FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   74   75   76   77   78   79   80   81   82   83   84   85   86   87   88   89   90   91   92   93   94   95   96   97   98  
99   100   101   102   103   104   105   106   107   108   109   110   111   112   113   114   115   116   117   118   119   120   121   122   123   >>   >|  
s words; but, through the kindness of Mr. and Mrs. Frank Hill, I am able to give Mr. Browning's direct statement of the case, as also his expressed judgment upon it. The statement was made more than forty years later than the events to which it refers, but will, nevertheless, be best given in its direct connection with them. The merits, or demerits, of 'A Blot in the 'Scutcheon' had been freshly brought under discussion by its performance in London through the action of the Browning Society, and in Washington by Mr. Laurence Barrett; and it became the subject of a paragraph in one of the theatrical articles prepared for the 'Daily News'. Mr. Hill was then editor of the paper, and when the article came to him for revision, he thought it right to submit to Mr. Browning the passages devoted to his tragedy, which embodied some then prevailing, but, he strongly suspected, erroneous impressions concerning it. The results of this kind and courteous proceeding appear in the following letter. 19, Warwick Crescent: December 15, 1884. My dear Mr. Hill,--It was kind and considerate of you to suppress the paragraph which you send me,--and of which the publication would have been unpleasant for reasons quite other than as regarding my own work,--which exists to defend or accuse itself. You will judge of the true reasons when I tell you the facts--so much of them as contradicts the statements of your critic--who, I suppose, has received a stimulus from the notice, in an American paper which arrived last week, of Mr. Laurence Barrett's intention 'shortly to produce the play' in New York--and subsequently in London: so that 'the failure' of forty-one years ago might be duly influential at present--or two years hence perhaps. The 'mere amateurs' are no high game. Macready received and accepted the play, while he was engaged at the Haymarket, and retained it for Drury Lane, of which I was ignorant that he was about to become the manager: he accepted it 'at the instigation' of nobody,--and Charles Dickens was not in England when he did so: it was read to him after his return, by Forster--and the glowing letter which contains his opinion of it, although directed by him to be shown to myself, was never heard of nor seen by me till printed in Forster's book some thirty years after. When the Drury Lane season began, Macready informed me that he should act the play when he had brought out two others--'The Patrician's Daughter', and 'P
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   74   75   76   77   78   79   80   81   82   83   84   85   86   87   88   89   90   91   92   93   94   95   96   97   98  
99   100   101   102   103   104   105   106   107   108   109   110   111   112   113   114   115   116   117   118   119   120   121   122   123   >>   >|  



Top keywords:
Browning
 

Forster

 

Barrett

 

paragraph

 

Laurence

 
letter
 

London

 
brought
 

reasons

 
Macready

accepted
 

statement

 

received

 

direct

 
amateurs
 
present
 

influential

 

American

 

arrived

 
critic

notice
 

suppose

 

intention

 

subsequently

 
contradicts
 

failure

 
stimulus
 

shortly

 

produce

 

statements


Charles

 
printed
 
directed
 
thirty
 
Patrician
 
Daughter
 

season

 
informed
 

opinion

 
ignorant

manager

 

retained

 
Haymarket
 
engaged
 

instigation

 

return

 
glowing
 

England

 

Dickens

 

discussion