August Strindberg, the Spirit of Revolt: Studies and ImpressionsLind-af-Hageby, L. (Lizzy)
General
August Strindberg, the Spirit of Revolt: Studies and Impressions
Lind-af-Hageby, L. (Lizzy)
Strindberg, August, 1849-1912
There is something infinitely pathetic in Strindberg's life-long
conflict with social injustice and fatuity. He was like a man digging
deep for the straggling roots of a large tree. Sometimes he found
one, but he could never put his foot on all at the same time. Social
evolution, with its infinite variety of hidden forces, which burst into
foliage on the tree of good and evil, yielded but few secrets to his
spade. He besieged the soil in his hand with passionate questions and
showered curses upon the matter under his muck-rake, but the elusive
spirit which makes flowers out of dirt and green life out of black
decay escaped him. The scepticism and impetus to transvalue all values
which the rejection of _Master Olof_ had accelerated were further
developed by the company which Strindberg now found congenial. A
coterie of artists, writers and dilettantish philosophers assembled in
the evenings in the Red Room of "Berns Restaurant." The tone was free,
the clamour for truth loud, and contemptuous of the treasures of the
past. The company was heterogeneous and disputatious, but held together
by an aggressive scepticism which was beautifully sincere. The axiom
that the spring of human action is egoism, was the basis of argument,
and hypocrisy was hunted down with relentless severity.
The old was to be destroyed and the new created.
"That is ancient," were words of reproach. As new human beings they
must think new thoughts, and new thoughts required new language.
Anecdotes and old jokes were cut short. Phrases and borrowed
expressions were rejected. One was allowed to be coarse and to call
things by their proper names, but not to be vulgar, not to quote from
the latest comic opera or to use witticisms which had appeared in the
last number of the comic paper.
Everything was focussed to strictly personal and independent judgment.
Strindberg led the way in destructive criticism. Like Spencer before
the old masters, he found the artistic perfection of the past centuries
over-rated and superseded. The historical Jesus had been exposed to
speculative criticism by scholars, and every tyro in the Red Room had
the courage to follow.
But Strindberg defied the art-consciousness of the world by attacking
Shakespeare. He knew all his plays, had read them in English, and was
familiar with the commentators. He inveighed against the loose and
disconnected composition in _Hamlet_, the commonplace characterisation,
the weakness of the anti-climax. His sling wanted a Goliath. The blind
worship of that which is old and famous roused him to battle. Friends
who came from Upsala thought alike and talked alike. They had become
parrots who repeated the same views on Raphael and Schiller, automata
from which conventional imitation had plucked every idiosyncrasy.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account