THE PLAY OF " HEROD."
[TO TIM EDITOR 0)? TEE "SPECTATOR."]
Stu,—May one who has in his time, as the Spectator knows, been something of a poet as well as of a dramatist, add to the well-worthy remarks of your reviewer in your issue of Decem- ber 15th one of his own? Namely, that after watching Herod closely twice within a week (so far I have not read it)--current criticism having given me no idea of its true value—I
deliberatelyhold it to be the finest acting Lragedyproduced upon the English stage in my time, or, as far as my own rather wide reading goes, for very long before. For it does what the tragedies of many very great as well as very small poets do not,—it " moves " from start to finish. And the very word drama" means something to be done ; not, with all respect to many of the moderns, something to be said. To the dramatic insight with which Mr. Phillips has seized upon Josephus your critic pays a very worthy tribute. So Shakespeare seized on Plutarch, in the block. Better be incorrect on one fine authority, for the purposes of stage-poetry, than struggle blindly against many. As for Mr. Phillips's lines, they ring their passion for themselves. It is not for me to make a comment on them. Love-stories are the life of drama, and this is one of the noblest I have ever heard. I do not speak in any spirit of criticism, but from a deeper motive,—quite overpowering feeling.—I am, Sir, &c.,
HERMAN llimavari.
[Mr. Merivale's declaration as to something more than words being needed for the drama recalls the French saying, " On ne fait pas les drames avec les mots, mais avec lea situations."— En. Spectator.]
Previous page
