Marta Wiszniowska
Major themes and their presentation
in Christopher Fry’s dramas =
Naczelne motywy i ich
przedstawienie w dramatach
Christophera Fry’a
Annales Universitatis Mariae Curie-Skłodowska. Sectio F, Nauki Filozoficzne i Humanistyczne 19, 147-158
U N I V E R S I T A T I S M A R I A E C U R I E - S K Ł O D O W S K A L U B L I N — P O L O N I A
VOL. X IX , 6 SEC TIO F 1964
Z K a t e d r y J ę z y k a P o l s k i e g o W y d z i a ł u H u m a n i s t y c z n e g o U M C S K i e r o w n i k : p r o f , d r L e o n . K a c z m a r e k
M a r t a W I S Z N I O W S K A
M ajor T hem es and T h eir P re se n ta tio n in C hristopher F ry 's D ram as N aczelne m o tyw y i ich przed staw ien ie w d ram a ta c h C hristophera F ry ’a О сновные мотивы драм Х ристоф ора Ф р а я и ф орм ы их вы раж ен и я
C h risto p her F ry sta rte d w ritin g in th e th irtie s b u t he did no t becom e p o p u lar u n til a few y e a rs a fte r th e w ar. One can re a d ily believe th a t his success w as due to th e co n trast b etw een his p lays and the gloomy r e a lity of th e p ostw ar y ears, fu rth e r em phasized by the pervasive pes sim ism of n a tu ra listic and realistic p lay s.1
His d eb u t, 1937, T he B oy w ith a Cart, published 1939, was a r a th e r w eak play. In this he had a lre ad y chosen poetic d ram a as the m eans o f his expression on th e stage. Though th e genre has a long-standing tra d i tion in English d ram a 2, it has n ot alw ays succeeded in coming to term s w ith th e th ea tre . Now F ry seem s to have su rm ounted difficulties of this kind and to hav e created a highly personal style th a t enables him to achieve th e reconciliation fa r b e tte r th an the m a jo rity of his contem p o raries.3
The plays, w ritte n in blank v erse w ith a llite ra tio n and the line cu t b y a caesura, and based on w ell-know n sources m igh t have appeared o u t of d a te even a t the m om ent of th e ir first staging had it not been for th e ir astonishingly strong u n d erstan d in g of th e co ntem porary m an and
1 E. M. B r o w n e : V e r s e in M o d e r n English T h e a tr e , T h e W. D. T h o m a s
M e m o r ia l L e c tu r e . U n iv . of W ales P ress, 1963, p. 27. G. В u 11 о u g h : C h r is to p h e r F r y an d th e ’R e v o l t ’ a g a in s t E liot [from :] E x p e r i m e n t a l D r a m a (Ed. W. A. A r m
s t r o n g ) , B ellan d S ons, L ondon 1963, p. 8.
2 A. N i с о 11: B r itis h D ram a, L ondon 1962 H arrap.
3 A. N i c o l l : S o m e t h in g in a N e w D im e n s io n [from .] C o n t e m p o r a r y T h e a tr e ,
his problem s. F ry know s how to re-fashio n com m on them es so th a t he b rings to light both new m eanings and lasting values. H e is a h u m an ist and a pacifist. He opposes an y violation of basic h u m an rig h ts such as encroachm ents of th e freedom of w ill and conscience, abuses of pow er, and g en erally all action th a t p rev e n ts m an from a tta in in g happiness.
F ry has been discounted, som ew hat w ith o u t sufficient reason, a r e li gious d ram atist. H e ce rtain ly tre a ts religious su b je c ts som ew hat extensively, b u t his view of h u m an existence o ften tran scen d s th e region of theology. Though he holds God to be th e final aim of m ankind, his D eity v e ry ra re ly in te rfe re s w ith th e w orld. T hrough his em phasis on m an ’s freedom of choice F ry approaches existentialism . T hus in his d ram as m an is alw ays free to choose and alw ays decides to live; if m en w an t to die, as does Thom as in The L a d y ’s N ot fo r B urning, o r D ynam ene, in A P ho enix Too F requent, th ey a re m ade u ltim a te ly to realize the ab su rd ity of th e ir wish. The change comes abo ut as a re s u lt of re a ffirm a tion of a c e rtain v alu e — o fte n of love — th a t helps th em to come to term s w ith th e w orld. U sually th e w orld is accepted w ith resignation, less fre q u e n tly w ith enth usiasm .4
A mood of resignation, the idea th a t m an is destined to e n d u re ev ery thin g is a tra it F ry sh ares w ith th e ex istentialists. His c h a ra c te rs a re alw ays o u t of h arm o n y w ith them selves, th e y alw ays look for som ething to satisfy th em and all the tim e th e y a re dissatisfied w ith w hat th ey have a lre ad y achieved.
Now and th en F ry allow s pessim ism and tra g ic resig n atio n to e n te r his plays. A sad p ercep tion o f th e tragic re s u lt th a t follow s e v e ry h u m an action, even w hen m an a tte m p ts to com e n e a re r to God, is e x p re sse d by Moses, in The F irstborn p. 88:
I do not k n o w w h y th e n e c e ss ity o f God S hould feed on g rief; b u t it seem s so [...]
A re m a rk m ade by M eadows, in A S leep o f P risoners p. 47, deals w ith th e sam e p roblem ; he w onders how it is th a t o u t of all possible m eans h u m an ity has chosen w ar, an in stru m e n t w hich is te rrib le and futile, to re-in tro d u ce peace into th e w orld:
B ehind us lie
T h e thousand, and th e thousand and th e th ou san d years V ex ed and terrib le. A nd w e s till u se
T h e cures th a t n ev er cure.
Y et cu riou sly enough F ry does n o t seem to believe th a t th e re is any w ilful evil in ten ded b y m an. He seem s to tak e a d elig h t in n o rm ality ;
4 G. W e a l e s : R elig io n in M o d e r n E n glish D ra m a , U niv. P ress, P h ila d elp h ia 1961, p. 219.
fo r such m en as Seti in The Firstborn, and H e n ry IV in C urtm an tle are n o t m ade m o n sters of crim e, though c e rta in ly th ey could ap pear as such.
F r y ’s u sual focus is th e individual; it m ay even be observed th a t society has no p a rt to p lay in his dram a. It w ould perh ap s be m ore precise to say th a t he is m ainly concerned w ith th e pro blem of individual re s ponsibility for w h a t one h a s o r has not done for o th er people. To m ake th is clear F ry o ften has to d eal w ith im p o rta n t individuals, w ith those who govern, such as a pharaoh, an archbishop, a duke or a duchess — persons w ho a re p re e m in e n tly responsible for oth er people, and should do m o re fo r th em th a n anyone else could. This, how ever, does n o t seem to be F r y ’s view . In his com edies he is concerned w ith the responsibility of one ind ividu al to an o ther. In The D ark Is L ig h t Enough and in The
L a d y ’s N o t fo r B u rn in g w e m eet c h aracters w ho a re n a tu ra lly n ot heroic
b u t p e rfo rm v ario u s heroic d eed s in given circum stances. We see ex am ples of e x tra o rd in a ry h u m an helpfulness and k indness show n b y u tte rly u n -heroic c h a ra c te rs in th e m ost o rd in a ry m an n e r w hen th e re is no a lte rn a tiv e w ay in w hich a m an can behave. H ere F ry seem s to suggest th a t w hen th e h o u r of tria l comes, m an n iust w ish to be good since he h as n e v e r been w ilfu lly wicked. T hus F ry re je c ts the C h ristian notion of m a n ’s n a tu ra l sinfulness. A lthough th is view of F r y ’s position m ay a p p e ar to be u n ju stified it h a s been suggested by re c u rre n t h in ts to the effect th a t h u m an n a tu re is basically good and th a t evil n e ith e r prevails no r is o m n ip resen t in th e w orld. B u t on th e o th er hand he does not go to the opposite e x tre m e so as to say for instance th a t m en a re alw ays good and heroic, ju s t and brav e; he sees them as m e re ly hum an, even · though cow ardly and w eak th e y still m ay act lik e heroes.
We m a y also note th a t F r y ’s c h aracters a re not d u ll, no r a re h is plays didactic. The fact m ay seem e x tra o rd in a ry as so m an y elem ents of his d ram as a re ta k e n d ire c tly fro m th e Bible, b u t this h as referen ce only to the su b ject m a tte r. He does, of course, use ideas th a t are u su ally called C h ristian in th e bro ad est sense of th e w ord.
A m ong th em is th e do ctrin e of love and forgiveness, w hich is often co n trasted w ith th e p agan code of h a tre d and revenge, as in Thor w ith
A ngels. B u t in th e m o dern w orld people experience alm ost the sam e
h ardship s as th e ir ancestors did. In one o f his best plays, A Sleep of
Prisoners, m an en d u res th e crucifixion of history. D erek S ta n fo r d 5
h as used th e phrase: „[...] and if it be asked w h at are th e forces behind th is crucifying process, F r y ’s an sw er w ould seem to be th a t th e y are p reju d ice, intolerance, and h a tre d .’’
5 D. S t a n f o r d : C h r i s t o p h e r F ry, W r i t e r s a n d th e i r W o r k s , No. 54, L o n g m ans, 1954, p.20.
In th e sam e p lay F ry has u tte re d o th e r re la te d d o ctrin es n am ely th a t m an w ill survive only if he is hum ble and re a d y to forgive and th ere is hope for m an to approach God though th is is fa r from easy. In his firs t play, The B o y w ith a Cart, be had said th a t it is im possible for m an to
approach the absolute, p. 40: f
B etw een
Our birth and d eath w e m ay tou ch u n d erstan d in g A s a m oth b ru sh es a w in d o w w ith its w in g.
If F ry does n ot co n trad ict him self h e re a t least he show s how v e ry broad his notion of religion is and how little it has in com m on w ith a n y form al religious loyalty.
W hen we com pare F r y ’s com edies and his church dram as, th e y look a t first as if th e y had been w ritte n by tw o d iffe re n t authors. In the com edies F ry has a m ore specific aim , he w an ts to please his v iew ers and readers, and does this in a b re a th -ta k in g w ay, dazzling his audience by w itticism s, jokes, h ighly im probable situ ations and sem i-nonsensical dialogues. Y et fo rtu n a te ly th is is n o t th e w hole co n ten t of th e comedies. Though th ere is no ex te n d e d discussion of ideas, w e feel th e ir presence. T h e m ain differen ce b etw een these com edies and th e ch urch d ram as is in the w ay in w hich th ey a re conceived. F ry has p robab ly re-in tro d u ce d com edy in Oscar W ilde’s style.® This is th e gen re based alm ost e n tire ly on b rilliance of language. F r y ’s w orld of u n p red ictab le h appenings and sudden tw ists of action creates th e atm o sp h ere of m e rrim e n t an d to p sy tu r v y d o m essential to such com edy. It also leads to seeing life th ro u g h a veil of am azem ent. The am azem ent is u su ally cre a te d verb ally . The use o f v e rb a l m eans by F ry h as been criticized by G. W eales 7, who rep e a ts th e opinion of S. S p ender w ith th e u n fla tte rin g conclusion in w hich he trie s to convince u s th a t F ry is g u ilty of shallow ness. Y et though the arg u m en ts a re valid he seem s to do less th a n ju stice to the p layw right. It is tru e th a t the high seriousness of th e Church D ram as is n o t reta in e d in th e lig h ter „com edies of seasons” , nor does he seem to have aim ed a t retain in g it; b u t in m any cases he has m anaged to include deep o bserva tions on life and m an and record th em in an in trig u in g w ay. It is tru e th a t, although his p lay s contain re m a rk a b ly shrew d reflections, u n fo r tu n a te ly one o fte n feels th a t these a re n ot indispensable to th e s tru c tu re of th e d ram a o r even th a t some of th em a re n o t in c h a ra c te r b u t in tro duced as m ere o rnam ents. If w e explored th is aspect of F r y ’s p lay s m ore extensively, we w ould have to d eal w ith a n o th e r m a tte r, n am ely F r y ’s
• R. W i l l i a m s : D r a m a f r o m Ib s e n to Eliot, C hatto and W indiis, 1952, p. 262. 7 y i e a 1 e s: op. cit., p. 233.
effectiveness as a d ra m a tist w ritin g for the th ea tre , b u t th is is not of p rim a ry in te re st to us here, though o ften rem a rk e d on by the critics.8 R e tu rn in g th e n to th e conceptual elem en t in F ry ’s comedies w e have to recognize th at, how ever loosely connected w ith th e action, th e y still rev e a l m ore aspects of his w ay of view ing th e w orld. The quotation th a t I am going to produce is supposed to provide an im p o rtan t p ointer on his creed as a playwright.® In V en u s O bserved R edbeck says, p. 36:
A sp ad e is n e v e r so m e rely a sp ad e as th e w ord sp ad e w o u ld im ply.
This m ay m ean th a t th e re is alw ays th e elem ent of surprise or m y ste ry p re se n t in even th e m ost uninsp irin g things. M ystery and lau g h te r seem to be v e ry im p o rta n t guiding principles in his comedies. T here are often u n e x p e cte d ly good reasons for th e pro tag on ists to laugh, as in The L a d y ’s
N o t jo r B urning, p. 49:
T hom as. For G od’s sak e, sh a ll w e laugh? J en n et. For w h a t reason?
Thom as. For th e reason o f lau gh ter, sin ce la u g h ter is su rely th e su rest tou ch o f g en iu s in creation.
[...]
T h a t sam e lau gh ter, m adam , is an irre lev a n cy W hich a lm o st am ou n ts to rev ela tio n .
H ere w e see th a t for th e p lay w rig h t, to view th e w orld in term s of lau g h te r helps him to approach its hidden significance.
The ideas th a t w e a re asked to grasp th ro u g h th e language a re not d iffe re n t from those expressed in th e Church Dramas. Take The Dark
Is L ig h t Enough; h e re th e hum an istic elem en ts have been strongly stressed.
This is a pacifist p lay show ing th e te rrib le influence of w ar on m an. R ecreatin g th e H u n g arian U p ris:ng of 1848, F ry considers the case in te rm s of h u m an su ffering and not in term s of justice, which seem s to him irre le v e n t w h en people die;
S tefa n , p. 6: B ut th ese H ungarian n a tio n a lists th in k th e y stand For tru th and lig h t and k ill accord in gly.
So w e can see th a t the plots of these so called su nny comedies are not so v e ry lig h t a fte r all. S everal tragic com ponents have been discussed by D. S ta n fo rd .10 Comic and trag ic situ atio ns spring from one an o th er
8 D. D o n o g h u e : C h r is to p h e r F r y ’s T h e a tr e of W o r d s , "Essays in C riticism ”, vol. IX , No. 1, J a n u ary 1959, p. 37— 49.
9 Cf. D o n o g h u e and W e a l e s : op. cit., and K. M u i r : V e r s e an d Prose,
C o n t e m p o r a r y T h e a tr e , S t r a t f o r d - u p o n - A v o n S tu d i e s 4, 1962, pp. 97— 115.
10 S t a n f o r d: C o m e d y a n d T r a g e d y in C h r is to p h e r F ry, "The M onth”, M ay 1959, pp. 307— 312.
im prom ptu and w ith such rap id ity th a t one has th e illu sion of u n iv ersal confusion. All of a sud den th e pro tag on ists face situ atio n s th a t could easily change th e p lay into a tra g e d y if th e y w ere d w e lt upon a little longer. This is the case of J e n n e t in T he L a d y 's N o t fo r B urning, w h en she re je c ts H u m p h ley’s in v itatio n to becom e his m istress. The situ atio n is m ore im m ediately acute th an in S h ak esp eare’s M easure fo r M easure for J e n n e t h erself is to b e a r th e consequences. N everth eless she refu ses H um phrey on th e ground th a t she h ates th e idea though it seem s sin fu l to h e r not to save herself, pp. 81—84), b u t w hen she says:
O God, I w ish
T h e ground w ou ld open
Thom as clim bs in th ro u g h th e w indow and re to rts a t once: „A llow m e to open it for you", and su d d enly th e atm osphere of m e rrim e n t is resto red .
F ry n e v e r uses such technique in th e Church Dramas, w here his a tte n tio n is focused on single significant problem s so m uch th a t he h a rd ly e ver rev eals his su p erb sense of h u m o u r so e b u llie n t in his comedies. His plots alw ays d eriv e from w ell k now n sources b u t in th e C hurch
D ram as th e ir in te rre la tio n is fa r m ore obvious th a n in th e comedies.
In these th e source is h in te d a t r a th e r th a n pointed to, b u t a ll th e tim e th e a u th o r m anages to tell u s m ore th a n a m ere story. In fact he in tro d u ces a second level of m eaning; in F r y ’s th e a tre w e m ay laugh, an d w atch w h a t is going on on th e stage, b u t a t th e sam e tim e w e have to thin k, and th e problem s exposed a re v alu ab le to us. F ry him self tr e a ts th em from our, th a t is to say co ntem porary, point of view — how ev er m uch obscured by the a n c estry of th e plot. In read in g V e n u s O bserved w e realize how fre e ly he tra n sm u te s th e an cien t sto ry of the apple of discord, w hich is presen ted in the residence of an e ld e rly b onvivant, and how he also m anages to convey to u s m uch m ore th a n th e story.
It seem s alm ost im possible to pass a fin al ju d g em e n t upon F ry . W hen w e view his lite ra ry o u tp u t as a w hole it a p p ears to be a p ro d u ct of cro ss-fertilization: his academ ic tra in in g visible in th e choice of sources and stylistic devices, and th e re is also his e x tra o rd in a ry sensitiveness and - im agination. These tw o aspects should be discussed w hile a tte m p tin g a reassessm ent of his technique.
As I have a lre ad y said, one reason w h y F ry is orig in al is th a t h e has re-in tro d u ce d v erse to th e th e a tre . I do n o t th in k it w o rth w hile dw elling upon the „m echanics” of the v erse; it is m u ch m ore in te restin g to find o u t th e possible reasons fo r his choice of m edium . The o n ly source th a t can th ro w some lig ht on th is is an essay b y th e p lay w rig h t him self bearing th e title W h y V e rse ? 11
11 F r y : W h y V e rse ? [from :] P l a y w r i g h t s on P l a y w r i t i n g (Ed T oby C ole) L o n - 1960, pp. 120— 125.
H ere th e a u th o r m akes it p lain th a t although th e verse and prose p lay s a re n o t antagonistic, th ere a re some factors th a t m ake verse m ore su itab le fo r th e th e a tre . F irs t o f all v erse p rovides speed and economy. Q uoting v ario u s passages from M acbeth he contends th a t verse provides experience of th e c h a ra c te rs as w ell as a second level of m eaning. The la tte r w h en com m unicated by p o e try goes fa r beyond the m ere sto ry and can e x te n d u n d e r o u r eye, in fac t is unlim ited. In this p o etry can be com pared to m usic because b oth a re u niversal.
In F r y ’s view v erse can convey both th e im m ediate and deeper m ean ing s and th e experience is p e rfe c tly n a tu ra l since w e know the same th in g from ev e ry d a y life. A ccording to F ry , w e are m ade of tw o parts, one prosaic, th e o th e r poetic; and w e n e v e r e n tire ly belong to one „cam p” only, and the sam e th ing hap pen s w ith p o e tr y 12 in th e th eatre.
F r y ’s preoccupation w ith w ords in th e th e a tre shows in th e extensive use of v ario us sty listic devices in his plays. If I w ere to indicate the one m ost ch aracteristic, I w ould point to im agery. The un usual thing ab o u t it is th a t though th e im agery is larg e ly conventional th e effect is fa r from trite . The choice of elem ents w hich th e m etaphor joins together m akes fo r its uniqueness. C onsequently w e begin to w onder a t the u n ex pected com plexity of seem ingly p lain o b jects and events. Now and th e n som e m etap h o rs seem incom prehensible, and though it is an annoying fact, y e t to some e x te n t it h elps to c re a te th e atm osphere of irresp o n sib ility and confusion — p erh ap s th is w as in tended by th e author.
F r y m akes u s feel the living presence of darkness, though this phe nom enon of n a tu re as w ell as th e accom panim ent of o u r hom ely activities is q u ite com m onplace, th e com bination evokes a feeling of w onder at th e w orld. The follow ing m etap h or is tak e n from T h e B o y w ith a Cart, p. 1:
Chorus: T h e d ark n ess h an gs th e h a tch et in th e barn and scrap es th e h e a v y boots a g a in st th e iron.
A n o ther d a rin g m etap h o r is introduced b y D avid, A Sleep o f Priso
ners, p. 31:
God dips h is hand in d eath to w a sh th e w ound. T ak es e v il to in o cu la te our liv e s
A g a in st in fectio u s ev il.
A t th e opposite pole stan d s a n o th e r m etap h o r (The L a d y ’s N o t for
B urning, Je n n et, p. 49):
T he m orn in g cam e, and le f t
T h e su n lig h t on m y step s lik e an y norm al T radesm an.
This one seem s v e ry charm ing. I t has a q u iet charm of a w orld sym p ath etic to m en — th e y a re given th e sun, and it is as if „th e su n lig h t” w as a thing one could buy; th u s stra n g e th in gs occur alm ost im perceptibly.
Y et th ough some of these m etap h o rs seem v e ry clever and original th ey are o ften som ew hat im perfect. T hey do suggest a lot b u t v e ry o ften th ey are too vague, th e ir v e ry profusion m akes them larg ely ineffective for an audience th a t cannot grasp th em all d u rin g the perform ance. So F r y ’s p rincipal fa u lt seem s to be such a m assive use of m etap h o r w hich robs it of th ea tric al effectiveness. Sim ilar objections hav e been m ade by the follow ing critics: R. W illia m s 1S, M. B e w le y 14, D. D onoghue.15 D. D a ic h e s18 points out, m oreover, th a t F r y ’s poetic im agery is too indiscrim inate and rep e titio u s in d iffe re n t circum stances. Since these opinions a re su p p o rted b y ap p ro p riate evidence th e y cannot be d isre garded. T aking all such objections in to account, one m ay conclude th a t F r y ’s im ag ery is indeed of lim ited use to th e th e a tre , b u t closely studied, can ad eq u ately convey th e a u th o r’s m eaning, on th e w hole th e fa u lts do not obscure th e achievem ents.
Focusing his a tte n tio n on language F ry en rich es his plays w ith still an other elem en t a p a rt from im agery. He uses language for comic effect extensively. The comic tone, how ever, is h a rd ly ever noticeable in his
Church Dramas, and w h en it is, it ap p ears to be o u t of place.17
N ot so in th e comedies. The a u th o r m akes m uch p lay of hum o ur, w it, irony, and achieves his effects by m eans of: p lay on w ords, en u m eration , paradox, m etonym y, special use of idiom s, and ju x tap o sitio n of w ords and phrases.
The double m eaning of th e w ord „ re b o rn ” is used b y Nicolas and M argaret, T he L a d y ’s N ot fo r B urning, p. 11:
N icolas. I m u st te ll you I’ve b een reborn. M argaret. Y ou can b e su re
Y ou w e r e born q u ite ad eq u a tely at th e fir st occasion .
In the n e x t ex am p le F r y achieves irony by an unex p ected use of the word „illu m in atio n” — com m only associated w ith som ething b e a u tifu l and inspired w hile lum bago is a som ew hat comic a ilm e n t of old age. The irony is stren g th en ed by a fu rth e r m ocking re m a rk ; V e n u s O bserved, p. 99:
13 W i l l i a m s : op. cit., p. 264.
14 M. B e w l e y : T h e V e r s e of Ch. F ry, “S cru tin y ”, vol. X V III, No. 1, Ju n e 1951, pp. 79— 82.
15 D o n o g h u e : op. cit., pp. 39— 43.
19 D. D a i c h e s : T h e P r e s e n t A g e, I n d ia n a U. P., B loom in gton 1958, pp. 165— 167.
D uke. A su d d en illu m in a tio n o f lum bago. W hat a rich w orld o f sen sa tio n to a ch iev e, W hat in fin ite v a r ie ty o f b eing.
The disquieting fact ab o u t such use of the comic is th a t it is ra th e r loosely in set in th e co n tex t so th a t in fact such passages could be used alm ost an y w h ere. As a re s u lt th e comic does n ot seem to sp rin g from th e sto ry b u t serves only to em bellish it.
This b rie f su rv e y of th e a rtistic devices used b y F ry does not ex h au st th e s u b je c t.-I m ention th em chiefly because th ey do seem to help the p la y w rig h t create a special atm osphere, an in te lle c tu a l „clim ate" in th e plays.
S uch effects unden iab ly ex ist b u t it is h a rd ly possible to analyse them b y applying some o bjective stan d ards. Of some help is S ty a n ’s18 rem a rk concerning The D ark C om edy w h en he places F ry am ong the e a rly rep re sen ta tiv e s of th e so called m od ern comic tragedy. A ccording to the definition of th e com edy of mood quoted b y S ty a n a fte r V an D ru te n it is the kind of p la y „whose m ain q u a lity — fa r m ore im p o rta n t th an its sto ry or its p lo t — is th e m ainten an ce an d cortim unication of a certain mood, th ro u g h w hich th e e n tire action is p resen ted ." F r y ’s all four comedies of seasons w ould answ er th e d efinition of com edies of mood. To m ake the th ing clear let m e re fe r to V e n u s O bserved. H ere th e sto ry of the apple of discord is o nly a p re te x t to introduce th e m iddle aged duke w ho feels th e approaching a u tu m n of his life to g eth er w ith loneliness and resigna tion. Even m eeting his th re e fo rm er m istresses w ill change nothing in his life and w ill not release him from his fears.
D. S tan fo rd q u o te s 19 F r y on th is subject: „1 d on’t know w h eth er a com edy of mood is an accepted category, or w h e th e r i t ’s som ething I ’ve coined to cover m y p a rtic u la r end. I t m eans th a t th e scene, the season, and th e ch aracters, a re bound to g ether in one clim ate. In V en u s the season is au tu m n , th e scene is a house beginning to fall into decay, the c h aracters, m ost of th em a re in m id d le life.”
*
* *
In conclusion I w a n t to consider w h a t chance of life, if any, F ry ’s plays could h ave on Polish stages. As is g en erally agreed the m ost ou t standin g fe a tu re of F r y ’s d ram a tic dialogue is th e p lay on words. U nfor tu n a te ly th e a u th o r’s m aste ry in th is kind of gam e is a thing alm ost im possible to im ita te in tran slatio n . T he Polish ren d e rin g of The L a d y ’s
18 S t y a n : T h e D a r k C o m e d y , CUP, 1962, p. 120— 122. 18 S t a n f o r d : C h r is to p h e r F ry, pp. 21— 22.
N o t jo r B u r n in g 20, th e only p lay th a t has been tra n sla te d and staged
so far, illu tra te s th e difficulty ; it has little v irtu e a p a rt from being faith fu l to th e original, it is u n ab le to re ta in e ith e r th e charm o r th e nonchalant q u a lity of th e language.
A few exam ples w ill suffice to show how th e p la y has changed in Polish version; th u s th e typical W ild ian h u m o u r in th e p h rase ,,I w asn’t bo rn I w as come across” (p. 9), has been lost in th e w ord s „N ik t m nie nie urodził. J a jeste m z n a jd a ”. T hom as’ u tte ra n c e (on page 51) begins w ith an idiom w hich has no close eq u iv a len t in P olish and en ds w ith a sequence of p a ra lle l constructions, some of w hich have b een ren d e re d v e ry loosely:
E m perors
W ould b e colon izin g you, th eir m istresses P atro n izin g you, m in isters if sta te G o v ern m en ta lizin g you. A nd you W ould b e eu logized , lio n ized , p rob ab ly C anonized for your d iv in e m ishap.
The Polish version ru n s as follows:
C esarze b y cię sk o lo n izo w a li, ich k och an k i O toczyły opieką, a m in istro w ie
U p a ń stw o w ili. B y ła b y ś p od ziw ian a, C eleb row an a, a m oże
I k an o n izo w a n a za sw o ją b osk ą niezręczn ość.
F r y him self trie d his han d at tra n sla tio n . H e tra n sla te d G irau d o u x and A nouilh in to English b u t ren d e re d th e ir p lays r a th e r freely . He even changed the titles, G irau d o u x ’s La G uerre de Troie n ’aura pas lieu to
Tiger at the Gates, and A nouilh’s L ’in vita tio n au C hateau to R ing round the Moon. The in te re st th a t F ry has ta k e n in these d ra m a tists m ay sup
p o rt th e contension th a t he also adopted some of th e view s u su ally associated w ith existentialism .
In spite of all th e in te re s t th a t F ry has for a stu d e n t of d ra m a the Polish audience w ill pro b ab ly co n te n t itself w ith tra n sla tio n s of C hurch
Dramas. In a n y case even a fra g m e n ta ry know ledge of his p lays w ill enable
d ram a re a d e rs and th ea tre -g o ers to get in tou ch w ith a n in te llig en t th in k e r, an ind ep en d en t an d reflectiv e m ind. He w ould soon m ake an im p a c t on his audiences th an k s to his links w ith E u rop ean c u ltu re, his g re a t skill com bined w ith h is h u m a n ita ria n outlook, and academ ic lite ra ry h eritag e. He should also im press people w ith h is m a ste ry in conveying, if not
20 F r y : S z k o d a t e j c z a r o w n i c y n a stos, tra n sla ted b y W. L e w ik and C. W o jew oda, "D ialog”, J u n e 1958, pp. 5— 54.
discovering, th e c o n tem p o rary significance of w ell know n them es. In both th e choice of su b jects and th e form o f his p lay s he has to be considered a n origin al w rite r. * * * T e x t s : T h e B o y w i t h a C a rt, M uller, L ondon 1961. T he F irs tb o rn , O: U. P., 1952. ' A P h o e n ix Too F r e q u e n t, O. U. P., 1950. T h e L a d y ’s N o t f o r B u rnin g, O. U. P., 1950. Th o r, w i t h A n gels, O. U. P., 1954. V e n u s O b s e r v e d , O. U. P., 1950. A S le e p of P ris o n ers, O. U. P., 1951. T h e D a r k Is L ig h t Enough, O. U. P., 1955. C u r t m a n t l e , O. U. P., 1961.
R in g R o u n d th e Moon (transl.), M ethuen, 1950. T i g e r a t th e G a t e s (transl.), M ethuen, 1955.
S T R E S Z C Z E N I E
A rty k u ł stanow i prób ę zestaw ienia naczelnych m otyw ów ideow ych i arty sty czn y ch d ra m a tu rg ii C hristophera F ry ’a. B adane są pow iązania m iędzy poglądam i a u to ra a fo rm ą arty sty czną, w jak ie j je w ypow iada.
Jako ideolog F ry m oże być zaliczony do k o n ty n u ato ró w d ra m a tu r e ligijnego w podobnym stopniu, ja k T. S. Eliot, co p rzejaw ia się przede w szystkim w propagow aniu idei hu m an itary zm u i pacyfizm u. O wiele w ażniejsze m iejsce zajm u je on jed n ak w lite ra tu rz e jako, bodaj jedy ny , a rty s ta średniego pokolenia, k tó ry konsekw entnie używ a na scenie tylko w iersza. Ze w zględu na języ k k o n ty n u u je tra d y c ję kom edii w stylu O scara W ilde’a.
Jednocześnie tenże język, k tó ry m z takim m istrzostw em operuje, jest obiektem najw iększych atak ów k ry ty k i. O ryginalny język F r y ’a nie stw arza w ielkich nadziei na pojaw ienie się zadow alających przekładów na języ k polski. , Р Е З Ю М Е В настоящ ей статье делается попы тка синтеза основных идейных и ху д ож ественны х мотивов драм атургии Х ристоф ора Ф рая. И ссле дую тся связи м еж ду взглядам и п и сателя и теми худож ественны ми ф ормами, с помощью которы х они вы раж аю тся.
К а к идеолог, Ф рай, т а к ж е к а к и Эллиот, м ож ет бы ть отнесен к продолж ателям религиозной драмы . У Ф р ая это п роявл яется п р еж де всего в пропаганде идей гум анизм а и п ациф изм а. О днако основ ное значение Ф рая к а к х у д ож н и ка состоит в том, что он, пож алуй, я вл яется единственным писателем среднего поколения, пиш ущ им свои произведения в стихотворной ф орме. Кром е того, я з ы к произве дений Ф рая продолж ает традиции комедий в стиле О скара У айльда. Вместе с тем, этот ж е я зы к , используем ы й Ф раем с таки м вели колеп ным мастерством, яв л я е тс я важ н ей ш и м объектом а та к кри ти ки . Ори гинальны й, самобытный я з ы к Ф рая не д ает нам больш их н ад еж д на появление хорош их переводов на польский я з ы к его произведений. P a p i e r d r u k . s a t . I I I k l . 80 g F o r m a t 70 x 100 D r u k u s t r . 12 A n n a l e s U M C S L u b l i n 1968 L Z G r a f . I m . P K W N , L u b l i n , U n i c k a 4 Z a m . 1386. 8 .IV .8 7 700 + 60 e g z . P - 8 M a n u s k r y p t o t r z y m a n o 8 .IV .6 7 D a t a u k o ń c z e n i a 17.X .67
