In early August, 1888, the American actor Richard Mansfield brough his performance in the dual role of Dr. Jekyll ad Mr. Hyde to the London stage, where it opened at the Lyceum theatre on the 4th of August.

He had previously performed the role in America, and critics and playgoers alike were desperate to know how he achieved his remarkable transformation between the two characters, seemingly, right in front of the eyes of the audience.

In London, theatregoers ad journalists were equally curious as to how the feat had been achieved, and several newspapers published their theories as to how it was done.

On Saturday the 1st of September, 1888, The Pall Mall Gazette published an article refuting some of the claims:-

THE TRANSFORMATION IN “DR JEKYLL AND MR HYDE”

HOW IT IS DONE

BY ONE WHO KNOWS

Now that half stay-away London has been thrilled by Mr. Mansfield’s tremendous impersonation of Mr. Hyde, everybody is asking how the marvellous transformation from Mr. Hyde to Dr. Jekyll before the very eyes of the audience is accomplished; but no one has as yet been forthcoming to explain the mystery.

Let me step into the breach –  not with the immediate intention of showing “how it was done,” but rather with a view to warning the playgoing public off the usual track, and telling them how it was not done.

INQUIRING AMERICAN MINDS

It may well be imagined that so startling, and withal so powerful and artistic, a feat could hardly have been performed nightly for twelve months in the United States without the inquiring and ingenious American mind being set vigorously to work to penetrate the secret.

Such, indeed, was the case; but so well was that secret kept, that no hint escaped to the outside public, and even the keenness of the ferreting journalist was for once at nought.

At Louisville (so runs the record in an American paper) its dramatic critic sat out the play for three consecutive evenings, armed with strong opera-glasses; but to no purpose.

THE SECRET EXPOSED?

At last a reporter of St. Louis burst forth upon a relieved world with what he called “Mr. Mansfield’s Exposure,” publishing a statement that rapidly went the round of the press.

Here is his story, together with his alleged discovery.

Having been refused admittance as a reporter at the rehearsals, he disguised himself as a workman, and obtained a situation as a scene-shifter.

HOW HE DOES IT

When in this capacity he kept his eagle eye fixed on the actor during the course of the play, arriving thereby at the following conclusions:-

“To begin with, the face is made up for Dr. Jekyll.

Above the eyes and about them the cavity is coloured a dark red – not the red that is put upon the face for health, or used on the cheeks for the actors, but a dark red used for lining wrinkles.”

After some more very detailed description of this sort, he went on to explain that a mask of thin rubber fixed on to the wig, and is so made as to remain in position over the face as required.

A TRICK WIG

The wig, he said, is a trick wig, with the hanging hair (for Hyde) on a spring piece that allows this fringe to turn over back or down over the forehead.

“The spring of the wig that turns down holds the top of the mask in place.

The bottom of the mask is attached to two rubbers that are intended to draw it out of sight and into Jekyll’s collar. These rubbers are extended, but are kept from acting by being fastened to his collar-button, which takes the pressure from the mask.

As Hyde (in the scene in Dr. Lanyon’s office) is taking the medicine, he clutches at his throat, releases this button, and with the next movement, the spring of the hair and the mask flies out of sight.

The play of the hands over the face conceals its passage.

As for the hands, they are white and simply turn green in the light-a calcium light being thrown through a green gelatine plate.

COMPLETELY UNTRUE!

Now all this sounds very ingenious and plausible; but, in spite of the circumstantial character of this description, there is absolutely no truth whatever in it – more’s the shame to “journalism.”

I can affirm (1) that there is no rubber mask, or mask of any sort, kind, or description; (2) that there are no rubbers or springs; (3) that there is no spring to the wig.

There may be a collar-button – there probably is: I won’t quarrel about that; but I know that it has absolutely nothing to do with the “change.”

The wig is an innocent wig, in which there is no guile. I examined it only yesterday, when it was being re-dressed by Mr. Fox, the maker, and so I know.

JUST ONE PECULIARITY

The only peculiarity I noticed was that it is rather heavily pomaded – that, in fact, the hair which is brushed back from the forehead on either side of the parting was somewhat weighty with grease; the effect being that, whether the matted hairs were brushed back or pulled forward, they kept their place with curious docility.

I stuck the wig on my closed hand, and, amused at the experiment, I made my fist a Hyde or a Jekyll one at will.

HOW DOES HE DO IT?

How then does Mr. Mansfield make so extraordinary a change in his person without mechanical aid? How, from the yellow, shiny-faced, impish, deformed, twisted, shock-headed, hateful, diabolic thing, as he first appears at the window (a mixture, he has been called, of cold shiver, nightmare, and delirium tremens, which may well account for the fainting of a lady last Tuesday night), how does he become before our eyes the tall, well-made, eminently respectable and well-cared-for professional man?

By means of six things: (1) the change of attitude, (2) of facial expression, (3) of voice, (4) of make-up, (5) of arrangement of his coat, and (6) by the manipulation of the gas.

Thus, when he cries “Behold!” and swallows the potion out of the empty glass, he straightens himself, allows his poor distorted features to return to the places appointed by nature, opens the coat and turns down its collar, rubs the outside coat of “make-up” off his face (leaving that of Dr. Lanyon underneath visible); and, as he changes from the gurgling and raucous “Ah ! ah ! ah ! ah! ah! ah! ah!” to the plaintive and deeply-musical “Lanyon! Lanyon! ” the gradually-rising gaslight is turned on full.

AN INTERVIEW WITH RICHARD MANSFIELD

Now, when I had an interview with the actor some weeks ago and asked him what apparatus or other unusual appliance was used, he replied, not without a touch of reproof in his voice, that the change was effected entirely without adventitious aid.

The use of masks or other appliance, he declared, would not only be inartistic and illegitimate, but downright farcical; and that he only used such materials as in every actor’s make-up box – grease-paint, rouge, lining-pencil, and powder.

But on the ground that he objects, for the sake of art, to too intimate a relation between actor and public, considering that the footlights should be between them, and the public not invited into the actor’s dressing room, be declined to explain his little secret.

NO FEAR OF CONTRADICTION

Satisfied that I have solved it by other means, I give my explanation without fear of contradiction, either from the actor himself or from those of the public who have already witnessed, or will go to witness, this remarkable performance.

So far as I am aware, this play is the only one in which an actor tries to double two parts, which in character, appearance, and individuality are at opposite poles.

Mr. Irving as Duboscq and Lesurques in “The Lyons Mail,” Mr. Righton as the Bishop and the drunken waiter in “Twins,” and many other dual characters, from Shakespeare downwards, have oftentimes been done before, and the method of their quick changes explained in print.

But “Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde” form a precedent as interesting from the curiosity of the transformation as it is from the psychological study presented by this “strange case.”