Should an Actress marry?
Haß a lovely creature the recognised privilege of placing it beyond the right of universal mankind to admire her? This is the" question jealous Parisians ask in print and xn private when one of their popular beauties assumes the obligations of marriage ; and never, perhaps, was this query more persistently propounded, more vigorously assailed and defended than on the occasion of the marriage of Mddle. Sybil Sanderson a little time ago. 'Figaro,' the most courtly of papers, took upon itself the task of upbraiding the graceful artiste for thus deserting her cohorts of hopeful lovers. How Mdlle Sanderson's associates on the stage WQuld accept the interference, and what their idea might be upon a matter so momentous, was promptly made known by their frank expressions. Everyone among them is so charming in personality that the incumbrance of a husband is probably more difficult to avoid than to acquire. Maile Leonie Yahne is, at the same time, one of the most beautiful of Parisian actresses and one of the .most prominent. *An artiste marry,' said j&fdlle. Yahne, 'and concern herself with a husband and housekeeping ! Is it possible ? Listen to what we have to do. In the morning we must exercise in the open air, with perhaps a call at the dressmaker's, the milliner's, or the bootmaker's. In the afternoon we have rehearsal until 6 o'clock. At half -past 7we must be in our dressing-room preparing for the night performance. We have an hour and a half to ourselves during the day. And all this ie for what ? To secure a small quantity of, self-satisfaction, because we haye trained ourselves to portray properly certain characters. And when we meet a man of the world of unusual intelligence and kindly disposition, who iB able to give us the luxury •we have become more or less accustomed to, and who makes us susceptible to hia attractions, then,l understand, we quit the theatre, our associates, success, ovations, everything, and consecrate our lives exclusively to the fireside. Oh no, there is nothing in it.' Mdlle. Charlotte Wyns, star of the Opera Comique, disposes of the affair in a few words : 'My idea is that those connected with the theatre should not marry. An artistic life is the antithesis of a conjugal life.' Mdlle. Paulette Filliaux, of the Theatre des Nouveautes, is terse and very French : 'Should an artist* marry/ 'No.' 'Why? Because a woman should lje true to one lover. The public is the great lover of the artiste ; she owes it to herself that she should give her love, her coquetry, her preference to it.' Mdlle. Angele Heraud, a fascinating artiste of the variety stage, is emphatic and original in her opposition : 'No; an actress should not marry; she thereby loses her prestige. I wish that a particular part of the city might be reserved for us ; there we could live by ourselves,far from the profane. The public could only see us when we were on our pedestal -the boards. There would be total ignorance of our private life. What opinion can the public have of us when, sec ing us in the eclat of our talent, it knows that we are married, and after having )>een Phedre, Camille or Cleopatra, we go home to nurse babies and change their clothes,! After such a formidable front of unanswerable arguments why an artiste should Remain single it seems hopeless to expect that any had married, as it would require a rare (juality of courage for ope of the etttfr-
hood to fiy in the face of unanimous opposition and take a husband. However, a womon has been found who dared public resentment by possessing a husband. Madame Louise Grandjean has distinguished herself at the Grand Opera, is strikingly handsome, and looks upon marriage as eminently respectable and desirable. — 'Ji.A.P.'
Permanent link to this item
Southland Times, Southland Times, Issue 14294, 11 March 1899
Should an Actress marry? Southland Times, Issue 14294, 11 March 1899
Using This Item
See our copyright guide for information on how you may use this title.