SALARIES OF STARS

Greymouth Evening Star, 27 December 1928, Page 10

SALARIES OF STARS

PAYMENT AT THE HALLS. Mr Edgar Wallace, the author of more than a hundred sensational novels and 20 “crook” plays, is his own theatrical manager in London. He finances the production of his own plays, because he found early in 'his career as a playwright that those who find the money for producing plays take most of the jrofits, and leave comparatively little for the author. His first great success on the London stage was “The Ringer,” out of which he made £6000; but the manager look £20,000 as his share of the profits. But Mr Wallace as a theatrical manager finds that star actors want big salaries that cut into the profits of a successful play, and accelerate the bankruptcy of an unsuccessful one. Writing in the “London Morning Post,” to which he contributes articles three times a week, Mr Wallace says : “The other day I was talking to a brilliant young actress. She is a lady with unusual gifts, and in a certain type of play 1 doubt if she can be bettered. I have a very strong personal liking for her and my predilection is generally shared by the public. Naturally we discussed plays and plans, and I mentioned the possibility of her appearing in a play of mine.’ “ ‘What are your terms?’ I asked, a little awkwardly, because I do not like to discuss money with beautiful leading ladies. “ ‘Oh, s/he said, ‘so much per cent of the gross takings, with a guarantee of so many hundreds a week and 20 per cent of Hie profits-’ “Because I was a polite man T did not ask her whether Hie author got anything, and whether Hie man who financed the play (which in this case would be I) would have any return for his outlay. 1 didn’t ask these things, because T knew it was unnecessary to ask. The author would get his fees; 'he manager would, with a bit of luck, make just enough money to pay off the production, unless the piece was an enormous success.

“I spoke to a w’ell known actor a few months ago and asked him whether we could do any kind of business together. He said yes he thought we could. He wanted a percentage of the gross takings, a guarantee, etc.,' etc. “In England you can. count on the fingers of one hand the actors and actresses who draw money into a theatre, and who can keep an .indifferent play running for three months. I do not refer, of course, to to such great vaudeville artists as Lauder, Robey, Merson and Bobby Howes; they are in themselves solo attractions. I am speaking more of the legitimate and the musical comedy stage.

“Some of the salaries which are being paid and offered nowadays are impossible. I know of one lady who Lakes £4OO a week and has taken £6OO. t know of another lady who would laugh at you if you offered her anything less than £3OO. In England, in my humble judgment, there are not ten actors and actresses, who are worth more than £5O a week to any management in any play. “The terrible tiling is that very few actors or actresses who have received, say, £7O a week, will ever take a penny less, however badly they may need money ; and I have watched, I don’t know how many, people disappear from the West End of London, have seen their careers ruined because of their refusal to go back by so much as a penny on their best salaries. “It is a consequence of this salary fetish that we have been deprived of a great deal of attractive acting. There are names which appear at rare intervals on the playbills. It is a mystery to the public why they are not to be seen constantly in London. The truth is that managements cannot afford to pay them. A salary list with a couple of stars is more foimidable than the rent.’’

VARIETY ACTORS. Theatrical salaries in London have risen since the war, partly owing to the increase in the cost of living and partly to the fact that successful actors and actresses live more luxuriously than they did in the previous generation. It is only 50 years ago since Henry Irving, as leading man at the Lyceum Theatre before he went into management on his own account, received a salary of £35 a week, which was then regarded as princely remuneration. To-day there are many actors wflio' are able to command more than £35 a week, but despite the lament of Mr Wallace the number who can command more than £2OO a week is very few. Even on the variety stage, where salaries for stars have always been higher than on the legitimate stage, there are very few actors receiving more than £2OO a week. Three years ago when the question of the salaries paid to stars of the variety stage was under discussion, in connec-

tion with the slump in variety which followed the success of revues, Mr Fred Russell, speaking as one with authority, gave some interesting information abofit salaries of variety actors in England in order to correct, tho widespread impression that the depression in the variety theatres was line in part to excessive salaries paid to stars, lie stated that there were only about a dozen British, wiriety artists earning over £2OO a week, two dozen who earned between £lOO and £2OO, four dozen between £5O and £lOO, and a great many between £3O and £5O. The great bulk of the profession earned between £lO and £4O a week, but very few, even at the top of the profession, were engaged all the year round. He said an artist was very lucky if he got 25 weeks’ work in a year, and in most cases half the salary was swallowed up in expensesThere were over 5000 variety artists in Great Britain, and if every variety theatre played its full complement of variety turns at more than 400 turns could be put on each week.

There have been occasions when a variety star has been paid as much as £lOOO a week, and during the theatrical boom in London in the latter pari of the war, salaries of £6OO to £BOO were paid to several artists. The largest sum ever paid to a variety star, for a week’s appearance was £2172, received by Sir Harry Lander. But on that, occasion he was mi half-shares with the management of the Glasgow Theatre, at which he appeared. It is of interest to recall that when Harry Lauder made his first appearance, on. a London stage in February, 1901, he was paid £8 a week, and the engagement was limited to four weeks. This was at the Pavilion Theatre- He was engaged for the Christmas season that year at the same theatre at the same salary, the engagement being for eight weeks. Next Christmas season he had a nine weeks’ engagement at £9 a

week, and he reappeared at the same theatre in 1903 at £lO a week. Less than thirty years ago the aggregate salaries paid to all the artists on the programme of any of the variety theatres in Loudon was less than the salary paid in Hie war boom to single artists at the top of the bill. Air Frank Glenister. who lias been connected with the Pavilion Theatre for over 40 years, records that on Easter Monday, 1901. the Pavilion had a star programme of 25 turns, which included George Robey, George Mozart, 'lorn Me NaughHfjr, George Lashwood, Harry Randall, the Brothers Griffiths, T. ,E. Dunville, ami Louis Bradfield. the week’s salary lor the 25 turns was £323 LO/, and the highest salary was £5O for the joint turn of Messrs Dunville and Bradfield, who were accompanied on the stage by Six Little Maidens. «■ When the stars of Hie legitimate stage in London began to appear at variety theatres in short one-act plays, they earned big salaries, but their engagements were only for a few weeks. The highest salary was £lOOO a week paid to Sarah Bernhardt for appearing at the Coliseum, the largest variety theatre ir. London. Sir Herbert Tree also acted at a variety theatre, the Palace, but did not receive anything like £lOOO a wek. Sir George Alexander, the actor-manager, who produced “The Second Mrs Tanqueray,” “Lady Windermere’s Fan,” “ the Importance of Being Earnest,’’ and other successful plays, succumbed to an offer of £250 a week to play the leading part in a Drury Lane melodrama.