THE THREE FANNIES. 361 North. Don't come over me with the Mocking-Bird. I have frequently observed that whatever disparaging character a man carelessly sports of himself or writings, his commonplace people forthwith adopt it as gospel; and thus a modest person like myself, being taken at his own word, is estimated far below his great genius Tickler. Hem! North. This most charming of all the works of a charming writer has revived in me my old love of the Acted Drama. I shall again be a Play-goer. Tickler. Here? North. Yes-here and in London, which I shall visit next spring-if alive; and I am engaged, indeed, to dine on the first of May with my friend Allan Cunninghame. Tickler. I shall be of the party. North. It is false and most unjust to living genius to say that there are now on the stage few or no great actors. There are as many as ever there were at any one era. Young has just retired; but I trust to see him once or twice again ere I make my final exit-Macready is first-rate-Kean, in some characters, greater than Garrick. Tickler. But the actresses? North. A few-and there never were more than a few at any one time-are admirable. Tickler. Miss Tree I saw lately in Julia in The Hunchback, and she is a charming performer. North. She is Tickler. Eh? but there are-THE THREE FANNIES. North. Miss Fanny Kelly-a woman of original geniusfine taste-strong intellect—and exquisite sensibility—equal to any part of passion. Tickler. She is. North. Miss Fanny Kemble acts nobly, like a Poetess, as she is―and equal to either of them in all things, and in some superior to both, is-our own Miss Fanny Jarman. Equal to either in power and pathos, and superior to both in grace, elegance, and beauty. The Three are all as much respected for their virtues in private life, as they are admired for their genius on the stage. And that lends a charm to their impersonations of such characters as Imogen, Desdemona, Ophelia, and Cordelia, which is felt by every audience, and for the want of which no accomplishments can compensate. 362 REPORT ON DRAMATIC LITERATURE. (Enter LOUISA, HARRIET, and HELEN, with the Tickler. Angels and ministers of grace! North. One or other of you, my good girls, look in upon us, now and then, during the hour, to see if we require any of your services. God bless you. [They curtsy and retire. Tickler. Eh? North. Sisters three-and daughters of the Grieve on my little property in Tweeddale, on a visit at present to an uncle, gardener to our friend in Trinity Tower. My worthy housekeeper has a young party in her own room this evening, and these obliging creatures requested permission to be attendant nymphs on the old gentleman Tickler. They did not call you so? North. Not to my face, Tim; but depend on't, middle-aged men like us are thought as old as the hills by Miss in her Teens; and as for these pretty creatures, I look on them as mere children. Such a sight as that is good for the eyesightBut pray what were we talking about? Tickler. Confound me if I remember. have These witches North. You see that blue folio? 'Tis the Report from the Select Committee on Dramatic Literature, with Minutes of Evidence. I glanced over it this afternoon, along with Mr Bulwer's excellent speech on moving the appointment of the said Select Committee. Have you studied the Question? Tickler. What Question ? North. That of the patents granted to the Two Great Theatres for the performance of the Drama. Tickler. Not I-but let us study while we discuss it. I know no better method of mastering any subject. I forget what you were going to say ? North. How would you define or describe the "regular drama?" Tickler. The regular drama is-is,-the regular drama is— that drama which comprehends-or say rather which excludes all dramatic perform-performances-that is compo,-stop, I must correct myself,-the regular drama may, I think, be defined to be that-no-described as that which,-nay, let me perpend,-why, after you-if you please, Kit-for you have been ruminating on the subject. Pray, North, let me ask THE REGULAR DRAMA. 363 you-my good fellow-before we go any farther, how would you define or describe the regular drama? North. I see nothing that can be either added or taken away from the truly Aristotelian definition which you have now given of it; and everything dramatic not included within the terms thereof, may be philosophically pronounced to belong to the irregular drama. Tickler. Having settled that point, which is at once nice and knotty, we may proceed to overhaul the minutes of evidence, and judge of its bearings on the general question of the patents. North. Would that worthy Mr Winston had had the benefit of hearing your admirable definition, before he was badgered by the Select. "What do you consider is meant by the regular Drama ?" asked one of the inquisitors. And the veteran Ex-Manager of the Haymarket replied "The regular Drama I consider to be Tragedy and Comedy, and everything on the stage."—"What! Burletta?"-" Yes-because TOM THUMB was played in the regular theatres, and is printed and called a Burletta."- "What do you consider a Burletta to be?"—" Recitative and singing; no speaking whatever; THE GOLDEN PIPPIN is a strong specimen of it—and OLYMPUS IN AN UPROAR.”- "Is OLYMPUS IN AN UPROAR the regular Drama."-" Yes-for it is played at the regular theatres, and played under license."-" Do I understand you to include every stage representation ?"-"Yes the regular Drama includes everything. Tickler. Very sensible. North. One of the Select then asks Mr Winston what he "considers to be not the regular drama ?" At that he shakes his head, and says, "I do not know; that it is a very difficult thing to ascertain;" but plucking up courage, he adds, "If they can play everything, then everything is the regular drama." Tickler. So in a regular drama there is no need for the performers, unless they like it, to utter a single word. North. None in the world. Tickler. And "Tom Thumb," "the Golden Pippin," and "Olympus in an Uproar," are all strong specimens of the regular drama? North. Samsons. Mr Winston is then asked if "tumbling be the regular drama?" and his silence speaks consent. So, of course, must be dancing and swinging on the rope. 364 BULWER'S SPEECH ON DRAMATIC PRIVILEGES. Tickler. Why go into particulars? Did he not say the regular drama included "everything?" North. But he qualifies that somewhat sweeping assertion; for, on being asked, "Are lions the regular drama?" he answers promptly and firmly, "No, I should consider not; not lions, certainly." Tickler. Well, well-though there may perhaps be some slight difference between Mr Winston's definition and mine of the regular drama, they seem to agree on the main points; so let's to the general question of the patents. North. It is well stated by Mr Bulwer to be this-" How far is it expedient for the public, that privileges and enactments of this monopolising description should be continued ?"1 Tickler. What privileges and enactments? North. Why-to use the words of Mr Bulwer-by a late decision of the Lord Chancellor, it seems that all performances worthy of the attendance of persons pretending to a reasonable degree of education-all performances, except those of the most mountebank and trumpery description, fit only for the players of Bartholomew Fair, are to be considered as infringements of the law, and as subjecting those who assist in them to serious penalties. Tickler. Pray, what, generally speaking, is the character of the Minor Theatres? North. More or less respectable. Tickler. Clear and explicit. North. And can there be a doubt that their character would be elevated by lawful liberty to enact the regular drama? Tickler. "To be or not to be-that is the question." North. There is much difference of opinion among the witnesses as to the comparative adaptation of large and small theatres for general dramatic effect. Charles Kemble (one of the proprietors of Covent Garden Theatre) argues with much ability in favour of very large ones, such as Covent Garden and Drury Lane. The same plays, acted by the same performers on alternate nights, at the Haymarket and the OperaHouse, paid better by £200 or £300 at the larger than at the smaller. 1 On the 31st May, 1832, Sir Edward Bulwer Lytton "moved for a select committee to inquire into the law respecting Dramatic Literature and the performance of the Drama," which motion was agreed to, MATTHEWS IN JOHN KEMBLE. Tickler. That proves nothing. North, Mind the smaller was not half full. 365 Tickler. Ho-ho-then it would seem to prove a great deal. North. Matthews the Admirable, whose amusing and ingenious evidence, however, is far from convincing on the general merits, treated the Select with John Kemble's opinion, delivered as if by John himself; for, quoth Charles, “I never can repeat a conversation, unless I do it in the style of the person who gave it." Tickler. O rare Charles Matthews! He becomes the original with such intensity, that the original seems to dwindle into an imperfect and ineffectual imitation of his own self. You cannot allow the original original, after you have seen and heard Charles in him, to perform himself; he looks so very tame; he wants that brilliance, which burns round and about his creative doubleganger; and the wisest thing he can do is to become, in the critic's row in the pit, an ecstatic admirer of his own perfections. North. "It is a common complaint," quoth Charles as John, "to speak about the size of the Theatres; the Public will tell you that they like small Theatres; sir, they lie; they like large theatres. They go to the opera, because it is a large theatre; and when my sister and myself, and Mr Cook, acted in Henry the Eighth, when we acted at the King's Theatre, we played to £600; and when we went over to the Theatre opposite, we never got £200 to the same play." Tickler. "Sir, they lie!" Christopher North in Charles Matthews in John Kemble in Samuel Johnson. North. One of the Select says, that he can perfectly well understand that there are certain sorts of representations which can only be represented in large theatres, such as pantomimes, melodramas, and spectacles, and things of that sort; but Charles Kemble rather sharply replies-" Excuse me; I think, with respect to melodramas and pantomimes, it is a mistake to suppose they can be better acted at large than at small theatres. Indeed, I think a pantomime may be better acted in a small theatre than in a large one; because those changes which are necessary for the great success of a pantomime, are much more easily effected in a small theatre than in a large one. With respect to melodramas, they do not depend for success entirely on splendour. On the contrary, I should say, |