Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

must hasten to take a more decisive part, to use a more authoritative tone in the counsels of Europe, than we have latterly been wont to do, if we intend to preserve our prestige, and, with our prestige, our commerce. Our enemies-and who can doubt that a country such as England must have many enemies ?-know well enough that there is our vulnerable point. Strike a deadly blow at that, and the flag of England will dare no more maintain its proud pretensions. The fact is, the honest men of both the peace and the war party in this country, differ far more about means than about ends. The one say-" Be peaceable yourselves, and others will keep the peace towards you." The other say-" No, they will not; the experience of the world is wholly against such an assumption." Both agree in looking to our commerce as the great means of maintaining our place in Europe. But the one party constantly forgets that, as in nine instances out of ten commerce has been created by war, so in nine instances out of ten it will have to be defended by war. Commerce is a valuable

possession, just as territorial dominions are: and, even if we could get all the merchants of the world to agree upon a system of forbearance, free trade, and arbitration-a consummation in itself most improbable the world is not yet governed by merchants, but by persons who, however much they may appreciate commerce, still do not appreciate it from the individual merchant's point of view. With him trade is an end. With the rulers of the world it is commonly only a means; and, if England wishes to retain her commercial supremacy, she will one day or another have to fight for it.

One word on the religious aspect of the question, and we have done. It is very common to meet with persons in this country, more especially among those who arrogate to themselves the title of the "religious public," who profess an abhorrence of the Turks as infidels, and consider the secular interests of Europe as a feather in the balance against the propagation of the Christian faith. Now, we will say nothing of the fact, that Christianity is not in any sense a religion of the sword; nor of the further fact, that to endeavour to spread our own tenets by the commission of injustice towards our neighbour, is to take a leaf out of that book which is odious to Protestant England. We wish to take our stand upon the question of real religious gain to the world at

large, by the substitution of Christianity for Islamism in the present dominions of the Porte. No doubt, if we picture to ourselves Roumelia, Bulgaria, and Asia Minor dotted all over with Protestant communities, and English village churches, with Sunday schools, pupil teachers, and perhaps even choral services, we may for the moment feel inclined to think that any means would be justifiable to obtain such a delightful end. But what would be the real state of the case? Greek and Roman Catholic priests would simply walk into the mosques; hang them with images; sprinkle them with confessionals; and then establish a mode of worship little less sensuous and materialistic than the one they had superseded. We have a foretaste of the priestly mode of proceeding in such cases, in their demands upon the people of China. We have no doubt, moreover, that the humorous article upon that subject which appeared in the Times newspaper is close upon the truth; and that the native views about religion will undergo very little virtual change at the hands of the Jesuit missionaries. These considerations may perhaps a little mitigate the uneasiness which many worthy persons entertain, at the idea of supporting a nation which has long been the foe of Christianity. We shall say no more on this subject. But we heartily commend the interest of the Turkish nation to all lovers of justice, and to all English patriots, without fearing that we shall at the same time be doing any thing detrimental to the cause of Christianity.

THE DRAMA; FRENCH AND ENGLISH.

THE theatrical year of 1860 may be compared to a long, commonplace drama, crammed full of incidents, but as a whole producing very little effect. During the past quarter every theatre in the metropolis has been open-including one of which, until a couple of months ago, the very existence was unknown to most persons in London. We allude to the little "Bijou Theatre" attached to her Majesty's, which was originally intended as a concert room, but which has never, during the memory of living playgoers, been used as one. On the occasion of the Princess Royal's marriage, when a certain number of state performances were given, it was fitted up very tastefully as a reception room, and a passage was opened which connected it with

the corridor of the grand tier. But the public were admitted to the "Bijou Theatre" for the first time when M. Talexy took it for his second series of French plays, and we wish for, our part, that the public had gone there in larger numbers. As it was, the speculation proved a failure after a very few weeks, though the company was well selected, worked well together, and included among its members the celebrated Madame Doche. Unfortunately, the pieces in which Madame Doche is most successful are of a class which our censor deems unfit for public representation, though the most objectionable of them all is far less so than many of the plays which the censor has licensed, and which were performed last season apparently without giving offence to any one at the St. James's theatre. We do not think that the licenser's office could safely be abolished; but we certainly consider that he might exercise his very delicate duties with a little more discrimination than he has recently displayed. Such pieces as "Les Premières Armes de Richelieu," and "Les Amours de Cleopátre,” which were played night after night by the French company at the St. James's theatre, could scarcely have been licensed, if Mr. Donne had read and understood the very unbecoming pleasantries which they contain on subjects which people not only do not joke about, but do not even allude to in decent English society. On the other hand, La Dame aux Camélias was, in a certain way, quite entitled to a hearing, being infinitely superior not only as a work of art, but also, in a general sense, as a work of morality to other productions in which the censor saw nothing to reprehend. Besides, why should a story, which is tolerated as the groundwork of an opera, be condemned when it is presented in its original dramatic form? Set forth in mediocre Italian verse, and in music which is scarcely above mediocrity, the plot of the Dame aux Camélias finds favour in the sight of Mr. Donne, but he will not give it his countenance when he meets with it in good French prose-" Ce qui est trop bête pour être dit on le chante," says Figaro. Substitute for the word bête, the word immoral, and Mr. Donne would appear to be quite of Figaro's opinion. As it was, however, we were sorry that Madame Doche's engagement was not prolonged. Her performance of the part of the heroine in "Adrienne Lecouvreur," was

full of pathos and emotion. In that character she was worthy of being compared with Rachel, although—perhaps we should say because her histrionic style differs in so many important respects from that of the lamented tragedienne of the Théâtre Français. The death of Adrienne, as represented by Madame Doche, was especially fine; indeed, in her dying scenes, this actress, though doubtless not so poetical, is as real as Ristori herself.

In saying a few words about the London theatres, we have a right to speak at length of the French plays, for the simple reason that nearly all our dramatic works in the present day come to us from France, and that, when we have an opportunity of choosing, we naturally prefer originals to imitations. Indeed, our stage has now declined to such a point that France not only supplies us with plays, but has actually sent us the most successful actor who has appeared in London for years past-the most successful tragic actor, indeed, that the present generation of Englishmen has seen. M. Fechter speaks with a French accent, declaims with French emphasis, and has been playing exclusively in adaptations of French pieces. His Ruy Blas is an admirable piece of acting; but the drama, as given at the Princess's Theatre, is, looked upon as a whole, simply Ruy Blas spoiled. If the Queen of Spain, of the English version, were represented as being married, it would of course be inconceivable to an English audience that Ruy Blas should become so devotedly attached to her. Accordingly, the English adapter has unmarried her Majesty. Perhaps the alteration spoils one of the best works of by far the greatest dramatic poet modern France has produced; but, thanks to the change, there is no possibility of the delicate feelings of the audience being outraged. They cannot, of course, remember any instance in Shakspeare of an affection not strictly "proper" being entertained; and the manager dares not pay them the compliment of supposing that they can distinguish between a base attachment and a magnanimous and poetical love, such as Ruy Blas feels for the young queen. The character of Don César de Bazan, too (which suggested to MM. Dumanoir and Dennery the highly successful drama of that name), has been so curtailed by the English proser commissioned to improve

VOL. III.

K

the French poet, that it might as well have been omitted altogether. M. Fechter acts the principal part, to which the rest of the piece has been entirely sacrificed, with great intelligence and with true passion; but we cannot help regretting that he did not appear at the French theatre, and that Victor Hugo's fine play was not brought out in the original, and precisely as he wrote it. We wonder what people in Paris would think of an Othello, mutilated and translated into indifferent French, and with the principal personage of the tragedy represented by an Englishman? What would they answer if they were asked whether such a performance would be likely to supersede in interest all the best pieces by native authors, supported by the best native actors they could produce? Yet Othello is a far greater work than Ruy Blas.

It is evident that our stage is now more than ever dependent on that of France. Ruy Blas, at the Princess's, with a Frenchman in the chief part, is the most striking sign of our helpless theatrical position that we have yet met with. Mr. Reade, in his "Eighth Commandment," suggests a remedy for this state of things, to which we may here call attention.

What the immorality and indecency of French dramatists promise soon to bring about, would, according to Mr. Reade, be the natural effect of enforcing the international copyrightlaw, which has now for some years been in existence between England and France, but which has never been strictly and honourably observed in connection with theatrical productions. In comparing the French with the English stage, he sets forth :—

1. That the French managers are selling their public representations of modern French life, really interesting, and often beautiful and instructive; and that the English managers are selling pantomime, good scenery (English), puns, and certain ordurifications of all that is great in man, and pure in woman, and ennobling in art, called burlesques, and clever French truths tamed by discolouration into stupid English lies.

2. That they are selling this bad intellectual ware dearer to the public, than the French managers sell their good article to their public.

3. That they have closed the stage to English authors or inventors, as a class.

« AnteriorContinuar »