A treaty between two stages
What should one national stage concede in order to gain what the other does well? The terms are set out as an exchange: English playwrights give up breaking the unities and killing people in view of the audience, French playwrights give up declamation for action and hold their rules more loosely.
Neither theatre is told to convert. The classical rules the French keep and the English break are treated as habits with costs rather than laws of nature: a unity held too tightly stiffens a play, and a corpse dropped in front of the audience buys a shock at the price of the illusion. The trade runs both ways, each stage importing what the other has and surrendering what it has overworked. It is the author of the Enquiry turning a theory of the passions on a craft that has to be practised in front of a room of people.
- dramatic theory
- dramatic unity
- dramatic propriety
- imitation
- naturalism
- drama
- theater
- tragedy
- taste
Enter a dialogue
- A miser dragged into a lawsuit pays for every move, whether he advances or retreats. Why does that make a character show himself best on stage?
- The plot of a good play is usually dull when told. Why do you think characters and passions, not events, are what hold an audience?
- Idle people of refined taste and weak understanding shrink from strong movements, and their fashion is ruining the theatre. Why would delicacy of feeling make plays worse?
- Someone telling a story with feeling starts to mimic the looks and voices of the people in it. How did that habit turn into the theatre?