II

In 'Patrie' as in 'Vanderdecken' the real reason for the failure of

these mechanical devices is that the plays were themselves on a superior

level to those stage-tricks; the themes were poetic, and any theatrical

effect which drew attention to itself interrupted the current of

emotional sympathy. It disclosed itself instantly as incongruous, as out

of keeping with the elevation of the legend--in a word, as inartistic. A

similar effect, perhaps even more frankly mechanical, would not be

inartistic in a play of a lower type, and it might possibly be helpful

in a frankly spectacular piece, even if this happened also to be poetic

in intent. In a fairy-play, a _feerie_, as the French term it, we expect

to behold all sorts of startling ingenuities of stage-mechanism, whether

the theme is delightfully imaginative, as in Maeterlinck's beautiful

'Blue Bird,' or crassly prosaic, as in the 'Black Crook' and the 'White

Fawn.'

In picturesque melodrama also, in the dramatization of 'Ben Hur,' for

example, we should be disappointed if we were bereft of the wreck of the

Roman galley, and if we were deprived of the chariot race. These

episodes can be presented in the theater only by the aid of mechanisms

far more elaborate than those needed for the scenes in 'Vanderdecken'

and 'Patrie'; but in 'Ben Hur' these mechanisms are not incongruous and

distracting as were the simpler devices of 'Vanderdecken' and 'Patrie,'

because the dramatization of the romanticist historical novel is less

lofty in its ambition, less imaginative, less ethereally poetic. In

'Vanderdecken' and in 'Patrie' the tricks seemed to obtrude themselves,

whereas in 'Ben Hur' they were almost obligatory. In certain melodramas

with more modern stories--in the amusing piece called the 'Round Up,'

for example--the scenery is the main attraction. The scene-painter is

the real star of the show. And there is no difficulty in understanding

the wail of the performer of the principal part in a piece of this sort,

when he complained that he was engaged to support forty tons of scenery.

"It's only when the stage-carpenters have to rest and get their breath

that I have a chance to come down to the footlights and bark for a

minute or two."

A moment's consideration shows that this plaintive protest is

unreasonable, however natural it may be. In melodramas like the 'Round

Up' and 'Ben Hur,' as in fairy-plays like the 'Blue Bird,' the acting is

properly subordinated to the spectacular splendor of the whole

performance. When we enter a theater to behold a play of either of these

types, we expect the acting to be adequate, no doubt, but we do not

demand the highest type of histrionic excellence. What we do anticipate,

however, is a spectacle pleasing to the eye and stimulating to the

nerves. In plays of these two classes the appeal is sensuous rather than

intellectual; and it is only when the appeal of the play is to the mind

rather than to the senses that merely mechanical effects are likely to

be disconcerting.

Mr. William Archer has pointed out that Ibsen in 'Little Eyolf,' has for

once failed to perceive the strict limitation of the stage when he

introduced a flagstaff, with the flag at first at half-mast, and a

little later run up to the peak. Now, there are no natural breezes in

the theater to flutter the folds of the flag, and every audience is

aware of the fact. This, then, is the dilemma: either the flag hangs

limp and lifeless against the pole, which is a flat spectacle, or else

its folds are made to flutter by some concealed pneumatic blast or

electric fan, which instantly arouses the inquiring curiosity of the

audience. Here we find added evidence in support of Herbert Spencer's

invaluable principle of Economy of Attention, which he himself applied

only to rhetoric, but which is capable of extension to all the other

arts--and to no one of them more usefully than to the drama. At any

given moment a spectator in the theater has only so much attention to

bestow upon the play being presented before his eyes, and if any portion

of his attention is unduly distracted by some detail--like either the

limpness or the fluttering of a flag--then he has just so much less to

give to the play itself.

Very rarely, indeed, can we catch Ibsen at fault in a technical detail

of stage-management; he was extraordinarily meticulous in his artful

adjustment of the action of his social dramas to the picture-frame stage

of our modern cosmopolitan theater. He was marvelously skilful in

endowing each of his acts with a background harmonious for his

characters; and nearly always was he careful to refrain from the

employment of any scenic device which might attract attention to

itself. He eschewed altogether the more violent spectacular effects,

altho he did call upon the stage manager to supply an avalanche in the

final act of 'When the Dead Awaken'; but even this bold convulsion of

nature was less incongruous than might be expected, since it was not

exhibited until the action of the play itself was complete. In fact, the

avalanche might be described as only a pictorial epilog.

A Book About the Theater · 第 59 / 158 题