Page:Encyclopædia Britannica, Ninth Edition, v. 9.djvu/712

 (576 FRANCE [LITERATURE. periodical literature. The feudalist affectations of Chateau briand and the legitimists excited a sort of a3sthetic affec tion for Gothicism, and Walter Scott became one of the most favourite authors in France. Soon was started the periodical La Muse Francaise, in which the names of Hugo, De Vigny, Deschamps, and Madame de Girardin appear. Almost all the writers in this periodical were eager royalists, and for some time the battle was still fought on political grounds. There could, however, be no special connexion between classical drama and liberalism; and the liberal journal, the Globe, with no less a person than Sainte-Beuve among its contributors, declared definite war against classi cism in the drama. Soon the question became purely literary, and the romantic school proper was born in the famous cenade or clique in which Hugo was chief poet, Sainte-Beuve chief critic, and Gautier, Gerard de Nerval, Kmile and Antony Deschamps, Petrus Borel, and others were officers. Alfred de Vigny and Alfred de Musset stand somewhat apart, and so does Charles Nodier (1783-1844), a versatile and voluminous writer, the very variety and number of whose works have somewhat prevented the in dividual excellence of any of them from having justice done to it. The objects of the school, which was at first violently opposed, so much so that certain Academicians actually petitioned the king to forbid the admission of any romantic piece at the Theatre Franc.ais, were, briefly stated, the burning of everything which had been adored, and the adoring of everything which had been burnt They would have no unities, no arbitrary selection of subjects, no re straints on variety of versification, no academically limited vocabulary, no considerations of artificial beauty, and, above all, no periphrastic expression. The mot propre, the calling of a spade a spade, was the great commandment of roman ticism ; but it must be allowed that what was taken away in periphrase was made up in adjectives. De Musset, who was very much of a free-lance in the contest, maintained indeed that the differentia of the romantic was the copious use of this part of speech. All sorts of epithets were in vented to distinguish the two parties, of which Flamboyant and Grisdtre are perhaps the most accurate and expressive pair, the former serving to denote the gorgeous tints and bold attempts of the new school, the latter the grey colour and monotonous outlines of the old. The representation of Hernani in 1S30 was the culmination of the struggle, and during great part of the reign of Louis Philippe almost all the younger men of letters in France were romantics. The representation of the Lucrece of Ponsard (1814-1 8G7) in 1846 is often quoted as the herald or sign of a classical re action. But this was only apparent, and signified, if it signified anything, merely that the more juvenile excesses of the romantics were out of date. For forty years all the greatest men of letters of France have been on the innovat ing side, and all without exception, whether intentionally or not, have had their work coloured by the results of the movement Drama and Poetry since 1830. Although the immediate subject on which the battles of classics and romantics arose was dramatic poetry, the dramatic results of the movement have not been tho*e of greatest value or most permanent character. The principal effect in the long run has been the introduction of a species of play called drame, as opposed to regular comedy and tragedy, admitting of much freer treatment than either of these two as previously under stood in French, and lending itself in some measure to the lengthy and disjointed action, the multiplicity of personages, and the absence of stock characters which characterized the English stage in its palmy days. All Victor Hugo s dramatic works are of this class, and each, as it was pro duced or published (Cromwell, Hernani, Marion de I Orme, Le AW s amuse, Lucrece Boryw, Marie Tudor, liny Has, and Les Bury raves), was a literary event, and excited the most violent discussion, the author s usual plan being to prefix a prose preface of a very militant character to his work. A still more melodramatic variety of drame was that chiefly represented by Alexandre Dumas (1803-1874), whose Henri III. and Antony, to which may be added later La Tour de Neslc and Mademoiselle de Belleisle, were almost as much rallying points for the early romantics as the dramas of Hugo, despite their inferior literary value. At the same time Alexandre Soumet (1788-1845), in Nor ma, Une Fete de Neron, &c., and Casimir Delavigne in Marino Fali&amp;lt;*)~o, Louis XI., &c., maintained a somewhat closer adherence to the older models. The classical or semi- classical reaction of the last years of Louis Philippe was re presented in tragedy by Ponsard (Lucrece, Ac/nes de Meranie, Charlotte Corday, Ulysse, and several comedies), and on the comic side, to a certain extent, by Emile Augier (b. 1820) in L Aveniuriere, Le Gendre de M. Poirier, Le Fils de Giboyer, &c. During almost the whole period Eugene Scribe (1791-18G1) poured forth innumerable comedies of the vaudeville order, which, without possessing much literary value, attained immense popularity. For the last twenty years the realist development of romanticism has had the upper hand hi dramatic composition, its principal representatives being on the one side Victoricn Sardou (b. 1831), who in Nos Intimes, La Famille Benolton, Itabagas, Dora, &c., has chiefly devoted himself to the satirical treat ment of manners, and Alexandre Dumas fils (b. 1824), who in such pieces as Les Idees de Madame Aubray and L iZtrangere has rather busied himself with morals. Cer tain isolated authors also deserve notice, such as Autran (1813-1877), a poet and Academician having some resem blance to Lamartine, whose Fille d JEscliyle created for him a dramatic reputation which he did not attempt to follow up, and Legouve (b. 1807), whose Adrienne Lecouvreur was assisted to popularity by the admirable talent of Rachel, A special variety of drama of the first literary importance has also been cultivated in this century under the title of scenes or proverbes, slight dramatic sketches, in which the dialogue and style is of even more importance than the ac tion. The best of all of these are those of Alfred de Musset (1810-1857), whose // faut qu une porte soit omvrte ou fermee, On ne badine pas avec I amovr, &c., are models of grace and wit. Among his followers may be mentioned especially M. Octave Feuillet (b. 1812). In poetry proper, as in drama, M. Victor Hugo showed Vu the way, and has never allowed any one since to take the Hu lead from him. In him all the romantic characteristics ars expressed and embodied, disregard of arbitraiy critical rules, free choice of subject, variety and vigour of metre, splendour and sonorousness of diction. If the careful atten tion to form which is also characteristic of the movement is less apparent in him than in some of his followers, it is not because it is absent, but because the enthusiastic conviction with which he attacks every subject somewhat diverts atten tion from it. As with the merits so with the defects. A deficient sense of the ludicrous which has characterized many of the romantics is strongly apparent in their leader, as is also an equally representative grandiosity, and a fond ness for the introduction of foreign and unfamiliar words, especially proper names, which occasionally produces an effect of burlesque. Victor Hugo s earliest poetical works, his chiefly royalist and political Odes, are cast in the older and accepted forms, but already display astonishing poetical qualities. But it was in the Ballades (for instance, the splendid Pas d Armes du lloi Jean, written in verses of three syllables) and the Orientates (of which may be taken for a sample the sixth section of Navarin, a perfect torrent of outlandish terms poured forth in the most admirable verse, or Les Djinns, where some of the stanzas have line*