with sarcasm (which seems well merited) the theory of Brodmeier, who
holds that the entire stage in Shakespeare’s theater was curtained from
view. But I should like to question whether or not his own judgments
would have been quite the same if he had known the Chinese stage before
he wrote his estimable thesis. A Chinese actor walks once around the
stage in full view of the audience, and in conformity with the ruling
conventions he has traveled miles, or hundreds of miles, as the plot
requires. Doctor Albright, arguing backwards from the Restoration
staging, comes to the conclusion that there was in the Elizabethan
theater a regular changing from inner to outer scenes, and vice versa,
and that the few pieces of furniture which constituted the stage setting
were always carefully shut off from the view of the audience. He quotes
an example with his comment from a play called “Pinner of Wakefield”, Act
IV, Scenes 3-4. “Jenkins enters a shoemaker’s shop, and dares the owner
to meet him at ‘the towne’s end.’ The challenge is accepted, and after a
certain amount of stage business, _during which the curtains must have
been closed_ [italics mine], Jenkins says, ‘Now we are at the towne’s
end, what say you now?’” However, I should add that in his concluding
paragraph Doctor Albright is by no means dogmatic, but gives this merely
as his theory, stating that there is absolutely no way of proving it.
With all the striking similarities in the Shakespearean and the Chinese
theater there are of course also vast differences, especially in the
background of the two. So far as I know there has never existed in China
a manner of staging which could in any way be compared to the medieval
system of mansions. Likewise the evolution of the platform stage into the
picture-frame stage of the present day makes it seem that even on the
projecting stage the feeling for the need of the curtain for the sake
of the illusion increased as time went on. I repeat that I have not the
slightest intention of arguing from certain conventions on the Chinese
stage that they must have been identical in Elizabethan times. My point
is simply that scholars ought not to assert that certain primitive
conventions are “against the nature of the stage” or “contrary to human
nature”, for this point of view is based on the current conventions
with which the particular writer is acquainted. I should like to quote
the concluding words of Doctor Albright’s thesis, spoken out of the
depth of his experience of wrestling for years with the problems we
are discussing. He calls an article by William Archer “one of the most
original and enlightening articles on the Shakespearean stage that has
yet appeared.” He says further about this writer, “As a learned dramatic
critic of to-day, he approaches the Elizabethan stage with that special
insight and ability which a closet student cannot hope to have. The stage
and the staging have changed since the days of Shakespeare, but the mimic
world is still the mimic world; and the deeper the scholar is grounded
in the stage of to-day, the better he is qualified to study the stage
of yesterday.” And, allow me to add, the knowledge of a living stage at
a similar period of culture will likewise add to his qualifications to
study the theater of the past.
[Illustration]
CHRONOLOGICAL TABLE
B.C.
2705-2595 Huang Ti, mythological emperor.
2357-2206 Legendary sages to whose teachings Confucius harked
back.
551 Birth of Confucius.
255-206 Ch’in Shih Huang Ti, the emperor who burned the books
and built the Great Wall.
206 B.C. to
221 A.D. Han Dynasty—Recovery of literature—Introduction of
Buddhism.
A.D.
221-265 The “Three Kingdoms”—Age of romantic chivalry.
618-906 The T’ang Dynasty—Emperor Ming Huang, traditional
founder of the theater, and his consort Yang
Kuei-fei, China’s most famous beauty. China was
at this time the most civilized country in the
world. Li Po and other great lyric poets.
960-1127 The Sung Dynasty—Development of landscape painting.
1280-1368 The Yuan or Mongol Dynasty—Classical age of Chinese
drama. Genghis Khan and Kublai Khan. Marco Polo.
1368-1644 The Ming Dynasty—Restoration of Chinese rulers—Drama
in the hands of scholars.
1644-1911 The Ch’ing or Manchu Dynasty—Emperors K’ang Hsi and
Ch’ien Lung encourage arts and letters, including
the theater.
1912- The Republic.
[Illustration]
BIBLIOGRAPHY
History of the Drama under the Sung and Yuan Dynasties. Wang Kuo-wei.
Commercial Press. Shanghai, 1915.
Not translated into any European language.
Théâtre Chinois, ou Choix de Pièces de Théâtre Composées sous les
Empereurs Mongols. Bazin Ainé. Paris, 1838.
Four Yuan Dynasty plays translated by a French sinologue who
was for years Professor of Chinese at the École des Langues
Orientales.
Chine Moderne, ou Description Historique, Géographique, et Littéraire de
ce vaste Empire, d’après des Documents Chinois. Paris, 1853.
In the second part of this volume M. Bazin gives numerous
discussions of Chinese plays with summaries of their plots.
Very valuable work.
Le Pi-Pa-Ki, ou L’Histoire du Luth. Traduit sur le texte original par M.
Bazin Ainé. Paris, 1841.
Contains also a very good introduction to this important Ming
drama.
L’Orphelin de la Chine. Drame en prose et en vers, accompagné des pièces
historiques qui en ont fourni le sujet, de nouvelles et de poésies
chinoises traduit de chinois par Stanislas Julien. Paris, 1834.
A complete translation by the famous French sinologue of the
Yuan drama, The Orphan of the Chao Family. Voltaire made an
abridged version by a Jesuit missionary the basis of his
L’Orphelin de la Chine (1755), a stiff and artificial piece,
presenting a Genghis Khan who falls in love in the manner of a
French courtier of the 18th century.
L’Histoire du Cercle de Craie. Traduit du chinois par Stanislas Julien.
London, 1832.
Translation of a Yuan drama.
The Sorrows of Han. Translated by John Francis Davis, F.R.S. London, 1829.
A Yuan drama translated by a British sinologue; The Fortunate
Union, a Chinese romance, appears in the same volume.
Le Chagrin dans le Palais de Han. Louis Laloy. Publié par la Société
littéraire de France. Paris, 1921.
M. Laloy’s version of this Yuan drama attempts to introduce
some modern motivation. In his preface the author expresses
the fear that in working over this Chinese tragedy “_il l’a
défigurée en tachant de l’embellir_”, and perhaps his fears
were justified.
La Chine Familière et Galante. Jules Arène. Paris, 1876.
In this volume by a French consul “_qui contient des détails
fort curieux et intéressants sur les chinois, et surtout sur
les chinoises_” are printed translations of four realistic
comedies of popular life, “_sorte de vaudeville au gros sel,
où, en gestes comme en paroles, la license chinoise se donne
libre carrière_.” About ninety pages are devoted to the theater.
The Chinese Drama. William Stanton. Kelly and Walsh. Hongkong, 1899.
A British colonial official has translated three plays. The
Willow Lute, The Golden-leafed Chrysanthemum, and The Sacrifice
for the Soul of Ho Man Sau. In an introduction of eighteen
pages the author discusses the types and conventions of the
Chinese stage as seen in Hongkong and Canton. It is interesting
to note that in general the southern theater is identical
with that of Peking, but that there are some variations,
particularly in customs and ceremonials.
Catching a Golden Tortoise.
Beating the Gold Bough.
Two Chinese plays translated by Charles Budd, Tung Wen
Kuan Translation Office, Shanghai, 1913. Short and mildly
interesting plays, translated partly for the purpose of aiding
Chinese who wish to learn English.
Chinesische Schattenspiele. Übersetzt von Wilhelm Grube, herausgegeben
und eingeleitet von Berthold Laufer, Verlag der königlich bayerischen
Akademie der Wissenschaften. München, 1915.
A huge volume containing in translation the entire repertoire
of a company of shadow players which Berthold Laufer, Curator
of the Field Museum, had bought in Peking in 1901 and which
were translated by the famous German sinologue. Though these
plays are not presented on the stage, but recited by shadow
players to accompany the movements of their puppets that cast
shadows on a screen, yet the plots are the same as those of the
theater. The book thus serves as a wonderful source for some
one wishing to familiarize himself with Chinese plays. Berthold
Laufer has prefaced the book with a meaty introduction.
Pekinger Volksleben. Wilhelm Grube. Berlin, 1901.
Sociological studies on popular customs and usages in Peking. A
chapter is devoted to the theater in which numerous summaries
of modern plays are given. The author also deals with related
subjects: acrobats, story-tellers, annual ceremonies of guilds,
etc.
Geschichte der chinesischen Litteratur. Wilhelm Grube. Leipzig, 1909.
Several chapters are devoted to the drama. Professor Grube,
in his discussion of Yuan and Ming plays, is using Bazin’s
translations, but in his evaluation of modern plays he is
drawing on his long and intimate experience with the theater in
Peking.
A History of Chinese literature. Herbert A. Giles. Heinemann, London.
This well-known sinologue devotes two chapters to the drama,
but they are not up to the standard of the rest of this
excellent work. Pi-Pa-Chi is the most modern drama he discusses.
Das Theater und Drama der Chinesen. Rudolf von Gottschall. Breslau, 1887.
This small volume of 209 pages was written by a minor German
dramatist without first-hand knowledge of China. The author
based his study upon French translations of older dramas. Yet
the book is not lacking in remarks showing a keen insight into
the Chinese character.
La Littérature Chinoise Contemporaine. Soong Tsung Faung, _Journal de
Pékin_. Peking, 1919.
A volume by a professor of literature at the National
University, Peking, in which his critical articles from
Peking’s French paper are reprinted. Forty-seven pages are
devoted to the theater under headings such as the following:
“Origin of the Drama”, “Evolution of the Modern Chinese
Theater”, “Ibsenism in China”, etc. Professor Soong follows to
a certain extent Wang Kuo-wei’s History of the Drama under the
Sung and Ming Dynasties. His thorough knowledge of the European
stage enables him to make very striking comparisons.
Peking, A Social Survey. Sidney Gamble and Stewart J. Burgess. Doran,
1921.
The chapter “Recreations” in this interesting and painstaking
survey presents statistics on the number of theaters, their
locations, prices of admission, status of the actor and
actress, etc.
En Chine, Mœurs et Institutions, Hommes et Faits. Maurice Courant. Paris,
1901.
The French diplomat devotes one chapter to the theater. He
writes before the Revolution, but most things connected with
the theater have been changed very little. He reports one
abuse, however, which the Revolution (1912) abolished. Page
144: “_La prostitution féminine reste discrète, car la femme
est toujours tenue à l’écart; mais la prostitution masculine
s’étale au grand jour; il n’est guère de pàrtie de théâtre où
l’amphitryon ne réunisse ses amis d’abord au restaurant et
ne convie quelques jeunes garçons de bonne mine, richement
habillés, sachant causer et ‘rendre le vin plus agréable’;
ils plaisantent et rient avec les convives, les accompagnent
au théâtre et restent avec eux jusqu’à ce que, la fête finie,
chacun rentre chez soi. Naturellement, aux simples lettrés on
ne demande que leur bonne humeur, et ce sont les riches qui
paient la note; bien de fils de famille se ruinent de cette
façon._”
The Yellow Jacket. A Chinese play done in the Chinese manner, in three
acts, by George C. Hazelton and Benrimo. Bobbs-Merrill, 1913.
This play represents a unique example of Chinese influence
producing a worth-while drama on our stage. Will Irwin was kind
enough to write to me concerning its origin:
“... I can tell you the history of the play. Harry Benrimo,
actor and stage-director, is a native of San Francisco. He
saw much of the Chinese in California. His father was a
contractor, employing Chinese labor and doing business with
Chinese merchants. As a young actor, Benrimo became interested
in the Chinese theaters of San Francisco. That was the golden
age of the Chinese theater in America. The price of admission
made the Jackson Street Company and the Washington Street
Company rich on Chinese standards and they were able to get
some great actors—just as the money from the Metropolitan
Opera drew Caruso from Italy. Ah Chic, leading tragedian of
the Jackson Street Company, was as great an actor as I ever
saw.... Benrimo sketched out a scenario made not from any one
Chinese play, but from a dozen—situations or bits of business
or dialogue which he remembered from his old days in San
Francisco theaters. Benrimo called into collaboration the late
George Hazelton, playwright. On this scenario they worked out
The Yellow Jacket.... Several Chinese, notably one man—name
forgotten—from the Consulate helped with the rehearsals.
Deliberately the authors took certain liberties with Chinese
drama and psychology in order to make the play effective for
an Occidental audience. Notably, they made the love of man for
woman the main theme. One piece of business, I remember, caused
endless dispute. It is where the happy and united lovers kiss.
That would not happen, of course, with the Chinese. Benrimo
understood that perfectly. But he said that an Occidental
audience would expect it. And he had his way. I remember that
whenever this piece of business occurred in the rehearsals, the
man from the Consulate used to giggle.
“Lately I was talking over The Yellow Jacket with Percy
Hammond, dramatic critic. ‘Do you know what made it a success?’
he said, ‘The Property Man as played by Shaw.’ Possibly he’s
right about that. But the play served its artistic purpose.
It made American audiences understand something of this
extraordinary art. And I’ve no doubt but that if Hazelton and
Benrimo had stuck close to the originals our audiences wouldn’t
have understood half so well.”
So far as my experience goes, making love the main theme is not
un-Chinese, but The Property Man as played on our stages is.
Possibly Cantonese usage differs in this respect, but in Peking
property men are always on the stage, coolies dressed in shabby
blue cotton, but they are conspicuous only to the Westerner
not used to Chinese conventions. They by no means have the
importance attached to them in The Yellow Jacket. Compare the
chapter, “External Aspects.”
The Chinese Drama. R. F. Johnston. Kelly & Walsh, 1921.
A slender volume that came to be written because the publishing
firm had four paintings of Chinese actors which they wanted
to issue in calendar form with a few words of comment from
the well-known sinologue. Mr. Johnston became absorbed in the
subject and wrote so much and so interestingly on it that Kelly
& Walsh decided to make a book out of it. The text is much
better than the pictures.
Le Théâtre Chinois. Chu Chia-chien. Paris, 1922.
The chief features of this book are the excellent paintings
and sketches made in Peking theaters by the Russian artist,
Alexandre Jacovleff. An English edition has been published by
Putnam. No other book can give such a vivid notion of the real
appearance as well as the spirit of the Chinese stage as this
volume of inspired drawings. M. Chu Chia-chien, instructor in
the École des Langues Orientales in Paris, writes well, but too
briefly, on the conditions and conventions of the Chinese stage.
Chinesische Literatur. Eduard Erkes. Hirt, Breslau, 1924.
A brief, but up-to-the-minute sketch of Chinese literature.
This volume by a University of Leipzig Privatdozent is one of
a series on the literatures of various nations. The book came
to me too late to include what it said on the origin of the
theater in China in the text, and therefore I shall quote an
interesting paragraph here. (The author speaks of the Pear
Garden origin as a myth and says that the Chinese had a theater
as early as other nations):
“_Es hat sich aus den bei festlichen Gelegenheiten aller Art,
bei Krieg und Jagd, bei Opfer und Gelage, inszenierten Tänzen
entwickelt, in denen man vorher im Spiel darstellte, was sich
nachher zutragen sollte, um so auf magische Weise das Geschick
günstig zu lenken, und nachher seiner Freude mimischen
Ausdruck verlieh. Zu diesen Tänzen sang man Wechselgesänge mit
Rede und Gegenrede, wie solche uns anscheinend aus mehreren
Liedern des Schi-king erhalten sind, so dasz das China der
Urzeit auch hierin das Leben anderer primitiver Völker geführt
hat. Aus Südchina sind uns Texte solcher Dramen religiösen
Charakters, wie sie auch K’üh Yüan im dritten Jahrhundert
vor Christo bearbeitete, mehrfach überliefert, und bereits
aus dem Jahre 545 v. Chr. haben wir eine Notiz nach der bei
Tempelfesten, ganz ähnlich wie im alten Hellas, nach den
ernsten Schaustellungen eine Burleske von den Stallknechten
aufgeführt wurde. Das zeigt also, dasz die dramatische Kunst
der Tang-Zeit nicht einen Anfang, sondern nur eine späte
Etappe auf einem langen Wege bedeutet. Auch die Han-Zeit
hatte ihre Singspiele, die bereits mit einem umfangreichen
szenischen Apparat auf geführt wurden und vielleicht
kompliziertere Bühneneinrichtungen voraussetzen lassen,
als sie das heutzutage an Einfachheit unserer modernsten
Schaubühne ebenbürtige—vielleicht für sie vorbildlich
gewordene?—chinesische Theater jetzt bietet._” Pages 58-59.
Altchinesische Liebeskomödien, aus dem chinesischen Urtexte ausgewählt
und übertragen von Hans Rudelsberger. Kunstverlag von Anton Schroll & Co.
Wien, 1923.
Free translations of five comedies of love (among them two
comedies discussed in this book on pages 33 and 96). The
work is a splendid specimen of book-making with five colored
illustrations by the Chinese artist Hua Mei-chai and numerous
woodcuts from the original Chinese editions.
_Journal of the North China Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society._
This very interesting journal, so far as I have been able to
examine the files, contains only two articles on the theater:
Volume XX, “Chinese Theatricals”, and Volume XXI, “Histrionic
Notes.” Neither is very important.
This bibliography is by no means exhaustive. There are a great many
articles not mentioned here, but they are generally not very instructive.
In most cases they are written by travelers who note the obvious things
about the Chinese theater. Naturally there is also a great deal of
repetition in these writings.
FOOTNOTES
[1] As I find the Revised Version, with a fuller understanding of
Oriental life, prefers to phrase it.
[2] Commercial Press, Shanghai, 1915.—A small volume of about 200 pages.
Not translated into a European language.—The same author has issued a
“Dramatical Catalogue”, same publishers, 1917.
[3] Quoted by De Groot, “Religious Systems of China”, vol. VI, p. 1187.
[4] The chief reason why theatricals are given at the village temples
to-day is that they are public buildings with convenient stages. Not only
religious but also secular plays are performed, sometimes vulgar and
immoral ones. On the whole the moral standard of the Chinese stage is
very high and must be called a good influence for the largely illiterate
population. The worship at Chinese temples in the course of the religious
festivals has the general character of a carnival with money changers,
booths for eating and drinking, acrobats, magicians, beggars, gambling
devices, etc.
[5] See Sir William Ridgeway, “The Dramas and Dramatic Dances of
Non-European Races in Special Reference to the Origin of Greek Tragedy,”
Cambridge University Press, 1915.
[6] Professor Porter calls my attention to the fact that Doctor Hu
Shih calls these court jesters “sophists.” They were the ones to make
the shrewdest observations among all courtiers. The suggestion of the
revolutionary element probably accounts for the death sentence.
[7] _La Revue de Genève_, January, 1921.
[8] Note by Professor Porter: Mr. Wang develops his argument very well,
using evidence from the odd foreign names of countries, localities and
places. At the period it is known that there was extensive intercourse
between Western countries and China along the northern and southern
caravan routes.
[9] Page 257.
[10] The difficulty in acquiring a reading knowledge of the classical
Chinese (Wen Li) does not consist chiefly in learning to read five
thousand or more ideograms—that is only a minor trouble—but in the
retention in the memory of the texts of the classics to which constant
allusion is made in a manner to confuse utterly the uninitiated. “The
dragon has gone down to the sea” means “the emperor has died.” Or to
translate the idea into English; the Bible says, “The words of the wise
are as goads” (Ecclesiastes xii, II) and Shakespeare (Hamlet V, I).
“There is no ancient gentleman but gardeners”; therefore the reader would
have to know that “goads” stands for the words of the wise and “ancient
gentlemen” for gardeners. But connoisseurs regard this classical language
as the greatest monument of China, far finer than Sung pottery or the
Temple of Heaven. Said a friend to me one day, picking up a copy of Omar
at the verse:
O Thou, who man of baser earth didst make,
And didst with Paradise devise the snake,
For all the sin wherewith the face of man
Is blackened, man’s forgiveness give and take.
“Such is this wonderfully rich, poetic Wen Li, while in Pai Hua (the
vernacular) this same thought would cover pages of dull, colorless
prose.” Of course, the spoken language is still as poor a vehicle for
poetic thought as Italian was before Dante, but its advocates hope for
its growth and development.
[11] “Travels of Marco Polo”, Everyman Edition, Dutton and Company, page
186.
[12] The Chinese woman must as a child obey her father, as a wife her
husband, and as a widow her son. The four wifely virtues are: (1) to
honor and serve her mother-in-law; (2) to respect her husband; (3) to
live in peace with her sisters-in-law; and (4) to have pity on the poor.
[13] See Bibliography.
[14] The Chinese name for the instrument is _chin_. Chinese writers on
music have set down seven conditions under which one should not play the
instrument: when one has just heard the news of a death; when some one
is playing the flute in the vicinity; when one is oppressed by business
cares; when one has not purified his body; when one is not wearing the
ceremonial cap and gown; when one has not lighted sweet-smelling incense;
and when there is not present a friend who understands music. Chancellor
Tsai Yuan-pei, until 1923 the head of the National University in Peking,
was a believer in training in æsthetics, and considered a proper
appreciation of the music of the chin a most desirable element in the
_mental equipment_ of a cultured man.
[15] Giles, “Chinese Literature”, page 155. “A poet should not dot his
i’s. The Chinese reader likes to do that for himself, each according to
his own fancy. Hence such a poem as the following, often quoted as a
model in its own particular line:
“A tortoise I see
on a lotus-flower resting:
A bird mid the reeds
and the rushes is nesting;
A light skiff propelled
by some boatman’s fair daughter,
Whose song dies away
o’er the fast-flowing water.”
[16] A most readable biography in English has just been published by the
Commercial Press, Shanghai: “Yang Kuei-fei”, by Mrs. Wu Lien-teh.—In
the _Mercure de France_, beginning August, 1922, there appeared a
fascinating series of articles: “La Passion de Yang Kuei-fei”, by Soulie,
translations of songs by blind Chinese singers woven into the story of
the greatest Chinese tale of love.
[17] “The Jade Chaplet, A Collection of Songs, Ballads, etc., from the
Chinese.” Trübner and Company, London, 1874.
[18] The Chinese actually say that the birds imitated her voice in their
notes.
[19] One of the many complaints against Yang Kuei-fei was her fancy for
fresh _Li-chihs_. She was so fond of these, that she had them, when in
season, brought from the South to Ch’ang An daily, a distance of three
thousand _li_. This apparently simple fancy was the cause of immense
suffering, distress, and injustice; the messengers carrying the luxury,
presuming on the protection of their mistress, committed all manner of
depredation and violence.