ENGLISH PLAYS

Evening Post, Volume CXIX, Issue 126, 30 May 1935, Page 14

ENGLISH PLAYS

SIX BEST CHOSEN

MERIT AND POPULARITY

THE BOX-OFFICE TEST

Apropos of those two excellent and successful stage adaptations of novels, "Frolic Wind" and "The Old Ladies," it may be of interest to note the difference in the attitude to the theatre of English men of letters and of French, writes Richard Prentis in "John o' London's Weekly." In France the men of letters gravitate naturally to the theatre; in England, they are repelled by it. The reason is, of course, that English literary men, as a rule, have had no liking for the stage. But it is also true that the stage has no | liking for them. If Shelley's play about the Cenci were not about incest it would, in my view, have disappeared from memory equally with "The Blood Drinker," the principal part in which play was, you will remember, created by Mrs. Vincent Crummies. It is only fair to Shelley to say that when I saw his play the Count, who if I recollect rightly makes a posset of somebody's blood, was so over-mouthed by the actor that one was forced to laugh. Tennyson's "Becket" was saved by Irving, and I wisli my worst enemy nothing more horrible than an evening at "The Cup." Browning's "Strafford" was one of those respectable sallies that Macready flirted with, and of which one goes in nightly—or, rather, Sunday nightly—fear of revival. Somebody had the temerity to stage "Pippa Passes" the other day; Prentis passed the theatre in which this event uniquely happened. ' The truth of the matter is that the Elizabethans cleared up all that there was to be done with blank verse for the rest of time. Dickens, though he was attracted by the stage, never wrote anything of importance for it. Neither did Thackeray, and the novels of both have always proved, too big for successful adaptation. Meredith left the theatre alone, and Hardy's qne play, "The JDynasts," requires three theatres going at once to perform it. Henry James and George Moore failed, as the former would say, ."beautifully." NO NOVELISTS. In fact, since- Goldsmith, who contrived in the course of a small output to be first class in everything he did and to produce one immortal poem, one immortal novel, and-one immortal comedy—since Goldsmith ,up to".recent times I cannot think of any first-class novelist who. was also a;first-class,play-wright. There is -always, tytton, of course, the greatest figure'in the fustian age, and who produced one famous play which is now unseeable and many novels which are now unreadable. 'Jn fact, I should describe Bulwer Lytton as not remembered but forgotten by "The Lady of Lyons" and "Ernest Maltravers." : Coming to the "present time, Mr. Wells has always declined to have anything to do with the stage as a medium, on the singular ground that nothing can happen on it, while Arnold Bennett, though he tried very hard, never attained anything approximating to his success in the other medium. In fact, his only two real successes in the theatre were "The Great Adventure," adapted from his own novel, "Buried Alive," and "Milestones," in which he had Mr. Knoblock as collaborator. But among modern writers we find four who have been conspicuously successful in both mediums—Galsworthy, Sir James Barrie, Mr. Maugham, and Mr. Priestley. Mr. Hugh Walpole has given us "The Cathedral," which is in many ways a fine play, though an adaptation from one of his novels. Mr. Walpole loves the theatre. Can he, then, not give us an original play of his own? Or, at the very least, adapt somebody else's novel? ' I see that the old. question of the world's best plays has cropped up again. The concern is sometimes for the best six, sometimes for the best ten, and sometimes, for the best twenty. What is interesting is always not so much, the plays chosen as what is in the minct of the person v making the selection. I am going to suggest that readers should, before they go any further, jot down on a piece of paper what,they consider to be the world's greatest tragedy, ripest comedy, and most rollicking farce. > .There can be no possible doubt to my mind .that the finest tragedy in the world is "Macbeth." But I don't think it wins the tragic race by a length or a Tieck or even a short head. I think "Macbeth" just ge.ts .the tip of its nose ■in. front of "Hamlet", and half of one ear in front of "king Lear."' Which is a rhyme, and if the reader thinks it a nonsense rhyme I won't quarrel! Perhaps; it \yould : be wiser to say that these three tragedies are realty abreast, like: horses in .the old-fashioned omnibus. -Personally, I feel perfectly certain that the great Greek plays are half a furlong behind, though this again may be:due to the fact that I have no Greek. FAROE AND COMEDY. In'the matter of■ farces, again I personally venture to think that there can be very little.room for dispute.. I remember once asking a famous dramatic critic which was the better, "The Private Secretary" or "Charley's Aunt." He was a very solemn person, and he replied: "I must take time to consider that question. I will drop you a postcard this evening." He did, and the card duly arrived next morning. On it was written: "The answer to your question is 'Are You a Mason?"' So I think we may be said to have disposed of the best tragedies and the best farces in the world in a couple of omnibus loads. . When we come to the question of comedy, it is really . very difficult. There are those who might hold "The Cherry Orchard" to take pride of place, because it is one of the great plays of the world and its author called it a comedy. To this it is a fair reply that it may be comedy, but that the laughter is on the wrong side of one's face. Then there is "The School for Scandal," glittering like a diamond in comparison with , the unhealthy phosphorus of the plays that, preceded it. There would, of course, be an enormous number of votes for "She Stoops to Conquer," though my own vote would go. to. one of the Shakespearean comedies. Which one? Ay, there's the rub!" I remember a friend of mine/who, entering a competition for the world's twelve best books, started off with: One, .the Bible and Shakespeare.' He was disqualified, and the editor of the paper sent him the following quotation:—: Hamlet: What's his weapon? Osric: Rapier and dagger. Hamlet: That's two of his weapons. In the same way I am going to say that: the best comedy, in the world is "As You Like It" and the second part of "King Henry IV." COMPARISONS. It is always said that comparisons are odious, whereas I always greatly enjoy making them. So long as they are fair and sensible. It is foolish to compare the greenness of a field with the three-corneredness of a triangle, just as it would be rank nonsense to compare Lamb's' essay on Dream Children or Old China with Hazlitt's criticisms of Kean's "Othello" or. Kemble's "Hamlet." To compare two thinks .whigh. are^aot^ ,jof_a kind .is

critical folly, whereas to compare two things which are of a kind often reveals a rare critical sense. Thus it would be impossible to compare the merits of "Hamlet" and "Ralph Roister Doister," though it is possible to compare, say, Malvolio and Jourdain in "Le Bourgeois Gentilhomme." A still I better stick by which to measure that i great character of Moliere would be Mr. Pickwick. There is, in both the Moliere and the Dickens, that genial working out of simple extravagances which has endeared two immortal characters to the whole human race. The first three acts of "Le Beourgeois Gentilhomme" are the more Shakespearean of all Moliere's comedies, because in them the author has given vein to the richest of his humanity and kept most in check the malice of which he was also master. If we say that Jourdain is a figure of eternal ridicule, we must also add that the whole world has taken him to its heart. He is one of the new rich, and outwardly what we now mean when we, talk of a profiteer.. But he is also a profiteer in the very best sense of that word. His wealth has made the whole world open to him, and he wants to profit by it. Yes, I have now argued myself into thinking that "Le Bourgeois Gentilhomme" is the world's greatest comedy outside Shakespeare, though I might be tempted to run Sheridan's masterpiece abreast of it. THE LIST. If now anybody should still want to know what, in my opinion, are the six best English plays, leaving Shakespeare out of it entirely, I will say the morality-play called "Everyman," "The Duchess of Malfi," "The Way of the World," "Caste," "The Second Mrs. Tanqueray," and "When Knights Were Bold." And if he wants the six best plays written in the last thirty years or so, I would give the following as my selection: Masefield's "Nan " Galsworthy's "The Silver Box," Barries "The Admirable Crichton," Drinkwater's "Abraham Lincoln," Maugham's "Our Betters," and either "Saint Joan" or four-fifths of "The Doctor's Dilemma." If this does not please, I will amend the list in favour of "Chu-Chin-Chow," "The Maid of the Mountains, "A Little Bit of Fluff" "Peg. o> My Heart," and Tons of Money," which between them rail for seven thousand three hundred and twenty-four consecutive nights According to the box-office test, these are the six best' English plays!