Variety (December 1912)

Record Details:

Something wrong or inaccurate about this page? Let us Know!

Thanks for helping us continually improve the quality of the Lantern search engine for all of our users! We have millions of scanned pages, so user reports are incredibly helpful for us to identify places where we can improve and update the metadata.

Please describe the issue below, and click "Submit" to send your comments to our team! If you'd prefer, you can also send us an email to mhdl@commarts.wisc.edu with your comments.




We use Optical Character Recognition (OCR) during our scanning and processing workflow to make the content of each page searchable. You can view the automatically generated text below as well as copy and paste individual pieces of text to quote in your own work.

Text recognition is never 100% accurate. Many parts of the scanned page may not be reflected in the OCR text output, including: images, page layout, certain fonts or handwriting.

JO VARIETY COMEDY BY JOHN E. HBNSHAW. Comedy is King—Some vaudeville managers before the opening of their first show seem to fear for the success of a hill that boasts comedy throughout, but his capacity audiences generally reassure him that comedy is what they want. That great essential— contrast —is gain- ed on an all-comedy bill, by the different methods employed by the various acts, which, of course, must be discreetly placed. The desired quality is neither spite the other numbers on the bill, and that keen competition that keeps the va- riety actor strung to the highest pitch. There is no such condition in the legi- timate. I regard vaudeville as the cream of theatricals; it is the essence of what per- formers spend years to acquire—concise- ly, it is the kernel, whereas the long, drawn-out legitimate show is the kernel and shell, too. FRANCES Merry Xmas aiid Happy New Year to all. MURIEL and FRANCES. "JUST TWO GIRLS " MURIEL all high brow nor all low comedy. In the many comedy roles I have enacted I find my different methods influenced more or less by my audience, and that although the low comedy methods ni.ty elicit more demonstration in the way of hysterical laughter and guffaws, it docs not compare with the more solid enjoy- ment evinced by the pleased expressions and impressive laughs of the more in- tellectual ones, who are appealed to by a more refined and subtle method. One of the great advantages in vaude- ville, I find, is the prerogative of deliver- ing material as I see fit, without any re- straint, adapting my mode of procedure to prevailing conditions. This freedom to assert one's individuality tends to bring out the best in an actor. Handling comedy in a vaudeville act is a more difficult proposition than in a legitimate show, vaudeville requiring more finesse. In the legitimate, the com- edy is consistently planned for the gen- eral good of the whole piece, and not 10 t><* readjusted as vaudeville acts are each week; whereas, in vaudeville each act must make good, independent of, and de- HOLDEN and HARRON. 'The Messenger Boy and Soubrette " In their eccentric comedy conversazione A young act with a record of two years solid booking with more to come. Direction of NORMAN JEFFERIEB. HOW McINTYRE AND HEATH DO IT This is a talc with a moral—several in fact—to which any quantity of fa- miliar proverbs may be suitably applied. An artistic partnership covering a peri- od of thirty-eight years without a break or even a rift is unusual if not altogether unprecedented. Yet this is the case with James Mc- Intyrc and Tom Heath, blackface come- dians. "How is it," asked a Variety repre- sentative, "you two men have stuck to- gether so long? Have you had any se- rious quarrels, and, if so, what about?" Mr. Heath was at first inclined to be facetious and replied: "We are not afraid to lend each other money." Mr. Mclntyre, on the contrary, accept- ed the interview seriously and at once became thoughtful. Seeing this, Heath immediately fell in with his partner's mood and from then they were earnest. During the visits the artists spoke al- Uinately, never together and not once tecr a 'yes' or a 'no' in any matter per- taining to business. "Gentlemen," said the interviewer, "in a commercial business a trademark and enterprise as well established as yours would live many years after you are gone. If one of you were to die or retire, what would become of the other and of what value would be the reputations you have labored so long to establish?" "Early in our partnership association we discussed the ultimate end of all successful acting alliances. On investigation wc found that the finish was usually the Act ors' Fund or the poorhouse. So we de- termined that each week we would lay aside a certain proportion of our joint income for a real estate investment. The result is that we now own property in nearly every state in the union, with large holdings on Long Island. So, in the event of anything occurring, wc have today independent incomes. "We are even protected against any general slump in the entire real estate market without having recourse to tlvj McINTYRE and HEATH. IN 1174. interrupting each other. They said, in effect: "Whenever a serious question arises we toss up the first coin that is handy and make a decision without resorting to outside advisers or lawyers. For in- stance (this by Mclntyre), Heath on one occasion wanted us to put out a minstrel show and I was in favor of a specialty organization. In the toss I won and a specialty company it was, without any further discussion. By this method we never have been annoyed by any real scraps. "When we joined hands more than thirty-eight years > • ■ were both sin- gle. Then ancf . n *• p greed that in the event euli . ■ >'.■ r> <'*:?*, the women should nevei u » .„ 01 i. '-Pe in our business. We l»av^ «te*i!i.. fl adhered to this rule. From »!»e they have been so trained and in all v.-,?.> years have never been known to volun Fund for assistance, for we are insured in favor of each other with both life and accident insurance policies to amounts that would make the other absolutely in- dependent. "We arrived at these conclusions after numerous talks, based on a survey of the finish of all the popular teams and other combinations of the good old days. As we recall some of them at this moment, off-hand, they were Harrigan and Hart, Baker and Farren, Murray and Mack, Hawley and Buisley, Sheridan and Mack, Delahanty and Hengler, Rogers and McKce, Homer and Holly, Park- hurst and Collins, Ferguson and Mack, Two Johns,. Two Macks, Collins and Moore, Hurley and Marr, Guilfoil and Rourke, Barlow Bros., Emerson, Clarke 1 The Daly Bros., etc. The mo- l he partnership dissolved the tradc- i»;came valueless. All of them were performers and many died broke."