Pictorial Shakespeare, 1880-1890 - eTheses Repository - University ...

95
himself from such gossip. In December he v/r; ':e to a friend in
Baling about a cable - the purpose of which is not clear -
and other prejudicial activities, apparently having their
source in Irving. Richard Mansfield entertained similar
suspicions - e-cill less cordial ones - about Irving's rivalry.
In 1893 he wrote to Dithmar, the New York Times critic, that
he was"shocked and disgusted" by William Winter's admiration
for Irving at a time when he and others were striving to obtain
recognition for the native product - "Confound these lickspittles"
12
. Mansfield *s quarrel v/ith Winter was made up before
long, but in the course of it Mrs Winter received a very
acrimonious letter* showing the financial grounds of the actor's
grievance:
Irving can play to 536,000 a week - we can barely
play to S4»000 - our share of tlirt is S2 t 400, our
expenses over S3»000. The work of the critics is
bearing fruit - and it's dead sea fruit - Irving
has as usual feted wined and dined & supped and
beseiged the critics - they condemn my Merchant
of Venice to please him & send him the articles
to read and nod over - and v/e starve hero where
v/e have worked so long. I think I could bear it
if he were really great and good and anything but
a charlatan and a fraud.
One of Irving* s acts 0^ unkindness appears to have been his
announcing that he would produce and act in a version of
Dr Jekyll and I.Ir Hyde in London: a direct challenge to ilancficld
who had "created" the dual role in America and in England. To
thic letter is 'appended a reply from ;irs winter, which is
conciliatory in tone but does not, however, clear Irving.
A later letter to her from Llonsfiolu, v/ritten in Columbus,
Ohio on 7 May, 1894 breaks off after the phrase "I hope by now
he has forgotten my" - a page is ni; sine, and the extant
letter continues v;ith an account of Jansfiold's frri-tpe, a
malady from which he habitually suffered.
" he tever trut.. there was in the accusations made by
Barret and anrjfiold, their correspondence with ,;inter and
Dithmar reveals an intimacy between critic and ct.;r-:v n, ; or
thr'; mi^t be supposed to have some danger in it. Similar
ro, rtionships existed between critics and authors, and Ithough
Irving did not produce any of Scott's plays, other n;UTic:crc