It would hardly be possible to name within the whole range of dramatic

literature another work so thoroughly pervaded with the chilling horror

of approaching calamity. The talk at the table is of the most

commonplace,--that the door will not shut properly, and they must send

for the carpenter to-morrow. But from the mechanism of the environment

there comes cumulative and incremental warning that something

extraordinary and fatal is about to happen. The wind rises, the trees

shiver, the nightingales break off their singing, the fishes in the pond

grow restive, the dogs cower in fear,--an unseen Presence walks through

the garden. Then the clanging of a scythe is heard. A cold current of

air rushes into the room. Nearer and nearer come the steps. The

grandfather insists that a stranger has seated himself in the midst of

the family. The lamp goes out. The bell strikes midnight. The old man is

sure that somebody is rising from the table. Then suddenly the baby

whose voice has never been heard starts crying. Through an inner door

steps a deaconess silently crossing herself: the mother of the house is

dead.

These incidents in themselves are not necessarily miraculous. There are

none of them but might be accounted for on perfectly natural grounds. In

fact, very plausible explanations do offer themselves for the weirdest

things that come to pass. So, especially, it was a real, ordinary mower

that chanced to whet his scythe; yet the apparition of the Old Reaper in

person could not cause the chilling consternation produced by this

trivial circumstance coming as it does as the climax of a succession of

commonplace happenings exaggerated and distorted by a fear-haunted

imagination. To produce an effect like that upon an audience whose

credulity refuses to be put to any undue strain is a victorious proof of

prime artistic ability.

_Les Aveugles_ ("The Sightless"), (1891), is pitched in the same

psychological key. The atmosphere is surcharged with unearthly

apprehension. A dreary twilight--in the midst of a thick forest--on a

lonely island; twelve blind people fretting about the absence of their

guardian. He is gone to find a way out of the woods--what can have

become of him? From moment to moment the deserted, helpless band grows

more fearstricken. The slightest sound becomes the carrier of evil

forebodings: the rustling of the foliage, the flapping of a bird's

wings, the swelling roar of the nearby sea in its dash against the

shore. The bell strikes twelve--they wonder is it noon or night? Then

questions, eager and calamitous, pass in whispers among them: Has the

leader lost his way? Will he never come back? Has the dam burst apart

and will they all be swallowed by the ocean? The pathos is greatly

heightened by an extremely delicate yet sure individuation of the

figures, as when at the mention of Heaven those not sightless from birth

raise their countenance to the sky. And where in the meanwhile is the

lost leader? He is seated right in their midst, but smitten by death.

They learn it at last through the actions of the dog; besides whom--in

striking parallel to "Princess Maleine"--the only other creature able to

see is a little child. The horror-stricken unfortunates realize that

they can never get home, and that they must perish in the woods.

In _Les Sept Princesses_ ("The Seven Princesses"), (1891), although it

is one of Maeterlinck's minor achievements, some of the qualities that

are common to all his work become peculiarly manifest. This is

particularly true of the skill shown in conveying the feeling of the

story by means of suitable scenic devices. Most of his plays depend to a

considerable degree for their dark and heavy nimbus of unreality upon a

studied combination of paraphernalia in themselves neither numerous nor

far-sought. In fact, the resulting scenic repertory, too, is markedly

limited: a weird forest, a deserted castle with marble staircase and

dreamy moonlit terrace, a tower with vaulted dungeons, a dismal corridor

flanked by impenetrable chambers, a lighted interior viewed from the

garden, a landscape bodefully crêped with twilight--the list nearly

exhausts his store of "sets."

The works mentioned so far are hardly more than able exercises

preparatory for the ampler and more finished products which were to

succeed them. Yet they represent signal steps in the evolution of a new

dramatic style, designed, as has already been intimated, to give

palpable form to emotional data descried in moments anterior not only to

articulation but even to consciousness itself; and for this reason, the

plane of the dramatic action lies deep below the surface of life, down

in the inner tabernacle where the mystic looks for the hidden destinies.

In his style, Maeterlinck had gradually developed an unprecedented

capacity for bringing to light the secret agencies of fate. A portion of

the instructed public had already learned to listen in his writings for

the finer reverberations that swing in the wake of the uttered phrase,

to heed the slightest hints and allusions in the text, to overlook no

glance or gesture that might betray the mind of the acting characters.

It is true that art to be great must be plain, but that does not mean

that the sole test of great art is the response of the simple and

apathetic.

In Maeterlinck's first masterpiece, _Pélléas et Mélisande_, (1892), the

motives again are drawn up from the lower regions of consciousness; once

more the plot is born of a gloomy fancy, and the darkling mood hovering

over scene and action attests the persistence of fatalism in the poet.

The theory of old King Arkel, the spokesman of the author's personal

philosophy, is that one should not seek to be active; one should ever

wait on the threshold of Fate. Even the younger people in the play are

infected by the morbid doctrine of an inevitable necessity for all

things that happen to them: "We do not go where we would go. We do not

do that which we would do." Perhaps, however, these beliefs are here

enounced for the last time with the author's assent or acquiescence.

In artistic merit "Pélléas and Mélisande" marks a nearer approach to

mastery, once the integral peculiarities of the form and method have

been granted. Despite a noticeable lack of force, directness, and

plasticity in the characterization, the _vie intérieure_ is most

convincingly expressed. In one of the finest scenes of the play we see

the principals at night gazing out upon a measureless expanse of water

dotted with scattered lights. The atmosphere is permeated with a

reticent yearning of love. The two young creatures, gentle, shy, their

souls tinged with melancholy, are drawn towards one another by an

ineluctable mutual attraction. Yet, though their hearts are filled to

overflowing, not a word of affection is uttered. Their love reveals

itself to us even as to themselves, without a loud and jarring

declaration, through its very speechlessness, as it were. The situation

well bears out the _roi sage_ in _Alladine et Palomides_: "There is a

moment when souls touch one another and know everything without a need

of our opening the lips." There are still other scenes in this play so

tense with emotion that words would be intrusive and dissonant. There is

that lovely picture of Mélisande at the window; Pélléas cannot reach up

to her hand, but is satisfied to feel her loosened hair about his face.

It is a question whether even that immortal love duet in "Romeo and

Juliet" casts a poetic spell more enchanting than this. At another

moment in the drama, we behold the lovers in Maeterlinck's beloved

half-light, softly weeping as they stare with speechless rapture into

the flames. And not until the final parting does any word of love pass

their lips. In another part of the play Goland, Mélisande's aging

husband, who suspects his young stepbrother, Pélléas, of loving

Mélisande, conducts him to an underground chamber. We are not told why

he has brought him there, and why he has led him to the brink of the

pitfall from which there mounts a smell of death. If it be a heinous

deed he is brooding, why does he pause in its execution? His terrible

struggle does not reveal itself through speech, yet it is eloquently

expressed in the wildness of his looks, the trembling of his voice, and

the sudden anguished outcry: "Pélléas! Pélléas!"

Evidently Maeterlinck completely achieves the very purpose to which the

so-called Futurists think they must sacrifice all traditional

conceptions of Art; and achieves it without any brutal stripping and

skinning of the poetic subject, without the hideous exhibition of its

_disjecta membra_, and above all, without that implied disqualification

for the higher artistic mission which alone could induce a man to limit

his service to the dishing-up of chunks and collops, "cubic" or

amorphous.

In recognition of a certain tendency towards mannerism that lay in his

technique, Maeterlinck, in a spirit of self-persiflage, labeled the book

of one-act plays which he next published, (1894), _Trois Petits Drames

pour Marionettes_ ("Three Little Puppet Plays"). They are entitled,

severally: _Alladine et Palomides_, _Intérieur_, and _La Mort de

Tintagiles_. While in motifs and materials as well as in the principal

points of style these playlets present a sort of epitome of his artistic

progression up to date, they also display some new and significant

qualities. Of the three the first named is most replete with suggestive

symbolism and at the same time most remindful of the older plays,

especially of "Pélléas and Mélisande." King Ablamore is in character and

demeanor clearly a counterpart of King Arkel. To be sure he makes a

temporary stand against the might of Fate, but his resistance is meek

and futile, and his wisdom culminates in the same old fatalistic

formula: "_Je sais qu'on ne fait pas ce que l'on voudrait faire._"

_L'Intérieur_ ("Home") handles a theme almost identical with that of

_L'Intruse_: Life and Death separated only by a thin pane of glass,--the

sudden advent of affliction from a cloudless sky. In this little tragedy

a family scene, enacted in "dumb show," is watched from the outside. The

play is without suspense in the customary use of the term, since after

the first whispered conversation between the bringers of the fateful

tidings the audience is fully aware of the whole story:--the daughter of

the house, for whose return the little group is waiting, has been found

dead in the river. The quiescent mood is sustained to the end; no great

outburst of lamentation; the curtain drops the instant the news has been

conveyed. But the poignancy of the tragic strain is only enhanced by the

repression of an exciting climax.

"The Death of Tintagiles" repeats in a still more harrowing form the

fearful predicament of a helpless child treated with so much dramatic

tension in Maeterlinck's first tragedy. Again, as in "Princess Maleine,"

the action of this dramolet attains its high point in a scene where

murderous treachery is about to spring the trap set for an innocent

young prince. Intuitively he senses the approach of death, and in vain

beats his little fists against the door that imprisons him. The

situation is rendered more piteous even than in the earlier treatment of

the motif, because the door which bars his escape also prevents his

faithful sister Ygraine from coming to the rescue.

We have observed in all the plays so far a marked simplicity of

construction. _Aglavaine et Selysette_, (1896), denotes a still further

simplification. Here the scenic apparatus is reduced to the very

minimum, and the psychological premises are correspondingly plain. The

story presents a "triangular" love entanglement strangely free from the

sensual ingredient; two women dream of sharing, in all purity, one

lover--and the dream ends for one of them in heroic self-sacrifice

brought to secure the happiness of the rival. However, more noteworthy

than the structure of the plot is the fact that the philosophic current

flowing through it has perceptibly altered its habitual direction. The

spiritual tendency is felt to be turning in its course, and even though

fatalism still holds the rule, with slowly relaxing grip, yet a changed

ethical outlook is manifest. Also, this play for the first time

proclaims, though in no vociferous manner, the duty of the individual

toward himself, the duty so emphatically proclaimed by two of

Maeterlinck's greatest teachers, Ralph Waldo Emerson and Henrik Ibsen.

* * * * *

The inner philosophic conflict was but of short duration. In 1898 _La

Sagesse et La Destinée_ ("Wisdom and Destiny") saw the light. The

metaphor might be taken in a meaning higher and more precise than the

customary, for, coming to this book from those that preceded is indeed

like emerging from some dark and dismal cave into the warm and cheering

light of the sun. "Wisdom and Destiny" is a collection of essays and

aphorisms which stands to this second phase of Maeterlinck's dramaturgy

in a relation closely analogous to that existing between "The Treasure

of the Humble" and the works heretofore surveyed. Without amounting to a

wholesale recantation of the idea that is central in the earlier set of

essays, the message of the newer set is of a very different kind. The

author of "Wisdom and Destiny" has not changed his view touching the

superiority of the intuitional function over the intellectual. The

significant difference between the old belief and the new consists

simply in this: the latent force of life is no longer imagined as an

antagonistic agency; rather it is conceived as a benign energy that

makes for a serene acceptance of the world that is. Of this turn in the

outlook, the philosophic affirmation of life and the consent of the will

to subserve the business of living are the salutary concomitants.

Wisdom, in expanding, has burst the prison of fatalism and given freedom

to vision. The world, beheld in the light of this emancipation, is not

to be shunned by the wise man. Let Fortune bring what she will, he can

strip his afflictions of their terrors by transmuting them into higher

knowledge. Therefore, pain and suffering need not be feared and shirked;

they may even be hailed with satisfaction, for, as is paradoxically

suggested in _Aglavaine et Selysette_, they help man "_être heureux en

devenant plus triste_,"--to be happy in becoming sadder. The poet, who

till now had clung to the conviction that there can be no happy fate,

that all our destinies are guided by unlucky stars, now on the contrary

persuades us to consider how even calamity may be refined in the medium

of wisdom in such fashion as to become an asset of life, and warns us

against recoiling in spirit from any reverse of our fortunes. He holds

that blows and sorrows cannot undo the sage. Fate has no weapons save

those we supply, and "wise is he for whom even the evil must feed the

pyre of love." In fine, Fate obeys him who dares to command it. After

all, then, man has a right to appoint himself the captain of his soul,

the master of his fate.

Yet, for all that, the author of "Wisdom and Destiny" should not be

regarded as the partizan and apologist of sadness for the sake of

wisdom. If sorrow be a rich mine of satisfaction, joy is by far the

richer mine. This new outlook becomes more and more optimistic because

of the increasing faculty of such a philosophy to extract from the mixed

offerings of life a more near-at-hand happiness than sufferings can

possibly afford; not perchance that perpetual grinning merriment over

the comicality of the passing spectacle which with so many passes for a

"sense of humor," but rather a calm and serious realization of what is

lastingly beautiful, good, and true. A person's attainment of this

beatitude imposes on him the clear duty of helping others to rise to a

similar exalted level of existence. And this duty Maeterlinck seeks to

discharge by proclaiming in jubilant accents the concrete reality of

happiness. _L'Oiseau Bleu_ ("The Blue Bird"), above all other works,

illustrates the fact that human lives suffer not so much for the lack of

happiness as for the want of being clearly conscious of the happiness

they possess. It is seen that the seed of optimism in "The Treasure of

the Humble" has sprouted and spread out, and at last triumphantly shot

forth through the overlaying fatalism. The newly converted, hence all

the more thoroughgoing, optimist, believing that counsel and consolation

can come only from those who trust in the regenerative power of hope,

throws himself into a mental attitude akin to that of the Christian

Scientist, and confidently proceeds to cure the ills of human kind by a

categorical denial of their existence. Or perhaps it would be more just

to say of Maeterlinck's latter-day outlook, the serenity of which even

the frightful experience of the present time has failed to destroy, that

instead of peremptorily negating evil, he merely denies its supremacy.

All about him he perceives in the midst of the worst wrongs and evils

many fertile germs of righteousness; vice itself seems to distil its own

antitoxin.

Together with Maeterlinck's optimistic strain, his individualism gains

an unexpected emphasis. "Before one exists for others, one must exist

for one's self. The egoism of a strong and clear-sighted soul is of a

more beneficent effect than all the devotion of a blind and feeble

soul." Here we have a promulgation identical in gist with Emerson's

unqualified declaration of moral independence when he says: "Whoso would

be a man must be a nonconformist. He who would gather immortal palms

must not be hindered by the name of goodness, but must explore if it be

goodness. Nothing is at last sacred but the integrity of your own mind.

No law can be sacred to me but that of my nature."(8)

(8) "Self-Reliance."

His attitude of countenancing the positive joys of living causes

Maeterlinck in his later career to reverse his former judgment, and to

inveigh, much in the manner of Nietzsche, against the "parasitical

virtues." "Certain notions about resignation and self-sacrifice sap the

finest moral forces of mankind more thoroughly than do great vices and

even crimes. The alleged triumphs over the flesh are in most cases only

complete defeats of life." When to such rebellious sentiments is joined

an explicit warning against the seductions and intimidations held out by

the official religions--their sugar plums and dog whips, as Maeterlinck

puts it--one can only wonder how his writings escaped as long as they

did the attention of the authorities that swing the power of imprimatur

and anathema.

Maeterlinck may not be classed unreservedly as a radical individualist.

For whereas a philosophy like that of Nietzsche takes no account of the

"much-too-many," who according to that great fantasist do not interest

anybody except the statistician and the devil, Maeterlinck realizes the

supreme importance of the great mass as the ordained transmitters of

civilization. The gulf between aristocratic subjectivism, devoted

single-mindedly to the ruthless enforcement of self-interest, and, on

the other hand, a self-forgetful social enthusiasm, is bridged in

Maeterlinck by an extremely strong instinct for justice and, moreover,

by his firm belief--at least for the time being--that the same strong

instinct exists universally as a specific trait of human nature. By such

a philosophy Justice, then, is discerned not as a supra-natural

function, but as a function of human nature as distinguished from nature

at large. The restriction is made necessary by our knowledge of the

observable operations of nature. In particular would the principle of

heredity seem to argue against the reign of justice in the

administration of human destinies, inasmuch as we find ourselves quite

unable to recognize in the apportionment of pleasure and pain anything

like a due ratio of merit. And yet Maeterlinck realizes that perhaps

nature measures life with a larger standard than the individual's short

span of existence, and warns us in his essay on "Justice" not to indulge

our self-conceit in a specious emulation of ways that are utterly beyond

our comprehension. After all, then, our poet-philosopher succeeds _foro

conscientiæ_ in reconciling his cult of self with devotion to the common

interest. Morality, in that essay, is defined as the co-ordination of

personal desire to the task assigned by nature to the race. And is it

not true that a contrary, that is, ascetic concept of morality reduces

itself to absurdity through its antagonism to that primal human instinct

that makes for the continuity of life?

* * * * *

From the compromise effected between two fairly opposite ethical

principles, there emerges in the works of this period something akin to

a socialistic tendency. It is organically related to the mystical

prepossession of the author's manner of thinking. Maeterlinck gratefully

acknowledges that by the search-light of science the uppermost layers of

darkness have been dispelled; but realizes also that the deep-seated

central enigma still remains in darkness: as much as ever are the

primordial causes sealed against a glimpse of finite knowledge. We have

changed the names, not the problems. Instead of God, Providence, or

Fate, we say Nature, Selection, and Heredity. But in reality do we know

more concerning Life than did our ancestors?

What, then, questions the persevering pursuer of the final verities,

shall we do in order that we may press nearer to Truth? May we not

perchance steep our souls in light that flows from another source than

science? And what purer light is there to illumine us than the halo

surrounding a contented worker performing his task, not under coercion,

but from a voluntary, or it may be instinctive, submission to the law of

life? If such subordination of self constitutes the basis of rational

living, we shall do well to study its workings on a lowlier and less

complicated plane than the human; for instance, in the behavior of the

creature that is proverbial for its unflagging industry. For this

industry is not motivated by immediate or selfish wants; it springs from

instinctive self-dedication to the common cause. Some people expected

from _La Vie des Abeilles_ ("The Life of the Bee"), (1901), much

brand-new information about matters of apiculture. But in spite of his

twenty-five years' experience, Maeterlinck had no startling discoveries

to convey to his fellow-hivers. His book on bees is not primarily the

result of a specialist's investigations but a poetical record of the

observations made by a mind at once romantic and philosophical and

strongly attracted to the study of this particular form of community

life, because by its organization on a miniature scale it spreads before

the student of society a synoptic view of human affairs.

Of the great change that had by now taken place in his conception of

life, Maeterlinck was fully cognizant, and made no concealment of it. In

the essay on "Justice" he says, with reference to his earlier dramas:

"The motive of these little plays was the fear of the Unknown by which

we are constantly surrounded," and passes on to describe his religious

temper as a sort of compound of the Christian idea of God with the

antique idea of Fate, immersed in the profound gloom of hopeless

mystery. "The Unknown took chiefly the aspect of a power, itself but

blindly groping in the dark, yet disposing with inexorable unfeelingness

of the fates of men."

Prophets of Dissent : Essays on Maeterlinck, Strindberg, Nietzsche and Tolstoy · 第 2 / 10 段