|
 |
|
O'Quinn, Daniel J., ed. 'Appendix of Selected Reviews for Lady Eglantine Wallace's
The Ton; or, Follies of Fashion.' British Women Playwrights around 1800. 15 June 2004. <http://www.etang.umontreal.ca/bwp1800/essays/oquinn_ton_reviews.html>
|
Copyright © Contributor, 2004-2008. This essay
is protected under the copyright laws of the United States and
the Universal Copyright Convention. Publication (print or electronic)
or commercial use of any of the copyrighted materials without direct
authorization from the copyright holder is strictly prohibited.
|
| |
[Anon.]. 'Theatrical Intelligence.' Morning Chronicle (9 April 1788), rpt. in British Women Playwrights around 1800. 8 pars. 1 June 2004. <http://www.etang.umontreal.ca/bwp1800/essays/oquinn_ton_reviews.html#1> [from the Morning Chronicle, April 9, 1788]
THEATRICAL INTELLIGENCE. |
| 1. |
Yesterday a new Comedy, called The TON; or, Follies of Fashion was performed for the first time at Covent Garden Theatre, the characters of
which were as follow, and were thus represented:
Captian Daffodil, Mr. Lewis.
Lord Bon Ton, Mr. Wewitzer.
Lord Raimond, Mr. Farren.
Lord Ormond, Mr. Pope.
Villers, Mr. Aickin.
Captain Mc Pharoah, Mr. Johnson.
Levi, Mr. Quick.
Pink, Mr. Bernard.
Butler, Mr. Fearon.
Lady Bon Ton, Mrs. Mattocks.
Lady Clairville, Miss Brunton.
Clara, Mrs. Wells.
Mrs. Tender, Mrs. Bernard.
Mademoiselle, Mrs. Morton.
AND
Lady Raimond, Mrs.Pope.
This comedy is the production of Lady Wallace, and was received with a mixture of
applause and disapprobation, by one of the most fashionable
and crowded audiences that were assembled in a theatre. |
| 2. |
The object of the author's Satire is to lash the follies of fashionable life
and expose them to ridicule; and though she has not succeeded
in the production of a perfect play, she merits the warmest
praise from every friend to morality, for the laudableness
of her aim and the boldness of her attempt. The Ton is defective in regard to the construction and conduct of its plot; it also
wants a greater variety and novelty of character, and is
infinitely too long for representation. The fable is meager
and barren of incident. Till the fourth act we barely meet
with any business or bustle; long and tedious scenes of coloquy
occupying that time, that ought to be employed in the exhibition
of dramatick action. The dialogue proves Lady Wallace to
have been a discerning observer of what has passed in fashionable
life, and to have judiciously fixed on those circumstances
that demand the castigation and severity of comick exposition.
The dialogue is, however, unequal, and although it contains
some points peculiarly happy in regard to the turn both of
thought and expression, it is slurred occasionally with a
degree of vulgarity of diction, and grossness of allusion, that at once degrade and
disgrace it, and excite disgust in the audience. First among
the fortunate passages, we reckon Pink's description of the
manner of dressing his master Captain Daffodil; the idea
is new, and it is satirically, neatly and adroitly managed.
The pronouncing Daffodil right in being in love only with
himself, as that is the surest way of having no rival the
lamenting that coroners are not appointed to enquire what
female reputations are murdered, and what die a natural death
the comparing a female face, beautiful by nature, to a half-ripe
Cherry, and the declaration of Mac Pharoah, that the sight
of it always made his mouth water; together with Levi's desiring
Lord Raimond to be merciful, because his life was not insured,
were instances of uncommon felicity and merit. The incident also of making Lady
Raimond and Daffodil conceal themselves in the same clothes-press,
was a good one, and led to a situation powerfully dramatick
and picturesque, but it wanted a better and a more artful
preparation.
|
| 3. |
Upon the whole, this Comedy contains much claim to praise, notwithstanding its
defects predominated, and gave rise to that struggle between
its friends and its opposers, that had nearly doomed it to
a violent and a sudden death. By the generalship of the Manager,
who wisely thought it better to give way that rashly to oppose
the tumult of opposition, another piece was announced for performance
this evening, and thus an opportunity has been afforded the
author of making those alterations, the effect of last night's
exhibition may suggest to her as fit to be adopted. Whether the comedy sink or swim, we think the manager justifiable in having produced
it. When a lady of fashion, supported and encouraged by a large
train of persons of the first rank in life, brings a piece
to the manager, his door must be opened to her; and unless
her production should appear prima facie, to be altogether destitute of claims to commendation, and such as would equally
disgrace her and discredit the theatre, her piece ought to
be prepared for representation; at least every prudent manager
would produce it, and suffer the author to have a fair trial. |
| 4. |
The Comedy of the Ton was decorated with several new scenes, one of them a most
beautiful view of the Queen's House, in St. James's Park;
and another, a view of Kensington Gardens, disposed for a
Masquerade al fresco.
|
| 5. |
The parts were in general well acted, but excepting Mrs. Pope, Mrs. Mattocks,
and Miss Brunton, scarcely any of the performers were perfect.
We never saw Johnson, who played the part of McPharoah (which, by the by, is by far the best acting character in the Comedy)
so often at a loss for the words. Lewis was peculiarly happy
in the frivolity and nothingness of manner, that he assumed
in Daffodil. It was marking and characteristick. Quick also
played the little part of Ben Levi with a considerable share
of humour, and Farren shewed a proper portion of earnestness
and feeling, when he thought his wife had played the wanton.
Bernard's Pink was lively and pert, and Pope's Ormond warm
and interesting. We often pitied Mrs. Pope, for although
her's was a truly amiable character, and she made the most
of it, yet her goodness and virtue were so much dwelt upon,
that like the frequent allusions to the follies of St James's-street,
and to Lord Bon Ton, and Bon Ton House, they were at length voted a bore, and were felt to have grown ridiculous by repetition. The characters were all
well dressed. Lewis's suit, in particular, was fancied with
much taste.
|
6.
|
The Play was prefaced by a Prologue, written by Mr. Kekyll, and spoken by Mr.
Farren. It had infinite merit, and was delivered very ably.
The object of it was to laugh at those who were the law-makers,
being themselves the principle law-breakers; and it ridiculed
their attempts to reform the rest of mankind, and to punish
petty offenders, while they were indulging in the commission
of offences of a more important nature, with great happiness
and success.
|
| 7. |
The Epilogue was written by Mr. Topham, and spoken by Mrs. Wells. Like the Prologue,
it was extremely good, and full of felicitous point; it was
given with uncommon neatness and force of effect by Mrs. Wells.
The allusion to a simple cowslip was very prettily introduced,
and as delicately managed in the delivery. At the end of the
Epilogue, after a proper preparation, Mrs. Wells favoured the
house with an imitation of Mrs. Siddons in a passage of Isabella,
an imitation which she hit off with wonderful closeness and
truth; the similitude, both in look and utterance, was so forcible,
that it flashed conviction of its being a true likeness on
every ear, and having the very singular merit of being equally
devoid of anything that looked like burlesque or caricature,
it excited very deservedly a thundering peal of applause. |
| 8. |
We shall take a future opportunity of giving a sketch of the fable.
|
| |
[Anon.]. '[The Ton].' Morning Post (9 April 1788), rpt. in British Women Playwrights around 1800. 7 pars. 1 June 2004. <http://www.etang.umontreal.ca/bwp1800/essays/oquinn_ton_reviews.html#2> [from the Morning Post, April 9, 1788] |
| 1. |
A Comedy, entitled The Ton, or Follies of Fashion, written by Lady Wallace, was represented, for the first time, last night to
a prodigious audience amongst which were a considerable
number of the higher order, who appeared very active
in supporting it.
Characters.
Lord Raymond, Lord Bon Ton, Villars, Lord Ormond, Mac Faro, Ben Levi, Trusty,
Pink, Captian Daffodil, Lady Raymond, Lady Bon Ton,
Mrs. Tender, Clara, Mademoiselle, Lady Clairville,
Mr. FARREN; Mr. WEWITZER; Mr. AICKIN; Mr. POPE; Mr.
JOHNSTONE; Mr. QUICK; Mr. FEARON; Mr. BERNARD; Mr.
LEWIS; Mrs. POPE; Mrs. MATTOCKS; Mrs. BERNARD; Mrs.
WELLS; Mrs. MORTON; Miss BRUNTON.
The object of this Comedy is to expose the corrupt principles and dissipated
manners that characterize the high life; and this the
fair author has effected with great spirit, and perhaps
too lamentable an accuracy.
|
| 2. |
Among the personages employed in this drama, is a dissipated man of quality,
who mixes in all the profligacy of the times, and, with
his other follies, keeps a mistress. His wife, by patience,
tenderness, and generosity, reclaims him. The person, however,
who makes the greatest figure in the piece, is a coxcomb,
whose chief object is to appear a man of gallantry, in
universal favour with the ladies, though in reality he
only aims at the reputation of an amour, in all his intercourse
with the sex, and, for this paltry gratification, would
sacrifice any character however virtuous. Another of the
persons, who belong to the fashionable world, is a worthless
Lord, who degrades his rank by mixing with sharpers, confederating
in their schemes, and leaving his wife to the pursuit of her own pleasures, however disgraceful to himself. A common gamester, of Hibernian
origin, is also among the amiable mass of fashionable characters,
and though indecent, unprincipled, and ignorant, yet having
money, he is deemed a proper object for the countenance
of the first people. The characters of the more reputable
kind, is a young Lord, who, though betrothed to a lady
of rank, fortune, and honour, suddenly deserts her in favour
of another; but is reformed by the disinterested kindness
of his first mistress, and his friend, whose counsels are
of the faithful and moral kind. The whole terminates, as
usual, in exposing the depraved characters, and rewarding
the virtuous.
|
| 3. |
In this comedy are introduced some few strokes of humour, and touches of temporary
satire; but these are not sufficiently numerous to compensate
for many long, dull, heavy scenes of uninteresting dialogue.
It is very obvious, that Lady Wallace had not been accustomed
to write for the stage, otherwise she would have attended
more to stage effect, and trusted less to the foolish flippancy
of what is called tonish dialogue. |
| 4. |
The sentiments throughout the piece were of so common-place and hacknied a kind,
that we wonder a Lady so distinguished for sprightly powers,
should have condescended to adopt them. The attempts at
wit, in general, were constrained and awkward, and mostly
ended in some miserable pun.
|
| 5. |
The principal objection lies, however, against the tendency of the dialogue,
which is prurient in a high degree, and often grossly in
opposition to every thing delicate and decent. As a transcript
of modern high life, we are afraid, however, it is too
correct, and think the author merits great praise for endeavouring
to draw into odium and ridicule, manners and principles,
to which no elevation of rank should afford a shelter from
the contempt of mankind.
|
6.
|
The judgement of the audience, through the exhibition of the piece, and at its
conclusion, though strongly blended with the partiality
of friends, was obviously against its further representation,
and this seemed to be the idea of the Manager, as Lewis
did not give it for a second performance, but the Castle
of Andalusia in its stead.
|
| 7. |
The performers exerted themselves with laudable ability; particularly Lewis,
Farren, Quick, Aickin, and Johnstone . Of the Ladies, those
to whom the Authoress was most indebted, are, Mrs. Pope,
Mrs. Mattocks, Mrs. Morton , and Miss Brunton. |
| |
[Anon.]. 'Lady Wallace and her Comedy'. The English Chronicle; or, Universal Evening Post (10 April 1788), rpt. in British Women Playwrights around 1800. 4 pars. 1 June 2004. <http://www.etang.umontreal.ca/bwp1800/essays/oquinn_ton_reviews.html#3> [from The English Chronicle; or, Universal Evening Post, April 10, 1788]
Lady Wallace and her Comedy. |
| 1. |
TO what strange deviation of the human mind, from its most obvious principles,
are we to ascribe the circumstance, of Ladies not only being
more licentious in their writings than the men, but even those
being the most remarkable for that propensity, whose characters
are of an opposite complexion? |
| 2. |
Whatever may be the cause, the fact is indisputable or if disputed, we might
produce one instance, not only in this Lady but in several
female dramatists now living Mrs. Brooke, Mrs. Inchbald, Mrs. Cowley. Is then, like Swift 's definition of a nice man, every virtuous woman possessed
of a prurient imagination?
|
| 3. |
We have the authority of Pope for saying that the disposition of the mind is
not always evinced in one's writings. He celebrates Buckhusrt
as
'The best good man, with the worst natur'd Muse.'
Lady Wallace divorced her husband for infidelity, and is, if we believe her own
Comedy, unique among women of fashion. It is not so much
the follies of high life, that she has portrayed in her Comedy
of the Ton as their vices and those in the most depraved
colours. |
| 4. |
She tells us that in high life money is all, and character nothing Qui renda pecunia primum and not only first but last. That alone will carry you through nothing else
is desireable. This is, perhaps, an exaggeration. It is to
be hoped that some kind or degree of virtue, and regard to
character, is to be found even among the Great. If she had
hinted, that there was no honesty among the lawyers, Lady
Wallace would have come nearer the truth, instead of drawing
down a hiss by the curious introduction of 'the eloquent
and benevolent Erskine.' |
| |
[Anon.]. 'Theatre, Covent Garden'. Morning Post (11 April 1788), rpt. in British Women Playwrights around 1800. 6 pars. 1 June 2004. <http://www.etang.umontreal.ca/bwp1800/essays/oquinn_ton_reviews.html#4> [from the Morning Post, April 11, 1788]
THEATRE,
Covent-Garden.
|
| 1. |
It is not often that the public judgement is exercised with such manifest rectitude,
as in respect to the new Comedy of The Ton, which, on its second representation last night, received the strongest testimonies
of general and unequivocal reprobation. |
| 2. |
As the production of a female, and one who is distinguished for sprightly talents
and enterprising spirits, we cannot but look with some regret
on this decision but its dramatic imperfections were so glaring,
that it would be a disgrace to sense, decency, and humour,
to give it critical countenance.
|
| 3. |
The audience remained in tolerable good humour till the end of the third Act,
when the clouds began to lour, and the tempest to swell, which
afterwards burst forth with unmitigated fury. |
| 4. |
Lewis frequently attempted to gain a hearing, but in vain. At last, however,
he was permitted to speak. He told the audience 'that it
was not the manager's intention to force the comedy on the
public, but as the author had many friends, who were desirous
of hearing it, he solicited their permission for a third
performance, for her benefit,' but this requisition was rejected by a large majority, and the piece therefore
ultimately condemned.
|
| 5. |
A scoundrel in the gallery threw a quart bottle into the Pit, which severely hurt a Lady. This incident was mentioned in a paper,
which was thrown on the stage in consequence of which Lewis
came forward to enquire into the truth of it, and finding
it had really happened, offered, by the manager's direction, Five Guineas for a discovery of the man by whom the bottle was thrown; but the audience in
general seemed to think this a very inadequate reward for
the suppression of a mischief so alarming, and that has lately
so often occurred.
|
6.
|
Let us hope that the age of theatrical impartiality will, before long, arrive;
since personal reputation for wit, and an illustrious and
numerous list of friends, have not been able to save a woman
of quality's comedy from damnation. It only now remains,
that a deserving play, by some friendless man or woman, should
be suffered to try its chance with the public. 'Tros tyriusve
suat nullo discrimine.'
|
| |
[Anon.]. 'Theatrical Intelligence'. Morning Chronicle (11 April 1788), rpt. in British Women Playwrights around 1800. 4 pars. 1 June 2004. <http://www.etang.umontreal.ca/bwp1800/essays/oquinn_ton_reviews.html#5> [from the Morning Chronicle, April 11, 1788]
THEATRICAL INTELLIGENCE. |
| 1. |
Lady Wallace's new Comedy, called, The TON; or, Follies of Fashion, was performed, for the second time, yesterday evening; and received, as before,
with an equal mixture of applause and disapprobation. The
latter, however, was more wantonly exerted than on Tuesday,
since the author had very considerably curtailed her play,
and expunged most of the passages that were disrelished on
the first night of representation. When we use the term wantonly, we are far from meaning to avow ourselves advocates for the piece, or to affect
to insinuate that it has a claim to that degree of approbation,
a fair admission to which ought alone to entitle it to hold
its place in the catalogue of plays in performance; we mean
merely to adhere to the line of conduct, which ought ever
to distinguish those, who presume to pronounce judgement
on the works of others, and to endeavour to act with candour.
When sentence of condemnation must necessarily pass for the
sake of truth and justice, it ought to be calmly and solemnly
delivered, that the effect may be awful and exemplary; our
sincere wish, therefore, always has been, that an audience
would hear a new play to its conclusion, and restrain every
violence of censure, till that period, when final judgement
might be given, without impeachment and with fairness of
decision. Yesterday evening there were whole clusters of young men in the pit and boxes,
who came obviously for the purpose of enjoying the sport
of a theatrical damnation, and who instead of patiently waiting
for cause for censure, hooted, encored, applauded, and hissed
without rhime or reason. To these sublime geniusses, the
opportunity of triumphing over an unsuccessful author may
be fine fun; but let us whisper in their ears that such a mode of condemnation is a disgrace
to a civilized country; it is irrational, savage, unmanly,
illiberal, and indecent; what is worse, it may injure the
cause of dramatick literature, and prove seriously detrimental
to the source of theatrical entertainment. Modest writers
may be deterred by these harsh means from attempting to court
the dramatick Muse, and as merit and modesty are always companions,
the publick may in the end be essential sufferers. |
| 2. |
In the course of the fourth act, the opponents of the piece became so turbulent
and clamorous, that the performers could not be heard, and
a stop was put to the progress of the play for some seconds.
Mr. Lewis came forward to address the audience, but such
was the struggle between the friends and foes of the Comedy,
that it was in vain for him to attempt to speak; the act
therefore, was concluded like a pantomime, in dumb-shew by
the comedians, but with the contending parties among the
audience in full chorus. When the fifth act commenced, the
clamour was again violent, and while Lewis was 'bowing and
bowing,' in order to obtain an audience for a short address.
a quart bottle was thrown from the gallery to the pit. This
raised additional noise and encreased the embarrassment between
the audience and the actors; at length, however, Mr. Lewis
was heard, and after informing the House generally, that the new tumult was occasioned by a bottle having been thrown into the Pit,
and offering a reward of ten pounds for whoever would discover
the person who threw it, stating, at the same time, that
peace officers were then employed in endeavouring to apprehend
the offender, he gained permission to say, 'that as the comedy
did not seem to meet with general approbation, the Theatre,
upon that presumption, withdrew it; but as great numbers
of the author's friends had not seen it, the Manager hoped
the audience would have the goodness to indulge them in one
more representation; at least, that they would be kind enough
to let them perform the piece to its conclusion then.' This
was received with loud shouts of applause, allayed with some
strong indications of objection and denial. The play, however,
was suffered to proceed quietly to the end, and therefore
we presume, it will be represented a third time, and never afterwards.
|
| 3. |
Mrs. Wells spoke the Epilogue, (which we now understand to be chiefly the composition
of Captain Morris) with as much success as on Tuesday. Her
imitation of Mrs. Siddons is beyond all question incomparably
close and correct. It pleased us so highly, that we heartily
wished for more imitations by the same copyist, who, though
a Cowslip, is no simple weed. |
| 4. |
We are happy to have it in our power to add, that the person who threw the bottle
was secured.
|
| |
[Anon.]. 'Theatrical'. Morning Chronicle (12 April 1788), rpt. in British Women Playwrights around 1800. 1 pars. 1 June 2004. <http://www.etang.umontreal.ca/bwp1800/essays/oquinn_ton_reviews.html#6> [from the Morning Chronicle, April 12, 1788]
THEATRICAL. |
| 1. |
What has passed in the course of the week relative to Lady Wallace's Play, is
well worthy the publick notice; a Comedy, written by a Woman
of Fashion, applauded in private circles, and sustained by
the voice of public report, as an excellent piece, was handed
to the Manager of Covent Garden Theatre, in a manner that
made refusal altogether improper. Finding himself called
upon irresistibly to act as Master of the Ceremonies, he
gallantly took the Lady by the hand, and after sparing no
expense of time, and trouble, and charge; in fact, after
making all practicable preparation to smooth the way to it,
he conducted the fair Author to her trial. Anxious to give
her every possible chance of success, he brought the play
a second time before an audience, and then finding the majority
present adverse to the representation, signified his desire
to withdraw it, but begged to be indulged in a third performance, merely with a view to compliment the author
with an opportunity of collecting all her friends to attend
and grace its funeral obsequies. There is something so strikingly
proper in this line of conduct, that it demands our remarking
it to the publick. It proves the liberal feeling of the Manager,
who has in this instance shewn a laudable readiness to do
himself an injury, rather than to afford ground of complaint,
however captious or capriciously urged, that he was either
too opiniative in the first instance, or niggardly and self-interested
in the second. It proves also, (and may that proof produce
good consequences to the drama!) that is not so easy to write
a perfect play as two thirds of mankind imagine; and that
although wit and pleasantry, and forcible observation, are
powerful materials, and indeed essentials in the formation
of a Comedy, they are of little use, unless combined with judgement, and skill in the art of
dramatick construction. |
| |
[Anon.]. 'Theatrical Intelligence'. Morning Chronicle (14 April 1788), rpt. in British Women Playwrights around 1800. 2 pars. 1 June 2004. <http://www.etang.umontreal.ca/bwp1800/essays/oquinn_ton_reviews.html#7>
[from the Morning Chronicle, April 14, 1788] THEATRICAL INTELLIGENCE. |
| 1. |
Lady Wallace's comedy was honoured in its exit on Saturday evening by the attendance
of a very genteel, though not very numerous audience. John Bull, when he feels himself affronted, is apt to make a temporary sacrifice
of his liberality, but he always means well. On Saturday
he had not forgotten that the comedy was ab initio, a dull
play, and having been led, from the author's fame, to expect
a lively performance, he had not forgiven his disappointment.
The curtain rose, and act the first proceeded in tolerable
quiet; as the acts encreased, john rumbled and grumbled;
he seemed, however to have recollected himself, and re-assumed
his presence of mind and his constitutional generosity before
the fifth Act commenced; that act was listened to with patience,
and a large plaudit crowned the conclusion, though it was
made into excellent punch by a small but distinguishable
squeeze of acid. |
| 2. |
Mrs. Wells, if possible, spoke the Epilogue better than ever. Both on the second
and third nights she has, in a small degree enlarged her
imitation of Mrs. Siddons in Isabella. She gives it so neatly,
so closely, and so chastely, that we not only pardon the
violence to propriety, committed by the introduction of such
a display of extraordinary talents in an Epilogue, but heartily
wish the violence extended.
|
| |
[Anon.]. 'Theatrical Intelligence from Edinburgh'. Morning Chronicle (31 April 1788), rpt. in British Women Playwrights around 1800. 3 pars. 1 June 2004. <http://www.etang.umontreal.ca/bwp1800/essays/oquinn_ton_reviews.html#8> [from the Morning Chronicle, April 31, 1788]
Theatrical Intelligence from Edinburgh.
|
| 1. |
Saturday night, Lady Wallace's new comedy of The Ton; or, Follies of Fashion, was attempted to be introduced upon the Edinburgh theatre.
|
| 2. |
An account of this play, as well as its fate upon the London Stages has already
been given in former papers. Of its real merits or demerits,
it would be improper to say any thing, now that the play
is in the hands of the publick, who are the most competent
judges of whatever is offered either for their instruction
or amusement. One thing, however, may be said, and we do
it without meaning the smallest offence to any part of the
audience which attended on Saturday night, that if the comedy
had not been previously published, there could not have been
sufficient reason to justify the very harsh treatment it
met with on a first representation. To hear it to an end,
before pronouncing the sentence of condemnation, would surely
have been no criminal act of condescension; because though
many present might have read and disapproved of the piece,
still there were others, no doubt, who had not had the same opportunity, and who were therefore entitled to be indulged with a patient
hearing. This, however, was denied them; very few scenes
were allowed to go on without some interruption; but, towards
the end of the third, and beginning of the fourth act, the
house became exceeding clamorous and noisy, that scarce a
word could be heard. It would be doing injustice to the performers
not to mention that they all, without exception, exerted
their utmost abilities in their respective parts; and that
they persevered with a firmness, which the fair Authoress
cannot but applaud, in endeavouring to execute the duty allotted
to them.
|
| 3. |
Finding, however, that every effort proved fruitless; and the actors being, on
several occasions, obliged to quit the stage, Mr. Fennel at
last came forward, that as it never was, nor ever would be
the Manager's desire, to bring any piece before the Edinburgh
audience which did not meet their approbation, and as the present
had unfortunately incurred so much of their displeasure, he
had to assure them, that it never would be again performed.
This address had the desired effect. The audience resumed their
good humour, and Catherine and Petruchio went off with every
mark of approbation and applause. |
| |
[Anon.]. 'Covent-Garden'. The New Lady Magazine (May 1788), rpt. in British Women Playwrights around 1800. 2 pars. 1 June 2004. <http://www.etang.umontreal.ca/bwp1800/essays/oquinn_ton_reviews.html#9> [from The New Lady's Magazine, May, 1788]
Covent-Garden
|
| 1. |
April 8. A new comedy, the avowed production of Lady Wallace's pen, was acted—and though, at the conclusion, it received very numerous marks of the highest
disapprobation, to the disgrace of the management, was fairly
forced on the town two more nights, and then wholly withdrawn.
Of the plot it is impossible to give any account, as, in fact, there was none. Several of
the performers too, on the supposition that it would not
be received favourably, were shamefully imperfect in their
parts, Johnstone in particular. This is a custom deserving
the severest reprobation. The Prologue, my Mr. Jekyll, was
very well written. The Epilogue seemed to turn on nothing,
but merely to give Mrs. Wells an opportunity of showing her
talent for imitation, which is, at best, a despicable one.
For, besides the unfairness and impropriety of it, we may
say with Churchill, 'I hate e'en Garrick thus at second-hand.'
|
| 2. |
On the whole we are glad, for the sake of decency, that this was not well received, for indeed our present female dramatic writers, Mrs. I__d in
particular, seem in their productions, fairly to set modesty
at defiance though we must, in justice, totally free the
Miss Lee's from this charge.
|
| |
[Anon.]. 'Dramatic. The Ton; or, Follies of Fashion'. The Critical Review (May 1788), rpt. in British Women Playwrights around 1800. 4 pars. 1 June 2004. <http://www.etang.umontreal.ca/bwp1800/essays/oquinn_ton_reviews.html#10>
[from The Critical Review, May, 1788]
DRAMATIC.
The Ton; or, Follies of Fashion. A Comedy. As it was acted at the Theatre-Royal, Covent Garden. By Lady Wallace.
8vo. 1s. 6d. Hookham.
|
| 1. |
That Criticism has smoothed his brows, and laid aside his severity, when a lady
sues at his tribunal, confers more honour on his tenderness
than his justice, and may add to his character as a gallant,
at the expense of his impartiality. In reality, a literary
woman is an Amazon, whom it is no disgrace to oppose in the
field; for, when she assumes martial weapons, she must submit
to the laws of war. Lady Wallace has, however, a claim to
our compassion: she has been condemned unheard, or at least
has been heard imperfectly; and, while we would soften, if
it were possible, the severity of the critical code, in favour
of a lady, and an unfortunate one, we cannot silence the
hisses of the theatre, nor can we condemn, on cool examination,
the verdict of her jury.
|
| 2. |
The male coquettes have a powerful party in their favour, for not one satire,
and we remember several attempts, on their follies, has been
permitted to live on the stage. Lady Wallace had, perhaps,
too much courage to be frightened with the spectres of murdered
embryos, or she had too much dependence on her own comic
powers, and extensive interest. Another rock, which proved
fatal to her bark, was her own reputation. Wit was expected
to flash in every line; every thought was to be brilliant,
and every situation truly comic. A sprightly play would have
fallen short of expectations, which were raised very high;
and, unfortunately, spirit and wit have but small share in
this comedy. Genteel comedy, at best, wants poignancy; the
polish of fashion wears away the distinguishing asperities;
and the Follies of Fashion are often insipid, except to those
who feel the force of satire. One party will consequently yawn, and the other oppose.
|
| 3. |
If we were to examine this play critically, we should observe, that the conversations
were too numerous in proportion to the incidents; that they
had little influence on the events, and often were not connected
with them; that time was frequently violated; and that the
most comic situations had lost their influence, from familiarity.
We ought, however, to add, that the characters of the fashionable
people, though seemingly of the same kind, were well discriminated,
and, in one or two instances, strongly contrasted; that the
tale of Julia, the Fanny Mountfort of a novel, whose particular
title we do not recollect, is interesting; that the character
of lord Ormond (the lord Ossory of the work just mentioned)
is drawn with spirit and skill; that the incidents are numerous,
and the conversation, though not sprightly, at least free from
indelicacy, with which it has been charged. The two plots, indeed, are not dextrously united, so as to form one piece. |
| 4. |
Lady Wallace must us for observing, that her play has too many defects to be
admitted on the stage. Yet she has been particularly unfortunate,
that, in consequence of the clamour raised against it, she
has been prevented from taking advantage of judicious criticism.
Many plays, on their first appearance, have been found to be
defective, which have been afterwards amended with good success.
She should remember, that from the days of Horace, the vulgus,
we suppose he meant, in modern language the town, though it,
in a few instances, errs in judgement, generally decides with
justice. The public is a many-headed, and often a capricious
monster; but all it efforts seldom defeat the success of a
truly good play. The utmost that party can do, is to exaggerate
the real errors, so that they may hide the beauties. |
| |
[Anon.]. 'Dramatic. Art 35. The Ton; or Follies of Fashion'. The Monthly Review (May 1788), rpt. in British Women Playwrights around 1800. 1 pars. 1 June 2004. <http://www.etang.umontreal.ca/bwp1800/essays/oquinn_ton_reviews.html#11>
[from The Monthly Review, May, 1788]
Dramatic.
Art.35. The Ton; or Follies of Fashion. A Comedy. As it was acted at the Theatre-Royal, Covent Garden. By Lady Wallace.
8vo. 1s. 6d. Hookham. 1788.
|
| 1. |
To lash the follies and vices of the day, was the object of this Comedy; and
when that task was undertaken by a Lady, who lives in a sphere
that gives her opportunities of seeing what she intended
to represent, the Public might reasonably expect a piece
composed of wit, humour, and genteel dialogue. It seems,
however, that they were disappointed. From the judgement
pronounced at the theatre, the fair Authoress, by her publication,
appeals to the reader in his closet; but, of a play which
has been rejected, it cannot be deemed necessary to give
a regular analysis; and in the present case it would be difficult.
Lady Wallace is candid enough to acknowledge her want of
skill in the mechanism of dramatic writing, stage effect,
and the necessity which there is for constant action. This
confession proceeds from candour of mind. Moral sentences
and sentimental talk will not constitute a comedy, which professes to be an imitation of life and manners, and
should therefore present the several personages engaged in
some pursuit, and incidentally disclosing their tempers,
their humours, and their foibles. This certainly is not the
case with respect to the present play. No main interest is
kept before the eye. Amid a variety of subordinate interests,
not one is made important enough to arrest our attention.
Nothing excites curiosity; nothing impresses us. In every
comedy there should be a principal action, and all episodic,
or inferior concerns, should move with that; sometimes crossing,
accelerating, or retarding the main event; and all either
having an influence on that event, or brought to a conclusion
by it. In this principle of the dramatic art, Lady Wallace
is deficient. The characters are many, but, we think, not
drawn with due strength of colouring. On the whole, however, we see indications of a dramatic genius; and we therefore
recommend to this Lady, before she ventures forth again,
to study the principles of the art, and to see them exemplified
in some of our best comedies. The less she reads of modern
productions the better: a writer may be lead by such a comparison
to be too easily satisfied. Lady Wallace complains, in her
preface, of a party, headed by the Daffodils, Macpharo's,
and Lords Bonton of the day. If that be true, we agree with
her that no play could make head against such a combination:
but this we can add, that it has been our lot to have perused
some modern pieces, acted, as it has been said, with great
applause, which did not appear to us, in sentiment and observation
of the manners, to deserve a longer life than this piece,
which is now no more.
|
|
|
|
|
|
