PARTIAL GLOSSARY OF THE WORD-BLUNDERS OF Accommodation recommendation. 52 2. Affluence influence. 70 47. III. MR. JOSEPH JEFFERSON'S ACTING VERSION OF THE RIVALS While the primary interest of the reader and student of Sheridan's plays lies emphatically in the text of his plays as he wrote them, secondary interest attaches to alterations of the text for dramatic representation. To compare lesser things with greater, modern stage versions of The Rivals bear somewhat the same relation to Sheridan's own text as the various acting versions of The Merchant of Venice bear to the text of the First Folio. Not to dwarf interest or obscure the comparison by an inextricable mass of detail, the present purpose is best served by a brief account of the alterations made in a single representative stage version that of Mr. Joseph Jefferson,1 to American audiences the most familiar Bob Acres of the modern stage. Most noteworthy is the almost complete excision of the Julia Faulkland under-plot. Julia's part is entirely omitted, while Faulkland is retained simply in the scene with Bob Acres. To the sentimental taste of Sheridan's own day Julia and Faulkland appealed strongly. To-day, however, that excess of sentiment, at times degenerating into the sentimentality which Sheridan himself held up to ridicule, wearies the reader, and irritates the playgoer. This radical excision is accomplished so simply as to fortify the common criticism that Sheridan failed to weld together firmly his plot and under-plot in The Rivals. In Mr. Jefferson's version, in i, 2, after Lydia's speech (15 39-40) Lucy remains on the stage, and replies immediately with her later speech (19 150). iii, 2, is omitted entirely, while v, 1, begins with the entrance of Mrs. Malaprop and David (88 187), to whom Lydia is added to take the few short speeches remaining in Julia's part. The play is ended, save for the epilogue, at Mrs. Malaprop's "Men are all barbarians!" (101 247). No other changes are necessary. Other changes made by Mr. Jefferson are the omission of Sheridan's opening scene; a dramatic "curtain" at the exit of the irate Sir Anthony after the stormy interview with his son (which forms the end of Act I, in Mr. Jefferson's version); the running together of the two scenes on "the North Parade” (Sheridan's, ii, 2, and iii, 1) into the first scene of his second act; the similar running together of two successive scenes at "Acres' Lodgings" (Sheridan's iii, 4, and iv, 1); at the conclusion of this scene, another dramatic "curtain" by making Acres reiterate to the departing Captain Absolute, "Tell him I generally kill a man a week." Acres faints on sofa; and, finally, the omission of iv, 3. Such, essentially, are the changes by which Mr. Jefferson removed from his acting version of The Rivals the scenes least effective dramatically, notably those in the Julia-Faulkland under-plot, and 1 Mr. Jefferson courteously supplied me with a copy of the play "cut as we do it." heightened the stage effectiveness of some scene-ends by dramatic, but not melodramatic, "curtains." 1 THE SCHOOL FOR SCANDAL CONTEMPORARY CRITICISMS OF THE SCHOOL FOR SCANDAL The Public Advertiser, May 9, 1777. [After three-quarters of a column devoted to an outline of the plot and characters.] This is a short Sketch of the Fable; to the Conduct and Originality of which it is impossible to do Justice in so brief a Detail. The Persons of the Drama have all of them something particular marked in their Characters, and the Humour of each belongs to that Character, and is admirably well sustained throughout. The Satire is forcible, and in many Places as severe as Comedy can admit of. The Situations are so powerfully conceived, that little is left for the Performers to do, in Order to produce what is called Stage Effect; and the Circumstance of the Screen and Closet in the fourth Effect, produced a Burst of Applause beyond any Thing ever heard perhaps in a Theatre. With such Support it is needless to add that the whole was received with an extravagant Warmth of Approbation, which seemed to shew that a generous British Audience will still overpay the strongest efforts of Genius. The London Chronicle, May 8-10, 1777. The School for Scandal is the production of Mr. Sheridan, and is an additional proof of that gentleman's great abilities as a dramatic writer. The object of the satire is two-fold detraction and hypocrisy, which are the prevailing vices of the times; by the first the good are reduced to a level with the worthless, and by means of the second, the latter assume the appearance of men of virtue and sentiment. Nothing, therefore, could have been more seasonable than this comedy, which, in point of execution, is equal, if not superior, to most of 1 An interesting account of many minor changes in the text made by Mr. Jefferson, and the reasons therefor, is in The Technique of the Drama, by W. T. Price, pp. 183-188. I am indebted to Mr. Jefferson for a copy of the book, with the comment, "I do not know Mr. Price, but he seems to have not only found out what I did, but why I did it." the plays produced for the last twenty years. The characters are drawn with a bold pencil, and coloured with warmth and spirit. The two principal, Joseph and Charles Surface, are the Blifil and Tom Jones of the piece. The dialogue of this comedy is easy and witty. It abounds with strokes of pointed satire, and a rich vein of humour pervades the whole, rendering it equally interesting and entertaining. The fable is well conducted, and the incidents are managed with great judgment. There hardly ever was a better dramatic situation than that which occurs in the fourth act, where Sir Peter discovers Lady Teazle in Joseph Surface's study. The two characters of the brothers are finely contrasted, and those of the Scandal Club well imagined. . . . Upon the whole, the School for Scandal justifies the very great and cordial reception it met with; it certainly is a good comedy, and we should not at all wonder if it becomes as great a favorite as the Duenna, to which it is infinitely superior in point of sense, satire, and moral. Horace Walpole, to Robert Jephson, July 13, 1777. To my great astonishment there were more parts performed admirably in The School for Scandal, than I almost ever saw in any play. Mrs. Abington was equal to the first of her profession, Yates (the husband), Parsons, Miss Pope, and Palmer, all shone. It seemed a marvellous resurrection of the stage. Indeed, the play had as much merit as the actors. I have seen no comedy that comes near it since The Provoked Husband. [The Letters of Horace Walpole, Toynbee ed. (1903-5), X, 82.] The Gentleman's Magazine [Communication], February, 1778 ANIMADVERSIONS ON THE MORAL TENDENCY OF THE SCHOOL FOR SCANDAL [The School for Scandal is] a play which is at least as defective in morality, as abundant in wit; and more dangerous to the manners of society, than it can possibly tend to promote its pleasure. Affection of Sentiment, and love for scandal, are the foibles satirized by this comedy: the former is not a reigning vice of the times; on the contrary, a shameless depravity of disposition, which |