Imagens das páginas
PDF
ePub

the soldier in the trench. Perhaps of "hing less than this terrible war uld shake the selfishness out of the human race and awaken them to world consciousness.

My reputation for unquestioned veracity being well vouched for, I trust my readers will not think I am lapsing into fiction when I say that the writing of this review was interrupted by a most unexpected and interesting interview with a former coal miner, on the subject so occupying our minds: the coal situation. My chance remark to the man who came to read our gas meter that I hoped we'd continue to have gas to be read elicited his reply that he thought there was no reason why we should not, the present situation being utterly artificial and unnecessary. He said the majority of the miners want to work six days a week, regularly. He was a man of intelligence, who reads and thinks, and it was pleasant to learn something at first hand from one who knew the hardships of mining coal. He was of French descent, with the usual large amount of idealism in his makeup, and

won my heart by avowing his interest in "real music-not popular (?) stuff." Now, why shouldn't this "sorry scheme of things entire" be so altered that a man may have time to satisfy his craving for soul-food, as well as for bodyfood? Hasten the day when each man and woman may paint or sing or carve the thing he loves, without the body starving!

Sidney Lanier, a true seer, away back in 1878, saw "mixt fuels-Labor's Right and Labor's Crime," and heard "Grindings of upper against lower greeds."

Where? In the music of that fine old German revolutionist, Richard Wagner! Richard Wagner! In another poem Lanier uses words applicable to the present unrest:

"Vainly might Plato's brain revolve it, Plainly the heart of a child could solve it."

The solution is so easy it has never been fully tried. As Lady Astor so truthfully says, it is found only in the teachings of that leader of "The Toilers," whom Harold Spearman speaks of as a fellow working man-a carpenter from Galilee.

[graphic][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed]

An Actor's Impressions of Shakespeare

(Notes on an Address by Fritz Leiber Before the Indianapolis Center of the Drama League.)

During the recent engagement of Robert Mantell in Shakespearean repertoire in Indianapolis, Fritz Leiber, leading man in his support, spoke before the Drama League from his experience of more than ten years with Mr. Mantell in Shakespearean roles, including, this year, Romeo and Hamlet. There were a large number of Indianapolis teachers in the audience, to whom the address proved so interesting that it was suggested to the editor of this department that notes

might be of interest to the English teachers, in general, who would find them here. Accordingly, we give, in brief form, our notes on the most striking comments that Mr. Leiber made including his answers to the questions that were put to him after the main address.

That Shakespeare lives after 300 years is due to the fact that he created great personalities. The actor feels this strongly. As he takes any of the more important roles, he seems to be

presenting characters that have had an historical existence in real flesh and blood.

The truth to human nature found in these characters is well illustrated by Hamlet, probably the best known and most talked of, of Shakespeare's characters. His outstanding traits are vacillation and procrastination. Any one of us has had the experience of being absolutely determined to do something on the morrow only to find when the time came that we did not do it. Just what the cause of this vacillation may be, we are unable to say, but we recognize it as a natural human weak

ness.

Hamlet receives from the ghost the statement that his father has been murdered, prudently decides to get more substantial evidence, and cleverly invents what is probably the first use of a "third degree" in a play. The evidence he receives from the enacting of the story of his father's murder before the king is conclusive and he is elated over it, but he does not seize upon his opportunity and kill the king immediately. Instead, for some unexplainable reason, he appears soon after in his suicide soliloquy.

The only decisive action of Hamlet in the whole play is the instance in which he thrusts his sword through the arras, thinking it is the king, and rashly kills the old Polonius, whom he would like to have dead but whom he had no thought of killing.

It was not Hamlet that killed the king in the end of the play. It was an act that resulted from an impulse, like jumping off a burning building. Shakespeare used it very cleverly to bring the action to a close without throwing away the character of Hamlet.

The discussion over the question of Hamlet's insanity seems rather absurd to Mr. Leiber as there is no question in his mind that Hamlet is entirely sane. He may do queer things at times, like anyone of us, but he cannot be said to be insane. Also he makes it clear in several passages that his unusual conduct is feigned and

asks his friends not to think anything of it. (These passages were quot After playing both Hamlet and pns meo, the speaker has come to the con clusion that there is nothing in the suggestion that Romeo is Hamlet in love. Romeo is merely a vivid representation of first love and the two characters do not have any traits in common. Having played Iago, also, Mr. Leiber thinks that a much better comparison might be made between that character and Hamlet as they have much the same intellectual depth. The contrast between the two characters is striking. Instead of Hamlet's indecision, we find in Iago a remarkable clear-cut decisiveness. No sooner does he decide upon a course of action than he puts his ideas into operation.

The custom of taking books to a Shakespeare play is not fair to the actor. Any elocutionist can give a fair reading of the lines in so far as cadence and rhythm are concerned. The real art of the actor is found in his feelings and is shown in the pauses and in the expression of the face. All of this is lost to those who are leafing their books trying to find the place. which is often impossible, as the play may have been cut or the actor may have "gone wrong" on his lines.

Many of those who have a desire to go on the stage and are on the stage, have Shakespearean ambitions. The illustration was given of a man who was "crazy" to act and appeared before Mr. Mantell in the opening soliloquy of Richard III. He was a small man and had none of the physical requirements of the part, nor any signs of talent for acting. Naturally he did very badly and was not encouraged to continue. Years after, in New York, after a performance, this man came to Mr. Leiber, recalled the incident of his first try-out in a Shakespearean part, admitted what a fool he had been, and expressed his satisfaction that he had given up his ambition so promptly. The speaker stated that anyone who is ambitious along the line of a stage career, especially in

Shakespearean parts, must have some of the physical requirements of the parts, no matter how much ability he may have or how much ambition. The audience will not tolerate an actress in the part of Ophelia who is not attractive, no matter what her talent may be.

In mastering a part, the learning of the lines is the least of the actor's problems. Any fool can learn lines. While preparing to take the part of Hamlet, Mr. Leiber found that his eight-year-old son had learned practically all the lines but the boy could not be regarded as capable of understanding the character. After Mr. Leiber had spent months in the study of the character, he found that he would have to perfect his lines in two weeks and go on with only two rehearsals. This he was able to do because he had done the work required to get the interpretation, in comparison with which the mere learning of the lines was a small matter.

There is a constant temptation to the actor to resort to tricks to get the applause of the audience. While there is truth in Shakespeare's idea that the applause of the one who knows is worth more than that of all those who do not, if the actor is to advance in the eyes of the public, he must get general applause. The theatre-goer still has much of the circus attitude of wanting to be tricked and amused and will applaud the tricks of the actor on the stage, even though the thing that is done has no connection with the business in hand. The most difficult thing for the actor is to make the entrances and exits. The amateur can always be told by the difficulty he has in getting off and on the stage. The professional knows this and, in many cases, takes advantage of the opportunity to make a hit with the audience. by making a trick or false exit or entrance. Impressed with the skill of the actor, the audience applauds vigorously, without stopping to think whether the thing done is in keeping with the character that is being por

trayed. So great are the possibilities of these tricks, that there are some players in popular productions who make constant use of them and win applause at the expense of the real art of acting.

The applause at a Shakespearean production is probably greater than that of any other, partly because of the intelligence of the audience and partly because the audience is familiar with the piece and is expressing its appreciation of the actor's handling of the different situations. In most modern plays there is little applause except at the close of the scenes, while in a Shakespearean play it is almost continuous.

The knowledge that the average person has of the plays is a hindrance rather than a help to his enjoyment. If the person who goes to see the play could have the open-minded attitude that he would have if he had not read it previously, he would get much more out of it, because he would keep his mind constantly on what the actor is doing and not have his thought partly on what some one else had done in the situation by way of comparison. Furthermore, such a comparison is not fair to the actor, for he must be judged by the total effect of the characterization and not by the comparison of the handling of situations with the work of other actors in the same situations.

The effect of so much bad acting of Shakespeare has been to give the public a poor opinion and yet the support at the present time of companies that are really adequate is remarkable, considering what it has to compete with in the form of popular amusement.

The lines of Shakespeare's works lingers much longer in the memory than those of the popular amusement type of modern play. This is due, in part, to the rhythm, but more largely to the fact that the thought is of more permanent value and more worth remembering. Once you have been in a Shakespearean play, it is a small matter to brush up on the lines.

Formal Rhetoric in the Secondary

School.

The tentative report of the Committee on Economy of Time in English of the National Council, published in the "English Journal" for November, contains many interesting suggestions, from which we quote the closing paragraph. It furnishes considerable food for thought, although we doubt whether all of our teachers will agree with it. Perhaps it would be interesting to get an expression of opinion through this department in an early issue. Teachers will be welcome. to send in a frank statement of their views.

"Too great insistence on formal rhetoric in the secondary school is not desirable. The students who leave the school for college will continue their work in English, while those who do not go to college need practice in using

their mother-tongue with clearness and force in the everyday situations of life. Many less experienced teachers in secondary schools are inclined to bring into their classes the methods they have inherited from college professors, and instead of using their college courses as a background, they are inclined to reproduce them. They are likely to require of immature students. flights of imagination and pretentious themes for which they are unprepared. On the other hand, those teachers who have sufficient initiative to adapt their work to the actual conditions and needs of their students find that the letter, the occasional article on some subject of real life-interest, and the pithy and forceful, talk are forms of composition that appeal to all students and that all need to master. Few secondary students need more than these practical and reasonable exercises."

PRIMARY AND INTERMEDIATE DEPARTMENTS

Conducted by THE TEACHERS' COLLEGE OF INDIANAPOLIS, Frances M. Kelsey, Editor

(All rights reserved to all material in this Department)

Worth of Organization

There were many things of permanent value to teachers of all grades growing out of our State Teachers' Association held in October. Among these was noticeably the value of organization. Never before in the history of education have so many distinct bodies taken up a few ideas with the emphatic determination of testing. them and demonstrating their worth. It has come with great force to teachers that an individual working alone has scant opportunity for leadership, however excellent the result may be. A local organization no longer satisfies, nor is state representation sufficient. More and more is there coming to be nation wide concentration upon great ideas underlying all movements from kindergarten to university, inclusive. This has a strong tendency to break up so-called fads and frills. The

factory system of teaching is rapidly being destroyed. No one aspires to deal with a piece of a child. This certanly must tanly must secure for education a place in the cabinet of the President of the United States. No body of teachers in the smallest community of our state can afford to be outside this net work of organization. This is the meaning of the Indiana State Kindergarten Association which is to have a column in each issue of the EducatorJournal. We hope to have rich contributions from every corner of the This idea of organization for the purstate and a fruitful exchange of ideas. pose of working out great underlying principles of Education, emphasizes again the folly of placing stress upon special method or devices for the teaching of a subject.

We talk and write about the value of socializing the school, but we still cling to our "keep still" òrganization. I wonder how many of our kindergarten and primary teachers who listened to Prof. Patty S. Hill will be content to teach that kind of school now? It might be a good time to try out a plan for the Christmas entertainment that would place the initiation with the children. The school might be divided into small groups each with a leader. Encourage them to hold meetings and allow each group to deIcide what it would like to do for the entertainment. The teachers work, of

course, would be to surround the children with a wealth of material and suggestion from which to choose and to be ready to answer questions and help them over difficulties. An air of mystery is always enchanting. In this way a program is built up that the children feel is their own. There is no holding back on the part of any one because they are all in the game. This would do away with the old stereotyped plan of all making the same thing. The spirit of giving and the thought for others would bind them together.

King Richard, the Crusader
Adapted from Scott's Talisman.

By Lois G. Hufford, Teachers' College of Indianapolis.
(All rights reserved.)
(Continued from November.)

On the morning following the day when Kenneth, the Scot, had been so reluctantly released by Richard, at the urgent prayer of the Arab physician, the knight was taken out of the camp of the Crusaders as a member of the convoy of El Hakim. In bitterness of spirit, Kenneth reflected upon the events that had led to his enslavement. His attention was attracted now and then to the low wail of a dog, secured in a wicker enclosure suspended on one of the camels, which, as an experienced woodsman, he had no hesitation in recognizing to be that of his own faithful hound; and from the plaintive tone of the animal, he had no doubt that he was sensible of the nearness of his master, and that he was, in his dog's way, invoking his assistance for liberty.

Suddenly, as the caravan rounded a ridge of sand, the riders discerned in the distance, a body of cavalry much. superior in numbers to their own. In thus threatening to attack the Mohammedans during the truce, these Templars (for such they proved to be) were guilty of a serious breach of faith. To Sir Kenneth, however, their appear

ance was welcome, for he hoped, by their aid, to make his escape. Therefore, when El Hakim said to him: "Thou must tarry close by my side," he answered solemnly in the negative.

"Yonder," he said, "are my comrades in arms-the men in whose society I have vowed to fight or fall— I cannot fly from the Cross in company with the Crescent."

"Then I will compel thee to follow me," said El Hakim.

So saying, he threw his arm aloft, and uttered a shrill cry, as a signal to his retinue, who instantly dispersed themselves on the face of the desert. Kenneth had no time to note what ensued; for at the same instant El Hakim seized the rein of his steed, and putting his own to its mettle, they sprang forth, at once, with the suddenness of light. Practised as Sir Kenneth was in horsemanship, the speediest horse he had ever mounted was a tortoise to these.

After a time, they checked their horses beside a fountain called the Diamond of the Desert, and Hakim invited Kenneth to descend, and rest in a place of safety.

"Meantime," he said, spreading some food on the grass, "eat and drink, and

« AnteriorContinuar »