What can we glean about the limitations of the dramatic subject from
these successful plays? There is a limitation somewhere, and the first
and most obvious is--time. A novelist can make the minute description of
a life interesting. The most celebrated novels, such as "Robinson
Crusoe," "Vicar of Wakefield," "David Copperfield," "Pendennis," "The
Three Guardsmen," and others, have been just such books, imitations of
real biographies. But a play is limited in length to five acts, or six
at most, and its time of acting has a practical limit of three hours,
with the inter-acts. Each act is further practically limited to five
scenes, and it is but seldom that it stretches over three, while the
latter average is never exceeded and seldom reached in a five-act play.
No scene can properly contain more than a chapter of a novel, so we find
ourselves practically limited to a story which can be told inside of
fifteen chapters, the further inside the better. The French, who are
much more artificial than the English in their dramatic canons, almost
invariably limit their acts to a single scene, reducing their story
thereby to only five chapters. A careful comparison of successful acting
plays will generally end in bringing us to one obvious canon:
I. The subject of a drama must be capable of being fully
treated in fifteen chapters at most.
The next limitation that we meet is in the nature of the story. A
novelist can describe his hero and heroine and the scenes in which they
move. He can depict them in motion, and describe a long journey in
strange countries, trusting to picturesque scenery and incident to help
him out. He can give us a sketch of their former life, and tell how they
fared after they were happily married. The dramatist cannot do this. He
must put his people down in a given place and leave them there till his
scene is over, opening another scene or another act after a silent
interval. He can, indeed, put a narrative of supposed events into the
mouth of any of his characters, but such narratives are always dull and
prosy, and to be avoided. Shakespeare uses them sometimes, but only when
he cannot help himself, and always makes them short. The nearest
instances that occur to us are, the description by Tressel to Henry VI.
of the murder of Prince Edward, usually put now in the first act of
"Richard III.," and the story of Oliver in "As You Like It." Sometimes a
short story cannot be helped, but if told, it is always found to be of a
collateral circumstance not directly leading to the catastrophe. It
generally is brought in only to explain the presence of a character on
the stage in the successful drama. Sometimes it happens otherwise. For
instance, Coleman makes Mortimer, in the "Iron Chest," tell the whole
mystery of his life in the form of a story instead of acting it. The
result is a poor play, seldom acted, and generally to small audiences,
being only valuable for some special features of which we shall speak
later.
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.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account