# Whether Actors Ought to Sit in the Boxes? explained — Table-Talk

> Chapter companion for Table-Talk by William Hazlitt.

## What happens

Hazlitt argues that actors should not sit in the boxes of the theatre because they belong to the public and their persons are not their own property. He contends that actors, after performing, should affect obscurity and avoid breaking the illusion they create on stage. He uses examples of Garrick, Mr. Mathews, and others to illustrate how appearing in propria persona can diminish the audience's admiration. He also contrasts the pit as the true resort of critics with the stage-boxes, which he sees as contemptuous of the stage.

## Themes in this chapter

### Fame, Reputation, and Public Opinion

Hazlitt discusses how actors' public visibility affects their reputation and the audience's perception, arguing that too much exposure breeds contempt.

### The Psychology of Habit and Novelty

The essay explores how familiarity with an actor's real self breaks the illusion and novelty of their stage characters.

### Criticism and Critical Practice

Hazlitt positions the pit as the true place for critics and amateurs, contrasting it with the boxes where ignorance prevails.

## Character check-ins

### William Hazlitt

Author and narrator of the essay, arguing against actors sitting in boxes.

### Edmund Kean

Mentioned as one of the actors who should not obtrude themselves voluntarily when out of character.

### Mr. Mathews

Cited as an exception for his 'at home' performances where he appears in the side-box after imitating characters.

### Jack Cavanagh

Mentioned as 'our old friend Jack Bannister' in the context of Mr. Mathews shaking hands with him.

### David Garrick

Referenced for his performance as Lear where his crown of straw came off unnoticed, and for a lady falling in love with him as Romeo.

### Mrs. Siddons

Implied through reference to 'poor Monimia' and the tragic actresses, though not explicitly named.

## Key lines

> An actor, after having performed his part well, instead of courting farther distinction, should affect obscurity, and 'steal most guilty-like away,' conscious of admiration that he can support nowhere but in his proper sphere.

After a good performance, an actor should seek to be inconspicuous and leave quietly, aware that the admiration they receive is only sustainable on stage.

_Hazlitt's core argument for actors to avoid public attention after performing._

> The stage is not a mistress that we are sworn to undress. Why should we look behind the glass of fashion? Why should we prick the bubble that reflects the world, and turn it to a little soap and water?

The theatre should not be stripped of its mystery; we should not expose the mundane reality behind the performance.

_Metaphor for preserving the illusion of the stage._

## Links

- HTML: https://www.betterreads.online/discover/table_talk_se/chapters/volume-ii-whether-actors-ought-to-sit-in-the-boxes
- Book: https://www.betterreads.online/discover/table_talk_se
- All chapters: https://www.betterreads.online/discover/table_talk_se/chapters