William Gillette in "Sherlock Holmes" at the New National
William Gillette in "Sherlock Holmes" at the New National is an article published in The Washington Post on 20 november 1900.
About the play Sherlock Holmes at the New National Theatre, Washington, DC, USA.
William Gillette in "Sherlock Holmes" at the New National
Conan Doyle's celebrated detective appeared upon the stage of the New National Theater last night in the person of William Gillette, and not one person in the capacity-audience found the least flaw in either his mental or physical reproduction. Those who have read the book possibly expected, as is the case with so many stage versions of popular books, that the personification would fall short of the original literary creation. In only one respect does the Gillette detective disappoint one. He gets married instead of being hurled down into an Alpine abyss with Prof. Moriarty, the arch-criminal. There is a story that Mr. Gillette received from Dr. Doyle carte blanche as to what should be done in staging the detective, Dr. Doyle closing with the words: "You can marry him or murder him." So Mr. Gillette in making his play — the scheme of it is original, by the way, and very ingenious — decided to make the famous detective marry. Passion is rather an unexplored field for Mr. Holmes, and it is a queer sensation to hear his cocaine-soaked, hard, cold, reasoning, and self-posessed man make love to a pretty girl. Mr. Gillette knows it is unwise to expect an audience to sympathize with sentiment when it came to see the stage detective, so he sensibly makes the love interest a very subordinate one, culminating in the last act with a declaration of love for the young lady who has been rescued from the scoundrels.
The scenario of the play is an original creation by Mr. Gillette, who, taking the two principal characters in Mr. Doyle's work, and many disconnected incidents, has welded all together in a consistent, coherent play, highly melodramatic at all times, intensely thrilling every second, yet thoroughly enjoyable. Aside from the actual doings of the big gang of villains on the stage, and the efforts of Sherlock Holmes to checkmate them, there is an atmosphere of impending danger, which keeps one on edge with excitement, which is certainly justified. Act one shows Miss Faulkner, a young lady who possesses papers worth a fortune to blackmailers, in the hands of a couple of crooks. The girl has hidden the papers, and refuses to reveal their hiding place. Enter Sherlock Holmes. He raps on the floor twice, his assistant, in disguise as the butler, knocks over a lamp, every one cries "Fire!" the villains run to the window, and Miss Faulkner to her precious papers, which the great detective immediately seizes, only to generously restore them a moment later to their rightful owner, Miss Faulkner, with whom he at once falls in love.
Act 2 introduced Prof. Moriarty, the clever intellectual scoundrel, who fought Holmes with his own weapons of deduction and reasoning. Prof. Moriarty and his gang plan to kill Holmes. In the next scene Moriarty calls on Holmes to send him on a pleasant little journey across the Styx, but of course Holmes is triumphant. Then he permits himself to be drawn into a trap, where he arrives just in time to make the villains stand aside and let Miss Faulkner, their prisoner, escape with him. Then the scene changes to the rooms of Dr. Watson, where Moriarty and his principal crooks are gathered in one at a time. Finale, love scene between the great detective and the fair Miss Faulkner.
To say that Gillette realizes Sherlock Holmes as could no other actor called to mind sums up the matter of his individual performance. The intellectual side of Sherlock Holmes is portrayed by suggestion and deed just as though the original had stepped from between the covers of the book. The same cannot be said for Prof. Moriarty. That splendid scheming rascal evoked our admiration as Dr. Doyle drew him. Mr. George Wessells, who undertakes to revive the professor, fails to give us the real Moriarty, who accomplished the final overthrow of the book detective.
This may be the fault of Gillette in writing the character, and it may be the fault of Mr. Wessells, who presents the usual conventional, old-fashioned melodrama villain, groveling and sneering in turn. Moriarty was a man essentially in the same intellectual class as Holmes, but this Prof. Moriarty is so distinctly his inferior that even the effect of contrast between the two characters is lost. However, Mr. Wessells makes a great popular hit with the gallery, which, in its way, is well deserved.
Miss Olive Oliver, well remembered from last summer's stock company, received a pleasant greeting. She portrays an adventuress and all-around villainess most admirably. Miss Maude Fealy, the young girl who last season came attired in the classic robes of "Quo Vadis?" now makes a dainty and charming young heroine in distress. Miss Fealy is said to be but seventeen; at any rate, she is very young to be playing a leading lady role. But her performance is excellent. Reuben Fax made a good associate detective, Frederick Truesdell was a genial and acceptable Dr. Watson, Ralph Delmore was good as the first assistant villain, and Henry McArdle made quite a hit as an office boy. The other characters were all well handled, the supply of villains being large and capable.
Mr. Gillette has a great play.
