I found my soul, during the action, gradually worked up to the
highest pitch, and felt the exalted passion which all generous minds
conceive at the sight of virtue in distress.... But the ludicrous
epilogue in the close extinguished all my ardour, and made me look
upon all such achievements as downright silly and romantic." To this
letter a reply, signed "Philomedes," appeared in "The Spectator" a few
days later, expressing, in the first place, amazement at the attack
upon the epilogue, and calling attention to its extraordinary success.
"The audience would not permit Mrs. Oldfield to go off the stage the
first night till she had repeated it twice; the second night, the
noise of the _ancoras_ was as loud as before, and she was obliged
again to speak it twice; the third night it was still called for a
second time, and, in short, contrary to all other epilogues, which are
dropped after the third representation of the play, this has already
been repeated nine times." "Philomedes" then points out that, although
the prologue and epilogue were real parts of ancient tragedy, they are
on the English stage distinct performances, entirely detached from the
play, and in no way essential to it.
Pages:
706
707
708
709
710
711
712
713
714
715
716
717
718
719
720
721
722
723
724
725
726
727
728
729
730