The Works of Lord Byron: Letters and Journals - novelonlinefull.com
You’re read light novel The Works of Lord Byron: Letters and Journals Volume II Part 102 online at NovelOnlineFull.com. Please use the follow button to get notification about the latest chapter next time when you visit NovelOnlineFull.com. Use F11 button to read novel in full-screen(PC only). Drop by anytime you want to read free – fast – latest novel. It’s great if you could leave a comment, share your opinion about the new chapters, new novel with others on the internet. We’ll do our best to bring you the finest, latest novel everyday. Enjoy
In the 'Courier', February 26, 1814, appears this paragraph:
"Mr. Kean's attraction is unprecedented in the annals of theatricals--even Cooke's performances are left at an immeasurable distance; his first three nights of 'Richard' produced upwards of 1800, and on repeating that character on Thursday night for the fourthth ('sic') time, the receipts were upwards of 700."
On March 1 the same paper says,
"Drury Lane Theatre again overflowed last night, at an early hour.
Such is the continued and increasing attraction of that truly great actor Mr. Kean."
After the retirement of John Kemble (June 23, 1817), he had no rival on the stage, especially in such parts as "Oth.e.l.lo," "Lear," "Hamlet," "Sir Giles Overreach," and the two already mentioned. His last appearance on the stage was in "Oth.e.l.lo" at Covent Garden, March 25, 1833.
"To see Kean act," said Coleridge, "is like reading Shakespeare by flashes of lightning."
"Garrick's nature," writes Leigh Hunt, in the 'Tatler', July 25, 1831, "displaced Quin's formalism; and in precisely the same way did Kean displace Kemble. ... Everything with Kemble was literally a 'personation'--it was a mask and a sounding-pipe. It was all external and artificial.... Kean's face is full of light and shade, his tones vary, his voice trembles, his eye glistens, sometimes with a withering scorn, sometimes with a tear."
It was the realism and nature of Kean which so strongly appealed to Byron, and enabled the actor, to the last, in spite of his drunken habits, poor figure, and weak voice, to sway his audiences. The same qualities at first repelled more timid critics, and perhaps justified Hazlitt's saying that Kean was "not much relished in the upper circles."
Miss Berry, for example, who saw him in all his princ.i.p.al parts in 1814--in "Richard III," "Hamlet," "Oth.e.l.lo," and "Sir Giles Overreach"--remained cold.
"His 'Richard III.' pleased me, but I was not enthusiastic. His expression of the pa.s.sions is natural and strong, but I do not like his declamation; his voice, naturally not agreeable, becomes monotonous"
('Diary', vol. iii. p. 7). Of his "Hamlet" she says,
"To my mind he is without grace and without elevation of mind, because he never seems to rise with the poet in those sublime pa.s.sages which abound in 'Hamlet'"
('ibid.', p. 9). Miss Berry's criticism is supported by good authority.
Lewes ('On Actors and the Art of Acting', pp. 6, 11), while calling him "a consummate master of pa.s.sionate expression," denies his capacity for representing "the intellectual side of heroism."
Kean preferred the Coal-Hole Tavern in the Strand, and the society of the Wolf Club, to Lord Holland's dinner-parties. Though he never fell so low as Cooke, his recklessness, irregularities, eccentricities, and habits of drinking, in spite of the large sums of money that pa.s.sed through his hands, made his closing days neither prosperous nor reputable.
Such effect had the pa.s.sionate energy of Kean's acting on Byron's mind, that, once, in seeing him play "Sir Giles Overreach," he was so affected as to be seized with a sort of convulsive fit. Some years later, in Italy, when the representation of Alfieri's tragedy of 'Mirra' had agitated him in the same violent manner, he compared the two instances as the only ones in his life when "any thing under reality" had been able to move him so powerfully.
"To such lengths," says Moore, "did he, at this time, carry his enthusiasm for Kean, that when Miss O'Neil appeared, and, by her matchless representation of feminine tenderness, attracted all eyes and hearts, he was not only a little jealous of her reputation, as interfering with that of his favourite, but, in order to guard himself against the risk of becoming a convert, refused to go to see her act.
I endeavoured sometimes to persuade him into witnessing, at least, one of her performances; but his answer was (punning upon Shakspeare's word, 'unanealed'), 'No--I am resolved to continue 'un-Oneiled'.'
In his 'Detached Thoughts' (1821) Byron says,
"Of actors Cooke was the most natural, Kemble the most supernatural, Kean the medium between the two. But Mrs. Siddons was worth them all put together."]
February 20.
Got up and tore out two leaves of this Journal--I don't know why.
Hodgson just called and gone. He has much _bonhommie_ with his other good qualities, and more talent than he has yet had credit for beyond his circle.
An invitation to dine at Holland House to meet Kean. He is worth meeting; and I hope, by getting into good society, he will be prevented from falling like Cooke. He is greater now on the stage, and off he should never be less. There is a stupid and underrating criticism upon him in one of the newspapers. I thought that, last night, though great, he rather under-acted more than the first time. This may be the effect of these cavils; but I hope he has more sense than to mind them. He cannot expect to maintain his present eminence, or to advance still higher, without the envy of his green-room fellows, and the nibbling of their admirers. But, if he don't beat them all, why then--merit hath no purchase in "these coster-monger days." [1]
I wish that I had a talent for the drama; I would write a tragedy _now_.
But no,--it is gone. Hodgson talks of one,--he will do it well;--and I think M---e [Moore] should try. He has wonderful powers, and much variety; besides, he has lived and felt. To write so as to bring home to the heart, the heart must have been tried,--but, perhaps, ceased to be so. While you are under the influence of pa.s.sions, you only feel, but cannot describe them,--any more than, when in action, you could turn round and tell the story to your next neighbour! When all is over,--all, all, and irrevocable,--trust to memory--she is then but too faithful.
Went out, and answered some letters, yawned now and then, and redde the 'Robbers'. Fine,--but 'Fiesco' is better [2]; and Alfieri, and Monti's 'Aristodemo' [3] _best_. They are more equal than the Tedeschi dramatists.
Answered--or rather acknowledged--the receipt of young Reynolds's [4]
poem, _Safie_. The lad is clever, but much of his thoughts are borrowed,--whence, the Reviewers may find out. I hate discouraging a young one; and I think,--though wild and more oriental than he would be, had he seen the scenes where he has placed his tale,--that he has much talent, and, certainly fire enough.
Received a very singular epistle; and the mode of its conveyance, through Lord H.'s hands, as curious as the letter itself. But it was gratifying and pretty.
[Footnote 1: 'Henry IV.', Part II. act i. sc. 2.]
[Footnote 2: Schiller's 'Robbers' was first produced at Mannheim, January 13, 1782; his 'Fiesco' was published in 1783. The 'Robbers' is included in Benjamin Thompson's 'German Theatre' (1801). 'Fiesco' was translated by G. H. Noehden and John Stoddart in 1798.]
[Footnote 3: Monti's three tragedies, 'Caio Gracco', 'Aristodemo', and 'Manfredi', were written in rivalry of Alfieri's tragedies between the years 1788 and 1799.]
[Footnote 4: For John Hamilton Reynolds, see 'Letters', vol. iii.
(February 20, 1814, 'note' 1).]
Sunday, February 27.
Here I am, alone, instead of dining at Lord H.'s, where I was asked,--but not inclined to go any where. Hobhouse says I am growing a _loup garou_,--a solitary hobgoblin. True;--"I am myself alone." [1]
The last week has been pa.s.sed in reading--seeing plays--now and then visitors--sometimes yawning and sometimes sighing, but no writing,--save of letters. If I could always read, I should never feel the want of society. Do I regret it?--um!--"Man delights not me," [2] and only one woman--at a time.
There is something to me very softening in the presence of a woman,--some strange influence, even if one is not in love with them--which I cannot at all account for, having no very high opinion of the s.e.x. But yet,--I always feel in better humour with myself and every thing else, if there is a woman within ken. Even Mrs. Mule [3], my firelighter,--the most ancient and withered of her kind,--and (except to myself) not the best-tempered--always makes me laugh,--no difficult task when I am "i' the vein."