunless he hurries up, for it has an\neloping look about it.\nAnd it is these ships, we are told\nby Sir Alan Moore, in his \" Last days\nof Mast and Sail\" that are all passing\naway: if they happen to have sails\nand masts they are useless.\nThe book that Sir Alan has writ-\nten is not likely to pass so quickly.\nNor am I persuaded that the days\nof the sail and mast are numbered.\nIs the horse-drawn carriage to go too?\nI should not care to prophesy about\nthese things. I have sometimes risked\nan optimistic guess about the Theatre,\nand its actors, plays, masks and the\nrest, because 1 have looked into pos-\nsible changes and betterment in the\nmanagement of this world of ours. 1\nhave no talent to despair as Sir Alan\nMoore despairs; I could only do it\ntheatrically ; he does it in the nearest\nto the true tragic manner—which is a\nthought too grave to please me.\nHe says that \" nothing less than the\nfailure of the race can revive that\nand mast which once produced such\nable individual men \".... The failure\nof the race, what race ? The race\nwhich cannot perceive all the values of\nthe best we have on earth is a race\nwhich may well fail, falling captive\nsuddenly to some race which can un-\nderstand each value and can put them\nin order once more. In those days\nSir Alan's last chapter to his beautiful\nbook will be prized, but the world I\ntrust will not wait placidly for that day\nto come.\nUnfortunate it is that it will mean,\nhere and now, sinking the twelve chap-\nters of Pirate Sigmund Freud's volume.\n\" Group Psychology and The Ana-\nlysis of the Ego \"is the flag flown, and\nI am reminded of the old skull and\ncrossbones.\nToo bad ... too bad.... for Freud is\na man of great qualities.... as was old\nMorgan : but his group is a group of\nPirates. We all love 'em, these pirates,\nroaming the wide seas and often\ndoing good; curing people of the\njumps, really gaining little for them-\nselves ; not altruists, not egoists, but just\nunaware of all the values.\nSir Alan's book breathes health,\npours it into you. Freud's book would\nkill you. It is the first and last I shall\nread by this remarkable being.\nAs I write this the wind is howling,\nand smashing trees, and playing havoc\nall around. The sea is in a fury....\nand I happen to re-open the Memoirs\nof \" Lady Anne Barnard at the Cape\nof Good Hope, 1797-1802 \" at the\npicture showing her in the Atlantic on\nboard the mast and sail ship \" Sir Ed-\nward Hughes \"; the picture is called\n\" General Hartley and I moralize on\ndeck \" and is drawn by Lady Anne.\nShe was a delightful lady with a real\ngift for painting vivid water colours.\nThis one shows us that the ship which\ntook her to Africa, was about as wide\nas a couple of good-sized cabins, with\nits deck level with the water. There\nare some advantages in living in 1926\nand I see it clearly when I look at\nthis General and Lady moralizing at\nthe edge.\nOne of the best antidotes to mora-\nlizing is a little bibliography, and the\nlittle bibliography, of •• John Cary, En-\ngraver, Map, Chart and Printseller and\nGlobe-maker \" is perfection.\nAs a piece of bookmaking it is de-\nlicious except for the rather rough\npaper on which it is printed. What\nhas put us all against that paper of\npolished surface once known as Art\nPaper ? Why do publishers use it so\nlittle today ? It pleased the touch and\nwent well with the half-tone plates.\nI am entirely in its favour ; a book is\nthinner and perhaps a little heavier,\nbut what of that; the smooth touch of\nit is so agreable. Or if ' Art * paper\nis too glossy, there is that ordinary\nsmooth paper used in books of refe-\nrence.... and what better ?\nThe six books reviewed here are all\nprinted on rough paper of a blotting-\npaper texture, and I for one detest\nthat: five of them have plates on\nsmooth paper, and the contrast is not\npleasant. What law binds the publi-\nshers to use such a combination; why\ncannot they escape from the situation?\nAs a rule the plates come unstuck,\nthough nowadays a new and good me-\nthod prevents that, and the plates in\nMr. Kingsford's excellent \" Early Hi-\nstory of Piccadilly, Leicester Square\nand Soho \" are clearly not going to\ncome out after the book has had hard\nuse. And that it will have hard use\nis certain, for it is a book that was\nneeded. The public all over the world\nwould no doubt like to see a good\nmany more such books on London, but"}, {"page_pdf": 58, "page_imprimee": "86", "url_page": "https://bluemountain.princeton.edu/bluemtn/?a=d&d=bmtnaau192604-01.1.58", "texte": "for itiy part I would that they dealt\nwith one district only, or even one\nsquare, 6r one street; and I would\nhave the entire history of that street,\nsquare or district, not alone that of one\ncentury of it. Limit the space of ground\ndealt with, not the facts.\nBoth these books from the Cam-\nbridge Press are delightfully bound,\nand the price of the John Gary book\nis astonishingly low, spite of it 3 expen-\nsive looking covers. I do not despair\nof some day seeing English publishers\ncutting the covers and coming to the\ncackle a little quicker and adopting the\ncontinental custom of issuing serious\nworks in paper covers. So much more\nsensible, especially in an age when a\nshilling or two off the price makes such\na great difference to the public's purse.\n\nEDITORIAL NOTES.\n\nENGLISH COMMONSENSE.\nmmmmmmmmmemmmmmmmmmmmammmmßmmcmaamßmmmmmmmmrnmmmmMmmmmmmmm twmmmwmmmmmmmmmmam\nIT is seldom that the careful observer\n1 can find anything at all fundamen-\ntally wrong with the policy of the\nItalian Theatre. And if today we have\nnoticed something odd, may be it is\nonly a temporary hitch in a mechanism\nwhich formerly ran along very smoothly.\nOnce you smoked your cigar or ci-\ngarette during performances—only in a\nfew theatres was it disallowed. Now\nyou may not smoke in any real thea-\ntre, and only in a few Halls. This\nnew regulation may have some unex-\npected consequences.\nThe Facist Government, so sanely\nmasculine in most things, seems not to\nhave perceived that the prevention of\nsmoking in a theatre may in time ren-\nder the Italian stage effeminate.\nIt may not have occurred to them\nto look around Europe and America\nand see what kind of audience is\nbrought into being when smoking is\nforbidden.\nIt is seldom that the careful observer\ncan find much that is fundamentally\nright with the policy of the English\nTheatre.\nBut recently one of the best Thea-\ntres in London has done a very sen-\nsible thing. The order has gone out\nthat \" In the Gaiety Theatre by per-\nmission of the Lord Chamberlain smo-\nking of cigars and cigarettes is per-\nmitted in all parts of the house du-\nring performance \".\nIt is many a year since so sane, so\nordinary an innovation has been per-\nmitted.\nWith our excellent modern systems\nof ventilation the smoke annoys no\none, and the obvious pleasure derived\nby most men (and some ladies) who\nsmoke a good cigar or cigarette after\ndinner is not interfered with. The\nmood evoked by smoking a good smoke\nis the right mood to witness the per-\nformance of a play or a comic opera.\nIf the acting is so magnificent that it\ncan succeed in putting out the cigars\nit will be quite an achievement. But\na regulation should not.\nWe shall be much surprised if this\npermission to smoke does not very\ngreatly increase the popularity of the\nGaiety Theatre.\nAnd to think that London should\nbe the place where this little innova-\ntion has seen the light, and without\nany pain and with a lot of pleasure.\n\"We wish the Gaiety Theatre many\na long run and we look forward to\nits next commonsense reform.\n\n——p—asa—««—■g—iManacftf bwummKHH—aawia»,iwnBWßßßßWMneMßß«\nS TRA TFORD UPON A VON.\nTHIS TIME ENGLISH NOT AMERICAN.\nFATE, having been cruelly kind,\nburned down an inadequate theatre\nbuilt as a memorial to Shakespeare\nand used to utterly devastate his plays.\nThey propose to raise £lOO,OOO to\ndo this again. It seems sentimentally\nidiotic. What £lOO,OOO is needed for\nis not to pay for bricks and plaster\nbut to preserve genius. Around the\ngenius of Shakespeare could be as-\nsembled what remains of the same\nbrand in Great Britain.\nWhy isn't this the aim? Why is\nthis the pretended aim, and why is\nthis pretence tolerated by Englishmen?\nWe don't want Bernard Shaw in\nStratford, nor the Cinema, nor Mr.\nBridges Adams plus Sir Frank Benson\nand a theatrical wardrobe. There are\nthirty like things we don't want there.\nWhat is wanted by us all is Shake-\nspeare.\nWe are in favour of the notion we\nhear suggested of offering Mr. William\nPoel his place at last, It is a debt\ndue to him for at least twenty years\npast. It would cost a quarter of the\nsum it is intended to raise. Rather\nlay that spectre of a sum: raise £25,000\nor what it would need; invite Mr.\nPoei to design and see to the erection\nof a playhouse quite as Poelish as his\nfancy once dictated, that means Eli-\nzabethan. Avoid all modernish ways.\nGet back to the Elizabethans for\nthis one item. Then thank your stars\n*nat again the danger of genius has\nbeen avoided, and make the sole com-\nmon sense compromise worth making.\nAnd above all stop any American\ninterference: there are already too\nmany Americans in control of things\nShakespearean and at Stratford on Avon.\nIhe flower of Shakepearean. Drama\nis an English flower.\nRemember the lesson of those type-\nwriting machines and let us take a\nhint if we want to avoid having to\nobey an order,\nAmericans are perfection but in\nAmerica, It goes without saying that\nwe too are perfection but obviously\nnot at Stratford. Clear the Ameri-\ncans out of it.\n\n° mn o\nPg. Col. Line\n5 2 32 For: ''was in the back\nroom of Talma's house\"\nread \" was at the back of\nTalma's house \".\n22 2 G For: \" unfair on her to\nask more than sanctity\nfrom her\" read \"un-\nfair to ask of her more\nthan sanctity \".\n23 2 36 For: \" Kouslski \" read\n\" Koulski\n26 2 33 For: \"Go the Houses of\nLords \" read \" Go to\nthe Houses of Lords \",\n22 2 53 For: \"The Fairy Dell\"\nread \" The Fairy Doll \".\n29 1 14 For: \" (After I8IJ) read\n(After 1871).\n34 1 19 Delete the word \"today\".\n34 1 43 A comma should come\nafter \" be free \".\n34 2 42 For: \" Gaboraiu \" read\n\" Gaboriau \".\n35 1 12 For: \"eveo\" read uever\"\n39 1 41 For: \" Cooee \" read\n\" Come\n40 3 66 For: \" and be the result\"\nread \"and let them be\nthe result\".\n46 2 7 For: \"But\" read \"But\".\n47 2 14 For: \" Better than did\nMr. Rutherston\" read\n\" Better than he did \".\n\nAN ACKNOWLEDGEMENT.\nTHE designs on pages 71, 74 column\none, 78, are reproduced from the\nCollection of Commendatore Leo Oischki\nby his kind permission. The design on\npage 74, column two, (as also the one\non page 20 January number) is repro-\nduced by the courtesy of the Curator\nof the South Kensington Museum.\n\nAll Rights re sewed. April 1926.\nDirettore responsabile Antonio Maraini*\nTipografia Giuntinay Firenze."}]}