Page:Encyclopædia Britannica, Ninth Edition, v. 7.djvu/445

425 FRENCH.] DRAMA 425 speech are cadeuced by a modern measure. In construc tion, tlie simplicity and regularity of the ancient models are stereotyped into a rigid etiquette by the exigencies of the court-theatre, which is but an apartment of the palace. The unities of time and place, with the Greeks mere rules of convenience, French tragedy imposes upon itself as a permanent yoke. The Euripidean prologue is judiciously exchanged for the exposition of the first act, and the lyrical element essential to Greek tragedy is easily suppressed in its wuuld-be copy ; lyrical passages still occur in some of Corueille s early master-pieces, 1 but the chorus is con sistently banished, to reappear only in Racine s latest works 2 as a scholastic experiment appropriate to a con ventual atmosphere. Its uses for explanation and comment are served by the expedient, which in its turn becomes conventional, of the conversations with confidants and con fidantes, which more than sufficiently supply the foil of general sentiments. The epical element is allowed full play in narrative passages, more especially in those which relate parts of the catastrophe, 3 and, while preserving the stage intact from realisms, suit themselves to the generally rhetorical character of this species of the tragic drama. This character impresses itself more and more upon the tragic art of a rhetorical nation in an age when the loftiest themes are elsewhere (in the pulpit) receiving the most artistic oratorical treatment, and develops in the style of French tragedy the qualities which cause it to become something between prose and poetry or to appear (iu the phrase of a French critic) like prose in full dress. The force of this description is borne out by the fact that the distinction between the versification of French tragedy and that of French comedy is at times an imperceptible one. iltaire. The universal genius of Voltaire (1694-1778) found it necessary to shine in all branches of literature, and in tragedy to surpass^ predecessors whom his own authority declared to have surpassed the efforts of the Attic muse. He succeeded in impressing the w orld with the belief that his innovations had imparted a fresh vitality to French tragedy ; in truth, however, they represent no essential advance in art, but rather augmented the rhetorical tendency which paralyzes true dramatic life. Such life as his plays possess lies in their political and social senti ments, their invective against tyranny, 4 and their exposure of fanaticism. 5 In other respects his versatility was barren of enduring results. He might take his themes from French history, 6 or from Chinese, 7 or Egyptian, 8 or Syrian, 9 from the days of the Epigoni 10 or from those of the Cru sades; 11 he might appreciate Shakespeare, with a more or less partial comprehension of his strength, and con descendingly borrow from and improve the barbarian. 12 But he added nothing to French tragedy where it was weakest in character; and where it was strongest in diction he never equalled Corneille in fire or Racine in refinement. While the criticism to which French tragedy in this age at last began to be subjected has left unimpaired the real titles to immortality of its great masters, the French theatre itself has all but buried in respectful oblivion the dramatic works bearing the name of Voltaire a name second to none in the history of modern progress and of modern civilization. ench As it is of relatively little interest to note the ramifica- issieal tions of an art in its decline, the contrasts need not be igfly.in pursued among the contemporaries of Voltaire, between his decline. o i Le Cid; Polyeucte. 2 Esther; Athalie. 3 Comeille, Rodogunf; Racine, Phedre. 4 Brutus; La. Mori de Ctsar; Semiramls. 8 (Edlpc; Le Fanatis/ne (Mahomet}. 6 Adelaide du Giiesclin. 7 V Orphean de la Chine. s Tunis et Zeiide. ti Les Gitebres. 10 OUmpie. ]1 Tan^ ede. 12 La Mcri. de Cesar; Zaire ^OtteUo). imitator Saurin (170G-1781), Sanrin s royalist rival De Belloy (1727-1775), Racine s imitator Lagrange-Chancel (1676-1758), and Voltaire s own would-be rival, the &quot; terrible &quot; Crebillon the elder (1 674-1762), who professed to vindicate to French tragedy, already mistress of the heavens through Corneille, and of the earth through Racine, Pluto s supplementary realm, but who, though thus essaying to carry tragedy lower, failed to carry it further. In the latter part of the 18th century French classical tragedy as a literary growth was dying a slow death, however numerous might be the leaves which sprouted from ths decaying tree. Its form had been permanently fixed; and even Shakespeare, as manipulated by Ducis 13 (1733-1816) an author whose tastes were better than his times failed to bring about a change. &quot;It is a Moor, not a Frenchman, who has written this play,&quot; cried a spectator of Ducis s Othello (1791) ; but though Talma might astonish the theatre, Shakespeare s influence over the French drama was only gradually preparing itself, by means more especially of Letourneur s translation (1776- 1782), which attracted the sympathy of Diderot and thu execrations of the aged Voltaire. The command which classi cal French tragedy continued to assert over the stage was due in part, no doubt, to the love of Roman drapery which in more than one sense characterized the Revolution, and which was by the Revolution handed down to the Empire. It was likewise, and more signally, due to the great The tr; actors who freed the tragic stage from much of its artifici- sta S e - ality and animated it by their genius, No great artist has ever more generously estimated the labours of a predecessor than Talma (1763-1826) judged those of Le Kain (1728- 1778) ; but it was Talma himself whose genius was pre eminently fitted to reproduce the great Bgures of antiquity in the mimic world, which, like the world outside, both required and possessed its Gesar. He, like Rachel (1821-1858) after him, reconciled French classical tragedy with nature; and ifc is upon the art of great original actors such as these that the theatrical future of this form of the drama in Franco depends. Mere whims of fashion even when inspired by political feeling will not -waft back to it a real popu. larity ; nor will occasional literary aftergrowths, however meritorious, such as the effective Lucrece of F. Ponsard, and the attempts of even more recent writers, suffice to re establish a living union between it and the progress of the national literature. The rival influences under which classical tragedy has Coraecl become a thing of the past in French literature connect themselves with the history of French comedy, which tinder the co-operation of other influences produced a wide variety of growths. The germs of most of these though not of all are to be found in the works of the most versatile, and, in some respects, the most consummate comic dramatist the world has known, Moliere (1622-1693). Molten; What Moliere found in existence was a comedy of intrigue, derived from Spanish or Italian examples, and the elements of a comedy of character, in French and more especially in Italian farce and ballet-pantomime. Corneille s Metrteur had pointed the way to a fuller combination of character with intrigue, and in this direction Moliere s genius exercised the height of its creative powers. After begin ning with farces, he produced in the earliest of his plays (from 1652), of which more than fragments remain, comedies of intrigue which are at the same time marvel lously lively pictures of manners, and then proceeded with the Ecole des Maris (1661) to begin a long series of master pieces of comedy of character. Yet even these, the chief of which are altogether unrivalled in dramatic literature, do not exhaust the variety of his productions. To define the 13 Hamlet; Le Loi Lear, d-c. VII. -- 54