Maude Adams Book 12: Romeo and Juliet

Welcome to this twelfth book in my Maude Adams series. This one is about a fairly controversial play she performed in, Romeo and Juliet. In general the critics did not seem to care very much for how she performed the role of Juliet, yet it seems that the public did like the play at least moderately successful.

When you look at the plays she was in, and the comments about her performance, she would seem to be, as described in today's terms, type-cast. She did best with the plays where she was allowed to be herself, a beautiful young woman who was intelligent, charming, at times girlish, and admired by her audience. The further she went away from that type of role the more difficulty, and more critical comments seemed to arise, such as in her role of Juliet or her role as Chantecler.

What makes things particularly difficult here is that her work is historical, but pre-mass media, basically. The only information we have about almost all her plays is newspaper and magazine articles by viewers or critics. There were no movie recordings made, no sound recordings, no instant broadcast on the radio. Thus, we have to rely on other people's opinions, and a lot of digging, to try to come up with a reliable over-all view of the plays she was in.

The play opened may 8, 1899 at The Empire. From some sources indications are that the expectations for her ability to handle the role were not high.

Articles About the Play

The Kansas City Journal, May 9, 1899. MAUD ADAMS IN JULIET. The popular actress makes a successful debut in Shakespearean drama.

Maude Adams made her debut tonight in Shakespearean tragedy, essaying Juliet to William Faversham's Romeo, at the Empire theater. the interpretation of the role by this popular young actress was entirely different from other Juliets. She relied absolutely upon perfect girlish simplicity with just a faint dash of coquetry. She was sweet and pretty and carried her audience with her well. There was scarely anything of the grand passion in her acting. She was the (?) girl from beginning to end, truer, perhaps, to the real Juliet than to the popular conception of that immortal character.

Judging from the frequent ovations she received from the audience, her debut was eminently successful, though whether her conception of the role will live is another matter.

=====

The Sun May 7, 1899: Curiosity and surmise are rife as to miss Adam's Juliet. One thing may be depended on. We shall not see a conventional performance. the personality and art of this actress are never violent. Her Juliet will remain a gentle girl, and not become a tragedy queen. So a positive novelty, at least, is in store for us.

'...Maude could never satisfy the physical and temperamental requirements for embodying the ideal Juliet of old. She lacked the dark coloring, sensuous figure, and breathtaking beauty of the Italian stereotype, and she lacked the emotional reserves and vocal power to give full vent to Juliet's ranging passions....She emphasized Juliet's youth and girlishness.

=====

The New York Times, May 9, 1899: Her portrayal of Juliet is sensibly and sympathetically conceived and executed with beautiful sincerity and simplicity. It is lovely in spirit, absolutely free from affectation and extravagance, fervent and affecting, and sustained from first to last by a natural eloquence of speech, gesture, and facial play which will more than atone, in the minds of some hundreds of thousands of spectators in the years to come, for her lack of mere elocutionary power and studied plastic grace.

=====

New York Sun: May 9, 1899. The recalls to which she responded were many, and she might have doubled their number if she had chosen to turn all the applause to account in that way. Her conduct in that respect was modest. She came out in every instance with one or more of her companion players and accepted in an apologetic manner the honors paid to her.

=====

New York Times, May 9, 1899. MAUDE ADAMS AS JULIET. A Notable Performance of Shakespeare's Love Tragedy. TRIUMPH FOR THE ACTRESS. The Play Beautifully Staged and Presented with Zeal, Taste, and Discretion.

Maude Adams acted Shakespeare's Juliet for the first time in her life at the Empire Theater last night, after a year's study of the role. The immediate result was a prodigious triumph. At the hands (literally speaking) of an audience of extraordinary quality, but somewhat overemphatic in the expression of its enthusiasm, the young actress revealed a mighty tribute. Everything she did, every smallest detail of her acting, seemed to have approval.

But, what is more to the purpose, much that she did deserved the most cordial approval. Her portrayal of Juliet is sensibly and sympathetically conceived and executed with beautiful sincerity and simplicity. It is lovely in spirit, absolutely free from affectation and extravagance, fervent and affecting, and sustained from first to last by a natural eloquence of speech, gesture, and facial play which will more than atone, in the minds of some hundreds of thousands of spectators in the years to come, for her lack of mere elocutionary power and studied plastic grace.

Strange to say, also, Miss Adams' positive triumph is obtained not so much in Juliet's earlier scenes, in the beautiful sonnetlike dialogue with Romeo; the balcony episode, though her girlish fervor and sweet simplicity in that are not to be slighted, or the telling interview with the Nurse in the garden. Failure for her in these passages was quite out of the question. It was upon her easy mastery of the lighter side of Juliet's character that many wise persons have taken the trouble to say the success of her portrayal would depend.

Yet young playgoers (to whom Adelaide Neilson is but a name and not a memory) may have seen Juliets as graphic and touching in their denotement of love at first sight, as fervent and charming in the balcony, as naturally girlish in the expression of mingled tenderness and impatience in the colloquy with the nurse; while there surely have been few Juliets of the stage in any era so absolutely real and pathetic in the scene of parting with Romeo and one or two of the succeeding episodes.

The manner of classical tragedy is not in Miss Adams' equipment. As surely her voice, though it never failed her last night, is not of wide range. It is sufficiently strong, however, to give due vehemence to the famous 'O, bid me leap, rather than marry Paris'; it has volume enough and commands all the tones required to express the bitter anguish of Juiliet in the scene of old Capulet's wrath; it lends itself fairly well to the grotesque horror of the potion scene.

Miss Adams' methods in these episodes may be called realistic. It is certainly unconventional. And we are far from saying that many of the Juliets of old may not have reached greater tragic heights in any one of the scenes mentioned. but recent Juliets, however much they may have striven, have not nearly equaled the pathos Miss Adams lends to them.

It is, of course, only another evidence of the wonderful universality, the perfect humanity of the greatest of dramatic poets, that his love tragedy, with its matchless lyrical beautify and its tremendous sweep of emotional power, can be treated in this modern realistic way to try a little slip of a woman with a face assuredly not beautiful, to such fine effect. But obviously, too, the result proves as well the rare and positive histrionic talent of the actress and her own subtle power over the sympathies of her fellow-men. It would not do to assume that, because this new Juliet is both realistic and successful, a realistic and prosaic treatment of Shakespeare's tragedies, if only the treatment is earnest and well meant, will suffice. The contrary has been too often and too recently proved.

This 'Romeo and Juliet' is poetry, and the gift of poetry must be in the nature of Maude Adams, or she could not make one feel so strongly the fervor, the exquisite pathos, the heart-breaking agony, the thrill of horror in her portrayal of Juliet. Though her method seems all so simple, her charm is subtle and defies analysis. Mere earnestness, a desire to do well, will not suffice; nor, for that matter, will the knowledge of how to do well, provided the executive skill is lacking.

The remarkable fact about the career of Miss Adams, thus far, is that since she emerged into public view as the prattling sister of the clergyman in 'A Midnight Bell,' she has never failed. Each task set for her she has performed with sufficient skill. Failure has been prophesied for her, but the prophets have been silenced. Last night when the wild note of grief sounded in the poor girl's appeal to Capulet, and the desperate earnestness of the protestation to the Friar moved the house, some more prophets were silenced.

Richer virtuosity, probably, combined with Miss Adam's present artistic traits, might have lent a still larger measure of effect to the potion scene, which was yet, as we have said, unexpectedly powerful.

Here, and in various other passages, there is still room for improvement, and much improvement may be looked for. But, as long as the play remains in her repertory (and the whole country will want to see her new portrayal), she will never exactly realize the physical ideal of Juliet, and in spite of all her intelligence,charm, and strange power she will never satisfy those comparatively few students of Shakespeare who form hard and fast ideas of how the plays should be acted, and cannot easily be made to depart from them. Only dramatic genius of the highest order can move them.

Miss Adams speaks much of the text set down for juliet in shakespeare's play. her first notable omission is the short passage beginning 'Bondage is hoarse, and may not speak aloud,' in the balcony scene. In accordance with recent custom, the whole of Scene 2, Act III, with the beautiful evening song 'Gallop apace, you fiery-footed steeds,' and the famous passage ,'Blister'd be thy tongue,' is omitted. The prompt-book, however, has been capably and reverently made.

The production is all remarkable tasteful and well ordered. We have not often seen a more satisfying Shakespearean revival in late years, and one may well feel disposed, in view of its pictorial excellence, and I ts many dramatic merits, to hail it with acclaim, and to give over looking for the inevitable defects in it. but the elocution of Mr. Hackett - or his delivery, rather, he knows not elocution-will not do, and his Mercutio is but a raw boy with a heavy voice. His friends in the house, however, tried hard to make it a night of triumph for him.

On the other hand, the Romeo of Mr. Faversham is an admirable piece of acting in which Romeo's earlier mood (when he is desperately in love only with himself) is well contrasted with his demeanor when the true passion possesses him. He plays the balcony scene discreetly, and kills Tybait with superb vehemence. His delivery of the banishment speech is excellent. He wears his rich dresses gracefully and well.

A still finer performance is the Friar Laurence of Mr. Thompson, whose reading is delightful, and whose denotement of the simplicity and shrewdness of the old priest has not been excelled on our stage since the days of the elder Mark Smith.

Mrs. W. G. Jones acts the Nurse in her competent, old-fashioned way, while Mr. Compton and Mr. Carter carry their small parts with the zeal of true artists.

There was a great cry late in the evening for Charles Frohman, who showed himself briefly, with seeming reluctance. He well deserved the tribute. He has placed to his credit a fine, and uncommonly interesting revival of a masterwork.

=====

New York Times, May 14, 1899: Maude Adams and her portrayal of Juliet are the all-absorbing theatrical topics of the hour in this neighborhood. Possessing an extraordinary share of personal charm, Miss Adams has been also the luckiest young actress of her time, for the mere reason that public expectation has never been too highly keyed in advance of her various undertakings. In the case of her Juliet, which is a veritable and valuable work of dramatic art, though it conforms to few of the accepted stage traditions anticipations were not of a glowing sort. Wherefore the fervor and pathos, and the downright virtuosity of the actress, in these very scenes in which she might have been expected to fail, counted for so much more with the first-night audience and with all her critics.

Some few words by way of review of the tasteful and beautiful revival of 'Romeo and Juliet' at the Empire Theater may be found elsewhere in The New York Times to-day, so that the details of Miss Adams' new portrayal need not be dwelt on here. But there is no danger that the beautiful simplicity, the apt intelligence, the gentle but sufficient emotional quality of the new Juliet will be too often extolled. In a day of much theatricalism and comparatively little dramatic art, an achievement so refreshing and notable cannot be too cordially welcomed.

=====

Life, May 18, 1899: It was far better in a realization of the girlishness and emotionality of Shakespeare's heroine than in a perfect rendering of his lines. Anyone who looked for an interpretation of the beautiful speeches the author puts into Juliet's mouth would be disappointed; another, who sought only the impressions of a very young and impressionable girl carried through a tragic romance, would find in Miss Adams's portrayal a most moving and convincing picture. In appearance she is not at all the warm and precocious beauty of a Southern clime, but what she lacks in Italian sensuousness she makes up in vivacity and a magnetism peculiarly her own. Miss Adams can never be a great Juliet, but she may always be a charming one.

=====

The World, May 19, 1899: Miss Adams's Juliet is a triumph in the impersonation of simple, spontaneous, unaffected girlhood. It is rich in romantic charm and great viewed from the standpoint of comedy.

=====

The Tribune May 19, 1899: Miss Adams, a delicate, seemingly fragile and febrile person, in the potion scene of Juliet, might be expected to supply a mild specimen of hysterics. That was feasible, and that was afforded. The individual charm of girl-like sincerity which is peculiar to Miss Adams swayed her performance of Juliet with a winning softness, eliciting sympathy and inspiring kindness. beyond that there was nothing. Many schoolgirls, with a little practice, would play the part just as well and would be just as little like it. In her special way Miss Adams is a most agreeable actress; she ought to be neither surprised nor hurt to ascertain by this experience that nature never intended her to act the tragic heroines of Shakespeare. Much of the part was whispered and much of it was bleated. The personality cannot readily be described, but perhaps it will not be unfairly indicated as that of an intellectual young lady from Boston, competent in the mathematics and intent on teaching pedagogy. A balcony scene without passion, a parting scene without the delirium of grief, and a potion scene without power-these were the products of Miss Adams' dramatic art.'

=====

The Critic, June 1899: Whatever may be the critical estimate of Maude Adams's Juliet, there can be no doubt of its popular success. She came, she played, she conquered.

[Sometimes critics seemed to get a little carried away with their criticism. Normally they criticize the play itself, the scenery, or the actors, but there was one critic who went so far as to criticize the audience! He felt that they applauded too much.]

=====

Frank Leslie's Popular Monthly Vol. 55, Nov. 1902-April 1903. In the way of enthusiastic demonstration the reception that greeted Miss Maude Adams as Juliet was the noisiest I can remember, interest being added to the night by Mrs. Mary Anderson de Navarro, our former Juliet, applauding from a stage box. But Miss Adams has been greeted tumultuously in all of her stellar ventures...

=====

[The following is sort of an ultra-negative review of the play. Note, though, that it is written in 1915, well after the play ended.

Shakespeare on the Stage 1915. Maude Adams, a clever and interesting actress in domestic or elfishly eccentric parts,showed herself unsuited to tragedy and woefully out of place as Juliet, giving a performance which ceased to be frivolous only when it became mildly hysterical. Shakespeare's Juliet, by her words and actions, shows herself to be superbly developed, of a vigorous mind, a passionate heart, a powerful imagination, and an imperious will, which, but that it is curbed by her sense of right and her womanly instinct of prudence, would overbear and demolish every restraint; and the dramatist has placed her in harrowing situations, and allotted for the expression of her feelings some of the most impetuous bursts of poetic frenzy that passion ever prompted or eloquence ever winged. Whether Juliet can be considered fourteen or forty, it will make no difference as to the practical result, in acting. The representative of the character must be competent to realize it. Juliet cannot be effectually shown by either the precocious child or the priggish prude. The Juliet of Miss Adams was a mixture of both. The actress did not, even at the comparative early age of twenty-seven, possess the exceptional physical beauty that would enable her to look like Juliet, nor did she evince the imagination, passion, personal force, vocal power, elocutionary art, or diversified professional skill that are essential for a true, or even for an acceptable, embodiment of that character. The performance was as flaccid in execution as it was mistaken and insipid in idea. The Frohman production was quietly inurned after a brief tour, in the spring of 1899.

This is an original book published in 1899. By acting edition it means that not only is the dialogue included, but explanations and asides are also included. The critics review of the play generally went towards the negative, but the public seemed to like the play and Maude Adams no matter what the critics said.

Other Books In This Series

BOOK 1: MAUDE ADAMS: AS OTHERS SAW HER. A book containing a lot of information about Maude Adams. This includes Chapter 1 (Basic information); Chapter 2 (family news); Chapter 3 (her avoidance of publicity); Chapter 4 (illness); Chapter 5 (fashion); Chapter 6 (money); Chapter 7 (her return to the stage); Chapter 8 (movies); Chapter 9 (teaching); Chapter 10 (as an inventor); Chapter 11 (her personal life); Chapter 12 (her statue); Chapter 13 (death notices); Chapter 14 (plays she was in); Chapter 15: Conclusion; Appendix A (books about her); Appendix B (books with some information about her); Appendix C: (longer magazine and newspaper articles about her); and Appendix D (radio programs she did).

BOOK 2: MAUDE ADAMS: A KISS FOR CINDERELLA (Scan of the original book of the play along with articles about the play.

BOOK 3: MAUDE ADAMS: CHANTECLER (Scan of the original book of the play along with a scan of a booklet of the play plus articles about the play.

BOOK 4: MAUDE ADAMS: L'AIGLON: (Scan of the original book of the play, plus scan of the original souvenir booklet, plus articles about the play.

BOOK 5: MAUDE ADAMS: THE LITTLE MINISTER (Scan of the original book of the story, scan of the original souvenir booklet, plus articles about the play.

BOOK 6: MAUDE ADAMS: THE JESTERS (Scan of the original book of the play plus articles about the play.

BOOK 7: MAUDE ADAMS: JOAN OF ARC (Scan of the book Maid of Orleans along with articles about the play.

BOOK 8: MAUDE ADAMS: OP 'O ME THUMB (Scan of the original book of the play plus articles about the play.

BOOK 9: MAUDE ADAMS: PETER PAN (Scan of the original book plus articles about the play.

BOOK 10: MAUDE ADAMS: THE PRETTY SISTER OF JOSE (Scan of the original book of the story plus articles about the play.

BOOK 11: MAUDE ADAMS: QUALITY STREET (Scan of the original book of the play, scan of the original souvenir booklet, plus articles about the play.

BOOK 12 MAUDE ADAMS: ROMEO AND JULIET (Scan of the original book of the play plus articles about the play.

BOOK 13: MAUDE ADAMS: WHAT EVERY WOMAN KNOWS (Scan of the original book of the play plus articles about the play.