hardt, Duse, and hundreds of other distinguished players."
It is principally urged against the claims of acting as an art that a
young person without previous experience or training can make an
immediate (and sometimes lasting) effect upon the stage, whereas in
the preparation for any other art (even the interpretative arts) years
of training are necessary. This premise is full of holes; nevertheless
George Moore, and Messrs. Nathan and Sherwin all cling to it. It is
true that almost any young girl, moderately gifted with charm or
comeliness, may make an instantaneous impression on our stage,
especially in the namby-pamby roles which our playwrights usually give
her to play. But she is soon found out. She may still attract
audiences (as George Barr McCutcheon and Alma Tadema still attract
audiences) but the discerning part of the public will take no joy in
seeing her. Charles Frohman said (and he ought to know) that the
average life of a female star on the American stage was ten years; in
other words, her career continued as long as her youth and physical
charms remained potent.
We have easily accounted for the unimportant actors, the rank and
file, but what about those who immediately claim positions which they
hold in spite of their lack of previous training? These are rarer. At
the moment, indeed, I cannot think of any. For while genius often
manifests itself early in a career, the great actors, as a rule, have
struggled for many years to learn the rudiments of their art before
they have given indisputable proof of their greatness, or before they
have been recognized. "Real acting," according to Percy Fitzgerald,
"is a science, to be studied and mastered, as other sciences are
studied and mastered, by long years of training." They may not have
had the strenuous Conservatoire and Theatre Francais training of Sarah
Bernhardt. As a matter of fact, indeed, the actor may far better learn
to handle his tools by manipulating them before an audience, than by
practicing with them for too long a time in the closet. The technique
of violin playing can best be acquired before the _virtuoso_ appears
in public, although no amount of training in itself will make a great
violinist, but the basic elements of acting, grace, diction, etc., can
just as well be acquired behind the footlights and so many great
actors have acquired them, as many of the greatest have ignored them.
There can be no hard and fast rules laid down for this so
|