Punch (95.1888)

208 PUNCH, OR THE LONDON CHARIVARI. [November 3, 1888.

Mr. j. L. T-le, Lord R. O-w-r, Lord Mayor Torpedo (Elect),
and Mr. Oso-r W-l-de, adopt the New Style, and lead the
Fashion on Nov. 5th.

" Men's Dress.—If it be true, as announced, that men are going to wear
embroidered trousers this season, the first step will be taken towards a further
embellishment of masculine attire."—Daily mips.

A PLAYGOER'S PROTEST.

Dear Mr. Punch,

I am nobody,—not even a Critic. Still less am I a dramatist
or a librettist. I am simply a playgoer, and a reader of criticisms
upon plays. And there are some matters concerning botli the plays
and the criticisms which puzzle me exceedingly.

So_ far as I can gather, certain Critics seem to have two ways of
dealing with a man who has made a shining, and especially a sudden,
success. The one is to " slate" him with unmeasured maliciousness,
the^ other to beslaver him with indiscriminate praise. It is rather
difficult to decide which is the more offensive, the splenetic
slaughtering, or the fulsome gush.

I am a lover of all sorts and conditions of music, "from gay to
grave, from lively to severe," I may almost say from the sublime to
the ridiculous. _ 1 am also a great admirer of Mr. Gilbert's peculiar
humour, especially when it is wedded to Sir Arthur Sullivan's
music. You may imagine, therefore, that I anticipate with immense
pleasure the production of a new piece at the Savoy. I do not go to
First Nights, but I eagerly scan the Press notices of the new piece,
with a view of tasting, as it were, in advance the quintessential
flavour of the treat in store for me. And if I can obtain a copy
of the Opera before seeing the performance itself, I do so, and read
it carefully.

Of course, therefore, I promptly perused the Press Criticisms of
the Yeomen of the Guard. What a promising consensus of praise!
Gilbert at his best, Sullivan better than ever! The music was
almost bound to be good; in the libretto I should have expected a
choice literary banquet,—if the admiring Critics had not made the
mistake of quoting. Then—well, then, I began to have my
doubts.

One Critic in a Sunday paper, for instance, was generally lauda-
tory. Coming to particulars, he quoted with approbation the lines:—
" The rose's sigh
Were as a carrion '& cry
To lullaby

Such as I \1 sing to thee,
"Were I thy bride! "

tw t?"S 13 no* nonsense, I am a Dutchman. But I am not a
Dutchman. It may be that Mr. Gilbert here is the victim of a
printer s error. _ But the Critic praised the lines as they are printed!
<( Another Critic, in a weekly review, quoted in brackets the words
she be, as though they constituted a marvellously original and
humorous rhyme to'' Phusbe." He might almost as well have praised
the novel coupling of "love" and "dove," or the selection (by a
post:lngoldsby poet) of " Greenwich " as perfectly antiphonetic to
spinach. A third congratulates Sir Arthur on his good fortune
in having such lyrics as these to set to music. Such lyrics as these ?
Here be specimens :—

" Here's a man of jollity,

Gibe, joke, jollify!
Give us of your quality
Come fool, follify!

" River none can mollify ;—

Into it we throw
Fool who doesn't follify,
Cock who doesn't crow! '"

Again:—

" 1st Yeoman. Did'st thou not, oh, Leonard Meryll !

Standard lost in last campaign,
Rescue it at deadly peril-
Bear it bravely back again ?
Chorus—Leonard Meryll, at his peril
Bore it bravely back again! "

Is this so very much above the level of the celebrated " eagle " who
"played with" (and attempted to rhyme to) "the sea-gull!" Is
it anything like as good as the old nursery jingle—

" There was a little girl

Who had a little curl
Which hung down the middle of her orehead,

And when she was good

She was very, very good ;
But when she was bad, she was horrid !"

Mr. Gilbert as a lyrist is not altogether unlike that illustrious
young lady. At any rate, when he is good—as in most of the Bab
Ballads and many of his Operas—he is very, very good. Like his
own Point, he has " a pretty wit," but in this piece at least seems
very chary of exercising it. He doubtless can 'jest yon, jibe you,
quip you, crank you," only he doesn't; though he does "wrack
you " with bad verse, and '' riddle you " with forced rhymes, e.g. .—

Fate all flowery

"Joyful, joyful!

When virginity
Seeks, all coyful

Man's affinity;

Bright and bowery
Is her dowery!
Joyful, joyful!"

But, after all, it is not Mr. Gilbert, whom I, as a playgoer, have
to pick a bone with, but his fulsome " Critics." Mr. Gilbert must,
long ago, have cynically laughed in his jester's sleeve at these adu-
latory 'notices of his work. One can imagine what a brilliantly
bitter Bab Ballad he could make of it all.

The work, we were told in advance, with a considerable flourish of
critical trumpets, was to be "a new departure." It is certainly a
departure from the land of Topsy-turvy wherein Gilbert and
Sullivan have so long disported themselves, and wherein they
worked so harmoniously, and with so much success. But what is
it? Serio-comic romantic Opera? Possibly. But if so, the "de-
parture" cannot appropriately be called "new." I agree with
your "Jack in" the Box" that, had any other writer announced
the libretto as "new and original," the Critics to a man would
have been down upon him for niching the essence of Maritana. As
it was, they very mildly accused, profusely excused, and extra-
vagantly " enthused." However, we are transferred from imaginary
Topsy-turvydom to the historical Tudor period. There is not
very much of the Tudor style about the dialogue; there is even less
about the lyrics :—

" Tower warders
Under orders

Gallant pilcemeri, valiant sworders!
Brave in bearing
Foemen scaring

In their bygone deeds of daring,

Somehow this does not smack very strongly of the days of bluff
King Hal, does it ? That, perhaps, would not much matter, were
it flowing or funny ; but it isn't.

Enough. I have not yet seen the piece. I have no doubt that
when I do, I shall enjoy the music and be pleased with the ensemble.
But dealing with the libretto as a production for which the Critics
have claimed considerable literary merit, what is one to think—of
the Critics? Yours, &c. Playgoer.

" Xe'er a stranger
There to danger —

Each was o'er the world a ranger:
To the story
Of our glory

Each a bold contributory !"

If this be not the merest doggerel with rhymes as forced as they
are feeble, what in the name of metre gone mad is it ?

Magic and Mystery.—The following extraordinary circumstance
is vouched for by several eye-witnesses of unimpeachable veracity.
A tall man of respectable exterior, with a pale face, dark moustache,
and a peculiarly saturnine cast of countenance, was observed walking
down a street leading out of the Strand. For obvious reasons we
suppress the name of the street pending further inquiry. Stopping
for a minute in close proximity to a lamp-post, he plunged both hands
into his trousers' pockets. A sudden gleam was seen to illuminate
his countenance; he was heard to mutter some words, which were
probably cabalistic, and then suddenly turned into a public-house !
The Psychological Society has been communicated with, and M. B.
de Kolta, the inventor of the Vanishing Lady and the Pavilion
Cocoon, has undertaken to find out how this marvellously rapid and
complete transformation was effected. Augustus Druriolanus
hopes to purchase the patent for his Christmas Pantomime.

Up and Down.—The Times calls public attention to the fact that
Land which is "going down" in England is "going up" in
Australia. Well, there are places in the world where Land seems to
be continually "going up," such as Japan and other volcanic
districts ; but whether many speculators would be eager to invest in
the consequent " ground rents " is another question.