Life and Letters of Robert Browning [35]
it
is in the acting, which, `by possibility, might carry it to the end
without disapprobation,' though he dares not hope without opposition.
It is quite conceivable that his first complete study of the play,
and first rehearsal of it, brought to light deficiencies
which had previously escaped him; but so complete a change of sentiment
points also to private causes of uneasiness and irritation; and, perhaps,
to the knowledge that its being saved by collective good acting
was out of the question.
`Strafford' was performed at Covent Garden Theatre on May 1.
Mr. Browning wrote to Mr. Fox after one of the last rehearsals:
==
May Day, Lincoln's Inn Fields.
Dear Sir, -- All my endeavours to procure a copy before this morning
have been fruitless. I send the first book of the first bundle.
PRAY look over it -- the alterations to-night will be considerable.
The complexion of the piece is, I grieve to say, `perfect gallows' just now --
our KING, Mr. Dale, being . . . but you'll see him, and, I fear,
not much applaud.
Your unworthy son, in things literary,
Robert Browning.
P.S. (in pencil). -- A most unnecessary desire, but urged on me
by Messrs. Longman: no notice on Str. in to-night's True Sun,*
lest the other papers be jealous!!!
--
* Mr. Fox reviewed `Strafford' in the `True Sun'.
--
==
A second letter, undated, but evidently written a day or two later,
refers to the promised notice, which had then appeared.
==
Tuesday Night.
No words can express my feelings: I happen to be much annoyed and unwell --
but your most generous notice has almost made `my soul well and happy now.'
I thank you, my most kind, most constant friend, from my heart
for your goodness -- which is brave enough, just now.
I am ever and increasingly yours,
Robert Browning.
You will be glad to see me on the earliest occasion, will you not?
I shall certainly come.
==
A letter from Miss Flower to Miss Sarah Fox (sister to the Rev. William Fox),
at Norwich, contains the following passage, which evidently continues
a chapter of London news:
==
`Then `Strafford'; were you not pleased to hear of the success of one
you must, I think, remember a very little boy, years ago.
If not, you have often heard us speak of Robert Browning:
and it is a great deal to have accomplished a successful tragedy,
although he seems a good deal annoyed at the go of things behind the scenes,
and declares he will never write a play again, as long as he lives.
You have no idea of the ignorance and obstinacy of the whole set,
with here and there an exception; think of his having to write out the meaning
of the word `impeachment', as some of them thought it meant `poaching'.'
==
On the first night, indeed, the fate of `Strafford' hung in the balance;
it was saved by Macready and Miss Helen Faucit. After this they must have
been better supported, as it was received on the second night with enthusiasm
by a full house. The catastrophe came after the fifth performance,
with the desertion of the actor who had sustained the part of Pym.
We cannot now judge whether, even under favourable circumstances,
the play would have had as long a run as was intended;
but the casting vote in favour of this view is given by the conduct
of Mr. Osbaldistone, the manager, when it was submitted to him.
The diary says, March 30, that he caught at it with avidity,
and agreed to produce it without delay. The terms he offered to the author
must also have been considered favourable in those days.
The play was published in April by Longman, this time
not at the author's expense; but it brought no return
either to him or to his publisher. It was dedicated
`in all affectionate admiration' to William C. Macready.
We gain some personal glimpses of the Browning of 1835-6;
one especially through Mrs. Bridell-Fox, who thus describes
her first meeting with him:
==
`I
is in the acting, which, `by possibility, might carry it to the end
without disapprobation,' though he dares not hope without opposition.
It is quite conceivable that his first complete study of the play,
and first rehearsal of it, brought to light deficiencies
which had previously escaped him; but so complete a change of sentiment
points also to private causes of uneasiness and irritation; and, perhaps,
to the knowledge that its being saved by collective good acting
was out of the question.
`Strafford' was performed at Covent Garden Theatre on May 1.
Mr. Browning wrote to Mr. Fox after one of the last rehearsals:
==
May Day, Lincoln's Inn Fields.
Dear Sir, -- All my endeavours to procure a copy before this morning
have been fruitless. I send the first book of the first bundle.
PRAY look over it -- the alterations to-night will be considerable.
The complexion of the piece is, I grieve to say, `perfect gallows' just now --
our KING, Mr. Dale, being . . . but you'll see him, and, I fear,
not much applaud.
Your unworthy son, in things literary,
Robert Browning.
P.S. (in pencil). -- A most unnecessary desire, but urged on me
by Messrs. Longman: no notice on Str. in to-night's True Sun,*
lest the other papers be jealous!!!
--
* Mr. Fox reviewed `Strafford' in the `True Sun'.
--
==
A second letter, undated, but evidently written a day or two later,
refers to the promised notice, which had then appeared.
==
Tuesday Night.
No words can express my feelings: I happen to be much annoyed and unwell --
but your most generous notice has almost made `my soul well and happy now.'
I thank you, my most kind, most constant friend, from my heart
for your goodness -- which is brave enough, just now.
I am ever and increasingly yours,
Robert Browning.
You will be glad to see me on the earliest occasion, will you not?
I shall certainly come.
==
A letter from Miss Flower to Miss Sarah Fox (sister to the Rev. William Fox),
at Norwich, contains the following passage, which evidently continues
a chapter of London news:
==
`Then `Strafford'; were you not pleased to hear of the success of one
you must, I think, remember a very little boy, years ago.
If not, you have often heard us speak of Robert Browning:
and it is a great deal to have accomplished a successful tragedy,
although he seems a good deal annoyed at the go of things behind the scenes,
and declares he will never write a play again, as long as he lives.
You have no idea of the ignorance and obstinacy of the whole set,
with here and there an exception; think of his having to write out the meaning
of the word `impeachment', as some of them thought it meant `poaching'.'
==
On the first night, indeed, the fate of `Strafford' hung in the balance;
it was saved by Macready and Miss Helen Faucit. After this they must have
been better supported, as it was received on the second night with enthusiasm
by a full house. The catastrophe came after the fifth performance,
with the desertion of the actor who had sustained the part of Pym.
We cannot now judge whether, even under favourable circumstances,
the play would have had as long a run as was intended;
but the casting vote in favour of this view is given by the conduct
of Mr. Osbaldistone, the manager, when it was submitted to him.
The diary says, March 30, that he caught at it with avidity,
and agreed to produce it without delay. The terms he offered to the author
must also have been considered favourable in those days.
The play was published in April by Longman, this time
not at the author's expense; but it brought no return
either to him or to his publisher. It was dedicated
`in all affectionate admiration' to William C. Macready.
We gain some personal glimpses of the Browning of 1835-6;
one especially through Mrs. Bridell-Fox, who thus describes
her first meeting with him:
==
`I