70

MONBODDO ON STEELE'S NOTATION.

When Steele's notation of speech was explained to Garrick he asked if anybody, by the help of such notes, could pronounce his words in exactly the same tone and manner as he did himself. The reply was: "Suppose a great musician had written a piece of music, and had played it on a very fine violin, and then another performer had played the same composition on an ordinary fiddle with the same accuracy as the great master, though perhaps with less ease and elegance? In such a case, no matter how correctly the music might be played on the poor fiddle, nothing could prevent the audience from perceiving the difference in the instruments that one was fine and beautiful, the other mean and execrable. And so, though the speech-notes, and the rules by which they are expressed, may enable a master to teach a just application of the expressive forms of speaking, they cannot give sweetness to a voice where Nature has denied such a gift."

Lord Monboddo, the author of The Origin and Progress of Language, says of Steele's notation: "Upon the whole, it is my opinion-and I find it the opinion of all the musical men here to whom I have shown it-that Mr. Steele's dissertation is a most ingenious performance. It is reducing to an art what was thought incapable of all rule and measure, and it shows that there is a melody and a rhythm in our language which I doubt not may be improved by observing and noting what is most excellent of the kind in the best speakers. In that way I should think that both the voice and ear of

IMPROVEMENT IN DECLAMATION.

71

those who do not speak so well might be mended, and even the declamation of our best actors may be improved, by observing in what respects they fall short or exceed; for as soon as a thing is reduced to an art, faults will be found in the best performers that were not before observed."

CHAPTER IV.

JOHN PHILIP KEMBLE, CHARLES KEAN, AND

JOHN

COOKE.

OHN PHILIP KEMBLE, who followed Garrick, must be viewed as an actor entirely from the tragic standpoint. Coldly classic in his conceptions, dignified and

deliberate in action, he seems never to have risen above the pall and gloom of the Tragic Muse. His acting and bearing upon the stage resembled the sculptured marble of the classic times or the heroic presentations of the historic canvas. It is said he suffered from asthma, and that his voice was deep and hollow, lacking in force, and of little variety save in the quality of pathos. His effects were confined within a proper range of height and depth, and marked with appropriate variations of quantity.

The late Dr. Walter Channing of Boston was a lover of Shakespeare and an ardent admirer of good speaking and reading. In his younger days he had heard the London celebrities of the stage, and remembered their several modes of speaking and the distinctive qualities of their voices. In comparing notes with the doctor I remember reciting for him Hamlet's soliloquy on death, after what I had considered Mr. Kemble's

KEMBLE'S READING.

73

manner of delivery, and which I had picked up from the traditions of the stage. He was surprised when I told him that I had never heard Mr. Kemble, "For," said he, "your imitation of his quality and movement of voice and intonation is certainly a well-marked presentation of the tragedian's manner, without, of course, the high coloring of a literal likeness." As I remarked to Dr. Channing, this might be attributable to my having acted frequently with Mr. Charles Kemble, whose manner in tragedy must have been a close copy of his brother's peculiarities.

The stately movement and the undulating swell of tone in altitude and depression which marked Mr. John Kemble's recitation must have been peculiarly adapted to grave and sombre effects, and, though it might tardily meet the requirements of abrupt and startling passion, it was fully equal to the expressive demands of intensified grandeur in declamatory force. Imagine, for instance, the majesty of Kemble's voice giving utterance to the o'erfraught soul of the proud Roman as expressed by Shakespeare's Coriolanus, when Tullus Aufidius tauntingly calls him a "boy of tears." The outraged hero, towering to the full height of majestic indignation, exclaims

Measureless liar, thou hast made my heart

Too great for what contains it." Boy!" O slave!

Cut me to pieces, Volsces; men and lads,

*

Stain all your edges on me.-" Boy!" False hound!

74

KEMBLE AND GARRICK CONTRASTED.

If

you have writ your annals true, 'tis there,
That, like an eagle in a dove-cote, I

Flutter'd your Volsces in Corioli:
Alone I did it." Boy!"

Deliberate even in impetuous utterance, too dignified to be boisterous, and too haughty to be aroused to unbridled anger, the arrogant patrician would find expressive utterance in the full swell of "the orotund," the well-sustained force of "final stress," and every degree of the undulating "wave." Such forms and quality of voice only could exhibit the indignant astonishment and suppressed rage with which he greets the insulting epithet of a "boy of tears." Save in the one element of absolute force, in which he was wanting, there can be no doubt Mr. Kemble's voice was equal to the emergency of such a situation.

The movement and quality of Garrick's voice and speech, on the other hand, were comparatively shorter, sharper, and more rapid, and, it may be said, harder, consequently better adapted to the expression of incisive and fierce declamation or petulant and angry utterances beyond the limit of dignity, while for the expression of intensified heroism, love, and pity, or the mingled bitterness of scorn, hate, and rage, and for all such ardent presentations of human passion, the English Roscius must have appropriately worn the garland of the British stage.

Again, Garrick not only possessed the graces and force of vocal expression, but also all the physical attributes of action. His features were