THE VOICES OF FAMOUS ACTORS.

Otago Witness, Issue 1856, 8 July 1887, Page 31

THE VOICES OF FAMOUS ACTORS.

To succeed in parts,, the character of which is love, it is necessary that the actor should possess smoothness of tone. This was manifested to a remarkable degree by Barry in his performance of Castalio. For rage and sudden anger, as in Lear and other characters of that kind, a shrill and piercing tone i 8 necessary, and as examples, the, names of Garrick and Irving need scarcely - : t>e mentioned; " "" \ ' ' Quin was rich in possessing the deep tone

'6f majesty. " The manner in which he pronounced the three words' "Portia is dead," thrilled an audience, and has never been equalled. The full sonorous voice, so neces-, ' sary, to the tragedian, would be a disadvantage to the comedian, who should have a voice that is under perfect control, and that can be thrown into a thousand changes ; for these are the qualilies required to express the sudden and various starts of passion that ' make up the beauty of the scenes. Frederic Lemaitre and the two Keeley's excelled in these qualifications. .In its full perfection, and on a proper occasion, the voice of Garrick pierced and struck the ear like the sound of a trumpet. No one could have heard the Alicia of Mrs Cibber, or the , Hermione of Mrs Gregory, without even feeling more than the author did when" he wrote those scenes. Mrs Wof- .' fington wanted only this one requisite to have excelled all the women in the world in the amorous parts of comedy, but all her merit could not atone for that defect. Sweetness of voice is expected from actresses. It is one of the distinctions of the sex. Edmund Kean vigilantly and patiently rehearsed every detail, trying the tone until his ear was satisfied, with the result that, having once regulated them, he never changed his tones. When he was sufficiently sober to stand or speak, he could act his part with the precision of the singer who had thoroughly learned his air. Hence it was that he was always the same. On some nights the voice would be more touching in •'But, oh! the pity of it, Iago!" or more musically forlorn in " Othello's occupation's gone," or more terrible in " Blood, lago ! blood, blood 1" but always the accent and rhythm were unchanged. In the upper range his voice was rather harsh and rasping, but in its lower range it was marvellously musical, and the pathos was exceedingly searching. Partly because of his voice being inflexible, but mainly owing to the insensibility of rhythmic modulation, Charles Kean had a harsher and more rasping voice than his father, and could not deliver a single passage with musical effect. The mechanicalness of his elocution stamped itself on even his best parts. When, as Richard, he delivered the speech, "Now is "the winter of our discontent," it passed unnoticed. No one, however, could forget the look and voice' of the father when repeating the same words. In the early days of Rachel nothing more exquisite could be heard than her elocution. Later on in her career she grew careless, and consequently, she, whose elocution had been incomparable, came at last to gabble and mix up her rhythm till the verses were often unintelligible and generally ineffective. Macready had a very powerful voice, of great compass, and capable of delicate modulation in quiet passages. He had,_ however, a tendency to scream in violent passages. His tones were often exceedingly thrilling, and caused tears to come to the eyes of the audience- The hearer never felt as in the declamation of Charles Kean, and many other actors, that he (Ma-:ready) was speaking words which he did not fully understand. Farren had a penetrating voice, a clear articulation, and a singularly expressive laugh.. He was one of that class of actor whom everybody applauded, but no one went specially to see. Charles Mathews allowed incongruity of character and language to work their own laughable way during his high comedy performances, and everyone knows the success which attended his efforts. Probably — for there is no definite information on the point— Shakespeare was an indifferent actor, owing, undoubtedly, to the want of a sympathetic voice in declamation, at all events his non-success as an actor implies that his voice Avas limited in its range.