VIII.

From Édouard Pailleron.

You ask me how a play is made, my dear Dreyfus. I may well astonish you,

perhaps, but on my soul and honor, before God and man, I assure to you

that I know nothing about it, that you know nothing, that nobody knows

anything, and that the author of a play knows less about it than any one

else.

You don't believe me?

Let us see.

Here is a capable gentleman, a man of the theater, a dramatist acclaimed

a score of times, at the height of his powers, in full success. He has

written a comedy. He has bestowed upon it all his care, all his time,

all his ability. He has left nothing to chance.

He has just finisht it, and is content. According to the consecrated

expression, it is "certain to go." But as he is cautious, he does not

rely entirely upon his own opinion. He consults his

friends--fellow-workers, skillful as he, successful as he. He reads to

them his piece. I will not say that they are satisfied--another word is

needed--but at any rate, with more reason than ever, it is "certain to

go."

He seeks out a manager, an old stager who has every opportunity for

being clear-headed, because of his experience, and every reason for

being exacting, because of his self-interest. He gives him the

manuscript, and as soon as the manager gets a fair notion of the piece,

this Napoleon of the stage, this strategist of success, is seized by a

profound emotion, but one easy to comprehend in the case of a man who is

convinced that five hundred thousand francs have just been placed in his

hand. He exults, he shouts, he presses the author in his arms, he rains

upon him the most flattering adjectives, beginning with "sublime" and

mounting upward. He calls him the most honied names: Shakspere, Duvert

and Lauzanne, Rossini, Offenbach--according to the kind of theater he

directs. He is not only satisfied, he is delighted, he is radiant--it is

"certain to go."

Wait! That is not all. It is read to the actors--the same enthusiasm!

All are satisfied, if not with the play--they have not heard it yet--at

least with their parts. All are satisfied! It is "certain to go."

Thereupon rehearsals are held for two months before those who have the

freedom of the theater, who sit successively in the depths of the dark

hall and show the same delirium. Even the sixty firemen on duty who,

during these sixty rehearsals, have invariably laught and wept at the

same passages. Yet it is well known that the fireman is the modern

Laforêt of our modern Molières, as M. Prud'homme would say, and that

when the fireman is satisfied--it is "certain to go!"

The dress rehearsal arrives. A triumph! Bravos! Encores! Shouts!

Recalls! All of the signs of success--and note that the public on this

evening of rehearsal with the exception of a small and insignificant

contingent, will be the public of the first performance the next night.

It is "certain to go," I tell you! Certain! Absolutely certain!

On this next night the piece is presented. It falls flat! Well, then?

If the author knows what he is doing, if he is the master of his

method, explain to me then why, after having written twenty good pieces,

he writes a bad one?

And don't tell me that failure proves nothing--you would pain me, my

friend.

I do not intend to deny, you must understand, the value of talent and

skill and experience. They are, philosophically speaking, important

elements. But in what proportions do they contribute to the result?

That's what, let me repeat, nobody knows, the author as little as

anybody else.

The author in travail with a play is an unconscious being, whatever he

may think about himself; and his piece is the product of instinct rather

than of intention.

Believe me, my dear Dreyfus, in this as in everything, the cleverest of

us does what he can, and if he succeeds, he says that he has done

exactly what he tried to do. That's the truth. In reality an author

knows sometimes what he has tried to do, rarely what he has done;--and

as to knowing how he did it, I defy him!

Then if it is good, let him try again! I cannot recede from this view.

In our craft, you see, there is an element of unrebeginnable which

makes it an art, something of genius which ennobles it, something of the

fatally uncertain which renders it both charming and redoubtable. To try

to pick the masterpiece to pieces, to unscrew the ideal, to pluck the

heart out of the mystery, after the fashion of the baby who looks for

the little insect in the watch, is to attempt a vain and puerile thing.

Ah! if I had the time--but I haven't the time. So it's just as well, or

better, that I stop. To talk too much about art is not a good sign in an

artist. It is like a lover's talking too much about love; if I were a

woman I should have my doubts.

Well, do you wish me to disengage the philosophy of this garrulity? It

is found whole and entire in an apolog of my son--he too a philosopher

without knowing it. He was then seven. As a result of learning fables he

was seized with the ambition of writing one, which he brought to me one

fine day. It is called the 'Donkey and the Canary.' The verses are

perhaps a trifle long, but there are only two. That's the compensation.

Here they are.

The canary once sang; and the ass askt him how he could learn this to

do?

"I open my bill," said the bird; "and I say you, you, you!"

Well, the ass, that's you--don't get angry. The canary, that's I. When I

sing I open my bill and I say, "you, you, you!"

That's all that I can tell you.

Édouard Pailleron.

* * * * *

How to Write a Play Letters from Augier, Banville, Dennery, Dumas, Gondinet, Labiche, Legouvé, Pailleron, Sardou and Zola · 第 19 / 23 题