" CHANTECLER:"

Auckland Star, Volume XLI, Issue 68, 21 March 1910, Page 6

" CHANTECLER:"

M. ROSTAND'S FARMYARD ALLEGORY OF LIFE. ■ACTORS AS BIRDS. FIRST NIGHT OF FAMOUS PLAY. (From Our Special Correspondent.) LONDON, February 11. '■'Chantecler" has been produced at lasi in Paris. Tho greatest first night of i modern times has come and gone. All Paris, one may say all Europe, is talking this week about the wonderful fanri-yaril play in which M. Edmond Rostand symbolises human life and effort —the plaj for which France has waited for seven long years. Briefly, "Chantecler" is an allegory oi life, in which, animals and birds think, act, and talk like men and women, who the poet thinks, are, after all, not sc very unlike the tenants of the farm-yard. The central figure, Chantecler, himself is merely man, and the hen pheasant represents woman. Falling in love with the pheasant, the cock flies with her t<: the woods.' He boasts to her of his fancied power to call forth the sun by his lordly crowing! But the pheasant, realising thai Chantecler is far more in love with himself and his fancied authority than witt her, finally taunts him with the illusorj nature of his power. The sun can, after all, rise'without him. Then the luckless lien pheasant -is caught in a poacher's trap, and, woman-like, her love for hei lord and master (though she has seen through him) returns. She warns him of the danger. Hfi returns to his farmyard chastened and humbled, and he hears the crows of many codes proclaiming that.his domination even of his own little world is gone. Tnstead of bringing forth the sun, he is content henceforth to rouse the human

neighbours by his crowing. A hurricane of cheers greeted the rising of tho curtain upon a delightful picture of a rustic farmyard. Fowls and chickens moved about the stage, and on tho wall a huge black cat sat dozing, while a blackbird tripped Hither and thither, interposing sarcastic comments on the gossip of the farmyard. A huge kennel, 10ft high, was occupied in the course of the act by the dog, who is the philosopher of the play. It is in this act that M. Guitry, who makes a splendid cock, recites the noble' "Hymn to tho Sun." We aro also introduced to an amusing dialogue between the cock and tho. dog Patou, played by M. Jean Coqueli n. The second act, in which the night bird plots to bring about Chantecler'a overthrow, is a very impressive scene. Darkness envelopes the stage, and the trees conceal the owls, their green eyes glittering in the night as they declare thoir hatred of the king of the farmyard. Tlir third act shows a reception at the home of the guinea-fowl (Mnie. Leriuhe). There is a wonderful exhibition of many beautiful breeds of cocks. This scene terminates with a combat between a fighting cock and Chantecler, in which the latter is victorious. As the curtain descends the arrival of the indolent tortoise at the reception is announced. The fourth act takes place in the forest by night. The feature of the scene is a group of very ugly frogs, who jump ataoti* in the liveliest manner, and hold a round table conference seated at a huge toadstooU

A characteristic example of M. Rostand's subtle wit occurs in the scene where Chantecler telephones to the farm, using a convolvulus as a medium. While he is talking, one hears the buzzing of a bee inside the instrument. The scenery, stage setting, and costumes are the perfection of dramatic art, but there was one anomaly in regard to tho size of the dog, who, on the stage, is no bigger than the blackbird. After each act, the curtain had to bo raised again, and there were loud cries of " Long live the cock!" Enthusiastic calls for the author were made at the end of the play, but M. Rostand did not respond. POET'S BRILLIANT WIT. All the critics agree that "Chantecler" begins finely, and is a complete success up to the end of the second act. The third act is irrelevant and even tedious, and the fourth act confirms the sense of disappointment amongst the audience. The splendid promise of the earlier scenes of the play is not fulfilled- M. Rostand, it would seem, has won success, but not a triumphant success. Here is the verdict of the " Times" critic, Mr. A. B. Walkley, on " Chantccler":—

" It is a work full of literary delights, of high fantasy; of extraordinary virtuosity in versification (" de Pacrobatisme! , was the comment of one veteran, spectator in my hearing); sometimes of genuine lyrical fervour; not seldom tending to the ' showy' and rhetorical; inspired by a genuine love and knowledge of Nature, even in her most secret placc3; fresh, ingenious, and ' amusing ' as a spectacle; bristling with literary satire, some of it rather recondite —altogether an extraordinary work that none other than R i <stand could have imagined—but too plainly deficient in the ' body,' the conflict of wills, the continuous and cumulative interest of action that are essential for an acted play." Tlie "Daily Telegraph" lays stress on the extraordinary brilliancy of the author's verse: — " No other writer living could have bejewelled such a subject with such wealth and variety of ornament. The whole play is a glittering mass, almost a jumble, of sparkling things. They are cast on to ' the heap with wild lavishness. Stones of all sorts, from base to pure, are thrown together, and all have some sparkle. There never was such a spending of wit and eloquence, ' beaux vers ' and ' blague, , great larkg and fine lines. Ths crowd is right -when it comes in thousands to look at the people who have seen ' ChatitcKileT,' for there is only one Edmond Rostand!" "He carves antithetical, eloquent, arresting lines a la Victor Hugo by the score, he throws in with tliem amazing quips and cranks by the hundred: by turns he casts verse in marble, anl shapes it in very brilliant tinsel. He gives his Chantecler astonishing bits of eloquence to spout, and amazing jokes to reel off; he throws off lines of marvellous spirit and brio, passages of dazzling brilliancy and dash, and peppers the rest of the dialogue with an astounding firework of puns. There never were so many puns I made in correct, academically correct, verse before."