BAD HABITS ON THE STAGE

Sun (Auckland), Volume 1, Issue 38, 7 May 1927, Page 21 (Supplement)

BAD HABITS ON THE STAGE

MARY CLARE EXPLAINS HER VIEWS ON THE SUBJECT

Quite often theatre audiences are annoyed, and rightly so, by the members of a company indulging in private jokes on the stage. In the following article, Mary Clare, a well-known English actress , states the case for the actor.

Vigorous criticisms are continually being made in the Press, and in letters written to the managements by playgoers, who have the interest of the Stage at heart, on the practice among actors and actresses of laughing among themselves during their performances. It is pointed out that it is a deplorable breach of good manners and unfair to the public, who pay to be amused and not to see the members of the company amuse each other at the expense of the audience, management and the play itself. Up to the present, I do not remember having seen any presentation of the artist’s point af view on the subject, and, therefore, I should like to offer if not actually an apology, at least some explanation of a player’s feelings and attitude toward this criticism. No matter how it may appear before the curtain, I must believe that all conscientious performers deplore any conduct that tends to render their performances imperfect, and lowers the esteem m which the public would otherwise hold their work.

I feel I am qualified to discourse on the matter because to all appearances lam one of the worst .offenders, being one of those unfortunate people, who cannot disguise their feelings. There are many people, particularly on the Stage, who are able so to control their features that they can laugh invisibly as it were, but the other unfortunates like myself are incapable of keeping a “straight face.” This is a terrible handicap, because there are times when it is almost impossible not to laugh against all volition.

The state of mind of an actor who is heart and soul in his performance is not normal. The restraint and concentration required, and the highlystrung nervous condition, keys the mind up to its highest pitch. The concentration keeps the balance of the dual personality of actor and character, and this balance is so delicate that the least suggestion of something foreign to the character will destroy it and leave the actor out of control—adrift. A trivial remark, an infecious laugh in the audience, the missing of a cue, a mishandling of a “prop,” a Spoonerism in a line, anything out of the ordinary is enough to throw a whole company off its balance, and cause them, at what is their weakest moment, to laugh, and almost at nothing!

Take for example an incident that happened recently during a performance in “The Ghost Train.” There is a scene in which I describe a terrible train disaster. It is a moment of great importance to the atmosphere, and the line telling how the train fel! “down into the valley below, crash!” should be intensely dramatic. One evening as I pronounced the word

“Crash!” a wag in the gallery added the word “Wallop!** Now, could you have resisted the desire to laugh had you been in my place? For a few seconds the company succumbed: the incident had temporarily unbalanced ut#, disturbed the atmosphere we were trying to create, and called for a tremendous effort to regain control and re-establish the original state of mind. The performance may be said to have suffered, and the laughter, for that reason, was inexcusable. But it was unavoidable.

Te me, this laughter is a rather terrible thing. It is to me, and, I think, to most actors and actresses, a form of hysteria. Have you not felt yourself, as a grown-up or a child, that dreadful and uncontrollable impulse to laugh in church, in school or at a time

or place where and when laughter is forbidden or in bad taste? When you feel that you must suppress the impulse or explode, have you not had the painful sensation of terror? Panic is the only word that adequately expresses what I experience. But even this hysteria is not excusable. If we may ask for a little toleration on the ground that we are flesh and blood and cannot always resist temptation, there is still a more powerful accusation against which there is no defence. This is the growing practice of players who deliberately attempt to make other members of the company laugh during the performance. Such conduct has absolutely no justification whatever. It is< the laughter with perfect face control who, not occasionally, but continually, makes a pastime of “drying-up” his fellow players. It affords him great pleasure to let some stupid remark (and he knows exactly the kind of remark to make) slide out of the corner of his mouth, and then chuckle inwardly at the devastating effect it has on the unfortunate victim. He is able to laugh himself and yet present a perfectly innocent face to the audience. I do not wisii to suggest that every actor who “gags” is being malicious, but many, who merely wish to have a bit of fun, carry the joke too far—just how far is made patent by the fact that the laughter is apparent to the audience and that protests are made. The real sufferer, however, is the unfortunate persons who, like myself, is unable to conceal their laughter. All the gags are worked on him or her, who is in consequence reduced to that state of hysteria I have described. It is not weak-mindedness or the lack of concentration, but the reverse, for the greater the concentration the greater the loss of control.

This deliberate provocation of laughter is the root of the evil, I think, and will havfe to be dealt with by disciplinary action before the Stage can clear itself from this particular brand of censure.