A Sinister Macbeth: the Macklin Production of 1733

A sinister Macbeth: The Macklin production of 1733

The Harvard community has made this article openly available. Please share how this access benefits you. Your story matters

Citation Kinservik, Matthew J. 1995. A sinister Macbeth: The Macklin production of 1733. Harvard Library Bulletin 6 (1), Spring 1995: 51-76.

Citable link http://nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:42665374

Terms of Use This article was downloaded from Harvard University’s DASH repository, and is made available under the terms and conditions applicable to Other Posted Material, as set forth at http:// nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:dash.current.terms-of- use#LAA 51

A Sinister Macbeth: The Macklin Production of I 77 3

Matthew]. Kinservik

hades Macklin's production of Macbethat Covent Garden in 1773 was a criti- C cal success, a commercial failure, and the occasion of a riot by theatergoers. Most of the attention devoted to this production has focused on the riot that re- sulted from a dispute between Macklin and William "Gentleman" Smith over who should play Macbeth. The merits and limitations of the production had little to do with the riot and have been ignored by scholars. This neglect is unfortunate because Macklin's Macbeth is an important part of the history of Shakespearean production in the eighteenth century. Macklin took an innovative approach to Macbeth's character, one that challenged the standard interpretation and expanded the range of choices in Macbeth production. Macklin was seventy-four years old when he staged his Macbeth, older than most MATTHEW J. KINSERVIK, a doc- people when they retire from the stage. He continued to do innovative work well toral student at Pennsylvania into his eighties. His Man of the World, one of the finest eighteenth-century satiric State University, is working on theatrical censorship and plays, was not staged until 1781-and Macklin played the demanding lead role. satire in eighteenth-century Indeed, he had not established himself as a major performer until he was in his England. forties, when he unveiled his revolutionary interpretation of Shylock in 1741. Later that same year, David Garrick (1717-79) changed the theatre forever with his Ri- chard III, a role for which some suggest Macklin helped him prepare. The two men were close friends until the failed actors' rebellion of 1743 left each deeply suspicious and resentful of the other. Macklin' s first success as a playwright came in his sixtieth year, when his Love a la Mode (1759) was a surprise, and enduring, hit. His contributions to satiric drama alone make him an important figure for our un- derstanding of the eighteenth-century stage; and his reinterpretations of major Shakespeare plays constitute an entirely different-and as yet not fully appreci- ated-contribution to the English dramatic tradition. When Macklin approached Macbeth in 1773, Garrick's interpretation was the standard. First staged in 1744, Garrick's Macbeth was itself an innovative production. Employing a text purged of many of Sir William Davenant's seventeenth- century additions and featuring a major reassessment of Macbeth's character, it told the story of a good man gone bad. Tempted to his fate by a cunning wife and the enticing prophecies of the witches, Garrick's Macbeth is buffeted by the conflict- ing forces of ambition and remorse. Despite his crimes, he remains fundamentally

I would like to thank Robert D. Hume and John T. Harwood for their helpful comments and suggestions. 52 HARVARD LIBRARY BULLETIN

good-a point Garrick emphasized by adding a repentant death speech he wrote especially for the production. 1 This interpretation closely agrees with mid-eighteenth-century Macbethcriticism, some ofit clearly influenced by Garrick's performance. For nearly thirty years, English theatergoers and readers encountered the same Macbeth, and he was Garrick. Even when other actors such as Spranger Barry, Henry Mossop, and Smith played the role, they tended to imitate him. 2 Not until the Macklin production was Garrick's interpretation seriously rethought. Macklin's Macbethfeatured new sets, new costumes, and a new conception of Macbeth's character. Garrick's Macbeth was led into criminality by others; Macklin's possessed it on his own. An innately evil Macbeth was an original concept in 1773, much different from the print commentaries on the play and the prior stage productions. Although Garrick had not performed the role since 1768, he remained the standard against which newcomers to the role were judged. Whether Macklin thought he could out-shine Garrick, we cannot know. But he was aware that his Macbeth differed radically from Garrick's, and he was eager to make his darker vision of Macbeth a credible alternative to the standard interpretation. Thanks to three pages of manuscript notes by Macklin, we can reconstruct his Macbethwith a degree of specificity remarkable for a production that was performed only six nights. These notes, preserved in the Harvard Theatre Collection, are fully and accurately reproduced here for the first time (figure 1).3 To learn how much of Macklin's ideas were actually staged, however, we must look to reviews and reactions in contemporary newspapers. In issues dating from October to December 1773, I have found 252 entries relating to the production-an astonishingly high number for the time. 4 Although many entries have to do with the theatre disturbances and ensuing riot, others provide significant detail and commentary about Figure1. Oppositeand following pages: the production itsel( By comparing Macklin's notes with eighteenth-century Macklin's notes on Macbeth. Cour- tesy of the Haivard TheatreCollection. Macbeth criticism and with Garrick's interpretation, we can judge the extent to which Macklin's conception departed from the status quo. The newspaper reactions tell us what Macklin's contemporaries thought of his production. Taken together, we get a surprisingly full picture of Macklin's Macbeth, its impact on eighteenth-century theatre, and its legacy for future productions.

MACKLIN's IDEAS FOR Macbeth

Macklin had long been concerned with Shakespearean criticism and production. When The Merchantof Venicewas revived at Drury Lane in 1741, Macklin's triumph in the role of Shylock established him as one of the major actors of his time.

'Tis done! the scene of life will quickly close. 3 Macklin' s Macbethnotes are bound into Harvard's extra- Ambition's vain, delusive dreams are fled, illustrated James T. Kirkman, Memoirsof the Life of Macklin And now I wake co darkness, guilt and horror. (London: Lack.ington, 1799), vol. 2. At the end of them, I cannot bear it! Let me shake it off.- Macklin has written unrelated notes for future produc- 'Twa' not be; my soul is clogged with blood. tions. William W. Appleton includes excerpts from the I cannot rise1 I dare not ask for mercy. notes in Charles Macklin: An Actor's Life (Cambridge, It is too late, hell drags me down. I sink, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1960). Denis Donoghue I sink-Oh!-my soul is lost forever! reproduces chem inaccurately in a virtually incomprehen- Oh! (Dies.) sible transcription in "Macklin's Shylock and Macbeth," The Plays ofDavid Garrick,ed. Harry William Pedicord Studies: An Irish QuarterlyReview ofLetters, Philosophy& and Frederick Louis Bergmann, vol. 3, Garrick'sAdapta- Science43 (1954): 421-30. tions ofShakespeare, 1744-1756 (Carbondale, Ill.: South- • The newspapers I consulted are The GeneralEvening Post, ern Illinois University Press, 1981), 72. The St.James's Chronicle,Lloyd's Evening Post, The London 2 See Dennis Bartholomeusz, Macbethand the Players(Lon- Chronicle,The Macaroni,and The Morning Chronicle. don: Cambridge University Press, 1969), 82. A Sinister Macbeth

53 54 HARVARD LIBRARY BULLETIN A Sinister Macbeth

4'4/i4''•7; ·,.,; # ·... · ..... ···. ..,.,,,.~ .,...... ·. .· ....···..,,J ..~·., ~•· :····.·.·. .. .

v ·t..'f" :', :~. ~.

#Ci~.,. ,.;.t_ HARVARD LIBRARY BULLETIN

This performance foreshadowed his approach to other Shakespearean characters. The first eighteenth-century actor to work from Shakespeare's text as opposed to Lansdowne's adaptation, The Jew ef Venice (1701), Macklin played Shylock as a tragic, fiercely dignified character, rather than as a comic buffoon. Radically de- parting from the prevailing declamatory style of acting, Macklin chose a restrained approach. Furthermore, his Shylock wore a costume that paid close attention to historical detail. These same elements characterized his production of Othello at the Little Haymarket in 1744. Macklin had been giving acting lessons that season, and on 6 February his troupe of students inaugurated a short (and technically illegal) season with Othello. Macklin's performance as Iago featured his chaste style and a new costume; Othello (played by Samuel Foote!) was dressed "after the manner of his country." 5 Ten years later, Macklin briefly retired from the stage and opened a tavern and public lecture forum called "The British Inquisition." He advertised that his lec- tures would consider how Shakespeare's "capital Characters have been acted here- tofore, are acted, and ought to be acted." 6 When he approached Macbeth twenty years afier that, he returned to the same concerns that shaped his earlier approaches to Shakespeare: a revisionist interpretation of dramatic character, the restoration of Shakespeare's text, and historical accuracy in costumes. In this sense, his Macbethis the fullest realization of a Shakespearean agenda that he had been pursuing for more than thirty years. Macklin's Macbethnotes are private and personal jottings. Kalmin A. Burnim calls them "rambling and often incoherent. "7 In a more accurate assessment, Dennis Bartholomeusz considers them "impulsive fresh thoughts. " 8 The notes show Macklin to be intensely concerned with all aspects of the production, as well as developing a unifying concept for it. As Appleton observes, they reveal an actor anticipating "the function of the director in the modern theatre." 9 Macklin's thoughts are recorded in no particular order, but in most cases are clearly separated by bold lines; they run in two columns from top to bottom, like a newspaper. 10 Macklin thoroughly rethinks the play, considering blocking, costumes, delivery, music, and sets. He has three general objectives: (1) to make the costumes and sets more elaborate and historically accurate; (2) to convey Macbeth's feelings clearly; and (3) to create a forbidding, violent atmosphere. Critics tend to remem- ber the production for the introduction of Scottish dress, perhaps its most significant legacy (Burnim calls it Macklin's '"Scottish' production"). 11 But Macklin's innovations were far more extensive than that. Even the notes regarding costumes are not confined merely to making the dress Scottish-Macbeth is to be weighted down with weaponry at his first entrance and "preceeded by officers drums Fifes Standards, & other warlike characters.'' From the outset, Macklin wanted to stress Macbeth's martial nature. Historical accuracy required Scottish dress, but Macklin's

5 Appleton, Charles Macklin, 69 and 253, n. 8. See pp. 66- 7 Kalmin A. Burnim, David Garrick, Director (Pittsburgh: 70 for a full discussion; and pp. 43-5 5 for his discussion University of Pittsburgh Press, 1961), 98. of Macklin's Shylock. For a more recent treatment of 8 Bartholomeusz, Macbeth and the Players, 8 5. Macklin as Shylock, see John Gross, Shylock: A Legend 9 Appleton, Charles Macklin, I 7 I. and Its Legacy (New York: Simon & Schuster, 1992), w Donoghue's transcription runs all the notes together, de- 105-24. stroying the sense of separate, cogent thoughts. 6 The PublicAdvertiser (London), 21 November 1754. The 11 Burnim, David Garrick, Director, 1.22. advertisement notes that the "First Lecture will be on HAMLET." A Sinister Macbeth 57 dark interpretation of Macbeth's character demanded the fierce, "warlike" entrance. Macl

12 Bell's Edition o_{Shakespeare'sPlays (1774; reprint London: Commarket Press, 1969) 1: 77. 58 HARVARD LIBRARY BULLETIN

when the Cauldron Sinks-in the act there be a great Crash of Screaming discordant musick.-at-an eternal fall on you.-and after Mac Says-why Sinks that Cauldron.-& what noise is this? there must be a loud flourish or prelude of music to introduce the eight visions.

Macbeth's anguish as he curses the witches for not revealing more of his future is exemplified by the "great Crash of Screaming discordant musick." Then, his mood quickly changes to awe when "a loud flourish or prelude of music" signals the procession of the kings. Macklin combines delivery, music, and setting to create a mood of supernatural wonder that illuminates Macbeth's desperate ambition. The notes tell us least about his intentions concerning act 5. He clearly wanted to stage a suspenseful back-and-forth struggle between the Scots and the English in order to emphasize Macbeth's martial valor: "Macbeth must appear in the front of the battle when the Scotch drives the English off" If his notes about the "Inside of the Castle" refer to Dunsinane instead oflnverness, then the "bad Pictures of warriors," the stuffed boars and wolves, and the many weapons would create a formi- dable atmosphere for Lady Macbeth's sleep-walking scene. The props would both foreshadow the battle to come and suggest the savage nature of the crimes that trouble Lady Macbeth. The castle in the last act mirrors its owner in the first: both have a fierce, martial air and bristle with weapons. Appleton concludes from these notes that Macklin's "primary aim was to re- create the barbaric splendors of early Scottish history." 13 But the notes clearly show that Macklin was concerned with more than setting. I believe that his primary concern was to make his production different from the status quo by emphasizing Macbeth's criminality over his nobility. His Covent Garden audiences saw a highly innovative approach to an old play, one that did not resemble earlier Macbethpro- ductions or criticism.

EIGHTEENTH-CENTURY Macbeth CRITICISM

When SamuelJohnson decided to become an editor of Shakespeare, he made his critical debut by attacking Sir Thomas Hanmer's "Oxford Edition" of Shakespeare (1743-44), which had just appeared. In an essay titled "Miscellaneous Observa- tions on the Tragedy of Macbeth" (1745), he uses that play to establish his creden- tials as an editor of Shakespeare. His pamphlet was published one year after his friend Garrick's triumphant production at Drury Lane and generally corresponds with Garrick's conception of Macbeth. Thus, just as Garrick's Macbeth became the standard stage version, so did Johnson's assessment come to dominate Macbeth criticism. Before Johnson, critical observations on Macbeth are scanty. Nicholas Rowe's 1709-rn edition contains no observations or annotations on the plays. However, in the spurious seventh volume of Rowe's Shakespeare, published by Edmund Curll and probably written by Charles Gildon, we find one of the earliest eighteenth-century appraisals of Macbeth's character. The author writes, "To say much in Praise of this Play I cannot, for the . . . Character of Mackbeth and his Lady are too monstruous for the Stage. But it has obtained, and in too much Esteem with the Million for any Man yet to say much against it." 14 This brief observation contains strands of Macbeth criticism that will run through the eighteenth century:

'J Appleton, Charles Macklin, I 7 r. ed. Nicholas Rowe, vol. 7 (London, 1710), 394. '4 Charles Gildon(?), The Works of Mr. William Shakespeare, A Sinister Macbeth 59

Macbeth and his Lady are evil, repugnant persons, yet the drama in which these "monstruous" characters play such a central role somehow merits the public's "Esteem." Unfortunately, Pope and Theobald are silent on Macbeth's character and Hanmer's "harmless industry" 15 does not extend to character analysis. But Johnson's "Observations" deals squarely with the conflict between the esteem that audiences have for Macbeth and his monstrous deeds. Indeed, in Johnson's view, this conflict is central to the play. His Macbeth is willingly led from the path of virtue by the witches' spell and Lady Macbeth's equally powerful exhortations. For Johnson, "the excellence and dignity of courage, a glittering idea which has dazzled mankind from age to age" is at once the source of public esteem for Macbeth and the lure used by Lady Macbeth and the witches to urge him to his crimes. 16 Contrary to the eighteenth-century practice of playing the witches for comic effect,Johnson does not regard them as comical or superfluous to the main action. Instead, their enchantment of Macbeth is real and has important implications for an assessment of his character. Johnson even suggests that Shakespeare made the play "depend upon enchantment" and says that "the scenes of enchantment, however they may now be ridiculed, were both by himself and his audience thought awful and affecting" (pp. 4, 6). To this enchantment, Shakespeare adds Lady Macbeth's challenges to Macbeth's courage. Johnson argues that "Courage is the distinguishing virtue of a soldier, and the reproach of cowardice cannot be borne by any man from a woman, without great impatience" (p. 18). Johnson views Macbeth's crimes as the result of the witches' enchantment and Lady Macbeth's goading. While this conclusion does not completely excuse Macbeth's crimes, it certainly mitigates them. True,Johnson recognizes that Macbeth is easily led astray. He says that Macbeth succumbs to an "art of sophistry by which men have some- times deluded their consciences, and persuaded themselves that what would be criminal in others is virtuous in them" (p. 18). But while this seems to indict Macbeth, it also lessens his crimes by suggesting that he had a conscience to delude in the first place, something that the author of the seventh volume of Rowe's Shakespeareseems to have denied. Johnson's Macbeth is persuaded to trade his true virtue, "the excellence and dignity of courage," for a false virtue, ambition. This is essentially the same trajec- tory that Garrick's Macbeth follows. 17 In fact, eighteenth-century critics are nearly unanimous in their assessment of Macbeth's character, building on and exaggerat- ingJohnson's assessment. For example, in An Essay Upon English Tragedy(1747?), William Guthrie calls Macbeth and his Lady a "wicked pair," but in the same breath contrasts the "reluctant" Macbeth with his "remorseless" Lady. 18 The next year, John Upton laments that Macbeth, who had "conduct and courage, ... should fall off from the ways of virtue!" 19 Upton elaborates his assessment of Macbeth's

1 s Samuel Johnson, "Miscellaneous Observations on the 17 George Winchester Stone.Jr. says that Garrick consulted Tragedy of Macbeth" (London, 1745), in The Yale Edition with Johnson when preparing his stage version of the of the Works ef Samuel Johnson, vol. 7 & 8, Johnson on play. See Stone's "Garrick's Handling of Macbeth," Stud- Shakespeare, ed. Arthur Sherbo (New Haven: Yale ies in Philology38 (1941): 609-28, esp. 615-17. University Press, 1968}, 45. 18 William Guthrie, An Essay Upon English Tragedy(1747?). 16 Johnson, "Miscellaneous Observations," 17. For a fuller Reprinted as vol. 6 of EighteenthCentury Shakespeare,ed. treatment of Johnson's appraisal of Macbeth, see Edward Arthur Freeman (New York: Augustus M. Kelley, 1971), Tomarken, SamuelJohnson on Shakespeare:The Discipline 22. ef Criticism(Athens: University of Georgia Press, 1991), 19 John Upton, CriticalObservations on Shakespeare(1748; re- 152-74. print New York: AMS Press, 1973), 27-28. 60 HARVARD LIBRARY BULLETIN

character, pointing out that "the hero of the tragedy, is drawn a man, not a monster; a man of virtue, 'till he hearkened to the lures of ambition" (pp.30-31). Here, as in Johnson's "Observations," Macbeth is initially virtuous until infected by an external viciousness. Upton also draws Lady Macbeth's evil influence in bolder strokes thanJohnson. He sees her as "ten times prouder" than Macbeth and says that "For her sake (powerful phantom!) honour, honesty, all is sacrificed" (pp. 29, 32). He suggests that Macbeth did not commit his crimes for his own sake, but instead, to please the "powerful phantom," his wife. In that phrase, Upton equates the powers of Lady Macbeth and the witches, the agents mostly responsible for Macbeth's fall from "the ways of virtue." Ultimately, Upton claims that the lesson of Macbeth is that "'Tis much happier for a man never to have known what honesty is, than once knowing it, after to forsake it" (p. 34). Like Johnson, Upton as- sumes that Macbeth is a "man of virtue" at the outset. The strongest praise for Macbeth's virtues comes from Elizabeth Montagu in An Essay on the Writings and Genius efShakespear (1769). Like Johnson and Upton, she believes Macbeth to be a good man gone bad and the witches a serious evil influence on him. In Lady Macbeth and her husband, she sees the "difference between a mind naturally prone to evil, and a frail one warped by force of tempta- tions" (p. 200). But Montagu goes beyond her predecessors, by suggesting that Macbeth is never completely evil. She asserts that in act 5, the "man of honour pierces through the traitor and the assassin" (p. 195). Macbeth's natural propensity is to virtue, not vice, in spite of his crimes. Comparing him to Richard III, Montagu pronounces Richard a monster, "But Macbeth, of a generous disposition, and good propensities, but with vehement passions and aspiring wishes, ... a subject liable to be seduced by splendid prospects, and ambitious counsels" (p. 176). We are, at this point, a long way from Gildon's "monstruous" Macbeth. Montagu's sympathetic assessment of Macbeth's character is indicative of the grow- ing interest in character psychology in the eighteenth century; and considering the encomia she bestows upon Garrick in her introduction, her reading is consistent with his interpretation. Thomas Whately's Remarks on Some efthe Charactersef Shakespeare, written in 1772 (published 1785), reinforces a number of the accepted opinions on the eve of Macklin's production. Referring to the murder of Duncan, he asserts that Macbeth's "natural temper would have deterred him from such a design, ifhe had not been immediately tempted, and strongly impelled to it" (pp. 29-30). Similarly, he explains that the "intervention of a supernatural cause accounts for his acting so contrary to his disposition," adding that the "instigations of his wife" are also nec- essary (pp. 33-34). However, Whately famously takes exception to the notion that Macbeth is courageous. Comparing Macbeth to Richard III, he sees not the difference between a man and a monster, but between a man driven by terror and one driven by ambition. Whereas Richard fears only "losing the great object of his ambition," Macbeth "dreads the danger which threatens his life; and that terror constantly damps all the joys of his crown" (p. 74). Whately agrees with Montagu that Macbeth is "much more complicated than ... Richard" (p. 119); and like most commentators, he finds that Macbeth's evil comes from external sources, not from within. This review of Macbeth criticism between 1710 and 1772 indicates general una- nimity about Macbeth's character after 1745. Commentators from Johnson to A SinisterMacbeth 61

Whately see Macbeth as a complex, initially virtuous man, but one easily influenced by the witches' enchantment and Lady Macbeth's counsels. Most critics view Macbeth's courage as both his greatest virtue and the key to his downfall. Being virtuous, he is conscious of his guilt (unlike his Lady) and never fully reconciles himself to the evil path down which he has been led. Critical assessments of Macbeth closely accord with Garrick's stage version, and were almost certainly influenced by it. 2° Contemporaries, as the newspapers show, were aware that Garrick's was the stage interpretation against which Macklin's 1773 production reacts.

GARRICK'S Macbeth

Garrick's interpretation of Macbethso completely eclipsed previous versions that a 1773 audience would have known no other. In Garrick's Essay on Acting (1744), published just before his production, he tries to preempt criticism of it. 21 He tidily sums up Macbeth as follows:

He is an experienc'd General, crown'd with Conquest, innately Ambitious, and re- ligiously Humane, spurr' don by metaphysicalProphecies, and the unconquerablePride of his Wife, to a Deed, horridin itself, and repugnantto his Nature; but as it is the Ladderto the swellingAct efthe ImperialTheme, his Milk soon becomes Gall, imbitters his whole Disposition, and the Consequence is the Murder of Duncan, the taking qff of Banquo, and his own Coronation.(p. 13)

Garrick's Macbeth is tom by the conflict between ambition and humanity. On stage, he showed audiences neither the humane nor the ambitious Macbeth, but the effects of his internal struggle. Francis Gentleman assesses Garrick's performance thus:

Through all the soliloquies of anxious reflections in the first act; amidst the pangs of guilty apprehensions and pungent remorse in the second; through all the distracted terror of the third; all the impetuous curiosity of the fourth, and all the desperation of the fifth, Mr. Garrick shows uniform, unabating excellence. 22

This first-hand account is both a testament to Garrick's ability to convey emotions and proof that his portrayal focused on Macbeth's changing psychological states. While Garrick most certainly exploited the role as a performance vehicle, his de- piction also reflects the current vogue of character psychology. Garrick adheres to his original conception of the character: Macbeth is never comfortable with his criminality, nor is he ever any single thing at once. No doubt, Garrick's skittish portrayal is meant to show that Macbeth retains a glimmer of goodness despite his bad deeds. Significantly, Gentleman makes no mention of Macbeth's courage, only his "anxious reflections," "pungent remorse," "distracted terror," and "desperation." As Joseph W. Donohue,Jr. points out, Garrick "preferred to concentrate on what seemed greater opportunities for theatrical effectiveness in the portrayal of horror"

20 Joseph W. Donohue.Jr., Dramatic Characterin the English 1744) reveals the ironical method Garrick used. In a sin- Romantic Age (Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University cere passage, Garrick singles out Macklin's Shylock for Press, 1970), 241-42, and 241 n. 52. praise, especially "his greatAttention and Observationof the 21 The full title, An Essay on Acting: in Which Will be Manners,Dress, and Behaviourofa particularTribe ef People" Consider'd The Mimical Behaviour of a Certain Fashionable p. II. Faulty Actor, and the Laudablenessof Such Unmannerly, As 22 Quoted in Stone, "Garrick's Handling of Macbeth,"623- Well As Inhumane Proceedings.To Which Will Be Added, A 24. Short Criticismon His Acting Macbeth,(London: Bickerton, 62 HARVARD LIBRARY BULLETIN

at the expense of Macbeth's courage (p. 237). Perhaps realizing this, Garrick re- fined his portrayal to show more of Macbeth's courage. In 1762, he responds to an anonymous correspondent who had gently criticized him for being too brave in the banquet scene, saying that "Should Macbeth sink into pusillanimity [at the second appearance ofBanquo's ghost], I imagine that it would hurt ye Character, & be contrary to the intentions of Shakespear. "23 Perhaps, then, Garrick began to emphasize Macbeth's courage more in later performances, but his main focus remained the character's inner turmoil. Garrick's fidelity to his original conception is evident from a 1768 letter to Arthur Murphy. In a previous letter, Murphy suggests that Garrick was "too much at Ease" when speaking with Banquo prior to the murder of Duncan. Garrick agrees, apologizing, "I was indeed not quite Master of my feelings till I got to clutch- ing the air-drawn dagger." 24 Portraying Macbeth as over-confident would indeed dilute the ravages of guilt that Garrick sought to keep before audiences. His inter- polated death speech was designed to crown the performance with this notion of conscious remorse. In the throes of death, Macbeth cries: "I dare not ask for mercy. / It is too late, hell drags me down. I sink, / I sink-Oh!-my soul is lost forever! "25 And so Garrick's Macbeth expires with a terrified cry. In a description reminiscent of Montagu, Jean Georges Noverre observes that in Garrick's death speech, "humanity triumphed over murders, and cruelty. The tyrant sensible to its voice abhorred his crimes. " 26 This is precisely the pious message that Garrick's interpolation sought to convey. Only through death does the war within Macbeth end. The physical and mental demands of Garrick's tumultu- ous portrayal took an obvious toll on him. He called Macbeth his "most violent part," and in eight letters he makes excuses for not performing the part on grounds of infirmity. 27 Garrick last performed the role on 22 September 1768. He was un- able to steel himself for a final performance of the role during his last season in 1776. After he ceased playing the role, Macbethwas seldom offered at Drury Lane. In the five seasons following Garrick's last performance as Macbeth, Drury Lane staged the play only five times. By contrast, Covent Garden staged the play seven- teen times during this same period, with William "Gentleman" Smith playing the lead every time. When his brief departure from Covent Garden in l 77 3 left the theatre without a Macbeth, Macklin seized the opportunity to step in and claim the role.

MACKLIN's PRODUCTION

Macklin did more than just replace Smith as Macbeth; he rethought the entire play, which we have just established by comparing his notes to contemporary attitudes about Macbeth.From newspaper accounts of the day, we can determine both how much ofMacklin's conception was actually performed at Covent Garden and how audiences received his innovations. Arthur Murphy, who attended the 23 Octo- ber 1773 premiere, welcomed "as many editions of Macbeth on the stage, as the

21 The Letters of David Garrick, ed. David M. Little and Monsieur Noverre (1782-83). Reprinted as vol. 1 of Music George M. Kahrl (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard Univer- and Theatre in France in the 17th and 18th Centuries (New sity Press, 1963), 1: 351. York: AMS Press, 1978), 200. •• Ibid, 2: 593--94, and 594 n. 3. 27 Letters of David Garrick, 2: 838. The letters in which 2 s Plays of David Garrick, 72. Garrick excuses himself from playing Macbeth are num- 26 "An Essay on the Art of Dancing" in The Works of bers 399,452,485, 517, 523,680,726, and 733. A SinisterMacbeth 63

commentators have given us off the stage." 28 He notes significant differences between "Macklin's edition" and what he terms Garrick's "white and glossy" version. Claiming that "the sense of the author was never delivered by any actor with more intelligence than by Macklin," he judges Macklin's production to be closer to Shakespeare's intentions. This assessment must have pleased Macklin, who is reported to have said, "[Garrick] is for Nature and Shakespeare; I am for Shakespeare and Nature!" 29 Macklin saw in Shakespeare's text a Macbeth who was more sinister than Garrick had played him. This is the major distinction between the two productions and the key to Macklin's conception of Macbeth's character. Judging from newspaper reviews, Macklin successfully conveyed his vision of an innately evil Macbeth to the audience. A spectator at the third performance writes approvingly in The Morning Chronicleof I 3 November: ... tho' I have seen every actor who has appeared in that character for twenty years past, never before did I see a villain and a murderer so naturallydepicted. The actor outstripped the poet; for even in scenes of compunction he looked as if he had not glutted his appetite for blood, but wished Duncan again alive that he might once more have the pleasure of murdering him!

Others who noted the savage tenor ofMacklin's performance were less approving, however. Some accused him of playing Macbeth like Shylock (who, according to one correspondent, is just like Macklin); and a caricature titled "Sir Archy McSarcasm in the Character of Macbeth" equates Macklin's Macbeth with the boorish Scot he played in Love ala Mode (figure 2).30 But the favorable observation above tells us that Macklin is the first actor in the reviewer's memory to emphasize Macbeth's villainy rather than his virtue, and that he portrayed it convincingly. With Garrick, Macbeth's "humanity triumphed over murders, and cruelty," according to Noverre; whereas with Macklin, Macbeth's murderous impulses over- power any pangs of conscience. Several correspondents note that the ferocity of Macklin's Macbeth marked a departure from Garrick's interpretation. Arthur Murphy commends Macklin's emphasis in the line: "Time,-and the hour (i.e. opportunity) run through the roughest day." 31 According to Murphy, Garrick observed no pause, rendering the line a "flat tautology;" but Macklin's emphasis "marks a mind intensely bent upon the idea of a murder which had already engrossed the imagination." Another reviewer comments on Macklin's intensity: in the banquet scene, where Garrick was careful to show some courage without appearing over-confident, Macklin is accused of nearly coming to "fisty-cuffs" with Banquo's ghost and stamping and shouting excessively throughout the scene. 32 In the last act, Macklin received some of his loudest applause for his reaction to the news that Birnam Wood was ap- proaching Dunsinane. In earlier performances, when Garrick heard the news he

28 The Morning Chronicle of 30 October. Appleton, in Charles accusations that Macklin played Macbeth like Shylock. Macklin, 179, identifies "Touchstone" as Murphy. How- The caricature, "Sir Archy M

·sir ARCHY M'SARCASM. _ in the Character of MACBETH.

Figure2. "Sir Archy MCSarcasmin the Characterof Macbeth." Courtesy of the Harvard Theatre Collection.

broke his truncheon on the messenger's arm, but later he merely threatened the messenger by laying his hand on his weapon. Macklin's reaction was more omi- nous. An anonymous correspondent in The St.James's Chronicleof 28-30 October says that Macklin "seized his [the messenger's] Arm; and bent him to the Ground in the Posture of vanquished ]achimo;and then, after delivering the hasty Menace, uttered the last Line of the Speech with a frigid Despondency which would not have disgraced even your own [Garrick's] Adherence to Nature." 33 Both Macklin and Garrick championed a naturalistic acting style, but their approaches to Mac- beth were clearly different.

JJ William Cooke says that Macklin's reaction to the mes- Charles Macklin, Comedian (London: Printed for J senger "was delivered in a tone and look of such terrible Aspeme by T. Maiden, 1804), 285. menace as almost petrified the audience," in Memoirs of A Sinister Macbeth

Many commentators praise the merits of the production while finding fault with Macklin's performance. "Eumenes," writing in The St. ]ames's Chronicleof 2-4 November, says that Macklin "has brave Notions, but unhappy Organs; he cannot execute with the same Felicity that he conceives." Even Macklin's most hostile critic, "Lictor-Theatricus," suggests that if "Mr. Macklin had advertised a reading of Macbeth, I should not have wondered if many had attended, and even approved of his plan." 34 Macklin's advanced age may have affected his ability to portray his violent conception of Macbeth. Since Garrick found the role taxing at fifty-one, we should not be surprised that Macklin struggled with it at seventy-four. Indeed, Macklin apologized to the audience at the second performance for his hoarseness and lapses of memory on the first night. 35 The most common criticism of Macklin's acting is that he delivered his lines in a harsh monotone without varying his emotions. A review of the first performance in The St.James's Chronicleof 23-26 October accuses him of being "ever hard and dry, his Voice harsh and unpleasing, ... his Deportment ungraceful and undigni- fied, his Emphasis flat and unmusical." But this same critic considers Macbeth to be one of "Nature's favourite Children," and prefers "Ease and Dignity" in his representation. Audiences were used to Garrick's inner turmoil and, more recently, Smith's noble deportment in the role. Little wonder, then, that Macklin's more one-dimensional Macbeth struck some spectators as harsh and flat. There was general praise for Macklin's innovations in the stage business. Murphy assured readers of The Morning Chronicle on 30 October that theatre manager George Colman (1732-1794) "absented himself from this business [the details of the production], and therefore the whole credit is Macklin's." Furthermore, Macklin's production notes clearly indicate that he assumed he had control over the staging, scenes, and costumes. Colman and co-manager Thomas Harris obvi- ously had faith in Macklin'sjudgment. An act-by-act analysis ofMacklin's innovations along with reactions in the press reveal the novelty (and expense) of the actual production. AcT 1. Macklin's notes envision an impressive martial display at Macbeth's first entrance, thereby establishing the character's importance and martial prowess. He has Macbeth enter from the back and stand on a bridge at his first appearance. 36 Murphy commends the military emphasis in this scene, arguing that it has "more dignity than the Drury-lane manner of entering at the side scene, without shewing that Macbeth is then at the head of his army. " 37 Garrick excused the absence of his army in this scene by retaining Davenant's line, "Command they make a halt upon the heath." Oddly, however, Macklin keeps the troops on stage during the con- ference with the witches. Several correspondents note this impropriety, and one suggests that Macbeth should dismiss his soldiers before addressing the witches.38 The newspaper correspondents are unfortunately silent about Duncan's arrival at Inverness, so we cannot be sure that it was actually performed according to Macklin's elaborate intentions. AcT 2. Macklin wanted to improve the stage business in the second act so that Macbeth's servant would not leave him in the dark for the dagger soliloquy. Al- though the newspaper reviews do not specifically mention that Macklin rectified

34 The Morning Chronicle, 5 November. 36 Taylor, Records of My Life, 248. 35 His speech to the audience is printed in The London 37 Letter by "Touchstone" in The Morning Chronicle of 30 Chronicle of 30 October-2 November. October. 66 HARVARD LIBRARY BULLETIN

this "breach of manners," we can assume that he did, given the care with which he considered the matter. What is clear, however, is that Macklin moved this action outside. In his notes, he wonders, "why is the murdering Scene in the open Court, (or place that is common to So many) where the heavens are Seen," and suggests that once Macbeth dismisses his servant there should be a "Scene change from the outside to the inside of the Palace, leading to Duncane's appartment." Ultimately, he decides that all the action before the murder should take place outside. One of the new sets he ordered for the production was a quadrangle of Macbeth's castle with a door leading to Duncan's chamber. The "Theatrical Intelligence" column in The Morning Chronicleof 25 October praises these "entirely new" scenes as "additions of consequence to the exhibition of the play." Murphy praises Macklin's staging and faults Garrick for playing the scene in a chamber, likening Macklin's set to an "old Gothic castle, and the single stroke upon the bell is more awful than the tingle-tingle of a modern chamber." 39 Murphy also cites Johnson's opinion that the scene "must be in the inner court of the castle, which Banquo might properly cross in his way to bed." 40 Macklin's set seems made to Dr.Johnson's specifications. In this quadrangle, then, Macklin delivered the dagger speech. Although one of his notes appears to refer to the soliloquy as the "Couch Scene," he delivered the speech under the stars just outside Duncan's door. Whether Lady Macbeth was actually "peeping-to See what Macbeth is about," as the notes indicate, we do not know. But the newspaper accounts suggest that he played the scene with de- cidedly more animation than Garrick, who delivered the soliloquy as if entranced by the illusory dagger. In contrast, Macklin turned away, closed his eyes, applied his hand to his forehead, and moved quickly-all gestures expressing agitation and fear.41 The Morning Chronicle's"Theatrical Intelligence" column of 25 October accuses Macklin of a "sententious doling out of the dialogue" in this scene; and a correspondent in the same paper complains that Macklin "discovered not that per- turbation of mind, which the situation required, and he seemed not to be sensible of the enormity of the crime he was going to commit. "42 The reaction to this scene agrees with general reaction to the production: approval of the stage business, but not of Macklin's characterization and acting. AcT 3. Commentary on the third act deals mainly with the elaborate banquet scene that Macklin presented. He wanted a horse-shoe shaped table large enough to encompass "the whole Scope of the Stage" that would allow Macbeth to ad- dress Banquo's ghost at center stage and permit Lady Macbeth to "come to Macbeth down ye centre of the stage." There was wide-spread praise for the new set, with the "Theatrical Intelligence" in The Morning Chronicleof 2 5 October stat- ing, "the managers seem to have spared neither cost nor assiduity to ornament." Although one critic claims that the banquet scene is lifted from Wolsey's banquet in Henry VIII and probably "settled by the manager," most correspondents view the banquet hall as both new and unique to this production. 43 As we already noted, Macklin was accused of nearly coming to "fisty-cuffs" with Banquo's ghost. His

38 See the letter by "Eumenes" in The St.James's Chronicle 4° Johnson, "Miscellaneous Observations," 769. of 2-4 November, and the letter to Garrick in The St. 4 1 See Murphy's description in the letter by "Touchstone" James's Chronicle of 28-30 October. in The Morning Chronicle of 30 October. 39 Letter by "Touchstone" in The Morning Chronicle of 30 42 Letter by "A Friend to Injured Merit" in The Morning October. An anonymous correspondent in The St. Chronicle of I I November. James's Chronicle of 28-30 October also praises the new 43 See letter by "A. B." in The Morning Chronicle of 5 No- set. vember. A Sinister Macbeth biographer, William Cooke, considers him to have failed in this act; and a correspondent in The Morning Chronicleregards Macklin as a disappointment. Again, the production details seem to have outshone Macklin's portrayal. 44 AcT 4. In this act Macklin cut Lady Macduffs scene and introduced a new set for the witches' cave. He notes, "there must be high Rocks, All round So as to form the Stage into a deep Cave, & down the back part must be a winding way for Macbeth's [sic] to come down to the witches." Apparently Macklin's set more closely resembled an actual cave than that at Drury Lane, for The Morning Chronicle reports that Macklin's entrance "is a better and more probable entrance than thro' the common stage portal." 45 "A. B.," the same commentator who questioned the originality of the banquet set, denies the originality of this one, calling it an inno- vation of "six years standing on Covent-garden stage, where it was first introduced, and afterwards adopted at Drury-lane. "46 However, no one else makes such a claim. Unfortunately, the reviews do not tell us if the musical effects Macklin calls for in this act were incorporated to the production. A correspondent in The St.James's Chronicleobserves that the "eight Kings had been in better Training than those which cross [the Drury Lane] Stage" and "presented themselves distinctly. "47 This same correspondent criticizes Garrick for not demonstrating enough surprise and awe in this scene, which could imply that Macklin emphasized these emotions, as his notes regarding the music suggest. AcT 5. Planning for the final act, Macklin sought to furnish Dunsinane with images of violence: "every Room Should be full of bad Pictures of warriors, Sword helmet Targets dirk,-Escutchions. & the hall, bores Stufft, wolves.-& full of Pikes & broadswords." The rough furnishings seem designed to reflect the nature of its inhabitants. His notes also indicate a suspenseful final battle "So manoevered as to make the Scotch Seem first to defeat the English & drive them off the Stage- the English must beat them back and totally rout the Scotch ... English-Scotch, English. Macbeth must appear in the front of the battle when the Scotch drives the English off" Newspaper commentary reports Macklin's effectiveness in this act: "he was bold, daring, and inimitably pathetic, when he was informed of his wife's death. " 48 But unfortunately, the reviewers are silent about the set and the battle, except to criticize an anachronistic cannon on top of the castle.49 The newspapers also do not tell us whether Macklin delivered the death speech written by Garrick. Without knowing which text Macklin used for the production, we cannot say for certain how he handled Macbeth's death. 50 Garrick's repentant speech seems in- consistent with Macklin's interpretation, but the possibility remains that Macklin delivered it. As this act-by-act summary shows, Macklin thought about more than just how he would play Macbeth. He imagined new sets for each act; and the newspaper

44 Cooke, Memoirs, 285; letter by "A Friend to Injured tra-illustrated copy at Harvard, Macl

SlITLOCK lUtnrl.1VIA.CBETHo Figure 3. Caricature of Macklin as fhd. ~•tf , m fr11111,a.; pa/;,a?/4 Macbethin Scottishdress. Courtesy of ,:/!~,,.._,; '">'//1(1/ Jtln:t.(/ -. -~,i.J ~•lr•f::::..1_~ ..,,14 ..... : ... -u,,...•• ,.,.. the PennsylvaniaState UniversityLi- ', -V.;,•~4,_v,-. .,,.1JJ if.~ • ..,....., .....,, brary.

reviews confirm that new sets were built for acts one through four, Harris and Colman must have approved of Macklin's plans, since they were willing to pay for such a thorough restaging of a play already in the repertory. Their confidence was not ill-placed: most reviewers considered the new sets clearly superior to those in previous productions. Indeed, as late as 1804, some of Macklin's sets were still in use.5' For the first time on the London stage, Scottish costumes were worn in Macbeth (West Digges had introduced them in a 1757 Edinburgh production). What Macklin's Scottish costumes actually looked like is not clear.52 We do know that the cap (and possibly the short tied hair) that his notes call for were part of his costume. One correspondent describes "a garter of some order on his neck and

51 Cooke~ lVfenwirs, 289. History (London: Society for Theatre Research, 1952), 52 See Appleton, Charles Macklin, 175-76; Donohue, Dra- 52-64. Byrne's essay is often uncritically cited, but should matic Characterin the EnJ?lishRomantic Age, 426-27; and be approached with caution. She relies far too heavily on M. St. Claire Byrne, "The Stage Costuming of Macbeth the evidence in two contemporary engravings of Macklin in the Eighteenth Century," Studies in English Theatre as Macbeth, assun1ing that "they must be" accurate. A Sinister Macbeth

N.rN.J.CKUN, ;,, ,,,,. t~('f'~H. A.u1.•.S-•i

Figure4. Macklin as Macbethin regal dress. Courtesy of the Pennsylvania State UniversityLibrary. right arm," and wants "an explanation of the words, IN. DE. FENS. which appeared as a motto on the cap of Macbeth, on his first entrance, and upon those of the other Scotch nobility." 53 This description roughly matches a contemporary caricature of Macklin in the role published by M. Darby on 5 November 1773 (figure 3). While we cannot rely on evidence from the caricature alone, it does corroborate the newspaper report of Mack:lin's military costume, giving us a sense of what it looked like in Act 1. The stockings, cuffs, scarf, and cape are all of a checkered material that could approximate a tartan, and Macklin appears to be wearing a tu- nic, if not a proper kilt. 54 After the first act, Macklin probably changed into a more traditional costume, including the long wig customarily worn in tragedy. Another contemporary engraving, published in The London Magazine of November 1773, may give us an idea of Macklin's regal costume (figure 4). This engraving is sup- posedly "sketched from the Life," but it shows Macklin without a wig, contradict- ing a report in The Macaroni that ridicules Macklin for his "flowing curls, like the

53 The Morning Chronicleof 2 7 October. 54 Byrne, "The Stage Costuming of Macbeth," 5 5. 70 HARVARD LIBRARY BULLETIN

LOCKS OF AN ADONis." 55 Such inconsistencies aside, the point is that Macklin's dress was probably more recognizably Scottish in the first and final acts when Macbeth was in his military outfit, and more conventional in the intervening acts. Mrs. Hartley played Lady Macbeth in modem dress, an incongruity an eighteenth-century audience would hardly have noticed. Nevertheless, one reviewer criticizes her "modern robes" which "by no means accorded with the habits of the other personages," supplying us with one of the few clues we have regarding the costuming of the smaller roles. 56 Cooke mentions that the "subordinate characters" were dressed in Scottish garb, and Macklin's notes indicate that he even in- tended Macbeth's bodyguard to appear in "highland dress." 57 But exactly which characters were dressed in Scottish costumes remains uncertain. Although no reviewer actually describes the witches' costumes, one does suggest they were of Scottish origin. Once again denying Macklin's originality, "A. B." insists that the witches, formerly played as a "mob of old women," had "been converted into a groupe of Caledonian sybils" six years earlier at Covent Garden.58 We know that Macklin's witches were played seriously for the first time, as Johnson had suggested. This prompted a correspondent in The St. James's Chronicle of 28-30 October to suggest that Drury Lane follow suit. A letter to The Morning Chronicleof I November, believed to be written by Macklin, faults the witches for not seeming old enough: " [they should] line their faces, and at least attempt the appearance of old women." 59 Apparently, the witches were played seriously and in Scottish dress, but were too sprightly to convey the awful effect Macklin sought. The Scottish costumes were well-received. A correspondent in The St.James's Chronicleof 28-30 November noted that Garrick played Macbeth dressed as a "mod- ernfine Gentleman," who, in the fourth act, "looked like a Beau, who had ... tumbled into a Night Cellar, where a Parcel of old Women were boiling Tripe for their Supper. " 60 But even Garrick so admired the Scottish costumes as to admit, "The Ancient dresses are certainly preferable to any Modern ones," and to imitate Macklin by ordering similar costumes for Drury Lane. 6 ' Macklin's innovations in scenes and costumes were widely regarded as improvements of consequence to Macbethand are the most enduring legacies of his production.

EPILOGUE

Macklin did not last long as Macbeth. He played the role on four consecutive Sat- urday nights between 23 October and 13 November 1773 to increasingly hostile crowds packed with Smith's friends. Smith was upset about Macklin's muscling in on his repertory, and Macklin publicly accused Smith of inciting crowds against him. After the fourth performance, Macklin nonetheless relinquished the role to Smith and prepared to play Shylock on Thursday 18 November. On that night, Smith's friends rioted, demanded Macklin's dismissal from the theatre, and got it. 62

55 The Macaroni (October 1773), 8. Lover of Order"); and on 15 November ("Theatrical In- s6 Ibid, 8. telligence"). Only the 1 November "Theatrical Intelli- 57 Cooke, Memoirs, 284. gence" contains commentary about performance details. 58 The Morning Chronicle of 5 November. 60 Burnim, in David Carrick, Director, 208 n. 37, notes that 59 According to Appleton, in Charles Macklin, 264 n. 29, this same description appeared in The Public Intelligencer Colman charged that Macklin wrote letters to The Morn- in 1769. ing Chronicle on 23 October (letter by "Fair Play," which 61 Letters of David Garrick, 3: I 204. does not exist; perhaps Appleton meant 27 October); on 62 For a much more detailed discussion of the theatre distur- r November ("Theatrical Intelligence"); on 3 November bances and riot, see Appleton, Charles Macklin, I 78-<;4. (letter by "Fair Play"); on 6 November (letter by "A A Sinister Macbeth 71

The fact that they rioted at a performance of The Merchantef Venice, when Macklin was appearing in a role he indisputably owned, indicates that the riot was moti- vated more by personal rivalry between the two actors than by the audience's objections to Macklin's Macbeth. In consequence of the quarrel with Smith, Macklin found himself without a job. In a letter to Colman of 29 November 1773 Macklin informs the manager that when he tried to collect his salary the week after his dismissal, he was stopped by the theatre's porter, "who took me into Mr. Serjeant the house Keeper's office. Mr. Serjeant informed me that he had orders from the Proprietors not to permit me to go behind the Scenes ... [and] that I should not be paid any money beyond wednesday the 17th of november." On the same day he wrote this letter, Macklin was dealing with a challenge from Smith. Consequently, he drafted a letter to an unidentified party (perhaps Smith's friend, Henry Bate) urging him to give up his "Resolution to appear for Mr. Smith," so that Macklin and Smith might be "at full Liberty" to achieve "Mutual Justice." But Macklin's efforts were unsuccessful: he and Smith never dueled; and as late as 2 June 1774, he wrote Colman another petition for the £501. rn.o that he claimed was still due him. 63 Ultimately, Macklin turned to the law for redress of these grievances, winning a lawsuit against six of the rioters in May of I 77 5. He asked only for minimal dam- ages and was back at Covent Garden within a week. Somewhat surprisingly, he played Macbeth again on 19 October 1775, almost exactly two years after his first appearance in the role. The reactions to this performance, although much less vis- ceral than during the first run, largely agree with earlier assessments of his production. A reviewer in The Morning Post of 20 October writes: "We allow him merit, in the arrangement of the stage business, dresses, &c. but there we must draw the line." Macklin fared worse a year later when he performed Macbeth for the last time on 2 December I 776. The Morning Chronicleof 3 December complained about Macklin's acting, the costumes ("Banquo last night looked like a Saxon warrior, and Macbeth in his regal dress resembled the King of Diamonds"), and the scenemen, who dropped a curtain in act 3, leaving Banquo stranded on the forestage. This was Macklin's sixth and final performance as Macbeth on the Lon- don stage. It could not have been a satisfying finale.

CONCLUSION

An engraving of Macklin as Macbeth that has been largely ignored by scholars can help us draw some conclusions about and assess the impact of Macklin's production (figure 5). Titled "Roscious in Triumph, or the downfall of Shylock alias Mackbeth," it was published in The Macaroniof October 1773 (p. 25). It shows Garrick raised on the shoulders of the figures of comedy and tragedy, while Macklin is dragged down to hell by devils. This engraving tells us a great deal about the reception and influence of his production. First, it graphically confirms that Macklin's production was considered a direct challenge to Garrick's. Although Garrick had not played Macbeth for over five years and, in the meantime, Barry, William Powell, Samuel Reddish, and Smith had all performed the role, Garrick's interpretation dominated.

6J These three letters, one a fragmentary draft, are in the Library. See the Appendix for transcriptions of the texts. Rare Books Room of the Pennsylvania State University 72 HARVARD LIBRARY BULLETIN

Figure 5. Caricature of Macklin as Macbeth, with Garrick in triumph. Courtesy of the Harvard I7ieatre Col- lection.

Second, it reinforces many contemporary opinions that Macklin played Mac- beth like he portrayed Shylock: as a bloodthirsty, innately evil character. In 1773 this was a startlingly new interpretation, fundamentally different from Garrick's. The relative positions of Macklin and Garrick in the engraving illustrate their approaches to Macbeth: Garrick, who emphasized Macbeth's virtues, is lifted heav- enward, while Macklin, who stressed Macbeth's vices, is pulled into hell. Third, the engraving indicates Macklin's ultimate failure in the role. Macklin was successful in that he offered an alternative to Garrick's production; and audiences recognized the radical departure from it. The new interpretation was an ugly and upsetting one. Not surprisingly, perhaps, it failed to displace Garrick's sympathetic one. As Marvin Rosenberg notes, "Garrick's great English successor in the A Sinister Macbeth 73 late eighteenth century, John Philip Kemble, safely played the noble hero-murderer, sympathetic because driven to crime by his wife." 64 This interpretation remains popular even today, a Macbeth more sinned against than sinning is an object of compassion and sympathy, not fear and revulsion. Even from our twen- tieth-century point of view, Macklin's unsympathetic Macbeth is a much tougher and more challenging approach to the role. Macklin should certainly be credited with attempting such a bold new concept, whether or not it had a lasting effect on subsequent portrayals. A century later, Henry Irving had much greater success with a similar interpretation. 65 Macklin's Macbeth, nonetheless, was a significant moment in the history of Shakespearean production. It introduced Scottish dress to the play on the London stage; it presented Macbeth as a fierce, malevolent character for the first time; and it challenged the supremacy of Garrick's sympathetic portrayal, which so dominated mid- to late-eighteenth century productions. In short, it ought to be remembered for the innovations it brought to the stage, not merely for the disturbances it inspired in the galleries.

64 The Masks of Macbeth (Berkeley: Universiry of California 6 5 Ibid, 93. Press, 1978), 70. 74

Appendix: Three Unpublished Letters by Macklin 66

(1) MACKLIN TO COLMAN, 29 NOVEMBER 1773

Sir

I attempted last Saturday to go to the office of your Theatre where the Perform- ers are /\usually/\ paid thei1 Sallarics weekly Sallaries but was Stopt by the Porter of the Theatre, whose name is Simmons, who took me into Mr Serjeant the house Keeper's office. Mr. Serjeant informed me that he had orders from the Prop[r]ietors not to permit me to go behind the Scenes. I then requested that Mr. Serjeant would go in my name to Mr. Gaston the Treasurer and ask him for my week's Sallary. he did go. Mr Cooke the under Treasurer came to me, & in Consequence Aof Mr. Serjeants message from meA informed me that you had given orders that I should not be paid any money beyond wednesday the 17th of november. of this Sir I thought I ought to inform you. and farther that I am ready to perform any part that you shall appoint according to the Terms of my aggreement with you & the /\other/\ Proprietors of Covent garden Theatre.

I am Sir november 29th : 1773 yr. hu ble Servt. To George Colman Esqr. Charles Macklin

66 All three of the documents in the Appendix are printed from Macklin to Colman, 2 June 1774, is bound into the by the kind permission of Charles W. Mann, Jr., Cura- extra-illustrated James T. Kirkman, Memoirs of the Life of tor, Rare Books, The Pennsylvania State University Li- M,uklin (1799) in the Harvard Theatre Collection. Un- brary. Deletions are in italics and interlinings are like the Penn State manuscript, that draft is not in indicated by carets. Another draft of the third letter, that Macklin's hand. A Sinister Macbeth 75

(2) FRAGMENTARY DRAFT OF A LETTER BY MACKLIN, 29 NOVEMBER 1773

-veniener will permit. and that you may do it with exactness I have here enclosed "my"' the Copy of that my Letter "'the Paragraphs" to Mr. Smith the par ts of which I have distinguished "into" by Sections distinguished by Sections. that you may make your References more clearly to the parts against which where your objections lye lie. The leading Point being Settled of our [illegible deletion] altercation being ad- justed by ourselves will facilitate the kind dispositions of you Sir and a gentleman "'whom"' I Shall request to meet you, Should you continue in your Resolution to appear for Mr. Smith in order finally to adjust this affair between him & me. but -and in the mean time Sir I hope you will agree with me that Mr. Smith & I are at full Liberty Liberty to proceed according to the dictates of Such Sentiments as are consistent with good manners Tmth & private Justice and the discovery of Truth and the Steps to "'[illegible text]"' Mutual Justice.

I am Sir with great Respects your very hu ble Servt. Charles Macklin

monday Nov: 29 1773 James Street Covent garden. HARVARD LIBRARY BULLETIN

(3) DRAFT OF A LETTER FROM MACKLIN TO COLMAN, 2 JUNE 1774

Sir June 2d. 1774

The acting Season being now over I here lay before you the State of my Ac- count with you and the other Proprietors of Covent-garden Theatre for the year 1773 - according to my agreement with you & them.

£. s. d. To Salary ------400: o: o to my Benefit which you refused to grant me 200: o: 0

600: o: 0

Received of Mr. Gaston your Treasurer 98: IO: 0

Balance 501: IO: 0

£. s. Octr. 2d 1773 ------13: 4: 0

9_th 11: o: 0

30.th 39: 12: 0

Novr. 20.th 34: 14: O

98: IO: 0

The Balance, you See Sir, by this account is five hundred and one Pounds ten shillings which I now demand. I am Sir yr. hu 61e Servt. Charles Macklin

To george Colman Esqr. Delivered a true Copy of the above Letter & account at the house of george Colman Esqr. in the Piazza Covent-garden June 2d. 1774

John Charles Macklin