Vokes Theatre - The Monologues of Beatrice Herford

The Monologues of Beatrice Herford

Introduction

Introduction (excerpted from a dissertation by Linda Sue Long entitled Beatrice Herford, Cissie Loftus and Dorothy Sands within the Tradition of the Solo Performance
University of Texas at Austin, School of Communications, 1982.

Upon seeing Beatrice Herford for the first time, one of the immediate responses of critics and audiences was the recognition of her originality. The most favored term was "inimitable." Her popularity and acclaim was so extensive that it led Alexander Woollcott, New York Times drama critic, to respond, “If there is a more entertaining woman extant, someone has been concealing her from us ... [A] single Beatrice Herford monologue has more art, more life and more fun in it than three-quarters of the plays along Broadway. It is one of the few perfect institutions in an imperfect world."
As the twentieth century was getting under way, Beatrice Herford who had begun performing her own monologues in her late twenties, had reached the height of her career in middle age. Herford received wide critical acclaim because her style of performance was a new and effective approach to comedy in this time of exaggerated presentational acting. In 1901, the Boston Evening Transcript described her "prepossessing presence [as] devoid of artifice," and her expressions as "never overdone." Herford was also dubbed a phenomenon because she succeeded in a field largely restricted to men. And though critics often spoke of her charming, refined, delicate manner as a performer, members of The Vokes Players, the theatre company Herford started in 1904, painted a somewhat more complex portrait: "She swore like a trooper . . . was risqué and very Bohemian, but ... was also a grande dame ... "
In making her art reflective of life, Herford strove to avoid exaggeration and the sensational. She explained, "Just as soon as you begin to ramp (sic) around the stage, just as soon as you begin to overdo you cease to be an artist. Many a time in writing, a climax occurs to me; but I will not use it, for I realize I would be sacrificing the truth to a sensation." Herford engendered this atmosphere of truth even though her monologues only suggested the dialogue of other characters. "In my monologues, I never explain. There is no need; the monologue explains itself. You gather from the conversation of the one I am impersonating just what the other is saying."
In 1896 another reviewer noted: You see, we have here the drama reduced to its simplest expression ... We wish those old-school playwrights who still insist that people must say things on the stages that they never would dream of saying in real life----simply to explain the plot and situation to the audience--could see her and study the workings of her system. Although she has no scenery, properties, nor other accessories, although all the dramatic persons except herself have to be taken for granted, we could not in a single instance catch her saying anything that was merely explanatory. The humor upon which Herford relied was primarily recognition comedy. Audiences saw her monologues as travesties of everyday activities and as satires of the foibles of friends, relatives, acquaintances and sometimes even themselves. Hers was a sort of "comedy of manners of ... [her] time," quoted one reviewer in 1951. Her recognizable portraits were "so absurd and so authentic that ... audience[s), [though) limp with laughing, exchanged sidelong looks." After her 1915 vaudeville debut, Herford proved her success with a variety of audience types by drawing her society admirers to the vaudeville houses and her vaudeville fans to the concert halls, with an appealing entertainment that transcended social-class barriers. “After I entered vaudeville, some of my friends remarked, 'Isn't it wonderful how they enjoy it?' I can't understand the classification of they ... Vaudeville is cosmopolitan. It is not bound by tradition. In fact, it is at this moment the most progressive part of our theatre.” As the New York Times reported in 1916, Beatrice Herford " ... graduated successfully from the gloved applause of select recitals to the thunderous approval of vaudeville ... " because she made no changes in her expectations for audience intelligence and involvement.

Monologue: At The Art Museum

Monologue: In the Flower Shop

Monologue: Radio Pudding


	*Introduction*
	Introduction (excerpted from a dissertation by Linda Sue Long entitled Beatrice Herford, Cissie Loftus and Dorothy Sands within the Tradition of the Solo Performance University of Texas at Austin, School of Communications, 1982. Upon seeing Beatrice Herford for the first time, one of the immediate responses of critics and audiences was the recognition of her originality. The most favored term was "inimitable." Her popularity and acclaim was so extensive that it led Alexander Woollcott, New York Times drama critic, to respond, “If there is a more entertaining woman extant, someone has been concealing her from us ... [A] single Beatrice Herford monologue has more art, more life and more fun in it than three-quarters of the plays along Broadway. It is one of the few perfect institutions in an imperfect world." As the twentieth century was getting under way, Beatrice Herford who had begun performing her own monologues in her late twenties, had reached the height of her career in middle age. Herford received wide critical acclaim because her style of performance was a new and effective approach to comedy in this time of exaggerated presentational acting. In 1901, the Boston Evening Transcript described her "prepossessing presence [as] devoid of artifice," and her expressions as "never overdone." Herford was also dubbed a phenomenon because she succeeded in a field largely restricted to men. And though critics often spoke of her charming, refined, delicate manner as a performer, members of The Vokes Players, the theatre company Herford started in 1904, painted a somewhat more complex portrait: "She swore like a trooper . . . was risqué and very Bohemian, but ... was also a grande dame ... " In making her art reflective of life, Herford strove to avoid exaggeration and the sensational. She explained, "Just as soon as you begin to ramp (sic) around the stage, just as soon as you begin to overdo you cease to be an artist. Many a time in writing, a climax occurs to me; but I will not use it, for I realize I would be sacrificing the truth to a sensation." Herford engendered this atmosphere of truth even though her monologues only suggested the dialogue of other characters. "In my monologues, I never explain. There is no need; the monologue explains itself. You gather from the conversation of the one I am impersonating just what the other is saying." In 1896 another reviewer noted: You see, we have here the drama reduced to its simplest expression ... We wish those old-school playwrights who still insist that people must say things on the stages that they never would dream of saying in real life----simply to explain the plot and situation to the audience--could see her and study the workings of her system. Although she has no scenery, properties, nor other accessories, although all the dramatic persons except herself have to be taken for granted, we could not in a single instance catch her saying anything that was merely explanatory. The humor upon which Herford relied was primarily recognition comedy. Audiences saw her monologues as travesties of everyday activities and as satires of the foibles of friends, relatives, acquaintances and sometimes even themselves. Hers was a sort of "comedy of manners of ... [her] time," quoted one reviewer in 1951. Her recognizable portraits were "so absurd and so authentic that ... audience[s), [though) limp with laughing, exchanged sidelong looks." After her 1915 vaudeville debut, Herford proved her success with a variety of audience types by drawing her society admirers to the vaudeville houses and her vaudeville fans to the concert halls, with an appealing entertainment that transcended social-class barriers. “After I entered vaudeville, some of my friends remarked, 'Isn't it wonderful how they enjoy it?' I can't understand the classification of they ... Vaudeville is cosmopolitan. It is not bound by tradition. In fact, it is at this moment the most progressive part of our theatre.” As the New York Times reported in 1916, Beatrice Herford " ... graduated successfully from the gloved applause of select recitals to the thunderous approval of vaudeville ... " because she made no changes in her expectations for audience intelligence and involvement.