| This analysis of the predominant stylistic features of Henry Irving's non-Shakespearean productions advances a twofold argument. First, that Irving based his mature art from 1870 to 1905 on a number of clearly defined, nicely interrelated and practical aesthetic beliefs. Secondly, that Irving consciously evolved four modes of performance, each of which had its distinctive intentions and methods, not only in acting but in staging as well.;The second chapter moves from the general to the specific by providing a comprehensive survey of the four modes of performance in which Irving specialized: contemporary realism; historical realism; a predominantly psychological form of acting; and finally idealistic acting. Irving is compared to other actors in these modes of performance, in order to understand his unique qualities by means of contrast, and in order to determine the complex relationship that existed between the traditional and the original features of his art. Throughout, there are discussions of Irving's specific attitudes towards these four modes of performance, as well as brief accounts of their historical origins.;The three subsequent chapters present detailed re-constructions and analyses of three of the four modes of performance. Chapter Three is concerned with Two Roses (1881), an example of contemporary realism; Chapter Four with Robespierre (1899), an example of historical realism; and Chaper Five with The Bells (1871), an example of a predominantly psychological form of theatre. Included are not only descriptions of Irving's acting, but of the stylistic significance of lighting, settings, costumes, music and ensemble playing. Critical reactions are quoted directly, in order to capture the tone of the period; Irving's annotated study copies of the plays are cited when available; and there are accompanying illustrations. As is the case throughout the study, each re-construction is based on a collation of various kinds of primary and secondary source material culled from private and public collections in Europe and North America.;In the epilogue, Irving is viewed briefly at the end of his career, in relationship both to the nineteenth century and the long continuous tradition of British acting of which he was one of the last representatives. Clearly, Irving was not only an innovator, but a refiner of traditions. Moreover, although he was a remarkable director, he was a remarkable (although very controversial) actor as well. Gradually, by virtue of unrelenting practice, he gained extraordinary control over his mannerisms, poses, gestures, walk, facial expressions and even his voice. His technique therefore harmonised with his subtle and often original conceptions of character, in all four modes of performance in which he was preeminent.;The first chapter prepares for the analysis of these four modes of performance, by examining features common to all of Irving's performances, whatever their controlling style. In particular, it studies his predilection for the detailed and profound analysis of character and the significanrt part that his so-called mannerisms and physical limitations played in either detracting from or enhancing his characterizations. Attention is also given to the prevailing aesthetic attitudes against which he often had to struggle, and to a careful understanding of the kind of critical vocabulary that was most frequently employed in order to evaluate his art. |
