According to the paragraphs, he was a wondrous
man, and the theatre was a wondrous house, the best of all possible
theatres, and Carlo Trent was a great writer, and Rose Euclid exactly
as marvellous as she had been a quarter of a century before, and the
prospects of the intellectual-poetic drama in London so favourable
as to amount to a certainty of success. In those columns of dramatic
gossip there was no flaw in the theatrical world. In those columns
of dramatic gossip no piece ever failed, though sometimes a piece was
withdrawn, regretfully and against the wishes of the public, to make
room for another piece. In those columns of dramatic gossip theatrical
managers, actors, and especially actresses, and even authors, were
benefactors of society, and therefore they were treated with the
deference, the gentleness, the heartfelt sympathy which benefactors of
society merit and ought to receive.
The tone of the criticism of the first night was different--it was
subtly, not crudely, different. But different it was.
The next newspaper said the play was bad and the audience indulgent.
It was very severe on Carlo Trent, and very kind to the players,
whom it regarded as good men and women in adversity--with particular
laudations for Miss Rose Euclid and the Messenger. The next newspaper
said the play was a masterpiece--and would be so hailed in any country
but England.
Pages:
296
297
298
299
300
301
302
303
304
305
306
307
308
309
310
311
312
313
314
315
316
317
318
319
320