MELODRAMA DEFENDED.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 19283, 22 September 1924, Page 8

MELODRAMA DEFENDED.

ADVICE TO FUTURE DRAMATISTS.

Many and various are the definitions of Melodrama, William Archer writes in the Daily Telegraph. May I add one to the list, and call it “a picturesque play, containing elements of tragedy, but ending, as a rule, in the defeat of the villain”? Xow, where is the harm in this? There is such a thing as villainy in life. And villainy is sometimes foiled. Right is not tor ever on the scaffold, nor Wrong for over on the Throne. There is undoubtedly a large admixture of melodrama even in our well-policed a^e; and I know not why rhe theatre should scorn to hold up the mirror to it. The truth seems to be that modern intellectualism has '• schooled itself to despise what may be called strong, straightforward dramatic effect—the sort of effect at which the great dramatists of the past have always, and quite shamelessly, aimed. Where is the harm in a thriling scene?. The theatre which refuses to thrill ns rejects the most characteristic part of its birthright. Psychological and psychoanalytic investigation, moral edification, immoral titillation, pathos, paradox, and humour—all these things we can find in literature. But where else than to the theatre shall we go for the indescribable thrill which is the very essence of drama? For my part, I find the latter-day theatre insufficiently melodramatic. In a certain sense, no doubt, the public is more intellectual to-day than it was 30 years ago. The success of such a play as ‘'Outward Bound’ seems to me a thing of excellent omen, though we must set against it certain crazes of false intellectualism. On the whole, I find that scarcely any play of to-day leaves on my mind such a deep mark as did the outstanding plays of the Edwardian period. We await a new generation of great dramatists, as disdinct from clever writers for the stage. And the born dramatist of the future will not allow himself to bo terrorised by the label “melodrama*”