The Second Mrs Tanqueray

For those interested in The Second Mrs Tanqueray, here’s a fuller description of the edition of the play that covers virtually every aspect of the play and its first production.

The Second Mrs Tanqueray

Written by: Arthur Wing Pinero
Edited by: J.P. Wearing

Series: Broadview Editions

Publication Date: January 01, 2007
216pp • Paperback
ISBN: 9781551116877 / 1551116871

The Second Mrs. Tanqueray was the theatrical sensation of the London stage in 1893. It established Pinero as the leading English dramatist of serious social issues, and created a star out of Mrs. Patrick Campbell in the title role. The play recounts the marriage of a “woman with a past” and how it fails because of the double standard of morality applied unequally and hypocritically by Victorian society to men and women.

This Broadview edition includes a thoroughly revised text based on the author’s manuscript, the prompt copy for the first production, and the published first edition; it also incorporates pertinent stage directions from the first production. The critical introduction examines all facets of the play and its production, and the appendices make accessible a wide variety of hard-to-find contemporary contextual materials related to the play.

Comments:

“Although I have known this play for many years, J.P. Wearing’s introduction sheds new light on many interesting aspects of the piece, which I look forward to teaching afresh with the benefit of this text. The footnotes and the supplementary material all help in understanding the play, placing it in the social and legal context of its day. Not that it is a mere period piece; Pinero’s skill as a playwright is impressive, and one hopes that this edition will encourage new productions.” – Richard Foulkes, University of Leicester

“A century and more after the fact, A.W. Pinero’s most penetrating play, The Second Mrs. Tanqueray, has now been given a full-dress evaluative and contextual editorial treatment that does complete justice to its subject. J.P. Wearing, editor of Pinero’s letters, has brought his finely honed scholarly skills and broad knowledge of English theatre and culture to the task of presenting the single most authoritative text of Pinero’s play in existence and surrounding it with several sets of informative critical, social, and cultural writing, along with a comprehensive introduction, chronology, and bibliography. An immense amount of research lies behind this enterprise, and a great range of potential readers, from undergraduate and graduate students to historians and critics, will be the beneficiaries.” – Joseph Donohue, Professor Emeritus, University of Massachusetts

J.P. Wearing is Professor Emeritus of English at the University of Arizona. He is the editor of The Collected Letters of Sir Arthur Pinero (1974) and has published widely on nineteenth-century drama.

Table of Contents: [Back to Top]

Acknowledgements

Introduction

Arthur Wing Pinero: A Brief Chronology

A Note on the Text

The Second Mrs. Tanqueray: A Play in Four Acts

Appendix A: Pinero on Drama

1. From T.H.L., “How I Construct My Plays: A Chat with Mr. Pinero,” Sketch (1893)
2. Pinero, “The Modern British Drama,” Theatre (June 1895)
3. From Pinero, Robert Louis Stevenson: The Dramatist (1903)
4. From William Archer, Real Conversations (1904)
5. From Pinero, “Robert Browning as a Dramatist,” Browning’s Centenary (1912)
6. From Pinero, “Foreword,” Two Plays (1930)

Appendix B: The Second Mrs. Tanqueray, The Golden Butterfly, and the Albany

Appendix C: Social Background

1. From Caroline Norton, A Letter to the Queen on Lord Chancellor Cranworth’s Marriage and Divorce Bill (1855)
2. From the Divorce and Matrimonial Act (1857)
3. From John Ruskin, “Of Queens’ Gardens” (1865)
4. Eliza Lynn Linton, “The Girl of the Period,” Saturday Review (14 March 1868)
5. From A. St. John Adcock, “Leaving the London Theatres,” Living London (1901)
6. From Emily Constance Cook, “The London Season,” London and Environs (1897-98)
7. “Police,” The Times (5 November 1895)
8. “The Charge Against Mr. George Alexander,” The Times (6 November 1895)
9. “School Teacher’s Suicide: Letters from a Married Man,” The Times (29 June 1920)

Appendix D: Contemporary Reactions to The Second Mrs. Tanqueray

1. L.F.A., Illustrated London News (3 June 1893)
2. William Archer,World (31 May 1893)
3. Illustrated Sporting and Dramatic News (3 June 1893)
4. Punch (10 June 1893)
5. Saturday Review (3 June 1893)
6. T.H.L., “A Chat with Mrs. Patrick Campbell,” Sketch (7 June 1893)
7. From Yorkshire Post (22 September 1893)
8. From T.W.M. Lund, The Second Mrs. Tanqueray: What? And Why? (1894)
9. From Bernard Shaw, Saturday Review (23 February 1895)
10. From H. Barton Baker, History of the London Stage and Its Famous Players (1576-1903) (1904)

Appendix E: Dramatic Techniques

1. The Original Closing Scene to Pinero’s The Profligate (1889)
2. The Performed Closing Scene of the First Production of The Profligate (1889)
3. From Henry Arthur Jones, Act 4, The Liars (1897)

Select Bibliography

Ewan McGregor as Iago on BBC

Ewan McGregor’s performance as Iago (with Chiwetel Ejiofor as Othello) can be heard on BBC Radio 3 Sunday 4 May 2008 20:00-22:45. Details available at: http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio3/dramaon3/pip/lo0mw/    (copy and paste).

See The Shakespeare Diaries.

Macbeth Act 2.3.1-57

The drunken Porter’s opening soliloquy (linked to the previous scene by “knocking”) has sometimes been regarded as unShakespearean. However, Shakespeare frequently inserts a comic episode at moments of high drama to provide so-called “comic relief.” And it is true that audiences do need to experience different emotional levels during the course of a play; they cannot be left at a consistently high pitch. Variety in tone or pace is simply a practical necessity, and the comic in its turn serves to highlight the tragic. Here the Porter’s reference to “if a man were porter of hell gate” is particularly appropriate because what has already occurred inside the castle is hellish (and see similar word associations later in his soliloquy). The soliloquy is also interesting for its references to equivocation that serve to link the play to the Gunpowder Plot of 1605, and the subsequent trial of Father Garnet in March 1606. The thwarted Plot was designed to blow up the Houses of Parliament, including King James (and thus there’s the strong regicide link to Macbeth). During his trial Garnet maintained that equivocation was appropriate when laws were unjust (and thereby justifying certain acts of treason). Shakespeare turns this to comic effect with the Porter’s explanation to Macduff of drinking being “a great provoker of three things,” and which he enumerates at 25-33. It might not be stretching the point too much to tie his remarks to the recurrent theme of reality and illusion.

Macbeth’s entrance after this brief comic interlude reminds us swiftly of previous events, and instantly makes an audience wonder how Duncan’s murder will be revealed, etc. This is not to say there are not a couple of black humour, ironic lines, such as Macduff’s “Is the King stirring, worthy Thane?” or Lennox’s “Goes the King hence to-day?” And then, in response to Lennox’s description of the “unruly” night, “strange screams of death,” “accents terrible,” Macbeth provides us with: “’Twas a rough night.” Rough indeed!!!!!!!

Check out The Shakespeare Diaries.
© 2008

Julius Caesar Act 2.1.1-85

Some may be slightly quizzical why Lucius, Brutus’ servant, makes so many entrances and exits in these 85 lines, though the answer is really obvious. It creates the impression of action in an otherwise static sub-scene; without Lucius’ comings and goings, Brutus would have the whole of the sub-scene to himself, and thus have only a very long soliloquy to deliver. However, Lucius does have one additional function–to carry out servant-like duties (such as presenting Brutus with one of the letters thrown through the windows); but Brutus could have carried out each one of these functions.

For the rest, Brutus debates the current situation, namely Caesar becoming king, and the consequences. In doing so, Brutus is actually weighing up Caesar’s character, particularly as it concerns his ambition–and ambition can lead easily to an abuse of power. Brutus’ thoughts are reinforced by two images, that of the adder and that of a ladder, and both are fairly commonplace. The letter thrown in through the window helps spur Brutus on, though it is also clear that he is troubled: “Between the acting of a dreadful thing / And the first motion, all the interim is / Like a phantasma or a hideous dream.” (There are parallels here with the Macbeth of the early scenes, although the language of the later play is richer and more evocative than this one.) Noteworthy too are Brutus’ comments on the nature of conspirators and conspiracy (77-85). Conspiracy is cloaked by darkness, and by cloaks themselves, since conspiracy possesses a “monstrous visage.” Embedded here is the recurrent Shakespearean theme of things not appearing to be what they really are, the disparity between truth and illusion. Brutus, being an honorable man, would of course prefer the honorable and open ways of doing things.

Check out The Shakespeare Diaries.
© 2008

Romeo and Juliet Act 5.1

Meanwhile, over in Mantua, there’s Romeo, whom we may have begun to forget. Obviously by this juncture, Shakespeare has to begin to wrap things up, to fulfil his audience’s expectations, and to move on to the play’s climax. Notable here is the role of coincidence and/or fate, and it is significant that this element is again associated with Romeo who throughout the play has invoked “fate” in one form or another. His opening speech in this scene recalls his recent dream: “I dreamt my lady came and found me dead / (Strange dream that gives a dead man leave to think!).” Of course, people do dream; however, it is rather convenient that Romeo should dream an inversion of what is about to happen in the play, i.e. Romeo finding Juliet “dead.” In the second part of the above quotation, it might be possible to detect Shakespeare commenting wryly on his own creaky dramaturgy, i.e. a dead man in a dream being able to think. This is followed swiftly by more plot manipulation; Balthasar arrives with news of Juliet’s death (so he thinks), which, naturally, induces an immediate, impulsive reaction from Romeo. Note too the convenient reference to the lack of any letters from Friar Lawrence–“Hast thou no letters to me from the friar?” This provides a ready answer to those who might remember that part of the plot. The more cynical might ask how this came about–a knot in the plot which the next scene answers.

Equally convenient and contrived is the second part of this scene. “I do remember an apothecary, / And hereabouts ’a [he] dwells.” Not only that, but said apothecary is poor and hungry and generally in need. And lo and behold “As I remember, this should be the house” where the apothecary lives. Although the apothecary is more than wary of Romeo’s intentions and even cites the laws of Mantua that forbid selling poisons, “My poverty but not my will consents” to sell said drugs. (Note Romeo’s epigrammatic reply: “I pay thy poverty and not thy will.”) And so, poison in hand, off goes our hero. All rather too convenient? The cynical might say so, and if true, then that would decrease the effect of the tragedy. For the more we are made aware of the elementary construction of the drama, the less is the realism achieved; and surely a strong sense of realism is needed to bring about the final emotional effect–otherwise everything is simply play-acting.

Check out The Shakespeare Diaries.

© 2008

Julius Caesar Act 1.2.215-319

This section of 1.2 divides into three sub-scenes that again reflect Shakespeare’s careful dramaturgy; the first sub-scene has 3 people in it, the second two, and the third just one person. Not a “big deal” some might say; in fact, this arrangement is a reflection of how a conspiracy often begins, and this very early stage of the conspiracy is signalled by Casca’s opening line “You pulled me by the cloak. Would you speak with me?” Cloaks are a “clothing symbol/image” of conspiracy–when have conspirators not worn them, although of course they were also a natural part of clothing (always hiding to a degree what is underneath). Speaking is also, again obviously, a part of conspiracy, but also of everyday life. (Like much in Shakespeare, it is how a thing or things are viewed that its/their purpose become clear–unlike this explanation so far!!). It should be emphasized that the “conspiracy” is in but its infancy at this stage.

Casca brings news of “what hath chanced to-day,” namely Caesar being offered the crown three times, significantly by Mark Antony, his protege. Again it is worth noting Shakespeare’s dramatic technique here. Instead of attempting to stage a large “crowd scene” with its attendant difficulties, the whole scene is reported by Casca. And by allowing Casca to so report it, Casca is able to put his own gloss on the events, rather than leaving an audience to judge for itself the events it witnesses. Thus the audience hearing Casca’s account is both subliminally influenced by Casca’s account but also learns a little more of Casca’s position and character. One small example will suffice. In describing the cheers, Casca says how the “rabblement hooted, and clapped their chopt hands.” His word choice is clearly derogatory towards the crowd; the event could have been described either neutrally or favorably (towards the crowd and/or Caesar). Thus, in little, is Casca’s own position established, as is his opinion of Caesar in detailing how (and by implication why) he fell down in a swoon and subsequently “offered them his throat to cut”–a form of crowd manipulation that affected at least “three or four wenches” who “cried ‘Alas, poor soul!’”

Brutus and Cassius alone (292-303) permits them to comment on Casca (whose ultimate importance will become clear later on), and Cassius’s final soliloquy (305-19) allows him to focus of the “noble” Brutus, and how he must be seduced. And how is Brutus to be seduced? Not by rational argument, but by false “writings” (purportedly from several people) thrown in through his window at night.

See The Shakespeare Diaries.

Jude Law as Hamlet

Jude Law will play Hamlet next year at Wyndham’s Theatre, London. Kenneth Branagh will be in a Chekhov play at the same theatre, and Derek Jacobi (as Malvolio) in “Twelfth Night.”

The Bard hopes to start more regular posts on “Romeo and Juliet ” in the near future, but in the meantime hopes you’ll have a look at The Shakespeare Diaries.

Ian McKellan, Patrick Stewart, and Dr Who

Ian McKellan’s Lear opens in Brooklyn on 6th September, while Patrick Stewart (as Claudius) will be in a 2008 Royal Shakespeare Company production of Hamlet with Dr Who (aka David Tennant) as Hamlet. No mention of how the tardis or darleks will feature in the latter production–but who knows??

Romeo and Juliet Act 1.1.101-153

This sub-scene exemplifies at least two of Shakespeare’s techniques. The first is signalled by Montague asking Benvolio “Who set this ancient quarrel abroach?” This allows for a quick recapitulation of “the story so far,” and since Benvolio is also addressed as “nephew” it helps establish relationships (as well as the divisions in this society, based on family ties alone–and we should remember that something as important as the Wars of the Roses, England’s earlier civil war, had much to do with families). Secondly, when Lady Montague asks Benvolio (now established as something of a reliable reporter) “where is Romeo” we are reminded that we have yet to see either of the title characters, and moreover the delay serves to increase our anticipation and expectations. Benvolio paints a picture of a typically love-lorn romantic adolescent who steals “into the covert of the wood” when he spots Benvolio. Montague adds to the impression of romantic excess:
Many a morning hath he [Romeo] there been seen,
With tears augmenting the fresh morning’s dew,
Adding to clouds more clouds with his deep sighs.
Not surprisingly, Romeo locks himself away in his room, creating “an artificial night.” And despite Montague’s enquiries, the reason for Romeo’s behavior is as yet unknown (although the whole tenor of the earlier descriptions provides us with a good clue).
Then, having delayed Romeo’s entrance suitably, he arrives (one might say almost on cue), and the good-hearted Benvolio offers to discover what ails Romeo (which is yet another of Shakespeare’s dramatic techniques).

{Please check out the links on the right for “The Shakespeare Diaries,” and Recommended books for some futher information}

Recommended books

Click on Recommended books on the right hand side for some books about Shakespeare, editions of his plays, criticism, and background information. The linked site is still under construction, so check back from time to time.