The daily worker. [volume] (Chicago, Ill.) 1924-1958, 1929-08-31
Modern DyamQtlst Must
Deal with Lite, Says Cabek

MERE l asked what are the chief
w tendencies dominating t. he
modern theatre, l should reply that
there is none. How could there be?
Never has the stage been more diff
cult to define than today. There is
no great dramatic movement, apart
from Ibsen and Bernard Shaw,
the two great combative critics
of modern society; all other
modern works are but isolated
experiments, sometimes very
important, but never connected
in real forward movement. l am
a great admirer of Shaw; in my
opinion he is the last of the great
dramatists, only one with O'Neill
(and this author in a minor degree)
in which I can trace real originality.
"The stage will tend" continues
Karel Capek in a recent interview
given, more and more to deal
ing with only the larger aspects of
human life-what l should call the
evolutionary forces that we see
forging the future in our midst"
Such world movements as capital
ism, industry, Bolshevism, ETC.,
should occupy the thought and at
tention Ct our modern dramatists,
but l do not see any one at present
who is trying to deal with them
freely and thoroughly. Many peo-
pie admire Pirandello, but, excep-
tional as is his talent, his art does
nothing but probe more deeply into
the mystery of IT,; it hardly adds
to our knowledge of it. 1t is a
pietinement sur place-not marche
en- avant.
l attribute this scarcity of dram
attic genius to the fact that we are
passinc today through a very cru
cial period of history. Every insti-
tuition, every accepted believe and
convention, is being questioned and
submitted to the most thorough and
searching test. A real, a great
drama, needs very firm standards
Of life or very firm belief in some
higher order. The act-.@l state of
change and flux y everything is
rather the opportune time for writ
ing comedies. am looking for great
writers Of comedy to arise.
In my opinion it is a fallacy to
believe that only the man who has a
Iconsummate kno7ledge of stage pro-
duction can compose satisfactory
play. Dramatic composition is
purely-or perhaps l should say
largely-a question of a sort of
dramatic instinct and of large ex-
perience in life. For on a dramatic
instinct eTerything turns in a play,
that is in dialogue, in action. The
essential is not the plot" the
dramtic anecdote, but what your
characters have to say together.
With regard to my own method,
experience some difficulties in the
actual writing of play, but not in
composing it. The idea underlying
the Robot play, "R. U. R." came to
me quite readily in five minutes;
but tie mere writing of the play
occupic.f considerable tie. l first
wrote the first and third acts and
then put them aside. I cannot say
that I particularly enjoy writing
play. Writing pla.'s necessitates
considerable amount of self-control
and "objectivity." I much prefer
writing novels and the freedom with
which one can roam freely over
every conceivable field.
Mine and my brothers last play
is adam Creator" The idea under
lying this play is the futile vanity
of man. Adam, by the strength of
his negative power, destroys the
world and God, then bids him build
up another. We seek to describe
the terrible position in which his
soaring pride has thus left him. This
play was first performed last
spring; l am doubling if it was
such success as some of my less
serious plays.
Finally to write good play is
becoming every day increasingly
difficult in view of the fact that
life is becoming so complicated. To
write good first and second acts has
been achieved by many dramatists.
But the last act is always bad. 1t
would be well if the last acts on the