The New York herald., 1877-11-01
MR.. BOUClCAULTS CHALLENGE.
VIEWS OF AN OLD PLAYooER ON coMEDY-THE
THEORY AND THE EXAMPLE.
NEW YoRK Oct 40 1877

THEORY AND THE EXAMPLE
NEW YoRx. Oct 80, 1871.
To THE EDITOR THE HERALD-
As an paygoer and incon slant reader of your
journal for the last thirty years, ou dramatic
critic venture TO give definition OF 'comedy" that
l believe the gifted author OF .'London Assurance
viii not quarrel with. fancy that more than one
dramatic critic not four thousand miles OF will
scarcely sympathize with the good humor OF Mr..
Boucicauirs defiance, and do envy the librarian
Of the dramatic department OF the As.or or OF the
British Museum during tho period this playful con-
troversy.
The inquiry Is by means novel, and Mr.. Bouct-
cauit will admit my right 70 opinion the sub
ject when assert my faith the perfection OF
comedy OF the seventeenth century In the the
immortal Molere, "Tartufe" and the s.Avarc;"
Conquer" and the ''Rvalsn OF the last
century. and OF the present. century, OF
still, comedy, the type undevia,ingly 10 be
followed John Kemble, IN comparing the dramatic
latter DID not place Moliers, pretending that chance
alone had brought forth at Paris man who, by his
talent. belongs 10 the world entire II Moere Is
appreciated by all nations II IL easily understood;
there alone be comedy with refined and polished
people sufficiently advanced IN civilization to hnd
amusement In the representation OF the neglect
or ignorance oil those duties which custom emands
from the thoughtless egotism Is necessary which
familiarity with society naturally brings, and which
makes feel OF JOY at tho aspect OF a
CONNIE IL taus than ourselves. That is why medy
peases more IN ripe age than during youth.
Comedy, such as It has been until time, is tho
honest representation OF ordinary action, more
less interesting taken from civil e aud arranged in
such to bring out the character OF those
personages placed before u.s. Ii ~ from the natural
disposition OF seize the ridiculous that comedy
draws force its MEANS but It is necessary that
the Incidents which II represents should not be suh
gently affecting TO excite pity nor odious enough to
inspire hatred, nor dangerous enough to give fear.
Tho essence OF comedy to provoke u smilc, little
compatible with tho passions above Indicated, and
vice alone belongs TO comedy when II lends TO tho
amusing
THIS need Of satisfying human malignity is as an
the end proposed by tragedy, bet from the days OF
Terence aud Plautus We must lcap to the sixteeuth
century hnd again IN the dramatic pieces OF Bbiena
and Macniavc the traces of good comedy. In France
IL ignored till the Menteur OF Corneile but Moli
ere naturazcd H. and the reading and meditation Of his
immortal works is tho best study that can be made
for comedy. 7. G. II. NJ.
RELATIVE DEFINITION DRAMA, TRAGEDY
AND COMEDY
NKw YORK, Oct. 80. 1877.
To THE EDITOR THE HKRALD:-
In answer to the challenge OF Mr. D. Boucicault in
the HERALD OF October 80, "What is q Comedyf"
respond
The stage should. Of course represent life as It Is
and have the power Of attraction, but mere amusc-
ment should constitute the principal part of it.
There two ch ef points OF view from which we can
regard life, two great elements that into all ex.
pcrience and which correspond to what Is called
happiness and misery. These tho comic and
the tragic sides OF life. and consequently
play which contains these elements will
be the most universal in its character
and give tho most correct notion OF real life. This
Is the drama proper There people whose whole
lifelong experience Is Of tragic character, while
others unaccountably enjoy almost uninterrupted
happiness aud pleasure The experience OF the
tho former gives the substratum for tragedy.
Most lives made up OF these two great elements in
different proportions thus have what Is called
the drama Hence 1t Is easiest TO write drama, be-
cause we have greater variety Of materials 10 draw
FROM
Tragedy rests tho high passions, virtues, crimes
and suIerings OF mankind, while comedy deals with
the humors, tollics and pleasures OF society. Tho
elements OF tragedy universal and everywhere
to be found the elements of comedy also partake
forcbly the mind than happiness and pleas
urc. rho elements which constitute tragedy are
easier laid hold Of and easier understood The causes
o misery are usually apparent but the causes OF hap
plness generally lie beneath the surface. Besides
tragedy the murder or other crime speaks violently
10 the feelings Of the audience and ensts universal
interest but u is more difficult task TO reveal the
subtle sources Of happiness, and render them intei
gble. These and other reasons which we might men
make less difficult task to good tragedy
than good comedy and the consequence Is there
many first class tragedies but very few comedies that
above the average. Hence find that prizes
frequently offered Tor good comedies.
Tragedy Is sometimes iiabe to fall into extremes,
and delights In the horrible and fesh-c creeping
tons, and, on the principle that "extremes meet" IL
sometimes borders on tho farcical. But still we have
large number OF good tragedies that do tall into
these and transgress the rules Of good taste
Nearly all the comedies, however, fall into the extreme
OF what IS called iarce This Is one Of tho principal
why comedy. in the real OF the word,
scarce, and tho general inability OF authors 10 draw
the line OF distinction between comedy and farce 10
the cnei reason why IL is SO difficult to writo good
comedy.
Since the days OF Arstophanes nearly every author
oil comedy has ialen more or less victim 10 that
tendency to overdo the character OF comedy and has,
consequently, run iuto farce, while the writer OF
tragedy becomes too often the victim OF that morbid
desire Tor the horrDle-that blood-curdlng style Tor
which Victor Hugo has such prcdilection. Such ex-
pad taste, contain instruction and IN
culcate no morality and, rs we have said IN The be-
ginning Of this article, instruction and morality ought
10 be the great objects never sight OF
in any dramatic performance that deserves tho name
We arc sorry TO be obigci 10 mako the sweeping
sertion that these two clements are almost entirely
wanting in modern theatrical literature.
Dr. f. LESS
DEFINITION IN THE INTERRoGATIvE FORM
WHAT COMEDY IS, WITH SOME IDEA OF
WHAT IT IS NOT.
NEW YORK, Ocr. 80, 1871
To THE EDITOR OF THE HERALD:-
q. declare there is not In this country Great
Britain dramatic critic who, affecting sit in judg-
ment on comedy, can tell me what a comedy Is. Ho
cannot describe IT'S component parts give a scnsi.
BILE definition OF this kind of drama as distinguished
from any othor."
Alter considerable meditation upon the alleged In
surmountablc difficulties attending the acceptance OF
the above challenge are naturally Impressed (nore
or lcss with the magnitude OF tho undertaking. and
consequently we would approach conc usions with
sentiments oi modest ana unprcsumptuous inquiry.
We WILL therefore, conhnc our remarks intcrroga
tories
Is not a comedy drama In which the painful
phases OF social lie are generally, If not exclusively
omitted
Is not a comedy play intended to embrace as many
oil natures smiles as may consistently be admitted
keeping the general tenor oi said play on the conserv
ative side Of burlesqueY
Is not comedy living picture OF all that Is augha
bic In nature yet at the same time perfectly true 10
that nature which II presumcs to represents
IL an artist pants the picture OF laughing face
truly correctly, without exlggcration that is CON-
edy
Ii n caricaturist paints laughing deformity from
the above true picture, by making the features OF
natural proportion, he destroys the comedy and
makes OF II a burlesque.
In other words, tho true comedian is must needs
be, artist while he who attempts TO pass the lin
It's which the human standard pEescrbes Is merely
gN mn ~