Vaudeville Theatre

After this I cannot claim that my paper on Ibsen, which was duly read at the St. James's Restaurant on the 18th July 1890 under the presidency of Mrs. Annie Besant, and which was the first form of this little book, is an original work in the sense of being the result of a spontaneous internal impulse on my part.

Having purposely couched it in the most provocative terms, of which traces may be found by the curious in its present state, I did not attach much importance to the somewhat lively debate that arose upon it, and I had laid it aside as a pièce d'occasion which had served its turn when the production of Rosmer's Home at the Vaudeville Theatre by Florence Farr, the inauguration of the Independent Theatre by Mr. J. T. Grine with a performance of Ghosts, and the sensation created by the experiment of Elizabeth Robbins and Marian Lee with Hedda Gabler started a frantic newspaper controversy, in which I could see no sign of any of the disputants having ever been forced by circumstances, as I had, to make up his mind definitely as to what Ibsen's plays meant, and to defend his view face to face with some of the keenest debaters in London.

I allowed due weight to the fact that Ibsen himself has not enjoyed this Fabian advantage.

But I have also shown that the existence of a discoverable and perfectly definite thesis in a poet's work by no means depends on the completeness of his own intellectual consciousness of it.

After this I cannot claim that my paper on Ibsen, which was duly read at the St. James's Restaurant on the 18th July 1890, under the presidency of Mrs. Annie Besant, and which was the first form of this little book, is an original work in the sense of being the result of a spontaneous internal impulse on my part.

Having purposely couched it in the most provocative terms, of which traces may be found by the curious in its present state, I did not attach much importance to the somewhat lively debate that arose upon it, and I had laid it aside as a pièce d'occasion which had served its turn, when the production of Rosmer's Home at the Vaudeville Theatre by Florence Farr, the inauguration of the Independent Theatre by Mr. J. T. Grine with a performance of Ghosts, and the sensation created by the experiment of Elizabeth Robbins and Marian Lee with Hedda Gabler, started a frantic newspaper controversy, in which I could see no sign of any of the disputants having ever been forced by circumstances, as I had, to make up his mind definitely as to what Ibsen's plays meant, and to defend his view face to face with some of the keenest debaters in London.

I allowed due weight to the fact that Ibsen himself has not enjoyed this Fabian advantage, but I have also shown that the existence of a discoverable and perfectly definite thesis in a poet's work by no means depends on the completeness of his own intellectual consciousness of it.

At any rate, the controversialists, whether in the abusive stage or the apologetic stage or the hero-worshipping stage, by no means made clear what they were abusing or apologising for or going into ecstasies about, and I came to the conclusion that my explanation might as well be placed in the field until a better could be found.

After this I cannot claim that my paper on Ibsen, which was duly read at the St. James's Restaurant on the eighteenth of July, eighteen ninety, under the presidency of Mrs. Annie Besant, and which was the first form of this little book, is an original work in the sense of being the result of a spontaneous internal impulse on my part.

Having purposely couched it in the most provocative terms, of which traces may be found by the curious in its present state, I did not attach much importance to the somewhat lively debate that arose upon it, and I had laid it aside as a pièce d'occasion which had served its turn, when the production of Rosmersholm at the Vaudeville Theatre by Miss Farr, the inauguration of the Independent Theatre by Mr. J. T. Grane with a performance of Ghosts, and the sensation created by the experiment of Miss Robbins and Miss Lee with Hedda Gabler started a frantic newspaper controversy, in which I could see no sign of any of the disputants having ever been forced by circumstances, as I had, to make up his mind definitely as to what Ibsen's plays meant, and to defend his view face to face with some of the keenest debaters in London.

I allow due weight to the fact that Ibsen himself has not enjoyed this advantage, see page fifty-six, but I have also shown that the existence of a discoverable and perfectly definite thesis in a poet's work by no means depends on the completeness of his own intellectual consciousness of it.

At any rate, the controversialists, whether in the abusive stage or the apologetic stage or the hero-worshipping stage, by no means made clear what they were abusing or apologising for or going into ecstasies about, and I came to the conclusion that my explanation might as well be placed in the field until a better could be found.

One of the plays which he prefers is Sardou's La Tosca.

Clearly these three representative gentlemen, all eminent both as actors and managers, will hold by the conventional drama until the commercial success of Ibsen forces them to recognize that in the course of nature they are falling behind the taste of the day.

Mr. Thorne, at the Vaudeville Theatre, was the first leading manager who ventured to put a play of Ibsen's into his evening bill, and he did not do so until Miss Elizabeth Robbins and Miss Marian Lee had given ten experimental performances at his theatre at their own risk.

Mr. Charrington and Miss Janet A.

After this I cannot claim that my paper on Ibsen, which was duly read at the St. James's Restaurant on the 18th July 1890, under the presidency of Mrs. Annie Besant, and which was the first form of this little book, is an original work in the sense of being the result of a spontaneous internal impulse on my part.

Having purposely couched it in the most provocative terms, of which traces may be found by the curious in its present state, I did not attach much importance to the somewhat lively debate that arose upon it, and I had laid it aside as a pièce d'occasion which had served its turn, when the production of Rosmer's Home at the Vaudeville Theatre by Florence Farr, the inauguration of the Independent Theatre by Mr. J. T. Grine with a performance of Ghosts, and the sensation created by the experiment of Elizabeth Robbins and Marion Lee with Hedda Gabler, started a frantic newspaper controversy, in which I could see no sign of any of the disputants having ever been forced by circumstances, as I had, to make up his mind definitely as to what Ibsen's plays meant, and to defend his view face to face with some of the keenest debaters in London.

I allowed due weight to the fact that Ibsen himself has not enjoyed this Fabian advantage.

But I have also shown that the existence of a discoverable and perfectly definite thesis in a poet's work by no means depends on the completeness of his own intellectual consciousness of it.

After this I cannot claim that my paper on Ibsen, which was duly read at the St. James's Restaurant on the 18th July 1890 under the presidency of Mrs. Annie Besant, and which was the first form of this little book, is an original work in the sense of being the result of a spontaneous internal impulse on my part.

Having purposely couched it in the most provocative terms, of which traces may be found by the curious in its present state, I did not attach much importance to the somewhat lively debate that arose upon it, and I had laid it aside as a pièce d'occasion which had served its turn when the production of Rosmer's Home at the Vaudeville Theatre by Florence Farr, the inauguration of the Independent Theatre by Mr. J.T. Grine with a performance of Ghosts, and the sensation created by the experiment of Elizabeth Robbins and Marion Lee with Hedda Gabler started a frantic newspaper controversy, in which I could see no sign of any of the disputants having ever been forced by circumstances, as I had, to make up his mind definitely as to what Ibsen's plays meant, and to defend his view face to face with some of the keenest debaters in London.

I allowed due weight to the fact that Ibsen himself has not enjoyed this Fabian advantage.

But I have also shown that the existence of a discoverable and perfectly definite thesis in a poet's work by no means depends on the completeness of his own intellectual consciousness of it.

After this I cannot claim that my paper on Ibsen, which was duly read at the St. James's Restaurant on the 18th July 1890, under the presidency of Mrs. Annie Besant, and which was the first form of this little book, is an original work in the sense of being the result of a spontaneous internal impulse on my part.

Having purposely couched it in the most provocative terms, of which traces may be found by the curious in its present state, I did not attach much importance to the somewhat lively debate that arose upon it, and I had laid it aside as a pièce d'occasion which had served its turn, when the production of Rosmer's Home at the Vaudeville Theatre by Florence Farr, the inauguration of the Independent Theatre by Mr. J.T. Grine with a performance of Ghosts, and the sensation created by the experiment of Elizabeth Robbins and Marion Lee with Hedda Gabler, started a frantic newspaper controversy, in which I could see no sign of any of the disputants having ever been forced by circumstances, as I had, to make up his mind definitely as to what Ibsen's plays meant, and to defend his view face to face with some of the keenest debaters in London.

I allow due weight to the fact that Ibsen himself has not enjoyed this Fabian advantage.

But I have also shown that the existence of a discoverable and perfectly definite thesis in a poet's work by no means depends on the completeness of his own intellectual consciousness of it.