POETICAL DRAMA AT THE PLAYBOX

Evening Star, Issue 22448, 19 September 1936, Page 11

POETICAL DRAMA AT THE PLAYBOX

‘PAOLO AHO FRANCESCA’ [By C. R. Allen.] An event which will not be greatly heralded, since these are the days of clamorous advertisement for the latest American “ Wow,” will be the staging of Stephen Phillipis's poetical drama ‘ Paolo and Francesca ’ by the members of Mr Russell-Wood’s dramatic class at the Playbox, Stuart street, next week. Stephen Phillips was an actor in Frank Ilenson’s company. Among the parts he played in London was that ot the ghost of Hamlet’s father. He was also a poet, who perhaps enjoyed extravagant praise in his day, and as a result is suffering unmerited- neglect m our own time. He lust attracted attention as the author of ‘ Marpessa and ‘Christ in Hades.’ The theme of the first-named poem is the choice young Idas had to make between union with a goddess or a mortal woman. The poem contains some passages which adumbrate the later beauties of ‘ Paolo and Francesca.' it is generally allowed that this poetical drama more easily approaches perfection than any of our day. It was preceded by ‘ Ulysses, which Stephen Phillips wrote for Beerbohm Tree for production at His Majesty’s Theatre. In every respect it is superior to this earlier pilay. Jn ‘ Paolo and Francesca ’.Stephen Phillips accomplished something which he never repeated. ‘ Herod,’ which was subsequently produced by Tree, may be said to stand in tho same category as some of Mr Masefield’s scmi-Biblical plays. About ‘ Paoio and Francesca,

however, there lingers an atmosphere which is induced by the simplicity of the theme and the chastity of the writer’s style. We contrast it with the Oriental opulence _ of James Elroy Flecker’s ‘ Hassau,’ or with the ‘ Will Shakespeare ’ of Clemence Dane, which is, from a technical point of view, more strictly in accord with the canons of poetical drama than is ‘ Hassan,’ hut is overweighted with dulcet imagery. Stephen Pliillips, of course, went to Dante for his story. Many will have noted the parallelism between it and that of ‘ Tristan and Iseult,’ which has provided a theme for several poets and one master composer. The dramatic version by J. Comyns Carr was played at the Adelphi, wliiph for the time being was given over to a courageous attempt to provide London with a poetical drama. ‘ The Virgin Goddess,’ by Rudolph Besier, who in our time lias won fortune with ‘ The Barretts of Wimpole Street,’ belong to this period. But whereas the play by Comyns Carr survives only in the libraries of collectors, 1 Paolo and Francesca ’ is still as vita! a literary and dramatic work as any play of Shakespeare. _ It is revived by amateurs in Great Britain, and was set down for another London season at the Little Theatre. The play was published with a reproduction of the famous picture by G. F. Watts as a frontispiece. Mr A. E. W. Mason, in his ‘ Sir George Alexander and the St. James’ Theatre,’ published this year, gives us an interesting account of the production by Alexander of ‘ Paolo and Francesca ’ at the St. James Theatre in 1903. Among those who took a deep interest in the production was Sidney Colvin, bettter known to us. perhaps, as the friend and editor of Robert Louis Stevenson. He was very solicitous that the authentic Florentine setting and costumes should ratify the lovely verse of Stephen Phillips. Henry Ainley, an extraordinarily handsome young actor who might have been born to represent Tito Malemraa

in George Eliot’s 1 Romola,’ was engaged to play Paolo. He had begun life as a clerk in his native Yorkshire. Mr Mason sots it down in his book that Ainley was overweighted by the part. This is not the impression that Ungers with one who had the privilege of witnessing his performance. Alexander himself played Giovanni, the hunchback, to whom Paolo_ brought Francesca from her cloistered life, for bride. The story of how the escort and the bridcelect were enmeshed in a passion for each other is, of course, one of the classics of the world. “ Unwillingly they loved,” writes Stephen Phillips. The Francesca was Evelyn Millard, while the blind nurse was played by Ada Ferrar, a name that sounded oddly familiar, conjuring up memories of Julius Knight’s tour through New Zealand with ‘ The Sign of the Cross.’ Another career which may be said to have had its starting point in ‘ Paolo and Francesca ’ was that of Lilian Braithwaite, who playdd the important part of the maid. The note of the play is inevitability, but it is uot the note of the trap, as is the case with so many tragedies. Perhaps the most poignant scene is that in which Paolo and Francesca, seated in the dawn-grey garden, read the story of Launcelot by turn. Mr Mason writes that the play was not relieved from sombreness by the jocularity of the soldiers, which is far removed from the buffoonery of a set of ■ Shakespearean clowns. One feels, however, that the unity of this play is a consummation rarely, reached by the greatest of dramatists, and that this perfection would have been marred by “comic relief.” It is not for one to say whether ‘ Paolo and Francesca ’ was a literary lluke or the outcome of transcendental genius. It suffices that we have it with us for our refreshment. The forthcoming production may bring one or two to a knowledge of their possession.