Page:The Elizabethan stage (Volume 3).pdf/138

From Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This page needs to be proofread.

the music-room, so that it could now hold larger scenes, and in fact now became an upper stage and not a mere recess. Adequate lighting from behind could probably be obtained rather more easily here than on the crowded floor below. There is an interesting allusion which I have not yet quoted, and which seems to point to an upper stage of substantial dimensions in the public theatres of about the year 1607. It is in Middleton's Family of Love, itself a King's Revels play.[1] Some of the characters have been to a performance, not 'by the youths', and there 'saw Sampson bear the town-gates on his neck from the lower to the upper stage'. You cannot carry a pair of town-gates into a mere box, such as the Swan drawing shows.

Meanwhile, what of the alcove? I think that it proved too dark and too cramped for the convenient handling of chamber scenes, and that the tendency of the early seventeenth century was to confine its use to action which could be kept shallow, or for which obscurity was appropriate. It could still serve for a prison, or an 'unsunned lodge', or a chamber of horrors. For scenes requiring more light and movement it was replaced, sometimes by the more spacious upper stage, sometimes by the main stage, on to which beds and other properties were carried or 'thrust out', just as they had always been on a less extensive scale for hall scenes. The difficulties of shifting were, on the whole, compensated for by the greater effectiveness and visibility which action on the main scene afforded. I do not therefore think it possible to accept even such a modified version of the old 'alternationist' theory as I find set out in Professor Thorndike's recent Shakespeare's Theater. The older alternationists, starting from the principle, sound enough in itself, of continuous action within an act, assumed that all interior or other propertied scenes were played behind the curtains, and were set there while unpropertied action was played outside; and they deduced a method of dramatic construction, which required the dramatists to alternate exterior and interior scenes so as to allow time for the settings to be carried out.[2] The theory breaks down, not merely because it entails a much more constant

  • [Footnote: suddenly risse out of two white sheets, and acted out of her tiring-house

window'. It appears from Tate Wilkinson's Memoirs (Lawrence, i. 177) that the proscenium balconies were common ground to actors and audience in the eighteenth century.]

  1. Family of Love, I. iii. 101.
  2. The theory is best represented by C. Brodmeier, Die Shakespeare-Bühne nach den alten Bühnenanweisungen (1904); V. Albright, The Shakespearian Stage (1909).