Lippincott'S Magazine Of Popular Literature And Science, Volume 26 December, 1880., Various None [best books to read for beginners .txt] 📗
- Author: Various None
Book online «Lippincott'S Magazine Of Popular Literature And Science, Volume 26 December, 1880., Various None [best books to read for beginners .txt] 📗». Author Various None
Authors Also Of The _Grande Duchesse De Gerolstein_ And Of _La Belle
Helene_, Of _Carmen_ And Of _Le Petit Duc_. There Are A Few, I Know, Who
Think That _Froufrou_ Was Written By The Fertile And Ingenious M.
Victorien Sardou, And Who, Without Thinking, Credit M. Jacques Offenbach
With The Composition Of The Words As Well As The Music Of The _Grande
Duchesse_; And As For _Carmen_, Is It Not An _Italian_ Opera, And Is Not
The Book, Like The Music, The Work Of Some Italian? As A Matter Of Fact,
All These Plays, Unlike As They Are To Each Other, And Not Only These,
But Many More--Not A Few Of Them Fairly Well Known To The American
Play-Goer--Are Due To The Collaboration Of M. Henri Meilhac And M.
Ludovic Halevy.
Born In 1832, M. Henri Meilhac, Like M. Emile Zola, Dealt In books
Before He Began To Make Them. He Soon Gave Up Trade For Journalism, And
Contributed With Pen And Pencil To The Comic _Journal Pour Rire_. He
Began As A Dramatist In 1855 With A Two-Act Play At The Palais Royal
Theatre: Like The First Pieces Of Scribe And Of M. Sardou, And Of So
Many More Who Have Afterward Abundantly Succeeded On The Stage, This
Play Of M. Meilhac'S Was A Failure; And So Also Was His Next, Likewise
In Two Acts. But In 1856 The _Sarabande Du Cardinal_, A Delightful
Little Comedy In One Act, Met With Favor At The Gymnase. It Was Followed
By Two Or Three Other Comediettas Equally Clever. In 1859, M. Meilhac
Made His First Attempt At A Comedy In Five Acts, But The _Petit Fils De
Mascarille_ Had Not The Good Fortune Of His Ancestor. In 1860, For The
First Time, He Was Assisted By M. Ludovic Halevy, And In The Twenty
Years Since Then Their Names Have Been Linked Together On The
Title-Pages Of Two Score Or More Plays Of All Kinds--Drama, Comedy,
Farce, Opera, Operetta And Ballet. M. Meilhac'S New Partner Was The
Nephew Of The Halevy Who Is Best Known Out Of France As The Composer Of
The _Jewess_, And He Was The Son Of M. Leon Halevy, Poet, Philosopher
And Playwright. Two Years Younger Than M. Henri Meilhac, M. Ludovic
Halevy Held A Place In The French Civil Service Until 1858, When He
Resigned To Devote His Whole Time, Instead Of His Spare Time, To The
Theatre. As The Son Of A Dramatist And The Nephew Of A Popular Composer,
He Had Easy Access To The Stage. He Began As The Librettist-In-Ordinary
To M. Offenbach, For Whom He Wrote _Ba-Ta-Clan_ In 1855, And Later The
_Chanson De Fortunio_, The _Pont Des Soupirs_ And _Orphee Aux Enfers_.
The First Very Successful Play Which Mm. Meilhac And Halevy Wrote
Together Was A Book For M. Offenbach; And It Was Possibly The Good
Fortune Of This Operetta Which Finally Affirmed The Partnership. Before
The Triumph Of The _Belle Helene_ In 1864 The Collaboration Had Been
Tentative, As It Were: After That It Was As Though The Articles Had Been
Definitely Ratified--Not That Either Of The Parties Has Not Now And Then
Indulged In Outside Speculations, Trying A Play Alone Or With An
Outsider, But This Was Without Prejudice To The Permanent Partnership.
This Kind Of Literary Union, The Long-Continued Conjunction Of Two
Kindred Spirits, Is Better Understood Amongst Us Than The Indiscriminate
Collaboration Which Marks The Dramatic Career Of M. Eugene Labiche, For
Instance. Both Kinds Were Usual Enough On The English Stage In The Days
Of Elizabeth, But We Can Recall The Ever-Memorable Example Of Beaumont
And Fletcher, While We Forget The Chance Associations Of Marston,
Dekker, Chapman And Ben Jonson. And In contemporary Literature We Have
Before Us The French Tales Of Mm. Erckmann-Chatrian And The English
Volume 26 Title 1 (Lippincott'S Magazine Of Popular Literature And Science) Pg 70Novels Of Messrs. Besant And Rice. The Fact That Such A Union Endures Is
Proof That It Is Advantageous. A Long-Lasting Collaboration Like This Of
Mm. Meilhac And Halevy Must Needs Be The Result Of A Strong Sympathy And
A Sharp Contrast Of Character, As Well As Of The Possession By One Of
Literary Qualities Which Supplement Those Of The Other.
One Of The First Things Noticed By An American Student Of French
Dramatic Literature Is That The Chief Parisian Critics Generally Refer
To The Joint Work Of These Two Writers As The Plays Of M. Meilhac,
Leaving M. Halevy Altogether In The Shade. At First This Seems A Curious
Injustice, But The Reason Is Not Far To Seek. It Is Not That M. Halevy
Is Some Two Years The Junior Of M. Meilhac: It Lies In The Quality Of
Their Respective Abilities. M. Meilhac Has The More Masculine Style, And
So The Literary Progeny Of The Couple Bear Rather His Name Than His
Associate'S. M. Meilhac Has The Strength Of Marked Individuality, He Has
A Style Of His Own, One Can Tell His Touch; While M. Halevy Is Merely A
Clever French Dramatist Of The More Conventional Pattern. This We Detect
By Considering The Plays Which Each Has Put Forth Alone And Unaided By
The Other. In Reading One Of M. Meilhac'S Works We Should Feel No Doubt
As To The Author, While M. Halevy'S Clever Pictures Of Parisian Society,
Wanting In Personal Distinctiveness, Would Impress Us Simply As A
Product Of The "Modern French School."
Before Finally Joining With M. Halevy, M. Meilhac Wrote Two Comedies In
Five Acts Of High Aim And Skilful Execution, And Two Other Five-Act
Pieces Have Been Written By Mm. Meilhac And Halevy Together. The _Vertu
De Celimene_ And The _Petit Fils De Mascarille_ Are By The Elder
Partner--_Fanny Lear_ And _Froufrou_ Are The Work Of The Firm. Yet In
These Last Two It Is Difficult To See Any Trace Of M. Halevy'S
Handiwork. Allowing For The Growth Of M. Meilhac'S Intellect During The
Eight Or Ten Years Which Intervened Between The Work Alone And The Work
With His Associate, And Allowing For The Improvement In The Mechanism Of
Play-Making, I See No Reason Why M. Meilhac Might Not Have Written
_Fanny Lear_ And _Froufrou_ Substantially As They Are Had He Never Met
M. Halevy. But It Is Inconceivable That M. Halevy Alone Could Have
Attained So High An Elevation Or Have Gained So Full A Comic Force.
Perhaps, However, M. Halevy Deserves Credit For The Better Technical
Construction Of The Later Plays: Merely In Their Mechanism The First
Three Acts Of _Froufrou_ Are Marvellously Skilful. And Perhaps, Also,
His Is A Certain Softening Humor, Which Is The Cause That The Two Later
Plays, Written By Both Partners, Are Not So Hard In Their Brilliance As
The Two Earlier Comedies, The Work Of M. Meilhac Alone.
It May Seem Something Like A Discussion Of Infinitesimals, But I Think
M. Halevy'S Co-Operation Has Given M. Meilhac'S Plays A Fuller Ethical
Richness. To The Younger Writer Is Due A Simple But Direct Irony, As
Well As A Lightsome And Laughing Desire To Point A Moral When Occasion
Serves. Certainly, I Shall Not Hold Up A Play Written To Please The
Public Of The Palais Royal, Or Even Of The Gymnase, As A Model Of All
The Virtues. Nor Need It Be, On The Other Hand, An Embodiment Of All The
Cardinal Sins. The Frequenters Of The Palais Royal Theatre Are Not
Babes; Young People Of Either Sex Are Not Taken There; Only The
Emancipated Gain Admittance; And To The Seasoned Sinners Who Haunt
Theatres Of This Type These Plays By Mm. Meilhac And Halevy Are
Harmless. Indeed, I Do Not Recall Any Play Of Theirs Which Could Hurt
Any One Capable Of Understanding It. Most Of Their Plays Are Not To Be
Recommended To Ignorant Innocence Or To Fragile Virtue. They Are Not
Volume 26 Title 1 (Lippincott'S Magazine Of Popular Literature And Science) Pg 71Meant For Young Men And Maidens. They Are Not Wholly Free From The Taint
Which Is To Be Detected In Nearly All French Fiction. The Mark Of The
Beast Is Set On Not A Little Of The Work Done By The Strongest Men In
France. M. Meilhac Is Too Clean And Too Clever Ever To Delve In
Indecency From Mere Wantonness: He Has No Liking For Vice, But His
Virtue Sits Easily On Him, And Though He Is Sound On The Main Question,
He Looks Upon The Vagaries Of Others With A Gentle Eye. M. Halevy, It
Seems To Me, Is Made Of Somewhat Sterner Stuff. He Raises A Warning
Voice Now And Then--In _Fanny Lear_, For Instance, The Moral Is Pointed
Explicitly--And Even Where There Is No Moral Tagged To The Fable, He Who
Has Eyes To See And Ears To Hear Can Find "A Terrible Example" In almost
Any Of These Plays, Even The Lightest. For The Congregation To Which It
Was Delivered There Is A Sermon In _Toto Chez Tata_, Perhaps The Piece
In Which, Above All Others, The Muse Seems Gallic And _Egrillarde_. That
Is A Touch Of Real Truth, And So Of A True Morality, Where Tata, The
Fashionable Courtesan, Leaning Over Her Stairs As Toto The School-Boy
Bears Off Her Elderly Lover, And Laughing At Him, Cries Out, "Toi, Mon
Petit Homme, Je Te Repincerai Dans Quatre Ou Cinq Ans!" And A Cold And
Cutting Stroke It Is A Little Earlier In The Same Little Comedy Where
Toto, Left Alone In Tata'S Parlor, Negligently Turns Over Her Basket Of
Visiting-Cards And Sees "Names Which He Knew Because He Had Learnt Them
By Heart In His History Of France." Still, In Spite Of This Truth And
Morality, I Do Not Advise The Reading Of _Toto Chez Tata_ In Young
Ladies' Seminaries. Young Ladies In Paris Do Not Go To Hear Madame
Chaumont, For Whom _Toto_ Was Written, Nor Is The Varietes, Where It Was
Played, A Place Where A Girl Can Take Her Mother.
It Was At The Varietes In december, 1864, That The _Belle Helene_ Was
Produced: This Was The First Of Half A Score Of Plays Written By Mm.
Meilhac And Halevy For Which M. Jacques Offenbach Composed The Music.
Chief Among These Are _Barbe-Bleue_, The _Grande Duchesse De
Gerolstein_, The _Brigands_ And _Perichole_. When We Recall The Fact
That These Five Operas Are The Most Widely Known, The Most Popular And
By Far The Best Of M. Offenbach'S Works, There Is No Need To Dwell On
His Indebtedness To Mm. Meilhac And
Comments (0)