Views and Reviews: Essays in appreciation: LiteratureHenley, William Ernest
History
Views and Reviews: Essays in appreciation: Literature
Henley, William Ernest
English literature -- History and criticism; Literature -- History and criticism
_Scin-Laeca_, the shining shadow adapted in a moment of peculiar
inspiration by the late Lord Lytton.
The Dramatist.
But we have the plays, and who runs may read and admire. I say advisedly
who runs may read, and not who will may see. Congreve's plays are, one
can imagine, as dull in action as they are entertaining in print. They
have dropped out of the _repertoire_, and the truth is they merit no
better fate. They are only plays to the critic of style; to the actor
and the average spectator they are merely so much spoken weariness. To
begin with, they are marked by such a deliberate and immitigable baseness
of morality as makes them impossible to man. Wycherley has done more
vilely; Vanbrugh soars to loftier altitudes of filthiness. But neither
Wycherley nor Vanbrugh has any strain of the admirable intellectual
quality of Congreve. Villainy comes natural to the one, and beastliness
drops from the other as easily as honey from the comb; but in neither is
there evident that admirable effort of the intelligence which is a
distinguishing characteristic of Congreve, and with neither is the result
at once so consummate and so tame. For both Wycherley and Vanbrugh are
playwrights, and Congreve is not. Congreve is only an artist in style
writing for himself and half a dozen in the pit, while Wycherley and
Vanbrugh--and for that matter Etherege and Farquhar--are playwrights
producing for the whole theatre. In fact Congreve's plays were only
successful in proportion as they were less literary and 'Congrevean.' His
first comedy was the talk of the town; his last, _The Way of the World_,
that monument of characterisation (of a kind) and fine English, was only
a 'success of esteem.' The reason is not far to seek. Congreve's plays
were too sordid in conception and too unamusing in effect for even the
audiences to which they were produced; they were excellent literature,
but they were bad drama, and they were innately detestable to boot.
Audiences are the same in all strata of time; and it is easy to see that
Wycherley's Horner and Vanbrugh's Sir John and Lady Brute were amusing,
when Lady Wishfort and Sir Sampson Legend and the illustrious and
impossible Maskwell were found 'old, cold, withered, and of intolerable
entrails.' An audience, whatever its epoch, wants action; and still
action, and again and for the last time action; also it wants a point of
departure that shall be something tinctured with humanity, a touch of the
human in the term of everything, and at least a 'sort of a kind of a
strain' of humanity in the progress of events from the one point to the
other. This it gets in Wycherley, brute as he is; with a far larger and
more vigorous comic sense it gets the same in Vanbrugh; it gets it with a
difference in the light-hearted indecencies of Farquhar. From the
magnificent prose of Congreve it is absent. His it was to sublimate all
that was most artificial in an artificial state of society: he was the
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