Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

This was so

Stars he makes now without thimbles."* early as 1747. The secret of our grand stage conflagrations, where practicable houses seemed to be bewrapt in flames, actually lies in the use of this coloured glass, which "Gætano" found a failure, and of jets of gas. In mere mechanical effects and changes they were more forward. They had the little models, which every scene-painter now makes, and preserves. There was one grand "set piece" for a "Feerie" which he got over from Paris, the description of which is highly curious, as showing the "transformation-scene" of a hundred years ago. It was called the "Palace of Armida." The painted stones were put together, with handles at the back; these were drawn away from the bottom; thus the whole came down in ruins. Traps were opened "when the change of the fiery palace was commencing," down which the façade began to descend, the groups of Graces changing also at the same moment, while from above were thrown down what seemed to be heavy beams of timber, but which were frames of wicker, covered with painted canvas. The conflagration, however, was managed in a rather primitive fashion. Strings of tow were wound on long "perches" held at all sides, and were set on fire; the car of Medea then crossed the stage, surrounded by little demons carrying torches, and firing the palace. There was then "a rain of fire" made of sulphuric firework composition. In short they had not yet learnt that the true secret of dramatic effect consists in deception, and that real objects seen on the

*Forster MSS.

This rude and ineffective fashion obtained at our theatres until a few years ago.

stage are most unlike what is real.* The rest of the effect was worked out with red agate-coloured columns and “gilt beams,” and a great deal of gilt moulding.†

Another matter, which really required ordering, was the regulations about taking seats. The custom was for ladies to send their footmen before the play began, dressed up in gaudy liveries, who sat in the best places, for two or three acts, and thus kept the places. This was an incongruous sight enough; as ladies of the first rank often found themselves seated, through a whole piece, beside a servant. But there was a worse abuse. The fine footmen often preferred the tavern to the play and the "Sir Harry or "My Lord Duke," whom Garrick had so happily ridiculed, often went away and left as his deputy a dirty, ill-dressed porter -a more unbecoming contrast still to his neighbours. It was suggested to Garrick that the simple practice of numbering the seats would remedy all this. But he does not seem to have adopted it. Mr. Varney, the box-keeper, was a very important personage with all persons of quality and condition. All these improvements were owing to Garrick's own unwearied attention and watchfulness. He kept his eye on the French stage; and it is surprising that, with the whole intellectual department of the establishment on his shoulders, he should have found time to busy himself with matters like these.

Thus real fire, real water, real furniture are not nearly so good for effect as the imitative articles.

+ Loutherbourg was his scene painter, and contrived some ingenious effects by placing screens, of various coloured silk and tiffany, in front of the side, and head lights. It was he who invented the "effect" of Harlequin in a fog, produced by hanging dark gauze between the figure and the audience.

CHAPTER IX.

FITZPATRICK.

1762-1763.

THIS clearing of the stage from the loungers was to be fraught with great difficulties, and even danger. Above all, the fiercest opposition would be raised by his own company, who on a benefit, would lose as much as a hundred pounds or more, by being curtailed of this privilege. Garrick, however, always on the side of propriety, was content to brave the first dangers; and the happy device of enlarging the house, and gaining in front, the accommodation that was sacrificed behind the curtain, took away all excuse for dissatisfaction among the actors. These alterations were done so judiciously, that the theatre gained, not only in size, but in beauty, and now held a receipt of £335 a-night.*

The opposition, and displeasure of the men about town, was more perilous still. They could not readily accept their dismission. Unfortunately, too, Garrick had been drawn into an open quarrel with their leader, "Thady" Fitzpatrick, the "fine gentleman" of the coterie, who affected a superior tone, from his West End connection. He would seem to have carried the extravagance of dandy dress and

[ocr errors][merged small]

airs to its farthest limit-and the bitter satire which Garrick some years before had levelled at the fops of the town, was applied in a special degree to this archexquisite. It has been mentioned that he began by taking Mossop's side, in that actor's discussion with Garrick, as to a choice of parts, and artfully inflamed his irritation, by exaggerated praises and representations, that his abilities were kept down. He had now himself found a personal cause of quarrel with Garrick.

At the Bedford, one night, among a group of Shakspearean admirers, it was proposed that some testimonial of honour should be offered to their "idol." The shape was being discussed, when a gentleman interposed, and moved that the matter be postponed until Mr. Garrick should be present, who, as the poet's finest interpreter, was surely the best authority on such a point. This was reasonable. But Fitzpatrick, filled with sudden spite at this compliment to a person he so disliked, said absurdly that he wondered how any one could think of putting off the business of the club, to suit the convenience of its most insignificant member." This public insult was reported to Garrick, who called on him for an explanation. Meetings and conferences took place, which only inflamed the matter: when Fitzpatrick, overflowing with venom, and knowing as all the world knew, the weak point of his adversary, took the usual course of assailing him with anonymous slanders in print. These were kept up unceasingly, and might well goad the manager to desperation. There was a yet more offensive mode of showing this enmity. Often, when the great actor was in the middle of one of his finest parts, his eye would fall on his enemy a little below him in the

pit, "attended by some noisy set." He would see the cold stare, and shrugs of contempt, and actually hear his remarks, and his loud laugh at some fine burst in Lear. When all the house was in fits at Drugger, Fitzpatrick's face and his companions', composed to a stony gravity, must have had a damping effect on the actor. This was a serious matter, for the critics of the pit were known and watched, and there were groundlings enough in the house to be influenced by such behaviour. As a matter of course, Fitzpatrick found coadjutors among Garrick's own treacherous dependants. There was a certain haberdasher in Cheapside, one of his green-room followers, who would come to sympathise with him, and consult as to what was to be done, and then repair straight to Fitzpatrick with fresh hints and information, for a new onslaught. Garrick soon found out this double dealing, and chasséd him promptly. The crowd presently began to discover that the person of the great Roscius was no longer sacred, and this never-flagging series of criticisms began to raise up at the coffee-houses and other places a train of little pretenders, who found an agreeable occupation, and some claim to consideration, in detecting his faults. The paper which was chosen for these attacks was "The Craftsman," in whose columns now appeared the most vindictive and malignant criticisms on Garrick's acting and manner. These were signed "X. Y. Z.," and soon attracted attention from their perseverance. Later these worthless criticisms were gathered up into a pamphlet, which was called "An Inquiry into the Merits of a Certain Popular Performer; with an introduction to David Garrick, Esq.," and was then known to be written by Fitzpatrick.

« AnteriorContinuar »