"Sherlock Holmes" An Exciting Play
"Sherlock Holmes" An Exciting Play is an article written by Sidney Sharp published in The World (New York) on 7 november 1899.
This is a review of the Sherlock Holmes play performed at the Garrick Theatre (New York, USA) between 6 november 1899 and 16 june 1900.
"Sherlock Holmes" An Exciting Play
Judith Berolde in "Sherlock Holmes" at The Garrick.
Gillette's Dramatization of Conan Doyle's Hero a Certain Success.
THE PLOT IS DISJOINTED.
But the Leading Character Overshadows Everything and Is Admirably Presented.
ORIGINAL AND ENTERTAINING.
There Are a Number of Brilliant Scenes, and the Acting Is Excellent.
William Gillette' new play, "Sherlock Holmes," founded on characters and incidents in Conan Doyle's widely read series of detective stories, was performed last night at the Garrick Theatre. That it will have a large measure of popularity there can be no doubt. It is full of exciting moments well conceived and well carried out; it contains some amusing bits of characterization, and it is most effectively acted in nearly all parts.
The lion's share of honors justly fell to Gillette both as playwright and as actor. The task he undertook of combining and expanding into a four-act play a number of descriptive episodes, whose chief is a subtle ingenuity of reasoning was not easy. It required almost as much dramatic instinct and ability as the construction of an entirely new work. It is probably true, moreover, that he would have made a better play by applying the same amount of talent to a dramatic subject, instead of a literary one, and worked out an idea of his own conception.
"Sherlock Holmes," inspite of its almost certain prosperity as a theatrical enterprise, is at bottom a rather disjointed, improbable and incomplete play —not to be compared for an instant with "Secret Service" or "Held by the Enemy," two strong works of Gillette's own creation. It has no central action, properly speaking; its love story is sketchy and unimportant, and the processes of reasoning with which it deals are frequently so obscure as to appear wholly fanciful and unintelligible to an audience that has not been especially prepared in advance.
To offset these very real defects, it presents a very original and extremely entertaining character in the person of its hero. A man who is quiet in manner, as cool as steel and as brave as a regiment — who sees everything, knows everything, assumes disguises and invariably turns the tables on his enemies at just the right time and in just the right way, is an extremely agreeable person to follow about.
Gillette plays the part in his own repressed, inimitable way. He carries conviction and sympathy with him, where other equally talented actors might excite only incredulity. His smooth-shaven face is unusually intelligent, forcible and attractive. His natural mannerisms fit in naturally with the biase eccentricities of the wonderful detective as portrayed by Doyle and enhance the value of each trifling detail. When he smokes his pipes and cigars, jabs himself with the hypodermic needle and lounges drowsily on his cushions, with a piercing intelligence always at work, Gillette and Sherlock Holmes are one and the same.
That is the greatest merit of the play as performed and it's certain assurance of popularity. There are some excellent scenes of dialogue, too, where Holmes has a chance to display all his witty infallibility against doughty adversaries and dangerous circumstances. bright lines are frequent and characteristic, and nearly all the points all carry home. The best of these scenes occur in the second act, in Holmes's lodgings, and form a little series of brilliant mental fireworks. Dr. Watson, the "buttons" and the faithful assistant detective come in one after another to be dazzled by the only Holmes. Finally, the master criminal Moriarty enters most ominously, and the best situation of the play is worked out when the two great minds join battle, with ready revolvers waiting their chance.
Moriarty's connection with the plot is mentsnot very clear, but his plans to exterminate Holmes supply most of the action. With the aid of his subordinates he lays one trap after another, only to be outmatched at the critical moments and end finally in ignominious defeat.
The thread of the story to which Moriarty is attached shows Holmes attempting to obtain possession of a packet of letters which compromise a royal personage. These are in the hands of a tender but rather vindictive heroine, whose sister has been ruined and who sees in the letters a means of revenge. Holmes gets them from her in the first act, but returns them at once, owing to a sentimental impulse, Then the villainess and the villains attempt to use the letters as a means of blackmail, while Holmes works to get them again. His purpose concerning them is not very clear. But in the end he gives the letters back to the girl and she gives them back to him. The final picture of the girl in Holmes's arms with a calcium light on them, in surrounding darkness is of a curious effect.
Katherine Florence was charming as the heroine. She was lovely to look at and acted with tenderness and charm. Judith Berolde acted with spirited cruelty as the villainess and illumined the role with her ample and resplendent beauty. Ruben Fax, Master McArdle and George Wessels gave wholly excellent performances in character parts.
SIDNEY SHARP.
