New-York tribune., 1918-02-03

ratOr lot the purpose OIL inc stage
1t must be beautiful picture-in
the artists sense Of the term. Now,
tho fashioned stage setting was
not attempt to be. 1t sought to be an
imitation Of reality. If any typical
setting of this sort-say that for the
second act of ola Tosca" at the Metro
politan-were accurately Transcribed
to small canvas, framed and hung
upon a wall, it would not pass for a
work of art in any gallery in the coun-
try. 1t would lack the contrast and
harmony of color. the balance and
rhythm Of design, which are the quail
ties most prized by the artist in his
canvases. The old-fashioned scene de-
signer will protest that this is not a
fair test; that his work is intended
for the practical needs of the stage,
not for the picture gallery. But the
new fashioned designer will reply
simply by insisting categorically that
the test is fair one. He will not
pretend that every good picture will
make a good stage setting, but he will
insist that every stage should make a
good picture.
Imitation and Suggestion
From this major premise-that the
stage setting must be a beautiful
picture-there follows one very i'm
portant principle: That the scene
cannot attempt to initiate reality. The
reality, or rather the locale, can be
suggested by all the means known to
the skilled painter, but this suggestion
will come from the aesthetic effect, not
from the realistic imitation. The dis
tinction is more important to the paint
er than at first blush it seems to the
layman; in general it implies full
tionalize and arbitrarily to dispose the
clements from which the picture is
made, for the sake of the aesthetic
effect. The great fallacy of the old
fashioned designer, SO his younger
rival maintains, was that he believed
that he was creating in his audience
the illusion of physical reality. In this
he was, for many reasons, quite de-
ceived. No spectator at performance
of Carmen" ever believed that he was
literally looking at a street in Seville
any more than a spectator of a Meis-
sonier picture ever believed that he
was in the physical presence of Ma
poleon the Great. Nor did the de-
signer OF the scene seriously suppose
that his audience would be fooled by
acted as though he did. His primary
fallacy led him into the doing of many
things which defeated his purpose-the
clumsy reproduction Of detail, the
painting of congealed shadows upon
the canvas. the drawing of a false per
spcctve which, by the very physical
conditions of the stage, could fool no
one. And while busying himself with
the literal aspect of things he gener-
ally forgot those aesthetic qualities of
design and color which could have
made his picture delight to the eye
The designer Of the new school does
indeed attempt to create a sort Of IL
lusion through the charm and legendry
OF beauty; it is the illusion of senti-
ment, emotion or mood. But he creates
1t by aesthetic, not by photograph c
means. On this principle all the artists
of the "new school" are agreed. On the
methods of realizing their purpose they
may be as far apart as the hemispheres
The MINOR premises of the new
stagecraft" arc few and are mostly
technical. There is a general agree
ment that the scene should suggest in
its aesthetic style the quality or flavor
of the opera and of the particular
action for which is designed, and
that tho costumes, poses and move
ments of the characters should be re
gArded AS an integral part Of tho stage
picture. False perspective. when in.
tended to deceive, is ruled out entirely
as are also painted shadows. The use
OF these clements by the modern Rus
sian designers, as cNcmpliilcd in the
"Borls" settings, is purely pictorial
and decorative; far from being meant