The times., 1897-09-05

atization OF a novels, should one read
the novel before viewing the play? The
first inclination of nearly every one who
anticipates seeing play built out of 4
book is to rush 10 the book beforehand.
Yet a cursory consideration OF the question
develops very considerable number OF
argunlents for and against.
a drama is constructed by technique 50
Numerically opposed To a novel that
the draEatist finas him self obliged TO take
the brOldest liberties, not alone with text
which must be eutirelyof his own eevisinG,
but with the characters, with their mo
tives, and with the plot fundamentals
Points of The IOveI would fan 10 the pla =,
motives In the novel would be rejected IN
the plan, characters In the one would not
ft In tie new perspective OF the other.
This IL one reason II H. unfair 20 reaG
book before You see IL played. You have
rTeconceiFed ideals OF certain persons
and Incidents, sympathy with develop
Iaent OF character, which is diverted In
the play, and an interest IN story Sc
quence, Which you may find all changed,
20 y0ur disappointment.
SO many zee dramatiZation, and say:
'HoW Disappointing why, IL is not Ike
the story at all. Everything is changed"
They 70 L. the tfeater with the look in
their head, and every DEPRESSION from the
original text is a disappointment To them.
for they think a dranIatiZation is meas
ured by its fidelity TO a text. In fact.
a psnde.ine TO this judgment is the cause
OF most of the failures OF novels drama
tized. The author has made this mistake:
lie has all the story characters, Incidents
and plot of the novel, but none Of the
Integrity of a play.
This does not mean that a draInatist
should reject the book entirely, His
measure Of success in making dramatiza-
tion must be judged by his ability to ad.
here 10 the original, yet at the same
time erect strong drama. His departure
from the book only finds apology In
some new strength added to the play. If
play or book must give way in dram
atization, it is well TO remember that it is
PLAY that the author is trying to make;
that it must be judged as such first, and
only seconcarily as 2 faithful rendering of
a book.
This dramatic license to play the icono-
clast with the novelist's work is not al
ways absolute. There is prejudice so
lar Ideals that consideration for the integ-
rity for some books IS deman ded. This'is
wien book has become so widely read,
so familiar 10 the whole public, tflat the
story hes crystallized in a way into his
tory ana tie characters into people. No
liberties would be permitted with Don
Quixote, because this hero is indeIibly i'm
pressed on the worlds mind as a iistincG,
personal and almost actual being. The
characters of Dickens, Thackeray and Hay-
thorae loom out of the pages as real, and
no one has been able to put them on the
stage with entire success The measure of
success 10 their cases was fidelity to origi-
mails, because the originals were accented
iacts, as IL were. A dramatization Of ona
OF Dickens novels is judged by how nearly
the maker hews to the line OF The, noyal-
1st. That is why little successes attend
these efforts OF Dickens type of plays; the
dramatic element is not in the original.
and departure from the original is q sin
not parlonable.
Thus, when the novel, from which a nIay
is made, is standard, accepted work of
permanent place in literature and not a
Here story OF the day or hour, the book