No CrossRef data available.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 02 December 2020
Studies of the total work of a dramatic author are likely to be mainly in terms of his subject-matter, ideas, portrayal of character, and literary style. In analyzing and evaluating these, the critic seeks those elements of unity throughout the author's work which will best characterize his art. Less frequently is the same element of unity sought in his plots: sometimes, no doubt, the critic considers them a mere vehicle for the expression of ideas and the presentation of character, although they have certainly had more importance than this to most playwrights; more often the critic assumes that each play has its separate plot, and that while certain comparisons can be made and certain structural tendencies noted there is no reason to seek basic unity in the plots of most dramatists. If by plot we mean the total and frequently complex dramatic action, it is of course true that a competent playwright does not repeat it from one play to another. But if we seek the plot beneath the plot, the type of action on which the writer depends to give him the motivation, movement, and climax needed to hold the attention of the spectator, we shall find that he well can, and sometimes does, create an extensive series of plays on a single pattern of dramatic action and that this has revelatory significance for his personality and art.
1 E.g., D'Estrigaud in La Contagion and Lions et Renards.
2 La Cigue, L'Habit vert, and Philiberte are exceptions, having other types of dramatic action. I include plays in which Augier collaborated with another writer, believing that in all he had an important part in determining the structure of the play.
3 E.g., Un Homme de bien.
4 In Les Lionnes pauvres and Les Effrontés, respectively. 5 Le Gendre de M. Poirier.
6 Viz. G. d'Heylli (ed.), Journal intime de la Comédie Française (1852–1871) (Paris: Dentu, 1879), pp. 528–531.
7 P. Morillot, Emile Augier (Grenoble: Gratier, 1901), p. 125.
8 Le Constitutionnel, Feb. 7, 1876.
9 H. Gaillard de Champris, Emile Augier et la comédie sociale (Paris: Grasset, 1910), p. 183.
10 “Guérin: C'est égal, je ne suis pas gentilhomme, mais je rougirais d'entrer dans une famille qui me repousse.
Desroncerets: Tout beau, monsieur Guérin. Ce n'est pas nous qui entrons dans votre famille, c'est le colonel qui en sort.“—Maitre Guérin, v, 9.
11 Le Mariage d'Olympe, ii, 2.
12 La Jeunesse, ii, 2.
13 Paul Forestier, i, 6.
14 Le Gendre de M. Poirier, iii, 1.
15 La Pierre de touche, i, 3.
16 Madame Caverlet, i, 6.
17 As in L'Aventurière, Le Gendre de M. Poirier, Mme Caverlet.
18 As in La Jeunesse, La Pierre de touche, Jean de Thommeray.
19 Perhaps this does not wholly apply to Les Lionnes pauvres, yet even there it is the introduction of evil into the family that is the real problem.