{"id":12483,"date":"2019-08-19T15:38:03","date_gmt":"2019-08-19T15:38:03","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/pemberley.com\/?post_type=kbe_knowledgebase&p=12483"},"modified":"2019-08-19T15:38:04","modified_gmt":"2019-08-19T15:38:04","slug":"family-theatricals","status":"publish","type":"kbe_knowledgebase","link":"https:\/\/pemberley.com\/?kbe_knowledgebase=family-theatricals","title":{"rendered":"Family Theatricals"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

Family Theatricals<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Private theatricals were all the rage during the late 18th century\/ early 19th century.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Certainly, Jane Austen reflected this craze, when she portrayed the young people in Mansfield Park being consumed with the \u201c itch for acting.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

No one knows\nexactly why. But certainly from about 1770 genteel British society was affected\nby the urge to perform plays in private theatres.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

And they had to\nbe \u201cprivate\u201d and amateur; unlicensed public performances were illegal .The\nLicensing Act of 1737 stipulated a fine of \u00a350 for anyone convicted of acting\nfor \u201chire, gain or reward\u201d in any play or theatrical performance not previously\nallowed by royal patent or Licensed by the Lord Chamberlain.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Marc Baer in his excellent book ” Theatre and Disorder in Late Georgian London\u201d theorizes that private may have been preferable to many of the upper classes who wished to avoid the riots which were so prevalent a part of theatre going, in the 18th century.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Also that it\nwas a step by the upper classes to distance themselves from the increasingly\nplebeian nature of performances at the two Patent theatres in London. They were once concerned only with\nproductions of \u201cserious\u201d plays and opera, but were increasingly incorporating\nelements of pantomine, and melodrama, burletta and pure spectacle into the\nevening\u2019s entertainment. In short the evenings were becoming vulgar. Horrors!<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cIt was beyond\neverything vulgar I ever saw\u2026the people were hollowing and talking to each\nother from the pit to the gallery, and fighting and throwing oranges at each\nother. The play itself was a representation of all the low scenes in London… a sort of very\nlow Beggar\u2019s Opera, but it is impossible to describe the sort of enthusiasm\nwith which it was received by the people who seems to enjoy a representation of\nscenes, in which, from their appearance, one might infer they frequently\nshared.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

(extract from a\nletter written by Mrs Harriet Arbuthnot, writing about seeing a performance of\nLife in London\nby Pierce Egan and George Cruickshank at the Adelphi Theatre in 1822.)<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Some of the more prosperous amateur performers constructed very elaborate private theatres – some were decidedly amateur.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Paula Byrne\nwrites in her bookJane\nAusten and the Theatre<\/em> remarks;<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Makeshift\ntheatre mushroomed all over England\nfrom drawing room to domestic buildings. At the more extreme end of the theatrical\ncraze member of the gentrified classes and the aristocracy built their own\nscaled down imitations of London\nplayhouses. The most famous was that erected in the late 1770s by the\nspendthrift Earl of Barrymore, at a reputed cost of \u00a360,000.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Barrymore’s elaborate private theatre was modelled on Vanburgh’s Kings Theatre in the Haymarket. It supposedly seated seven hundred<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

We know from records of the very elaborate and private theatricals at Richmond House – home to the Duke of Richmond (and his daughters, the Lennox sister, subjects of Stella Tillyard’s book Aristocrats<\/a><\/em>) that these private theatricals could be very professional indeed. (See Private Theatricals at Richmond House<\/a>)<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This craze for theatricals was reflected in the literature of the time. Jane Austen was not the only author who used the craze in her work. Amanda Vickery in her book the Gentleman\u2019s Daughter<\/a><\/em> remarks;<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cThe donning of\ndisguise and the doffing of decorum might be thrilling for participants but it\ncould be disquieting to attentive observers, as novels such as Jane Austen\u2019s Mansfield Park (1814) Maria Edgeworth\u2019s Patronage\n(1814) and Fanny Burney\u2019s The Wanderer (1814) dramatically demonstrated.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In a note to\nthis part of her text she adds;<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cThe narrative\npossibilities inherent in amateur performance were seized on by novelists, but\nassessments of the morality of female exhibition differed. Fanny Price piously\nrefuses to take part in Lovers Vows, which rebounds to her credit\u2026The pure and\nperfect Caroline Percy declines an invitation to take part in Zara, which in\nthe event demonstrates the vanity of her rival, yet Caroline remains a\nsympathetic member of the audience\u2026On the other hand, the \u201cincognita\u201d is\nallowed to give a dignified performance as Lady Townley in The Provoked Husband,\nwhich convinces many in the audience of her gentility:\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Opinions as to\nthe desirability and correctness of \u201cpolite\u201d females appearing on the stage\ncertainly varied as evidenced from these novels. A position certainly reflected\nby Jane Austen in Mansfield\n Park.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Certainly,\nmembers of the growing Evangelical Movement in the Church of England voiced\ngrave concerns about such performances.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Consider the attitude shown by the Reverend Thomas Gisbourne in his work An Enquiry into the Duties of the Female Sex<\/a><\/em> (1797): he took a stance very much against this type of theatrical performance. Remember- Actresses were still not quite “respectable\u201d at this time in history, despite the success of actresses such as Mrs Siddons, who was a favourite with King George III and Queen Charlotte.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

For some\nyears past the custom of acting in plays in private theatres, fitted up by\nindividuals of fortune, had occasionally prevailed. It is a custom liable to\nobjection among others: that it is almost certain to prove, in its effects,\ninjurious to the female performers. Let it be admitted that theatres of this\ndescription no longer present the flagrant impropriety of ladies bearing apart\nin the drama in conjunction with professional players. Let it be admitted, that\nthe drama reflected will in its language and conduct always be irreprehensible.\nLet it even be admitted, that many theatrical talents will not hereafter gain\nadmission upon such a Stage for men of ambiguous or worse than ambiguous\ncharacter. Take the benefit of all these favourable circumstances; yet what is\neven then the tendency of such an amusement? To encourage vanity; to excite a\nthirst of applause and admiration of attainments which, if the are to be thus\nexhibited, it would commonly have been far better for the individual not to\npossess; to destroy diffidence, by the unrestrained familiarity with the\npersons of the other sex, which inevitably results from being joined with them\nin the drama; to create a general fondness for the perusal of plays, of which\nso many are unfit to be read; and for attending dramatic representations, of\nwhich so many are unfit to be witnessed\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Jane Austen read this work, on Cassandra\u2019s recommendation, in 1805. She had expected to dislike it, but surprised herself by approving of it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

But the performances\nin which we are interested were produced by very respectable people in modest\ncircumstances. I refer to the plays produced first in the dining parlour, and\nlater the barn, at Steventon rectory. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Although\nthe family theatricals at Steventon ended in 1789,that was not the last time\nthat Jane Austen took part in family theatricals.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In\n1805 after the death of their father, Jane and Cassandra stayed at Godmersham,\nhome of their brother Edward Austen Knight.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Anne\nSharp, Edward\u2019s children\u2019s governess formed a strong friendship with JA at this\ntime; a friendship which was to remain strong throughout the rest of JA\u2019s life.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

While\nat Godmersham they performed plays written by each other and Miss Sharpe\nusually obliged by playing the male roles.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201c\nWednesday 26th June.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

We\nhad a whole holiday. Aunts and Grandmama played at school with us. Aunt C was\nMiss Teechum the Governess, Aunt Jane Miss Popham the teacher, Aunt Harriet,\nSally the Housemaid, Miss Sharpe the Dancing Master, the apothecary and the\nsergeant, Grandmama Betty Jane the pie woman and Mamma the Bathing Woman, they\ndressed in character and we had a most delightful day. After dessert we acted a\nplay called “Virtue Rewarded”. Anna was the Duchess of St Albans I\nwas the Fairy Serena and Fanny Cage a shepherdess \u201cMona\u201d. We had a bowl of\nsyllabub in the evening\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

From Fanny Knight\u2019s journals: see “Almost Another Sister” by Margaret Wilson. Paula Byrne suggests Anne Shape may have written this play especially to entertain the children.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

There\nwas in existence a play called Irish Hospitality: or Virtue Rewarded by Charles\nDibdin, but the characters in that play differs from the ones Fanny Knight\nlisted.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cVirtue Rewarded\u201d is also the subtitle of Pamela<\/a><\/em> by Samuel Richardson.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

On\n30th July Fanny wrote;<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Aunts\nC+J, Anna, Edward, George, Henry, William and myself acted \u201cThe Spoilt Child\nand Innocence Rewarded\u201d, afterwards we danced and had a most delightful\nevening\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The\nSpoilt Child was a play written by Issac Bickerstaff, and the role of \u201cLittle\nPickle\u201d contained within it was one made famous by Dorothea Jordan on the\nstage.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Clearly\nthough at his time Jane Austen was reading Thomas Gisbourne’s Enquiryinto the Duties of the\nFemale Sex, <\/em>it had no\napparent bearing upon her participating and involving children in private\ntheatricals, despite the rather damming passage, previously quoted in the\nPrivate Theatricals post;<\/p>\n\n\n\n

For\nsome years past the custom of actin plays in private theatres, fitted up by\nindividuals of fortune, had occasionally prevailed. It is a custom liable to\nobjection among others: that it is almost certain to prove, in its effects,\ninjurious to the female performers. Let it be admitted that theatres of this\ndescription no longer present the flagrant impropriety of ladies bearing a part\nin the drama in conjunction with professional players. Let it be admitted that\nthe drama reflected will in its language and conduct always is irreprehensible.\nLet it even be admitted, that many theatrical talents will not hereafter gain\nadmission upon such a Stage for men of ambiguous or worse than ambiguous\ncharacter. Take the benefit of all these favourable circumstances; yet what is\neven then the tendency of such an amusement? To encourage vanity; to excite a\nthirst of applause and admiration of attainments which, if they are to be thus\nexhibited, it would commonly have been far better for the individual not to\npossess; to destroy diffidence, by the unrestrained familiarity with the\npersons of the other sex, which inevitably results from being joined with them\nin the drama; to create a general fondness for the perusal of plays, of which\nso many are unfit to be read; and for attending dramatic representations, of\nwhich so many are unfit to be witnessed\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

It seems to me,\nshe could make the distinction between \u201cinnocent\u201d productions, and those where\nulterior motives were being employed by the individuals concerned. \u2026 <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Family Theatricals Private theatricals were all the rage during the late 18th century\/ early 19th century. Certainly, Jane Austen reflected this craze, when she portrayed the young people in Mansfield Park being consumed with the \u201c itch for acting.\u201d No … Continue reading →<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":5,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","template":"","kbe_taxonomy":[256,262,269],"kbe_tags":[515,444],"class_list":["post-12483","kbe_knowledgebase","type-kbe_knowledgebase","status-publish","hentry","kbe_taxonomy-arts-leisure","kbe_taxonomy-jane-austens-life","kbe_taxonomy-mansfield-park","kbe_tags-private-theatricals","kbe_tags-theatricals"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/pemberley.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/kbe_knowledgebase\/12483","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/pemberley.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/kbe_knowledgebase"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/pemberley.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/kbe_knowledgebase"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/pemberley.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/5"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/pemberley.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=12483"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/pemberley.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/kbe_knowledgebase\/12483\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":12485,"href":"https:\/\/pemberley.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/kbe_knowledgebase\/12483\/revisions\/12485"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/pemberley.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=12483"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"kbe_taxonomy","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/pemberley.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fkbe_taxonomy&post=12483"},{"taxonomy":"kbe_tags","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/pemberley.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fkbe_tags&post=12483"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}