"*»Vjfi;ft? "JW-f9P&f**<‘\lS$S3i.-:i'--- •«i,45>sis

7 1 -1 7 ,9 6 5

BOYER, Robert Downer, 1939- \ THE DIRECTORIAL PRACTICE OF W. S. GILBERT.

The Ohio State University, Ph.D., 1970 T h eater » '1 1 I

'M University Microfilms. A XEROX Company, Ann Arbor, Michigan |

THIS DISSERTATION HAS BEEN MICROFILMED EXACTLY AS RECEIVED THE DIRECTORIAL PRACTICE

OF W. S. GILBERT

DISSERTATION

Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University

By

R obert Downer Boyer, B .A ., M.A.

*******

The Ohio State University 1970

Approved by

A dviser Division of Theatre ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

I an sincerely grateful to John C. Morrow, John H. McDowell,

Roy H. Bowen, George P. Crepeau, Corwin A. Georges, J r., and Lawrence

Selka. This study was made possible by their advice, assistance and encouragement, as well as by the International Seminar Program of the

Ohio State University Division of Theatre.

11 VITA

September 23, 1939 ...... Bom - Washington, D.C.

1 9 6 1 ...... B.A., The University of Maryland, Co liege Park, Maryland

1961-1963...... Graduate Assistant, Department of Speech and Dramatic Art, The University of Maryland, College Park, Maryland

1963 ...... M.A., The University of Maryland, College Park, Maryland

1963-1968 ...... Administrative Assistant, Department of Speech, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio

1968-1970...... Lecturer, Division of Theatre, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio

1970 ...... Lecturer, Divisions of Theatre and Comparative Literature, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio

PUBLICATIONS

"The Theatre That Escaped Infamy." Players Magazine, Volume 43, Number 4, pp. 122-124, April-May, 1968.

FIBLDS OF STUDY

Major Field: Theatre

Studies in Theatre History. Professors John H. McDowell, John C. Morrow and G. Charles Niemeyer

Studies in Dramatic Literature. Professor John C. Morrow

Studies in Direction and Production. Professors Roy H. Bowen, George P. Crepeau and Rudolph Pugliese

i l l TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page ACKNOWU2 DGMENTS...... i i

VITA ...... i l l

LIST OF FIGURES...... » v i

C hapter

I . INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY...... 1

Purpose of the Study Research Methods and Sources Biographical Data Journalistic Criticism The Influence of T. W. Robertson 'Enemies' on the Contemporary English Stage

I I . GILBERT PREPARES THE PRODUCTION...... 20

Hie Form of the Libretto Use o f the Model Stage Planning the Details of the Physical Production Casting the Operas The Technical Theatre The Promptbook Evidence Textual Considerations

I I I . GILBERT IN REHEARSAL...... 67

General Philosophy of Rehearsal Procedures in Rehearsal Rehearsing the Revivals Trouble with Actors Technique with the Individual Actor Discipline for the Acting Company The Delivery of Lines The Admiration of the Company First Night Behavior The Working Partnership

IV . GILBERT AND THE PUBLIC...... 110

The Problem of the Playhouses C ensorship

iv Chapter Page

IV . GILBERT AND THE PUBLIC (continued)

The M aintenance o f Good T aste The Reputation of the Theatre and the Company

V. CONCLUSIONS...... 125

BIBLIOGRAPHY...... 132

y LIST OF FIGURES

Figure Page

1. The model stage used by Gilbert ...... 25

2. Reconstruction of the Incantation Scene, Act I, The Sorceror ...... 42

3. "Positions for opening chorus," Act I, The Sorceror. . . . 4 4

4. The Entrance of Katasha, Act I, The Mikado ...... 46

5. Three Chorus positions from The Mikado (Act I ) ...... • 47

6. Prompt notes for the Trio, "Three Little Maids Are We," Act I (The Mikado) ...... 49

7. Positions following the Entrance Procession of the Mikado, with Katasha, Act I I ...... 59

8. Engraving depicting a rehearsal, Gilbert present ..... 68

vi CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY

The phenomenal success of the Gilbert and Sullivan light operas has been veil, perhaps excessively, documented. The popularity of the so~called Savoy Operas, particularly among literate middle-class audiences in England and the United States, gave rise to an almost mind- stopping array of books and articles as veil as a number of "authorita­ tive" biographies of Gilbert, Sullivan and Carte, the triumvirate vhich created the phenomenon. These studies detail, often in informal anec­ dotes, the circumstances surrounding the original productions.

William Schvenck Gilbert has long fascinated English theatre historians. Each treatment of his career, except those devoted ex­ clusively to his dramaturgy, mentions his vork as 'producer,' 'stage manager,' or 'master sp irit.' He is respectfully credited vith having created the original productions of those remarkable operas devised in association with Arthur Sullivan. And yet, not one study treats this specific aspect of his career vith other than cursory attention. A couple of intriguing stories stolen from actor's memoires, a mention of his unusually lengthy and productive rehearsals, a sentence or two on his use of the model stage, usually suffice to explain his directorial prac­ t i c e .

Of the manifold instances of the neglect and ignorance of

G ilbert's directorial technique and philosophy, a few pieces of evidence may perhaps suffice. Leslie Baily in The Gilbert and Sullivan Book.*

a generally authoritative and highly informative work, devotes part of

a chapter to Gilbert as a ' p r o d u c e r'.^ Excepting the inclusion of a photographic copy of two promptbook pages, with no commentary, the

segment is extremely inconclusive and slight. The Encyclopedia

Britannica^ in the year of G ilbert's death, neglects to consider, in any

degree, his work as a director. Typical of the commentators who do

contribute a word or two on the subject is H. M. Walbrook in Gilbert

and Sullivan Opera: A History and a Comment.^ Walbrook w rites, "W.

S. Gilbert on the comic stage, and Henry Irving on the tragic, were the

ablest English 'producers' of plays of the Victorian Era," and defends

the statement with a trivial anecdote, and no apparent insight into the

basic reasons for the success of the two directors. Reginald Allen, in

his otherwise important bibliography of materials related to G ilbert's

career,^ lists no significant sources relating directly to Gilbert's

directorial practice.

Gilbert is, moreover, often dismissed as a curious "martinet

in the theatre,w hen clearly his behavior in rehearsal and with his

professional colleagues, as this study w ill attempt to reveal, is

attributable not to eccentricity nor to personal whim, but rather to

his committment to certain artistic ideals which have since been

recognized as the foundations of the modern director's art.

Purpose of the Study

The primary purpose of this dissertation will be to establish

the premise that W. S. Gilbert, represented the advancement of "stage

management" to a unique art in the musical theatre of the late 19th 3 C entury.

As w ill be readily seen, this dissertation is primarily a con­ textual study, placing Gilbert, for the first time, among the well- documented nineteenth-century actor-managers, regisseurs. and other practitioners of the relatively new art of the director. Promptbooks have been used to establish certain aspects of G ilbert's practice, but this dissertation looks at the man in a broader perspective than the promptbooks alone would permit. The study w ill appraise aspects of

G ilbert's directorial practice which the promptbooks do not illuminate, i.e ., rehearsal practices, attitudes toward the theatre-going public, guidance for the actor, etc.

There are three secondary purposes: (1) to suggest that

Gilbert's directorial practice contributed to the original success of

the Savoy Operas in greater measure than has ever been formally recognized, ( 2 ) to survey the specific directorial methods by which

Gilbert achieved the creative success which helped to win almost unanimous success for the operas, and (3) to present the man as a

particular human being and as a sensitive craftsman.

Research Methods and Sources

The method of preparing this study has been essentially histori­

cal investigation and the synthesis of evidence gathered from primary

and secondary resources. Those sections citing the promptbooks as

evidence w ill be analytical. These documents, currently available o n ly in th e M anuscript D iv isio n o f th e B r itis h Museum, a re d e ta ile d

records of the original productions and the early revivals, as directed

by the author.^ They represent neat, lucid documentation from which 4 G ilbert's achievement as a director can be readily reconstructed and assessed by the modern scholar.

In a d d itio n to the promptbooks from th e B r itis h Museum, the following sources have been employed:

a. G ilb e r t's d ia ry , a lso a v a ila b le o n ly in th e B r itis h Museum, valuable for the limited period which it encompasses. The first volume is for the year 1878, and the second is for the period 1905-1911, and is in French.

b. Gilbert's letters, primarily to Sullivan and Mrs. Helen L enoir C a rte , from th e B r itis h Museum, M anuscript D iv isio n .

c. Gilbert's relatively slight collection of published drama­ tic criticism.

d. Newspaper reports and reviews of the original productions.

e. Biographies and autobiographies of the players and personnel connected with the original productions.

f. Standard secondary sources relating to the careers of Gilbert, Sullivan and Carte.

g. General sources relating to the history of late 19th Century English theatre.

Biographical Data

The biographical details of G ilbert's early years have been reiterated by so m w riters, and are so widely available to the reader, I shall not repeat them here. Only selected biographical facts which seem to bear on his eventual theatrical practice, will be re­ counted. The idea that, from early childhood, Gilbert had a deep love for the theatre is generally acknowledged by his biographers. Isaac

Goldberg, in an apparent effort to prove the child father to the man, credits the young Gilbert with being, "from the first . . . an homme de thdfltre. fam iliar from personal experience with every detail of production."^ Goldberg continues, 5 His childhood fondness for writing the play, preparing the scenery, rehearsing the acts and even acting a part was carried over into manhood. He appeared in his own pieces, he drew designs for scenes and costumes, he made models of stage and personages and rehearsed every move on his minature stage before he entered the playhouse to conduct regular rehearsals. He was more at home behind the footlights than before them.

During his residency at Great Ealing School, 1850-1851, the young Gilbert, then thirteen, became a domineering adolescent,9 and th e re he

contrived and stage-managed a number of plays for his school­ fellows, besides painting the scenery, and in one of them, a melodrama on Guy Fawkes, he played the leading part as well.*-®

His strength of personality and confidence in his own creative powers, even in this early period, resulted in unconventional theatre practice:

Rehearsals were noisy and recalcitrant members of the casts were dealt with in physical combat. The stage manager [Gilbert] dis­ covered that when an actor was knocked down he usually calmed down and did what he was to ld .^

In his youth, Gilbert unsuccessfully attempted to enter the theatrical profession. The young boy's father, a cultured physician and sometime novelist, was a friend of Charles Kean. Without his father's knowledge, Gilbert, then s till in school, approached Kean for work as an actor. .!aan merely laughed and had the boy taken home from the theatre in a carriage. ^

The young manhood of W. S. Gilbert was distinctly non-theatrical

He was formally prepared for the bar, a profession which he followed with little enthusiasm or success in the late 1850's and early 1860's.

His next contact with the stage was a series of sketches which he wrote

for German Reed's "entertainments" at the Gallery of Illustration. Reed had opened the Gallery to provide a "special form of refined amuse­ m e n t . " ^ The Gallery was a theatre in all but name, and, as such, enabled that part of the Victorian public, to whom The Stage was repugnant, to

taste the delights of innocent stage comedy, gentle, harmless mimicry and burlesque operatic singing, without risking their consistency* * .

In the early winter of 1866, Gilbert was commissioned to write a Christmas piece for the St. James's Theatre. He was recommended to

Miss Herbert, the lessee of the theatre, by a mutual friend, Tom

Robertson, who could not accept the commission himself. Gilbert later asserted, "It is entirely to him [Robertson] that I owe my in tr o ­ duction to stage w o r k ." *5 Miss H erb ert gave G ilb e rt two weeks to com­ plete the commission. Ten days later, Gilbert submitted his parody on

Donizetti's L'Elixir d'Amore entitled Dulcamara: or. the Little Duck and the Great Quack. It was rehearsed in a week and found great success.

Thereafter, G ilbert's chief passion would be the stage.

The director of Dulcamera was Tom Robertson, and it was at the rehearsals for that Christmas novelty that Gilbert first encountered

"the foundation of that technique which was to revive the precision of stage movement for which his productions were to become famous."16

Journalistic Criticism

Before considering the profound influence of Tom Robertson on the techniques and philosophy of V. S. Gilbert, it is necessary to investigate briefly a minor periodical, entitled Fun, which was pub­ lished in London in the I860's;^ for pun that Gilbert pub­ lished occasional dramatic criticism . Hesketh Pearson has stated that

"nothing survives of G ilbert's journalism, tfiether in line or rhyme, except The Bab Ballads."*** and he is substantially correct. It is 7 almost impossible to determine precisely what portion of the criticism in Fun may be ascribed to Gilbert as it is all anonymous. The paper vas founded in 1861 by one, Mr. Maclean, who owned a mirror shop on

Ludgate H ill, trading as The Commercial Plate-Glass Company. The first editor was H. J. Byron, but in May of 1865, the paper was put into the hands of Tom Hood, only son of the humourist and versifier, Thomas

Hood, and a friend of Gilbert. Hood, the younger, worked all day at the War Office, Pall Mall, and edited the paper at night., Clement

Scott, the Victorian critic, assumes in his book The Drama of Yesterday and Tod ay*-^ that Gilbert began his association with Fun when Hood took the reigns of that paper. If this be so, then the critiques attributable to Gilbert are those under the title "From Our Stall." This seems rather unlikely considering the fact that the writer of this particular column, on January 12, 1867, devotes the column to a lengthy and enthusiastic review of G ilbert's Dulcamera.^0 and later objectively mentions a play of G ilbert's at the Haymarket. On several bases, I am inclined to believe that G ilbert's association with Fun is from a much earlier period. First, when the reviewer writing "From Our Stall" evaluated the first productions of Tom Robertson's plays, he never mentioned the stage business, an aspect which obviously fascinated

Gilbert. Second, Scott describes G ilbert's contributions to Fun as

"burlesque criticism s of plays and players in duologue form," 2 * and this description fits none of the journal's criticism of this period. Scott's chronology of the I860'sf in his chatty reminiscences, despite the fact that he was part of the literary circle of which he writes, is blurred.

Issac Goldberg, on the other hand, quotes a friend of G ilbert's named

Roland-Brown, who asserts that Gilbert felt himself well-paid by H. J. 8 Byron, the first editor,^ although Goldberg later suggests that

Gilbert also served under Hood until the latter 1 s death in 1874. I believe it more likely that G ilbert's contributions to Fun are those under the title "Pan at the Play" published in the first years of the journal's operation as veil as individual articles under Hood's editor­ ship. The style and nature of the criticism bear this out. While the later critical style is dour, and emphasizes dramatic (literary) ele­ ments and performances, the earlier criticism is more humourous, and is particularly Gilbertian in its tendency to use the pun for humourous effect,23 and in its concern with those production elements which were

to fascinate Gilbert in his later work. In speaking of the typical activity in the local theatres, "Pan" w rites,^

You will probably see . . . the author looking daggers at the low comedian, who w ill insist upon doing some 'business' of his own invention, which he thinks marvelously funny, but which is nothing at all like what was intended.

Gilbert was, throughout his career determined to keep the tradition of the improvising low comedian from determining the business in the operas. In another number,^5 "Pan" writes of a production of Othello with Hr. Charles Fechter as Iago:

By the way, what a blessing the stage business, which forms a prominent feature of that new school, must be to the performer. I know that it is an old dramatic tradition that a hero never sits down; but to allow him to repose now and then in a chair at table, Is not only char-i-table, but true art, mildewed veterans not withstanding. How pleasant it is to see the personages in a tragedy moving about and talking like real men and women, instead of strutting like peacocks with the spasms, and boring each other to death with set orations.

The matter of natural stage movement and business, too, preoccupied

Gilbert in the practice of the director's craft. Whatever journalistic

criticism can be attributed to Gilbert is slight, and no attribution 9 can be positively m a d e . 26

Aside from the disputed journalistic criticism , Gilbert left very little else of a critical nature. Of his own work there is prac­ tically nothing to indicate his personal evaluation. The latter sec­ tion of the diary contains two passages concerning the revival of

Yeomen of the Guard, under his direction, which opened late in 1906.27

On November 26, date of the first rehearsal, he notes, "Assez bonne troupe excepte Serg. Meryll qui est terrible," and on opening night, he evaluated the production thus, "Mediocre representation. J'a i eu une magnifique reception a la fin de la piece." Gilbert could also be quite discerning, in a detailed way, wheh it came to the work of others.

When Ivanhoe. Sullivan's grand opera, opened Carte's new theatre, Gilbert attended, and wrote to Mrs. Carte a letter containing his comments on the production. Part of the letter is as f o l l o w s : 26

"I was much pleased with Miss Macintyre and Mr. Oudin last night-- though Miss M. should show a little more emotion at the stake. The theatre is most convenient and admirable for sound. The opera was more tuneful than I was led to expect. I am, as you know, quite unable to appreciate high class music, and I expected to be bored—and 1 was not. This is the highest' compliment I ever paid a grand opera. Friar Tuck's part seemed (to me) excellent both in dialogue and music—it is a pity that the part could not be played by a fat man. Its present representative over-acts— he will not be quiet. Don't you think you want another dozen people on the left of the stage (upstage) during the last scene to balance the templars? From the left of the house, I should fancy most of the chorus would be invisable. And I think—indeed I am sure—I should abolish the small tables in Act I. Poor Ivanhoe should not have to sing his opening recitative at the side and from behind a lot of people.

"Yours very truly "W. S. Gilbert"

"P.S.—Could not the high table be placed further up the stage? And Kebecca should mount on the to£ of the battlement in her scene with the crusader. As it is, she doesn 11 look as if she meant throwing herself off. The Influence of T. W. Robertson 10

The winter of 1866-1867 seems to have been the crucial period in Gilbert's decision to devote his life to playwriting and directing.

And most critical in that decision was the happy intrusion of Tom

Robertson into the professional life of the twenty-nine year old ex­ lawyer. Mander and Mitcheson have put it succinctly in their book A

Picture History of Gilbert and Sullivan: 29

It was his jHobertson 1 s| ideas that Gilbert copied and introduced to the musical stage; he had no time for stars who moulded plays to suit themselves and sought the limelight, but preferred to train his ovm actors into a strictly drilled team. Much of the success o f h i3 work was due to this regimentation. A competent actor him­ self, he gave his company every preconceived inflection, supervising everything behind the footlights. . . . His caustic wit and blunt outspoken comment made him unpopular not only with his colleagues, but with those in authority.

Clement Scott, late in the 19th Century, also recognized the importance of G ilbert's early alliance with Robertson and with "those reforms which resulted in the renaissance under the Bancrofts at the little

Prince of Wales's Theatre in Tottenham Court R o a d . "30 Mare recently,

George Rowell, writing from the advantage of greater historical per­ spective, has suggested,31

The dramatist-director is an influential factor in the late Victorian theatre, the succession passing from Robertson to Gilbert to Pinero, and ultimately to Shaw. But these men exercised their powers by virtue of their pre-eminence as dramatists. Lesser men were less respected and in general the actor continued to rule the Victorian stage.

In order to illuminate those practices which Gilbert borrowed from

Robertson and interpreted for his own purpose^ I shall briefly summarize the advances made under the Bancroft management at the Prince of Wales' s 32 Theatre. Robertson was not the first artist to demand the right, as dramatist, to control the rehearsals of his own plays. Boucicault had for many years taken that authority, but Boucicault had also acted in 11 the plays which he created and directed. Robertson, by remaining a spectator, gave greater attention to ensemble and balance than could h is predecessor. 33 Rowell asserts that "the appearance of an artistic director who was neither actor nor prompter marks a definite stage in the evolution of the modern producer or director . " ^ This advance was, of course, made possible in great part by the perceptive encourage­ ment given to Robertson by Squire and Marie Wilton Bancroft, who managed the Prince of Wales's. Under the aegis of the Bancrofts,

the theatre no longer belonged to the rowdy, lower class mobs in the pit and gallery; once the theatre was made respectable, the audiences returned to the favorable balance of c l a s s e s .

Robertson also possessed that ability, rare in dramatists, of making his characters vivid to the acting company. Ernest Bradley Watson has written that this "gift of impartment" was perhaps the most

significant attribute possessed by the young director,36 and continues,

"to hear him [Robertsonj read a play was to immediately grasp the meaning of every character."37 Robertson's comedies had characteristics which Gilbert was to incorporate into his own works for the stage. In contrast to the typical mid-19th Century play the Robertsonian produc­

tions "did not contain scenes of fantasy or grossly exaggerated spectacle," nor did they "require elaborate or multiple settings," but, rather, they "remained believable" with a "sense of truth within the

comic structure."38 Working with a dedication, a thoroughness and a

sense of perfection, Robertson refused to allow the actor's ego to

determine the dramatic effect. Frank Moore w rites,39

His manner of conducting rehearsals and of staging the play, and the way he moved the actors about on the boards were revolutionary in an age when actors did as they pleased and pampered their vanities before considering the meaning or the total effect of the p la y . 12 In sum, Robertson perceived that In the theatre, the whole must be greater than the part, that "the tyranny of the actor, scene painter and manager" must be replaced "by the far more exacting domination of art.Sir George Arthur writes,41-

Even if he had no other claim—and he has many—to be remembered for honour, Tom Robertson would always stand as the first stage director imbued with the notion that a play, like a plant, should be carefully cultivated and trimmed before it is exhibited. He insisted—and apparently he was the first to do so--that later rehearsals should embrace the effect till then usually kept secret until the first performance ....

All of this Gilbert learned well, and in his own unique way, applied it to the musical stage. Jessie Bond, the charming young female lead of many of the original productions of the Savoy Operas, suggests that

Gilbert learned partly from Robertson and partly from his own experience

"to think out every situation, every bit of business, grouping and by­ play. "4 2 The result was a production that was

neat, finished, artistically restrained [with] no confusion or vulgarity, a production in which no "star" was permitted to usurp attention and spoil the continuity and balance.

Chapters II, III and IV of this study will illustrate in detail

the manner in which Gilbert applied these Robertsonian principles to his own practice.43 Inevitably, Gilbert elaborated upon and amended

that which Robertson had taught him, but the influence is strongly and undeniably there. Here is G ilbert's own tribute to his teacher:44

Stage management was an unknown art before his time. Formerly, in a conversation scene, for instance, you simply brought down two or three chairs from the flat and placed them in a row in the middle of the stage, and then people sat down and talked, and when the conversation was ended, the chairs were replaced. Robertson showed how to give life and variety and nature to the scene by breaking it up with all sorts of little incidents and delicate by-play. I have been at many of his rehearsals and learnt a great deal from them. 13 'Enemies' on the Contemporary English Stage

No attempt will be made at this point to portray all of the

impropriety and vulgarism of the English musical stage at the time

Gilbert decided to make it his career. Rather, I shall suggest < several of the specific offenses which were to be confronted by Gilbert during his professional life. The musical stage was inundated with

English adaptations of operas by Offenbach, Audran and Lecocq, which often "savoured of impropriety, and so far as the staging was concerned,

the ladies dresses suggested that the management had gone on the princi­ ple of doing little and doing it w ell."^5 Even when a serious attempt was made to expunge the offensive materials from these "crude, unin­

telligent and sometimes frankly improper"^ adaptations, the results were often laughably scrambled. Aside from grand opera, for which

Gilbert professed no affection, the alternatives in the musical theatre were the fashionable burlesque and the music-hall performance, both of which Gilbert could not abide . ^ The Savoy O peras a re c re d ite d w ith

destroying the public taste for such entertainments.^ According to

Henry Saxe Wyndham, Gilbert once said to an interview er^

When Sullivan and I determined to work together, the burlesque stage was in a very unclean state. We made up our minds to do all in our power to wipe out the grosser element, never to let an offending word escape our characters, and never to allow a man to appear as a woman or vice versa.

Certain offensive theatre "types" particularly offended Gilbert,

end his published sketch, "Actors, Authors and Audiences"^ g iv es th e

reader, not without bitterness, an insight into these common offenders

in the Victorian theatre. Gilbert found the average theatre manager

lacking in integrity and artistic perception. In the above-mentioned

sketch, the manager says to the playwright^ 14 I did not read your play before accepting it, because I do not profess to be a judge of a play in manuscript. I accepted it because a French play on which I had counted proved a failure. I had nothing ready to put in its place. . . . I have no special training for the position of manager. I am not aware that any special training is requisite. It is a very easy profession to master. If you make a success, you pocket the profits; if you fail, you close your theatre abruptly, and a benefit performance is organized in your behalf. Then you begin again.

The young actor or actress, who invented his own business, however in­ appropriate it may be, and who was allowed incredible latitude in characterization in order to satisfy his egoistic whim, also offended

Gilbert. In "Actors, Authors and Audiences," an ingenue is called to testify, and she r e l a t e s , ^2

The part I played was that of a simple minded young governess in a country rectory, who is secretly in love with the Home Secretary. I did not see why such a character should not sing and dance in the intervals between her pathetic scenes. She might be supposed to do so in order to cheer her spirits. I do not consider 'Father's pants w ill soon fit brother' an inappropriate song for such a character. There is nothing immoral in it. I see no reason why a broken-hearted governess should not endeavour to raise her spirits by dancing and occasional 'breakdown.' I would not dance one in every scene because that would not be true to nature. . . . A governess would probably have to teach her pupils to dance, and she would naturally practice occasionally to keep her hand in. . . . I wore short petticoats because the audience expected it of me. I see no reason why a governess in a country vicarage should not wear short petticoats if she has good legs.

But, the favorite target of Gilbert's satiric thrust was always the low comedian. In the same sketch, such a comedian reveals his special technique^:

I did my best with the part. I bought a remarkably clever mechani­ cal wig . . . but it was useless. In my zeal . . . I introduced much practical 'business' into the part that was not set down for me. . . . I did not charge extra for introducing practical business; I introduced it solely in the Prisoner's [the leading character'll interest. No doubt, the Prisoner remonstrated, but I knew what an audience likes much better than he does. . . . The part was soundly hissed—even the introduced scene with the guinea pig and the hair-oil.

Zn another published piece, Gilbert reveals a further failing 15 of contemporary theatre production: the practice of taking liberties with Shakespeare's plays. He bemoans the fact that Englishmen are so unfamiliar with Shakespeare's work, and goes on to castigate the actor- managers who rework the plays to their own w i l l : 54

Who resents these atrocious liberties? I do and the reader does, but who else? A few perhaps, but how many? Who calls out from the pit to the 'star' who deliberately cuts out the last two acts Henry VIII because he has no part in it—'You insufferably vain and sacreligious imposter, how dare you lay your mutilating hands upon the immortal works of a genius whom we revere as we revere our religion. . . . I am in the habit of publically addressing the star-tragedian in these words and so is the reader; but who does so? No one else—probably because it is not generally known that the two acts have been suppressed. As for the ' star , 1 in all pro­ bability he has probably never read those acts. Why should he? There is no Wolsey in them.

These 'enemies' are by no means inclusive of all the culprits and crudities which Gilbert confronted in his professional career.

Others w ill be implicated in the course of the study. In the chapters which follow, I shall reveal G ilbert's specific, if not always original, remedy for each of the symptoms of the malaise which had struck the nineteenth century English musical theatre. His professional techni­ ques, for which he was indebted to Robertson and to his own instincts and experience, w ill be systematically appraised. FOOTNOTES

CHAPTER I

^•Leslie Baily. The Gilbert and Sullivan Book (London: Spring Books, 1952), pp. 221-241.

^The term producer in the English theatre is approximately equivalent of the term director in the American theatre. I shall employ the American term throughout the study, except, of course, in direct quotations.

^"Gilbert, Sir William Schwenck" Encyclopedia Britannica. 11th Edition (1910-1911). Volume XII (Cambridge: University Press, 1910).

^H. M. Walbrook. Gilbert and Sullivan Opera: A History and a Comment (London: F. V. White and Company, 1922), p. 145.

^Reginald Allen. W. S. Gilbert. An Anniversary Survey and Exhibition Checklist vith Thirty-Five Illustrations (Charlottesville, Va.: The Bibliographical Society of the University of Virginia, 1963).

^Raymond Mander and Joe Mitcheson. A Picture History of Gilbert and Sullivan (London: Vista Books, 1962), p. 11. Sir Henry Lytton in A Wandering Minstrel (London: Jarrolds, Ltd., 1933), p. 255, likewise suggests that when Gilbert had a perfect conception of the opera in mind, he became "a martinet, so anxious was he to see his opera produced exactly as he had conceived it."

^The collection in the British Museum is described by Reginald Allen (The First Might Gilbert and Sullivan, New York: The Heritage Press, 1958, p. xvi) as G ilbert's "own archive" containing his "per­ sonal copies of the operas (in later issues or editions) in which he made manuscript revisions for revivals in the '90's and early 1900's." Mr. Allen, quoting Miss Nancy McIntosh, G ilbert's adopted daughter, asserts that Gilbert "never kept any of his preliminary material once the production was launched." Reference to this extensive preliminary material w ill be made in Chapter II of this dissertation. In order to provide a logical and practical limitation to the study, the promptbooks for the light operas were most rigorously searched. The bulk of the evidence w ill come from the promptbooks for The Mikado and The Sorceror. which were selected for the most intensive

16 17 study. The Sorceror was chosen because it was the first full-length opera and The Mikado because it was, and is, the most popular of the o p eras.

®Isaac Goldberg. The Story of Gilbert and Sullivan (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1928), p. 473.

^Hesketh Pearson. Gilbert and Sullivan (New York: Harper & Brothers, 1935), p. 15.

U I b id .

l^Sigmund a . Lavine. Wandering Minstrels He: The Story of Gilbert and Sullivan (New York: Dodd Mead, 1954), p. 7.

^London Illustrated News on the death of German Reed (1888), quoted in Jane W. Stedman, Gilbert Before Sullivan (Chicago: Univer­ sity of Chicago Press, 1967), p. 5.

14Ib id .

l^S. j, Adair Fitz-Gerald. The Story of the Savoy Opera (London: Stanley Paul and Company, 1924), p. 224.

l^Frarik Leslie Moore. Crowell’s Handbook of Gilbert and Sullivan (New York: Thomas Y. Crowell Company), p. 130.

l^With varying popularity Fun, which sold for Id., survived until 1901. Horace G. Hutchinson once described the paper as "that extinct and not always funny journal which, with Judy, was at one time rival of the great Punch. ..." (Portraits of the Eighties. London: T. Fisher Unwin, Ltd., 1920, p. 255).

^Pearson, o£. cit., p. 21.

19ciement Scott. The Drama of Yesterday and Today. Volume II. (London: Macmillan and Company, 1899), p. 255.

^Fun. January 12, 1867.

^Scott, o£. cit.. II, 254.

22 G oldberg, oj>. c i t . . p. 61.

23(>ne column, for example, describes the "per-Version" of a par­ ticular classic play. Gilbert uses this exact pun in the subtitle of his opera Princess Ida: "A Respectful Operatic Per-version of Lord Tennyson1s The Princess." 18 ^Fun, Volume XI, April 12, 1862, p. 24

33Fun, Volume IX, March 22, 1862, p. 1.

26ciement Scott (op. c it.. Volume I, p. 481) also suggests that Gilbert followed Tom Pvobertson as critic for the London Illustrated Times, but this, too, is extraordinarily difficult to document, not only because the criticism is anonymous, but also due to the vagueness of Scott's reference.

^G ilbert's Diary, 1905-1911. Manuscript Division, The B r itis h Museum. M anuscript Add #49329.

33From Wyndham, op. c it.. p. 210.

^^Mander and Mitcheson, op. c it. , p. 11.

30scott, op. cit., II, p. 225.

31George Rowell. The Victorian Theatre. A Survey (London: Oxford University Press, 1956), p. 81.

32por much of the following information, I am indebted to Richard L, Lorenzen and his study A History of the Old Prince of Wales's Theatre. London. 1772-1905 (Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, The Ohio State University, 1968).

33Rowell, op. cit., p. 80.

3 4I b id .

33Lorenzen, pp. c it., p. 208.

3% rnest Bradley Watson. Sheridan to Robertson: A Study of the Nineteenth-Century Stage (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1926), p. 410.

37I b id .

3 3Lorenzen, op. c it., p. 206.

39Moore, op. c it., p. 130.

4®Watson, op. c it., p. 409.

4*Sir George Arthur. From Phelps to Gielgud: Reminiscences of the Stage through Sixty-Five Years (Freeport, N. Y.: Books for Libraries Press, Inc., 1936), p. 19.

43 je s s ie Bond. The L ife and Rem iniscences o f J e s s ie Bond (London: John Lane, 1930), p. 8. 4 8 1he attribution of such sweeping reforms entirely to T. W. Robertson is, considering what is now known about the practice of Kean, Phelps, Macready, etc., somewhat naive and overly sim plistic. Gilbert, however, learned the principles from Robertson. That is certain; influence, either direct or indirect, of the earlier actor-managers, is not provable.

^Quoted in Sidney Dark and Rowland Grey. W. S. Gilbert. His Life and Letters (London: Methuen & Co., Ltd., 1923), p. 59.

^Edith A. Browne, W. S. Gilbert (New York: John Lane, Company, 1907), p. 60.

4 6Baily, op. cit.. p. 128.

4?Dark and Grey, o£. c it., p. 17.

4 8I b id .

4%enry Saxe Wyndham. Arthur Seymour Sullivan (New York: Harper and Brothers, 1926), p. 173.

5®Quoted in Dark and Grey, op. c it., p. 38.

5 1Ibid.. p. 37.

5 2Ibid.. p. 39.

^8Ibid., p. 38. CHAPTER XI

GILBERT PREPARES THE PRODUCTION

The primary advantage gained by a dramatist who supervises the production of his own work is his ability to conceive the details of production as he invents the dialogue and lyrics. Although Gilbert destroyed all of his preliminary materials, including sketches of pro­ posed dialogue, leaving only the relatively perfected texts used on opening night, his general approach to the creation of the light operas is known. First, he wrote out the plot in the manner of an anecdote, then expanded this to the length of a magazine article with summaries of con­ versations. This sketch was then overhauled, corrected and manipulated into a skeleton, similar to a scenario, detailing scenes, entrances and exits. Not until the fifth manuscript was the narrative idea il­ lustrated with actual dialogue.* During the period in which he labored over the actual words of the libretto, Gilbert was simultaneously de­ vising in his mind the myriad non-textual details which were to be characteristic of the final productions. And during the later prepara­ tory and rehearsal period, while the libretto and music were "subjected to sizzors and spokeshave until every rough edge had been rem oved,so, too, were all the elements of the physical and visual production heing formulated and perfected, first in G ilbert's mind, then in sketches and notes, finally on the rehearsal stage.

20 21 The Form of the Libretto

In the writing of the librettos, Gilbert was actively opposing the elaborate trappings which were thought to be necessary in the

Victorian theatre. He refused to write what Audrey Williamson has called "the Irvingesque type production, with its long and noisy in­ tervals of scene-changing and halting action."3 Early in his career as a dramatic author, Gilbert published a humourous article^ which included a parody of the typical extravaganza of the period. The piece introduced the plot of a pantomime entitled Harlequin Wilkinson, or the

Fairy Pewopcner and the Vicar of Pendleton-cum-Turnuptop and at the crucial moment in the drama, when the lovers "are embracing more than ever," the following scenes are introduced:

Scenes 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, and 2 1 :

These scenes are introduced to allow time to set a Magic Drinking Fountain, or an Ethereal Wash-hand Basin, or a Chromatic Pump, or a Lime-Lit Tub, or any other elaborate 'property' which the manage­ ment may think fit to introduce into the story at the last moment.

Scenes 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, and 30:

Have no reference to the plot, but allow time to 'strike' elaborate property afore:'id.

Gilbert strongly supported minimal setting arrangements, and in the operas, he intentionally reduced the scenic requirements whenever possible. The two act-settings for the first production of The Sorceror

(1877) were "Grounds of Sir Marmaduke's Mansion" (Act I) and "The Market-

Place of Ploverleigh" (Act II). For the 1884 revival (with Trial by

Jury). Gilbert eliminated the second setting, having the entire action take place on the mansion grounds. In planning the setting for Yeomen of the Guard (1888), he originally intended two settings, "Tower Green" 22 in Act X and "The Tower from the Wharf" in Act II. But by opening night, the setting had been reduced to the Tower Green for the complete piece.^ Indeed, Gilbert developed the two-act form, with only one change of scenery and one intermission, which has a happy effect on

"the continuity and fluency of the action."*’ It was not until 1893, with the production of Utopia Limited that Gilbert received any publi­ city for elaborateness of setting. The latter notice was in regard to the lavish court reception scene. Reginald Allen has written of that

Drawing-Room scene:^

Herein Gilbert unwittingly foreshadowed a device that has since become a staple of musical comedy and revue technique—the costume spectacle, in which humour, romance, and even plot (if any) tem­ porarily give way to an eye-filling pageant against a background of m usic.

Interestingly enough, the reaction to that scene in 1893 was contradic­ tory. The Pall Mall Gazette, whose reviewer did not favor the entire work, wrote that,

The crowning weakness of a weary business is the reproduction of a Court reception as dull as it would be possible for a real Court ceremonial to be.

Yet, Bernard Shaw, who was not generally fond of G ilbert's work wrote,®

I cannot vouch for its verisimilitude, as I have never, strange as it may appear, been present at a Drawing-Room; but that is exactly why I enjoyed i t .

That Gilbert had in mind the shape of the final production which he desired, even as he wrote and adjusted the libretto, is made clear in the following passage from a letter to Sullivan, dated October

11, 1889, regarding the opera The Gondoliers, then in its early prepara­ tory stage:

I have written a nice little ballad for Pounds in Act I (he had no ballad), and a good rattling song for Barrington. I found that Denny had two songs in Act II, so I have taken a song from Denny 23 ('Now I'm about to kiss your hand1) and transferred it to Wyatt. I could not consult you about this as you were busy at Leeds, so have done it on the chance of your agreeing to it. If you don't, it can be restored to Denny. I have also done without Brandram's song, 'In those days when I was wedded', because it stopped that action of the piece (already too long) and I did not think it was the kind of song that would show her off effectively. However, it can be easily restored, if you like. I have rewritten Wyatt's song 'From the country of the Cid,' and I think it is greatly improved; but if you prefer the original it can be restored, as the situation in which it occurs is unaltered. I have also inserted as brief passage for Carlotta in Act II. This is, I think, the sum and sub­ stance of the alterations. Oh--there is one more—I have altered the Nurse's song at the end of the piece to eight lines of recitatif; firstly because I thought the audience would not care for a set ballad from a stranger at the end of the piece; and secondly, because the situation became too much like the situation at the end of Pinafore, where L ittle Buttercup explains she has exchanged the children at birth.

The innovative Mr. Gilbert also developed the idea of having his playscript set in type before rehearsals began, typewriters being a rarity at that tire. He advised other authors to pay the £5 for type­ setting out of their own pockets, saying that managers would be more likely to read a printed script than a hand-written manuscript, and actors could follow it more easily in rehearsal.Earlier a c to r- managers had printed versions of their productions available for pur­ chase in the theatre lobbies, as did Gilbert, but the technique of using printed scripts in the rehearsal of plays never before performed was unknown before Gilbert employed it.

Use of the Model Stage

Of all of the remarkable techniques of direction employed by

Gilbert, none was so astonishing to his colleagues as the complete preparation for rehearsal, which was his hallmark. Weedon Grossmith once commented that,**

the difference between the methods of production at the Lyceum and those at the Savoy was that at every rehearsal Henry Irving 24 groped for perfection, while Gilbert arrived at every rehearsal with perfection in his pocket. The first saw what he wanted in fitful gleams, the second in a hard steady light.

The perfection which Gilbert held in his pocket was the thorough set of notes which he had carefully prepared in advance of the rehearsal.

He dutifully planned every individual and group movement in his study before staging rehearsals began, thus enabling him to know precisely what each actor war to do. Miss Nancy McIntosh, G ilbert's American- born adopted daughter, states in an unpublished typescript in the British

Museum collection, that G ilbert's knowing all of the details of stage movement beforehand was especially valuable in handling large choruses, and enabled him "to perfect all the 'business' of a piece in a very s h o rt tim e." * 2

Miss McIntosh also reveals G ilbert's use of a small model stage, which he kept in his home for the purpose of arranging the action of the operas (Figure 1 ) . She details the technique as f o l l o w s : 13 When producing a play he had a complete model of each scene made, and a set of blocks to represent the characters. The blocks repre­ senting the principal characters had their names painted on them; those representing the women of the chorus were painted with red and white stripes; and the men black and white. These blocks he would move about on the model stage, according to the time that the dialogue or music allowed, and as each scene was arranged, a diagram was made of it in a book, on a blank page opposite the printed page of the play, to work from when rehearsing.

Gilbert himself told his friend, Sidney Dark, that he planned out the whole stage-movement on the model stage, "with blocks three inches high to represent men, and two and a half inches to represent w om en ."1-4 Dark continues to quote Gilbert as s a y i n g , *5

I knew exactly what groupings I wanted—how many people I could have on this bank, how many on that rostrum and so forth. I had it all clear in my head before going down to the theatre; and there the actors and actresses were good enough to believe in me and to lend themselves heartily to all I required of them. You see, I had 3&N&'

Figure 1. The model stage used by Gilbert in the planning of staging. The horizontally- striped blocks, left, are the figures used to represent chorus members. From Leslie Bally. The Gilbert and Sullivan Book (London: Spring Books, 1952), p. 153. 26 the exact measure of their capabilities, and took good care that the work I gave them should be well within their grasp.

Actors like Henry Lytton were amazed that Gilbert came into rehearsal w ith ,

clean-cut ideas as to the color schemes that would produce the best effects in the scenery, laid down the methods with which the lighting was to be handled, and arranged that no dresses had to be worn by those who had dances to perform .^

Planning the Details of the Physical Production

The thoroughness with which Gilbert prepared the original and revival productions of the operas is demonstrated by the concern and de­

tail that characterize his planning. With the aid of collaborative art­ ists, Gilbert prescribed or arranged the designs of costumes, properties and settings. From the earlier actor-managers, he learned the value of historical and geographic accuracy. Although never striving for the extreme, slavish effects of the "antiquarian" director, he did ^nsist on a level of detailed accuracy which placed him far in advance of the

typical director on the contemporary musical stage.

To assure that the preparation for the staging rehearsals might be as complete as possible, Gilbert often attended Sullivan's music re­ hearsals, according to Francoise Cellier,^^

[In order to] make mental notes of the style and rhythm of the songs and concerted numbers to assist him in the invention of the 'stage business' to accompany each number.

Nancy McIntosh notes that the movement of large choruses—and G ilbert's

choruses numbered between forty and fifty* members—was strongly determined

by the time the music allows. She continues that before Gilbert met his

choruses in rehearsal, all movements, particularly entrances and exits, were arranged "according to the number of bars of music to be filled 27 in. . . Gilbert's philosophy that all elements of the production should be the province of a single creative spirit, and that that force should be manifest in numberless production details can be illustrated by his constant striving for specific effects.

For the setting of the only one-act opera, Trial by Jury.

Gilbert insisted on an exact duplication of the Clerlcenwell Sessions

House, where Gilbert had practiced law as a young man.^ But it was with

H. M. S. Pinafore that the director first achieved a reputation for accuracy of setting and costume. To obtain "local color" Gilbert went to the naval yards at Portsmouth with Sullivan. After investigating several of the ships docked there, Gilbert chose Kelson's flagship

Victory, and with the permission of Admiralty authorities, he made minute sketches of the quarter-deck and its fittings.As with the setting,

Gilbert refused to accept anything less than complete accuracy of cos­ tume for the sailors. He wrote to Sullivan on December 27, 1877^

"The uniforms of the officers and the crew w ill be effective. The chorus will look like sailors, and 1 w ill ask to have their uniforms made for them in Portsmouth.

And, indeed, the original sailor costumes for H. M. S. Pinafore were made in naval workshops. Sullivan, too, was apparently concerned with the details of the physical production: he invited, perhaps at Gilbert's prompting, Ms friend Lord Charles Beresford to a performance of Pinafore.

Lord Beresford wrote to Sullivan, including a lis t of minor problems,^2

"I was perfectly delighted with Pinafore last night—quite excellent, you told me to tell you anything 1 saw that offended the eye of an expert. Don't be cross. They are minor details, but make the difference in perfection and not absolute perfection.

For the 1899 revival of Pinafore. Gilbert insisted on a precision of m ilitary bearing on the part of the sailors which quite astonished 28 Mrs. Alec-Tweedie, who attended a rehearsal. She r e c a l l s ^ th a t the dramatist was unimpressed with the line of sailors who, at one point, marched upon the stage. He approached one of the men and ascertained that the actor had had no experience on shipboard. Gilbert turned to the stage manager and stated that he had requested experienced soldiers.

"But there is a sergeant," replied the stage manager. Gilbert called him forth from the ranks and instructed him to either train the others or find real soldiers to take the parts. Later in the rehearsal, a dozen sailors marched on stage, and after a few moments questioning,

Gilbert was satisfied that they knew their business. Indeed, the sergeant had recruited all Naval Reserve men.

For Patience. Gilbert designed the costumes himself. The satire on contemporary aesthetic foppery was heightened by his use of "the most noticeable symbols and ornaments of the age as they were used by figure­ heads in self-decoration."^ The poet, Reginald Bunthorne in the opera wore a hairstyle similar to that of the painter Whistler and items from the eccentric wardrobes of both Oscar Wilde and Walter Crane.

For the original production of Iolanthe (1882), Gilbert ordered the scene painter Henry Emden to produce an exact replica of Palace Yard and the frontage of Westminster Hall. The Entrance and Chorus of the

Peers was a particularly effective moment. Gilbert had had several of the chorus members made up "to resemble well-known aristocratic p o liti­ cians, and the costumes of the Peers were meticulously correct, including the g ilt strawberry leaves signifying a Duke and the white satin rosette of an Earl, as well as crowns and gorgeous velvet c l o a k s , "25 The E ra , reviewing that production remarked, ^ 29 Nothing could be better of its kind than the pompous blustering mock-heroic march that enters in the procession of the Peers, Act I I .... The stage costumes of Messrs. Ede & Son, court robemokers to Her Majesty are alone worth a v isit to see.

Two letters written to Mrs. Carte, regarding the Iolanthe revival in

1901, are exceptionally revealing. In the first, dated November 24,

Gilbert devotes his concern to costume:^

"An important thing has occurred to me. We were quite wrong in putting the two earls in Act 2 into plain court dress. That is the dress of men who have no rank above baronets—or, at all events, who are n o t p eers and k n ig h ts o f o rd e rs . A G. C. B. o r a K. G. would never appear in velvet court dress—he would be certain to hold some appointment that would give him the right to wear a uniform. I should say that it would be best to put them into Lord Lieutenants* dress (red coats, silver striped trousers, general’s gold belt and cocked hat). These are posts that are (with one or two exceptions) held by peers of considerable landed property, and would be perfectly suitable to these two earls, who ought to wear the star of the order of knighthood assigned to them in Act I. Plain court dress would be impossible for such howling swells. Also, the peers ought to have calico or brown holland makeshift robes to rehearse in—as they did when the piece was produced—otherwise they w ill get into great trouble with their trains, etc. So long as they are of the right length, the detail of the robes is of no importance in the calico form .

In the second letter, the director is turning his attention to a detail of setting:^

"It has occurred to me that it would be good to have practicable hands to the ' jwer clock in Act 2, with real clockwork—(to be wound up every night before the act opens) and set to the actual hour of the night—say five minutes past ten or whatever the hour may be), and let it move on through the act to ten minutes past 11 —or whatever the hour of finishing may be—showing always through­ out the act the actual current hour.

"The clockwork wouldn't cost above £ l, and could be wound up when the scene is lowered.

"I think people would talk about it, and it would become a good advt. {advertisement)

"Of course, the clockwork should be quite compact and occupy as small a space as possible in the middle of the clock, so as not to obstruct the transparency too much.

Although Gilbert created an innately English population for The 30 Mikado. he set it among the exotic settings of Japan, dressed his cast in authentic garments, and was thereby able to perpetrate his most penetrating satire. It was exceptionally important to the dramatist-* director that the cast be tutored in the intricacies of Nipponese de­ portment. To this end, he hired a Japanese male dancer and a delicate tea-girl from Knightsbridge, the Japanese settlement in London, to

Instruct the c a s t . 29 The two native Japanese taught the women to walk with mincing feet, and all the performers to "speak" the subtle language of the fan, and to arrange their hair and line their faces in imitation of authentic Japanese make-up. The "three little maids" were taught the "little hiss which is the Japanese equivalent of the English giggle."30 Alfred Cellier, the resident orchestral conductor for Gilbert and Sullivan until 1878, when his brother Francoise succeeded him, remembered that the costumes for The Mikado were likewise authentic: 31-

Gilbert ordered dresses of 'pure Japanese silk' from Liberty's in Regent Street. The dresses worn by the principals were genuine and original Japanese. Miss Rosa Brandram, as ICatisha, wore a costume about a hundred years old. Hie gold-embroidered robe and petticoat of the Mikado was a faithful replica of the ancient official costume of the Japanese monarch.

Musically, Sullivan and Gilbert decided on a similar authenticity, and therein laid themselves open for an amusing practical joke. They were somewhat bothered by what music should be played for the great entrance of the Mikado, hoping that it might be authentically Japanese.

Nancy McIntosh recalls the results:32

[They] consulted a friend who had been much in Japan. He was glad to help them and asked, 'Why not use the Japanese National Anthem?' E x c e lle n t id ea! But they d id n o t know i t , so he hummed, "Mia Sama" for them and they were delighted. Just the thing! So characteristic and strange! and into place it went. They were perfectly satisfied until some months later a distinguished Japanese, who was visiting London, was taken to the Savoy to see the piece, and being asked what he thought of it, said he was greatly charmed by it, but had been 31 greatly surprised and pained to see the Mikado make his entrance to music of one of the worst, most dreadful songs ever sung in Japanese teahouses. Only then did they realize the huge joke that had been played on them.

For Ruddigore (1887), Gilbert selected uniforms for the first act which represented no less than twenty regiments. The Quartermaster*

General attended the dress rehearsal and vouched for the authenticity of the military d e t a i l . ^ Likewise, the family portraits (by a Mr.

Ballard) which come to life in the last act of that production, were specially painted and accurately copied from the members of the com­ pany whom they represented. 34 The uniforms and properties of Ruddigore c o s t ^ 6, 0 0 0 , and the two scenes an o th er 2 , 0 0 0 .

The opening night printed program for Ruddigore notes the touch of authenticity in costume with the following announcement: "In the

F irst Act, Officers of the following Regiments are represented, in order in which they stand on the Stage. (There follows a list of twenty regiment§3. " This notice is rather unusual, for Gilbert rarely made public announcements concerning his attempts at authenticity (unlike several antiquarian actor-managers of the age).

G ilbert's concern for accuracy in costume, setting and proper­ ties can be neatly seen in three incidents relating to productions of

The Yeomen of the Guard. In a letter to Carte, Gilbert w r o t e , 35

"Elsie should change her dress to something like a wedding dress at the end of the piece. It should not be a wedding dress of a modern type (of course), but a dress of Henry VIII time that w ill suggest something of a matrimonial nature to the spectator. White silk or satin, and white bows, and a wreath of white flowers would do—but kept 'bourgeoise' in cut. I hope I make myself clear.

For the revival of Yeomen, which was produced by Mrs. Helen Lenoir

Carte, Gilbert was typically thorough in scenic design, as shown by this letter from the dramatist to Mrs. Carte 32 "Dear Mrs. Carte—

"I met Qiawes} Craven at the Tower this morning and selected a capital and most effective scene. He is to have the model ready by Monday, and I am to meet him at the Savoy Theatre on Monday at 11:30 to approve it. Perhaps you would like to be present.

At the opening of Yeomen. Phoebe is discovered alone at her spinning wheel. Gilbert was not satisfied with a stage spinning wheel, but

searched antique shops to find one of just the right period. When he

found one that he felt was suitable, he rented it for the run of the opera, feeling it too expensive to buy.^

For the afore-mentioned Drawing-Room scene of Utopia (Limited) ,

Gilbert spared no pains to make sure that the deportment of the com­

pany was "correct to the button," according to Rutland Barrington, who

played King Paramount.Barrington continued, "It was great fun for

the company on the days when we had a lady professor of deportment

attending rehearsals to teach us how to bow."39

The result of G ilbert's concern for detail and accuracy is seen

in the critical reaction to the original and revival productions. The

Utopia Drawing-Room scene was, according to the Sunday Time s.^

superbly managed, brought down a hearty round of applause. . . . The handsome throne-room, with its dazzling g litter of incandescent lamps and the glorious array of rich uniforms and gowns, produced an impression quite unprecedented in the annals of Savoy comic o p era.

When the English company of The Mikado opened in Berlin, a year after it

had its English and American premiers (1886), The North German Gazette

commented, "At the outset we were surprised by the pretty scenery and

the truly blinding splendor of the dresses as well. . . ." ^

G ilbert's precision in duplicating reality on stage was not lost

on the reviewers of the original productions. Ohe American reviewer, 33 who had seen several "pirate" productions of Pinafore, before seeing the duplicate of the London production which Gilbert directed for the New York stage, wrote,

Practicable shrouds [Tigging from ship's side to masthead) were set, with sailors clambering up and down, and the chorus was skillfully divided, some on the gun deck, and some on the quarter deck, so as to destroy the unpleasant stiffness in the grouping.

Another American reviewer, also obviously familiar with "pirate" ver­ sions, commented,^3

Last evening, H. M. S. Pinafore was under the command of its builders. . . . It was studded with new points. . . . When the scene opened, the sailors were all seen at work attending to various ship's duties, while the whole was under the supervision of the busy and important little Midshipmate. This gave an animation to the first scene which it generally lacks. . . .

With the obvious exception of Sullivan, the collaborative artists who assisted Gilbert were strongly overshadowed by his enormous creative energy. Although they were occasionally credited in

the playbills, none had a free-hand artistically: Gilbert always had

the privilege of suggestion, revision, and ultimate approval. The only artist allowed to work with the performing company, besides Gilbert himself, was Messr. John D'Auban,^ the dancing master generally hired

to "arrange" the incidental dances in the operas. There is no evidence

that D'Auban did any more than refine and instruct the company in the execution of the choreographic ideas which were originally G ilbert's.

It should be noted that the dance segments of the operas are quite brief and simple.

Casting the Operas

G ilbert's philosophy of the dominance of the director in all aspects of performance was evident in his casting procedures. During 34 the audition period, Sullivan was always consulted about the musical capabilities of the prospective actors and actresses, but Gilbert was unquestionably the Casting Director.Edith Browne has noted that as both "producer and stagemanager," Gilbert "approved the cast he was to train, and enjoyed complete artistic and even financial freedom in the presentation of each successive opera.Crucial to his belief that actors should "be like marionettes to be moved about by the director, acting as a team with strict discipline," was the necessity of hiring

"novices who could be taught by himself and would not resent the teach­ ing."^ Leslie Baily, in The Gilbert and Sullivan Book, has written,^® that Gilbert and Sullivan, at the outset of their partnership,

had decided to make a completely fresh start Qnd tgj recruit a company from scratch, disregardingJWest End_favorite actors and seeking not grand operatic voices (but thos^ who could do clear justice to the words as well as the music (this Gilbert insisted upon).

The hiring of inexperienced actors is explained by another commentator,

Sir Arthur Quiller-Couch, as the result of the collaborators' early experience at the Opera Comique. Quiller-Couch w rites^

Remind yourselves that these two men when they started at the old Opera Comique, off the Strand, had to work with the cheapest material. . . .

Having at first a stage so inexpensive, a cast who had to listen and obey, they imposed their idea, or ideas, with a tyranny5® to which countless anecdotes bear witness.

Whether the casting of novice actors and actresses began in necessity or philosophy, there is no question that the Gilbertian stage did not demand highly accomplished performers. As H. M. Walbrook points o u t , 51

An intelligent man or woman could make Jjiis or he2 "first appearance on the stage in an important part in one of the operas and succeed in fulfilling every requirement 35 The meticulous care given the performers by Gilbert during the re­ hearsal period is credited with the astonishing fact that "no actor ever failed in one of their productions."^

The casting of The Sorceror, the first Gilbert and Sullivan production at the Opera Comique, delayed the opening of the piece. The collaborators had decided that the normal run of operatic singers was unsuited for their purposes.53 In gathering their first company—many of whom would become the leading performers of the celebrated D'Oyly

Carte Company—Gilbert and Sullivan intended to train their performers

specifically for the parts they wrote. The company was to include

George Grossmith, who had been previously occupied with entertaining provincial audiences of working men with songs and recitations. Gros­

smith, upon learning of G ilbert's desire to hire him for the part of

John Wellington Wells in The Sorceror. said to the dram atist-director,

"For the part of a Magician, I should have thought you required a man with a fine voice," "No," replied Gilbert, "that is just what we don't w a n t."54

The most improbable casting for The Sorceror was Rutland

Barrington, an actor who had made a slight reputation in second-rate melodrama. D'Oyly Carte, the producer, protested the hiring, to which

G ilb e rt r e p l i e d ,55

Barrington is a great hulk of a man who never thinks for himself and w ill do whatever I order without asking a single question—my.idea of a perfect actor. . . . I want amateurs who can be turned into professionals, not professionals who can act like amateurs.

On this particular piece of easting, St. John Ervine wrote that, 55

G ilbert's sense of the stage was as sharp as Mr. Noel Coward's. He would see an actor where other people could only see a wooden-faced fellow, as when he put Rutland Barrington into his cast. 36 For one of the later operas, The Gondoliers. Gilbert was auditioning Miss Decima Moore for the role of Casilda. After she had sung, accompanied by Sullivan, Gilbert asked, "Have you ever acted,

Miss Moore?" "No," she replied, and Gilbert responded, "So much the better for you. You've nothing to u n l e a r n ."^7 And yet, Gilbert customarily chose his chorus members primarily for their acting ability, a technique which placed severe restrictions on Sullivan.^®

Gilbert was particularly interested in the re-casting of roles, both to replace departing cast members during the original run and for the revival productions. A letter from Gilbert to Sullivan, dated May

1 2 , 1890, reveals some of this concern:59

"I learnt accidentally yejsterday that Miss Cameron has been playing the part of the Duchess [in The Gondoliergl since Wednesday last.

"I received no notification of this important change, nor was I asked to rehearse the lady—although when Miss Foster played the part as understudy, 1 received the usual notification. I assume that I may take it for granted that this studied slight was not inflicted upon me \*ith your consent or approval.

The matter is revived again in a letter to Sullivan, December 23, 1893.

Sullivan had suggested by letter that there should be a contractual stipulation assigning casting prerogative to Gilbert. Gilbert replied,**®

"I have no anxiety about this cast before production. There is no need to stipulate concerning that. You and I can settle it as of o ld . Ify care is to provide against unsuitable changes after pro­ d u c tio n .

Sullivan refused to condone a clause in their new agreement concerning the re-casting of parts. Gilbert, in a conciliatory mood, agreed in a letter dated January 7, 1894,61

"if it is understood between us (that] if any permanent change in cast should be necessary after my production, my opinion shall be consulted and all reasonable weight given to any bone fide objections X may raise—I on my part promising to raise no objections on merely cautious or vexatious grounds. 37 The T echnical T heatre

Although the details of the physical production of the operas occupied much of G ilbert's attention he seems to have been little interested in the methods by which the technical effects were accom­ plished. Hie promptbooks are almost devoid of technical entries, aside from the brief printed descriptions of the settings. It should be noted that the operas are inordinately simple technically, particulary when compared to the typical musical and melodramatic spectacles of the day.

Limited settings, minimal lighting requirements and relatively few properties characterize these productions. Occasionally Gilbert wrote scenes of elaborate spectacle or technical display, but they are un­ common. Perhaps for this reason, G ilbert's concern for the technical aspects of production is purely that of the designer-director and not of the stage technician.^

In the early diary, for the year 1878, Gilbert records only one specific mention of technical problems in rehearsal. For Friday, Febru­ ary 2 2 , he n o te d , ^

Rehearsed 1, 2, and 3 acts . . . all right—arranged to rehearse scene of the second act (lime light) at 11:20. [Later in the evening] Went to Olympic Theatre —found that Neville had forgotten scene rehearsal. Arranged for next night.

Properties necessary for the productions are noted in the prompt­ books before the first page of actual text. Because these books were prepared for purpose of reviving the operas, such notes were particular­ ly valuable. For The Sorceror. the properties primarily relate to the banquettlng scene: "52 cups & 52 plates," and "4 tea trays, 13 cups and 13 plates on each." ^ And occasionally there is indication of placement for the specific properties, backstage or on stage, and their 38 usage, as in The Sorceror promptbook: "a small teapot, kettle of water [etcTJ on tea tray for Constance to bring to Dr. Daly."®^

Sound and special lighting effects, too, are listed on the first page of the text. For The Sorceror. Act I: ngong (Prompt Entrance)," "1 sheet of iron . . . for thunder," and "red mediums on limes." For Act

II, the following notation is found, "Floats. Blue mediums on—Night.

Oil lamps behind windows L & R," and a page later in the script,

"Mediums slow ly off. Light's up by the time they (The chorus] begin to dance." In the promptbook for G ilbert's non-musical Fogerty*s

Fairies there is an interesting note in hand at Fogerty's line, "Still, if there is such a thing as a guardian angel watching over me, here is the opportunity to show what's she's worth that may never occur again."

The prompt note is, "Chord. Rebecca [a fairy[ steps through Vampire jjxap] in flat RC. Soft music until she s p e a k s ."^6 These technical innovations demonstrate standard 19th century practice, and similar requirements we found with great frequency in promptbooks of the p e rio d .

The period of the original productions transverses the era when the English stage turned from gas to electricity as the major power source.67 Apparently, this change little affected Gilbert. Gilbert's only specific use of electricity for a special effect came in the second act of Iolanthe in which the Fairy Queen and her three chief attendants each wore an electric star in her hair. The ornament was not totally effective; the Advertiser reviewer found it "wonderful," but the critic for Lloyd's found the effect "too dazzling to be pleasant, and in dark scenes obscures the face." 6®

There are few recorded instances in which G ilbert's relatively 39 minimal technical requirements were not met successfully. Jessie Bond recalled that the technical arrangements for her entrance in lolanthe were hazardous:

The river from which Iolanthe emerges . . . was a shallow trough of real water, and I was always afraid of stepping into it when I rose through the trap door on my little platform, and crossed it on the lily-leaves which were my stepping stones.

On the opening night of Ruddigore. a technical problem spoiled the second act appearance of the ghostly ancestors, when the portraits failed to operate within their frames inconspicuously. In the gallery setting of Act II, the portraits of the ancestors should have risen unobtrusively out of their frames, revealing actors impersonating the ancestors behind, but, the Times reviewer, writing of that opening night, stated,

The ghost scene of the second act, representing the descent of the Murgatroyd ancestry from the picture frames . . . was a very tame affair. The stage management here was not up to Savoy level. A set of very ugly daubs . . . pulled up as you might a patent iron shutter to reveal a figure in the recess behind, can scarcely be called a good example of modern stage contrivance, especially when, as on Saturday night, one of these blinds or shuttefrs comes down at an odd moment, while another refuses to move in time. . . .

This accident was probably due to the fact that the Savoy was only free for three days following the close of The Mikado, and Ruddigore re­ hearsals were hectic and lasted until 5 a.m. ^ The most embarrassing technical failure—obviously attributable both to G ilbert's stage management and the technical preparations—occurred on the opening night of Princess Ida. Edmund Yates, critic for The World, commented on the "poor business" of the Princess's plunge into the stream:?^

Ve are always hearing of Hr. G ilbert’s wonderful stage management but the tumble of the Princess and her rescue from drowning were so ludicrously mismanaged as to evoke hisses and laughter.

The incident occurred at the climax of Act I—Princess Ida opens with an act-long Prologue—when the Princess, played by Leonora Braham, discovers the Intrusion of a man Into Castle Adamant, and falls Into the stream, from which she is to be rescued by Hilarion, but, on opening night, "the sightlines had not been studied carefully, and the

'gallery gods' saw the plunge was badly managed and began laughing derisively."^

The Promptbook Evidence

The B ritish Museum promptbooks are not the preliminary sketch­ books which Gilbert prepared before going into rehearsal—these he destroyed--but are, indeed, a more accurate record of the original pro­ ductions. These neatly constructed volumes, prepared by Gilbert after

the opening performance in order to facilitate revivals, represent

Gilbert's final intention. The staging notes aside, these books are a more reliable source for ascertaining the dram atist-director's per­

fected conception of the operas than the published editions, which, as w ill be shown, are corrupted by erroneous, but traditional dialogue, blocking, and business, which individual performers have interpolated over the years. Gilbert used the original printed editions as the ba­

sis for these promptbooks, adding interleaving for the placement of handwritten prompt notes. The elaborate marginal and interlinear nota­

tions are so explicit that, employing them, a modern director could

duplicate the original production with astonishing accuracy.

The promptbooks contain numerous indications of the carefully planned business for which Gilbert is justly celebrated. For example,

in The Mikado, during the trio "Tb sit in silence in a dull, dark dock,"

the actors playing Ko-Ko, Pooh-Bah, and Pish-Tush, are instructed in the 41 use of props, thus:74-

Fans are used with the music throughout this [trio] and each time 'Big Black Block' occurs, they are used as a chopper. At the end all three turn upstage & Pish-Tush goes [off] R3E and Pooh-Bah o f f L3E.

In order to demonstrate the detail which Gilbert Incorporated Into the

promptbooks when necessary, the entire "Incantation" segment from The 75 Sorceror. Act I, has been reconstructed and included as Figure 2.

When appropriate, Gilbert added indications of scenic elements to help

locate the performers. The diagram marked "position for opening

chorus" from The Sorceror is included to illustrate this technique

(Figure 3). The standardized symbolism throughout the promptbooks is as

follows: the symbol o represents a single chorus lady, the symbol x a

single chorus man; principals are indicated by the appropriate symbol

for their sex, plus their name, often abbreviated.

Before G ilbert's reign, choruses on the English musical stage

were nothing more than part of the stage setting. Chorus performers

were hired "simply to sing, and would parade on stage like a platoon of

soldiers, taking no part in the a c tin g ." A s early as Thespis, Gilbert

began to carry out his determination to get the chorus to play its

proper and natural part in the performance. Mrs. Alec-Tweedie comments

that in his early experience as a spectator in the theatre, Gilbert

had been so horrified at chorus and crowd standing round the stage in a ring, he invented the idea of breaking them up, and there­ after, according to arrangement . . . the performers were to group themselves and talk in little clusters, and certainly the effect was more natural.

Earlier actor-managers, Macready and Kean among them, had taken special

care with their supernumeraries in a similar fashion, but Gilbert was

the first to apply this technique to the musical stage. He once said, Figure 2. The Incantation Scene, Act I, The Sorceror. Reconstructed from the promptbook by R, Boyer. Original in the Manuscript Division, B r itis h Museum (ADD v 49310).

42 LlfrHfS tiQWAl 43 1 MR. W. L C Sprites of earth and air— Fiends of flame and fire— FLASH R THUfJfcSLfc. Demon souls, 2 > |* CNTR 1 N C .E Come here in shoals, /Alt AL»r* This dreadful deed inspire! t/ Appear appear appear. R.C- r*.u. . -- r e » v v ' 11 AiriTUDfcof Good master, we are here! 1_lS;tN,Nb male voices MR. W. Noisome hags of night— Im ps of deadly shade— a i i m . f l a s h v j e l l s Pallid ghosts, .STemEs a tn ru .se6t Arise in hosts, listen w 6 LET US f si fLftSH L And lend me all your aid. \ clT e _ J*o CtJrBAJct Appear, appear, appear! fem ale voices. Good master, we are here! A lexis [aside]. Hark, they assemble, , These fiends of the night! .1

a l in e [aside]. Oh, Alexis, I tremble, _„„Seck safety in flight! J Let us fly to a far-off land, pLPt^A okl T er r a c e . 3 r o Le ft F u t ra n c s . VkluS cut Where peace and plenty dwell— TlSjacl L Where the sigh of the silver strand Is echoed in every shell. VIellS F.H To the joys that land will give, F lash du Tutnac*. Be* 'Simr Entrance Terrace R. On the wings of Love we’ll fly; In. innocence there to live— Puts ItArat In innocence there to die! c u A t KC A t FiRS't -too l a t e a f t e r s o l o U d ells 2.0 u s Uaulv Round it CHORUS OF SPIRITS RoUNO AuD OFF L I E. iU A L<»JoTlH POS­ DEMON USE. Too late— too late— ITION DIM TEA re f AUD CHANGES FbR It may not be! That happy fate \ _ T t n r t r r L TfticK tEAPcT taliTM LliHrto SrsNbEftT Is not for thee! J First fMrfinuce THE e»TIO»A SAtue.ATt.0 u.ni wcthslateo Spirit - Wells in Clmiul left Separates ALEXIS, ALINE, and MR. WELLS AlEKIS FllJO A uul. AliUE screaks. Too late—too late, That may not be! That happy fate

Is not for I 1”®* Cthee! MR. WELLS Now, shrivelled hags, with poison bags, Discharge your loathsome loads! F l a s h R . 3>rh L utt .« nce . Spit flame and fire, unholy choir! Belch forth your venom, loads! F l FTSH. R . A ea t.NTR»tlCE_ Ye demons fell, with yelp and yell, Shed curses far afield— Fl a s h . L i w o E utrancc . Ye fiends of night, your filthy blight In noisome plenty yield! Fl A s H. L . iR R LvrRAilCJE. Mr. WELLS [pouring phial into tea-pot—flash]. Number One! chorus. It is done! Four. Flashes 1st ft. , 2no i - t f t , MR. w . [same business]. Number Two! [flash], c h o r u s . One too fewl MR. W. [name business]. Number Three! [flash], ------M e. U k u .t exits . c h o r u s . Set us free! * L l E_ LEAVES WITH Set us free—our work is done. F lash 1st E u r. T e a fo T Ha! ha! ha! 8tc.

ALINE and ALEXIS [aside] H our Slashes 1st f t ; 2 n s L , Let us fly to a far-off land. Where peace and plenty dwell— 3R ,HL IN q u ic X Where the sigh of the silver strand Succession AS M r W ells Is echoed in every shell. LEAVES WITH TEA P e r L i t AND M C E AEA iN IMHEMATRkV . CHORUS OF FIENDS WDE.R Ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! hal hal hal halTW xj L i g h t s u p 44 TanOiww

Figure 3. From the promptbook for The Sorceror: "Positions for opening chorus," Act I. Reconstructed by R. Boyer. Original in the Manuscript Division, British Museum (ADD # 49310). 45 "1 refuse to have my chorus looking like a lot of stupid dummies. They must act—give life to the show.

By modern standards, G ilbert's handling of the chorus and the principals, when they sang in concert, is somewhat old-fashioned.

There is a tendency to over-use simple geometric forms (semi-circles, straight and parallel lines), as well as the technique of handling the chorus by "ranks," usually dividing the members by sex or vocal parts.

He w ill occasionally place his performers in lines at angles to the proscenium arch, but the use of triangular effects for emphasis is un­ common. This form of placement is used when extraordinary emphasis is required: for example the entrance of Katisha in The Mikado (Figure 4).

The use of uniform movement and gesture by the entire chorus and the placement of principals in "concert style"—that is, all in a semi­ circle or on a like plane—is likewise somewhat out-dated. However, to gain visual variety, Gilbert used, in addition to the techniques of small groupings for the chorus, a frequency of change in positioning which can best be demonstrated in a series of three major diagrams from

The Mikado (Figure 5). The extreme alteration of the chorus configura­ tion within a relatively short period of time is most significant.

As will be discussed in the following chapter, Gilbert rarely gave detailed instructions to an actor or actress performing a solo num­ ber. This is reflected in the promptbooks, where there are occasional instructions for the solo singer. The case of Dr. Daly's solo "Time was, when Love and I were well acquainted," is quite un-typical. The promptbook reads (printed), "Enter Dr. Daly" and (handwritten), "on terrace & down steps. He is pensive and does not see them [Constance and Mrs. P artletl. He goes downstage and sits on stool." Throughout C.C 01_l£s K it i ’ y x x

V * + -v t>

Katisha o - 0 0 >v w \ * * A ° ' % V Nr ~ «#- A0 *

F ig u re -t. The Entrance of Katisha, The Mikado, Act I. Reconstructed from the prompt­ book by R. Boyer. Original in the Manuscript Division, B ritish Museum (ADD # 49312). 47

jl X X XXX XXX

o o o O O O O X o X o X 0 o

Figure 5. Three Chorus Positions from The Mikado, Act I. Diagram A: Chorus at Katisha's line "Your revels cease!" Diagram B: Chorus at their line, "If true her tale, thy knell is rung." Diagram C: Chorus at Katisha's "The hour of gladness is dead and gone." Reconstructed from the promptbook by R. Boyer. Original in the M anuscript D iv isio n , B r itis h Museum (ADD # 49312). the ballad-song there are five directions: ( 1 ) indication that the .

singer rises after the first line, (2) note that "Constance and Mrs.

Partlet retire up and off 3rd Entrance R during song," (3) an x centered on the page with "Dr. Daly" above it, indicating that Daly is to perform center, (4) note to the Stage Manager: "See Marmaduke and Alexis," to ready the double entrance of Sir Marmaduke and his son approximately one page later in the printed text, and (5) at the conclusion of the

song, the note for Daly, "Turns up LC."

More typical is the absence of directions for the performer

doing the role of Mr. Wells in the major patter song, "tfy name is John

Wellington Wells." The only notations, other than the indication that

the song is done Center, are for persons other than Wells: (1) two for

Alexis and Aline, who are on stage during the song, (2) note for the

Stage Manager: "Everyone for Finale," and (3) the word "Encore" at

the line, "He can raise you hosts of ghosts," indication that the

repeat is to begin at this point.

However, once the musical number included more than one per­

former, Gilbert became very explicit in stage directions. Figure 6

illustrates the detail and care which went into the familiar "Three

L ittle maids from school" trio in The Mikado.

Textual Considerations

As Gilbert prepared the revival productions, he apparently

analyzed and evaluated his original directorial instructions, and made

appropriate changes. Alteration of dialogue and stage direction is not

Infrequent in the promptbooks. The purpose of this study is not to

complete an examination of textual variants, but the promptbooks suggest 49

® THE t h r e e. - Three little maids from school are we, ■< i Pert as a school-girl well can be, FANS CLOSE* Filled to the brim with girlish glee, j Three little maids from school! all . -meet. c u r t s iV VfMISttft to PiTTI-AI.lt> I YUM-YUM. Everything is a source of fun. cnvcrvC. 1 p e e p - d o . Nobody’s safe, for we care for none! I \n iiu p e r to Tum-vUm tnuiiu.i

p it t i - s in g . Life is a joke that’s just begun I THE t h r e e. Three little maids from school! ALL [dancing]. Three little maids who, all unwary, Come from a ladies’ seminary, Freed from its geniu^'tutelary— TMB6. SVMPK&tll, P in SI H i t t h e t h r e e [suddenly demure]. * P ttf 6o u»Mi4?ne iu Three little maids from school! c. u h t S l-1 am & O. k c wvrACCApo w h o p e l to e>dt Am o t h er . Yt/rt yijM S Ear. . iM t OfftCT SeCAT YUM-YUM. One little maid is a bride, Yum-Yum- cuRTSLS PEEP-BO. Two little maids in attendance come— c.UttTscI h o t ioa& rui.'/ Rtsu.-ies MCA S.HAVITV ; PITTI-SING. Three little maids is the total sum. AoaralN j THE THREE. Three little maids from school! CUAT4LV J From three little maids take one away. ARSUNO pill SINE* xPEEP-BO. Two little maids remain, and they— PITTI-SING. Won’t have to wait very long, they say 4*6 L Ads AfloudO Pitt I 1 Si HO I THE THREE. Three little maids from school! C-uJUSti a l l [dancing]. Three little maids who, all unwary, \ R INTO Pt£» B os'' 6J> Come from a ladies’ seminary, J—j bAdtG PLACE. Freed from its genius tutelary— / | t h e t h r e e [suddenly demure]. Three little maids from school! IU

F ig u re 6. Prompt notes for the Trio "Three little maids from school are we," The Mikado. Act I. Reconstructed from the promptbook by R. Boyer. Original in the Manuscript Division, B ritish Museum (ADD # 49312). 50 that modern editions do not take into consideration changes that

Gilbert, himself, authorized in the revivals, and an excellent case can be made, in the light of Gilbert's constant striving for perfection, that the promptbook readings should be considered preferable to those in the early printed versions (on which most modern editions are based).

Several examples w ill be given to illustrate the point.

Modem editions leave out important directions to the performer.

For example, in Act II of The Mikado, the response of Ko-Ko, Pooh-Bah, and Pitti-Sing to the Mikado's line "My poor fellow, in your anxiety to carry out my wishes you have beheaded the heir to the throne of Japan!" is to be read in unison, as indicated by the handwritten word "Together" in the margin, and a bracket around the three lines. In some cases, modern editions incorporate lines not in either the early printed edi­ tion, nor added in the promptbook. In the following dialogue, 79 the underlined sections are not in either:

K atish a

You know that I am not beautiful because my face is plain. But you know nothing; you are still unenlightened. Learn, then, that it is not in the face alone that beauty is to be sought. My face is unattractive.

Pooh-Bah

I t i s .

K atish a

But I have a left shoulder-blade that is a miracle of loveliness. People come miles to see it. My right elbow has a fascination that few can resist.

Pooh-Bah

Allow me! 51 K atish a

It is on view Tuesdays and Fridays, on presentation of visiting card. As for my circulation, it is the largest in the world.

Changes in the dialogue, often very minor, were made by Gilbert in the revival promptbooks for several reasons: ( 1 ) to up-date a phrase, to make it more topical, (2) to break up long speeches (3) to change wording to be more agreeable, (4) to place a dramatic tag to a scene or moment, or ( 5) to give additional length to a particularly popular lyric. Each of these will be illustrated with an example.

Gilbert was no purist in the rendering of his lines precisely as written, if a greater comic effect could be had, particularly by making the lyrics more topical. The list of offenders who'd "none of 'em be missed" in Ko-Ko's "catalogue aria" (The Mikado, Act I) had extensive, sanctioned variations to keep it up to date. The promptbook reveals:

ORIGINAL LYRICS

And apologetic statesmen of a compromising kind, Such as—what d'ye call him—Thing'em-bob and likewise—Never mind. And 'S t — ' s t — ' s t —and W hat's-his-nam e, and a lso You know who— The task of filling up the blanks, I'd rather leave to you. But it really doesn't matter who you'd put upon the list. For they's none of 'em be missed—they'd none of them be missed.

CHANGED LYRICS

The public curse, the Parliamentary obstructionist— The frothy Hyde Park ranter ar ’ the "scorching" bicyclist— And that cruel but comic coward, the depraved (boxer]81 chinaman We've taught them all the lessons that a single nation can But if Europe were agreed the malefactor's neck be twist I don't think he'd be missed—I don't think he'd be missed.

Also, in Patience. Grosvemor's phrase in the duet "When I go out of door," was originally "a three-penny bus young man;" it later became a

"two-penny tube young man," but due to an increase in the underground prices, was reverted to "a three-penny bus young man" in later editions. 82 52 In the promptbook of H. M. S. Pinafore, the following dialogue has been changed to lyrics for a recitative for Sir Joseph and Butter­ cup:®^

ORIGINAL DIALOGUE

S ir Joseph

Josephine, I cannot tell you the distress I feel at this most painful revelation. I desire to express to you officially that I am hurt. You whom I honoured by seeking in marriage—you, the daughter of a captain in the Royal Navy!

B uttercup

Hold, I have something to say to that

S ir Joseph

You?

B uttercu p

Yes, I!

CHANGE TO RECITATIVE

S ir Joseph

My pain and my distress Again it is not easy to express Ify amazement, sty s u rp ris e You may le a r n from th e e x p re ssio n o f my eyes

B u ttercu p

Hold! Ere you upon your loss lay much stress A long concealed crime I would confess.

In both cases, the dialogue is followed by Buttercup's song, "A many years ago." Modern editions of the opera incorporate the change to recitative, as there is music in the Sullivan score to justify the change.

In the second act of The Mikado, modern editions delete the underlined portion of the following speech: 53 Mikado

There's the pathetic part of it. Unfortunately, the fool of an Act says "compassing the death of the Heir Apparent." There's not a word about a mistake, or not knowing, or having no notion. There should be. of course, but there isn 't. That's the slovenly way these acts are always drawn. However, cheer up. I t'll be all right. I'll have it altered next session. Now, let's see about your execution—w ill after luncheon suit you? Can you wait till then?

The following dialogue has been added in modern texts in place of the deleted section:

Ko-Ko, Pitti-Sing and Pooh-Bah

No!

Mikado

Or not knowing—

Ko-Ko

No!

Mikado

Or having no notion—

P itti- S in g

No!

Mikado

Or not being there—

Pooh-Bah

No!

Mikado

There should be, of course

Ko-Ko, Pitti-Sing and Pooh-Bah

Yes! 54 Mikado

But there isn't.

Ko-Ko, Pitti-Sing and Pooh-Bah

Oh!

There are several lesser changes In lines in The Mikado. For example,

In the Act I song for Nanki-Poo, "A Wandering Minstrel I," the words,

"Oh, willow, willow," have been changed in the promptbook to "Oh, sorrow, sorrow," and the lines in the Trio and Chorus, "The criminal cried as he dropped him down," the chorus’s words,

He always t r i e s To u t t e r l i e s And every tim e he f a i l s have been crossed out and these words inserted:

Whenever he tries He u tte r ly l i e s And invariably he fails.

Occasionally, Gilbert adds lines in the promptbook to get an additional laugh, and with it to end a French scene. Compare the origi­ nal text with the promptbook variation of this section of The Mikado, following Pooh-Bah 1 s famous speech on maintaining the integrity of his various public offices:

ORIGINAL PROMPTBOOK (U nderlined added in hand)

Ko-Ko Ko-Ko

The matter shall have my careful The matter shall have my careful consideration. But my bride consideration. But see my bride her sisters approach, and any and her sisters approach, and compliment on your part, such as any little compliment on your an abject grovel in a character- part, such as an abject grovel Istic Japanese attitude, would in a characteristic Japanese be esteemed a favour. (Exeunt attitude^ would be esteemed a together) a favour 55 Pooh-Bah

I shall do nothing of the kind

Ko-Ko

You'll be Insulted in the usual way, (Bribes him with money)

(Pooh exits R2E, Ko-Ko exits R2E)

In a briefer manner, Gilbert ties up a scene in The Sorceror: just be­

fore the Quintet, "I rejoice that it's decided," Dr, Daly congratulates with the following line, "My dear Sir Marmaduke, I heartily congratulate

you." And in the original printed text, and the most recent published

edition, this ends the French scene. But Gilbert had added in the

promptbook Sir Marmaduke’s line, "Sir, you are most obleeging."

In Trial by Jury, Gilbert elongates the final moments of the

play with a "Grand Transformation Scene" and adds lyrics and stage

directions. After the Company has reprised the "Oh, yes, I am a

judge" Chorus and Solo, at the point where, some printed versions end

the opera, Gilbert adds:

Judge

Tho' defendant is a snob

A ll

And a good snob, too

Judge

Tho’ defendant is a snob

A ll

And a great snob, too

Judge

Tho' defendant is a snob I 'll reward him from my fob 56 So we've settled with the job And a good job, too. and then the stage directions:

Picture and curtain Red fire R and L 5 pans on each side

ftbdern editions vary in their treatment of these final lines.

Not one editor accepts the idea of a "Grand Transformation," and thus all omit the final stage directions. Likewise, the promptbooks are a rich source for the comic business which Gilbert intended to accompany the dialogue and lyrics. For example, in Act II of The Sorceror, when

Constance, under the influence of the magic philtre, falls madly in love with the decrepit deaf Notary, during the solo, "I know not why I love him so," Gilbert instructs the actress as follows: "Constance drags Notary around the stage L to R." If one takes the marginal nota­ tions for Trial by Jury alone, he can create a picture of the humourous, visual nature of the business intended by the author-director.^ During

the Defendant's Song "When first my old, old love I knew" the directions a re c le a r:

At [the words] Tick-a-Tank, the Jury affects to be playing a guitar. The man on the right affects to be playing a tamborine and the one on the left to be playing the bones.

Later, when the Counsel begins "But I submit, m'lud, with all sub­ mission," Gilbert instructs,

Judge now requests the [plaintiff] to go down—she objects—but he insists—she goes a couple of paces toward the witness box— and then she rushs back and sticks pen in Judge's wig. and as the Counsel begins "And at this stage, it don't appear that we can settle it," the required business is:

Defendant gets up and turns and looks at Counsel, who in striking desk with Brief hits defendant's hand. Defendant then sits down. 57 When the Bridesmaids sing, "But this he is willing to say," Gilbert instructs the Defendant to "remonstrate" with the Judge, "who dips his pen in ink and throws ink in the Def(endantj1s eye." In the final

Chorus Gilbert repeats the earlier motif, directing that "the Brides­ maids clap their hands a la minstrels," and for the final Picture,

the Plaintiff gets on the Judge's back, the two bridesmaids with Counsel and Defendant fall right and left, while the remaining Bridesmaids kneel with their arms over their heads.

The promptbooks often show Gilbert as the wise, practical man of the theatre, having the experience of actual performance in mind.

For example, after Ko-Ko's song listing those who "never would be missed," there is this note:

In the event of no encore, Ko-Ko says the following lines to get the Chorus off, 'Gentlemen, I expect my three beautiful wards Yum-Yum, Pitti-Sing and Peep-Bo in a few minutes. If you would go and receive them with a show of abject deference, I should feel o b lig e d ."

In Trial by Jury, the director notes an interesting theatrical device as he requests the principals in the repeat of "A nice dilemma" to each single out "someone in the Stalls or Boxes and [sing} to them but not offensively."

Often the prompt notes describe a degree of spectacle not even suggested by the printed stage directions. In H. M. S. Pinafore, for example, there is the following notation at the conclusion of the opera

For Picture the chorus gent[lemen} mount their guns two on each and wave hats. The ladies kneel in front of the guns and Sailor boys go up rigging and all sing Rule Britannia.

The afore-mentioned "Grand Transformation Scene" which Gilbert added to

Trial by Jury, borrowing the convention from the traditional English pantomime, is not acknowledged by modern editors. In the promptbook, at the printed words "Grand Transformation Scene," there is the 58 handwritten message, ’’Gong for Change," and as the Chorus sings the final "And a good Judge, too," the "gong is struck for the trick change to Fairyland," and the following directions appear:

The canopy revolves The far pieces behind Judge fall 2 revolving pieces behind Judge come around The rise comes up and covers bench front The Judge's and associates' desks open The chamber flats are broken and taken away and wings pushed on Cloths in front of benches and Jury box are let down And masking for same pushed on The Jurymen, Counsel and Ladies have blue bells which they hold over bridesmaids for Final Picture

Likewise, the entrance of Katisha in The Mikado was much more spectacu­ lar in production than the printed stage direction would indicate. In addition to numerous lesser notes to the principals and chorus in the margins of the printed page, Gilbert adds the following:

As procession enters, Ko-Ko goes off R1E. Chorus enters L3E, four deep and march to the footlights. Basses on the right, tenors on the left, the ladies in twos in the middle. On the first four reaching the footlights, the tenors pass immediately behind the ladies at their RH side, and take their places between the basses— the whole then line the Right and Back of the stage. The Coolies (six) then enter, march down to the footlights, the six soldiers enter, and march in like manner—taking up their positions in front of Platform L. The Mikado and Katisha enter with umbrella carried by Chorister--the entire chorus kneel as they enter with heads on ground--as he begins "From every kind of man" they raise their heads.

There follows a diagram of the positions at the end of the processional

(Figure 7).

The promptbook notes often give Indication of the business in­ vented by Gilbert to cover musical interludes as well as the manner in which Gilbert intended a scene to end. At the end of the final

Ensemble of The Sorceror. there is the printed note, "(General Dance)

During the symphony Mr. Wells sinks through trap amid red fire." Gilbert elucidates on this final spectacle of dance and fiery descent: 59

i. * i ^ ?

>>L * * P o P c> ^ » •K C? {? & M I K A t » 0 o’ p* * 0 0 t» . »

Figure 7. Positions immediately following the Entrance Procession of the Mikado, with Katisha, Act II, The Mikado. Reconstructed from the promptbook by R. Boyer. Original in the Manuscript Divi­ s io n , B r itis h Museum (ADD if 49312). L adies swing R, Gent'ra swing L t i l l l a s t o f sym (phony) then s e t and turn in time to Wells descending trap. At end of (Chorus] 2nd bell to lower trap two feet. 3rd bell as curtain descends on picture— the trap to be lowered to the bottom. Red fire. Previous to descending, Uells winds up his watch, sees that it is going, cleans his glasses, etc. and at the reassent of curtain for Picture, throws his hat up (out of trap) and last of all a shower of his business cards.

Over the years the information supplied in such abundance by

the promptbooks has been regrettably neglected by editors of the numerous anthologies, reading and acting versions of the operas. In many cases, these editors have overlooked the obvious intent of the

dramatist. There is a clear need for a definitive, new, annotated

edition of the complete Savoy operas, incorporating the immense

knowledge which would come from an acquaintance with the B ritish

Museum prompt scripts, which, after all, were Gilbert’s personal guide

to the re-creation of his works for the musical stage. FOOTNOTES

CHAPTER I I

*This method of composition is paraphrased from the entry "Gilbert, William Schwenclc" in The Dictionary of National Biography, 1901-1911 (London: Oxford University Press, 1912), p. 110.

2Francoise A. Cellier and C. Bridgeman. Gilbert and Sullivan and D'Oyly Carte (London: I. Pitman and Sons, Ltd., 1914), p. 52.

^Audrey Williamson. Gilbert and Sullivan Opera. A New Assess­ ment (New York: Macmillan, 1953), p. 229.

^From Fun. January, 1868, as quoted by Leslie Baily in The Gilbert and Sullivan Book (London: Spring Books, 1952), p. 74.

^Williamson, op. c it., p. 228. For the 1897 revival, the D'Oyly Carte Company added the second setting, but purely as a luxury.

®Ibid., p. 121. Princess Ida has a Prologue and two acts, with three different settings, but this is an exception; it was based on G ilbert's earlier play, The Princess, which had played at the Olympic Theatre in 1870.

^Reginald Allen. The First Night Gilbert and Sullivan (New York: The Heritage Press, 1958), p. 379.

^Quoted in Ibid.

^Quoted in Henry Saxe Wyndham. Arthur Seymour Sullivan (New York: Harper and Brothers, 1926), p. 203.

lOLeslie Baily. The Gilbert and Sullivan Book (London: Spring Books, 1952), p. 110.’

llQjoted in Hesketh Pearon. Gilbert and Sullivan (New York: Harper & Brothers, 1935), p. 121. Weedon Grossmith was the brother of the celebrated George Grossmith, leading comedian with the D'Oyly Carte Company in the e a r ly y e a rs.

^ D iv is io n of M anuscripts, The B r itis h Museum, M anuscript # 39345, foie 142.

13I b id .

61 62 ^Sidney Dark and Rowland Grey. W. S. Gilbert. His Life and Letters (London, Methuen & Co., Ltd., 1923), p. 85.

P» 8®* l^Henry A. Lytton. The Secrets of a Savoyard (London: Jarrolds Ltd., 1922), p. 60.

^•^Cellier and Bridgeman, op. c it. . p. 52.

l^M cIntosh ty p e s c rip t. M anuscript D iv isio n . B r itis h Museum. ADD # 39345, fol. 142.

^Audrey Williamson. Gilbert and Sullivan Opera. A New Assess­ ment (New York: Macmillan, 1953), p. 17.

2®Henry Saxe Wyndham. A rthur Seymour S u lliv a n (New York: Harper and Brothers, 1926), p. 142. On the battleship Victory, Nelson had lost his li£e in the battle o£ Trafalgar.

21 Ib id .

22Quoted in Wyndham, op. c i t . , p. 43.

^Ethel B. Tweedie. Behind the Footlights (London: Hutchinson and Co., 1904), p. 195.

^Frank L. Moore. Crowell*s Handbook of Gilbert and Sullivan (New York: Thomas W. Crowell Company, 1962), p. 136.

2^Audrey Williamson. Gilbert and Sullivan Opera: A New Assess­ ment (New York: Macmillan, 1953), p. 118.

28Quoted in Allen, First Night, op. c it., p. 174.

2?Quoted in Dark and Grey, op. c it. , p. 135.

28 I b id .

2 9A miniature Japanese village had been created at Knightsbridge L ittle was known of Japan in this period, and English society flocked to the little colony to watch native Japanese in their daily activity. It was considered stylish by Londoners to go to Knightsbridge and sip tea served in oriental fashion. The male dancer hired by Gilbert was an accomplished linguist, but the tea-girl could only say "sixpense please" —that being the price of a cup of tea in the establishment where she was employed. (See Sigmund A. Lavine. Wandering M instrels We (New York Dodd Mead, 1954), p. 172, and F ran co ise A. C e llie r and C. Bridgeman. Gilbert and Sullivan and D'Oyly Carte (London: I. Pitman and Sons, Ltd. 1914), p. 191). 3®Issac Goldberg. The Story of Gilbert and Sullivan (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1928), p. 309.

3*Quoted in Baily, op. c it., p. 268.

^ D i v i s i o n 0 f M anuscripts, B r itis h Museum, M anuscript ADD $ 39345, fol. 139.

33Park and Grey, op. c it., p. 104.

3 4Ib id .

33Quoted in Baily, op. c it.. p. 308.

34Park and Grey, op. c it., p. 134.

3^Jessie Bond. The Life and Reminiscences of Jessie Bond (London: John Lane, 1930), p. 149.

38($uoted Allen. First Nights, op. cit., p. 380.

39I b id .

^This celebrated scene accounted for a major part of the staggering cost of the opera: ,£7,200, of which more than £5,000 was attributable to costumes, accessories, and "hand-props," according to Allen, op. cit., First Night, p. 380, who quotes the Sunday Times rev iew er.

4*Quoted in S. J. Adair Fitz-Gerald. The Story of the Savoy Opera (London: Stanley Paul and Company, 1924), p. 119.

43Quoted in Baily, pp. c it., p. 177.

43Quoted in Norman Wyner. Gilbert and Sullivan (New York: Dutton, 1963), p. 89.

44D'Auban had danced the role of 'a Sprite' in G ilbert's early travesty Robert the Devil; or, The Nun. The Dun and the Son of a Gun, which opened the Gaiety Theatre, December 21, 1868.

43Baily, pp. cit.. p. 142.

4®Edith A. Browne. W. S. Gilbert (New York: John Lane, Co., 1907), p. 67.

4?Hesketh Pearson. Gilbert and Sullivan (New York: Harper & Brothers, 1935), p. 105.

48Baily. op. cit.. p. 141. 49sir Arthur Quiller-Couch. Studies in Literature. Third S e rie s (Cambridge; Cambridge University Press," 1933), p. 207-08.

50*[he "tyranny" of which Gilbert is here accused must be under­ stood in the light of the conventional latitude given the average actor in the Victorian theatre.

51-H. M. Walbrook. Gilbert and Sullivan Opera: A History and a Comment (London: F. V. White and Company, 1922), p. 119.

S^Lynton Hudson. The English Stage. 1850-1950 (London: George G. Harrap, 1951), p. 161.

S^The average tenor, according to Pearson, og. c it., p. 93, was "Particularly objectionable, being subject to fits of temperament."

^Fitz-Gerald. oj>. cit., p. 28.

^Quoted in Lavine., og. c it.. p. 65.

^%rom an article written for The Observor on the centenary of G ilbert's birth, quoted in Baily, oj>. c it.« p. 142.

S^Baily, oj>. c it., p. 335.

5%orman Wymer. Gilbert and Sullivan (New York: Dutton, 1963), p . 61.

5 % a n u sc rip t D iv isio n , B r itis h Museum, M anuscript ADD # 49333. The letter was written less than a month after the beginning of the so-called 'carpet quarrel,' which drew the partners apart, and explains the tone of the epistle.

^ M an u sc rip t D iv isio n , B r itis h Museum, M anuscript ADD # 49333. ^ M an u sc rip t D iv isio n , B r itis h Museum, M anuscript ADD # 49333.

®^Despite the relative simplicity of the settings, D'Oyly Carte felt it necessary on two occasions, the opening nights of Ruddigore and The Gondoliers, to include "indulgence slips" in the printed pro­ grams. These read, "Notice. It is probable that there will be a con­ siderable delay to-night between the first and second Acts of the Opera, in consequence of the complicated scenery. Under these circumstances the kind indulgence of the audience is requested."

^G ilbert's Diary, 1878. Manuscript Division, British Museum. M anuscript ADD V 49322.

^Promptbook for The Sorceror. Manuscript Division, British Museum, Manuscript ADD # 49310.

65Ib id . ^Promptbook for Fogerty's Fairies. Manuscript Division. B r itis h Museum. M anuscript ADD 49314.

^ lt should be mentioned here that the auditorium lights, gas and electric, at the Opera Comique and the Savoy Theatre were not lowered during the performance. Many audience members purchased the shilling "book of words" and followed the progress of the performance with book in hand. H. M. Walbrook. Gilbert and Sullivan Opera: A History and a Comment (London: F. V. White and Company, 1922), p. 12.

**®Both reviewers quoted in Allen, op. c it. , First Night, p. 174.

^Quoted in Allen, pp. c it.. First Night, p. 174.

70Quoted in Allen, op. c it., First Night, p. 274.

7*Baily, op. c it., p. 293.

77Quoted in Allen, op. c it.. First Night, p. 207.

7 3Ibid., p. 206.

74promptbook for The Mikado, Manuscript Division, B ritish Museum, M anuscript ADD v 49312. For this study, promptbook notations have occasionally been slightly altered for clarity. No major altera­ tion, addition or deletion has been made, however, without the tradi­ tional indication within the text.

75promptbook for The Sorceror. Manuscript Division, British Museum, M anuscript ADD # 48310. The d e s c rip tio n o f W e lls's movements is from a pencil sketch in the front of the promptbook; all else is reconstructed from handwritten ink notations on pages of, and adjacent to, the printed text.

7&Norman Wymer. Gilbert and Sullivan (New York: Dutton, 1963), p . 60.

77Ethel B. Tweedie. Behind the Footlights (London: Hutchinson and Co., 1904), p. 194.

7®Wymer, op. c it. , p. 60.

79The most modern edition, edited by Miss Bridget D'Oyly Carte, and based in part upon the promptbooks currently in the possession of the D'Oyly Carte Opera Company is: W. S. Gilbert. The Savoy Operas. Vols. I and II. (London: Oxford University Press, 1965).

®^The line, "My face is unattractive," is handwritten in the promptbook, but has been added to modem printed editions, thus further demonstrating the seemingly arbitrary way in which these editions were p rep ared .

t ®*This word in the manuscript is almost illegible, and al­ though it makes rough scanning, I am convinced that "boxer" is the proper reading, particularly in light of the following lines.

®^Allen. op. cit., First Night, p. 166.

®^Promptbook for H. M. S. Pinafore, Manuscript Division, B r itis h Museum, M anuscript ADD # 49310.

B^Modern editions invariably give the former reading.

^Rutland Barrington, in the role of Pooh-Bah, added the line "No money-no grovel!" here, and Gilbert accepted it grudgingly, according to Miss Bridget D'Oyly Carte in her Introduction to the 1963 edition of the opera lib retti published by the Oxford University Press (op. cit., p. viii).

®^Promptbook for Trial by Jury. Manuscript Division, British Museum, M anuscript ADD #49310. f o l. 14 and fa c in g page.

S^Ibid. , facing pages opposite folios 5, 12-14. CHAPTER I I I

GILBERT IN REHEARSAL

One may appreciate the typical procedures of rehearsal in the

Victorian theatre, and, more specifically, some of those procedures against which W. S. Gilbert was revolting, from an article which the dramatist wrote for Tom Hood*s Comic Annual of 1873, entitled "A Stage

Play11.'*’ In this piece, Gilbert describes what must have been a familiar scene:

The piece flounders through rehearsal—the dingy theatre lighted by a T-piece in front of the stage, which has no perceptible effect at the back; the performers usually (at all events during the first two or three rehearsals) standing in a row with their backs to the auditorium that the light may fall on crabbed manuscripts they are trying to read from; the author endeavors but in vain, to arrange effective exits and entrances because no one can leave the T-piece; the stage manager or prompter calling a halt from time to time that he may correct an overlooked error in his manuscript or insert a stage direction.

An engraving published in the Christmas number of the Graphic and pur­ ported to be a rehearsal of Thespis (Figure 8), has been shown to be in actuality the rehearsal of an earlier piece, but Gilbert is present as is Robert Soutar, who played Tipseion in T h e s p i s . ^ The picture clearly shows the gas-light T-piece, of which Gilbert writes in "A Stage Play."

The production of Thespis, the first opera from the G & S col­ laboration, was not well received, partially because of inadequate re­ hearsal. One critic, appraising the opening night wrote,3

That the grotesque opera was sufficiently rehearsed cannot be

67 68

F ig u re 8. Engraving depicting an on-stage rehearsal, Gilbert present. From Reginald Allen. The First Night Gilbert and Sullivan (New York: The Heritage Press, 1958), p. 3. 69 allowed, and to this cause must be ascribed the frequent waits, the dragging effect, and the indisposition to take up points which, recurring so frequently, marred the pleasant effect of Mr. Sulli­ van's music and destroyed the pungency of Mr. G ilbert's humour. . . . We anticipate that prodigious curtailment and further rehearsal will enable us to tell a different tale.

Gilbert never again let the charge of insufficient rehearsal be leveled against any of his productions. Rather, they became known for the re­ markable state of readiness which characterized the operas on their opening nights. The London Standard's review of Pinafore, was to be­ come typical of press reaction:^

The 'business' of the scene and arrangements of the characters are invariably strong points in Mr. G ilbert's pieces, and the results of his careful superintendence are always visible.

Hie British Museum diary for the year 1878 is revealing in re­ gard to Gilbert's rehearsal schedule. Although the entries are cryptic, they indicate the progress Gilbert made in several of his productions.

One can follow, for example, the unusually long rehearsal period of his non-musical play The Ne'er Do Weel in the entries for late January and

February. The first notation^ occurs on January 31st: "Rehearsed 3rd

Act of Ne'er do weel . . . everything satisfactory . . . Rehearsal of comic scenes. Tack leaps very well." No further mention of this play until February 13, when Gilbert notes, "Rehearsed 1st and 2nd acts of

Ne'er do weel. Wills wants to produce at next Wednesday (the 21st] — o b je c te d —postponed to Monday w eek." From February 13 to 21, G ilb e rt rehearsed two acts each day. On the 21st, the entry reads, "Rehearsed

3rd act (twice) + second act—but scenery abominable." On the following

Saturday, two days before the opening, Gilbert had,

No rehearsal this morning. Corrected copies of Ne'er do weel for critics - sent them off . . . afterwards went through Ne'er do weel. . . . Afterwards . . . went to Olympic for scene rehearsal of Act 2—everything satisfactory except that I found the piece arranged 70 to be played at 7.45. Altered this to 8.

Finally, on opening night, Gilbert notes,

Went to rehearsal of Ne'er do weel . . . all satisfactory. First night of Ne'er do weel. 1st and 2nd act (up to Zuelt's scene) went magnificently. End of 2nd act tame--comedy scene of 3rd act failed--serious scenes went well—divided verdict at end. Called.^

Unfortunately, the diary covers little of the period in which

Gilbert was rehearsing the operas. There are two interesting notes con­ cerning rehearsals for H. M. S. Pinafore. On May 24, 1878, Gilbert

"Rehearsed in the morning and . . . remained at theatre until 5.30. . .

. fhad dinner] . . . then drove to Opera Comique--night rehearsal.

Everything smooth—dresses all right—remained there until 3.35 a.m."

For the opening night, May 25, 1878, Gilbert notes,

Went to Opera Comique to superintend scene. Rehearsed there until 6.30, working at it . . . to theatre at 8—put finishing touches and: rowdy gallery, singing songs and piece went . . . well. I went out three or four times during the evening. Enthusiastic calls for self and Sullivan.

General Philosophy of Rehearsal

When The Pirates of Penzance had its world premiere in New

York, having been directed by the dramatist, the Dramatic Mirror praised the stage direction and commented, "Gilbert's quaint creation is il­ lustrated by the company just as Gilbert conceived it."? The general amazement that a production might be the outcome of a single master­ spirit is not unconmon among Victorian comnentators. Gilbert believed that the playwright should dominate the theatre and be a master of stage management. He pointed out in a privately printed preface to Pygmalion and Galatea that the supreme importance of careful rehearsal was not sufficiently recognized in England. He believed that when his pieces were carefully rehearsed they succeeded, when they were insufficiently 71 rehearsed, they failed. This he claimed could be supported by statistics.&

Gilbert believed that the "principle of subordination must be maintained in the theatre, as in a regiment," as he stated in a letter to an actor who was accused of defying the stage manager's authority.

Gilbert councelled further^

If an unreasonable order is given, it must be acted upon, and its unreasonableness represented to a higher authority. This is the rule of the Savoy Theatre and no one would be retained on its staff who hesitated to recognize it.

From his early days at the Royalty Theatre and the Opera Comi­ que, Gilbert was fortunate in his ability to demand almost m ilitary authority over his performers. As A. H. Godwin has pointed out, ^

Gilbert had the opportunity to be a dictator who did not need "to make little concessions here and there to satisfy nincompoops of crude judgement." Godwin continues, "in his own business, that of presenting a play, he would no more endure slipshod methods, either in himself or others, than he would strut like an aesthetic along Piccadilly.

As with the preparation outside of rehearsal, Gilbert believed in lengthy, careful and detailed endeavor in the rehearsals themselves.

He was, as numerous actors and actresses testified, a very patient man, who believed that no methods were too extreme if they resulted in the effect at which he aimed. Occasionally, the means which he found necessary to use were severely trying to his company, but, as Henry Saxe

Wyndham has pointed out ^-2 "it is doubtful whether any other means would have brought about a similar result." Sir Henry Lytton has remarked^ that Gilbert

nimble witted as he was . . . would spend days shaping and reshaping 72 some witty fancy into phrases that satisfied his meticulous taste and days and weeks would be given to polishing and repolishing some l y r i c a l gem. and, elsewhere relates that^

when everything else was perfect, I have known Gilbert to spend many long hours making his company practice facial expression, tiny movements of the hands and of the feet, impressing upon them the effect these small things had upon an audience and upon the general success of the piece.

Indeed, the company became used to spending "many long hours" in re­ hearsal with Mr. Gilbert. If the scheduled rehearsals seemed insuffi­ cient to him, Gilbert would call additional ones. For a revival of

The Gondoliers, for example, he insisted on a couple of extra rehearsals in order to get "(in the interests of the piece) as good a revival as the material at my command w ill allow.

The results of the lengthy rehearsals fully justified them. The productions seen on opening nights at the Savoy, when all of the music, words, business and spectacle came together smoothly and effectively, gave the impression that the performance was the hundredth instead of the first.I** Francoise Cellier, the first of the musical directors for the G & S productions, remembered,^

that, under our author and composer's careful, astute, and deter­ mined supervision and control, rehearsals were brought to such a pitch of perfection, the opera so thoroughly set and dried before offering to the public that seldom, if ever, was it found necessary to "call" the company [for] "more study or for any revision of the w o rk ."

Procedures in Rehearsal

As has been demonstrated in Chapter II, Gilbert came to rehears­ al fully prepared and with a detailed conception of the production as it was to proceed moment by moment. According to Henry L y tto n ,th e use of the model stage allowed the dramatist to say at the first staging 73 rehearsal: "Your first entrance w ill be here, and your second

entrance there," and "'Spurn not the nobly born 1 will be sung by

Tblloler just there, and while he sings it, Mountararat will stand

there, Phyllis there," and so on. Gilbert's ability to do this, with­ out deliberation, seems to have astonished actors of the day. The well- known Scottish tenor, Durward Lely, who joined the Savoy company for

The Pirates of Penzance described the first rehearsal for Iolanthe*9

saying the cast sat on the stage facing the author,

then Gilbert would read the 'book' to us, saying as he went, 'This is your part, Grossmith,' Barrington or Lely as the case might be. He read exceedingly well, and gave full value to every word and every phrase, and it was quite an education in itself to hear him.

That Gilbert was fully prepared in rehearsal is verified by Mrs. Alec-

Tweedie, who attended one of the revival rehearsals. She writes in her

book Behind the Footlights.^

Mr. Gilbert knows every bar, every intonation, every gesture, the hang of every garment, and the tilt of every hat. He has his plans and his ideas, and never alters the situations or even the gestures he has once thought out.

As soon as was practical in the rehearsal period, Gilbert re­

quired properties to be available, as well as costumes or surrogate-

costumes. His diary reveals his impatience with lack or properties.

On February 11, 1878, he noted, "after dinner we went to night rehearsal

at the Gaiety. Rehearsal rather weak—no properties. ..." and the

next day, . . went to the Gaiety—dress rehearsal—comic scenes

sloppy for want of properties."^*

A further interesting technique of rehearsal is revealed by

George G r o s s m i t h 22 who records that Gilbert and Sullivan were so con­

scientious in the preparation of stage and musical effects, that they

had raised in the auditorium "a sort of stage or scaffold," in order 74 that they might have the '’correct audience view” of the proceedings.

Even when, at the final full-dress rehearsal, an audience was invited to the theatre, "the first three rows of the stalls were railed off, so as to allow composer and writer a free range to study the effects."23

Mrs. Alec-Tweedie, a personal friend of the Gilberts, describes

Mr. Gilbert in rehearsal, and gives a partial picture of the typical procedure:24

From 11.30 to 1.30—exactly two hours, he [Gilbert] walked up and down in front of the stage, directing here, adjusting there; one moment he was showing a man how to stand like a soldier, then how to clap his thighs in nautical style, and the next explaining to a woman how to curtsey, or telling a lover how to woo. In no sense a musician, Mr. Gilbert could hum any of the airs and show the company the minutest gesticulation at the same time. Be it under­ stood, they were already word and music perfect, and this was the second 'stage rehearsal . 1

Nothing was ever left to chance by the collaborators, according to Hesketh P e a r s o n ^ and "the company had to go through its evolutions at the word of command, repeating thc^m, as on a parade-ground, until the process became automatic," and yet Gilbert was not known for bullying actors nor for using a peremptory tone. He was more likely to approach an actor, who was not performing satisfactorily, and say "If I were you,

I think I should do it like this."26 indeed, although he was not always placid and had a capacity for anger, one observor records that Gilbert,

marched up and down the stage advising an alteration here, an intonation there, all in the kindest way possible, but with so much strength of conviction that all his suggestions were adopted without a moment's hesitation. He never loses his temper, always sees the weak points, and is absolute master of stage-craft. His tact on such occasions is wonderful.27

When necessary, Gilbert was known to perform in rehearsal in order to show exactly what he wanted. The actress Ellallne Terriss in her auto­ biography ^ remembers that Gilbert was a great "stage manager," 75 and could show you what he meant by acting a scene for you. Sometimes having to impersonate a g irl's part, being six feet in height and big in proportion, he seemed funny, but he wasn't really, for he conveyed even to the ladies the exact way his dialogue should be spoken.

Gilbert could also show his company how to dance with the skill of a dancing-master, just as he could teach them how to pronounce words and maintain rhythm with the efficiency of a music-master. William

Archer, the American critic was astonished that even if it was necessary for Gilbert to instruct the ballet, "he is still in his element, being adept even in the harlequin art."2^ Mrs. Tweedie was likewise astonished at Mr. G ilbert's facility with musical and choreographic techniques.

She recalls that at the rehearsal which shev i s i t e d , ^

He even danced when necessary to show the company how to get the right number of steps in so as to land them at a certain spot at a certain time, explaining carefully, "There are eight bars, and you must employ so many steps.

Although many actors were offended by G ilbert's assumption of complete control, even over individual performances, members of the

Savoy company remember him as a kind and helpful guide. Miss Nancy

McIntosh, although his adopted daughter, writes with reasonable objec­ tivity. Commenting on how pleasant rehearsal were for Utopia (Limited) ,

Miss McIntosh is quoted as saying,31

I never knew so patient a man. After you have done a thing wrong twenty times, he will put you right the twenty-first as aimiably as if he were telling you a new thing.

Miss McIntosh, in the unpublished British Museum typescript, writes of

G ilbert's technique with the actors and of his ultimate kindness :^ 2

Sir William seemed to love rehearsing a new piece, and one of the things that impressed his company most when at work was his extraordinary patience whent teaching inexperienced or stupid people who tried to do what he wanted. He knew exactly how he wanted every line given and every scene acted and he never seemed 76 to mind how many tim es he had to go over th e same th in g , hammering on and on, until he got it as he wanted it, and the more difficult it was for the actor to grasp, the more patient and kind he grew, doing everything in his power to encourage and help him.

Often he was asked how he could have the patience to repeat the same thing over and over again, as often as he did when coaching beginners, and he always said that it was the only way to get the best out of the players; but it seemed to those looking on that mere patience could never have stood the strain, and that he must have possessed an unusually large store of genuine kindness to draw from as well. There was a tradition in the theatre that he could 'make a stick act 1 and it was most interesting to see how he d id i t .

G ilbert's supply of patience in the rehearsal situation was not inexhaustible. When he was particularly frustrated with an actor's inability to perform as he wished, Gilbert would resort to a dryly self-deprecating remark. When Grossmith became weary of rehearsing a certain gesture time and again, the performer told Gilbert "that he had rehearsed the business until he felt 'a perfect fool."' Gilbert replied, "AhI so now we can talk on equal terms."33 DeWolf Hopper, the celebrated star of American operetta and musical comedy, once w r o t e ,^

I should like to have known W. S. Gilbert, but I should not have cared to know him too well, perhaps. All of his wit is not found in the operas. His friends, his neighbors and actors were victims of some of his sharpest shafts. There is the story of the rehearsal of 'Pinafore' at which he directed Rutland Barrington, who played the captain, to sit pensively upon the skylight of the good ship. The actor sat down and the skylight collapsed under him. "Pensively, Rutland, pensively—not expensively," the author chided.

Although he was exceedingly patient in the early rehearsals, Gilbert seems to have become more volatile as opening night approached. In the early period, Gilbert was content to stand in the stalls area, or direct­ ly in front of the stage and give directions. As the rehearsal period progressed, the directions became less agreeably given, particularly 77 i f Gilbert were frustrated, and he was known to frequently bound up on

the stage to show an actor what he wanted. In the latter period, he was also known to resort to "unseemly language." One actor recalled

that Gilbert was the only man he had ever met, "who can swear straight on for five minutes without stopping to think and without repeating h i m s e l f ."35 His swearing must have been extremely rare, as it is almost never alluded to by those who knew him.

That Gilbert did not always achieve what he wished, he himself

testified in a conversation with Percy Fitzgerald.^ Fitzgerald

r e c a lle d ,

Gilbert once remarked to me that, however well conceived the character might be, he could not reckon with any certainty on its 'coming out' as he intended it. No amount of teaching shall insure that an actor shall take the author's view. On the other hand, the actor w ill often come to the w riter's aid and make a character out of a mere sketch or indication.

Although Gilbert got along well with most actors, there was a

certain type of performer which offended him throughout his career.

At one point, during a court trial, Gilbert was asked to signify the

direction of current dramatic taste. He replied that it was in the

direction of "musical comedy, bad musical comedy, in which half-a-dozen

irresponsible comedians are turned loose on the stage to do as they

please.Gilbert could not abide the "inventive" comedian.

Francoise C ellier,^ discussing G ilbert's aversion, describes the per­

former as the man engaged,

to paint his nose red in order to make people laugh, and gain a reputation for himself, but to forbid the cleverest clown to decorate his nasal organ—that is where the fun goes out and poor clown finds his occupation gone.

In a revival production of Trial by Jury. Gilbert discerned such a

player in the chorus, and promptly sent off a note to Mrs. C arte:^ 78 There is a man in the chorus—a 'funny* man who is the bane of true comic opera. He has overacted right through rehearsals and although I told the Jurymen not to make up with wigs, etc., he nevertheless took it upon himself to appear last night in a grotesque flaxen wig. He occupies a place in the Jury box close to the footlights and so is extremely conspicuous. I suggest that he be put in the back row at the end farthest from the stage, then his exaggerations w ill not be important.

Late in his career, Gilbert composed a poem on the difficulties of working with actors:^

Both A and B rehearsal slight— They say they’ll be 'all right at night1 (They've both to go to school yet): C in each act must change her dress D will attempt to 'square the press'; E won’t play Romeo unless His grandmother plays Juliet; F claims all hoydens as her rights (She's played them thirty seasons); A G must show herself in tights For two convincing reasons— Two very well shaped reasons'. Oh, the man who can drive a theatrical team, With wheelers and leaders in order supreme, Can govern and rule, with a wave of his fin. All Europe--with Ireland thrown ini

It was G ilbert's habit to allow acquaintances to attend

occasional rehearsals, and on two occasions, he invited a considerable

audience to be present at a final rehearsal. Rutland Barrington remem­

bers one such occasion in his autobiography:

Certain people had been in the habit of asking {Gilbert} to allow them to be present at a rehearsal, and as he could see no objection, certain people were present at odd times; but it got on the nerves of the artists engaged to a very great extent (artists are always touchy about such things), and they resented— silently, be it said—being practically taught their business before s tra n g e rs .

We held a consultation, and I proposed that a deputation should wait on Gilbert and ask him not to do it again. This was voted a capital idea, but nobody would assist on the deputation, so Carte was invited to approach the great man on the subject. He sternly refused to interfere in any way, so matters were at a deadlock. 79 On one eventful morning, however, I suppose I must have had a liver attack or something (the only way I can account for going about the matter the wrong way), and I declined to rehearse 'before a row of stalls filled with strangers.1 Then the breezes blew! Gilbert was, very naturally, very angry, and, also very naturally did not admit to say so, but matters were eventually adjusted and all was at peace once more.

A public rehearsal was given on the night before opening of Utopia

(Limited), and the audience was quite sizable. Gilbert was irked that critics did not always give him his due, and conceived the idea of allowing the press to see both the final dress rehearsal and the first performance.42 The audience was a cross-section—Bohemians, authors, journalists, artists—as Gilbert wanted the press not only to see the production but to experience the audience reaction, as well. The first few rows of the stalls were empty so that Gilbert and Sullivan might move about, but tl.e rest of the house was crowded. The performance was only stopped on a couple of occasions, and generally went with great smoothness.

Rehearsing the Revivals

By an agreement of September 30, 1903, Mrs. Helen D'Oyly Carte pledged to request Mr. G ilbert's services in the stage management of any revival at the Savoy opera. Gilbert had done several revivals previous to this agreement, but this document formalized the arrangement. The relationship with Mrs. Carte was not always pleasant, full of suspi­ ciousness on both sides, but the manageress did fu lfill her part of the arrangement,44 and paid Gilbert £200 for his contribution to each sub­ sequent revival.

According to Rutland Barrington, it was "Sir William's aim in

. . . revival to get as near to the original rendering as possible. . . For purposes of the revivals, it was the standard practice for the company to learn the music, lyrics and dialogue be­ fore Gilbert entered the rehearsal picture. When the company was suf­ ficiently acquainted with the material—many of them having done the roles previously—Gilbert would arrive totally prepared, notes in hand.

But, he never opened the promptbooks in rehearsal, being so thoroughly familiar with how everything ought to be d o n e .

Trouble with Actors

Like Tom Robertson, Gilbert impressed his personal views on the acting company during rehearsal. It was a relatively new thing for an author to stage his own plays. Robertson had been the first of the 19th

Century dramatist stage-managers—Gilbert the second. Many of the es­ tablished actors of the period "still thought they knew more about the production and performance than the man who provided what they would have called their raw material, and regarded dictation from the writer as an affront."^ Tb demonstrate the confrontation caused by G ilbert's directorial authoritarianism in a period of great permissiveness, several incidents w ill be reported.

Gilbert had worked with Miss Henrietta Hodson in a play called

Ought We to V isit Her? and a quarrel had occurred in rehearsal. The quarrel was renewed when Gilbert again directed Miss Hodsou in a re­ vival of Pygmalion and Galatea in January of 1877. The actress became so enraged by G ilbert's conduct that she published a letter in a leading periodical complaining of mistreatment at his hands, and gained some support for her cause. The Theatre editorialized on June 5, 1877:^®

Mr. Gilbert has yet to learn that he is a servant of the public and amenable to public opinion, and Miss Hodsonmust be 81 congratulated on the courage she has shown in appealing to her profession against him.

Never one to neglect a direct challenge to his artistic integrity and professional conduct, Gilbert responded to Miss Hodson in a phamphlet entitled, "A letter addressed to the Members of the Dramatic Profession in Reply to Miss Henrietta Hodson's Pham phlet."^ The director defends his attempt to avoid a confrontation with Miss Hodson by replacing her before rehearsals at the Haymarlcet Theatre began. He claims respect for her as an actress, but adds, "I have the misfortune to differ alto­ gether from Miss Hodson's view as to the function of the dramatic author at rehearsals. ..." Had he removed her from the cast after rehearsals had begun, he knew it would have meant unemployment, so he put the matter in the hands of the stage manager, Mr. Howe, as an arbiter.

There followed an argument over re-casting, with Miss Hodson first agreeing, then refusing to change parts. Instead of accepting the arbi­ tration of Mr. Howe, she wrote the lengthy catalogue of persecutions at the hands of Mr. Gilbert, and accused him in print of forcing J. B.

Buckstone, manager of the Haymarket, not to renew her contract. Gilbert submits a letter from Mr. Buckstone denying this allegation.

In a period several years earlier than the row with Miss Hodson,

Gilbert also confronted Mrs. Kendal, who with her husband produced many of G ilbert's non-musical plays. At one point in rehearsal of The Wicked

World. Mrs. Kendal threw down her part and refused to continue, adamantly asserting that she would not do what Gilbert was trying to force her to do.30 During the rehearsals for the original production of Pygmalion and Galetea (December, 1871), with the Kendals in the leading roles,

Gilbert was seldom On speaking terms with Mrs. Kendal, except when criticizing her performance audibly from a box.-** Mrs. Kendal recalled that Gilbert was often out in front during dress rehearsals, "when we did not know he was there," and he would suddenly shout out, "What on earth do you think you are d o i n g ? "5 2 The Kendals were not on speaking terms with Gilbert for about twenty years, but Mrs. Kendal later re­ called that he was a generous man, never forgetting his debt to her brother, Tom Robertson.^ During the same production of The Wicked

World mentioned above, Gilbert came to fisticuffs with an actor just before the latter was to appear on stage through a trap. As Gilbert had gotten the best of the other actor, the dramatist came up through

the trap, taking the role which the injured actor was p l a y i n g . 54

In one of the many revivals of Pygmalion and Galatea, Gilbert had to direct an eatress named Janette Steer, who refused to follow his

instructions. The i n c i d e n t ^ is told in two letters which Gilbert wrote to the rebellious Miss Steer:

"I must ask you to advance and kneel in front of Cynisca from her left, and not from her right—to throw yourself on your knees in front of her (without making an exclamation) to fall at Cynisca1s feet at the end of her speech, and not on any account to cross to Pygmalion, or, indeed, to do any business which was not arranged at rehearsal. If you do not comply with my wishes in these respects, I give you notice that on Monday I shall apply for an injunction to prevent your playing the piece, or otherwise as I may be ad v ised .

Miss Steer continued to play the part as she conceived it, and Mr.

Gilbert wrote her further:

"I understand that you interpolated several exclamations last night while Miss Repton was delivering her important speech at the end of the second act, thereby greatly impairing the effect of the speech and causing it to be indistinct and confused. I have instructed Miss Repton how to deal with the difficulty should it again arise. My instructions to her are to stop short at the first interruption, and to remain silent until that interruption has ceased—then to begin again, and should the interruption be repeated again to stop until the annoyance ceases altogether. 83 During a rehearsal for Broken Hearts, Gilbert almost came to blows with John Hare, the leading actor, both of them storming out of

the theatre. However, by chance, they met on a nearby subway platform, and made up. Hr. (afterwards Sir) Johnston Forbes-Robertson was not so

lucky. While rehearsing G ilbert's The Vagabond, under the author's

supervision, Forbes-Robertson began to Improvise the words, rather than

sticking to the playwright's text. Some unpleasant words followed, and

Gilbert did not speak to the actor for some thirty years.56

The actress, Amy Roselle, had appeared in several of G ilbert's

pieces and decided in September of 1877, that she would net like to

repeat the experience. As she was under contract, Gilbert threatened a

lawsuit and the actress gave in, but added, "But from your continued

impertinent conduct towards me, and the gratutitous insults you insist

upon heaping upon me . . . I can only think you wish me to cancel my

engagement." She further states that she w ill perform if he insists,

but that she will have nothing to do with him: "I must refuse to

recognize the existence of a man who has behaved in such an extremely

ungentlemanly m a n n e r ."5 7

When Mary Anderson did a revival of Pygmalion and Galatea in the

eighties, she wished to play the leading role in a classic style, while

the dramatist-director insisted on a modern approach. They also dis­

agreed on the designs of the dresses by Alma-Tadema. Gilbert said that

Miss Anderson "looked like a saint in a stained glass window, instead of

a lively up-to-date g i r l . "58 in her old age, Miss Anderson (who was

better known as Madame Novarro) wrote of her association with G ilbert,59

Ify memories of Gilbert are sweet and bitter. He was a very kind- hearted man, but he did not want anybody to know it. For the most 84 part, he was very kind in our dealings at the theatre, but he took offense very easily, and the result was that he used his great wit as a two-edged sword--often with sharp words. I am sure he was always sorry if he had hurt one. I could not help liking Gilbert, even though one was uncertain of him. . . . Gilbert w as, in h is own words: 'A mass of contradictions, A bundle of incongruities.1 In his kind moods he was one of the most charming men imaginable.

In the early period, when he and Sullivan were gathering an agreeable company to perform their comic operas, Gilbert had particular trouble in convincing established musical comedy performers that they must bend to his authority and foresake much of their earlier training and practice. He had allotted a role in The Sorceror to a Mrs. Paul, an established performer who was used to interpolating her own 'turns' into whatever role she was playing, "a latitude the collaborators never dreamed of allowing to any of their performers," according to Jessie

Bond.60 As early as February 5, 1878, Sullivan wrote to D'Oyly Carte that there would be absolutely no part in the next opera, H. M. S.

Pinafore for Mrs. Paul. Later, in a letter dated April 23, Sullivan reiterated that "there was absolutely nothing for her to do." Reginald

Allen writes61 that "Gilbert . . . intentionally wrote her out of the

script, and that he employed this indirect means of causing a waning and probably domineering star to leave the company of her own accord."

During the rehearsal period of Pinafore. Gilbert dismissed an experienced actor, who rejected G ilbert's ideas and an actress who had

sung previously in Italian opera.62 one of the earlier Josephines in

Pinafore protested that she, as a prima donna, was accustomed to occupy

the center of the stage whenever she sang—a tradition in opera. "But

this is only very common farce," she was told by G ilbert.63

Upon discovering that one of his principals was quite awkward on 85 stage and sang in the unnatural, cheap music-hall style of the time,

Gilbert required the offending actress to stand in an inobtrusive part of the stage. She responded, "Really, Mr. Gilbert, why should I stand here? I'm not a chorus girl." Gilbert retorted, "No, madam, your voice is not strong enough or no doubt you should be.

Technique with the Individual Actor

As I have established in Chapter II, using promptbook evidence,

Gilbert carefully prepared acting and dialogue movement and business before entering the rehearsal hall, and yet, for individual solo num­ bers, he prepared little other than a basic stage position and occasional business for other performers on stage. Realizing that an individual performer cannot create anything interesting without considerable la ti­ tude for his individuality, Gilbert guided, rather than forced his actors to create stage-worthy performances. Audrey Williamson has stated this process quite succinctly:^

It is very commonly stated that Gilbert mapped out every detail of performance; but a close study of contemporary records makes it clear that this applied only to the chorus and players of smaller parts. In the case of the principal artists, Gilbert, although making suggestions and retaining the autocratic right of final supervision, gave the player 'his head', only exercising his veto when the spirit and the style of the opera were violated. Gilbert was, Indeed, too experienced a man of the theatre not to know that first-rate stage players cannot be drilled like puppets, if they are to give of their best; but, consistently, within a certain style, must be allowed to play a character along the lines their natural feelings and personality dictate.

It must be reiterated here, however, that the "first-rate stage players," of which Miss Williamson speaks, were chosen by Gilbert at least par­ tially because of their flexibility, and their lack of compelling egoism.

Both Gilbert and Sullivan were accessible to their performers and were not above listening to and sometimes adopting suggestions of 86 business which the individual performer might invent. When Henry

Lytton assumed the role of the Pirate King for the revival of The Pirates of Penzance, he emphasized the melodramatic side of the character far more than had been seen in the original production, and added "lifts" in his jack-boots which gave him some extra height and an amusing flat- footed walk as he took enormous strides about the stage. Gilbert found the new characteristics both effective and amusing, and was immensely p l e a s e d . 66 On the opening night of The Sorceror, George Grossmith, playing John Wellington Wells, decided "to make his sacrificial exit with the sizzling, charm-brewing tea pot held up like the chimney of a steam ing locomotive."67 Although this business had not been pre-arranged,

Gilbert, perhaps influenced by the audience's obvious delight, endorsed th e addition.66 indeed Grossmith was allowed considerable freedom as is confirmed by G ilbert's statement:69

X used to invent a perfectly fresh character each time for George Grossmith, but he always did it his own way—most excellent in Itself: crisp and smart, but 'G. G.' to the end. . . . his individuality was too strong to be concealed.

Leonora Braham, writing in an early issue of The Gilbert and

Sullivau Journal, gives further evidence of the willingness of the collaborators to make adjustments to suit the performer's individual needs. She tells of how, on the day following the opening of Hie Mikado,

she went to Sullivan and in fo rm e d him that she found it difficult to sing her song, "The Moon and I" as her just-previous participation in the

"Three L ittle Maids" Trio and the Quartette and Chorus, "So please you,

Sir, we much regret," left her breathless. Sullivan, after conferring with Gilbert, moved the solo number to the second act, just following

the "Braid the raven hair" Chorus. 87 During the rehearsals for The Mikado, Gilbert became increasingly sure that Barrington’s solo "My object all sublime" would not be successful, and, at the final dress rehearsal, decided to cut it from the opera. He was particularly intransigent on the point, refusing to hear the performer's arguments for its retention. He was however moved by a plea from the Chorus en masse, and restored the song in time for inclusion on opening night.7*

Gilbert was not above altering the play to give an actor or an actress whom he especially admired, a better part. However, this was sparingly done, and always was a strong theatrical, rather than personal, judgement. When Jessie Bond, who had begun her D’Oyly Carte career in the original Pinafore, decided to defect from the Savoy ranks, just previous to the rehearsals for The Pirates of Penzance, Gilbert wrote h e r :72

"I have carefully considered how to improve the part of Edith (quite as much in our interests as in your own), and I don1t see how the dialogue can be materially altered in such a way as to do you any real good.

"My difficulty is increased by Sullivan's being abroad, for he might have consented to a song to procede Frederick's entrance from the cave—and I would gladly have written such a song—but he i s a t Monaco and q u ite u n lik e ly to work. Indeed, I w ill w rite you such a song with pleasure if you think my doing so w ill satisfy you.

Although Gilbert did not write a solo number for Miss Bond at the point indicated, the character Edith does sing two stanzas of the Chorus

"Climbing over rocky mountain," alone, immediately before Frederick re­ turns from the cave in Act I.

Barrington's relations with Gilbert were particularly strained during the Mikado rehearsals, and the performer's recollection of the circumstances gives insight into G ilbert's rehearsal temperament and 88 conduct with a principal p e r f o r m e r . 73

During rehearsals it was evident to me that Gilbert was not quite satisfied with my rendering of Pooh-Bah, and it worried me con­ siderably, because X could not quite make out what he wanted. I naturally tried my hardest to fall in with his wishes, and things seemed a little better, but when I said to him after some fort­ night's work, 'I hope that is more what you want,' his reply came as rather a shock, 'My dear Barrington, I have no doubt it w ill be an admirable performance, but it is no more my idea of Pooh-Bah than chalk is like cheese.' I then suggested that possibly a quiet v isit paid to him at home, coupled with an hour or two's devotion to the exposition of his views might have the desired effect. This was duly carried out, ;.nd as Gilbert afterwards said, the upshot was a performance that exactly embodied his idea of the part.

G ilbert's relationships with Grossmith and with Barrington, the

two major male principals of the Savoy company, demonstrate how he could

handle performers of almost opposite temperament with equal ease.

Grossmith was a high strung performer, suffering through the rehearsal

p e r i o d s ; 74 Barrington was placid, seemingly nerveless. Gilbert treated

each according to his nature. Hesketh Pearson has w ritten,75

Grossmith was the only man who, with a method and personality foreign to G ilbert's requirements, yet contrived by dint of intensive training to recreate the characters in his own image and add something of value to their creator's conception.

And, Pearson continues, "Barrington was the only man who ever spoke

G ilbert's words exactly as the author wanted them spoken. The enormous

success which each of the two performers found in the Gilbert and Sulli­

van operas is a measure of the viability of G ilbert's methods.

Henry Lytton, principal player in the revivals, recalls how

"wearisome," but well worth it, rehearsals could be under G ilbert's

direction. 76 At one point in a lengthy rehearsal, Lytton, quite dull

end fatigued and unable to grasp one of Gilbert's instructions, said,

"But I haven't done that before, Sir William." Gilbert tartly replied,

"Ho, but X h a v e . And, C. H. Workman, p lay in g Jack P o in t in a 89 revival of The Yeomen of the Guard, was criticized by Gilbert in rehearsal for caressing Elsie and Phoebe too realistically. Workman

said, "Ah yes, I see; you would not kiss them more than once." Gilbert replied, "Oh, indeed I wouldl But I must ask you not to."^®

Two pieces of advice which Gilbert gave to the young actor

Henry Lytton are quite revealing. The director told Lytton that the

delivery of comic lines should not be overplayed, and should leave "a

little to the audience's imagination:" the reason being that an actor must allow the audience "to see and enjoy the point of a joke." Gilbert

added, "I am sure you are intelligent, but, believe me, there are many

in the audience who are more intelligent than you." G ilbert's hint to

Lytton as to what to do with one's hands on stage was, "Cut them off

at the wrist, Lytton, and forget you've got hands'." This advice is

particularly fascinating as it was given in a period when Delsartean

postures and gestures were in fashion. Lytton confesses that he found

the advice quite sound and, if he would avoid nervousness, attempted

to forget his hands entirely.

By cajoling, drilling, and respecting the individuality of his

Individual performers Gilbert drew from them performances which both

enhanced the reputation of the Savoy company and earned national repu­

tations for the performers themselves. Even as early as The Sorceror.

the principals were receiving reviews astonishing for the musical

theatre of the time. Typical of the critical response was the Times

c ritic , who wrote,®®

The leading singers were also thoroughly efficient, every one of them doing all that was practicable to insure an effective 'ensemble,' and succeeding in proportion. 90 Discipline for the Acting Company

Gilbert demanded a level of discipline from his company which was highly unusual in the theatre of the day. The standards which he required in their off-stage conduct will be discussed in Chapter IV.

Here I shall deal with those demands he made in the performance s itu a tio n .

Because he was thoroughly prepared upon his arrival at re­ hearsal, Gilbert expected a like response from his company: a like appreciation for the importance of detail. For Iolanthe, Gilbert had lavished considerable expense and care to get the honorific insignia for the Chorus of Peers precisely correct. At rehearsals for the opera--then called Perola—Gilbert constantly implored the actors to wear the garments as though they were accustomed to wearing them all their lives. In the midst of the grand second-act Entrance and March of the Peers, Gilbert could be heard shouting "For heaven1s sake, wear your coronets as if you were used to them.

Punctuality was likewise important to the director. During a rehearsal for the revival of H. M. S. Pinafore. Gilbert gathered his company to dismiss them for a luncheon break. He gave them a firm, but agreeable little talk about the importance of returning at the appointed time for the afternoon's rehearsal, and then he, Mrs. Gilbert, and Mrs.

Ttaeedie, who were guests at the rehearsal, lunched at the Savoy Hotel next door to the theatre. Mrs. Tweedie recalls®^ that a couple of minutes before two o'clock—the appointed time for the resumption of rehearsal—Gilbert arose from the table, before finishing his coffee, and excused himself. Mrs. Tweedie laughingly remarked, "You are in a hurry." Gilbert replied, "Yes, I have made it a rule never to be late. 91 The company knows I shall be there, so the company w ill be in their p la c e s ."

The practice of "gagging"—that is, interpolating comic busi­ ness or new lines into performance which had not been sanctioned by

Gilbert—was a recurring problem. Gilbert left nothing to the inventive imagination of the comedian in the actual performance. All business was "set" in rehearsal or was approved later before it was put into the production. Gilbert looked upon "gagging" or "clowning" as a profana­ tion, according to Francoise Cellier, who writes, "the slightest sign of clowning was promptly nipped in the bud, and the too daring actor was generally made to look foolish under the lash of the author's sarcasm.

The provincial tours and the revival performances were particu­ larly vulnerable in regard to gagging, as Gilbert has less control over the performances subsequent to opening night. In a letter to Mrs.

Carte in 1896, Gilbert takes up the m atter:^

"With regard to the gags I must decline, on principle, to formally sanction any gag that has not been submitted to me before intro­ duction. At the same time, I have no desire to injure the pro­ spects of the piece by doing anything that would give an actor an excuse for walking sulkily through his part—so I w ill leave it to you to do exactly as you think best.

During the provincial tour of The Mikado, gagging crept into performance and Mrs. Carte sent Gilbert a list of them, asking him to return them with his comments. The following is the result:®-*

Mrs, Carte: Ko-Ko says, 'Pooh-Bah, I appoint you "Lord High Substitute" instead of "my substitute,” This appears to be unauthorized. I understand that it is effective, but it is of course for Mr. Gilbert to decide.

Gilbert: Yes.

Mrs. Carte: Pooh-Bah, interrupted when he is singing the word 'pedigree' by Pitti-Sing, says to her, 'I'll give you such a smack in a minute.' This seems to have sprung out of some b u sin e ss between Miss Bond and Mr. B arrin g to n

Gilbert: Omit. Utterly stupid. There is too much clowning in this scene.

When a controversy was raging in the London newspapers concerning the

success, or lack of success, of Ruddigore, a theatrical rival George

Edwards, presuming the work to be a failure, suggested in an open

letter to the Savoy management that they should follow the precedent of

the Gaiety Theatre (where he was employed) and allow the comedians to

'•gag," and this, he asserted would save the play. Gibert responded that

the ideals of the Savoy and those of the Gaiety were not exactly the

sam e,^

Gilbert was not above altering a line to suit the audience. In

the original dialogue of The Pirates of Penzance, written for the New

York audience, there is the line "A keener hand at scuttling Cunarder

or cutting out a White Star never shipped a handspike." In G ilbert's

personal manuscript and in the Lord Chamberlain's copy, the line reads,

"cutting out a P. & 0." Gilbert realized that the American audience

would not recognize the abbreviation for the Peninsula and Orient

Steamship Lines, and substituted the more familiar names.

Likewise troublesome was the fact that often performers who

had done provincial tours of the operas in companies not supervised by

Gilbert or Mrs. Carte were hired to do roles in the London revivals,

and would attempt to Include business which they had quietly interpolated

in the earlier prodictions. Gilbert would have none of it, and was heard

to remark quietly to a performer who was unhappy that he could not re­

peat some well-worn bit of business, "In London my plays are produced

as I wish them; in the provinces you can do as you like." 93 The runs of the original productions were quite phenomenal for the time, and invariably the performers would become slipshod if not carefully supervised. This Gilbert generally left to Richard

Barker, the Savoy stage manager, who attempted to use G ilbert's methods of stage direction and to maintain the performance exactly as the dramatist had directed it. When Gilbert returned from New York, where he had staged the authorized American production of H. M. 3. Pinafore, he found that the London production was doing excellent business, and that Barker had trained a children's cast in the opera, which, too, was very successful. Gilbert attended the children's performance, compli­ mented Barker on its quality, and then told the adult company that they

should v isit the juvenile production to sharpen their own performances.8®

So popular were the Gilbert and Sullivan pieces that there was

a concerted attempt by competing managers to learn the nature of each up-coming Savoy production, and if possible to steal portions of the material. The copyright laws not being stringently enforced, rival

producers were little hesitant to perform Gilbert and Sullivan material without authorization, particularly in the provinces and in other parts of the English-speaking world. To combat this offense, Gilbert and

Sullivan attempted many ruses. Iolanthe, as has been mentioned above, was called Perola until opening night, the chorus and principals having

to re-leam the title-character's name for the opening. The piracy of

G & S material also required a special discipline on the part of the

actors. Rutland Barrington recalls,8^ that company members were fre­

quently "tapped" for information, but,

Of course, it was one of the unwritten laws that no particulars acquired at rehearsal were to be given to anyone outside the 94 theatre, and this was wonderfully well maintained; in fact, I believe the law was only broken once, and the offender was never discovered or I feel sure he should have had ' something with boiling oil in it.'

lb maintain the performance exactly as Gilbert intended it, the performers were carefully watched by the stage manager, Hr. Barker, who could fine them for variances. During a performance of H. M. S.

Pinafore. Miss Julia Gwynne, a chorister, was caught inappropriately laughing during a performance while on-stage. Barker confronted her and would not accept her explanation that the laugh was merely "an amiable expression" and fined her a half-crown.®® During a performance

°* Patience, Jessie Bond recalls®1 that a beetle crossed the stage during Barrington's song "A Silver Churn," the g irl's chorus being all

about the stage floor dressed in their "aesthetic draperies." Miss

Bond was the first to see the beetle, and fled the stage, followed by

the rest of the chorus ladies, leaving Barrington alone. For this, she

was fined a half-crown, which was the standard fine for a mistake or a

slip in the rehearsed business.

The Delivery of Lines

Being an author-director, Gilbert had a particular interest in

the precise words which he wrote for each character. George Grossmith

once recalled that the "musical rehearsals were child's play in com­

parison to the stage rehearsals." He elaborated,®^

Mr. Gilbert is a perfect autocrat, insisting that his words shall be delivered, even to an inflection of the voice, as he dictates. He will stand on the stage and repeat the words, with appropriate action, over and over again until they are delivered as he desires.

The dramatist was not above stopping a performer in the midst of a most

beautiful passage of a song if he could not hear the syllables, the words 95 and the sentences with utmost distinction. At one point in the re­ hearsal for Ruddigore, Henry Lytton, who had taken over the part of

Robin Oakapple from the ailing George Grossmith, was rushing the ad­ dress to Robin's pictured ancestors. Gilbert told Lytton,93

the speech 'Oh, my forefathers' is now a short speech, but origi­ nally it consisted of three pages of closely-written manuscript. I condensed and I condensed. Every word I could I removed until it was the length you find it today. Each word that is left serves some purpose—there is not one word too many. So when you know that it took me three months to perfect that one speech, 1 am sure you will not hurry it.

He likewise gave Lytton a piece of advice on the delivery of lines in general, saying that the artist who is speaking and the artist who is being addressed should always be well to the front of the stage, for,

"if you are too far back, you not only lose your grip over the audience, but you also lose the power of clear and effective speech.

Decima Moore gives a vivid description of G ilbert's technique of teaching precise line readings. Miss Moore, who joined the Savoy company for The Gondoliers, r e c a l l e d , 95

He would read a line of dialogue . . . clapping his hands between the words to emphasize their rhythm, thus:

'I've no patience (clap) with the presumption (clap) of persons (clap) in his plebian (clap) position (clap). 1

'Now, Miss Moore,' he would say, 'again please!' . . . and his hands would go clap . . . clap . . . clap . . . clap. 'And keep your voice up at the end of sentences.'

And Durward Lely, the Scottish tenor, remembered that Gilbert had seated himself in the back seat of the gallery during part of a re­ hearsal, and following one of Lely's songs, the director returned to the stage and said to him,96

Sullivan's music is, of course, very beautiful, and I heard 96 every note without difficulty, but I think my words are not altogether without merit and ought to be heard without undue effort. Please pay particular attention to the consonants, the M's and N's, and especially the S's.

That Gilbert succeeded in making the precision of delivery an asset of the production is attested by the review of The Pirates of Penzance in The Monthly Musical Record. The reviewer wrote of "the sublime anxiety not to speak too fast by the ladies and gentlemen who have to interpret [the incidents of the play.l

Gilbert was likewise careful that comic business, no matter how effective, would never overshadow the words of the lyrics or dialogue. Jessie Bond was working out business with Gilbert for the moment in Yeomen o f th e Guard when Phoebe (Miss Bond) a ttem p ts to wheedle a key from the jailer, Wilfred Shadbolt. She stroked W ilfred's chin, and was about to proceed with further comic business, when Gil­ bert stated, "That w ill do! That w ill be splendid," and would let her do no more, lest the action take away from the lyric. He never allowed low comedy at the expense of the w ords.^

The A dm iration o f th e Company

Although in the first decade of Gilbert's theatrical career, he made a number of enemies among members of the acting profession, the per­ formers with whom he worked by and large held him in great respect. The members of the Savoy company over the years were particularly vocal in their admiration and affection for the man. Edith Browne has written,

"By humane c o n sid e ra tio n he won th e h e a r ts o f h is company, by sh eer ability he won their confidence.T here are numerous examples of his kindness to individual actors and actresses, particularly those who were 97 having problems in rehearsal. The Diary records for February 7,

1878: "M. T. fan actress] came home to lunch—rehearsed with her in afternoon." Miss Fanny Holland was in the original production of

G ilbert's short musical play Topsy-Turvydom at the Criterion Theatre in 1874. Many years later, she recalled,*®®

We had been rehearsing very hard and very late, and all were desperately tired. I was singing my song when I came to a stand­ still in my words. Gilbert was so angry and upset me so much that 1 was unable to continue for some time. He apologized and we finished the rehearsal. But to show what a large-hearted man he was, though it was in the early hours in the morning, when he returned home, he wrote to me at once saying how grieved he was that he had upset me and that he would not go to bed until he had made amends.

During the rehearsal period for the revivals at the Savoy, it was not unusual for Gilbert to invite a member of the company, who needed particular encouragement, to lunch with him at Simpsons.*®*

Many commentators have remarked on the love and admiration that both the original and revival companies had for Gilbert. There is

quite sufficient evidence to support this assertion. Barrington claims*®2 that little "gagging" actually took place during the public

performances--although Gilbert was never known to have seen a perform­

ance from the house—not because of fear, but rather out of the belief

that such interpolations would be a "profanation." It is also a tri­

bute to G ilbert's standing with his performers that the chorus members of the original company of Pinafore agreed to take a substantial cut in

salary to keep the production alive in the early weeks before it

"caught on" in London, even though they were only making the equivalent of about $12.50 per w eek .* ® ^ There is a large, carefully handwritten

letter to Gilbert from the 20 "Gentlemen of the Chorus" of the Surrey

Theatre, dated 2nd January, 1882, in the British Museum collection.*®^ 98 The letter thanks Gilbert for a "thoughtful present" and adds,

"It cones as a pleasant surprise because nothing like it had been experienced in any other Theatre before, in fact it is a greater novelty than the electric light." The same volume contains a half dozen thank you notes from principals to whom Gilbert had given gifts. The letters are generally written in the character-names and show a genuine regard for the playwright.

F irst Nisht Behavior

Perhaps the most curious eccentricity of Gilbert the director was his "first-night phobia." He was never seen "out front" at a premiere, and indeed, as the Manchester Guardian once noted, "he belonged to that small portion of the British public who never saw a public per­ formance of a Gilbert-Sullivan opera."105 Before the curtain would go up on opening nights, Gilbert would go from dressing room to dressing room, giving advice and reinforcing his ideas about how this or that should be played, checking the scenery and the opening choral positions.

Even the prop master came in for a short sermon, but as the roar of ap­ plause was heard, signalling Sullivan's arrival at the conductor's podium, Gilbert would disappear from the theatre. For the next three hours, he would walk along The Strand and along the Embankment Promenade, returning to the Savoy just in time to take the final curtain call. Mrs.

Carte sent him a complimentary box for the opening of the revival of

The Gondoliers in 1898, but Gilbert turned it down, with a formal note to the manageress "1 am much obliged to you for the box but I never sit in front when a piece with which I am concerned is being played. . . ." On the opening night of Yeomen of the Guard. October 3, 99 1888, Gilbert was nervous as usual. The opera opens with Phoebe alone on stage seated at her spinning wheel. She was in place, ready to sing her opening air "When maiden loves," when moments before the curtain went up, Gilbert appeared on stage. As Goldberg records it,*-®7

Gilbert asked Jessie Bond, who played Phoebe,

'Is everything right?1 She assures him that everything is fine, he leaves. In a moment he is back, 'Are you sure you're all right, Jessie?' Again assurance that everything is fine. Gilbert kisses her, does a little dance and disappears into the d ark n ess. . . .

On the first night of Princess Ida, Gilbert managed to spend the entire performance in the green room, reading a newspaper and apparently unconcerned. Sometime during the third act, the Frenchman, who had been engaged to fit the suits of armour, was so overjoyed by the audience reaction that he run up to Gilbert and cried, "Mais, monsieur, savez vous que vous avez la un succes solide?" It seems to be going very well," replied Gilbert, and returned to his reading. Afterwards,

Gilbert said, "I suppose he expected to see me kissing all the carpen­ ters." His behavior on that evening was not typical, and of the open­ ing night traumas, he once said,*®®

What I have suffered during those hours, no man can tell. I have spent them at the club; I once went to a theatre alone to see a play; I have walked up and down the street; but no matter where I was, agony and apprehension possessed me.

The Working Partnership

One hesitates to write of the Gilbert and Sullivan collabora­ tion with so many words already having been expended in print upon the partnership. However, there are certain aspects of that collaboration which bear on G ilbert's directorial practice. The latter once wrote, I attribute our success in our particular craft to the fact that Sir Arthur Sullivan and I were in a commanding position. We con­ trolled the stage together, and were able to do as we wished, so far as the limitations of our actors would allow it.

Gilbert did not always feel the value of the musical collaborator, as is evident in his treatment of a Mr. Lutz who arranged the music for

G ilbert's travesty Robert the Devil, or, The Nun, the Dun, and the Son of a Gun, which opened at the Gaiety Theatre, December 21, 1868. The promptbook reveals an interesting note to this musician. On the full page, opposite some fresh, additional lyrics, Gilbert has cavalierly w r i t t e n ,110

"Dr Mr. Lutz,

"Can you find some air (of the 'Cure' order) to fit these words? I don't suppose it will give you much trouble to string a few chords together that will answer every purpose.

"Very truly yours,

"W. S. Gilbert"

Gilbert learned that Sullivan did more than "string chords together," and that he demanded respect as an equal. All of the Savoy printed programs for G & S pieces bear the message, "The Opera produced under the personal supervision of the Author and Composer."

Tb demonstrate how well Gilbert and Sullivan worked together in rehearsal, the following incident is worth retelling:

The first time Gilbert heard the musical setting of 'Hail the bridegroom, hail the bride1 sung in rehearsal by the chorus, he was obviously disappointed. He had the chorus repeat it, using different attitudes and styles of expression, but was still unsatisfied. The music did not quite fit the attitude of the words. Gilbert conferred with Sullivan, who was always present at stage rehearsals. After a few moments, Sullivan asked the girls of the chorus to add an appoggiature (a sort of sliding note) to the last note of the chorus. The curious effect made everyone laugh, and Gilbert was eminently pleased. 'That's it,' he exclaimed, 'That's excellent!' 101 Courtice Pounds, the original Colonel Fairfax in Yeomen of

the Guard, once told an Interviewer for the Northern Dally Telegraph that Sullivan had written three tunes for the Solo "Is life a Boon?" none of which satisfied Gilbert. After the librettist rejected the

third tune, Sullivan refused to try again, but Gilbert remained adamant,

"puckering his brow and puffing out his cheeks" and Sullivan gave in and wrote the familiar melody which is now one of the most popular from

that opera.

Miss Nancy McIntosh recounts another example of the harmonious collaboration at work:*-^

One of the most difficult exits that [Gilbert] ever had to arrange was in 'Utopia Limited' where after the court scene he had to get twenty-four women wearing court trains off the stage during the playing of a very few bars of music, and it required many hours of study, this particular situation being one in which it was im­ possible to add more music. Very often when a situation was made difficult by too much or too little music, Sir William would ask Sir Arthur Sullivan to cut or add bits according to the situation; and Sir Arthur on his part, often wanted songs made longer or shorter according to the airs and measures that came to him while setting them, and these alterations both were always willing to make, for they worked together in perfect harmony, and during all the years which they were associated they never had the slightest disagreement of any kind in their work.

But, Miss McIntosh, perhaps out of affection for her foster-

father, neglects the bitterness of the so-called "carpet quarrel."*^

And while the original argument was not technically connected with

their creative partnership, the long-standing suspiciousness aroused

by that quarrel did affect their collaboration. For a period in the midst of the bitterness, their correspondence reveals an attempt care­

fully to segment the duties of each. Sullivan, in a letter dated March

27, 1889, requests Gilbert to reconsider the composer's duties: "That

Z should have a more important share in arranging the attitudes and 102 business In all the musical portions. . . ."13-5 ^ qu a rre i waned, however, the two partners gained perspective and the concern over dividing the collaborative effort became unimportant. Sullivan signals this return to a more agreeable working state in a letter dated December 22, 1892. A dispute over casting procedures had arisen and Sullivan had become concerned over G ilbert's determination to set down precisely the duties of each partner. In the letter, with the dateline "Diodato, Cabee-Roquebrune Alpes-Maritimes," Sullivan sums up admirably the essence of the successful partnership:

"But there is another and stronger reason against your purpose-- a sentimental one--. Do you think my interest in the piece is confined to getting my music sung? And would it not be humiliating to one to think that you didn't care a 'damn' about the music, so long as you got your words spoken and your business done? I should be paralyzed when writing if I had to consider what part you were to fill and which were alloted to me. Our pieces have been distinguished by the extraordinary oneness in idea and construction they display, and this has been achieved by the importance that both of us attach to every detail—words, music, scenery, dresses and cast. FOOTNOTES

CHAPTER I I I

^Quoted in Leslie Baily. The Gilbert and Sullivan Book (London: Spring Books, 1952), p. 110.

^The engraving is discussed in Reginald Allen. The First Night Gilbert and Sullivan (New York: The Heritage Press, 1958), p. 3.

^Quoted in Francoise Cellier and C. Bridgeman. Gilbert and Sullivan and D'Oyly Carte (London: I. Pitman and Sons, Ltd., 1914), p . 17.

^Quoted in Allen, op. c it., First Night, p. 108.

^This and subsequent entries from G ilbert's Diary. The British Museum. Division of Manuscripts. Manuscript ADD # 49322.

^Apparently the weaknesses of the 3rd act were critical: the play was immediately withdrawn for re-writing.

^Quoted in Allen, op. c it., First Night, p. 104.

^''Gilbert, William Schwenck." The Dictionary of National Bio- graphy, 1901-1911. (London: Oxford University Press, 1912).

^Baiiy, op. c it.. p. 14. Gilbert had strong attachments to the military throughout his life. In the 1860's he was a member of the local m ilitia, and by the early 1890's was the Deputy Lieutenant of the County of Middlesex.

*®A. H. Godwin. Gilbert and Sullivan: A Critical Appreciation of the Savoy Operas. (London: J. M. Dent & Sons, Ltd., 1927), p. 70.

**Ibid. The reference "strut like an aesthetic along Piccadilly," is obviously to the poet Bunthorne's confession in Patience that one is recognized more readily, "If you walk down Piccadilly with a poppy or a lily in your medieval hand."

^Henry Saxe Wyndham. Arthur Seymour Sullivan (1842-1900). (New York: Harper and Brothers, 1926), p. 164.

103 104 l^Henry A. Lytton. The Secrets of a Savoyard, (tondon: Jerrolds, Ltd., 1922), p. 58.

14Ibid.. p. 255.

15Hesketh Pearson. Gilbert and Sullivan. (New York: Harper & Brothers, 1935), p. 236.

l6H. M. Ualbrook. Gilbert and Sullivan Opera. A History and a Comment. (London: F . V. W hite and Company, 1922), p . 148.

^C ellier and Bridgeman. o2« c it., p. 18.

l^Lytton, £2* c it.. p. 59.

^Quoted in Baily, o£. c it.. p. 231.

2®Ethel B. Tweedie. Behind the Footlights. (London: Hutchinson and Co., 1904), p. 193.

21Gilbert's Diary, 1878. Manuscript Division. The British Museum. M anuscript ADD # 49322.

22Quoted by Sidney Dark and Roland Grey. W. S. Gilbert. His Life and Letters. (London: Methuen & Co., Ltd., 1923, pp. bo-7.

23I b id .

^T w eed ie, 0 2 . c i t . , p. 193.

23Pearson, oj>. c it., p. 121.

2^Tweedie, op. c it. . p. 193.

27Ib id . ^Quoted in Baily, o£. cit., p. 116.

2^Quoted in Dark and Grey, op. c it. . p. 59.

3®Tweedie, cp. c it. . p. 193.

3*Quoted by S. J. Adair Fitz-Gerald. The Story of the Savoy Opera. (London: Stanley Paul and Company, 1924), p. 171.

32Mclntosh typescript. Manuscript Division. The British Museum. M anuscript ADD v 39345, folio 143.

33Henry A. Lytton. The Secrets of a Savoyard. (London: Jarrolds, Ltd., 1922), p. 60. 3^DeWolf Hopper. Once a Clown, Always a Clown. (Boston: L i t t l e , Brown and Comp any, "T5"27Xr~pT ~62~.

3%ymer, op. c it., p. 82.

^Quoted in Audrey Williamson. Gilbert and Sullivan Opera: A New Assessment. (New York: Macmillan, 1953), p. 276.

^The testimony is recorded by Pearson, op. cit., p. 199. Gilbert was in court demanding £ 1000 damages fo r some b r ie f uncom pli­ mentary remarks that were published about him in The Era. Edward Carson, who addressed the question to Gilbert, had successfully prosecuted Oscar Wilde.

^^Cellier, op. cit., p. 35.

^Quoted in Baily, op. cit., p. 394.

40j?rom P earson, op. c i t . , p. 186.

^Rutland Barrington. Rutland Barrington . . . by Himself. (London: G. Richards, Ltd., 1908), p. 60.

^Sigm und a . Lavine. Wandering Minstrels We. (New York: Dodd Mead, 1954), p . 264.

«S . J. Adair Fitz-Gerald. The Story of the Savoy Opera. (London: Stanley Paul and Company, 1924), p. 170.

^An interesting history of this relationship can be found in th e le t t e r s between the two now housed in the Br itis h Museum. D iv isio n of Manuscripts. Manuscript ADD v 49333. However, little of the corres­ pondence is germane to this study.

^Barrington, op. cit., Rutland Barrington . . . by Himself., p. 261.

^®Tweedie, op. c it., p. 194.

^Pearson, op. cit.. p. 72.

^Quoted in Baily, op. c it.. p. 134.

rare copy of the Gilbert pamphlet, dated 18th May, 1877 is among the Gilbert papers in the Division of Manuscripts. The British Museum. Manuscript ADD # 49348.

SQpark and Grey, op. c it. . p. 153.

^Pearson, op. cit.. p. 40.

S^park and Grey, op. c it. . p. 153. 53Ibid. 54Ibid.

^Related in Pearson, op. cit., p. 40.

3^ Ib id . 3 7I b id . . p . 68.

3®Ibid., p. 41.

^Quoted in Dark and Grey, op. c it., p. 157.

60Quoted in Allen. First Nights, op. cit., p. 74.

61I b id .

62Norman Wymer. G ilb e rt and S u lliv a n . (New York: D utton, 1963), p. 80. ^3Jessie Bond. The Life and Reminiscences of Jessie Bond. (London: John Lane, 1930), p. 8.

^Jymer, op. cit., p. 61.

^-Hjilliamson, op. c it., p. 51.

^ R u t l a n d Barrington. More Rutland Barrington, by Himself. (London: G. Richards, Ltd., 1911), p. 37.

67Issac Goldberg. The Story of Gilbert and Sullivan. (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1928), p. 196.

6®As the revival promptbook indicates, he did not, however, retain the business in later production. See Chapter II, p. 60.

^Quoted by Williamson, op. c it., p. 117.

7®Allen, op. cit., First Nights, p. 240.

7*Goldberg, pp. c it.. p. 310.

72Bond, pp. c it.. p. 85.

^Rutland Barrington. Rutland Barrington . . . by Himself. (London: G. Richards, Ltd., 1908), p. 57.

7^The Mikado rehearsals so un-nerved Grossmith that he almost ruined the piece on opening night, and on later such occasions was known to take tranquilizers. Pearson, pp. c it.. p. 121.

75Ibid.. p. 103.

7®Henry Lytton. A Wandering M instrel. (London: Jarrolds, Ltd., 1933), p. 255. 107 77Ibid.

7®Pearson, og. c it,, p. 232.

7^Both anecdotes are found in Henry A. Lytton. The Secrets of a Savoyard. (London: Jarrolds, Ltd., 1922), pp. 48-9.

®®Quoted in Allen, og. c it., First Night, p. 48.

®*Baily, og. c it., p. 234.

S^iweedie, og. c it., p. 195.

®^Cellier and Bridgeman, og. c it., p. 51.

®^Quoted in Baily, og. c it., p. 13.

®5Ib id .

®®S. J. Adair Fitz-Gerald. The Story of the Savoy Opera. (London: Stanley Paul and Company, 1924), p. 129. By producing rather debased musical "entertainments," Edwards was attempting to exterminate comic opera. At the time of the letter, Edwards was presenting a very successful concoction, in which about ten authors and composers were engaged. v ®7Allen, og. c it.. First Night, p. 137. In November, 1878, Gilbert and Sullivan went to New York to supervise an authorized ver­ sion of H. M. S. Pinafore, giving it the benefit of G ilbert's stage- management. The opera itself had been seen in New York for several months in "pirate" productions, and had been received with "an enthusiasm bordering on insanity." (Kate Field. Scribner's Monthly, Volume X V III, p. 754.)

®®Lavine, og. c it., p. 114.

®9Barrington, og. c it., Rutland Barrington . . . by Himself, p. 55.

9®Cellier and Bridgeman, og. c it., p. 98.

^Bond, og. cit., p. 98.

^^Quoted in Arthur Quiller-Couch. Studies in Literature. (Third Series) (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1933), p. 208.

^According to Goldberg, og. c it., p. 343.

^Lytton, og. c it.. Secrets, p. 49.

®^Baily, og. c it., p. 335. 108 96Ibid.. p. 274.

"Quoted in Williamson, op. c it., p. 76.

98Bond, op. c it., p. 208.

99Edith A. Browne. W. S. Gilbert. (New York: John Lane, Co., 1907), p. 64.

l^Dark and Grey, op. c it., p. 154.

*®*Pearson, op. c it., p. 235.

102garrington, op. cit., Rutland Barrington . . . by Himself, p . 83.

lO^Lavine, pp. c it., p. 75.

^^M iscellaneous documents. Manuscript Division. The British Museum. M anuscript ADD # 49333.

l®^Quoted in Goldberg, pp. c it. . p. 65.

l 06Baily, op. c it., p. 394.

^"Goldberg, pp. c it., p. 381.

lO^Quoted by Pearson, op. c it.. p. 122.

^"Quoted in Williamson, pp. c it., p. 15.

HOpromptbook for Robert the Devil. Manuscript Division. The B r itis h Museum. M anuscript ADD v 49316, f o lio 60.

*l*Goldberg, pp. c it., p. 352. The story was originally re­ counted by a Mr. Gordon who was an early producer with the D'Oyly Carte Company.

H -^lnterview quoted by Baily, op. c it. , p . 323.

^^Mclntosh typescript. Manuscript Division. The British Museum. Manuscript ADD # 39345, folio 142.

**^In the late 1880's, the Gilbert and Sullivan collaboration was shaken by a series of quarrels between the lib rettist and the com­ poser. The so-called "carpet quarrel" arose over a disagreement con­ cerning the cost of replacing the carpet in the Savoy lobby.

H^Herbert Sullivan and Newman Flower. Sir Arthur Sullivan. His Life. Letters and Diary. (New York: George H. Doran Company, 1927), p. 240. ^^Miscellaneous Letters. Manuscript Division. The British Museum. M anuscript ADD # 49333. To my knowledge, th is stra n g e ly touching letter has never been published, nor have any scholars referred to it. CHAPTER IV

GILBERT AND THE PUBLIC

Although the principles and techniques of W. S. G ilbert's directorial practice were made manifest primarily in the preparatory and rehearsal periods, there are aspects of his practice—or, more specifically, of his philosophy as a director—which were seen outside of the theatre and the rehearsal hall. His attitude toward the place of theatre in life, the reputation of the theatrical profession, and his particular responsibilities in regard to the "taste" of the audience and the production, all colored his work.

The Problem of the Playhouses

When Gilbert and Sullivan began their partnership, the English stage was considerably stigmatized by the general public, particularly the "proper" middle class. Major actor-managers, most notably Macready,

Vestris, the Bancrofts and Phelps, had labored to bring respectability to the theatre. Each had had an impact, but prejudices—particularly those with a foundation in truth--are not easily put down. The average

Victorian might indeed attend a Shakespearean production or take his children to a Christmas pantomime, but regular or enthusiastic attendance at the theatre, according to Sigmund Lavine, was "considered an activity that 'nice people' just did not indulge in."*

Although generalities are difficult to make, it can be said that

110 I l l the opera and theatre of classical productions appealed to the

literate upper classes, and the burlesque and music-hall stage pandered to the taste of the lower classes. One commentator, Charles

E. Grlsby, remembered the opening night of Trial by Jury, and evaluated 5 the general theatrical scene thus.

Theatres in those days were beyond our [the middle classes! reach. Bus and tram services were bad and there was no catering for the suburbs as we have today. S till another obstacle to theatre-going was the stern, religious middle-class conscience that had no love for the theatre or regarded it, together with the dancing hall, as the anteroom to Hell. It was on such a world that Gilbert and Sullivan burst like a bolt from the blue.

Thomas German Reed overcame the Victorian animosity toward the theatre

by presenting harmless sketches and musical presentations at the Gallery of Illustration, reaching thousands of persons who would have found the

conventional theatre completely unacceptable. Both Gilbert and

Sullivan had worked at one time or another on presentations for the

Gallery, and indeed first met on those premises.

To the proper Victorian, the theatre stood primarily for obscene

and sensual pleasure, particularly that form called the burlesque. In

a highly moralistic world, these vulgar and suggestive entertainments,

replete with women en travesti. were held in particular and shocked

contempt. Gilbert had written several conventional burlesques. His

last foray in this genre, The Pretty Druidess, interestingly enough

ends with an apology to the audience: ^

Forgive our rhymes; Forgive the jokes you've heard a thousand times; Forgive each breakdown, cellar flap and clog, Our low-bred songs, our slangy dialogue: And—above a ll—oh, eye with double barrel, Forgive the scantiness of our apparel.

During the last thirty years of the Victorian era, higher 112 standards In the theatre were being encouraged by several factions.

The practitioners of theatre were improving the quality of performance, particularly the major actor-managers. But, more importantly, the improvement of general education was gradually producing a more demand­ ing taste. The 1870 Education Act opened educational possibilities to greater numbers of English subjects. Newham College for Women was founded at Cambridge in the same year as the premiere of Trial by Jury

(1875), and Girton College opened the year before. Greater numbers of educated women were attending and influencing the taste of the English stage. Gilbert was both to reflect and foster the return to respect­ a b i l i t y .

In the early years of the Gilbert and Sullivan collaboration, the partners had to fight against the very theatres in which they were to see their works performed. The Gaiety Theatre, where Thespis had its premiere in 1871, was an undistinguished playhouse on the site of the Strand Musick Hall, with its main entrance on The Strand and other entrances on Catherine Street. The Royalty in Dean Street, Soho, where

Trial by Jury (1875), was premiered had had a checkered career since it was built in 1840. After several changes of management and name, it was in a serious state of decline in the mid-1870,s, and had for several years prior to the opening of Trial by Jury been let to amateurs.^ The

Sorceror (1877) was the first of the operas to premiere at the Opera

Comlque, which had been built in 1868 and shared a plot of ground with the Globe Theatre, the back wall of the stage actually adjoining the back wall of the Globe's stage. The Opera Comique, which was also to see the first performances of H. M. S. Pinafore (1878), The Pirates of

Penzance (1880), and Patience (1881), had its entrance at 299 Strand, with other entrances in Holywell Street . 5 When Richard D'Oyly Carte became manager of the Opera Comique late in 1874, he stated in his announcement,

"To th e P u b lic ” :

It is my desire to establish in London a permanent abode for Light Opera, played with all the completeness to detail which is recognized in the representations given at even mediocre Continental Theatres.

But the Opera Comique was hardly an ideal theatre. Aside from the fact that the wall dividing the stage from that of the Globe was so thin that muffled voices of performers in one could be heard in the other,^ the theatre was, according to Jessie Bond, especially ill- suited to attract a "public that had not yet learnt the theatre-going h ab it.M iss gond continues her description, saying that the play­ house was in a "most unsavoury neighborhood," and,

was small, poor and inconvenient, even according to the standard of those days. The auditorium was approached by dismal sub­ terranean tunnels; and the stage and dressingrooms by a winding staircase that would have been a death-trap in case of fire.

Until D'Oyly Carte built the Savoy Theatre specifically as a showcase for the Gilbert and Sullivan operas, the partners had to overcome both the general prejudice against the stage and the reputation of the indi­ vidual playhouses in which they worked. But Gilbert and Sullivan did

Q succeed and saved the British theatre, according to Leslie Baily,

from the tawdriness and vulgarity of the mid-nineteenth century— from the 'vice and indecorum' described by Charles Dickens, who tells us that the respectable middle classes did not like 'the strong smell of orange peel and lamp-oil, with an undercurrent of sawdust.

Even in America, Gilbert and Sullivan managed to avoid the disreputable opinion of the popular theatre. The distinguished minister Henry Ward

Beecher, lecturing on the evils of entertainment in Philadelphia, was 114 seen a couple of hours after his lecture in a stage box of the

theatre playing Pinafore.^ The Gilbert and Sullivan operas gave par­

ticular confidence to respectable women to know that they would not be compromised by attendance at the playhouse. George Rowell has w ritten,

"Thus encouraged, English ladies ventured to attend performances at the

Savoy unescorted, and, in doing so, opened a new era in English Theatre h is to r y ." 10

C ensorship

In many ways, Gilbert was a conventionally Victorian dramatist, with a traditional, protectionist concern for the morals of the play-

going public. If he was to bring back the middle classes to the theatre,

he was determined that nothing which he put on the stage would bring

the blush of shame to an innocent cheek . 11 Speaking of Sullivan's and

his committment in this regard, Gilbert once said. 1 2

We resolved that our plots, however ridiculous, should be coherent; that dialogue should be void of offense; that on artistic principles no man should play a woman's part and no woman a man's.

Because Gilbert wrote not one word which would shock a censor, he

naturally favored the concept of censorship. One critic has written,

"His dramatic works . . . are unblemished by a single unseemly thought

or offensive w o r d ."

There is evidence that Gilbert specifically avoided any material

which might give offense. While he was never a passive conformist,

neither was he, like Shaw, an iconoclast, delighting in the shock value

of unpopular ideas. When he was creating the plot of Patience. Gilbert

first conceived the conflict to be between rival curates. The young

ladies of the chorus were to fall in love with clergymen of variant 115 beliefs and the dragoons were to attempt to gain back the ladles' affections by taking orders. However, Gilbert became uneasy at the possible audience response, and changed the two rivals to personages represeiiting the craze for aesthetic poetry. Gilbert himself wrote of the incident,

when I was engaged upon the construction of this plot, I became uneasy at the thought of the danger I was incurring by dealing so freely with members of the clerical order, and I felt myself crippled at every turn by the necessity of protecting myself from a charge of irreverence.

Likewise, the spelling of the title Ruddigore was, on the opening night of the opera, "Ruddygore." the "y" being changed to "i" subsequently.

The partners felt that ruddy was too close to the abhorred bloddy. particularly in conjunction with gore.

In August of 1909, Gilbert was called before a committee of both houses of Parliament, appointed to look into the subject of the censoring power of the Lord Chamberlain's office. He, along with

Arthur Wing Pinero, supported the Lord Chamberlain's function. His

testimony*--’ is quite enlightening. When asked if he would distinguish

between the stage and a book, Gilbert replied,

There is a very wide distinction. In a novel, when you read that Eliza slipped off her dressing gown and slipped into her bath, there is no objection to it; but if that were represented on the stage it would be a very different thing.

The committee asked his opinion on the question of whether after the

Lord Chamberlain has passed a play, he should be allowed later to inter­

fere with its production. Gilbert replied affirmatively:

If a strongly expressed love-scene takes place between a man and a woman seated at opposite sides of the stage, i t may mean nothing; but if they are seated together on a sofa with their arms around each other's waists and the dialogue is punctuated by kisses, the effect may be very undesirable. 116 Gilbert expressed his philosophy on the proper function of the stage in this response:

I think that the stage of a theatre is not a proper pulpit from which to disseminate doctrines possibly of Anarchism, Socialism, and Agnosticism. It is not the proper platform upon which to discuss questions of adultery and free love before a mixed audience composed of persons of all ages, both sexes, all ways of thinking, of all conditions of life, and of various degrees of e d u c a tio n .

The M aintenance o f Good T aste

Throughout his career, Gilbert was concerned with sustaining a high level of decency in the theatres—not only in regard to what might be called Morality, but also in that vague area termed Good

Taste. Perhaps his most Victorian characteristic was his determination to tailor his satire to suit the taste of the most conservative citizen and to avoid offense-giving subject matter, which is a particularly difficult task for a satirist. Gilbert did not always avoid censure.

Lewis Carroll, for example, raised objections to "indelicacy" in H. M.

S. Pinafore. He had not seen the adult production, but had attended the authorized juvenile version, and stated that in that production, one segment was,

sad beyond words. It occurs when the Captain utters the oath 'Damn me!' and forthwith a bevy of sweet, innocent-looking girls sing, 'He said Damn me! He said Dam me!' I cannot find words to convey to the reader the pain I felt in seeing these dear children taught to utter such words to amuse ears grown callous to their ghastly meaning. Put the two ideas side by side—Hell (no matter whether you believe in it or not; millions do) and those pure young lips thus sporting with its horrors—and then find what fun in it you can! How Mr. Gilbert could have stooped to write, or Sir Arthur Sullivan could have prostituted his noble art to set to music such vile trash, it passes sty skill to understand.^

Bernard Shaw, too, was never fond of G ilbert's satire and was particularly offended by the lib rettist's habit of furnishing his operas so carefully 117 with stout and mature ladies for the express purpose of making fun of their age and figure.Shaw continues, "Such fun has always revolted me; and I am waiting for the time when it w ill revolt the public too."

Others were likewise offended occasionally by G ilbert's fun- making. The critic for Bell's Life attended the opening night of lolanthe and was not amused. His review stated, in part,*® "It seems to me that {Gilbert) starts primarily with the object of bringing

Truth and Love and Friendship into contempt; just as we are taught the devil does. . . The offended critic goes on to suggest that his readers might better profit from attending an "interesting exhibition of pictures of Venice now on view at the rooms of the Fine Arts Society,

New Bond Street" than from attending Mr. G ilbert's "unwholesome" work.

The only accusation of impropriety recorded in regard to Trial by Jury came from the Lord Chief Justice, Sir Alexander Cockburn.

Sullivan once said,^®

Although jCockburn] was very fond of me personally, he did not like the notion of our Trial by Jury at all, as he thought the piece was calculated to bring the bench into contempt! He went to see the piece once, remarking afterwards that it was pretty and clever, and 'all that sort of thing,’ but he would not go again for fear he would seem to encourage it.

Miss Isabel Jay, in a symposium of Gilbert and Sullivan reminiscences held by the Strand magazine for December, 1925, recounted a story con­ cerning a Savoy revival of Trial by Jury. She had been cast in the role of the Plaintiff and as part of the comic business was required to produce a pair of silk stockings in court. She found the business quite shocking and asked Gilbert if she might omit that part of the proceed­ ings, and, to her relief, Gilbert agreed.

Early in his career as a dramatist-director, Gilbert was 118 reproached by the Lord Chamberlain's office in regard to a burlesque entitled The Happy Land, based on his own fairy play, The Wicked World.

Written under the pseudonym "Gilbert A*Beckett," and in collaboration with F. Tomline, the production contained particularly strong political

satire. Ayrtoun was parodied by an actor going about on the stage with

a bucket of slate-colored paint with which he decorated public buildings,

statues and monuments. "What is a ship?" asks an official, examining

applicants for public office. "I don't know," is the reply. "Then you

shall be the First Lord of the Admiralty," decrees the examiner. Each

night the audience cheered and encored the Trio and Dance of Gladstone,

Lowe and Ayrtoun with the Ensemble, "Here a save, there a save, every­

where a save." This angered the Prime Minister and subsequently the

Lord Chamberlain ordered the make-up of the actors, which was modelled 51 on the actual political figures, to be altered.When George Grossmith made up to play Sir Joseph Porter, First Lord of the Admiralty in

Pinafore, there was a strong suggestion of Lord Nelson about the appear­

ance, perhaps contrived by Gilbert to avoid the charge that Sir Joseph

was a parody of W. H. Smith, the then Lord Admiral (which, of course, it

w as). ^

In Utopia (Limited), Gilbert raised the ire of the royal family,

1 holding up to ridicule the customs of his native land. In the famous

drawing room scene—a meeting of the Utopian cabinet done as a minstrel

parody—the King, determined to follow the customs of England, asks if

the chairs are arranged "in accordance with the practice at the Court of

St. James's Hall." St. James Hall was the theatre where the Christy

M instrels, the American blackface troupe was playing to packed houses.^ 119 Particularly offensive In that scene was Barrington's costume as King

Paramount the F irst. The Prince of Wales (King Edward VII) upon seeing the opera, took exception to the appearance of the King wearing both the British Field-Marshal's uniform and the Order of the Garter—a combination which only the Prince himself was entitled to wear. Gilbert ordered the Garter r e m o v e d . 24 If the dramatist-director received modest censure for Utopia, he did accomplish a small political coup.

In the Second Act Drawing-Room scene, in which the Utopians emulate an

English royal reception, Gilbert has provided the following lines:

Dram aleigh

One or two judicious innovation, I think.

Goldbury

Admirable. The cup of tea and the plate of mixed biscuits were a cheap and effective inspiration.

Dram aleigh

Yes—my idea, entirely. Never been done before.

At V ictoria's "Drawing-Rooms," which were often quite long, refresh­ ments were not customarily served, a tiny economy which many found amusing. After seeing Utopia, the Prince saw to it that this was corrected.^

The Reputation of the Theatre and the Company

Like the Bancrofts, Gilbert attempted to maintain a faultless reputation for his theatre. If the audience could be assured that they would find nothing offensive on stage, Gilbert was equally concerned that the theatre and its resident company should not be the subject of scandal. He would not tolerate off-color remarks in rehearsal, nor impolite innuendo. One day in rehearsal, Gilbert was explaining to the 120 female chorus how the word politely should be accented in a song. He directed, "The ladies must go down on the 'po."' A sound of indiscreet tittering followed and was sternly reproached by Gilbert.

Gilbert was particularly sensitive to the reputations of the individual members of the company. The players were not allowed to entertain visitors in their dressing rooms or even to receive persons after performance.^ Rigid standards of decorum were demanded backstage

"to avoid scandals, jeolousy and bad-feeling (typical of the backstages of most of the London theatres of the time)."^® In the design of the

Savoy Theatre, Gilbert saw to it that men's dressing rooms were on one side of the stage and women's on the other. He allowed no mingling of th e sexes in the dressing room area during the performance nor the inter­ missions (although the actors and actresses were free to mingle in the greenroom).

During the run of Patience, the young singer Jessie Bond received a note backstage, and Gilbert, who happened to be nearby, inquired if it might be a love letter. Miss Bond showed it to him, and it turned out to be a request from four young men seated in one of the stage boxes that

Miss Bond have dinner with them after the performance. Gilbert con­ sidered this so great an insult to a lady that he went to the stage box, berated the young men and finally threw them out of the theatre. At another time, Gilbert heard that a young Hussar officer had been bragging about London that he had been intimate with a young lady of the Savoy company. He sought out the man, and using legal threats (perhaps learned

In his unsuccessful days in the courtroom), forced him to sign an

"unqualified apology and retraction','^ dictated by Gilbert, stating that he had no knowledge of the woman except in her public capacity and that they were total strangers. Because of such Incidents as these, the

London papers delighted in writing of "The Savoy Boarding School."

G ilbert's policy in regard to the conduct and refinement of the company undoubtedly was effective. Lindsay Harmon, at one time a singer with the D'Oyly Carte Company, w rites in his autobiography A Comic Opera

L if e . 30

Uhat struck me particularly was the class of lady and gentleman associated with the chorus. Three of the fellows had graduated, one at Oxford, two at Cambridge. Most of the ladies and gentlemen were excellent musicians. Most of the ladies had studied at the Royal Academy o r s im ila r i n s t i t u t i o n s .

One rather well-known singer left the company after only a few rehearsals, and Gilbert gave the following terse explanation of her abrupt departure:

"My companies consist of ladies and gentleman, and she was impossible."3* FOOTNOTES

CHAPTER IV

^■Sigmund A. Lavine. Wandering M instrels We: The Story of Gilbert and Sullivan. (New York: Dodd Mead, 1954), p. 28.

^Leslie Baily. The Gilbert and Sullivan Book. (London: Spring Books, 1952), p. 130.

^Baily, op. cit.. p. 99.

4 Raymond Mander and Joe M itchenson. The L ost T h eatres o f London. (London: Rupert Hart-Davis, 1968), p. 80.

5Both the Gaiety and the Opera Coraique were demolished for the Strand (Aldwych and Kingsway) development scheme about the turn of the cen tu ry .

%orman Wymer. Gilbert and Sullivan. (New York: Dutton, 1963), p. 69.

^Jessie Bond. The Life and Reminiscences of Jessie. Bond (London: John Lane, 1930), p. 62.

®Baily, op. c it., p. x iii. Baily, like several other commenta­ tors on Gilbert and Sullivan's contribution to theatrical respectability, fails to appreciate or, at least fails to acknowledge—the considerable achievement of other 19th century theatrical artists in this cause. A survey of recent studies of Kean, Macready, Phelps, etc., would suggest that Gilbert, Sullivan and Carte were hardly alone in their concern for higher standards of taste in the playhouses.

^Lavine, op. cit., p. 93.

^George Rowell. The Victorian Theatre, A Survey. (London: Oxford University Press, 1956), p. 93.

U-Lord Onslow, at a dinner honoring Gilbert at the Savoy Hotel, February 2, 1908, stated, "Sir William never brought the flush of shame to the cheek of innocence." Hesketh Pearson. Gilbert: His Life and Strife. (London: Methuen & Co., Ltd., 1957), p. 246.

122 ^Audrey Williamson. Gilbert and Sullivan Opera: A Hew Assessment. (New York: Macmillan, 1953), p. 7.

^Quoted in S. J. Adair Fitz-Gerald. The Story of the Savoy Opera. (London: Stanley Paul and Company, 1924), p. 224.

^Allen, pp. cit., First Night, p. 140.

^As recorded by Pearson, op. c it.. pp. 245-46.

^Isaac Goldberg. The Story of Gilbert and Sullivan (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1928), p. 212.

^Bernard Shaw. Our Theatre in the Nineties. (London: C onstable and Company L im ited, 1931), Volume I , p . 222.

l^Isaac Goldberg. The Story of Gilbert and Sullivan. (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1928), p. 212.

^Quoted in Allen, pp. cit., First Night, p. 176.

^Quoted in Baily, op. c it., p. 128. The quotation originated in Arthur Lawrence's book Sir Arthur Sullivan, 1899.

2^Frank Fcwell and Frank Palmer. Censorship in England. (London: Frank Palmer, 1913), p. 241.

22Allen, op. c it., First Night, p. 76.

^Lavine, op. c it., p. 269. The stage-directions for the Cabi­ net scene in which the King sits in the middle of the rows of his councilors like an Interlocutor read: "They range their chairs across the stage like Christy Minstrels. King sits C. Lord Dramaleigh, Captain Fitzbattleaxe R. of Mr. Goldbury, Mr. Blushing ton extreme R. Sir Bailey Barre extreme L."

2^Allen, pp. c it.. First Night, p. 390.

25I b id . .

2%esketh Pearson. Gilbert and Sullivan. (New York: Harper & Brothers, 1935), p. 148.

27This was true only for the chorus and secondary players; Grossmith, Barrington and several other leading players were known to have drinks with friends after performances in their dressing rooms.

2®Pearson, op. c it., Gilbert and Sullivan, p. 123.

2^Pearson, op. c it.. Gilbert and Sullivan, p. 124. 124 ^Quoted in Baily, o£. c it., p. 347.

31 Pearson, o£. c it., Gilbert and Sullivan, p. 148. CHAPTER V

CONCLUSIONS

Recent scholarship has demonstrated that the 19th Century theatre, in England and on the Continent, saw the emergence of stage direction as a unique art. Several leading English stage artists, such as tone. V estris, William Macready, Charles Kean, Samuel Phelps and Henry

Irving, have been shown to have contributed their ideas and ideals to the conception of the stage director as it is known today. These 19th

Century practitioners, however, worked almost exclusively in the non­ musical theatre, and this study has proposed to show that, for the musical stage, W. S. Gilbert functioned as the first great innovator.

His directorial precepts were rarely original, but his application of them to the staging of light opera was unorthodox, if not revolutionary.

In preparation of the production, Gilbert believed in detailed pre-planning. His position as creator of the libretto gave him the opportunity to envision the entire, finished production as he prepared the written dialogue and stage directions. He worked out the details of the staging of each opera by the manipulation of small wooden blocks on a model stage, and then recorded his desires in an elaborate produc­ tion book. With this book in hand, Gilbert entered the rehearsal hall with a clear vision of the "product" he was to create with his perform­ ing company, a vision precise to the smallest detail.

125 126 Gilbert insisted that rehearsals be held on a well-lighted and adequately equipped stage—a far cry from the standard practice of actors reading from hand-written sides while gathered about an insuf­ ficient gas light. Every element of the finished production was care­ fully rehearsed in what were often long, even gruelling, sessions.

Gilbert was particularly interested in the precision with which his performers accomplished movements, gestures, and the delivery of dia­

logue. These elements were rehearsed over and over with m ilitary dis­ cipline and determined patience until Gilbert felt that they were perfected. The actors rehearsed from neatly printed scripts, contain­

ing all of the dialogue and lyrics, and as soon as the scripts were out of hand, the exact properties to be used in performance were available. Although he was generally a benevolent dictator in regard

to the instruction of the chorus, Gilbert showed flexibility with

individual performers: the leading actors were given considerable lati

tude in the invention of movement and business. In contrast to the

slovenly approach to,staging, typical of the musical theatre of his

day, Gilbert was convinced that the success of a production was in

direct proportion to the quality of the rehearsals and the constant

attention to all of the particulars of performance.

Although he was not the antiquarian enthusiast that several

19th Century actor-managers, such as Kean and Macready, were, Gilbert

did insist upon reasonable accuracy in the design of costumes, settings

and properties. He recognized the theatrical potential of "local color

and verisim ilitude, and although his technical demands were not exten­

sive, he did insist on detailed and credible settings. Several of the o r ig in a l pro d u ctio n s (T ria l by J u r y . H. M. S. P in a fo re . Yeomen o f th e Guard) had settings taken from actual English locales. Likewise, the costuming of the operas was remarkably accurate. Gilbert personally supervised the selection of fabrics and ornamental details, and spared no expense to produce a visual effect that was both technically correct and theatrically effective.

The B ritish Museum promptbooks are an illuminating guide to

G ilbert's practice in regard to stage movement and composition. The staging diagrams therein show a concern for interesting, varied patterns of movement. Except for solo numbers, which he mapped out with the individual performing artist, Gilbert planned out each stage picture and each movement in advance with great care. Visually, the chorus is treated as several masses or units, their positions typically in straight lines at angles to the procenium plane or in semi-circles.

The performers in concerted numbers are generally placed on a mid-stage plane, often in a straight line. Although this positioning may seem stilted and old-fashioned to a modern musical director, the staging was innovative in its time. Before Gilbert, choruses were traditionally banked against the backdrop, with little or no movement or business, while the principal singers performed in "concert style" on the fore­ stage. Both chorus members and principals in the Gilbertian scheme were instructed in appropriate business and gesture, which made them an attractive and visually stimulating aspect of the production.

Like Mne. Vestris, the Bancrofts, and other English artists,

Gilbert was concerned with bringing respectability to the theatrical profession. His primary form of humor was satire, and thus he was par­ ticularly vulnerable to charges of bad taste and obscenity. In the preparation of the libretti, Gilbert was careful to select subjects 128 about which the Victorians could properly laugh, and then to treat

those subjects so as not to bring the blush of shame to a modest cheek.

Even In the days In which his productions were performed In less than

reputable playhouses, the Victorian public came to know that attendance

at a Gilbert and Sullivan opera would In no way compromise them.

Gilbert was publically in favor of censorship and exhibited a protec­

tionist instinct in questions of public morality and taste. He be­

lieved that performers in the theatre should maintain impeccable repu­

tations, and to this end, he watched his company for any signs of

questionable conduct and insisted upon rigorous standards of decorum on

and off the stage. In these efforts, he seems to have been almost

totally successful. The Savoy company was almost notorious for its

propriety, and Victorian ladies felt that they could attend a Gilbert

and Sullivan opera unescorted. G ilbert's knighthood testifies to his

own personal standards of decency, as well as his contribution to the

English stage.

Perhaps the most important contribution of 19th Century stage

artists was the conception that a production should be the product of

a single creative spirit. Puke Georg of Saxe-Meiningen, Richard Wagner,

Henry Irving—to name but a few of the renowned artists who ascribed to

this precept—join Gilbert in holding this viewpoint. In the manner of

Tbm Robertson, who had a similar advantage as dram atist, and following

his own instincts and experience, Gilbert fought against the prevalent

tradition in the English musical theatre which gave autonomy to all of

the many creative artists involved in a given production. Even when he

sought the assistance of strong associate artists, Gilbert worked closely with them as they prepared their designs, and always maintained the right of ultimate veto. He chose actor-singers from whom he could draw performances sympathetic to his ultimate conception of the opera, and in the unusually long rehearsal periods, he subordinated the performer's ego to the demands of the opera. He taught his actors the value of subtlety and restraint, of reliance upon the audience's intelligence and imagination, rather than dependence upon hoary, almost always

■4C inappropriate, gicsnicks. Once a production had been premiered, he saw to it that it was maintained exactly as rehearsed.

It would be impossible to measure accurately the effect that

Gilbert's directorial practice had on the later musical theatre. The fact that the original and revival productions were enormous financial successes could not but have had an impact on other directors and theatre artists. There is occasional testimony to Gilbert's influence.

Lynton Hudson, writing of Granville Barker , 1 remarks that Barker was,

in a line of descent from Tom Robertson and W. S. Gilbert, with whom the play was the all-important thing. Their genius was in the executive ability by which they insured their ideas being carried into action; ideas which were the product of a meticulous understanding of the result to be achieved.

The effect of Gilbert's appeal to the middle class and of his satire is credited with paving the way for the plays of Bernard Shaw. John W.

Cunliffe, writing in Modern English Playwrights, s t a t e s , ^

It is a long cry from W. S. Gilbert to Bernard Shaw, but the earlier satirist had made a beginning; first by securing the attendance of the middle class audience at the theatre, and then, by winning their approval, he had opened the way for more profound criticism of national life and character on the stage by his more richly gifted su cc e sso r.

There is little question that W. S. Gilbert educated a genera­ tion of middle-class playgoers, as well as Instructing his own pro­ fession. By eliminating the crudities of burlesque, the clowning and 130 gagging of music hall comedians, by removing slovenly production methods and replacing them with careful, purposeful design, he helped to teach

the audience to demand quality. Jessie Bond, writing of the impact which G ilbert's methods had on the uninitiated audience of the day, w ro te,^

Both actors and audience needed educating in G ilbert's new theory of fun, which had thrown aside all the hoary traditions of the stage. He would have no horseplay, no practical joking, no make-up of the crude red-nose order or ridiculous travesties of dress and manner. All must be natural, well-behaved and pleasant, and the actors were trained to get their effects by doing and saying absurd things in a m atter-of-fact way, without obvious burlesque of the characters they were representing.

Recognizing Gilbert's debt to other theatrical artists, one may

still say, with A. H. Godwin, that through Gilbert's influence, the

English musical stage "was drawn out of the mire of banality and un­ wholesomeness and lifted artistically to a much higher p la n e .B u t

Gilbert's practice as a director is not only significant when viewed

in the context of the banalities of the 19th Century musical theatre.

His ideals and techniques are more than simply a response to the

theatrical crudities of an age, more than a bandage for an embarrassing

sore. The principles which Gilbert adapted to the musical stage are the

reaction of a sensitive, creative artist to a stale and graceless art

form, but more importantly they are the ageless hallmarks of sound

directorial practice. FOOTNOTES

CHAPTER V

^Lynton Hudson. The English Stage. 1850-1950 (London: George Harrap, 1951), p. 161.

^ John W. Cunliffe. Modern English Playwrights (New York: Harper and Brother, 1927), p. 28.

^Quoted in Leslie Baily. The Gilbert and Sullivan Book (London: Spring Books, 1952), p. 104.

^A. H. Godwin. Gilbert and Sullivan: A Critical Appreciation of the Savoy Operas (London: J. M. Dent and Sons, Ltd., 1927), p. 69.

131 BIBLIOGRAPHY

Books

Allen, Reginald. The First Night Gilbert and Sullivan. New York: The Heritage Press, 1958.

______. W. S. Gilbert. An Anniversary Survey and Exhibition Checklist with Thirty-Five Illustrations. Charlottesville, Virginia: The Bibliographical Society of the University of Virginia, 1963.

Arthur, Sir George. From Phelps to Gielgud: Reminiscences of the Stage through Sixty-Five Years. Freeport, New York: Books for Libraries Press, Inc., 1936.

Baily, Leslie. The Gilbert and Sullivan Book. London: Spring Books, 1952.

Barrington, Rutland. Rutland Barrington: A Record of Thirty-Five Years Experience on the English Stage by Himself. London: G. R ichards, L td ., 1908.

______. More Rutland Barrington, bv Himself. London: G. Richards, Ltd., 1911.

Bond, Jessie. The Life and Reminiscences of Jessie Bond. London: John Lane, 1930.

Browne, Edith A. W. S. Gilbert. New York: John Lane, Co., 1907.

Cellier, Francoise A. and Bridgeman, C. Gilbert and Sullivan and D*0yly Carte. London: I. Pitman and Sons, Ltd., 1914.

Dark, Sidney and Grey, Rowland. W. S. Gilbert, His Life and Letters. London: Methuen & Co., Ltd., 1923.

Dictionary of National Biography 1901-1911. London: Oxford Univer­ sity Press, 1912.

Dunn, George E. A Gilbert and Sullivan Dictionary. New York: Oxford University Press, 1936.

Fitz-Gerald, S. J. Adair. 13e Story of the Savoy Opera. London: Stanley Paul and Company, 1924.

132 133

Fowell, Frank, and Frank Palmer. Censorship In England. London: Frank Palmer, 1913.

Godwin, A. H. Gilbert and Sullivan: A Critical Appreciation of the Savoy Operas. London: J. M. Dent & Sons, Ltd., 1927.

Goldberg, Isaac. The Story of Gilbert and Sullivan. New York: Simon and Schuster, 1928.

Grossmith, George. Reminiscences. London: Simpkin, Marshall and Co., 1910.

Hopper, DeWolf. Once a Clown. Always a Clown. Boston: L ittle, Brown and Company, 1927.

Hudson, Lynton. The English Stage. 1850-1950. London: George G. Harrap, 1951.

Hutchinson, Horace G. Portraits of the Eighties. London: T. Fisher Unwin, Ltd., 1920.

Lavine, Sigmund A. Wandering Minstrels We: the story of Gilbert and Sullivan. New York: Dodd Mead, 1954.

Lorenzen, Richard L. A History of the Old Prince of Wales's Theatre. London. 1772-1905. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, The Ohio State University, 1968.

Lytton, Henry A. The Secrets of a Savoyard. London: Jarrolds, Ltd., 1922.

. A Wandering Minstrel. London: Jarrolds, Ltd., 1933.

Mander, Raymond and Joe Mitchenson. A Picture History of Gilbert and Sullivan. London: Vista Books, 1962.

. and Mitchenson, Joe. The Lost Theatres of London. London: Rupert Hart-Davis, 1968.

Moore, Frank Ledlie. Crowell’s Handbook of Gilbert and Sullivan. New York: Thomas Y. Crow ell Company, 1962.

Pearson, Hesketh. Gilbert and Sullivan. New York: Harper & Brothers, 1935.

. Gilbert: His Life and Strife. London: Methuen & Co., Ltd., 1957.

Quiller-Couch, Sir Arthur. Studies in Literature. Third Series. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1933. 134

Rowell, George. The Victorian Theatre. A Survey. London: Oxford University Press, 1956.

Searle, Townley. Sir William Schwenck Gilbert: A Topsy-Turvy Adven­ ture. London: Alexander-Ouseley, Ltd., 1931.

Scott, Clement. The Drama of Yesterday and Today. Vols. I and II. London: Macmillan and Company,'1899.

Shaw, Bernard. Our Theatre in the Nineties. Vol. I. London: Con­ s ta b le and Company L im ited, 1906.

Stedman, Jane W. Gilbert before Sullivan. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1967.

Sullivan, Herbert and Newman Flower. Sir Arthur Sullivan. His Life Letters and Diary. New York: George H. Doran Company, 1927.

Tweedie, Ethel B. (Mrs. Alec-Tweedie.) Behind the Footlights. London: Hutchinson and Co., 1904.

W albrook, H. M. G ilb e rt and S u lliv an O pera, A H isto ry and a Comment. London: F. V. White and Company, 1922.

Watson, Ernest Bradlee. Sheridan to Robertson: A Study of the Nine­ teenth-Century Stage. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1926.

Williamson, Audrey. Gilbert and Sullivan Opera, a New Assessment. New York: Macmillan, 1953.

Wymer, Norman. Gilbert and Sullivan. New York: Dutton, 1963.

Wyndham, Henry Saxe. Arthur Seymour Sullivan (1842-1900). New York: Harper and Brothers, 1926.

Periodicals

Fun. Volume II, March 22, 1862.

Fun. Volume II, April 12, 1862.

Fun. Volume VII, January 12, 1867.

Scribner1s Monthly. Volume XVIII, March 12, 1899. 135 Special Collection

The listed volumes are part of the archives of the Manuscript Division o f th e B r itis h Museum, and a re the p ro p e rty o f th e Royal T h e a tric a l Trust. The number refers to the Division's catalogue entry.

ADD # 49310 - Promptbooks for Trial by Jury, The Sorceror and H. M. S. P in a fo re .

ADD # 49311 - Pirates of Penzance. Patience and Iolanthe.

ADD # 49312 - Princess Ida, The Mikado, and Ruddigore.

ADD # 49313 - Yeomen of the Guard and The Gondoliers.

ADD # 49314 - Foggerty's Fairy.

ADD # 49315 - The Ne'er Do T7eel, The Mountebanks and His Excellency.

ADD # 49316 - Dulcamera, Robert the Devil, Pygmalion and Galatea, Charity. Ought i.7e to V isit Her?, Broken Hearts, Dan11 Druce. On Bail. Rosencrantz and Guilderstern.

ADD # 49317 - The Wicked Uorld, Gretchen. Comedy and Tragedy. Branting- hame Hall, The Fortune Hunter, Fallen Fairies.

ADD # 49321 - Miscellaneous Drawings and Costume Sketches.

ADD # 49322 - G ilbert's Diary, 1878.

ADD # 49329 - G ilbert's Diary, 1905-1911 (In French).

ADD # 49333 - Papers Relating to the Savoy Operas.

ADD v 49334 - Papers Relating to the Savoy Operas.

ADD # 49345 - G ilbert's Correspondence.

ADD # 49348 - Miscellaneous Typescripts and Printed M aterials.

ADD v 49350 - Boxes of Pictures of the Later Plays and Opera Revivals.

ADD v 49351 - Boxes of Pictures of the Later Plays and Opera Revivals.