This image is available from the United States Library of Congress's Prints and Photographs division under the digital ID cwpbh.04761. It was taken by Matthew Brady in Feb 1871.
Opinions differed as to whether the
audience got their money's worth or should have had their admission
remitted. The Kalamazoo Gazette [Kalamazoo Gazette, 12-22-1871, P3]
described the spectators as being rapt, on the edge of their seats
one moment and rolling with laughter the next. The Kalamazoo
Telegraph [Kalamazoo Telegraph, 12-18-1871, p4, col.1] correspondent,
on the other hand, felt that the audience had been imposed upon for
having such a disjointed collection of stories fed to them as a
“lecture.” Ironically, a Google search for the Artemas Ward
speech of Mark Twain came up with one newspaper article in the
Brooklyn Daily Eagle [11-22-1871] that described it as follows: “On
the whole, the lecture. . . was actually nothing but a discursive and
pleasant bundle of stories, bound together by a cord of quaint
fancy.”
Union Hall, where the lecture was held,
was packed, even including the aisles. As there was no reserved
seating, many arrived early to secure a seat and according to the
Gazette, “it became a grab game.” Both news outlets stated that
no lecturer visiting Kalamazoo had drawn a larger crowd except for
John B. Gough, a noted temperance orator.
The Gazette described the mix of
stories adding “these, interspersed with a description of the
country, so minute, so picturesque, and yet no doubt so true, that
one could almost imagine himself standing where the narrator had
stood, and gazing across the sandy and forsaken plain, or with him
peering into the clear and placid waters of Lake Tahoe. One moment
he would be dealing with a description of scenery that would rise to
the loftiest heights of grandeur, the next, his humor would break out
as it seemed, involuntarily, and instead of the listening, wrapt,
[sic] enchanted audience of the moment before, would be one swayed in
the convulsions of laughter.”
The Telegraph railed that “the
substitute for a lecture which Mr. Clemens foisted upon his audience
was an insult to their intelligence and capacity” and that “no
lecturer we regret to say, ever more completely disappointed his
hearers.” The Telegraph continued that “Mr. Clemens had no right
to impose upon his hearers any such desultory trash as they were
subjected to.” The Telegraph correspondent must have known that
his sentiments were not shared by the Gazette reporter and ended his
diatribe saying Mr. Clemens “should have given the lecture he
contracted to deliver, or something equally good, in its stead, and
not put us off with a rambling, disconnected talk about a hackneyed
subject, sans wit, sans information, sans sense. It is the duty of
the press to expose such impositions, and if other journals remain
silent, we shall not.”
Mark Twain's visit certainly drew a
large crowd, but whether his lecture left his audience wishing to
obtain a copy of his latest book or wanting a refund seems open to
debate. One thing is clear of the opinions of the Telegraph and the
Gazette, never the twain shall meet. It is possible that the
Telegraph reporter was expecting an informative lecture. Though he
stated he had read and enjoyed Twain's books I doubt he would have
appreciated the Artemas Ward “lecture” any more than the one he
heard. I suspect those that merely wanted an entertaining evening,
without a preconceived notion of what a “lecture” should be, were
rewarded.
No comments:
Post a Comment