Life, 1926-03-11 · page 23 of 40
Life — March 11, 1926 — page 23: what you’re looking at
What you’re looking at
This article satirizes Eva Le Gallienne's revival productions of Henrik Ibsen plays, particularly her insistence on historically accurate 1890s costuming. The author mocks the practice of dressing modern actors in period clothing when performing Ibsen, arguing there's nothing inherently tied to 1890s fashion in his plays. The satire targets the pretentiousness of "serious" theatrical revivals—the idea that authentic Ibsen requires authentic Victorian wardrobes. The author suggests instead: "More Ibsen in modern clothes!" The critique reflects tension between theatrical authenticity and accessibility; Le Gallienne is praised as an "ardent reviver" of Ibsen's work, but criticized for making productions unnecessarily stiff and historically bound. The piece credits Le Gallienne with bringing important Ibsen plays like *The Master Builder* and *John Gabriel Borkman* to American audiences, acknowledging her cultural contribution while gently mocking her costume choices as overly scholarly and impractical.
📄 Transcribed text from this page (OCR, searchable)
Machine-transcribed from the original scan — historical spelling and the odd misread are preserved.
The Ibsen Girl HE trustees of the Henrik a busy winter with their p ) estate must have h ior New York has been sporting no fewer th Eva Le Gallienne’s en efforts n revival, We <t looked up the Ibsen dates, thinking that all this to-do was ken connected in some way with his birth or death, but his tl centenary is two years off. What there will be 1 ihe then we can't imagine, s the New York Times literary ¢ : we : | supplement mins an article on “Ibsen, 1828-1928." Maybe et ne at ' ‘ wires can be pulled to assure tribute Soln \ h in the ma “The Master I be her pri it is, we are mo Miss I , brought “John 1 MISS LEGALLIENNE has been the most ardent re eo agar | viver of the Good Gray Poet. Hardly a special mati | nee has gone by but what the 3 actress could be seen in some old dre in that omine © which is the They have to talk much like real folks, Ihsen expre might sound te But we can not see why they have to dress in the fashion of the 1890's, For now nothing of Ibsen's seems abl ing the men up to look like mem ne tim ing. er done without dre s of the 03 Det Team and the women like Mary An nm, (Not that th » look like Mary Anderson.) There is nothing inherently Thsen. There are no reference the Norwegian Grover Cleveland the time. It is all right for research purposes to. see what people wore when “Hedda Gabler” was first pro hi Hars of the time, when seen in revival duced, but the parlor-furn and_ gentlemen's ter revival, pretty darned depressing. Why not follow Hamlet and let us see George Tesman in a dre is a dress-suit? “More Ibsen in modern clothes!” is our ery x sepulchr v 'O return to Miss Le € res, and the procedure. In her productions furnish comic relief to the p T | and “John Gabriel Borkman,” she that Mr have to wat tw less-revived we of Thsen, the f him Rob comicbooks.com