INFORMATION TO USERS

This material was produced from a microfilm copy of the original document. While the most advanced technological means to photograph and reproduce this document have been used, the quality is heavily dependent upon the quality of the original submitted.

Thefollowing explanation of techniques is provided to help you understand markings or patterns which may appear on this reproduction.

1. The sign or "target" for pages apparently lacking from the document photographed is "Missing Page ($)''. If it was possible to obtain the missing page(s) or section, they are spliced into the film along with adjacent pages. This may have necessitated cutting thru an image and duplicating adjacent pages to insure you complete continuity.

2. Whan an image on the film is obliterated with a large round black mark, it is an indication that die photographer suspected that the copy may have moved during exposure and thus cause a blurred image. You w ill find a good image of the page in the adjacent frame.

3. When a map, drawing or chart, etc., was part of the material being photographed the photographer followed a definite method in "sectioning" the material. It is customary to begin photoing at the upper left hand corner of a large sheet and to continue photoing from left to right in equal sections w ith a small overlap. If necessary, sectioning is continued again — beginning below the first row and continuing on until complete.

4. The majority of users indicate that the textual content is of greatest value, however, a somewhat higher quality reproduction could be made from "photographs" if essential to the understanding of the dissertation. Silver prints of "photographs" may be ordered at additional charge by writing the Order Department, giving the catalog number, title, author and specific pages you wish reproduced.

5. PLEASE NOTE: Some pages may have indistinct print. Filmed as received.

Xerox University Microfilms 300 North Zaab Road Ann Arbor, Michigan 46106 I I

76-24,630 KREMLING, Helmut John, 1941- GERMAN DRAMA ON THE CLEVELAND STAGE: PERFORMANCES IN GERMAN AND ENGLISH FROM 1850 TO THE PRESENT. The Ohio State University, Ph.D., 1976 Literature, Germanic

Xerox University MicrofilmsAnn , Arbor, Michigan 48106

© Copyright by Helmut John Kremling 1976 GERMAN DRAMA ON THE CLEVELAND STAGE:

PERFORMANCES IN GERMAN AND ENGLISH

FROM 1850 TO THE PRESENT

DISSERTATION

Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for

the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate

School of The Ohio State University

By

Helmut John Kremling, B.S., M.A.

* * * * *

The Ohio State University

1976

Reading Committee: Approved ]

Professor David H. Miles r Professor Henry J. Schmidt Professor Charles W*. Hoffmann

Adviser Department of German ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

For helping to nurture the idea for this dissertation my thanks go to John Sinnema and Robert Ward.

I express my gratitude to Henry Schmidt, Charles Hoffmann, and

David Miles for their constructive advice concerning style, organiza­ tion, and presentation.

I am also indebted to Kurt Guddat for his consistent support

and to Betty De Vries and Ann Nagy for typing the manuscript.

To the staff of the library of the Western Reserve Historical

Society, and especially to Constance Koehn of the literature section

of the Cleveland Public Library, I render thanks for help in my research.

ii VITA

May 29, I9U1 ...... Born - Temesvar, Romania

1 9 6 3 ...... B.S., John Carroll University, Cleveland, Ohio

19 6 5-I9 6 6 ...... English Teacher, Thomas Edison. Occupational High School, Cleveland, Ohio

1 9 6 6 -1 9 6 8 ...... Teaching Assistant, German Department, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio

1 9 6 8 ...... M.A., Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio

1 9 6 8 -Present...... Instructor, Assistant Professor, Department of German and Russian, Ohio Wesleyan University, Delaware, Ohio

iii TABLE OF CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION......

Chapter

I. THE AUDIENCE--THE GERMAN IMMIGRANTS......

Three Waves of Immigrants Population Statistics Vereine Activities

II. THEATRICAL BEGINNINGS, 1820-1860 ......

Cleveland's Cultural Growth German Clubs Initiate Theater, 1 8 5 0 s First Professional German Theater in Cleveland, 1856 Comparison with the Contemporary Theater in Germany and the Contemporary English-Language Theater in Cleveland Opposition to the Theater

III. PROGRESS FOR CLEVELAND’S GERMAN-LANGUAGE THEATER . . .

Two Seasons under F. Szwirschina, I8 7 2 -I8 7 U Another Attempt in 1 8 8 5 Comparison with the Contemporary Theater in Germany

IV. LAST AND GREATEST CLEVELAND GERMAN-LANGUAGE THEATER ERA......

Establishing of a Theaterverein, 1899 Two Seasons under A. Wurster, 1899-1901 Two Seasons under A. Sandory, 1901-1903 One Season under F Nolte, 1903-190^ Comparison with the Contemporary Theater in Germany and the Contemporary English-Language Theater in Cleveland V. ON ACTING IN CLEVELAND'S GERMAN-LANGUAGE THEATER . . 89

The Star System in America Imported Players for Cleveland

VI. A CROSS-SECTIONAL ANALYSIS AND CLASSIFICATION OF THE REPERTOIRE...... 99

1872-187U: Farces and Folk-Plays by Kneisel, Birch-Pfeiffer, and Benedix l899~190I+: Farces by Schonthan and Kadelburg, Melodramas by Sudermann, and Tragedies by Schiller Four Representative Plays: Kotzebue's Menschenhass und Reue, Gutzkow's Uriel Acosta, Moser's Per Bibliothekar, Sudermann's Heimat

VII. SPECULATIONS ABOUT THE RISE AND FALL OF THE GERMAN-LANGUAGE THEATER INCLUDING COMMENTS ABOUT AUDIENCE TASTES IN CLEVELAND...... 136

German Plays for a German-American Audience The Limited Audience Scandals and Financial Difficulties

VIII, GERMAN PLAYS IN TRANSLATION IN CLEVELAND SINCE THE FIRST WORLD WAR......

The Beginnings of Good Theater for Cleveland, 1915 Two Large Productions from New York: Hauptmann’s The Weavers, 1916 and Reinhardt *s The Miracle, I9 2U Expressionistic Plays in Cleveland, 1 9 2 0 s and 1 9 3 0 s Dearth of German Plays, 19^-Os Renewed Interest in German Drama, 1 9 5 0s and 1 9 6 0s

Conclusion 182

APPENDIX...... 190

A. German Plays of 1872-187^ Seasons B. German Plays of 1885 Season C. German Plays of l899-190k Seasons D. German Plays in Translation since W.W.I

SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY ...... 201

v INTRODUCTION

New York, Milwaukee, St. Louis, Cincinnati, Chicago, New

Orleans, San Francisco, Baltimore, Columbus (Ohio), and other cities

have had their German theaters recognized in print; this is not true

of Cleveland, whose German-language theater has remained a near secret

Even after a long search, one finds only vague references to German-

language plays in Cleveland. The attempt to rectify the neglect is,

I believe, both justified and timely; justified, because during the

several seasons of its existence, the German-language theater in

Cleveland achieved a degree of excellence that placed it on a par with

any except New York's; timely, because the present Bicentennial period

places additional emphasis on the cultural heritage of the United

States.

The first five chapters of this study present the creation,

development, and demise of Cleveland's German-language theater by con­

sidering the historical period, the audiences involved, the reception

of the performances, and the players themselves. Realizing that under

standing and appreciation are best achieved through comparison, I have

attempted throughout to contrast Cleveland’s German-language theater

with the American theater and with Germany' s contemporary stage.

Chapter six summarizes the repertoire of Cleveland's German

theater in general and discusses four plays in particular. The four 2 were chosen as being representative of the plays presented during the

period, and because of their general, importance for the German and

American theater. Since these four plays are nearly unknown today,

some space has been devoted to description as well as analysis. Chap­

ter seven, in reviewing the rise and fall of Cleveland's German-

language theater, ventures to draw conclusions about audience tastes

and attitudes. The final section then treats modern German drama in

translation. In this chapter I have discussed the critical reception

of the performances of nearly all the translated or adapted modern

German plays produced in Cleveland since the First World War.

The whole study covers a period of approximately 150 years,

from the first theatrical activity in Cleveland in 1820 to the present.

While only the more important periods, people, and plays have been

selected for actual discussion, the appendix lists all the plays per­

formed during the three major periods of the German theater and most

of the translated German plays performed this century in Cleveland.

These lists are as complete as available information allowed. I have

taken most of the information from the files of Cleveland’s German and

English-language newspapers at the Cleveland Public Library and the

Western Reserve Historical Society.

Along with acquainting the reader with little-known play­ wrights and plays of German origin, this study also attempts to provide

an insight into the German-Americans of Cleveland. The city has been a

lively scene for German drama, for it was in the forefront in 19th

century America in providing German ensembles and, on occasion, still

provides German plays of distinction in translation. CHAPTER I

THE AUDIENCE - THE GERMAN IMMIGRANTS

One of the most balanced works dealing with German culture in the United States, Pochmann's German Culture in America, contains the following assertion:

The high cultural aspiration of the German­ speaking theater in America, its extraordinary vitality and perseverance, and the general re­ spect that it won among playgoers and critics even outside the German circles make it a con­ siderable factor in the history of American drama.

Who, in fact, were these Germans who founded and supported theaters in their own language in the United States? The following pages will deal with this question.

Three Waves of Immigrants

G. A. Zimmermann, in one of the few works discussing German-

American literature, classified the German Immigration to the United

States up to the end of the 1 9th century as follows: the first wave, before 1 8 2 5 (missing Cleveland entirely), primarily seeking religious freedom; the second, from 1 82 5 to 1 8 5 5 > coming mainly for political reasons (and including the U8 ers); and the third, from 1 85 5 to the turn of the century, coming mainly for economic reasons. After the turn of the century, the influx dwindled because of prosperity in Germany. Not until after World War I did Germans again reach American shores in great numbers. However, by that time, the professional German language the­ ater had already become extinct.

In the twenty years between I8*t0 and i860 nearly one and one half million came to the United States from Germany and in the next two 3 decades over two million. The earlier German immigrants were mostly peasants and artisans; the later ones were industrial workers. The intellectual immigrants, following the political upheavals in the first half of the century in Germany, were a small minority but one whose in­ fluence was felt much more than their numbers would indicate. To this group belonged young men who had participated in the 18U8 revolution in

Germany. Many of them would have become, or were already, leaders in their communities in Germany. The Forty-eighters, as they were called, numbered only several thousand young men and their families in this country. The professions they had pursued before coming to America h were most frequently journalism, the military, medicine, and teaching.

It is no wonder they became community leaders in the new world also.

Even before the urbane Forty-eighters arrived, the German set­ tlers were hardly rustic pioneers.'’ They sought out already establish­ ed communities, usually smaller towns where land was still cheap. They came and planted their roots deeply and permanently. Since they valued security more than riches, the German settlers cautiously searched for pockets of civilization near rivers, lakes, and wooded hills. These areas reminded the immigrants of home; only there could they raise 5 their families and crops in their own way, which they considered much superior to the style of American frontiersmen. Further, contact with the rest of the world was important to them and the rivers, canals, and lakes allowed for communication and navigation.

The Germans struggled harder than perhaps any other group c against becoming assimilated. They were chiefly opposed by Yankee

Puritans — a situation which was, if anything, intensified by the arrival of the Forty-eighters, who felt culturally superior to the

Americans. This attitude was furthermore fostered by the German- 7 language press. Resisting assimilation were the older immigrants who had settled in America with the intention of staying, and also the newer political refugees (from 1 8 2 5 -1 8 5 5 ), who were often merely biding their time until it was safe to return to Germany. Once they realized that this hope was in vain, they sought other outlets for their patri­ otic fervor. There arose, for example, plans for the creation of a New

Germany in America. Areas of Wisconsin, Missouri, and Texas were espe­ cially mentioned as sites for the new nation. These efforts continued Q from 183*1 to 1855; fortunately, some of the older German immigrants opposed the idea, since they realized that persistence in such attempts would foster ill will.

The Forty-eighters continued to be politicially active, vigor­ ously supporting the election of Lincoln after his party had freed itself somewhat from what the Germans considered the major heresies in

America: the Puritan Sabbath, Nativism, and temperance. (Although most Germans were Democrats, their anti-slavery stance naturally caused them to vote Republican at that time.) Despite their involvement in 6

American politics, many of the political refugees had no intention of becoming Americans. If they could not continue their former professions 9 by creating German newspapers or German schools, they became what were called "Latin Farmers" by the local populace. They earned this appel­ lation because they often knew Greek and Latin, to the amazement of their fellow farmers.

Societies were created to provide for their entertainment needs.

Out of these societies came musical and theatrical activities, which took place on Saturdays and Sundays. The latter day was especially devoted to Gemutlichkeit, including drinking, card-playing, singing, dancing, and theater. The German insistence on maintaining their orig­ inal customs and language led to friction with other segments of the local population. Indeed, the intellectual Forty-eighters seemed to delight in flouting the Puritan traditions of their new home and in 10 ridiculing the Americans as uncouth.

The last and largest wave of unrestricted immigration from

Germany occurred in the final Uo years of the 19th century. This group, less educated than the Forty-eighters and more interested in economic improvement, consisted largely of craftsmen, artisans, mechanics, and other skilled workers, and sought out populated areas for their new homes in order to continue their trades. They frequently settled in sections of towns already housing numerous Germans and soon many cities of the United States had areas where German culture predominated - where one would hear more German than English. These "Little Germanies" were prevalent in nearly a dozen cities of the "German Belt" stretching from

New York to Kansas City and from Lake Superior to the borders of 7 12 Arkansas and Tennessee. Nine cities, each possessing a German stock of over 100,000, existed in this area in 1900. Cleveland was one of them.

The Germans probably did not consider Cleveland a civilized place before the building of the Ohio Canal in 1 8 2 5 . This was not true of Cincinnati which already had a total population of nearly 10,000 in

1820 whereas Cleveland had around 600 in the same year. Germans did not begin arriving in Cleveland until 1830,

settling along Lorain Street on the West Side, in the vicinity of Superior and Garden Streets to the east. They were industrious folk, skill­ ed in their trades, many of them political ref­ ugees, bringing with them a background of the cultural arts. 3

By 1835 there were about 2 5 German families living in Cleveland; the strange ways and names of families such as Neeb, Denker, Kaiser,

Silberg, Wanglein, and Hessenmuller aroused curiosity and at times un- lh . friendliness in older settlers. (There was one butcher and several tailors in the group.) A few of them were also early political refu- 15 gees. With the opening of the Ohio Canal, Cleveland became a boom

town. Its population increased from around 1,000 in 1 8 3 0 to over 6,000

■1 £ in I8 U0 - still far behind Cincinnati's of approximately 1*6,000. In

18^8, even before the major influx of Forty-eighters could have occurred, 17 Cleveland already had 2,587 Germans. The first German church in

Cleveland was built by a few dozen immigrants in 1835; the first Gentian

social club was founded in 1 8 3 6 and the first German-language newspaper, l8 Germania, was published ten years later. Settlers on the Cuyahoga

were by this time no longer gawking at the "strange" Germans; they had become a common sight. 8

The German immigrants apparently found the landscape of the

Cleveland area attractive. There were hills, a lake, a river, and, above all, forests. Many German immigrants went from the forests of their highly wooded homeland to the forested area of the new world.

They also called the city Die Waldstadt; whether the town already had been called Forest City before the Germans arrived is open to question.

The early German settlers wrote letters praising Cleveland to friends 19 and relatives thus attracting additional settlers. The Germans in the Forest City came to stay despite the hard work required to clear the land of trees and stumps before planting could begin. The cleared trees provided the lumber needed for sturdy, permanent houses.

Recreation was part of the social structure; it helped make life less drab. Vereine, such as a Frohsinn Gesangverein and Turn- verein, were founded to provide for these needs in 18U8 and I8 U9 re-

20 ' spectively. These clubs met in German cafes of which there were already several in Cleveland by the middle of the 19th century. One of the proprietors of such a German cafe* was Friedrich Wagner who gave 21 singing, piano, and writing lessons. His wife taught sewing. Al­ though Wagner must have been one of the most educated individuals among the town's 17,03^ people in 1850, he became less conspicuous as the highly educated Forty-eighters began to arrive--most of them after I8 5 O.

Since these later immigrants initially intended to return to their homeland, they remained in the background in America for years.

However, once they decided they were in Cleveland to stay, they initi­ ated a great burst of German cultural activity. The most important first effect of their activities was an excellent German-language newspaper in 1852, the Wachter am Erie, The editor of the paper was the

Forty-eighter August Thieme (1822-1879), who at 26 had been one of the youngest members of the Frankfurt Parliament in 18U8. His activism is reflected in the first issue of the Wachter am Erie: "dedicated to the 22 Union, the abolition of slavery and promulgation of liberal culture."

The last item included especially music and theater.

The first national Sangerfest was held in Cincinnati in 18^9» in 1855, Cleveland had gained enough prominence in German circles to 23 host this festival. Cleveland hosted it several more times during the 1 9th century, and the event became a city holiday. Before festivals of this nature could be held in the city and before people could be at­ tracted to the center of town in the evening or during inclement weather, the streets had to be paved and lighted. This was finally done in the

1850s. An amateur and later a professional German theatrical group were formed in this decade. More attention will be paid to this activ­ ity in a subsequent section of this discussion.

The political refugees were at times abrasive and only a common enemy kept the older "Greys" and the younger "Greens" from open strife.

This common enemy was the "Know-Nothing” or nativist movement which flourished in the middle of the century. The nativists distrusted for­ eigners, especially the ostentatious Forty-eighters who had no inten­ tion of changing their ways in their new home. The German immigrants, especially the journalists, hated the nativists more than slavery and blamed most of the ills of American society on them. 10

Population Statistics

The nativist movement faded after a few years and the German community was so strong by i860 that it had little to fear from opposi­ tion in Cleveland for over a decade. In fact, this year marked the highest percentage of Germans in Cleveland--1+0 percent of the total 2k population of U3,^17- The German element was by far the largest for­ eign one in the city.

However, Cincinnati to the south had a German population of

161,000 and thus Cleveland stood in its shadow until the turn of the century, when it actually surpassed Cincinnati in both overall and

German population. Population statistics of Cleveland and other "German 25 Belt" cities in 1 9 0 0 were as follows, with St. Louis leading:

City Total Population Born in Germany Of German Parents

St. Louis 575,238 58,781 199,182

Cleveland 3 8 1 ,7 6 8 1<0,6H8 105,321

Cincinnati 325,902 38,219 136,087

Milwaukee 285,315 53,85^ lU6,8U6

In 1900 all four cities still had strong German-language the­ aters, even though the Forty-eighters had all but died out and the more recent immigrants were more likely to become assimilated into American culture. In fact, 1900 marks a sort of watershed, for from this time on, specifically German culture began to decline in influence in

America. Hardly any German-language newspapers were founded after 1900; in fact, many of the old ones were disappearing, as their readership be- 26 came assimilated into American culture. Even the Lutheran ChiChurch 27 began using more and more English in its services after 1900. 11

Thus as the population of Cleveland increased, the percentage of citizens of German descent decreased from in i860 to 2 5$ by

1910. 28 As the assimilation increased, the solidarity of the German community automatically decreased, making the united efforts needed for supporting a theater more and more difficult to sustain. However, sixty-thousand people gathered in Wade Park in Cleveland in 1907 to dedicate the Goethe-Schiller monument there. The Kaiser sent a congrat- 29 ulatory note which was read to the multitude at the gathering. But this outburst was more patriotic than literary and does not indicate that there was still support for a German theater. The number of

Germans of foreign origin in Cleveland after World War I had shrunk to 30 26,000, although the figure is slightly misleading since several thousand could be added to this number by counting German-speaking people from Austria, Switzerland, Hungary, Rumania, and other countries.

The very strong resistance to assimilation by Germans had actu­ ally already weakened during a previous war, the Civil War. That con­ flict, in which many Germans fought for the Union, plus the gradual in­ volvement of the more politically-minded immigrants in other issues of the day, had helped them accept their role as "hyphenated" Americans.

This progress toward assimiliation, however, was still insufficient by the time of the First World War, since many of them were still con­ sidered with suspicion by Americans. (The hyphen was gotten rid of along with many German names which sounded too foreign to American ears.) When the First World War began the Germans, in order to survive, had to submerge themselves in the mythical melting pot. Most German neighborhoods and German cultural activities, including the theater, submerged as well. 12

Vereine Activities

The claim that when more than three Germans reside in the same area they will form a Verein was not much of an exaggeration for

Cleveland. There could not have been more than a hundred immigrants in

Cleveland when the first church and social clubs were founded in the l8^0s. These organizations were attempts to make their new world seem less strange, and to promote their old traditions. They provided mutual support and a refuge from homesickness, and to a lesser degree, they were attempts to maintain the language and culture of the homeland.

As part of this effort, one of the clubs, Per Freie-Manner Bund (The

Freeman's Society) sponsored amateur theatrical productions in the early 1850s. The purpose of this particular club was both social and educative. A section of the Verein was designated as being responsible for the theatrical productions. Gaiser, in his dissertation on the stage in Cleveland before 1 8 5 0 , aptly compared this amateur theater 31 with the activities of guilds in the late middle ages. A play was first performed for club members only; if it met with approval, it was presented for public consumption. The repertoire of this theater will be discussed later.

Although the strength and number of such organizations increased, the theater was gradually taken out of their hands during the next de­ cade. Professionals, usually from other cities, were hired to present productions. The quality of performance increased, but the quantity of community involvement decreased. Also, as the Forty-eighters died out, the activities of the Vereine probably became less political and 13 cultural, and more social. Thus, by 1900, hardly one of the hundreds of German clubs was listed as having donated financial support for

Gentian theaters. More will be said about these German clubs in subse­ quent sections. ll*

Chapter I Footnotes

^Henry A. Pochmann, German Culture in America (Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1957), p. 357.

^G. A. Zimmermann, Deutsch in Amerika (Chicago: Ackermann and Eyller, 1 8 9 2 ), pp. XVII-XXXV.

Albert Faust, The Gentian Element in the United States, 2 vols. (Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co., 1909)j 2 :5 8 3 .

*V, E. Zucker, "The History of the German Theater in Baltimore," Germanic Review 18 (l9*+3): 2 6 9.

^Dieter Cunz, They Came From Germany (Hew York: Dodd, Mead & Company, 1 9 6 6), p. 10.

^John Arkas Hawgood, The Tragedy of German-America (New York: Arno Press and The New York Times, 1970;, p . 37.

^Ibid., p. b2.

8 Ibid., p. 1 0 1 . Q After 1 8 5 0 German newspapers in this country increased tremen­ dously, and by 1900 there were over 800 German-language newspapers in the United States.

^Carl Wittke, We Who Built America: The Saga of the Immigrant (Cleveland: The Press of Western Reserve University, 196^), p. 206.

^Cunz, p. 1 3 - -1 p Hawgood, p. 81.

18William Ganson Rose, Cleveland: The Making of a City (Cleveland: The World Publishing Co., 1950), p. 113.

^Frank Durham and Harlan Hatcher, Giant From the Wilderness (Cleveland: The World Publishing Co., 1955)» P* 237.

^Michael S. Pap, Ethnic Communities in Cleveland (Cleveland: John Carroll University, Institute for Soviet and East European Studies, 1973), p. 109.

l8 Rose, p. 8 9 .

^Pap, p. llU. 15

l8 Ibld. 19 One of Gutzkow’s Dramas, Liesli (1 8 U9 ), deals with the problems such a letter caused within the family of a German community.

2 0 Pap, p. 116.

2 1 Ibid., p. 1 1 7 .

2 2 Bose, p. 2 5 3 .

2 3 Ibid., p. 272 2k Ibid., p. 2 9 6

2 '’Faust, 2:586

2 ^Hawgood, p. 2 9 0 . 27 Ibid.

28Pap, p. 125.

29Ibid., p. 12k. Of) Irving Brown, "Cleveland Theater in the Twenties" (Ph.D. dissertation, Ohio State University, 1 9 6 1), p.6. ^1 Gerhard Walter Gaiser, "The History of the Cleveland Theater from the Beginning to 1 8 5 V' (Ph.D. dissertation, University of Michigan, 195*0 > P- 31*+. CHAPTER II

THEATRICAL BEGINNINGS, 1820-i860

Cleveland's Cultural Growth

In 1796 Moses Cleaveland founded the city later called Cleveland on the banks of the Cuyahoga river near Lake Erie. Nearly 2 5 years later, in 1820, the first theater company to visit Cleveland bravely

sailed up the Cuyahoga on a boat called "The Tiger" to provide respite from the frontier life for the several hundred settlers of the Forest

City.^ The populace came on horseback and on ox-drawn lumber wagons from their farms to the tavern-turned-theater for the occasion. Several plays and scenes from plays were presented before nearly the whole set­ tlement turned out to bid goodbye to the mummers as they sailed on to their next destination. One of these scenes was from an adaptation of 2 Kotzebue’s play The Stranger or Misanthropy (Menschenhass und Reue).

This piece was destined to be one of the most popular in the United

States during the first half of the 19th century. In Cleveland before

1 8 5 0 it ranked second in popularity only to Shakespeare's Richard III and was preferred to Hamlet, as well as the popular melodrama Black-

Eyed Susan. ^

16 17

The performance left settlers in the mood for more such fun, and only eleven years later the first theater building was erected in the young city. By the 1850s the city had its first large-scale the- li ater, The Academy of Music. Cleveland, of course, was a frontier city and the intellectual climate was hardly conducive to good drama. The need for common display was satisfied largely by crude minstrel shows, whereas the need for an ideal was satisfied by religion. Jakob Mueller, a German immigrant who became Lt. Governor of Ohio wrote the following comment about the dramatic art in Cleveland in the middle of the century:

Der amerikanische Kunstgeschmack jener Zeit war allerdings noch nicht liber die Minstrels und die Kunst-Reiterei hinausgekommen, woraus aber nicht geschlossen werden darf, dass es an solchen Komodianten gefehlt habe, denen das Komodien- spielen zur zweiten Natur geworden, ohne es je professionell betrieben zu haben. Auf der ge- sellschaftlichen wie politischen Arena, in den Gerichtssalen, wie selbst auf den Kanzeln - konnte man auch damals, bei aller Natureinfach- heit des damaligen Geschlechts, recht tuchtige Leistungen auf dem Gebiete der Schauspielerei und des Komodienthums beobachten; und die Furcht vor der Konkurrenz mag auch der Grund gewesen sein, dass man die Fach-Theater und die pro- fessionelle Schauspielerei als siindhaft be- zeichnete, und nicht aufkommen lassen wollte.

The intellectual climate improved as railroads brought people and prosperity to Cleveland and, of course, to its theaters in the early 1 8 5 0 s. Before this time the city had depended mainly on Lake

Erie and the Ohio Canal traffic for economic and "artistic” sustenance.

With the railroads came people interested in the arts. Cultural eve­ nings were organized and speakers were invited, to stimulate interest in literature. Local debating societies helped in this enterprise. Newspapers— two of them in German— began to flourish. As the intel­

lectual climate improved, the professional theater in Cleveland also

came of age. A large number of German immigrants arrived around this

time (1 8 5 0 s) and they became a vital part of this improved intellectual

climate. Many of these new settlers were Forty-eighters, who were high­

ly educated and left their mark, on nearly every aspect of Cleveland's

intellectual life--including the theater. It was largely the Forty-

eighters who were spurred on by visiting German-language theater compa­

nies from Cincinnati and New York to begin local productions of plays 7 in the German language.

German Clubs Initiate Theater, 1850s

In 1859 German was introduced in a public school, and soon was taught in all schools in Cleveland. As many as 172 teachers were en-

gaged in teaching German in the city by 1 8 9 0 . When one considers these figures, one is not surprised at the attempts to create a German- language theater. When the railroad brought theater troupes to the

city, the thought must have been, "why not here?" In particular,

German Vereine spearheaded the efforts to imitate the cultural offerings

of the country of origin. The amateur thespians were quite ambitious, beginning with Schiller: Wilhelm Tell, Die Hauber, and Kabale und

Liebe were early production choices in 1851 and 1852.

Jakob Mueller, the Forty-eighter quoted earlier, recalled being at a performance of Die Rauber in 1852 and he claimed it was conceived as a "dramatisch-patriotische Demonstration." The dilettantes who 19

performed in the play were afflicted, as he said, with a shortage of

money and a surplus of thirst. It turned out to he more comic than

t r a g i c . ^ Inspired by the unintended comic success of this and other

ventures, the theater organizers concentrated mainly on comic pieces

and melodramas in the future. These efforts were considered noteworthy

not only by the two German-language newspapers but also by the Cleveland. 10 Plain Dealer.' Some of the other early efforts of the Freie Manner 11 ' Bund in l851_and 1852 were the following

Title Author

Die BeicliW Kotzebue

-Berlin bei Nacht Kalisch

Blind geladen Kotzebue

Boser Geist, der Lumpaci-Vagabundus oder: das liederliche Kleeblatt Nestroy

Der deutsche Einwanderer Boernstein

Ruckkehr des Landwehrmanns oder: so verheiratet man sich Cohnfeld

Schulze und Muller Genee

Toni Koerner

Das Versprechen hinter'm Herd Oder: Freiherr von Stritzow als Wilddieb Baumann

Der Vetter aus Bremen Koerner

Die Zerstreuten Kotzebue

Der gerade Weg 1st der Beste Kotzebue

Jaegers Abschied Baumann

It is obvious from this repertoire that (with the exception of

the three Schiller pieces referred to earlier) the classic dramas were 20 largely ignored. Public taste obviously demanded farces and melodramas.

A further reason for the preponderance of lightweight plays was that amateur players were more likely to succeed at slapstick farces rather than classical plays. The same was true of the Liebhabertheater of the

German Vereine. The decision to emphasize lighter fare was therefore a 12 realistic one as well as a pandering to public taste.

First Professional German Theater in Cleveland

In the fall of 1 8 5 6 , the first professional German theater 13 season began under the direction of H. F Bonnet and Xavier Strasser,

The same Strasser had attempted to start a professional German theater 1^ in St. Louis in 1 8 5 1 , but despite the large size of the city, had 15 failed there. Almost »-1 1 the plays of this first season in 1 8 5 6 had long double-titles designed to catch the eye, and the emphasis was on action-packed historical romances: Otto von Wittelsbach oder der

Kalsermord zu Bamberg, Die Rauber auf Maria Kulm oder die Kraft des

Glaubens, Hans Sachs oder der Kaiser und der Schuhmacher, Der Graf von

Burgund oder die Liebe in der Wildnis, and Der Wirrwarr oder Herr l6 Thlmotheus von Langsam are some examples. To make sure that these swashbuckling pieces would draw an audience, the performances were usually followed by music and dancing. In advertising Bruno der

Eisenknecht oder die Vehme vom Blutgericht, the management announced that the lamb appearing in one of the scenes of the play would be raffled off after the fourth act! 21

The next season - 1857 - was begun under the directorship of

Frau Keller. The blood and iron plays of the previous season disap­ peared and were replaced by "atherische Wolkengebilde der Marchen- IT welt”: Azarel oder der verlorene Gohn, Der Alpenkonig oder der

Misanthrop, Loreley oder die Nymphen des Rheins, Uriel oder der Liebes- damon, and other similar ones. It was not an auspicious beginning, however, and historians do not even mention a German language theater in Cleveland until nearly twenty years later. The initial theater endeavor in Cleveland was thus short-lived, due in part to the economic depression which hit the country in the late 1850s. But although the first attempts were meager, a beginning had been made.

Comparison with the Contemporary Theater in Germany

It might be helpful, in order to put things in better perspec­ tive, to consider next both the stage in Germany at this time, as well as the contemporary American stage in Cleveland. While the Senecas and other tribes were still performing their theatrical rites on the banks of the Cuyahoga in Ohio, Goethe, with the help of Schiller especially, was furthering the art of the theater in Weimar during his tenure as director there and, in fact, established the first great German theater.

Schiller's plays were especially well presented and enthusiastically received. However, serious drama was supported by a minority and

Schiller rightly believed that low humor and sentimental pathos were lS much more In demand than tragedy. This belief is supported by an examination of the repertoire in Weimar which was divided into opera, 22

light entertainment plays, and serious drama, and the last lagged far 19 behind the other two. Moreover, the mistress of the Duke of Weimar

considered the theater to be part of her domain, and intrigued against

Goethe to gain control over the repertoire. He had already acquiesced

to the public's demand by presenting lucrative Kotzebue works, but for

the lady mentioned above not even Kotzebue was enough and she arranged,

over Goethe's protests, to have a trained poodle star in a play called

Hund des Aubrey. Soon after this incident Goethe had had enough and he 20 resigned as theater director in l8l6.

By 1850 the stage in Germany was popular, but the enthusiasm of

the theatergoers was directed toward inferior plays or ostentatious

operas rather than at the classics, and toward "star" actors. (This

emphasis on the star was to have a profound effect on the American

theater as well). The great Schlegel-Tieck translation of Shakespeare,

for instance, was not taken advantage of by the theater. Because of

the mediocrity of theaters elsewhere in Germany and Austria, it mattered

little that directors such as Schreyvogel in Vienna and Immermann in

Dusseldorf created islands of theatrical excellence. Immermann gave up

in Diisseldorf in 1837 after three seasons and one of the problems seems

to have been that the public demanded showy, expensive operas, which 21 were presented at the cost of dramatic productions.

Although the classics were being performed, there was still

enough political censorship in some areas to prevent the staging of

Schiller's Die Rauber and Wilhelm Tell, Goethe's Egmont, and Kleist's 22 Prinz von Homburg. (The first three plays were banned because they dwell on revolutionary themes and Kleist's play was frowned upon because 23 it cast a shadow upon the honor of officers.) Grillparzer and Hebbel, two dramatists whose plays could have helped to raise the theater from its low state, were largely ignored in favor of lesser lights who gave the public its superficial sensations. Some of the most popular drama­ tists in Germany before the advent of Naturalism were Laube, Gutzkow,

Korner, Benedix, Moser, Raimund, Freytag, Halm, Birch-Pfeiffer, Nestroy, and Ludwig. It would be unfair to claim that these writers wrote only inferior plays; some of their works contain well developed characters and nearly all of them were effective theater. It was, however, usu­ ally escapist theater and the most popular plays ordinarily dealt with trite problems which were solved in a facile fashion. The Gewerbe- freiheit of 1 8 6 9 caused the number of theaters to increase dramatically, but many of them became enterprises of financial entrepreneurs, whose qualifications to further the cause of good drama were doubtful at best, 23 Such was the degenerate state of the theater in Germany in the later nineteenth century. Theater had become fashionable, but its fashion was to tickle the belly and not the mind.

Comparison with the Contemporary English-Language Theater in Cleveland

Although the settlers of Cleveland in the early lROOs indulged their need for entertainment through horseracing and hunting, and by 2b viewing Egyptian mummies, menageries, ventriloquists, and circuses, theater did gain a foothold. The first Shakespeare play performed in

Cleveland was David Garrick's adaptation of The Taming of the Shrew in 2h

1827.^ The pl»iy was not tame enough for some in the community, however, who voiced opposition to it in the press on the grounds of its immorality,

Kotzebue was one of the most popular dramatists, in adaptations by

William Dunlap of Hew York, one of the founding fathers of theater in

America, who even learned German to translate Kotzebue for his theater in New York. Essentially, Dunlap was able to stay open in New York be- cause of the money the Kotzebue adaptations brought in. 2 6 As we might infer from Kotzebue's popularity, other forms of entertainment, and even from the choice of The Taming of the Shrew as the first Shakespeare play, melodramas, romances, and farces were predominant in the reper­ toire of the 1830s and 18U0S.

The temperance movement was an active force in theater after

1 8 5 0 and presented a whole series of "drunkard" plays such as The 27 Drunkard's Doom, The Drunkard's Fate, The Drunkard's Return and others.

As bad as most of these pieces must have been, they at least show the beginning of a trend toward using theater to point out issues of the day instead of its serving as pleasant diversion. The potential audi­ ence for this diversion was increasing since population of Cleveland had reached over ^3,000 by i8 6 0 and this growth was reflected in the theater. A resident stock company had been formed at the end of the fifties. Playgoing was becoming fashionable, but despite the popular- 28 ity of theater, serious drama was still lacking in Cleveland.

From 1850 to 1875* the popular melodrama Black-Eyed Susan by

D. Jerrold continued to be extremely successful, as well as several

Shakespeare dramas, a stage version of Uncle Tom's Cabin, and Kotzebue's

The Stranger. The latter received twenty-three productions between 25 29 185*+ and 1875> only two less than Uncle Toni's Cabin In this period.

Cleveland patrons could expect to see these plays performed several

times each year. Successful plays often engendered popular spoofs as 30 well: Sinbad the Sailor, for example, became Sing Bad the Tailor.

A number of plays with German themes were presented at this time, indi­

cating an attempt to cater to the German immigrants, as well as an

interest in German "quaintness" by native Clevelanders. William Tell:

the Hero of Switzerland by Sheridan Knowles; and other usually un­

credited works such as Soldiers of the Rhine, Spirit of John Wolfgang,

Chris and Lena or German Life on the Upper Mississippi, and Fritz» Our

German Cousin were produced, among others. The very popular Fanchon,

the Cricket, based on Die Grille by Charlotte Birch-Pfeiffer (after a

novel by George Sand) and The Robbers or the Forest of Bohemia (based

on Schiller's play) were also performed. The latter was presented

almost annually between 1855 and 1871, under the direction of "Uncle

John" Ellsler, a leading figure of the Cleveland theater for over twenty 11 years, at the Academy of Music. Ellsler invited John Wilkes Booth to

play Charles DeNfoor (Karl Moor?) in the Schiller play on December 5, 32 186U — only a few months before Booth was to assassinate Lincoln.

The American theater in Cleveland was undergoing growing pains,

which were to increase with the adoption of the star system already in

use in parts of Germany. Serious productions were avoided almost

entirely and innovation was lacking since John Ellsler knew that the

people of Cleveland wanted shallow escapist theater and he was enough

of a businessman to give it to them. As of yet, America did not have

great playwrights and depended on Europe for serious material, without 26 being educated to appreciate it. Unfortunately, before the 1 8 7 0 s, the

positive influence from Europe was lacking in matters of taste, since

older classics were performed poorly there and the new serious plays

were usually avoided.

Opposition to the Theater

The most pervasive and organized efforts against the theater in

this country came from certain fundamentalist churches which claimed

that all theatrical performances were immoral. Sin and theater seemed

synonymous to these churches and their spokesmen; a few relevant exam­

ples of this controversy in Ohio will be noted here.

Moral arguments against the theater were presented to

Clevelanders as soon as the first theatrical activity occurred in the

1820s and 1830s. Aiken, pastor of a famous church in Cleveland,

attacked the ungodliness of theater groups in the city. Lively debates

ensued between directors and pastor, and Aiken next published a pam­

phlet attacking the theater as a public nuisance corrupting the young,

calling it a criminal waste of both time and money. One of the warnings

issued by Aiken sounds initially very much like an appeal to support the

stage:

No theater, can long exist in a village or small city unless it has the patron­ age and support of the virtuous and respectable class of the community. Let them withdraw their presence and influ­ ence and it will soon fall by the weight of its own corruption.33

Although some of these attacks actually gave fledgling theaters useful 27 publicity, anti-theater feelings ran strong enough to cause one editor of a Cleveland newspaper to suggest that theatrical nuisances be driven from the city and theaters be turned into places of worship. This was a more serious attack, since it was spearheaded not merely by a single zealot but by influential citizens and laymen as well.

Influential clergymen were still involved in the theater contro­ versy in the third quarter of the 1 9th century. One of these men,

T. E, Thomas from Dayton, gave sermon after sermon condemning the thea- ter as an "unmitigated curse." These sermons had enough impact to be published in newspapers and pamphlet form shortly after they were de­ livered in 1866. Thomas took note of resolutions adopted by the newly- established American Congress as early as 1778. These resolutions recommended the suppression of theatrical activity and had suggested that persons supporting the theater should not be allowed to hold public office. Thomas now stated the following concerning them in one of his published sermons:

Had this act been vigorously executed, America might have been spared the infamous treason of Benedict Arnold in the following year. And will not every patriot unite with me in the exclamation, Would to God that our ever-lamented Lincoln had heeded thig injunction of an American Congress!J

One is tempted to dismiss him as a fanatical cleric but his arguments were well-researched and they carried weight with the public. Thomas used the tricks of the rhetorician in quoting anyone from Socrates to

Rousseau to support his anti-theater thesis. Just as entertaining as these fire and brimstone sermons are the refutations by an individual 28 calling himself "Cadmus," actually a Dayton lawyer by the name of John

McMahon. McMahon quoted Goethe and Schiller, for example, as supporting theater, but Thomas claimed that the two poets, despite their great in­ tellect, were morally corrupt, and thus their views on theater were invalid.^

The opposition to the theater on moral grounds was at least partially justified due to rowdy audiences, excessive drinking in buildings, and bad theater locations. Fire hazards due to primitive lighting attempts and highly flammable materials also made the theaters unsafe places at times. Bouncers were also hired by German theater managers in the middle of the 1 9th century to prevent rowdy factions of the anti-immigrant American or Know-Nothing Party from disrupting per­ formances . Fonmed as a result of the heavy flow of immigrants from

Europe in the middle of the century, this party fostered hysterical nativism to combat the "insidious foreign influence" in the United

States. There were some reports that the burning of a German theater in New Orleans was caused by members of this party.

After the "Know-Nothing" Party faded from the scene in i860, indirect opposition to German theater came from supporters of temper­ ance and the Sunday-closing laws. The Temperance Movement had head- 39 quarters in Cleveland, where the membership included 5,000 women.

Although they got into the spirit of things by using the stage for propaganda purposes in temperance plays (see p. 2k earlier), their insistence on closing establishments that served liquor threatened a

German theater where social drinking usually preceded and followed play productions. A greater threat to the Sunday theater was the 29

Puritan Sabbath, which opposed the "Continental Sunday" of the immi­

grants . The Puritans banned entertainment on Sundays and actually

caused some German theaters in Ohio to be closed down. Consequently,

in the 1870s Germans paraded through Celveland with small beer kegs on their shoulders to protest the Sabbath laws as well as temperance.

(However, the Sabbath laws, temperance, and nativism also served as

catalysts to unite the various German factions. Older and newer immi­ grants forgot their differences when they fought Puritan hypocrisy.

Even the two competing German newspapers of the '70s and '80s, the

Wachter am Erie and the Cleveland Anzeiger, joined in attacking the opposition.)

Opposition obviously retarded the growth of theater in

Cleveland for a time, but ultimately the German theater in Cleveland weathered the attacks of its foes. It was not until the 20th century that it finally withered due to lack of support from its "patrons," primarily the Vereine, whose competing activities eventually deprived the German-language theater of vitally needed attendance. In the mean­ time, as growing pains were overcome and opposition ceased being a serious threat, the German theater grew along with Cleveland, By 1870 a potential audience was sufficiently established to provide financial support for truly artistic endeavors. Hie German community of Cleveland was ready for a serious professional German-language theater. Chapter II Footnotes 30

^"Gaiser, p. 18.

2 Ibid., p. 6 2 1.

^Ibid.,

^"Die Theater der Waldstadt und ihre Entwicklung," Cleveland Wachter und Anzeiger: 50. Jubilauirsausgabe, 9* August 1902, p. 92.

^Jakob Mueller, Aus den Erinnerungen eines Achtundvierzigers: Skizzen aus der Deutsch^Amerikanischen Sturm und Drang Periode der 50er Jahre (Cleveland: F,. Schmidt & Co., 1 8 9 6 ), p. 50^

^Gaiser, p. 1^3.

7 Ibid.

8 Pap, p. 122.

^Mueller, p. 51.

^ Cleveland Plain Dealer, 2 July 18 .

^Gaiser, pp. 633-635*

^ Cleveland Wachter am Erie, 20 August, 1853.

^■^Pap, p. U6.

^Alfred Nolle, The German Drama on the St. Louis Stage (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania, 1917), p. 1^.

^%t. Louis later did receive a German theater under the direction of a Forty-eighter named Boernstein. Boernstein was also the editor of the German newspaper in St. Louis and the author of at leas^ one play (Per deutsche Einwanderer) which was eventually performed by the Cleveland amateurs. Boernstein realized that the German theater could not always depend on imports from abroad and still reflect the lives of and serve the needs of German immigrants. He knew that the immigrants had to develop their own theater with some of their own plays reflecting their experiences in this country. To achieve this, Boernstein offered a prize of fifty gold dollars for any good German play and a prize of one hundred dollars to the best play submitted to him. His attempt failed and it is not known how many plays were sent to him. Wachter am Erie, 11 February 1853■

^^Wachter und Anzeiger: 50. Jubilaumsausgabe, p. 93*

1 7 Ibid.

■^Walter Horace Bruford, Theatre, Drama and Audience in Goethe's Germany (London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1950), p. 302. 19Bruford, P. 2 8 9 . on Max Martersteig, Das deutsche Theater im neunzehnten Jahrhundert (Leipzig: Verlag von Breitkopf & Hartel, 192^)7 p. 199- Cl Edward Devrient, Geschichte der deutschen Schauspielkunst (Berlin: Eigenbrodler Verlag, 1929), p. 388"!

2 2 Ibid., p. 329.

23Georg Witkowski, The German Drama of the Nineteenth Century, trans. L, E. Horning (New York: Henry Holt & Co., 1909), P- 107. pk Gaiser, p. 30.

25Ibid.

2^Arthur Hornblow, A History of the Theatre in America, 2 vols. (Philadelphia: J. B. Lippincott Co., 1 9 1 9), 1:31.

2?Gaiser, p. 621.

2^William S. Dix, "The Theatre in Cleveland, Ohio, I8 5 U-I8 7 5 " (Fh. D. dissertation, University of Chicago, 19^6), p. 8 3 .

2 9 Ibid., p. U5 5.

3 0 Ibid.

31Ibid., p. U37.

^Rose, p. 323.

33Samuel C. Aiken, Theatrical Exhibitions: A Sermon(Cleveland: Francis B. Penniman, 1 8 3 6 ), p. 18,

3^Rose, p. 212.

3^T. E. Thomas, The Theater (Dayton, Ohio: Payne & Holden, 1866), P. 31.

36lbid., p. 3 2 .

3^The little book makes fascinating reading. As with other crusades of demagogues though, there is something frightening about the incredible self-righteousness of this individual,

38Zueker, p. 1 2 9 .

39Rose, p. 398.

^°Ibid., p. 3 6 7 . It is difficult to ascertain the effects of moral arguments or temperance on attendance, but it is likely that some people of German descent were discouraged by law from attending Sunday per­ formances . CHAPTER III

PROGRESS FOR CLEVELAND'S GERMAN-LANGUAGE THEATER

After the unsuccessful attempts to create a German theater in the late 1850s no significant effort was made in Cleveland for about

fifteen years. Then, in 1870, Marie Seebach, one of the most cele­ brated German actresses, came to Cleveland."*" Marie Seebach (183^-1897) had become famous at the Burgtheater in Vienna and later through appear­ ances in Munich. Her renown later spread through her guest appearance in Russia and America. In addition to her most famous role as Gretchen in Faust, she appeared as Jane Eyre in a dramatic version of the novel and as Maria Stuart in Schiller's play. The plays were done in German before a large, fashionable,mainly German audience. The Plain Dealer, which devoted muc^ less print to the arts than contemporary German news­ papers, refers to her performance in Maria Stuart in calling it a great 2 one, although not the best Cleveland has ever witnessed. The writer was impressed by Seebach's queenly manner, but since the reviewer did not know German his comments are suspect. Seebach closed her engagement on the thirty-first of December, 1870 and departed for Toledo, the next stop on her tour. The Plain Dealer expressed regrets that she did not perform in English.

32 33

Two Seasons under F. Szwirschina, 1872-187*+

This celebrated appearance aroused the appetite of the German community for more German plays; in response to this interest, Filip

Szwirschina brought his German troupe from Detroit to Cleveland for guest appearances in the summer of 1872.^ Not only was it quite normal for a German company to augmeiit its income by playing in neighboring cities, but Szwirschina was also looking for a new home for his troupe.

Cleveland had doubled in population in the decade of the l860s and the

Germans continued to be the largest foreign element there. Since

Szwirschina was pleased by the reception in the Forest City, he decided in the fall of 1 8 7 2 to begin presenting German-language plays there on 5 a permanent basis.

The building to be used was completely redecorated and the opening of the season was announced with much fanfare for September 1,

1 8 7 2 . The opening play was Graf Essex by Heinrich Laube. The next day the production of this historical romance, and the acting of F. Szwir­ schina, who not only directed but also acted in every play, were highly praised by the critic in the German newspaper, Cleveland Anzeiger.

The feeling emerged that Cleveland was finally on the way to having the type of German theater season which the German community had been wait­ ing for.

Many of the pieces of this 72-73 season were farces and included music and dancing. The newspaper ads invariably mentioned these addi­ tional attractions and frequently gave a capsule preview of a particu­ larly spectacular or moving scene. A different play was normally done 3^ each Sunday since the theater could only expect to draw a small number of the community, who would not ordinarily desire to see a production twice within a short period of time. Producing a different play each week must have been quite a strain on the director and actors. One can hardly expect first-rate productions with such a schedule.

Because the theater was located on the eastern side of the

Cuyahoga, and west-siders frequently complained about the distance they had to travel, a rival troupe began performing German-language theater 7 on December 7, under the direction of L. Jacobson. The first two plays done were Dr. Fausts Zauberkappchen and Die Schnurrbarts-Mamsel— plays obviously aimed lower than the ones of the other theater.

Toward the end of the Spring, 1873 season, benefit productions were scheduled for Friday evenings - plays frequently different from those done on Sunday. These Friday performances were essentially attempts to supplement the low income of the actors and actresses, who then received the majority of the proceeds from these special evenings.

There was even a benefit performance for the prompter!

In praising some productions, the German press mentioned the Q occasional absence of a prompter. Since rehearsal time was so short the actors frequently had not properly memorized their lines. Such flaws were overcome by excellence in improvisation although this talent was appreciated more by the audience than by the German newspaper critics who frequently chided an actor by calling him a good verbal

Schwimmer.

Almost all plays performed were imports from Germany. In fact, if a play had been a recent hit this was well advertised to help attract 35 a crowd. An exception to this was the play Herz und Dollar, a German- 9 American play by Max Cohnheim. Very few German-American pieces were being written and there was the snobbish tendency to prefer the pieces from abroad. One wonders, however, how well the Cleveland German com­ munity was able to relate to a dialect play from Berlin which a Munich audience could scarcely appreciate.

The only literary classic to come across the boards during this season was Schiller's Die Rauber, on March 2 5, 1873. The critic for the

Cleveland Anzeiger was quite pleased with the production, but was sad­ dened by the small stage which took away from the effect, and by the need to employ amateurs since the company did not have the professional 10 manpower to fill every role. Schiller, and to a lesser extent

Gutzkow, seem to have been the only writers of serious drama acceptable for the German stage in Cleveland.^" The anniversaries of the former's birth were celebrated in Cleveland with nearly the fervor of the cente­ nary in Germany. However, the fact that a Schiller drama requires re­ sources beyond the scope of a small band of professionals and semi­ professionals continued to be a serious problem for the German theater in Cleveland and eventually helped to destroy it. Preparations needed to perform Die Rauber seemed to exhaust the troupe since the season ended with the third performance in two months of Moser's Stiftungsfest.

Nevertheless, it had been, according to contemporary observers, the most successful German theatrical year in the history of Cleveland.

Szwirschina’s second season opened on September lH, 1873 with 12 A. E. Brachvogel’s Narziss. The director promised to entertain

Clevelanders on both Fridays and Sundays. Sundays were originally 36 chosen in order to avoid conflict with the building's use by American groups who also used the building and to avoid competition with the

Vereine meetings held on Saturday evening. Unfortunately, the choice to perform on Sunday created other problems. For years the Cleveland

Anzeiger had fought to keep the law preventing entertainment on Sunday from being enforced but it was losing the battle, although the perfor­ mances were allowed to continue and the paper expressed the hope that the lack of other entertainment on Sunday might actually help theater attendance.^

Two Schiller plays were performed by Szwirschina's group in

November: Jungfrau von Orleans on the ninth and Wilhelm Tell two weeks later. The relative success of these productions led to a production of Kabale und Liebe in January, 187^. This proved to be a fateful choice for the future of German-language drama in Cleveland. Two mis­ leading theories concerning the problems stemming from the productions are evident.

Theater critics of the two German newspapers were engaged in a rivalry which caused one to praise a production and the other to condemm it. Szwirschina's company was eventually embroiled in this conflict, and dissension ensued within the troupe,causing F. Szwirschina to fire it the company. The other theory proposes that Szwirschina was a better manager than actor and that he had become quite insulted upon being severely criticized for his portrayal of Ferdinand in Kabale und Liebe; he supposedly resented this criticism, blamed his actors for it and, 15 consequently, fired them. 37

In examining the German newspapers of the period, one must con­ clude that the first explanation is misleading and that the second one is false. The Cleveland Anzeiger praised Szwirschina for having done 16 a fair job in the very difficult role of Ferdinand. The other paper,

Wachter am Erie, praised the production highly although it did comment 17 bitingly on the performances of two of the leading actors. A benefit performance for Szwirschina was then scheduled for one week after Kabale und Liebe. In the newspaper announcements for this event, the play selection was inexplicably changed several times. This confusion was also the result of the conflict which is examined more closely in the following paragraphs.

Appearing on the 17th of January, 187^ in the Wachter am Erie, a very long article by its theater critic contained a defense of his func­ tion as critic and a sarcastic condemnation of actors who consider them­ selves above criticism and who cannot tolerate praise for others. The writer claimed that such performers are the cause of the poor sjtate of 1 O the performing arts in the country. He made this charge because the actors had accused him of complicity with the director Szwirschina, and because they, who had been the victims of his barbs in the past, had attacked him verbally during a recent production. Meanwhile a letter, signed by Eiche and two other actors, appeared in the Anzeiger announc­ ing the firing of the whole company because, in their words, Szwirschina felt called upon to defend the critic by taking this action. 19 The scandal reached such magnitude that it provided material for the front page, the editorials, as well as for the theater section. An editorial in the Anzeiger bemoaned the fact that petty jealousies led to the crisis and chided the director for having come to the defense of the 20 other newspaper's critic hy firing the company. The same issue con­ tains a criticism of the most recent production, Das Stiftungsfest

(presented again), in which several actors were singled out for not having memorized their lines and they were advised to review the dative and accusative case endings. This was the play in which the critic of the other paper was attacked. Considering the low morale of the group, it is no wonder that the play was poorly rehearsed, if it was rehearsed at all. Szwirschina answered the Anzeiger's editorial the very next day, claiming that the jealousy had begun when local theater supporters suggested a benefit evening for him. A series of cabals ensued. The players refused to perform the play and finally forced him to settle for an inferior play at the last minute. These sajne actors, claimed

Szwirschina, applauded wildly when one of them insulted a member of the audience during a performance. He was therefore forced to fire the whole company because of the insult to the audience, to himself, and to his family. Also appearing in the same issue was a letter to the editor which sarcastically addressed itself to Szwirschina and asked whether this was his thanks for the $100.00 he received from Cleveland theater supporters at Christmas. The community was apparently taking sides in the scandal, 21 The Wiichtcr am Erie also printed an editorial which reaffirm­ ed the rights of its critic and expressed sorrow that petty bickering had progressed so far. It was hoped, the editorial concluded, that the two parties would settle their differences and continue the season.

When the dismissed actors decided to form their own company, both papers 39 foresaw the troublesome existence of two rival German-language companies in a city which found it difficult to support one. The Cleveland 22 Anzeiger stated, in a second editorial, that it was unfortunate that a critic became involved in the internal problems of the company instead of restricting himself to reviewing the productions. Attempts by vari­ ous intermediaries to bring the two warring factions together failed because the fired actors refused, as they said, to maJce a "Canossa g-j Gang" and F. Szwirschina refused, according to a claim by two of the actors, Herr and Frau Eiche, to apologize publicly, despite his private admission of having gone too far. The actors who were dismissed con­ sidered the matter to be closed and so, it seems, did F. Szwirschina since an ad announcing that Frau Szwirschina had a large number of the- 2k atrical costumes for sale appeared in the Cleveland Anzeiger.

The foregoing examination of newspapers points out the errone­ ous assumptions which had developed over the years concerning this episode. F. Szwirschina certainly resorted to overly strong measures to punish his actors for using the stage as a place to vent their spleen on a critic. Since all the actors except Szwirschina were occasionally critizised by the one critic, it is not surprising that the actors suspected collusion. The director must have also realized that discipline and morale were so low that he could no longer direct the group. It also seems that the Wachter am Erie added unnecessary fuel to an already hot problem. Wounded vanity helped prevent any reconciliation.

The first production of the company without the leadership of

Szwirschina was, ironically, Liebe kann alles oder Die bezahmte ho 25 Widerspenstige, after Shakespeare's play, on the 25th of January 187^.

This same company became ambitious enough to rent the city's largest theater, The Academy of Music, for its next presentation. They were

determined, it seems, to attract a large following even if doing so meant exorbitant financial outlays. It did not take Szwirschina long to respond to the challenge and he announced the formation of a new

company, consisting primarily of guest players from New York, which

2 6 would begin with a production on February 12. This was the beginning of a veritable theater-war. Both groups began large advertising cam­ paigns encouraging people to come and see their plays, which were frequently performed on the same evening. Nearly all the plays were very light pieces and, in fact, not one literary drama was to be per­ formed by either group the rest of the season. Eiche, the actor who had assumed leadership of the company in competition with Szwirschina, announced the building of a new theater within the confines of the existing Turnhalle. After this announcement nothing more was heard from this side until the new theater's gala opening on the 20th of

April, I8 7 U.

The conflict between the two theater groups was overshadowed by the activities of the women’s temperance movement mentioned earlier, which was quite vigorous in Cleveland and which was also quite energet­ ically opposed by most of the German community. Not a day passed with­ out the Cleveland Anzeiger attacking these "foolish" women who were barring entrances to establishments serving alcohol and who were gener­ ally considered a nuisance by the newspaper. The Cleveland Anzeiger describes them as being afflicted by the Betseuche. This caused Ifl the German newspaper to be accused by one of the English-language news- 27 papers of insulting .American ladies. Ironically, the Germans and the temperance women were working together to an extent, since temperance was primarily a war against whiskey; and the arrival of the Germans, who made beer and wine instead, helped partially to sway the public taste toward these less potent beverages. Interest waned later in the month after the party supporting a temperance platform was defeated at the polls.

Interest was also waning in the theater despite the flurry of plays the two companies spewed forth. During the height of the "woman's war," as it was also called, a play entitled Die Verschworung der Frauen 28 by A. Muller was performed. One wonders whether it was merely a co­ incidence. Szwirschina ended the season in the middle of May with the 29 play Lorbeerbaum und Bettelstab. ^ This was the last play F. Szwir­ schina ever directed in Cleveland. The other company continued to give performances in the building called Stadt-Theater (Szwirschina's was called Deutsches Theater) and the next play after Szwirschina*s last performance was Graf Essex by Laube,^0 the very play that the players refused to perform when Szwirschina suggested it for his benefit evening a few months before. These players continued to perform and even an­ nounced a summer season, now that there was no longer any competition.

Their season lasted until July, at which time it ended inauspiciously with a play called Die Mucker by W. Friedrich.

The competition of the two companies did not result in higher quality at the end of the second season: in fact, there were no liter­ ary dramas produced by either company after the break. The rival 1+2 directors were probably more concerned in driving each other out of business than with producing higher quality theater. Although the dramatic fare offered was meant for a humble palate, it was not real ly inferior to the offerings of other German-language theaters in such

cities as St. Louis, Cincinnati, and San Francisco, where Charlotte

Birch-Pfeiffer and Roderich Benedix plays were also presented most often.^

Another Attempt in 1885

The predictions of the newspapers came true. The community could not support two theaters and the competitive strife resulted in an ignoble ending to a promising beginning. The Cleveland German com­ munity, it seems, had had enough for a while and neither company oper­ ated the next season. Semi-professional, amateur, and guest perfor­ mances did take place over the next decade,but not until 1 8 8 5 was another serious effort made to provide the c t y with a standing German- language ensemble. In that year, several players, under the leadership of Goldschmied and Wolkenstein, came from a defunct theater group formerly housed in the Germania Theater in New York and announced the presentation of Kleist's Kathchen von Hcilbronn for the first of March,

I8 8 5 . The play featured Frl. Marie Kluhn who, the ads claimed, had once been employed in the Meiningen Court Theater.J

The Wachter am Erie critic expressed the hope that this new company would finally provide Cleveland with German-language plays again on a regular basis. He did not wish to cool the beginning by being overly critical, and seems to have avoided mentioning any negative

aspects of the initial production, although he did wish professionals

could soon be hired to replace the amateurs in the company. (Except

for that of Frl. Kliihn, the acting seemed to have been rather weak,

and the newspaper grew more impatient for the arrival of the better

actors promised by the directors). The first few plays were done in the

Turnhalle and the company, after beginning with a classic, soon turned

to the farces more suited to it. In spite of critical complaints the

farces drew well.

Additional players were finally hired and with this the Academy

of Music was rented for future Sunday performances. The critic was very

enthusiastic about this new group and he was thankful that Cleveland had

been given the first good company since the days of Szwirschina. The

first play to be done was Das Milchmadchen von Schoneberg, a farce by

Mannstadt.^ A full house was present at this performance, and at most

of the other ones of this short season which closed at the end of May.

The business director, Goldschmied, thanked Cleveland for its support

and promised better fare for the next season. Several actors remained

in Cleveland and the actor-director Wolkenstein produced several plays

during the summer of 1 8 8 5 .

The new fall season began in September with farces as the fare.

The Wachter am Erie was beginning to be a little disenchanted by the

repertoire and claimed that the management had promised something 35 better and newer than the old farces presented. In response to the

criticism, Schiller's Die Rauber was done in October. Further, an

announcement was made that the company had agreed to perform Wilhelm Tell on the afternoon of November 15 for a Swiss festival. The company also engaged Herr and Frau Szwirschina from Cincinnati to appear in the play Das Stiftungsfest for the same evening. There was a great deal of publicity for these performances; the Szwirschinas still seemed to have a large following in Cleveland. Yet the reviews the following day were hardly laudatory. The critic claimed that the ensemble should never have agreed to perform Wilhelm Tell, since the actors were obvi­ ously not able to do justice to the play. The Szwirschinas were also disappointing in the evening performance. Unfortunately the directors

Wolkenstein and Goldschmied and the actress Kluhn were no longer in

Cleveland to benefit from the criticism; they had disappeared during the night, apparently taking the large proceeds with them. The paper speculated that such might have been the intention all along. It might explain the lack of innovation in the repertoire since the management's purpose was, as the Wachter am Erie stated: "-- Die Sahne abschopfen 37 und dann fort - mag seine (Goldschmieds) Absicht gewesen sein."

Filip Szwirschina offered to aid the actors who had not been paid by volunteering to lead the remainder of the season. The players rejected his offer and decided to continue on their own by selecting

Jentsch, one of their number, to serve as director. The community seemed quite concerned about the financial plight of the deserted actors and gave them good support throughout the remainder of the year. The theater was, after a fashion, continued until 1890. The quality is re- ported to have been quite poor. The Szwirschinas must have realized that Cleveland was indeed not the best location in the nation for them and they departed again for Cincinnati. There Filip Szwirschina became ^5 the director of the German-language theater from 1 8 9 2 to 1 8 9 7 , and the 39 theater was rated one of the test of its type in the country. However, the Sunday law was more stringently enforced in Cincinnati than in

Cleveland, and the actors frequently found themselves in jail after their performances. The situation seemed to have been influential in 1^0 F, Szwirschina's decision to step down in 1 8 9 7 .

Comparison with the Contemporary Theater in Germany

While Szwirschina had been directing Birch-Pfeiffer and Benedix plays in Cleveland in the 1870s, the theaters in Germany were perform­ ing many of the same works. As has been mentioned, the German-language theater in Cleveland under Szwirschina frequently advertised a play by emphasizing that it had been a recent hit in Berlin or another large

German city. A play popular in Germany would likely come to America a short time later. This was not the case with the efforts of Cleveland's

Wolkenstein in 1 8 8 5 , for whom the theater was obviously a mere business investment. Farces predominated in his repertoire even more so than in

Szwirschina's and in the German theaters'abroad. These were not new farces, but ones which had drawn well in the past.

Soon it could no longer even be said that the German-language theater in Cleveland was a weak imitation of a theater in Germany, for voices there were being raised against the degenerate state of a theater which was for the most part presenting either farces or poorly done classics. Richard Wagner was one of the most important of these voices desiring to banish frivolity and mediocrity from the stage. His lofty U6

aim was to have all the art forms combined in his operas to produce a

worthy, uplifting musical drama. His achievements culminated in the

opening of the Bayreuth Festspielhaus on the 13th of August, 1 8 7 6 .

Although Wagner's efforts had a salutory effect on opera, such was not

immediately the case for drama. Many theaters in Germany were swept up

by enthusiasm ftorhis musical dramas and spent a major part of their

time and money in presenting them. Drama, consequently, became even

more of a stepchild.

Shortness of rehearsal time and lack of proper financing suggest

that the theaters of the time performed the classics, especially

Schiller's, out of a vague sense of duty. It was not uncommon to spend

only a few days to rehearse these, and a well-known theater in Germany

during this period presented Kataale und Liebe after only a few hours of In rehearsal. Given this situation, it is no wonder that the classics

were not popular. The actors were barely able to give cues to the

visiting stars and to each other, much less utter their lines with con­

viction. Theaters searched relentlessly for hits which usually turned

out to be farces. They could not and would not take a chance on any­

thing different and, consequently, resisted new though hardly revolu­

tionary talents such as Anzengruber and Wildenbruch, as they had largely

ignored Hebbel earlier.

When Duke George of Saxe-Meiningen took over the leadership of

the Meiningen Court Theater in 1870, a new age for staged drama began.

Duke George had a limitless respect and admiration for art and artists.

He also had the courage to flaunt tradition, as his marriage to an

actress of this theater showed. These qualities, combined with financial U7 means and artistic ability, were necessary to restore dignity to the theater. The Duke himself was an artist and drew stage designs and costumes until he was satisfied with the historicity of his conceptions.

His attention to detail sometimes distressed new actors in the ensemble, who were not accustomed to going over every scene time after time. Duke

George and his excellent choice for Regisseur, Ludwig Chroneg, did away with the star system and substituted for it an ensemble system under which an actor who played a lead on one night might find himself in a subordinate role the next. All efforts were united to honor the author's conception of the play. The classics made up the major portion of the repertoire but these "dull" plays were virtually reborn under the guid­ ance of the Duke and his Regisseur. Dramas by Shakespeare, Schiller,

Kleist, and others became popular again. Furthermore, the money from many guest appearances allowed the Meiningers to dare occasionally to perform the revolutionary as well. It was this ensemble, for example, which assured Ibsen's fame in Germany. When the Duke announced the forthcoming performance of Gespenster (Ghosts), the philistine society protested vigorously and, despite their loyalty to the Duke, decided to boycott the performance. However, the imperturbable Duke George had the financial means to fill the theater with employees to whom he gave li? free tickets,

The Meiningers had money to spend wisely on their productions not only because of the patronage of the court, but also because they avoided staging costly operas and, above all, because of the great success of their guest appearances. The group traveled throughout

Germany and six other countries, including England and Russia, from h& b3 I8 7 U to 1 8 9 0 , performing approximately 2,600 times. The comparatively

limited repertoire of Uo plays enabled the company to rehearse an amount

for each performance unheard of for that time. Julius Bab in his work

Das Theater der Gegenwart states:

Die Leistungshohe einer BUhne ist von keiner anderen Kraft (selbst vom Genie der Schau- spieler Oder des Regisseurs kaum) so unmittel- bar abhangig wie von der Menge der Zeit.. die fur die Proben aufgewendet werden kann. "

In other words, mediocre actors with much rehearsal time will do a better job than good actors after only a few rehearsals. The excellence of the ensemble-play was mainly achieved by unity of effort and not by expendi­ tures for "great" actors. Duke George, with his attention to staging,

further insured that the place of action was the one the author intended.

Realistic, authentic costumes were a must, despite the fashion of the day. The Meiningers gave their last presentation in I89 O and friends of the Duke and of the theater tried to persuade the ensemble to con­ tinue, but Duke George felt that the German theater had made the neces- U5 sary progress and that his role was finished.

Arnold L'Arronge opened the Deutsches Theater zu Berlin in 1883 and promised to continue the tradition of the Meiningers there. He ful­ filled this promise quite excellently and did not fall into the excesses of some theaters which imitated the Meininger efforts. King Ludwig of

Bavaria, to mention a prime example, was guilty of abuses for the sake of realism such as insisting on a real, roaring waterfall on the stage which would, of course, drown out the dialogue. That the Deutsches

Theater took theater seriously was evidenced by the number of classics it produced. However, the most frequently played authors were still 1+9 lightweights such as Lubliner, Lindau, Schonthan, and Kadelburg, and, 1+7 most of all, Oskar Blumenthal. L'Arronge did not yet recognize the importance of the new serious naturalistic drama being written.

A Frenchman named Andre* Antoine recognized this importance and dared to produce French revolutionary plays in his newly created Theatre libre in Paris. This minor official had seen the Meiningers perform in

Brussels in 1888 and was profoundly affected by the power of their lift theater. Antoine in turn influenced Otto Brahm and a group of his friends in the creation of a theater society called the Freie Buhne in

1889 in Berlin. The plays for the first season of this revolutionary type of theater were provided by writers such as Ibsen, Strindberg, and

Tolstoi. The Freie Buhne chose Ibsen’s Gespenster as its first play al­ though it was still forbidden in Berlin. Since the Freie Buhne was a theater society rather than a public enterprise, it could get away with performing the forbidden play. Hauptmann's Vor Sonnenaufgang was also shown later in the season, causing actual fights to break out during and 1+9 after the showing between supporters and enemies of this kind of play.

Otto Brahm undertook the leadership of the Deutsches Theater after

L'Arronge*s resignation in I8 9 U, and Ibsen and Hauptmann plays were con­ sequently produced there as well. Consequently, realistic drama and new staging methods were victorious.

Theater was, of course, still not the moral pedagogical insti­ tution Schiller and others had wished it to be. Superficial farces and mediocre dramas still made up the major fare of the repertoire in the­ aters throughout Germany. The melodramatic, often contrived works of

Sudermann were, for over a decade, more popular than those of Hauptmann. 50

The Kaiser himself disapproved of the new revolutionary type of drama

and claimed that the theater had teen reduced to the level of a brothel.-^ Theatergoers had reason to hope, however. The spark ignited by the Meiningers and by Antoine had become a bright flame lighting up many stages across Europe. Now, at the turn of the century, there was more than mere escapist entertainment. Play and author were regaining primacy over the tyranny of the star system. Actors began to organize

and were no longer totally at the mercy of a patriarchal director.

Their profession was beginning to gain respect, and institutions for the training of actors were created. Serious topical themes were no longer avoided by theaters and writers. The stage was a lively scene and innovators of serious stagecraft were found in many countries of

Europe. Chapter III Footnotes 51

1Dix, p. 211.

2Plain Dealer, 28 February 1870.

3 Ibid.

^Cleveland Anzeiger, 3 August 1 8 7 2 .

'’Using the Cleveland German newspapers as sources, comments will be made about Szwirschina's tenure in the city. A complete list of plays and authors can be found in the appendix, £ Cleveland Anzeiger, 27 August 1872.

^Ibid., 8 December 1872. O It makes one think of courageous trapeze artists performing without a net.

^Cleveland Anzeiger, U May 1873.

1 0 Ibid., 26 March 1873-

1LThe audiences of that time would have placed the often performed Gutzkow plays in this category. He and one of his plays will be dis­ cussed in a subsequent section. 12 Cleveland Anzeiger, lU September 1873-

1 3 Ibid. lU 1 Wachter und Anzeiger: 50- Jubilaumsausgabe, p. 9^-

•^Cleveland und sein Deutschthum (Cleveland: German-American Publishing Co., 1897-1898), p. 103.

^^Cleveland Anzeiger, 13 January l87t.

•^Wachter am Erie, 10 January l87t.

■^Ibid. , 17 January 1 8 7 b.

^ Cleveland Anzeiger, 19 January 1 8 7 ^.

2 0 Ibid.

2~*~Wachter am Erie, 21 January l87*i- PP Cleveland Anzeiger, 21 January 18?^.

2 3 Ibid., 23 January 1 8 7 U. 2k 52 Ibid., 26 January 187^+.

2 5Ibid.

2 6Ibid., 11 February I8 7 U.

2 7 Ibid., 27 March 1871*.

2 8 Ibid., 28 March 187^.

2 9 Ibid., 16 May 187^.

3 °Ibid., 21 May 187^.

3 ^L. Grant Loomis, "The German Theater in San Francisco 1861-186U, 1 University of California Publications in Modern Philology 36 (1952), p. 205.

32Wachter am Erie, 2 March 1 8 8 5 .

33 Ibid.

3 ^Ibid., 6 April 1 8 8 5 .

3 5 Ibid., 5 October 1 8 8 5 .

3 ^Ibid., 12 November I8 8 5 .

3 7 Ibid., 18 November 1 8 8 5 .

Cleveland und sein Deutschthum, p. loU. 39 Ralph Wood, "Geschichte des deutschen Theaters von Cincinnati,” Jahrbuch der Deutsch-Amerikanischen Historischen Gesellschaft von Illinois 32 (1932), p. 71.

^°Wood, p. 501. hi Julius Bab, Das Theater der Gegenwart: Geschichte der dramatischen Buhne seit 1 8 7 0 (Leipzig: J.J. Weber, 1928), p. 9-

^2 Ibid., p. 1 7 .

^^itkowski, p. 1 2 1 .

^^Bab, p . 8 0 .

*♦5Ibid., p. 30.

^Ibid.,h p. 8 1 ,

Ibid., p. Uo.

U8 Ibid., p. U7 . 53 ^Ibid., p. 5 0. SO ^Frank W. Chandler* Modern Continental Playwrights (New York: Harper & Brothers, 193l)> p. 274. CHAPTER IV

LAST AND GREATEST GERMAN-IANGUAGE THEATER ERA

Establishing of a Theaterverein, 1 8 9 9

The historical work, Cleveland und sein Deutschthum, describes the German theatrical situation in Cleveland at the end of the century in the following manner:

Trotz dieses unverkennbaren Misstrauens, trotz mehrfachen Abrathens seitens alter Theater- freunde, trotz des misslichen Umstandes, dass nur einmal in der Woche und zwar am Sonntage gespielt werden karin, weil fiir die Wochentage kein passendes Theater zur Verfiigung steht, trotz des driickenden Ohioer Sonntagsgesetzes unternahm es Frau Anna Franosch-Diehl mit keckem Muthe, den verfahrenen Thespiskarren wieder ins Geleise zu bringen.

Mme. Anna Franosch-Diehl began her attempts in the fall of 1 8 9 6 and ended them in January 1899 with the forced cancellation of a play. An editorial in the Wachter und Anzeiger reviewed the sad state of theater

The directress had had to contend with the restrictive Sunday law and was at one time forced to close because of it. The ensemble had contin ued to present humble but entertaining pieces until the last season

(1 8 9 8 J when an unfortunate contractual arrangement with Buffalo led to the dissolution of the Cleveland German theater. The ensemble had agreed to present plays in Buffalo as well but could not meet its 55 obligations in either city.^ The same editorial claimed that the

German theaters in the United States had always been too dependent on old hits and had failed to gain the support of the populace. The edito­ rial also proposed a Theaterverein, such as those already existing in

Cincinnati, Milwaukee, and St. Louis, should be created to champion the cause of German theater in Cleveland. Such an organization would insure the artistic and financial stability of any future undertaking. The same newspaper issue carried the news that plans were under way to create such a Theaterverein. All the citizens of German descent, esti­ mated at 75,000, were encouraged to become members of this organization by contributing at least a dollar. Their patronage would support any future venture and permit them to obtain tickets at reduced rates and also to have free admission to several special presentations.

For over a month news of efforts to gain membership made up the most dominant feature of articles in the newspaper, which mentioned each contributor. Many comments in support of the venture from leading citzens of German descent were also published. Even the older immi­ grants, who still had vivid memories of the previous debacles, were assuring their support. One issue contained a reprint from the

Cincinnati German-language newspaper, Der Cincinnati Volksfreund, wish- 5 ing the Cleveland efforts well. An anonymous poem supporting these struggles appeared in a subsequent issue:

In Cleveland hier, am Erie See, Wo soviel Deutsche wohnen, Da sollte ein Theater doch Sich wirklich dauernd lohnen, Es sollte hier in uns'rer Stadt Ganz sicher existieren Man sollte mit der Sache nur Nicht soviel Zeit verlieren. 56

Man sollt' nicht nur im Winter spiel'n, Nein, auch in heissen Tagen, Wo man im kiihlen Garten konnt* *Nen frischen Trunk vertragen Der Kunstler will im Sommer auch Grad leben, wie im Winter; Und dabei haben manche doch TNe ganze Menge Kinder.

Wenn jeder Mann 'nen Dollar gibt So fiinfzehnhundert Leute, Zum Kuckuck, wenn da sollte gehn Einst der Verein mal Pleite Und manche zahlen noch viel mehrf Als wie die hundert Cente, Ich wuerd's zum Beispiel gerne thun, Wenn ich's nur geben konnte.

Auf *s Pumpen sollte man nicht gehn Nicht Saal, nicht Dek'rationen, Am ersten Abend sollt* man schon Im eig'nen Hause wohnen. Denn Pumpen, das 1st hier fiirwahr Die erste, grosse Niete, Denn was beim Pumpen wird gespart Das setzt man zu an Miete,

Nun kennen Sie auch meinen Sinn Und wissen, wie ich's meine, Drum, bitte, acceptieren Sie Auch mich in dem Vereine . . . Bescheidenheit 1st eine Zier, Dickthun nicht meine Weise. Mein Name, der thut nichts gur Sach* - Bin Backer bei Herrn Heyse.

Not all responses, however, were so optimistic and jovial.

Some letters to the newspaper claimed that certain German-Americans avoided the German theater because they were afraid of being called

"Dutchmen." Other contributors questioned whether the German community could settle its differences and work for a common goal. There seemed to have been conflicts among the various groups. Regional differences were often imported from Germany, and some resentment also existed be­ tween older and more recent immigrants. Despite these misgivings, the 57 support for the Theaterverein was strong and consistent and resulted in the first general meeting of the newly created organization. The ubiq­ uitous Jakob Miiller called it a "Vorabend einer deutschen Wiedergeburt in Cleveland."^

Two Seasons under A. Wurster, 1899-1901

Alexander Wurster was subsequently chosen to head the first season of the Theaterverein. Wurster had thirty-five years of experi­ ence in German-language productions in the U.S.A. He had been director g of German groups in Chicago, Cincinnati, and St. Louis. The season opened on October 1, 1899» 'with Per Huttenbesitzer by Ohnet and, due to the financial security provided by the Theaterverein, hopes ran high 9 for a great beginning to an outstanding season. The popular and finan­ cial success of the opening seemed to justify this optimism.

The newspaper critic noted that Wurster did not favor classics since the ensemble was more suited to the light pieces planned for presentation.*^ The Wachter und Anzeiger was determined to do every­ thing possible to insure the success of this most recent venture. The reviewer constantly encouraged better attendance and nearly always emphasized the positive aspects of each production; if, in the critic's opinion, certain actors were deficient or certain scenes poorly done, he was very gentle in the review and added a phrase of amnesty, "ein

Schwamm dariiber. ” He prepared the patrons of the theater with almost daily articles about the upcoming piece. Moreover if the play had literary merit, he invariably provided a plot summary and discussed the 58 author’s intent in depth. Every Monday a long review of the Sunday evening production was published. (One of these reviews even contained admonitions to the audience not to look for their seats while the play 11 was in progress and not to applaud until an cct was over,) The review was especially thorough if the play belonged to the avant garde from

Germany, for the critic quite rightly felt that the audience needed more careful preparation for plays written by authors such as Hauptmann or

Sudermann.

Despite the director's stated intention to concentrate on light entertainment, one of Hauptmann's serious pieces, Fuhrmann Henschel, was 12 performed in October. All available information indicates that this was the first naturalistic play performed in Cleveland. It had been written only the year before and its performance shows the attempt to present a truly modern work to the German audience in Cleveland. The reviewer was more impressed than some in the audience who were disap­ pointed by the immorality in the play's heroes. Theater patrons ex­ pected the heroes of dramas to be above the degradation depicted by

Hauptmann. That Eva, a play written by Richard Voss in 1889, was pre­ sented at the end of October shows further that the Theaterverein felt responsible to bring Cleveland theater patrons recent entertainment from the German stage. The Voss plays including Eva portray in pseudo- realistic fashion women who have fallen blamelessly. These pieces be­ long to the tradition of the French plays of manners which were so popular in Berlin and Vienna in the 1870s and 1880s. It seemed that audiences felt superior to narrow middle-class ethics by approving of 13 and deriving amusement from the pleasure-seeking society portrayed. 59

During the remainder of the season most plays presented did not

pretend to have substance; the only play of measurable depth presented

was Sodoms Ende by Sudermann. The critic claimed it was the best pro­

duction of the season- The fear that the extreme realism, bordering on

immorality according to the reviewer, would shock some of the more

prudish souls in the audience was unfounded because of the "Dezenz der

Spieler."1^ Sudermann's popularity among intellectual circles in

Germany was already on the wane. Many critics there called him a

second-rate writer of meolodramas, but in Cleveland his plays were con­

sidered new and daring. In Sodoms Ende, written in 1 8 9 1 , a young artist

is seduced and corrupted by a person of the upper class and, along with

an innocent girl, is dragged to his ruin by evil high society. This theme like others of Sudermann were calculated to please and to shock.

An article appearing in the publication of the German-American Histori­ cal Society of Illinois in 1908 expressed admiration for Sudermann's craft but also sadness that this author always portrayed the sordid side of life. The article also refers to Sudermann as a "Verlasterer der X5 deutschen Frauenwelt."

After Sodoms Ende, the company turned again to triviality, per­ forming Hans Huckebein by Mosenthal and Kadelburg for the second time during the season. An explanation for the plethora of Fossen or farces was the time needed to prepare the nearly perennial Kabale und Liebe.

Since such lighter pieces, some of which were repeated, did not require much rehearsal time, more time was available for Kabale und Liebe. It comes as a surprise then that the paper did not contain news of the actual production of the Schiller play. One can only surmise that the 60 director felt the ensemble could not do justice to it, and hence it was cancelled. The German company did perform a Christmas play for children in the creditable attempt to involve the younger members of the German community.

At the end of the year many teachers of German came in for a harsh scolding in a letter to the editor. The writer had taken the trouble to determine that only six of the 150 German teachers in the area had purchased memberships in the Theaterverein. The writer claimed that only a small number of the teachers attended any of the performances and that they did not encourage their pupils to do so. The author of the letter accused the teachers of apparently teaching grammar rules instead of culture. He implied that the teachers should influence the children of the working class by their example of theater attendance and thereby help the German theater in Cleveland gain the popularity and stature it deserved. It is possible, however, that the pedagogues did not fre­ quent the German plays because they were ;itimidated by the Sunday law banning entertainment. Supporting Sunday performances could have been construed as lending support to a legally questionable action. The teachers, as servants of the state, were less likely to risk breaking any rules of their master. But mitigating circumstances or not, the teachers received a strong admonition.

The first play of the second half of the season was Im weissen 17 Ross '1 by Blumenthal and Kadelburg. This play had been done a few weeks earlier in English under the title At the White Horse Tavern at the prestigious Euclid Avenue Opera House, and its success there inspired the German ensemble to perform it in the original. The 6l

German-American community was much more aware, it seemed, of the

artistic efforts in English in Cleveland than the American community

was aware of German efforts. The natural dominance of American activity

in an American city only partially explains this situation, for the

Wachter und Anzeiger devoted much more space to the arts than did the

several English-language newspapers, and reviewed not only the German

plays but also the American ones. Each Sunday issue contained a large

separate section on theater both German and American in Cleveland, New

York., and major European cities. At this time, especially in the field

of the arts, the German newspaper was simply superior to its English-

language competition. Professional sports were on the rise in America

and received more print than the theater in the latter papers. The

German newspaper frequently commented negatively on American theatrical efforts and pointed out that the offerings of the German theater were usually of higher quality despite its smaller means.

The repertoire of the remainder of the 1899-1900 season in­ cluded only three serious plays, two by Sudermann and one by Gutzkow.

As the titles were shortened towards the end of the century, the line giving credit to the authors increased in length, A great number of pieces had more than one author. The most popular teams of writers were Blumenthal and Kadelburg, Schonthan and Moser, Walter and Stein, and Schonthan and Koppel-Ellfeld. The collaborations of these men proved financially lucrative, as was their purpose. They were produced in assembly-line fashion for mass consumption, and serious problems were avoided in order to offend no one. Laughter was supposed to be aroused at all costs. Witkowski, in his work on German drama of the 62 nineteenth century, admits that even Kotzebue's plays and French farces 18 were superior to many of the productions of these teams. About a dozen of the plays of this Cleveland season in discussion belonged to this genre.

Toward the end of the season, guest appearances of players from other German theaters in the country were the norm, and the Wachter und

Anzeiger critic, always aware of his duty as host, invariably praised 19 these guests. Wurster, the director, was seldom mentioned but the

Regisseur Horsky was often praised. The highest critical acclaim was given to the two Sudermann plays, Gluck im Winkel and Heimat. It is likely that the critic was attempting to encourage more serious drama.

After the season ended, the Theaterverein met several times to make plans for the future. The financial report indicated a deficit which could have been avoided if the attendance had averaged one 20 hundred fifty people more per performance. The meetings of the Verein were at times quite heated as when the repertoire of the past season was condemned for not including any established classics. Wurster was again elected to serve as director despite minority opposition. The

Theaterverein promised to learn from the mistakes of its first season.

The 1900-1901 season was introduced with much fanfare. A poem, written by one of the theater trustees, Dr, Rosenberg, was read to the full house before the curtain rose at the opening performance. The first of eleven stanzas follows:

Seid mir gegrusst, die heute Ihr auf's Neue Zum zweiten Gang der I^isen hier erscheint, Unwandelbar in altgewohnter Treue ^ Fur deutsche Kunst, zum Scherz und Ernst vereint. 63

The (sincere) attempt at grandeur in this poem was unfortunately not matched by the trivial play chosen to begin the season - Grafin

Charlotte Oder: Das zweite Gesicht by 0. Blumenthal. The disappointed critic hope this would be a mere Vorspeise to the rest of the season.

Several of the guest performers of the past spring had been permanently engaged for the present season and appeared in the opening play. Two of these, A, Metzer and V. Miiller-Fabricius, were singled out for PP praise. Despite the initial fluff, the Theaterverein showed that it remembered its inattention to the classics, for it chose Goethe's Faust as the third play of the current season. Although obviously pleased that the ensemble had finally chosen to perform one of the classics, the reviewer was placed in a difficult position by the ensemble's in­ ability to do the play justice. He was evasive and termed the perfor­ mance a qualified success. The audience was restless and the noise 23 made hearing the lines difficult. This ambitious undertaking was only the beginning; the repertoire for the remainder of the year in­ cluded one play each by Lessing (Minna von Barnhelm), Shakespeare (Die bezahmte Widerspenstige), two by Schiller (Don Carlos, Die Rauber). and also two by Hauptmann (Einsame Menschen, Der Biberpelz), Never had the

German-language theater in Cleveland presented as many plays of accept­ ed literary quality in so short a time.

Alexander Wurster was finally mentioned by the critic early next year but only to announce that the director had contracted to take 2 U over the German theater in Philadelphia in the fall. There was no hint of regret to this notification. The reviewer, at least, did not feel that Wurster deserved any praise for the excellent repertoire. 6k

The Theaterverein and A. Metzer, actor and Regisseur, received the

plaudits instead. Probably no one worked harder and longer than

Wurster to provide German-language theater for America, but with a

personal disappointment in Cleveland, his life was drawing to a close,

for he died a few years later in Philadelphia. A new director, A. Heine 25 formerly of the Potsdam theater, had already been chosen for the fall.

The second half of the season continued at almost the same

level. Schiller was again performed, but of greatest note were the

productions of Liebelei by Schnitzler and Des Meeres und der Liebe

Wellen by Grillparzer. There is no evidence that the pieces by these

two authors had ever been performed before this time, nor were they

afterwards. The presentation of the avant garde Liebelei was apparent­

ly disturbed by nervous giggling from patrons who were not used to

erotic situations being so openly portrayed on stage. The choice of

the Grillparzer play was faulted by the critic, who explained that

German-American audiences had not been educated to appreciate the

staging of classical Greek themes. He claimed that it taxed the imagi­ nation of the audience too much to see something so obviously ethereal, but admitted that theater in Germany, with greater means at its dis­ posal, might have been able to make the play realistic enough to over- 27 come these handicaps.

Toward the end of the season attendance dwindled, causing

financial problems to loom on the horizon. The last production, on

April 28, was designated as a special non-subscription event to benefit the operating budget of the Theaterverein. The populace was asked to

support this last program in order to insure another good beginning in the fall. And indeed, the attempts to prick the conscience of the

German community were successful again as the largest crowd of the season, 1 ,5 0 0 people, was attracted.

The Theaterverein met during the summer to evaluate the past season and to make plans for the next. The season was declared an artistic success but a financial failure, for the influential members of the German community still failed to support the theatrical efforts.

Spokesmen asked where the teachers, lawyers, druggists, and physicians were, and it was also pointed out that some businessmen capitalized on their German heritage for the sake of business but ignored the plight of the theater. Consequently the membership of the Verein was asked to contribute more than one dollar per person for the coming season. It was also hoped that some affluent patrons could be found to help finance the building of a theater for the ensemble, since increases in rents 29 were contributing noticeably to the deficit. An appeal for support was published in the newspaper. It contained the following paragraph:

Ein schlechtes Theater aber wollen wir nicht; ein solches hatte iibrigens auch gar keine Aus- sicht auf Erfolg, denn Tingel-Tangel, Varietes, Vaudeville und flache Tagesprodukte kann man in den englischen Theatern besser und billiger sehen, als sie irgend ein deutsches Theater aufzufiihren im Stande ware; dazu brauchen wir kein deutsches Theater; dessen Zweck soil sein, gute Erzeugnisse deutscher Literatur, komisch wie tragisch, unserer deutschsprechenden und deutsche Kultur hochhaltendcn Bcvblkerung vor- suflihren und dadurch die Pflege deutscher Sprache und Kultur zu fbrdcrn.30 66

Two Seasons under A. Sandory, 1901-1903

In the fall of 1901, President McKinley's assassination domi­ nated the news in the Wachter und Anzeiger hut the paper also devoted much print to inform the public that plans were being actualized to gather the best group of German actors ever to play in Cleveland. The

Theaterverein was obviously optimistic even though no wealthy patron had appeared to sponsor the building of a theater. The designated

Director, A. Heine, withdrew for personal reasons and Alexander Sandory, 31 an actor, was appointed director and Regisseur in his place. Several members of the previous year's ensemble remained, but others were added from German theaters in Cincinnati and St. Louis and still others came from theaters in Oldenburg, Stettin, and even St. Petersburg. Sandory 32 was recruited from Erfurt."^

The season opened on September 29, 1901 with Zwei gluckliche

Tage by Schonthan and Kadelburg. In praising the production the next day, the reviewer recognized the ensemble as the best ever assembled in Cleveland. There was good reason to believe that Alexander Sandory*s first season would be a great one. The choice of the next play, Otto

Ernst's Flachsmann als Erzieher, showed that Cleveland was no longer con­ tent to play a secondary role to the German theater In Mew York. A great success on German stages less than a year before, it experienced its American premiere in Cleveland. 33 The reviewer praised the company for attempting the new and difficult, but he expressed doubts about

Sandory*s ability to wear the three hats of director, Regisseur, and actor for very long. The critic was also still dissatisfied with the repertoire since Kabale und Liebe was the only classic performed in the

first half of the season. The production itself garnered high praise,

showing how far the German theater had come since that fateful perfor­

mance of the same play nearly thirty years before.

The second half of the season began on January 1902, with a

performance of Hauptmann's Die Versunkene Glocke. The Wachter und

Anzeiger, realizing the difficult and serious nature of the play, did

his utmost to prepare the patrons of the theater for over a week before

the scheduled presentation. The review included the usual plot summary,

and also a good interpretation, indicating that Heinrich, the main char­

acter, was probably an autobiographical figure portraying the conflicts

within the artist. The reviewer suggested that people buy their tickets

early since quite a few Americans had expressed interest in witnessing

this highpoint of the theatrical season. The production lived up to

its advertisement, as the following quotation from the Wachter mid

Anzeiger indicates:

Der gestrige Sonntag riickte fur uns Deutsche zu einem wahren Feiertage auf. Zu einer ge- waltigen Demonstration vereinte sich das Deutschthum am Nachmittag, urn seiner Sympathie fur die Buren Ausdruck zu geben, und am Abend sass es dicht gedrangt, das grosse Haus bis zum letzten Platzchen fUllend, in Andacht vor dem Genius eines Gerhart Hauptmann und liess die Wald und Marchenpoesie der Versunkenen Glocke auf sich einwirken, die von der Buhne " ' f t wie mit Zauber- schleiern umwallte

One has the impression from this and other comments that the audience went to see the fairytale creatures in the play rather than ponder the problematic issues raised by the figure of the main character. It is, 68

of course, possible that the production drew the attention of the audience to such elements.

Up to this point Sandory and his ensemble had garnered nothing but praise. With the production of Goethe's Egmont^ in February, how­ ever, they received severe criticism for the first time. The critic

found the performance, complete with Beethoven's music,quite weak. The ensemble, he claimed, had exhausted itself with Hauptmann's play and with plans to go on tour during the first week in February; Sandory, who played the leading role in Egmont, was travel agent for the tour and it was suggested that this, in addition to his other duties, was certainly too much for one man. The reviewer advised that the play should have been done when more time could have been devoted to it.

The public was also discontented and expressed some dissatis­ faction with the seriousness of recently performed plays. The comments of one of the dissatisfied patrons were recorded in the Wachter und

Anzeiger:

Wir Deutschen machen immer gerne den Fehler, dass wir nicht wie die Franzosen in's Theater gehen, um uns zu amUsieren, sondern urn auf Richterstiihlen zu sitzen.36

That the theater critic found no fault with this statement lent addi­ tional weight to it. It is no wonder that the Gesang-and Tanzpossen performed at the end of February met with favorable response. Also meeting with enthusiasm were several of the season's remaining per­ formances which were intended to honor individual actors, and one can gauge the popularity of an actor or actress by the size of the audience *. at the production honoring him or her. Victor Miiller-Fabricius, who 69 had been one of the most popular actors in Cincinnati before coming to

Cleveland, was honored in the presentation of Shakespeare's Die lustigen vj Weiber von Windsor in which he ably played Falstaff. Die Jungfrau von

Orleans. honoring Elizabeth Bischoff in the leading role, drew the larg­ est crowd of the season, nearly 1500 people. The performance attracted such large numbers not only because of Bischoff's popularity but also because it was advertised as a Cleveland premiere and as using the

Meiningen production as a staging guide.

The last two presentations of the season were Prinz Karnevals

Brautfahrt and Alt Heidelberg. The former, a burlesque operetta, was written by two locals: Fritz Nolte who provided the text, and M. Francisci who wrote the music. (Nolte was no other than the theater critic for the Wachter und Anzeiger, in which the piece was favorably reviewed by a substitute critic). The last play of the season, Meyer-Forster's

Alt Heidelberg, was a recent sentimental hit from Germany. This popular finale was staged for the benefit of the Theaterverein treasury.

At the annual open meeting of the Theaterverein that summer, the past campaign was reviewed again. Since the deficit was even greater than the previous year's, the main speaker chastised the German community again and wondered aloud whether there really were 5,000 people out of a total of 70,000 Cleveland Germans interested enough to support German culture in the city. "Has the race for the dollar taken 39 over the Germans as well?" asked the speaker. Sandory was named director again for the upcoming season and in the course of the summer the ensemble was enlarged by several players and singers. The most important acquisition was Wilhelmine Baste-Sandory, the wife of the 70

director, who had continued her acting career in Erfurt during her

husband's first year in Cleveland. Singers were hired from Germany and

elsewhere, primarily because of the increasing popularity of musical

pieces.

Despite the admitted financial problems, the Theaterverein

rented the previously unavailable Euclid Avenue Opera House for the

future regular Sunday evening performances. The contractual clause

forbidding Sunday performances in this building was negated upon the

urging of prominent Germans despite strong opposition, which continued

until the first German production there. The Opera House was the ho largest, most popular, and best-equipped theater in the city. Even

though rental costs were greater, it was felt that the technically

superior stage would allow better productions and the plush surroundings

would attract more patrons. Yet nearly twice as many people would have

to attend each week if financial disaster were to be avoided, and the

higher rent called, of course, for higher ticket prices.

One of the first presentations of the 1902-1903 season in the

Opera House was the operetta Die Fledermaus by J. Strauss, which

attracted a large audience. The repertoire of the first half of the

season also contained serious pieces: productions of Sudermann's

Johannes, Schiller's Maria Stuart, and the Cleveland premiere of

Hauptmann’s Hanneles Himmelfahrt. Fritz Nolte again devoted much print

to the Hauptmann play. He upbraided the confusion of dream and reality

in the production and presented extended suggestions how this could Ul have been avoided. 71

Toward the end of the year, complaints about lack of attendance became more insistent and a response from the trustees was not long in coming. Public apathy had been blamed for years, but a more concrete scapegoat was now needed: the manager Sandory was conducting a losing season and had to be replaced. In February, Fritz Nolte (!) was named h-2 to be Sandory's successor although Sandory finished out the season in

Cleveland. The ambition of Nolte had actually surfaced in the comments during the previous year, in which he doubted whether Sandory should have so much responsibility. Nolte himself now promised to provide

Cleveland's German community with its own theater building-- a very seductive promise in the light of the rental expenditures of the past.

Meanwhile a long letter from the Theaterverein published in the German newspaper thanked Alexander Sandory for having raised the German- language theater in Cleveland to its greatest artistic heights. The

Theaterverein was probably referring to the many classic and modern pieces performed under Sandory. Also implicit in the letter, however, was blame of Sandory for the financial failure.

Ironically, the productions of the outgoing director at this time were even more highly praised in the newspaper than any before.

Nolte seemed pleased by the many serious pieces on the schedule at this time. Nathan der Weise, Othello, and Wilhelm Tell were performed within four weeks of each other in the early spring. Sudermann's Es lebe das

Leben, slated for the end of February, was defended against charges of immorality by the Wachter und Anzeiger critic, despite contrary claims in the American papers when it had been shown in English a few weeks earlier. The German production received praise by Nolte but he 72

candidly admitted that, contrary to his previous statements, the play uu might be immoral after all. Whatever the moral character of the play, the production was remarkable for another reason; for before the curtain went up on the play several original songs were performed which casti­ gated the German public in Cleveland for its lack of interest in the theater and the German clubs for actually hindering the success of the theater through their numerous competing social activities.

Operettas and farces made up the bulk of the repertoire during the last month of the season. Since these productions were the people's choice, the Wachter und Anzeiger hoped for big crowds. Many appeals were made to support the last few productions especially in order to show appreciation to the departing Sandory, who, according to the paper, had worked so hard in Cleveland. A benefit production for Alexander

Sandory took place in April, featuring a dramatization of Per Roman eines Jungen Mannes. The plot of the piece reminded the critic of

Sandory's circumstances and he claimed that the director wanted to say the following with the play:

Seit Jahren habe ich mich nun rastlos bemiiht, unser Theater zu dem zu machen, was es sein soil: nicht zu einem blossen Amusierplatz, sondern zu einer Bildungsstatte, wo der Ge- schmack gelautert und gehoben wird. Ich war und bin Idealist. Meine Kunst stand mir hoher als Zugstiicke, bei denen das Volk sich fast die liaise bricht. Die Folge ist, dass ich ein armer junger Mann geblieben bin. 5

This evident support from the German newspaper came too late to pre­ serve Sandoryps position. The last play performed tinder his tenure in

Cleveland was Gerechtigkeit by 0. Ernst; the title points ou^ the absence of justice in the manner he was treated. Sandory stepped in 73

front of the curtain after the production to thank publicly those who 1+6 had worked with him the past two years.

One Season under F. Nolte, 1903-19Q1+

The 1903-19C>1+ season began later than promised, and this did not augur well for the future. Fritz Nolte had engaged a new company including Frau Franosch-Diehl who had directed the theater in Cleveland several years earlier. Both a Goethe and a Schiller play were performed in the first few weeks of the season, and yet aspects of each presenta­ tion were attacked by the critic who replaced Nolte. The reviewer hoped, however, that the new building under construction would provide new 1+7 artistic impetus upon its completion.

Dominating the news in January of 1901+ was the Chicago Iroquois

Theater fire in which nearly six hundred people died. This tragedy re­ sulted in inspections cf theater buildings throughout the country, and many were closed because of unsafe conditions or because the money was lacking to make necessary changes. This situation did not affect

German productions directly, since the Theaterverein did not yet have its own building. But according to Nolte, the situation made it more

1+8 difficult to obtain and more expensive to rent a theater. Upon can­ cellation in January of a play for which tickets had already been sold, a controversy matching «J1 past ones broke out. According to the

Wachter und Anzeiger, 1+Q7 Nolte was no longer recognized as director since he had broken his contract with the actors and with the Verein. His financial frivolity, it was claimed, had led to the present financial crisis; and it was he who caused the actors to go unpaid and perfor­ mances to be cancelled, Nolte apparently had tried to hide the diffi­ culties for a time, the paper stated, but his mismanagement finally had become too great and surfaced. Nolte was asked to appear at a special meeting of the Theaterverein to answer the charges presented against him. His wife attended in his place but was unable to answer the charges fully or to calm the actors and irate members of the theater organization. The season was suspended for several weeks and ten actors had to be released, reducing the company to sixteen. Three actors of the remaining number were chosen by the Verein to guide the rest of the season. The Theaterverein promised that a11. future proceeds would be in the hands of the actors, indicating the probable end of the Verein after the present season. There was no longer much interest in build­ ing up an operating fund for future seasons. Plays continued to be presented but season subscriptions purchased under Nolte's tenure were no longer honored without surcharge. Attendance dwindled and proceeds SO at times were barely enough to pay the rent for the building.^ In

March the Wachter und Anzeiger made the following grim statement after a poorly attended performance of Kabale und Liebe:

Wie lange die Schauspieler unter diesen Verhaltnissen weiter spielen werden, lasst sich voraussehen. Die Apathie dcs Fubiikums ist untor den bestohenden Vcr- Jkiltnissen kaum zu begreifen, und dcr Satz, dass jede Stadt und j'edes Publikum das Theater hat, das es verdient, scheint wicder einmal zur Wahrheit werden zu wollen,.. namlich gar keins. Die so wacker aus- haltenden Schauspieler sind doch nicht fiir die Nolte*sche Misswirtschaft verantwort- lich zu haltenl^l 75

The construction of the new theater, initiated by Nolte, was

behind schedule, preventing any presentations there until the middle of

April. (Nolte could not have guessed that this building, which he had

conceived and courageously helped finance, was to become a monument to

his failure.) Upon completion of the building, the Wachter und Anzeiger,

probably taking a deep breath, was again optimistic and hoped the new 52 house would erase the cultural lethargy in the community. Uriel

Acosta by Gutzkow was scheduled to open this theater intended exclu­

sively for performances in German. Adolph Heine, who had nearly become

the director of the theater instead of Sandory a few years earlier,

came from Cincinnati to star in the inaugural play. The paper exhorted

Cleveland's patrons with these words:

Wenn wir jetzt die Gelegenheit voriibergehen lassen und, verdrossen Uber frlihere Ent- tauschungen, apathisch und willenlos bei Seite stehen, nun, dann wird es rait dem deutschen Theater dauernd vorbei sein, und unsere Sprosslinge werden das Vaudeville oder bestens die widerlichen Melodramen und dramatisierten Romane der englischen Buhne fur das Hochste aller Geniisse halten. Das beste Mittel der Bildung eines guten Geschmacks fur die heranwachsende Jugend wird verloren gehen.^3

The exhortations of the paper bore fruit, for the initial production in

the new theater was well attended and praised for its excellence. The

new building, done completely in Jugendstil, received the admiration of

audience and critic. Unfortunately the financial deficit was so great

that it had to be sold after only one more performance there, 5U and

American productions were soon scheduled for the building. The season

ended quietly in May with several benefit presentations for the leading

actors and actresses. 76

Thereafter the paper reviewed the theatrical period leading up

to the I9 0 U fiasco. The article observed that the Theaterverein had

never been able to find a director both financially and artistically

qualified, and that the theaters which had been rented were either too 55 small or too expensive. That summer, the customary general meeting

of the Verein had a funereal atmosphere. No plans were made for the

future since no one seemed willing to ask the community for funds again.

The treasurer noted with some irony that there was one positive aspect

of the past season: for the first time since the organization's creation 56 there was no financial deficit.

Heinrich Jentsch finally broke the theatrical silence when he

began presenting plays in German on Sunday evenings in Cleveland at the 57 end of November in I9 0U. A few farces were performed with moderate

success by a group consisting of more amateurs than professionals.

Jentsch gave up at the end of the year, and this surrender caused as

little furor as the plays his ensemble had performed. The last scheduled

play was cancelled and thus the most recent attempt ended as had the

season the year before the creation of a Theaterverein — with a cancel­

lation, Another group was slated to perform early the following year but these plans did not materialize. The promising beginning of 1899

ended — five years later — with barely a whimper. All future pro­

fessional German-language theater productions in Cleveland were performed by visiting companies from cities such as Milwaukee and Cincinnati, where

German ensembles continued to exist for at least another decade.

During the era of the Theaterverein in Cleveland, at least thirty-five plays were performed during a season usually lasting from October to April. Most were performed on Sunday but quite a few were presented during the week in the confines of one of the local German clubs. The companies also went on tour at times to neighboring cities as near as Canton, Ohio, and as distant as Rochester, New York. It was, to say the least, a demanding schedule especially when one considers that very few plays were repeated during the five-year s.,an, much less during an individual season. Only a handful were played more than once.

Hans Huckebein by Blumenthal and Kadelburg led in this department, with three performances in five years. Franz von Schonthan, usually teamed with another writer, was the most popular German playwright during this period in Cleveland. He seemed to have been able tc turn out his laughter-evoking, forgettable pieces at will, but they became hits both abroad and here. Of the approximately twenty classics performed during the five years in question, half of them were by Schiller. The ensembles hired by the Theaterverein were highly professional and did not hesitate to perform most of the plays being done in Germany at the time. The companies usually consisted of fifteen to twenty players, some of whom were also singers. The latter were employed to facilitate the produc­ tion of operettas and musical farces which had increased in popularity.

Several of the operettas and also a number of other pieces in the reper­ toire were translated from the French. Except for several Shakespeare works, only two plays translated from English were performed by the

German groups. They were Miss Hobbs and Charley's Aunt, both highly successful comedies on the American stage of the period. Less than one play a season was of German-American origin. Since the Theaterverein made an effort to duplicate the theatrical fare of Germany, the 78

Cleveland German-language theater at the turn of the century probably

compared favorably to a small contemporary theater in Germany.

Comparison with the Contemporary Theater in Germany and the Contemporary English-Language Theater in Cleveland

What was the state of the contemproary theatrical scene in

Germany? How did it compare with the German and English-language

theater in Cleveland? Progress continued in theaters in Germany and

some of the advances made themselves felt in the German-language

theaters in the United States, but essentially, the situation in the

American theater between 1875 and 1900 had scarcely improved. Serious

literary theater patrons in America were still awaiting the theater re­

formation which had been achieved in many countries of Europe, especial­

ly in Germany.

The larger cities in Germany, especially Berlin, had the re­

sources, the directors, and actors which, of course, made their theaters

much superior to anything, German or American, in the United States.

The high niveau of Otto Brahm's theater in Berlin has already been , 58 noted; but if one examines the repertoire of the approximately 430

theaters in Germany between 1899 and 1905, it is evident that such in­

novative literary fare did not dominate other stages in Germany. Works

by Roderich Benedix, Gustav von Moser, and Franz von Schonthan were 59 performed more frequently than any of the classics except for Schiller's

Kleist, Grillparsef, and Hebbel plays were performed, though not often.

(These authors were almost totally ignored in Cleveland — only one

play of the three above writers having been performed in Cleveland between 1 8 9 9 and 1905-) 79

Other popular playwrights include Sudermann, who lost favor in

literary circles, yet continued to be very popular on the stage, and

his contemporary Hauptmann, who also maintained his place near the top.

Some theaters which presented avant garde pieces were turning away by

1 9 0 0 from naturalistic plays in favor of the poetic oeuvre of Wedekind,

Schnitzler, and Hofmannsthal. These authors were virtually ignored in

Cleveland because the life of the Cleveland German theater of the Theater­

verein was even shorter than the lifespan of naturalism and could not take part in the romantic reaction to naturalism.

The German theater in Cleveland also could not benefit from the

influence of Germany's greatest and most celebrated theater director at the beginning of the century, Max Reinhardt. Reinhardt took over the reins of the Deutsches Theater in 1905 and created an ensemble superior to anything seen before. Otto Brahm's theater was the servant of good literature but literature served the theater of Reinhardt. Good plays, new or old, blossomed under his innovative direction and Reinhardt, the 60 actor and artistic technician, raised the stage to new heights.

Advances in theatercraft spread to other European countries, especially to England and Russia. The German stage was repaid through the positive influence people such as Stanislavski and Gordon Craig had on German theater. The advances in stage design made by the latter were especial­ ly felt with the advent of expressionism a decade later.

Examining Cleveland's contemporary English-language theater one finds that in 1 87 8 the resident stock company under the leadership of

John Ellsler came to an end; this was the termination of the stock

£ ■ 1 system for Cleveland. It became cheaper to move a company from place to place than to maintain a separate ensemble in each major city. How­

ever, this did not improve the quality of offerings since even a poor

play in New York could recover its losses by going on the road. The

road companies were usually accompanied by at least one star, who often

received even higher billing than the play. Any attempt at realism was

interrupted by the applause of the audience when the star, whom it had 62 come to see, appeared on stage. The spectacle was increased when gas

lighting (1 8 2 0 ), and later electricity (1880), added to the magic of the

moment. The productions were advertised as being very "realistic" but

it was realism of the surface--real objects, authentic costumes, real

animals, and real Negroes and Indians, etc. What was not real were the

conflicts portrayed on the stage, since they did not show life as it

was. While newspapers were reporting panics, depressions, sweat shops,

child labor, and other such disturbing elements of the new industrial

age, the stage presented escape entertainment; in one of the most popu­

lar plays of the second half of the century Uncle Tom went straight to

. 63 heaven.

There were quite a few adaptations of German plays performed in

the 1880s. Die Rauber and Marla Stuart were performed (in English) but

the rest of the plays were melodramas and farces written by authors such

as Schoenthan, Benedix, L'Arronge, Halm, Moser, and Mosenthal. Even

Kotzebue’s The Stranger was still alive in Cleveland during this time.

Light plays featuring German themes, though not usually of German origin, were also as popular as before. Audiences did not seem ready for the

austerity of Ibsen, and no theater was willing to take a gamble on

losing money with such a play. 81

Toward the end of the century, the American theater in Cleveland and many other cities came under the control of a theatrical syndicate from New York. This Klaw-Erlanger Syndicate was able to dictate what played in many cities, simply because it owned most of the theaters in a particular city. The German theaters in New York, Cleveland, and other cities escaped control, however, because their performances did not really compete with the Syndicate productions. Norman Hapgood, in

The Stage in America, 1897-1900 ■. discusses the failings of the American theater in New York by actually pointing out the superiority of the

German theater there. Hapgood claims the following of an audience in this city:

An audience in New York goes to the theater and talks, not about the essential elements of Pinero and his art, but about the appear­ ance of a local favorite in his new role. It applauds, not when the pauses in the dramatic story invite a relaxation of atten­ tion, but when a popular actor makes his ^ entrance or a stage waterfall is revealed.w

He maintained that the only theater of high quality in the country at the end of the nineteenth century was the German one in New York under the direction of Heinrich Conried.^ The rehearsals of the German company were much more thorough, Hapgood stated, and the ensemble took no stock in the ridiculous claim that too much practice takes away from the realism of the performance. Every member of the German ensemble worked toward presenting a well-rounded production. There was no depen­ dence on a star who, to the detriment of the company, would dominate by his personality. Hapgood did admit that the German company performed many farces but without avoiding high-quality plays. Since the play changed almost weekly, the director did not always have to cater to 82 mediocre tastes, since one financial loss did not invite financial disaster, as was often the case in an American theater. This resulted

in a greater degree of innovation and daring on the part of a German- nlanguage company. 66

Since New York's English-language stage was so inferior, it is especially unfortunate that hy 1900 the city had assumed almost total theatrical dominance over the rest of the country. Clevelanders saw those plays which the Syndicate wished them to see. The Syndicate used towns such as Cleveland to recoup losses and not to try out controver­ sial plays or methods. Theater in New York and its circuit was supposed to he genteel diversion, and plays hy Ibsen and Hauptmann were still considered too radical. Ibsen's A Doll’s House was presented in New

York in 1 8 8 3 , hut only after it had been emasculated by a happy end­ ing, ^ and Hauptmann's Hanneles Himmelfahrt, produced in 189^, was closed down by the authorities on grounds of immorality. Not surpris­ ingly, the English-language theater in Cleveland was equally bleak.

It is obvious that the theater in Europe at the turn of the century had become international, since there was a lively exchange of ideas between leading figures from various countries. However, these ideas which helped reform the European stage did not cross the Atlantic for years, and the character of the repertoire in American theaters barely changed. After the end of German efforts in I9 0 U there were still several American theaters in Cleveland, but only the Euclid Avenue

Opera House presented what were termed high caliber productions instead of burlesque and animal acts, The English-language plays presented in the first few years of the twentieth century in Cleveland included several German farces in translation and a great number of American pieces of a similar nature. Pseudo-realistic melodramas and romances were also popular. The star system was still predominant, as evidenced by the arrival of famous actors several times a year; the classics, especially Shakespeare's, were the preferred vehicles for their virtuoso performances. Helena Modjeska, R. Mansfield, E. H. Sothern, and Ethel

Barrymore all stopped in Cleveland on the tour from Hew York to star in plays they had probably been doing for several years. The player, not the play, attracted the audience and the player would receive top bill­ ing. One of these star vehicles was Sudermann's Magda (translation of

Helmut) presented in 1902 with Ethel Barrymore in the leading role.

Though hardly a great play, it was the most famous of a number adapted from German at this time in Cleveland. 68 Some of the others were At the White Horse Tavern, translated from Im weissen Rossi'; Are You a

Mason?, adapted From Logenbruder written by Laufs and Kraatz; and Girl in the Barracks, an uncredited adaptation of a German play by Kraatz and

Stebitzer. All these plays had first been presented in New York. Some of the other popular plays of the Cleveland stage in the early years of the century were Miss Hobbs, The King's Musketeer, Rip van Winkle, and

Captain Jinks of the Horse Marines. Trivial sentimentality was the over­ riding quality these plays shared. Most were not intended to be read and cannot be classified as literature. But they were usually success­ ful; they were entertaining and they made money.

In 1905, the Wachter und Anzeiger contained an interview with

Charles Harris, a local professor of literature, who commented on the 69 American and German theater. He claimed that the weaknesses of the theater would remain as long as the theater needed to make a profit.

He suggested that the theater should be more like the church and school

instead of a business venture. He claimed that the demand for good

drama was much greater in Germany, and that, therefore, more plays were

written and produced there. Modern German drama also had a reading

public as opposed to American drama which almost never existed in book

form. There was still no alliance between literature and theater.

Harris maintained that one could see more Shakespeare in Berlin in one

season than one could view in a lifetime in Cleveland. He criticized the star system severely, claiming that a fair actor with a good ensem­ ble is preferable to a great actor with a poor supporting cast, the latter case being usual under the star system. The article contained hopes that the American theater might one day reflect life as it really is and that America would soon have its own dramatists of note.

First-rate American theater did not really exist until the second decade of the 20th century. Before this, one usually found adapted and imitated plays from Europe on the American stage. Unfortu­ nately, it was usually the weaker European plays that were imported or that served as models. The breakthrough came with imaginative theater people, influenced by Europe, who founded the Theatre Guild in New York in 19li+ (initially called Washington Square Players) and the Frovince- town Players in New England in 1915- The Theatre Guild brought to the public avant garde, literate European plays, and the Provincetovn Players were determined to promote literate American drama. Where Goethe had used the plays of Schiller, Otto Brahm plays of Ibsen and Hauptmann,

Stanislavski the plays of Chekhov, the Provincetown group used writers the American theater had been waiting for: Susan Glaspell, Edna St,

Vincent Millay, and especially Eugene O'Neill. O'Neill's plays gradu­ ally inspired other American dramatists such as Elmer Rice and Maxwell

Anderson and also encouraged the public to accept serious modern

European plays.

When the American theater came of age in the 1920s, it did so quickly and accomplished in a few years what it had taken Europe several decades to do. Competition for road shows sprang up in the form of community theaters in many cities, and the Cleveland Playhouse, founded in 1915, became one of the first and best Little Theaters in the country. 86 Chapter IV Footnotes

•^Cleveland und sein Deutschthum, p. lot.

^Wachter und Anzeiger, 3 January 1899* This German newspaper was created from a merger of the previous two.

^Mme. Anna Franosch-Diehl became directress of a German-Language theater in St. Louis in the fall of 1899*

^Wachter und Anzeiger, 9 January 1899*

'’ibid., 11 January 1899-

8 Ibid., 12 January 1899*

^Ibid., 29 January 1899*

8 Wolle, p. 65*

^Wachter und Anzeiger, 27 September 1899*

1 0 Ibid., 2 October 1899*

laibid., 7 October 1899-

1 2 rbid., it October 1899*

^^Witkowski,;p. 1 0 5* it Wachter und Anzeiger, 20 November 1899*

15Jahrbuch der Deutsch-Amerikanischen Historischen Gesellschaft von Illinois, 8 (190$^, p. I6 0. ' " *

^^Wachter und Anzeiger, 13 December 1899*

■^Ibid., 7 January 1900. 18 Witkowski, p. 1 6 7.

^^Wachter und Anzeiger, 1 April 1900. A. Schober, who was encouraged to learn case endings twenty-five years earlier, appeared as a guest player in one of these productions.

2 0 Ibid., 11 May 1900. 21 Ibid., 1 October 1900, Bosenberg was also a writer of socialist plays, one of which Was produced in Cleveland.

2 2 Ibid.

2 ^Ibid., 15 October 1900. 87 2U Ibid., 7 January 1901.

29Ibid., 8 January 1901. Heine resigned before the season actually began and became the director of the German theater in Newark, New Jersey.

26Ibid., ll+ February 1901.

27Ibid., 25 February 1901.

28Xbid., 29 April 1901.

29Ibid., 31 May 1901.

30Ibid., 20 July 1901.

31Ibid., 23 August 1901.

32Ibid., 29 September 1901.

33Ibid., 6 October 1901.

3^Ibid., 6 January 1902.

35Ibid., 3 February 1902.

36Ibid., 17 February 1902.

37Ibid., 3 March 1902.

38Ibid., 7 March 1902.

39Ibid., 26 May 1902,

1+0Ibid., ll+ September 1902.

l+1Ibid. , 25 December 1902.

^2Ibid., 2 February 1903-

l+3Ibid. 1+1+ Ibid., 2 March 1903- 1+5 Ibid., 13 April 1903.

U6Ibid., 27 April 1903.

^7Ibid., 23 November 1903-

1+8Ibid. , 9 February I9 0I+.

**9Ibid.

5°Ibid., 7 March I9 0U. 88 51 Ibid.

52Ibid., 12 April I9 0U.

53Ibid.

5**Ibid., 28 April I9 0U.

5 5Ibid., 16 May I9 0U.

5 6Ibid., h July I9 0 U.

"^Ibid., 27 November 190*4-.

itkowsk i, p . 2 0 5.

5 9Ibid., pp. 2 0 6-2 1 0 .

' Bab, p. 12k. His love of innovation led him to the use of a Drehbtihne in his production of A Midsummer Night * s Dream in Berlin in 1905. The staging of this play was such a sensation that Berliners supposedly turned toward each other at 9 P-m * on the evening of per­ formances and said, "Jetzt dreht sich bei Reinhardt der Wald." Since Shakespeare's plays appealed to Reinhardt, it is no coincidence that Shakespeare replaced Schiller as the most-performed dramatist in Germany at the end of the first decade of the twentieth century.

^Margaret U. Ezekiel, "The History of the Stage in Cleveland 1875-1885" (Ph.D. dissertation, Western Reserve University, 1967)> p. 2. 62 It must have been similar to the dinner theaters and summer stock enterprises now springing up all over the country. The main attraction is the "headliner" who interrupts the action upon first entering the set to acknowledge the applause. The theatrical fare provided is usually as bland as the food served,

^3 Ezekiel, p. I8 9 *

^Norman Hapgood, The Stage in America 1897-1900 (New York: Macmillan Co., 1901), pp. IJ+I-1 U2 .

6 5Ibid., p. 1*4-7.

6 6Ibid., p. lit3 .

^Peter Bauland, The Hooded Eagle: Modern German Drama on the New York Stage (Syracuse: Syracuse University Press, 1 9 6 8 ), pp. U-5- 68 This information is available in the extensive program files maintained by the Cleveland Public Library. 69 ^Wachter und Anzeiger, 12 March 1905. CHAPTER V

ON ACTING IN CLEVELAND'S GERMAN-LANGUAGE THEATER

With only a few exceptions the play and not the player was of

' rimary importance for the German-language theater in Cleveland. In ihe promotional efforts prior to the productions, the actresses and

.ctors were normally mentioned simply in passing. Only when a visiting

German player from New York or Germany appeared in Cleveland did the play take on a secondary role. The reviews usually dealt with the plays and only peripherally with the thespians. The German-language theaters in cities such as Cleveland were usually spared the ills of the star system. One does not have the impression from the newspaper comments that an actress or actor dominated more than what was called for by the play's plot. A dicussion of the acting in theaters such as the German one in Cleveland must therefore be content with deductions of a general nature arrived at by deciding what is likely to have been. But first of all, let us examine the actor's craft in especially the nineteenth century, the time of German-language theater.

Acting styles in the nineteenth century included the classical manner of Goethe's theater in Weimar and the more realistic style of the contemporary Hamburg Theater. A romantic style, strongly emotional, replaced them in popularity only to be followed by another realistic

89 90 school and its following more extreme form, a naturalistic acting manner.

These styles were prevalent in the rest of Europe and in America also.

Despite the various labels, acting styles before naturalism were all characterized by a leading actor's tirades which became less bombastic and less stylized as time passed. (These tirades were evaluated as one would evaluate an opera aria.) Even though there was progress toward external realism, the players presented a role which had been assumed and consciously played to an audience. Acting at the end of the 1 9th century became more "natural" as actors attempted to represent a char­ acter, to actually live a role. Actors were then less likely to play to an audience which was made to feel that it was viewing the action without the knowledge of the players. With Stanislavski at the begin­ ning of the 2 0 th century, internal realism was added to external realism allowing nearly total identification of an actor with a character. This acting style depended as much on intellect as on physical equipment.

The naturalistic plays at the turn of the century lent themselves well to this manner of acting.

The Star System in America

As with movements in literature, acting styles are often not clearly defined. A virtuoso usually determined the method and not the method the player. Before the advent of naturalism, all the schools of acting depended on elevated style. The actors would normally declaim rather than speak.; exaggerated gestures and emphasis on elocution were the norm. Even America's leading 1 9th century player, Edwin Booth, who preferred a more realistic and intellectual acting style, usually faced the audience and declaimed in elevated fashion. It is logical that acting styles which depended on exaggerated exhibitions would lead to the emergence of the dominating stars.

The rise of the virtuoso performers led to excesses of a varied nature both here and abroad. For example, the most popular figure of the world of art in America in the first half of the nineteenth century was Edwin Forrest, the dynamic romantic actor. Nearly invincible heroes were portrayed by Forrest and his physique lent itself well to these roles. His favorite role was that of Spartacus in a play entitled The

Gladiators. Playbills for the production name the play once and Mr,

Edwin Forrest three times.^ No other actor was honored with a title.

An incident which also underscores the exaggerated importance of actors was precipitated by Forrest's poor London reception, for which he blamed the English actor Macready. And Forrest's fans in this country were quick to exact their revenge: when Macready appeared in New York shortly thereafter, the audience drowned out his lines with every imaginable noise. The people unable to obtain seats for this shameful performance stormed the theater and a riot ensued. The militia was called in to help the police and order was restored but only after twenty to thirty people h&d lost their lives and hundreds were injured. This episode, 2 occurring on May 10, I8 U9 , is called the Astor Place Opera House Riot.

Thereafter Forrest lost some of his popularity among theater patrons of 3 the upper classes, but he retained his following among the masses.

From such incidents one can surmise that a number of theatergoers at

Forrest's performances were interested in the athletic histrionics of the star and others like him, rather than in the play. 92

The cult of these virtuosos continued until the twentieth

century and beyond. The German-trained actress Fanny Janauschek was k so famous that she was asked to play Lady Macbeth opposite Edwin Booth.

She played the role in German. This was not the only time Edwin Booth played opposite someone speaking a different tongue. In fact the high- point of such activity probably occurred in Germany in a production in which Booth played Othello in English, and Davison, the wildest of the

German virtuosos, played Iago in German. The polyglot Desdemona of this 5 production spoke German or English depending on her partner. It was a

spectacle of two titanic actors as opposing players.

As long as there are people in the acting profession whose tal­

ent places them above the rest, the star system will never completely die. This is how it should be if talent is not to be stifled. The

abuses of the star system in the nineteenth century were not caused by too much talent in the star but by too little in the surrounding satel­ lites . Even if the supporting players had ability, they were supposed to suppress it in favor of the visiting star. One of the most detri­ mental factors was the lack of rehearsal of the virtuoso with her or his company. This condition improved as the star system began to fade or when a company of some quality went on the road with, and rehearsed with the leading player. The days when the stars would meet their sup­ porting players on the day of the play production are, at least, no longer the norm.^

In Germany the prestige of the written play and the playwright helped lead to reforms (especially in Saxe-Meiningen), for the play and not the player was placed in the spotlight. Each actor, major or minor, was asked to play the part which served the realistic whole. Play­ wrights in .America did not have the stature of German writers; in fact, most of them were aging stars with a sense of theater who wrote showy pieces for what was aptly to be called "show business." Reforms helped limit the abuses of flamboyant stars in Germany in the latter decades of the nineteenth century and then in America in the first decades of the twentieth century with the advent of the repertory and Little

Theaters, The star system is, of course, still alive and "well" in certain Broadway pieces and in movies and television but even these latter media attempt to provide the leading figure with able support.

Imported Players for Cleveland

As has been noted, the German-language theaters in Cleveland and elsewhere were unlikely to participate in the tendency to glorify a star over the drama. It is probable though that the German theater in Cleveland went against the mainstream of the star system simply because it had no choice. Stars were too expensive for such a theater and they did not seem to want to play in the humble surroundings of

Cleveland on a permanent basis. Therefore visits of stars were few.

The acting of the professional German theater in Cleveland before 1872 was uniformly average in quality, but with Szwirschina came a profess­ ional company of talent in 1 8 7 2 . The troupe contained no virtuoso, however, and the director made sure that different people would have the leading roles in different plays. Although,throughout the German- language theater era,the thespians had type designations such as Liebhaber(in), Held(in), Salondame, Gesellschaftsdame, Charakterdar- steller(in), Komlsche Alte, Jugendlicher Komiker, and Soubrette, there were several players in most categories, providing the director with a choice. Naturally an actor or actress from a minor category would not play a major part. Szwirschina, like most directors, was an autocrat who determined the casting. Age was a primary factor in this determina­ tion, since realistic portrayal was attempted and makeup had obviously not yet reached today's sophistication. Grease paint did not replace the primitive powders used until the end of the century. The German newspapers often printed that the director had divided the roles well and that he had achieved a well-rounded production.

When the company contented itself with plays of modest substance, all went well, but problems sometimes surfaced when a play demanding ex­ ceptionally competent acting was performed. The company's personnel shortcomings then became evident. The amateurs used to supplement the ambitious productions, often requiring a large cast, proved lacking and even the professionals received criticism. These plays were usually pieces by Schiller, and the critics had preconceived notions as to how they should be performed — no doubt because they had probably seen the plays produced on the stages in Germany. It seems the company contained a few good actors and several adequate ones. Practice time was limited since at least one different play was produced weekly during the season.

The demanding schedule did not allow the rehearsal time necessary to overcome the shortcomings of some of the players. It is unlikely that the excesses of the various schools of acting, especially the romantic, were evident in the German-language theater. Costumes and staging were 95 ignored almost totally by the critic, and it is obvious that the ensemble was limited by lack of finances to what was available, since costumes and setting were seldom historically accurate. These items were con­ sidered much less important than the acting and the script at the time.

When the next permanent German-language ensemble after

Szwirschina's began, its efforts in 1 8 8 5 , it was a group that prided it­ self in the fact that its leading actress had recently been a member of the Meiningen Court Theater. She was definitely the star of each pro­ duction especially since, as the newspapers often pointed out, the rest of the company was deficient in talent. The management promised to hire better actors but except for some visitors, including the Szwirschinas, these promises were not kept. The organizers knew that one star was enough to attract the public for a while. It was a business venture that successfully duped at least part of the Germans in Cleveland.

The last' and greatest period of German theater in Cleveland was heavily influenced by the ensemble style of the Meiningers. It was the era of the Theaterverein which searched far and wide for an excellent director and actors. Established professionals were recruited not only from other German theaters in this country but also from Europe. Uni­ formity was again achieved as it had been to an extent in the 1 8 7 2 -1 8 7 ^ seasons but not because most players were average. This time it was be­ cause most of the actors were of high quality. During this period the term Regisseur was first used in Cleveland to describe the individual in charge of staging and acting. The very usage of the title indicates a greater concern for these aspects of play production. Comments about costumes and scenery were still rare, but the promotional ads for the 96 presentations did contain notes assuring the public that the costumes and scenery would be realistically beautiful. The reviewer seldom found fault with this aspect of the German productions, though it is unclear whether this was because he found it satisfactory or because he did not expect a great deal. After the Euclid Avenue Opera House was rented and the naturalistic plays began appearing, staging must have played an in­ creasingly important role, but the absence of critical comment continued.

As operettas increased in popularity in Germany and in Cleveland, the ensemble added more player-singers swelling the group to approximate­ ly 25 professionals during Nolte' s brief tenure as director in 1903-190*+ •

To pay all these players the Theaterverein had to organize a very de­ manding schedule which even included tours during the week to neighbor­ ing cities. Rehearsal time was still quite limited. The theater trustees realized too late that it was financially foolhardy to attempt to maintain such a large group. There was simply not enough continuous support possible for such a huge undertaking.

Throughout the German-language theater era in Cleveland, the most frequent critical comments concerning the acting dealt with actors’ voices. A strong, pleasing instrument was by far the most important prerequisite for a performer. Poor acoustics probably made powerful voices doubly important. The harsh Cleveland winters and the demanding schedule took their toll, and reviewers sometimes noted with regret that a performer’s voice lacked its usual pleasing and powerful quality.

Failure to memorize lines properly was also a criticism leveled several times each season. One has the impression from reading hundreds of reviews of the German productions in Cleveland that an actress or actor 97 was termed talented if she or he possessed a strong, pleasing voice, the ability to memorize, and an attractive appearance. Gestures and other movements were taken for granted by the critics. The comic pieces de­ pended on farcical situations and properly timed lines for their success.

This latter genre consistently elicited the most positive response from audiences. Such plays do not require virtuoso performers, but the gales of laughter frequently aroused by these plays give evidence of comic talent in the Cleveland troupe, especially in the 1 8 7 2 -7^ and 1899~1901* periods.

Despite the ultimate failure of the last venture, several

Sunday evening productions of this period must have ranked favorably with any contemporary ones in the United States. (This opinion is de­ duced from the reviews, audience reaction, and from readings about the

American theater of the time.) The German newspaper's critic was con­ vinced that the local German theater was much superior to anything the

Cleveland American theater had to offer and that it was equal at times to the excellent German theater in New York. The intention was, after all, to duplicate the theater offerings of the old homeland. Such ambitions eventually proved to be self-defeating but the worthy efforts deserve our admiration.

However, the performers were imported almost to the degree that the plays were, and they seldom could have felt at home in this country; many of them returned to Europe after a season ended. The German-

American community neither produced any notable plays nor players and thus theatrical success came and went as did the largely transient performers. 98 Chapter V Footnotes

^"Marion Geisinger, Flays, Flayers, and Playwrights; an illustrated history of the theatre (New York: Hart Co., 1971), P- 332^

Jordan Miller, American Dramatic Literature (New York: McGraw Hill Book Co,, 1961), p. 31. *3 Helen Chinoy and Toby Cole, eds., Actors on Acting (New York: Crown Publishers, 1970), p. 539-

^Geisinger, p.. 33*+-

^Bab, p . 8 . £ Garrett Leverton, The Production of Later Nineteenth Century American Drama (New York: Bureau of Publications, Teachers College, Columbia University, 1936), p. 115- There were people in the theater who attempted to reform acting before the twentieth century. The American actor and director Dion Boucicault actually established a school for the actors in his company in 1888. Students were encouraged to use natural speech and gestures. Distinctness was emphasized over loudness. CHAPTER VI

A CROSS-SECTIONAL ANALYSIS AND CLASSIFICATION OF THE REPERTOIRE

The repertoire of Cleveland's German-language theater consisted

mainly of plays little known or even forgotten today, and we shall be

discussing them here chiefly in terms of genre and type. Within each period, the playwrights will be treated in the order of their popular­

ity, with only those writers being discussed whose plays appeared three

or more times in the years 1872-7^, 1 8 8 5 , and 1899-190^* First a word might be said about the period directly preceding, however, 1 8 5 0 -1 8 7 2 .

The records of this period are sketchy but do indicate that Schiller,

Kotzebue, and Kiorner were among the more popular dramatists, just as they were in other German-language theaters in the country at the time.

Schiller’s Kabale und Liebe appears to have been a favorite. Its small production cost and its melodramatic appeal were obviously major factors

contributing to its popularity. The larger and greater Schiller dramas such as Maria Stuart, Die Jungfrau von Orleans, Wallenstein, Don Carlos were seldom seen in Cleveland, probably because they were too demanding

for the ensemble. Of the plays performed by the Freie Manncrbund in

1851 and 1 8 5 2 , approximately one fourth were by Kotzebue, His comedies

Blind geladen and Per gerade Weg ist der Beste were among the works per­ formed during this period, as was his melodramatic Menschenhass und Reue,

99 100

one of the four plays discussed later in this section. Emulating both

Schiller's tragic inclinations and Kotzebue's farcical bent, was

Theodor Kbrner. He also had Kotzebue's facility for writing with ease

and speed, as evidenced by the fecundity of his short adult life. His

drama Toni, a dramatization of Kleist's novella "Die Verlobung in St.

Domingo," and his comedy Per Vetter aus Bremen were presented in

Cleveland in the 1 8 5 0 s.

1872-187^- Farces and Folk-Plays by Kneisel. Blrch-Pfeiffer, and Benedix

The records of these first two major professional seasons are

complete, and hence there are exact statistics for the period. Most

frequently performed during this time were plays by Kneisel (8 perfor­ mances), Birch-Pfeiffer (7 ), Benedix (6 ), Hugo Muller, Schiller (5 each), I Anzengruber, Gutzkow, Laube, Nestroy, ( 3 each), Rader and Raimund

(2 each).

There is no mention of Rudolf Kneisel (1832-1899) in either

Rummers's or Witkowski's works on 19th century German theater, but re­ views indicate that he wrote Volksstucke, Fossen, and Schwanke. The slapstick of his pieces was so well received that several Kneisel plays were often repeated the following week, an honor bestowed on few plays in any season. Tochter der Holle, in fact, was performed three times in the month preceding a production of Kabale und Liebe. This fre­ quency of production not only attests to the play's popularity but also shows that it demanded little rehearsal time of an ensemble engaged in 101

preparing for a Schiller production. The farcical play contains crude

figures reminiscent of the Hanswurst which caused such convulsive

laughter that the amateur German theater on the West Side also produced

it a few weeks later. Only the lightest entertainment was performed by

this group and hence their choice of a Kneisel piece was a telling one.

The author was considered a minor talent by Cleveland's Germans and

only the reiteration of Tochter der Holle placed him in the top five in

terms of popularity. Kneisel's Papageno, a Schwank,was produced in

Cleveland as late as 190^. It contained a plethora of comical situations

and was supplemented by humorous "Coupletverse," some of them written by

the actors themselves.

Charlotte Birch-Pfeiffer (1800-1868) understood how to create

touching and rousing plays from popular novels such as Der Glbckner von

Wotre Dame after Victor Hugo, Dorf und Stadt after Berthold Auerbach,

and Die Grille after George Sand. Her pieces were popular among per­

formers because she fashioned good roles, especially for women. The

Schauspiel Die Grille, for example, contains the much sought-after role

of a simple country girl who wins the respect and love of higher society.

The role was popular among actresses because the girl invariably charmed

the audiences through her innocence and honesty. The happy ending of

this sentimental play made it, in translation, a popular choice of

English-language stages in America as well.

Roderich Benedix's (l8ll-l873) farces are simple but technically

effective situation comedies, populated by people who are humble, virtu­

ous, humorous, and, above all, who possess healthy common sense. His

plays present an utopian world and the occasional serious problems 102 touched upon are trivialized. Virtue and honor are invariably victori­

ous in plays such as Per Storenfried and Die Urgrossmutter. The denoue­ ment of a Benedix play frequently consists of the hilarity of an engage­ ment scene including at least two couples, and the result for theater patrons was "traumloser, gesunder Schlaf,"^ and thus plays by Benedix were snapped up by lesser theaters both in Germany and here. Although they weremost popular during the last quarter of the 1 9th century, some

Benedix plays still serve as "Luckenbusser" in Germany today.

Gustav Moser (1825-1903) and Hugo Muller (1831-1882) were guided by the successess of Benedix and in fact the former had the help of Benedix in constructing Das Stiftungsfest, one of the most popular plays ever presented in the German theater in Cleveland. Der Biblio- thekar, another one of Moser’s "Lustspielpossen," as his works were designated, has been chosen as one of the four representative plays of the German-language theater in Cleveland to be discussed below. Muller is even less known today than Moser, but his light folk-plays, especial­ ly Von Stufe zu Stufe, were in demand in Cleveland in the 1870s.

Heinrich Laube (1800-188U), a "Young German," was director of the Burgtheater in Vienna from 18U8 to 1866. In Cleveland two Laube plays were performed several times: the historical drama Die Karls- schiller and the tragedy Graf Essex. Die Karlsschiiler depicts the flight of Schiller from Stuttgart, and flattered the public's sentimental notion of the poet. Both plays contain democratic ideals, as befits a work by a writer of "Young Germany," but their characters are poorly motivated. Karl Gutzkow (I8 II-I8 7 8 ), the other "Young Germany" writer, was as a dramatist superior to Laube. Some of his historical dramas, 103

including Uriel Acosta, then considered an equal to Schiller tragedies,

express a vitality which places their author among the leading authors

of his time in this genre. Unfortunately the other Gutzkow play pre­

sented in Cleveland was the weak sentimental Der Konigsleutnant (1849)

which opportunistically celebrated Goethe in the year of his centennial.

Ludwig Anzengruber (1839-1889) raised the peasant play from its

either comic or idealized level and helped prepare the way for Ibsen and

Hauptmann in Germany. In fact, Otto Brahm recognized the modernity of

the Austrian writer by producing one of his plays in the first year of

the Freie Biihne in 1889- Two plays by Anzengruber, Der Pfarrer von

Kirchfeld and Der Meineidbauer, were presented in Cleveland during the

1 8 7 2 -1 8 7 4 period. Both depict peasant life honestly, even tragically,

without the false idyllic scenes often found in other peasant plays.

The priest of Kirchfeld is persecuted because he has attempted to shed

the light of reason on the strict orthodoxy of the church. The play

dared to deal with serious current problems and was being praised by

liberals and condemned by the church in Germany at the time. In Der

Meineidbauer Anzengruber portrays a peasant whose hunger for land

eventually leads to a tragic greed. The village portrayed is a microcosm of society, populated by figures possessing a Shakespearian

realism. The Wachter und Anzeiger reviewer called the play "eines der 2 besten Volksstiicke," containing "packende dramatische Kraft." He also

emphasized the entertainment value of the Cleveland productions by mentioning that it was accompanied by authentic Austrian zither music.

Johann Nestroy (1 8 0 2 -1 8 6 2 ) was represented in the Cleveland

repertoire primarily by several productions of his farce Lumpaci 10k

Vagabundus (1 8 3 3 ). Clevelanders found the play irrestistibly amusing,

and one of the German newspaper critics named it the "beste aller

P o s s e n . " 3 Nestroy's comic talent was so great that some of the jokes

in his plays have become classics. However, his wit was used with a

serious purpose since he cynically pointed out the flaws in Viennese

society.

1885

Only those plays are considered here which were performed by the

professional ensemble before its leading figures left Cleveland. (The

enterprise in the months thereafter was a semiprofessional one at best.)

Several plays and writers of the previous period appeared again on the

repertoire, but the most popular ones of the 1872-7*+ period were absent.

Only one new playwright, L'Arronge (3 performances), was presented more than once. Two plays each by Moser, Nestroy, and Schiller were also on the repertoire.

Best remembered as a theater director and manager, Adolf

L ’Arronge (1 8 3 8 -1 9 0 8 ) was also the author of a number of extremely suc­ cessful farces in the tradition of Benedix and the French society

comedies. He adapted the tone of the French plays with their stock

figures to German middle class situations with Mein Leopold and Doktor

Klaus being two of his most famous farces produced in Cleveland. 105

1899-190U: Farces by Schonthan and Kadelburg, Melodramas by Sudermann, and Tragedies by Schiller

Most frequently performed during this period were plays by

Schonthan (l^ performances), Kadelhurg (ll), Sudermann (9)» Schiller (8),

Blumenthal, Treptow ( 5 each), L'Arronge, Hauptmann, Jacobson, Mannstedt, and Moser each), Birch-Pfeiffer, Ernst, Fulda, Goethe, and Walter und

Stein (3 each), and Ganghofer, Gutskow, Laufs, Lessing, Meyer-Forster,

Shakespeare, Voss, and Wildenbruch (2 each).

Franz von Schonthan (181+9-1913)» G. Kadelburg (1851-1925)» and

Oskar Blumenthal (1 8 5 2 -1 9 1 8 ), whooe plays dominated the stages in

Germany as well as the German-language stages in America around 1900, were actually merchants of the theater who frequently collaborated to produce popular merchandise. When mentioned in stage or literary histories at all, they are called "Macher." They wrote entertaining farcical society plays which like most farces depend on comic provincial situations for effect. Schonthan and Blumenthal often collaborated with either a professor of literature, Koppel-Ellfeld, or with the actor

Kadelburg--the latter probably serving as technical advisor to insure the intended hilarity could be implemented on the stage. The play titles arc somewhat indicative of their lightweight nature: Comtesse

Guckerl by Schonthan and Koppel-Ellfeld, Im weissen Hdss’l and Hans

Huckebein by Blumenthal and Kadelburg. Other popular plays by Schonthan performed in Cleveland were Der Raub der Sabinerinnen and Krieg und

Frieden. l o6

Hermann Sudermann (1857-1928) was the most popular of the serious dramatists of this era in Cleveland, his most successful play being Heimat. Sudermann's plays were frequently contrived, but at least he did not ignore or trivialize serious problems prevalent in society. In fact, the realism of his pieces offended quite a few theatergoers, although it probably also helped to attract others. A subsequent section deals with Sudermann in greater detail.

Leon Treptow (1853- ? ), Eduard Jacobson (1833-1897), Wilhelm

Mannstedt (1837-190U). Plays such as Das Schiitzenlis’ 1, Unsere Don

Juans, and Unser Doktor by Treptow are found in the repertoire from

1 8 9 9 to I9 0U. Examples of Jacobson’s plays in Cleveland are Hopplal

Vater sieht’s ,ja nicht.' and Frauen von heute. Mannstedt was represent­ ed by farces such as Die wilde Katze and Der Walzerkonig, These three writers also often collaborated with another writer to produce their wares. The standard works dealing with German theater fail to mention any of the three, but Brummer's Lexikon not only lists the writers but also their plays: pieces such as Treptow's Jagerliebchen and Die wilde

Madonna, Mannstedt's Im Strudel and Die Schone Ungarin, and Jacobson's

Lady Beefsteak and Die Galloschen des Glucks. The Wachter und Anzeiger reviews indicate that the plays by these three authors were in the tra­ dition of L ’Arronge, Moser, and Benedix, and that they usually contained songs. The reviewer praised at least one of the plays for its "gesunde

Moral" and suggested that the youth of the time should learn from the healthy "burgerliche Familienverhaltnisse" portrayed.

As Gerhart Hauptmann's (1 8 6 2 -1 9U6 ) plays were much less in demand than the plays of Sudermann, his contemporary, so were the plays 107 of Goethe less in demand than those of Schiller. It is likely that

Hauptmann's plays were presented less frequently because they made greater demands on both audience and ensemble. Four Hauptmann plays,

Fuhrmann Henschel, Einsame Menschen, Der Biberpelz, and Die Versunkene

Glocke, were produced during the period, but only the last one was re­ ceived enthusiastically. Goethe's dramas, which have seldom been pro­ duced anywhere with the frequency of Schiller's, were almost totally ignored in Cleveland.

Two of Ludwig Fulda's (1862-1939) plays, the fairy tale Der

Talismann and the comedy Die Jugendfreunde, were performed in Cleveland between 1899 and 1 9 0U. Although Fulda praised the new naturalistic plays, his own plays tended to follow old masters, especially Moliere.

His plays are cleverly constructed and superficially modern but certain­ ly on a higher level than the trivial comedies of 0, Walther and L. Stein who were equally1 popular.

Otto Ernst's (1 8 6 2 -1 9 2 6) two most popular comedies in Germany were also produced in Cleveland. Jugend von heute satirizes the fol­ lowers of naturalism and Nietzsche; Flachsmann als Erzieher ridicules a school teacher. The characters in the latter play are unrealistically black and white, despite the increasing realism found in plays by

Ernst's contemporaries. The plays were obviously meant to flatter the ideas of a large portion of the middle class.

It is not surprising that the Cleveland German-language theater avoided Hebbel and Grillparzer; plays by these two dramatists were not popular in Germany either. It is surprising, however, that Ibsen,

Lessing, Shakespeare, and Wilderibruch--so popular in Germany around 108

1900— were almost ignored in Cleveland. Such was not the case in several other American cities with German theater groups.^ One can only speculate that the management in Cleveland felt that plays by these writers were too demanding for the ensemble and the audience. Even if a director in Cleveland had desired to produce more great dramas, his precarious position in Cleveland prevented him from gaining the needed support to do so.

Four Representative Plays: Kotzebuef s Menschenhass und Reue, Gutzkow's Uriel Acosta Moser’s ber Bibllothekar, and Sudermann's Heimat

These four plays are discussed because of the popularity of their authors in Germany and in America and because they are representa­ tive of the total repertoire from the rise to the fall of the German theater enterprise in Cleveland. Despite the sketchy records, we know that Kotzebue plays were often presented by Cleveland's Germans in the

1850s and 1860s. Of the serious dramas performed in Cleveland, only

Schiller's were presented more frequently than Gutzkow’s. Moser was well represented during each theatrical period, and excluding the prolific Schonthan and Kadelburg, he was the most popular writer of farces ever performed in Cleveland. During the last theatrical period, the well-made plays of Sudermann vied with the farces for popularity.

Not only were the four playwrights popular in Germany and in

German-language theaters in America, but these writers (with the excep­ tion of Gutzkow) were important for the American theater also. It will be shown that the American stage was nurtured in the beginning of the 109

19th century with adaptations of Kotzebue plays, grew on adaptations of plays by Moser and writers like him, and attempted to achieve modernity with translations of Sudermann plays in the early years of the 20th century.

Menschenhass und Reue

It has already been noted that a scene from Kotzebue's Menschen­ hass und Reue (1788) was presented as a portion of Cleveland’s initial theatrical fare in 1820. The play was called The Stranger in English adaptations, the best known being by Sheridan and B. Thompson. One cannot find a theater history of the United States which does not men­ tion Kotzebue and The Stranger. It experienced its best reception in the first half of the nineteenth century, but even in the period between lB^h and 1875 it was produced twenty different times in Cleveland— only 7 a few times less than Uncle Tom’s Cabin. The Stranger continued to be a part of the American theater repertoire in some cities until the turn of the century.

Kotzebue's star faded more quickly in Germany, but during the period called the Age of Goethe his plays were produced on stages throughout the country. In the Mannheim Theater, for example, Kotzebue plays were performed 1,728 times becween 1788-1808. Plays by Schiller g were stagodtwenty-eight times at this theater during the same period.

Kotzebue was the victim of Goethe and Schiller barbs in the Xenien, but

Goethe recognized his theatrical talent even though he had little posi­ tive to say about any specific play of Kotzebue's. Other critics did not even render lukewarm praise such as Goethe's. Kotzebue became 1X0

the whipping boy of theater critics in Germany in the early nineteenth

century while being called the German Shakespeare in other parts of the

world during the same period. According to the widely accepted (in

literary circles) views of Lessing, Schiller, and other authors, the

theater was supposed to be a moral institution in Germany; many of the

literary critics called Kotzebue's plays immoral, appealing to base

tastes, and, in fact, having helped cause the theatrical decay in

Germany after Goethe and before the Meiningen Theater.

An examination of the plot of his most famous play, Menschenhass

und Reue. reveals the following: Baron Meinau has withdrawn from public

life and lives alone with a servant because his wife, despite the pre­

sence of two children, has disappeared with her lover. A friend of the

Baron meanwhile falls in love with a Madame Muller who lives nearby, and

Baron Meinau is asked to intercede on his friend's behalf. His arrival

at the residence*of Frau Muller reveals her to be his repentant wife

Eulalia, who faints from the shock of seeing her husband again. Various

friends attempt to mediate, but for Meinau the conventional code of

honor associated with marriage prevents reconciliation despite their

renewed love. A tearful parting scene is interrupted by the arrival of their children, at whose sight the Baron's resolve melts and total har­ mony occurs. The ending of the play is an apotheosis cf tearful joy.

The drama was a sensation throughout Europe: men cried, women

fainted, and Eulalia's outfit became nearly as popular among women as 9 had Werther's among men a generation earlier. The initial critical

acclaim soon faded and the reviewers began calling the play immoral.

This was not because of its theme of adultery, rather, Menschenhass und i n 10 Reue was called immoral because of its happy ending. Adultery in

literature had heretofore ended tragically or had been the subject of

total farce; for the critics, it was unthinkable to have a woman accept­

ed by her husband after she had committed adultery. The (invariably)

male reviewers claimed that wives were being given a bad example by a

play in which infidelity is almost rewarded. This latter claim was

never substantiated with statistics but marriages were affected by the

play since some estranged couples were supposedly reconciled after

viewing- ■ the play. n 1 1

The improbable characters of Menschenhass und Reue are either

total saints, fools, or villains. Fitting the first category are the

two main figures, Baron Meinau and Eulalia. Despite the title of the

play, the former does not hate mankind since he spends much of his time

and money helping people in distress. Eulalia is the embodiment of

virtue and wit. The two are pleasing from beginning to end; any change

or development occurs, if at all, long before the play begins. The positive qualities of Meinau and Eulalia are as obvious as are the

negative characteristics of the chambermaid Lotte. She is so ostenta­ tiously obnoxious from the first moment we meet her that one wonders how her enlightened employers could have tolerated her for so long.

Improbable coincidences are used to make the play exciting and suspenseful. The two mysterious figures of Meinau and Eulalia, one called the stranger, and the other Madame Muller, just happen to settle on the same estate after years of travel. Major Horst, a suitor of

Madame Muller, has heard so much about the stranger's virtues that he decides to visit him. The stranger turns out to be the long-lost 112

friend of Horst who asks his friend to intercede with Madame Miller on

his behalf, and thus we have the titillating possibility of Meinau

pleading a suit with a woman who is actually his wife. The stranger

just happens to be nearby when the major's brother-in-law, the owner of

the estate and thus his and Eulalia’s landlord, is in danger of drown­

ing. Meinau saves the Graf and eventually accepts an invitation to

dine at the latter's home where Madame MUller is also a boarder. In

this fashion Kotzebue manipulated his figures as if they were puppets,

and he attempted to do the same with the emotions of an audience.

The play's dialogue is jovial, whimsical, and superficial. The

following exchange in which the chambermaid receives her comeuppance

serves as an example:

Lotte. Also kurz und gut, zur Sache! VJer ist sein Herr? Franz. Ein Mann. .Lotte. Nun freilich ist er kein Weib; denn sonst ware er hoflicher, und liesse sich auch nicht von einem solchen Grobian bedienen, Aber wie heisst er? Franz. Man nannte ihn nach seinem Vater. Lotte. Und der war?-- Franz. Verheiratet. Lotte, (ironisch) Mit einem Frauenzimmer vermutlich. Franz. Getroffen! Lotte. Vielleicht hat er im Duell-- Franz. Einen Hasen geschossen. Lotte. Oder als falscher MUnzer— Franz. Pasteten gebacken. Lotte. Oder er .ist als Doscrtcur-- Franz. Scinem Madchen entlaufen. Lotte. Oder er Franz. Ein Jesuit.

Some of the dialogue consists of facile phrases of wisdom such as,

"Ein gefiihlvoller Narr ist mehr vert, als ein eiskalter Klugler," "Ein wahrhaftig Unglucklicher klagt nicht," and "Hoffnung ist des Lebens

Amme. 113

Occasionally the very absence of dialogue is calculated to heighten the theatrical effectiveness of a scene such els the following one:

Unbekannter (tritt mit einer ernsthaften Verbeugung in das Zimmer). Graf (geht mit offenen Armen auf ihn zu). Eulalia (erblickt ihn, stosst einen lauten Schrei aus, und fallt in Ohnmacht). Unbekannter (wirft einen Blick auf sie, mit Schrecken und Staunen in seinen Gebarden, rennt er schleunig zur ThUr hinaus). Graf (sieht ihm voll Verwunderung nach). Grafin und der Major (beschaftigen sich mit Eulalien).

Kotzebue's greatest talent lay in the construction of farces and thus the fools in Menschenhass und Reue are his most effective figures. The buffoons in the play are Bittermann and his son. In one scene Bittermann explains his failure to jump into the water to help the Graf by stating that he did not want to get wet. The younger

Bittermann often stands behind his father and echoes the latter's humorous sentiments in the form of an absurd refrain. Frequently the son intentionally misunderstands directions; it is a typical Kotzebue gimmick.

Graf. Da, Peter, bring die Pfeifen zuriick.-- Was zum Henker! Du rauchst ja gar selbst? Peter. Ja freilich rauch' ich selbst. Es wird mir sauer genug. Graf. Wer Teufel hat dir’s geheissen? Peter. Die Excellenz hat mir's geheissen. Graf. Ich? Peter. Ja; sagten Sie nicht: ich sollte Pfeifen holen fur uns? Graf. Fur mich und den Major. Peter. Nun, ich stEind ja auch dabei, Graf. Bursche, du bist ein Eulenspiegel— llU

The foregoing examples illustrate that Kotzebue's goals were quite simple: tears, laughter, and applause. He claimed that his works should only be judged by the applause they garnered and the audience reaction was often so enthusiastic that Kotzebue considered himself a worthy successor of Shakespeare.

The play has been written off in Germany since the beginning of the nineteenth century as appealing to the inferior tastes of the masses.

Later the critics claimed that "Kotzebue's Popularitat spiegelt die

Schwache des deutschen Burgertums, It is certainly true that the presentation of somewhat contrived problems and their solutions appealed to the German BUrger. However, the play was also very popular among the aristocracy and among the lower classes, which is shown by its popu­ larity at the court theaters and by its being a favorite in villages for decades. 17 The play had nearly universal appeal except for the disap- 18 proval of what Stock calls the "Bildungsburgertum." Even this group was often moved to tears at productions but found the play faulty in reviewing it. They considered themselves the guardians of good taste and consequently felt obligated to condemn Kotzebue's methods; his popular success merely increased their criticism. These attacks eventu­ ally led to the virtual disappearance of Kotzebue plays on stages in

Germany by the middle of the century.

This did not happen in Cleveland, though, or elsewhere in the

United States. Available information indicates that the fledgling

German-language theater in the 1850s and 1860s presented many Kotzebue plays, several decades after they had lost favor in Germany. The liberal Forty-eighters who were influential in these beginnings could 115

not have thought highly of the conservative Kotzebue* but they did recog­

nize his plays as being effective theater, especially for amateur

groups. After 1870, however, the professional German-language theater

depended on contemporary Germany for its plays. It never presented a

play by Kotzebue, although many plays of the repertoire were of no

higher quality. In fact, a Kotzebue play had become a recognized symbol

of inferior taste among intellectual German immigrants by the end of the

third quarter of the nineteenth century.

The American theatergoer did not have these prejudices, since

Kotzebue pieces, especially The Stranger, were still in demand long

after 1870. His popularity in the United States lends additional weight

to the claim that his plays did not appeal to just one class of people,

since the audience in America was of course quite different from a

German audience. It should be admitted,though, that the gentle criti­

cism of the upper classes and foreigners in the plays probably appealed to both the more sophisticated Hew Yorkers and the settlers who enjoyed

Kotzebue on the frontier. Above all, the plays were popular because they moved audiences. The tear ducts and funny bones were invariably

exercised during a showing of The Stranger.

Uriel Acosta

The Forty-eighters made up a substantial part of the German

intellectual, community in Cleveland in the second half of the nineteenth century. These immigrants were influenced by, and felt an affinity for, the literary movement called Young Germany. It has already been mention­ ed that plays by Laube and Gutzkow, the foremost dramatists of this 116 literary movement, were frequently performed in the first real blossom­ ing of the German theater in Cleveland. K. Gutzkow's Uriel Acosta

(l8L6) was presented toward the end of this first period, and the play and its author will be discussed in the following pages.

The writers of Young Germany, many of them journalists, were aggressively engaged in attempting to reform the political and social conditions of their time. They vociferously rejected the Romanticists as escapists and reactionaries. By nature they were individualists, and only a decree forbidding their writings for a time allows one to lump them together. Even though they were written after the ban was lifted in 18^2, plays such as Uriel Acosta by Gutzkow and Laube's Die

Karlsschuler were still banned in certain provinces of German-speaking

Europe. The anti-establishment and anti-authority views were too strong for some of the reactionary states of Germany and Austria. Gutzkow

(1 8 II-I8 7 8 ) spent several months in jail for his ideas, as did a number of the other writers of Young Germany. He felt a special kinship with the writers of the Enlightenment and the Storm and Stress periods, and his Uriel Acosta has often been compared to the most famous play of

German Enlightenment, Lessing's Hathan der Weise,

Still one of the best plays of Young Germany, Uriel Acosta was, until the twentieth century, considered to be one of the classics of the

German stage. Plays by Gutzkow were usually performed over a hundred times yearly in Germany between 1890 and 1910. Uriel Acosta was the most popular of all and was performed seventy-eight times in the 1 9 0 3 -

1904 season in Germany."1'^ The work uses a historical situation to make a point about what Gutzkow felt to be contemporary reactionary oppression. 117

The main figure is Uriel Acosta, whom Gutzkow had already treated in a novella thirteen years earlier. The historical Acosta was born a Jew but raised a Catholic in Portugal as part of a group of people who be­ came Christians in order (unsuccessfully) to escape the Inquisition.

Upon fleeing to Amsterdam, Uriel Acosta wanted to return to his Jewish heritage but his published ideas conflicted strongly with the orthodox

Jewish hierarchy there. Bitter and full of hate he died by his own hand in I6H7 .

Gutzkowrs Uriel is a more sympathetic figure than the fanatical

Uriel of history, and he is the mouthpiece for Gutzkow's attack on sterile, hypocritical beliefs. A brief sketch of the plot follows here.

Ben Jochai, upon returning to Amsterdam, finds that the young philoso­ pher Uriel Acosta has won the heart of his betrothed Judith through his teachings, which are being investigated by Amsterdam’s rabbis. The benign physician’DeSilva is supposed to judge whether Uriel's published works are heretical, and he determines that their author cannot be a

Jew. Acosta could escape the curses and persecution of the rabbis by declaring himself a Christian but he chooses to challenge the rabbis instead. He becomes a proud outcast from the Jewish community but eventually decides to undergo the cruel recantation ceremony for the love of his despairing blind mother and for Judith whom he wants to marry. His love, in other words, wins out over his convictions. While

Uriel is in prison preparing his act of public contrition, his mother dies, and Judith agrees to marry the evil Ben Jochai in order to save her father's business enterprise. When he hears of all this, Uriel rushes to Judith who is already dying of a self-administered poison 118

taken after the marriage ceremony uniting her to Ben Jochai. Uriel

Acosta also ends his own life.

Toward the end of the 19th century Uriel was, along with Hamlet

and Tasso, a favorite tragic role of great German actors. Gutzkow

imbued his character with qualities of both and, in fact, Hamlet and

Tasso seem more decisive and less passionate than Uriel. The charge

of indecisiveness was leveled at Uriel soon after the drama was written,

and Gutzkow attempted to defend his hero in later editions of his works by claiming that Uriel changes his mind for the sake of his family and that he proves his decisiveness since he dies for his beliefs.

Examining the figure of Uriel, we find that he established a pattern of changing his mind early in the play. He had intended to leave Holland when Judith's fiance** returned but remained when he found out tbat his teachings are about to be judged by the rabbis. He ratio­ nalized this decision by claiming that he desired to avoid a "Kampf des 20 Herzens" but could not flee from a "Kampf des Geistes." Several days later we find him saying farewell to Judith, having apparently changed his mind once more. However, once his book is called heretical, he again stubbornly decides to remain in Amsterdam and is resolved to fight and suffer for the truth. He rejects the option of recanting for his or Judith's sake. Upon observing the suffering of his family, es­ pecially of his blind mother, and the increased pain of Judith because of his refusal to recant, his resolve weakens and he agrees to recant.

Gutzkow defended his character for this decision but this last reversal needed no defense; it is more understandable than the previous reversals since Uriel acts out of love and as a result of the incredible pressure 119 his family and Judith exert upon him. We respect Uriel's latest change of heart and we have empathy for his suffering much more so than we respect and empathize with his earlier wavering since it seemed to have been caused by stubbornness and pride. We also cannot judge Uriel harsh­ ly for his final change of mind at the end of the play upon finding out that he has lost both his mother and Judith. We pity him because he has suffered extraordinarily. Contrary to Gutzkow's claim,however, his ulti­ mate suicide seems less motivated by his commitment to truth than by his despair for having lost his mother, his love, and his pride.

Also deserving criticism are the several improbable situations and characters occurring in the drama. The rabbis, for example, are unworthy adversaries of Uriel. They are merely types and we know little about them except that they are diabolically evil. They insist on in­ human torture for Uriel although they are willing to set him free immedi­ ately if he were to declare himself a Christian. Ben Jochai, the fiance*', calls Judith a traitress for supporting the heretic Uriel but he con­ tinues to want her for his wife. His desire cannot be motivated by money since he has already ruined the financial empire of her father.

While Uriel is undergoing harsh torture, Ben Jochai wants to be the first to inform Uriel that Judith will become his bride after all. Ben Jochai takes defeat better than victory; his final loss of Judith elicits only a slight response. One wonders what Judith ever saw in him.

Further shortcomings in the play are found in the occasionally improbable and uneven dialogue. The stiffness of some of the lines in­ dicates that iambic pentameter did not come easily to Gutzkow. Besides being uneven, some of the lines also become sentimental in their excessive 120 pathos. The following words by Uriel, uttered when he is urged to

recant by his family, serve as an illustration:

Ein Pfeil steckt mir Im Herzen--schreien mocht' ich wie ein Thier-- 0 seht mich nicht so bittend an I Die Thranen, Die ihr vergiesst in eurem herbsten Leid, Sind Freude gegen meine--trocknen Augen. Ihr schweigt? Ihr blickt mich seufzend an? Erwartet Von mir die eine That, die schmerzlichste? Dem Herzen soli ich opfern meinen Geist, Der Liebe meine heil'ge Ueberzeugung? Du Stolz, was baumst du dich so wild empor? Ha, borstig Ungethum, flettsch' nicht die Zahn — Sei Wurm] Mensch, Thier, duck' unter-unter-unter! gebt Rettung vor dem stummen Blick der Liebe.' (Geht riickwarts schreitend.) Wer schiitzt mich vor den Augen? Schliesst Die Augen] Blinde Mutter, schliess die Augen— (Er reisst sich mit gewaltigem Entschlusse los,) Die Augen-! Ich thu's— ich thu's— ich thu's-- ^

In announcing the Cleveland production in I8 7 U, the Wachter am

Erie mentioned that Gutzkow's play had been chosen for presentation to pillory the hypocrisy and fanaticism of some of the churches that sup- 22 ported the temperance movement. The reviewer stressed the fight of the free spirit against outdated laws and mentioned that the play was a mirror of the present times in which reason was still struggling against superstition. The presentation of the play became a celebration of the victory over the temperance platform, since the latter was de­ feated several days before the production on April 12. The Cleveland

Anzeiger gloated over the victory and even broke tradition by trans­ lating into English articles praising the setback of the temperance people so that Americans might read them also. The same issue of the

Anzeiger contained an announcement for Uriel Acosta, which was given the subtitle of Der Kampf der Geister instead of the correct Der Kampf 121

des Oeistes.^3 Both German newspapers were highly pleased with the pro­

duction which included "both of the Szwirschinas. A fall and enthusiastic 2k house requested many curtain calls. (Uriel Acosta was not performed

during the next professional season of 1885, hut the Wachter am Erie did

contain notice of a dramatic reading in which one individual was to 25 present all eleven figures of the play! Only plays which had achieved

critical and popular acclaim were presented in this fashion),

Gutzkow’s play was performed twice during the l899-190H German-

language theater period. The promotion by the Wachter und Anzeiger for

the production on January lU, 1900 began days in advance. The play was

called a classic and one which would cause the audience to be "erschiit-

tert." 28 The review of the performance praised the plays' relevancy

despite its age. The critic noted that the theme of the play is intel­

lectual freedom against sterile orthodoxy. An extremely long and 27 thorough plot summary made up the bulk of the review. The last per­

formance of the play in Cleveland occurred on April 12, I90U, It was

an extravagant event, since the play was chosen to open Cleveland's

only (and ill-fated) German-language theater building. The German drama

critic defended the figure of Uriel Acosta against the recent critical

charges of moral weakness, by claiming that Gutzkow made the figure of

Uriel indecisive in order to make him more human. The newspaper con­ tained the following note on the day of the performance:

Uber das heute zur Auffuhrung kommende Stiick, Gutzkows Uriel Acosta, ist genug geschrieben worden. Auch wer es nicht kennt, weiss, dass es ein Repertoirestlick aller deutschen Biihnen ist, in der schonsten Sprache geschrieben und voll hoher sittlichen Ideen, ° 122

Part of this tribute can be chalked up to the critic’s habit of

hyperbole but the play really was highly respected at the time. The

drama's theme also made it a popular choice for Yiddish theaters both

here and abroad. German Jews were, around 1900, still an integral part

of the Cleveland German community and probably supported performances

of the play. It seems to have been presented as part of a quota of

classics, and of course its iambic pentameter form gave it an additional

classic aura. Even though the work is now nearly ignored because the

plot is contrived and overly melodramatic, the drama is not without

appeal to modern readers. Gutzkow exhibited enough talent and courage

to inspire liberal thinkers in Germany for decades and his tragic hero

garnered the sympathy of his age because he refused to capitulate to

injustice.

Der Bibliothekar■

As has been noted, Gustav von Moser's Das Stiftungsfest was the most frequently presented play during the first highpoint of the German- language theater in Cleveland between 1872-187*+. It was one of Moser's earlier efforts (1873) and launched his nearly unparalleled popularity on the stage in Germany for over thirty years. Another one of his popular pieces was Der Bibliothekar (1 8 7 8 ) which was performed in

Cleveland in German in 1 8 8 5 and at least five times in English under the title of Private Secretary at the turn of the century. (This popu­ lar farce and its author will be examined more closely below.)

Gustav von Moser (1825-1903) served as an officer in the Prussian army from I8 U3 to 1 8 5 6 and then supervised a large estate in Silesia. 123

Both these careers are frequently reflected in his over 70 plays. After devoting himself fully to a playwright's career, he sometimes collabo­ rated with Benedix or Schonthan. His plays are situation comedies or farces and do not pretend to be anything more. They are meant to excite hilarity by means of the most contrived comic situations. Yet the works could not have achieved such great popularity without containing ele­ ments of genuine humor as well.

The action of this four-act farce takes place in London and on an estate near the city. Lothair MacDonald, a young man of the leisure class, disappoints his uncle by not leading a frivolous life in London,

His uncle threatens to withdraw his beneficence in a letter encouraging

Lothair finally to live in a way befitting his station. The extent of

Lothair's wild life consists of running up a few bills which a humorous­ ly ridiculous tailor attempts unsuccessfully to collect from the unim­ aginative young man. Lothair is visited by his friend Harry who has come to the city to engage the services of a tutor-secretary for his own uncle. The more imaginative Harry devises a plan to add some ex­ citement to Lothair's life, which requires the latter to join Harry at his uncle's estate in the guise of the librarian-tutor. Once he arrives there, Lothair plays the role with such aplomb that he wins the affection of the daughter of Harry's uncle and the admiration of his own uncle who also happens to be there but who, never having met his nephew personally, assumes that Lothair is the real tutor. Additional arrivals at the estate are the would-be-gentleman tailor and later Robert, the real librarian. Everyone, except Lothair, Harry, and the audience, is duped by Lothair’s masquerade as Robert, the tailor’s masquerade as a gentleman, 12U

and Robert’s unwished role as Lothair. Robert is also pressed into

service as a spirit who teaches one of the superstitious members of the

household a lesson, and frightens the females in the play. In the role

of the librarian, Lothair surprises the ycrung ladies he tutors by his

riding and fencing ability but also by his ignorance of music and liter­

ature. All the confusion is unraveled in the last scene, and the play

ends in general joy and embracing. Lothair becomes engaged to one of

the young ladies and receives his uncle’s blessing. The latter realizes

that his nephew is not a milksop after all.

The names of the characters provide some humor as the related

names of Lothair and Harry indicate. Harry's uncle is named Marsland

and the episodes on his estate are out of this world. (it is question­

able whether the nineteenth century audience understood the name play;

Moser might have been having his own private fun.) Another technique

of humor, used on nearly every page, is the witty aside which may annoy

the modern reader but which apparently caused a great deal of mirth in

contemporary audiences. The upper class is presented as being generous,

fun-loving, and witty; their employees are ridiculous but harmless. No

one seems to have any serious problems— ever. The goal of the upper

class is to live happily and well, while the goal of the lower class is

to live comfortably despite being made the fools at every turn by their

superiors. The tailor might deserve this treatment because of his pom­

posity but the real librarian-tutor may arouse a reader's pity. He

reminds one of a type of victim portrayed with more sympathy in Lenz's

Der Hofineister, and later in plays of naturalism and expressionism. We

are not supposed to feel any sympathy for the librarian in Moser’s play 125 because he cuts such a ridiculous figure— he always appears wearing galoshes and carrying an umbrella tucked under his arm reminiscent of a Spitzweg painting of the Biedermeier era. Besides, it is all supposed to be good-natured fun. The play attempts to avoid offending anyone; its only purpose is the belly laugh, and its popularity attests to its success. One cannot help but admire the facility of Moser who brought all these incredible people and situations together in a fairly smooth way.

Audiences did not seem to tire of the main character, a dashing young man, who is normally found in uniform in Moser's plays. This stock figure and the multiple engagement scene at the play's end also are prevalent in the plays of Benedix. Before the victory of naturalism the Brothers Hart derogatorily referred to the repertoire of the German theater as "Moserei" but Moser’s plays were still being performed over

500 times a year"in Germany in the first decade of the 20th century.

When it announced a planned performance of Gustav von Moser's

Der Bibliothekar for the 18th of October, 1 8 8 5 , the German ensemble was engaged in a near war with the two German-language newspapers. This conflict had begun after the strong criticism of a performance of Pius

Alexander Wolff's Preziosa (1821). The critic of the Cleveland Anzeiger had accused the actors of ineptitude, and several actors charged the critic with plagiarism and with misusing his power. ' The conflict lessened with time but ill feelings continued to smoulder and certainly contributed to making the 1 8 8 5 attempt at German-language pro­ ductions a short episode. 126

The German community -was ready for some levity, and this was provided by Moser's Der Bibliothekar. A reviewer called the play a

"prachtige Situationsmalerei" and noted that it must be a sad fellow indeed who did not laugh heartily upon viewing the excellent produc- tion. The critic also mentioned that the play was less "unwahrschein- lich" than most of Moser's but added that it had only superficial enjoy­ ment as its aim.

The same critic made a reference to the English-language pro­ duction of this play under the title of Private Secretary. As William

Dunlap had adapted and Americanized Kotzebue plays in an attempt to keep his theater solvent nearly a century earlier, so Augustin Daly, one of the foremost theater directors of the day, was meeting audience demand with adaptations of Schonthan, L'Arronge, and Moser. Daly took his company on tour to the continent in 188U; he met with some success in London but was unappreciated in Berlin. This is not surprising since a German audience probably preferred to see the same plays pre­ sented by Laly in the original German. Although Der Bibliothekar was a part of Daly's repertoire, the play was actually adapted by William

Gillette (1855-1937), who is best known for the dramatic version of

Sherlock Holmes. The play Private Secretary is often mentioned in

American theater histories but, strangely enough, Moser is not credited with authorship.

Heimat

The most popular dramatist in Germany in the ten years before and after 1900 was Hermann Sudermann. In Cleveland several of his plays, 127 including Heimat (1 8 9 3 ), were presented during the last period of the

German-language theater 1899-190^* This play was chosen for investi­ gation because it is a typical Sudermann play and because for its time its international success was greater than that of any other German play except Kotzebue's Menschenhass und Reue.

Sudermann began as a journalist and writer of fiction. It is in this latter genre, with such novels as Frau Sorge, that he has achieved a degree of lasting fame. He was initially categorized as belonging to the movement of naturalism and was ranked next to Hauptmann. It was even stated that Sudermann was the heir of Schiller in his sense of effective theater. He was able to weather the earliest criticism leveled at him: that he portrayed scenes too explicit or too vulgar for the stage. But when some of the foremost critics of Berlin began to point out the contrived nature of his art, his plays quickly lost favor among intellectuals although they continued to be popular for years. Sudermann remained in the spotlight in Berlin because of his eccentric manner and appearance which lent themselves to caricature.

His plays are now nearly forgotten or ignored.

Heimat deals with the conflict between the world of the indi­ vidualistic artist and the stifling, hypocritical world of middle-class society. We find out that Magda, the heroine, was forced to leave the house of her autocratic father, Colonel Schwartze, because she had refused to marry the man of his choosing. She decided to go on the stage in Berlin and the news of this step caused her father to experi­ ence a heart attack forcing his early retirement from the military service. Colonel Schwartze blamed his daughter for his misfortune. 128

Magda has in the meantime been seduced by a barrister of her native city,

who then abandoned her while she was pregnant. Over the years she has become a renowned singer, and now, at the time the play begins, a music

festival brings her back to her birthplace. She returns to her home and

initially agrees to obey her demanding father. Magda is even willing to marry the man whose, child she bore and give up her career for the sake

of the family name. When it is suggested that she must give up the

illegitimate child as well, however, she rebels. Her father raises a

pistol against her but dies of a stroke before he can pull the trigger.

The plays's ending depicts a despairing Magda next to the prostrate body of her father.

The ’’Heimat'' described by Sudermann consists primarily of the tyrannical father, a number of philistines including his wife, the malevolent Keller, and the saintly Pastor Heffterdingk. Into this domain enters the dominant Magda who no longer has a home and for whom the laws of the "Heimat" no longer apply. Sudermann constructed Magda, the main figure, out of ideas gleaned from Nietzsche (including especi­ ally the idea that genius stands above narrow-minded morality), and

Ibsen's The Doll's House. The theme of emancipation of women found in

Ibsen's play was used with great success by Sudermann, and Magda was, for a time, a symbol of this emancipation. As an artist in the play she alternated between scorn, rage, and condescension while as a daughter and mother she expressed love, sorrow, and despair. It was a role for a vituoso performer! However, her behavior is often too mer­ curial and paradoxical to be believable. It stretches credibility, for

example, that she agreed to marry Keller whom she rightly despised. 129

Time after time Sudermann sacrificed plausibility for the sake of

exciting characters and situations.

The least plausible figure in the play is Magda’s father

Schwartze who has thrown his daughter out for refusing to marry the man

of his choice. When she returned after 12 years, he expected her to

plead for forgiveness, marry the father of her illegitimate child to

save his own name, and give up her child and careerI Only if Schwartze

were a psychotic would these demands seem credible. Sudermann, in other

words, has weighed the scales too heavily in favor of Magda.

The friends of Schwartze and his wife are the spokesmen of

narrow middle-class morality. The retired general describes art as

"eine Erfindung, die sich die Driickeberger zurecht gemacht haben, um im 32 Staate zu etlicher Bedeutung zu gelangen." The general's wife outdoes

her husband by insultingly asking the actress Magda: "Es sind wohl 33 nicht viel Tochter aus guten Familien beim Theater?" These statements

were intended to flatter the audience into thinking that they, by com­

parison, were enlightened.

The saintly pastor is also a contrived figure. He is actually

Magda's former suitor who now shows his magnanimity by doing his utmost to create harmony between Magda and her father. His incredible patience

and understanding help achieve an initial reconciliation, but his con­ tinued insistence on harmony eventually leads to the final tragedy.

Knowing Schwartze as well as he did, he should have known that his attempt could not succeed. The pastor does not express any regrets for the failure of his efforts and maintains his self-righteous stance to the very end. 130

Despite these shortcomings the play is exciting upon first

reading and must have been even more exciting upon first viewing.

Scene after scene is used to heighten the suspense of Magda's imminent

visit. Her entrance must have invariably stopped a performance of the play. The confrontation between Keller and Magda, in which it is re­ vealed that Keller seduced Magda and abandoned her with child, are charged with emotion as are also the arguments between Magda and her father. It is no wonder that audiences were swept up by Sudermann*s technical virtuosity.

This virtuosity is also evident in scenes in which Sudermann attempts to increase the pathos of a situation by naturalistically imitating the painful pauses and stuttering of a character. Another device used for effect is the condition Magda sets before agreeing to remain in her father's home. The condition is that no one must ask her about her past, but the reader and audience know that, as in Lohengrin, the question will be posed even sooner because of this demand.

For the Cleveland production of Heimat, Charlotte Durand from

New York, formerly of the Burgtheater in Vienna and the Deutsches

Theater in Berlin, was engaged to play Magda. The Wachter und Anzeiger contained many articles and pictures about the slated performance. One columnist pointed out that the actress is "eine gluckliche Frau, welche sich als Mutter ihres vierjahrigen Sohnchens ebenso stolz fiihlt als auf ihre anerkannte, unbestrittene Kunstlerschaft auf der Buhne."^ It seems as if there was an intention to defuse in advance any criticism of her role as a woman of questionable virtue in the drama. The re­ viewer strongly urged ai 1 to attend by appealing to the sense of duty 131

that should cause the German community to see this great actress in 35 Sudermann*s great play. The next day the review of the presentation

mentioned the full house, noting also that quite a few Americans were

p r e s e n t . ^ The critic called the play a protest against false morality.

Although he called the character of Colonel Schwartze unbelievable, he

added that the excellent delineation of Magda makes one forget the

shortcomings of some of the other figures in the play. There were

curtain calls after each act and the applause after Magda’s final re­

jection of the marriage offer was deafening. Most in the audience

seemed to have become totally involved with the proceedings, the review­

er added.

This was the only German-language production of Heimat in

Cleveland but the play returned to Cleveland as Magda in English at

least five more times. Each time a name star came on tour from New York

to play the rewarding role of Magda. Nearly every famous actress of the period included the play in her repertoire. Arguments raged as to whose

interpretation of Magda was the best one: Duse's, Bernhardt's,

Modjeska’s, or Campbell's. The last actress starred in the play in

Cleveland in both 1902 and 1903. The Wachter und Anzeiger printed a

favorable review of Campbell1s performance in both Joy of Living (Es lobe das Lcben, 1902) and Magda by Sudermann in 1903.^ Sudermann*s work was such a hit that Eugenie Blair starred in Magda later that same year in Cleveland. The play returned to the city in 1926 and 1928 with the famous Bertha Kalich as Magda.

McDermott of the Plain Dealer, who reviewed the 1926 production, observed that time had passed the play by, that the German title was 132 much more expressive of the theme, and that it was difficult to under- oQ stand why people still get excited by the play. Sudermann, he con­ tinued, had little poetic talent to go along with his technical skills.

His characters were poorly motivated and often psychologically incompre­ hensible, In order to understand the play, the reviewer added, one must transport oneself back thirty years to a Junker family of the Kaiser

Wilhelm era. The audience cheered lustily at the performance of Bertha

Kalich, although her histrionics were considered obnoxious by McDermott.

He noted that the qualities of Magda’s character were no longer as startling to present-day audiences as they had been to audiences 2 0 years earlier. Kalich attempted to add these qualities artificially, by shouting and blowing smoke in people's faces. These attempts were called offensive tricks by McDermott, who found nothing to praise in the production except the strength of the star's voice.

Although McDermott was not as critical toward Sudermann as was the New York critic W. Winter, who claimed that the play was "radically on pernicious,’ his negative comments still tempt one to come to the author’s defense- Sudermann was a master at providing humor and sus­ pense; he was also skilled at writing dialog that imitated well the speech habits of certain levels of society. Such skills were wasted in the English translation, which made Heimat even more unconvincing Uo and bereft of style. The original does contain wit, and it is still entertaining to read. Sudermann recognized that audiences wanted melo­ dramas clothed in realism. For Sudermann it was ultimately unfortunate that he was favorably compared to Ibsen and Hauptmann at the beginning 133 of his career, since subsequent criticism took great pains to point out that Sudermann wrote sentimental show, not substance.

A century separates Sudermann from Kotzebue, yet their plays and the effects of their plays are strikingly similar. Their pieces are usually amusing or exciting during a first reading or viewing, but they do not bear up well under scrutiny when the contrived nature of their situations and characters becomes evident. However, for a time, both authors were able to move masses of people of all types like no other contemporary playwrights.

t Chapter VI Footnotes

^Martersteig, p. UUU.

^Wachter und Anzeiger, 22 December 1902.

3 Ibid,

^Ernst Alker, Die Deutsche Literatur 1m 19. Jahrhundert (Stuttgart: Alfred Kroner Verlag, 1 9 6 1), p. 1 6 3 . One example: "Die Kachstenlieb' fangt bei slch selbst an,"

^Wachter und Anzeiger, 8 April 1902.

^John Andressohn, "Geschichte des Milwaukeer Biihnenwesens," German American Annals 10 (1912), pp. 167-168. The stage in Milwaukee, for example, frequently performed plays by these authors.

^Dix, p. U5 5. Q L. F. Thompson, Kotzebue: A Survey of his Progress in France and England (Paris: Libraire Ancienne Honore Champion,1928), p .25.

^Frithjof Stock, Kotzebue im literarischen Leben der Goethezeit (Dusseldorf: Berthelsmann Universitats-Verlag, 1971)) P- 129-

1 0 Ibid., p. llU.

13 -Ibid., p. 1 1 7 - 12 August von Kotzebue, Menschenhass und Reue, in Deutsche National- Literatur, Das Drama der Klassischen Periode, II, 2, ed. Adolf Hauffen (Stuttgart: Union Deutsche Verlagsgesellschaft, n.d.), p. 6 l.

1 3 Tbid., pp. 26-27, 32.

l2|Ibid., p. 9 2 .

1 5Ibid., p. 75-

^Karl-Heinz Klingenberg, Iffland und Kotzebue als Dramatiker (Weimar: Arion Verlag, 1 9 6 2), p. 159*

'^Stock, p. 1 )|8 .

l8 Ibid.

■^Witkovski , pp. 206-210, A/\ Karl Gutzkow, Uriel Acosta, in Dramatische VJerke. Vol. 7 (Leipzig: Brockhaus, 1862), p . 2b.

2lIbid., p. 70. 135 22Wachter am Erie, 9 April l87*K

^Cleveland Anzeiger, 10 April 187^. 2k Wachter am Erie, 1^ April 187^-.

2 5Ibid., 22 October 1 8 8 5 .

28Wachter und Anzeiger, 8 January 1900.

2 ^Ibid., 15 January 1900,

2 8 Ibid., 12 April 1 9 0 U.

2^Wachter am Erie, 10 October I8 8 5 . The insults traded by the various parties were brutally candid. One of the lighter notes was the critic's mention that the wooden leg used as a prop by one of the actors in the play was switched from leg to leg between scenes. The actor claimed that the appliance was poorly constructed and the result­ ing pain made the switching necessary. The newspaper issue above also contains a letter from an actor addressed to the critic of the Cleveland Anzeiger. The letter makes the following comment about the critic: "Weil er zu Hause nichts zu beissen hat, drum beisst er andere im Zeitungsblatt."

3 0 Ibid., 19 October 1 8 8 5 .

^Glenn Hughes, A History of the American Theatre, 1700-1950 (New York: Samuel French, 1951), p. 282. 32 Hermann Sudermann, Heimat, with an Introduction by F. G. Schmidt (New York: D.C. Heath & Co., 1938), p. 20.

3 3 Ibid., p. 7 1 .

Wachter und Anzeiger, 15 March 1900.

3 5 Ibid.

3 8 Ibid., 19 March 1900.

3 ^Ibid., 15 January 1903.

38Plain Dealer, 17 March 1926.

3^William Winter, The Wallet of Time, 2 vols. (New York: Benjamin Blom, 1913), 1:372. kn Bauland, p. 10. CHAPTER VII

SPECULATIONS ABOUT THE RISE AND

FALL OF THE GERMAN-IANGUAGE THEATER

INCLUDING COMMENTS ABOUT AUDIENCE TASTES IN CLEVELAND

The effects of population changes, temperance, Sunday laws, and lack of Verein support on theater have already been discussed.

These conditions, however, do not totally explain the problems the

German theater encountered in Cleveland; other factors were also at work.

German Flays for a German-American Audience

As German theater patrons became more integrated in their new culture, their support of the German-language theaters decreased pro­ portionately. Lack of expertise in English and the inability to relate to American entertainment, conditions which furthered German theater, were no longer applicable to children of German immigrants; in fact, these German-Americans experienced problems with the German language and with the themes of German popular plays. Under such circumstances the attempt to import hits from Germany was doomed to failure.

136 137

Popular provincial plays reflect the humor and pathos of the

country of their origin and, with the exception of literary pieces with

universal themes, popular plays are likely to have less appeal in

another country. German plays produced in English were adapted to

American situations, but the German-language theaters, on the other

hand, prided themselves for their authentic productions. These produc­

tions did not always find favor with an Americanized audience, since

only the people who had grown up in Germany could appreciate some of

the plays. The Berlin and Viennese farces depended greatly on dialect

and superficially presented political and sociological conditions which

were unfamiliar to a portion of German-American audience, and yet, re­

cognition of a situation is the prime source of humor of many of these plays. A visitor in Germany will usually fail to see the point in many

of the presentations of the cabarets there, even though he may have an

excellent grasp of the German language.

The repertoire was also affected by the disappearance of the

intellectual Forty-eighters since there were few highly educated Germans left in Cleveland to demand a more literary theater Teachers, doctors,

and lawyers of German descent seemed to have become too assimilated to support a German theater. There was little thought given to producing anything but proven hits from Germany, except for the yearly quota of

Schiller. The management, with few exceptions, did not take a chance on producing a Hebbel, Grillparzer, Wedekind, or Schnitzler play since pieces by these authors did not belong to the most frequently performed plays in Germany. The newspaper critics expressed reservations about the suitability of such works for the stage here, and when an Ibsen 138 drama was slated to be staged around 1 9 0 0 , it was withdrawn without known explanation. The works of Hauptmann and Sudermann were considered new and daring, but they were performed in Cleveland not because of these qualities, rather because of their great popularity in Germany.

The problem of transplanted themes could have been solved if the

German community had been able to develop its own theater repertoire.

It has been noted that very few pieces presented in the German-language theaters were of German-American origin. Few if any writers of note left Germany for America, since in this country they would have been prophets without a following--writers who hold up mirrors of life with­ out being able to make a living. What playwright is able to cut himself off voluntarily from the culture and audience support which enables him to be what he is? German actors and directors came to the United States in the 1 9 th century because there was a market for them for a time, but 1 the same was not'true for writers.

The German community occasionally should have presented a

German play in translation. It would have garnered good will from the

American community and attracted German-Americans who were already ex­ periencing difficulty with the German language. The imported players, it must be added, frequently did not speak English well enough to act in that language. The German theater seemed to have been so exclusive­ ly German, that even some German-Americans must have felt alienated from it. 139

Limited Audience

Every German-language theater in the country had a limited popu­ lation to draw from. Cleveland's German population, reaching a peak with approximately 70,000 foreign-born Germans, was smaller than that of other cities with strong German ensembles. The number of people of

German descent was higher than the above figure, but it is still diffi­ cult for a theater to garner consistent support with a potential audi­ ence of such size. Consequently the theater had to be very intent on pleasing its small public, and the patrons had to be induced to come back again and again. This could only be done by presenting a different play each week. The Theaterverein never consisted of more than 1,500 members despite the very intensive membership campaigns. The members probably made up the bulk of the audience at each production. Once these hard-core supporters became disillusioned or disappointed with their theater, there were few people to attend the performances. Un­ fortunately disillusionment seemed to occur more frequently in Cleveland than in other cities with German theaters.

German-language plays were usually performed on Sunday evenings, since the rented buildings were not available on Friday or Saturday evenings when American productions were scheduled. Some potential patrons were probably reluctant to attend on Sunday evening due to the work-week ahead, and because of the threat of censure due to the Ohio law banning entertainment on Sunday. The ensembles in both Cincinnati and Cleveland entitled the Sunday evening performances as "Sacred

Concerts," in order to subvert the Sunday law. This description, iko

printed on each program, was a simple but effective ploy since very few

performances were actually interfered with although it could probably

not have worked without some measure of good will in city hall.

Scandals and Financial Difficulties

Most of the above factors were common to all the German-language

theaters in the United States. The problems of the theater in Cleveland,

however, were greater than those in other cities, and additional local

factors must still be considered.

When the first high point of the Cleveland German-language theater occurred in 1872 under the directorship of Filip Szwirschina, the Forty-eighters had become established, and were able to give the theater greater financial support. The Germans were by far the most powerful ethnic groups in Cleveland, but their vitality was not directed toward supporting a theater as much as it was directed toward business and social clubs. The newspapers paid attention to the theatrical efforts but the critic of the Wachter am Erie was especially gleeful in pointing out the shortcomings of the actors. People who were looking for an excuse for their lack of support were provided one. These factors contributed to the scandal which spelled death to the German theater in

Cleveland for over a decade. The debacle of 1885 only strengthened the disillusionment of the German community.

When the German newspaper encouraged its community to forget past disappointments and support the creation of a Theaterverein at the end of the century, the support from the theater enthusiasts finally ll+l led to the high water mark of German-language productions in Cleveland— under the direction of Alexander Sandory. The concern over the regular financial deficits grew hut so did the ambitions of the Theaterverein to provide bigger and better theater. One can only surmise that it was

felt that these qualities were necessary to draw the crowds needed to make it a self-supporting venture. These ambitions led to difficulties as evidenced by the great financial outlay necessary to rent the best theater building in town.

The Theaterverein became tired of the constant struggle to stay in the black. When Fritz Nolte, the Wachter und Anzeiger theater critic, promised to end the financial worries and build a new theater for German- language use, the Verein jumped at his offer. If the Theaterverein had been unrealistic in its rental of the biggest and most expensive theater, it now became foolhardy in releasing the man and company, Sandory and his group, who had brought Cleveland its first truly creditable German- language theater. Nolte was a good journalist who for years had been one of the best supporters of the local efforts. Of his sincerity there can be no doubt. But unfortunately his pen was mightier than his busi­ ness acumen and practical theater expertise. Despite his good intentions,

Nolte failed badly and the Theaterverein seemed only too happy to attack its "savior" and the German newspaper to criticize its ex-critic. They,

Theaterverein and newspaper, were tired of blaming the public because this ultimately meant blaming themselves. Nolte became the scapegoat because, it was claimed, he broke his contract. Yet Nolte's attempts to cover up the bankrupt state of the theater, viewed from a distance, seem more acts of desperation than of dishonesty. At least some of the blame belonged to the Theaterverein itself which permitted Nolte his self-indulgence. The patrons and supporters of the cause of German- language theater in Cleveland said, "never again," and so it was.

The errors in judgment, cabals, and egotism causing the dis­ illusionment are especially tragic because Cleveland's German community around 1 9 0 0 had never been larger or more influential and could have maintained an estimable German-language theater for at least another O decade. Chapter VII Footnotes

A great number of German writers did come to the United States after 1933 but even Thomas Mann, the only one who was highly successful in this country, returned to Europe after the war. Most of the writers felt dissatisfied with their temporary home. o Eventually the anti-German sentiment would have ended the theater. During W.W. I, for example, Cleveland's German-language newspaper was burned several times by "patriotic" scouts and buildings used for German- American social activities were stoned. CHAFTER VIII

GERMAN PLAYS IN TRANSLATION IN CLEVELAND

. SINCE THE FIRST WORLD WAR

The Beginnings of Good Theater for Cleveland, 1915

We have already seen that the American theater came of* age at the beginning of* the L’Oth century by establishing theaters that pro­ duced plays of literary quality and through the emergence of American dramatists such as Eugene O'Neill. It is ironic that a Raymond O ’Neil helped Cleveland make progress toward better theater around the same time. This young Cleveland drama critic traveled to Europe in 191*+ to observe the staging techniques of the theater of Reinhardt and of the

Moscow Art Theater, a trip which helped prepare him to accept the leadership role of a little theater group in Cleveland.^ This enter­ prise began in 1 9 1 5 at the urging of severed, intelligent and artistic young men and women who became the enthusiastic members of the group.

In the foreword of Julia Flory's work, The Cleveland Play House,

Frederic McConnell, the director of the Playhouse (now written as one word) from 1 9 2 1 to 1 9 6 2, speaks of the group’s intentions and begin­ nings :

Ikh It (the Playhouse) was an effort within the soul of the community to elevate the drama which then in this country had fallen on evil ways. It was an insurgence against the sterility of the so- called Legitimate theater, which under the com­ pulsive attraction of commercial magnets [sic] had been drained of any appeal save the melo­ drama, bed-room farce and corruption.

The group of intellectual idealists soon numbered over fifty.

Unlike the German Theaterverein, there was never any desire to make the venture self-supporting and, in fact, for the first few years there was no admission charged to the performances. The financial support came from the membership and from patrons. Since the group was not inter­ ested in making money, it did not have to cater to popular tastes.

The group decided on three types of presentations: puppet plays, silhouette productions, and contemporary drama. The first sil­ houette production was an adaptation of Grimm's Forty at a Blow.

Raymond O ’Neil had learned his lessons in Europe well. This production and the two others of the first season took months to prepare; and all the arts were marshalled to increase the quality of the presentations which first took place in a deserted house, and later in a barn. Julia

Flory, who was a member of the group, remembers the production of Forty at a Blow in her book:

In the afternoon of a sunny summer day, it was presented in the first floor hallway of the Ammon house, behind a white screen stretched across a double doorway, A bright light behind the articulated pasteboard figures threw them into sharp relief and the ^ children, for whom it was intended, loved it.

By presenting pieces for the children of the community the Playhouse attempted to improve taste, and by having special evenings featuring 1^6 entertainment of ethnic groups it gained community support. The first ii contemporary literary drama presented was Strindberg's Mother Love.

In 1917 a Lutheran church on Seventy-third Street and Cedar

Avenue was purchased by the group and changed into a theater. This was 5 officially named Cleveland's Little Theater. After the remodeling of the church two German plays by Alexander von Bernus, Pan and Before

Midnight were presented in silhouette fashion. The first serious

German drama performed at the Playhouse was Hugo von Hofmannsthal's

Death and the Fool in 1919-

Two Large Productions from Hew York

While the Playhouse group was bringing Cleveland good and varied theater, a touring company from New York presented Hauptmann's The

Weavers at the Colonial Theater. The Hauptmann play was the first work 7 of German naturalism which was highly praised in the United States.

It appeared in New York in 1915 and came to Cleveland on tour in 1 9 1 6.

New York critics praised it almost unanimously, and found it to be radically new, even though the play had had its Berlin premiere twenty- Q three years before. The Cleveland News announced the coming of the play as the theatrical event of the year and, to increase the interest and probably also to negate anti-German sentiment in a war year, the claim was made that the play was suppressed by the Kaiser in Germany for over fifteen years. This was not true, for the Kaiser had merely cancelled his box at the Deutsches Theater after the play was performed 1^7

in Berlin. Actually only some of the cities of Germany and Austria-

Hungary suppresed the play.

A sensationalizing ad appeared in the same issue of the news­

paper, promoting The Weavers in the following manner:

It will sway the emotions--excite fear-- put the tremor in the timid--shock the short-sighted--a play in sooth that sweeps the audience off its equilibrium like a snow plow.-^

It was probably felt that ads of this nature were necessary to draw

Clevelanders. The Plain Dealer discussed the forthcoming production

and claimed that the actors had learned the "Communistic" lesson of the play and had backed it with their own money, showing that it was not only a successful artistic but also a successful sociological experi­ ment in cooperation.^

After the opening the review in the Plain Dealer called it one of the most interesting productions ever in Cleveland and noted that the audience remained "breathless and horrified" despite the difficul­ ties of the plot. It was called further a "perfect" production; no 11 single actor stood out. This latter comment, made casually perhaps, indicates one of the main aspects of the play: there is no single hero but rather the weavers as a whole are the heroic figures. The comment concerning the uniformity of acting attests to the excellence of the production more than the plethora of adjectives written in praise of it.

The Wachter und Anzeiger also reviewed the play positively.

Its critic attempted to point out the relevancy of the theme in the

U.S.A., since workers were still being exploited and occasionally re­ volts occurred. Such, In fact, he noted, had happened in nearby lU8

Youngstown not long before. All aspects of the production were 12 praised. The company remained for a week, and its presentation ranks with the best German ones coming on tour from New York.

The plot of The Weavers is the 18UI+ rebellion of some of the home weavers in Hauptmann's native province, Silesia. This rebellion had already inspired Heine's ballad, "Die schlesischen Weber."

Hauptmann portrays the dull despair of the weavers until they finally revolt and break into the house of their oppressor. Hauptmann claimed that his purpose was not to make socialistic propaganda but rather to give dramatic voice to his concern for suffering. Nevertheless the play was welcomed by the Social Democrats in Germany although the weavers in the play hardly resembled the proletariat of Hauptmann's day. Hauptmann's workers did not reach any ideological revolutionary conclusions; they merely reacted to hunger and oppression. The play ends pessimistically as the weavers’ revolt is crushed, and because there are indications that automation will soon make the home weavers obsolete.

The Weavers dared to deal seriously with contemporary problems and was part of a naturalistic movement that reached America only after it was already disappearing in Europe. Before W.W.I the realism of - naturalistic plays was too strong for American patrons. These audiences did not accept the plays of Hauptmann or Ibsen when they were first presented in America at the turn of the century. The superficial realism of melodramas such as Sudermarm’s had been popular all along, though, and movie makers capitalized on the hunger for this type of 1U9

entertainment. English-language and German-language newspapers were

already devoting more space to movies than to plays by the end of the

second decade.

An event which overshadowed all other theatrical events ever

to take place in Cleveland (as well as rising popularity of movies),

was the staging of Max Reinhardt's spectacle, The Miracle, in 192U.

Reinhardt had adopted the spectacle from a pantomime by Karl Vollmoller,

Das Mirakel. The pantomime portrays the story of a novice nun who

doubts her religious vocation but regains her faith after experiencing

the world's pleasures and pain. A miracle in a church, in the form of

a statue coming to life, helps to convince her. The production was previously staged in New York, and for it Reinhardt had brought most

of his stage equipment, players, and costumes from Germany. Despite

its great costs, the presentation was an enormous financial success—

and was the talk of New York for weeks after it went on tour to other 13 cities--with Cleveland being the first stop.

The excellent drama critic of the Plain Dealer, William

McDermott--one of the leading supporters of the theater in Cleveland for decades— called the upcoming plans to stage The Miracle, the lU theatrical event of Cleveland "and the world." Equipment and mon­ strous cast were all brought from New York. Morris Gest and Norman

Bel Geddes were in charge of the production, which was advertised as being bigger and better than any previous production in Berlin, Vienna,

London, and New York. The front page, theatrical section, and society page of the papers all contained articles about the event, and there 150 was even a debate as to what to wear, and some suggesting that only 15 church clothes would be appropriate.

For the performance the Cleveland Public Auditorium, a con­ struction of gigantic proportions, was transformed into a Gothic cathedral. In one of the eulogies following the first showing, the front page of the Plain Dealer called the production, "the most stupen­ dous theatrical entertainment in the history of the city."^ It seems to have been a pageant of behemoth proportions, and the play obviously had the power to move the audience. Some,however, were also moved to call it Jesuitical propaganda and others accused it of being anti-

Catholic. The debates were not resolved, but it was total theater and the city was totally affected. The lighting, costuming, staging, and

Engelbert Humperdinck's music must have made it quite appealing to the senses, yet it is regrettable that one of Reinhardt's more superficial efforts should Have been the one to make his name in Cleveland. It was a spectacular event but not one that can be compared to the first-rate dramas performed by his ensemble in Berlin. The publication Play claimed that the amount written about the staging in Cleveland would 17 fill a small library. It remained for three weeks and was seen by more people than the number of people who normally attended a whole season's productions.

Despite the interlude at Public Auditorium, the Playhouse was the place for significant drama, and nearly all important German plays to be shown in Cleveland were performed there. (Not until after the

Second World War was another serious play of German origin shown at a different theater.) Schnitzler's one-actor, Literature, was performed 151 there in 1923, "but no attention was paid by the press. The Playhouse was still primarily an amateur undertaking, and the newspapers were only just beginning to take note of its activity. Nevertheless, the attendance increased tenfold (from lj- ,0 0 0 to U0 ,0 0 0 ) between 1 9 1 6 and

-1 Q 1 9 2 6, and with such growing popularity, the entertainment section of the newspapers began to take notice. It is no coincidence that the influential and perceptive critic McDermott came upon the scene in

Cleveland in 1921, shortly before the increased interest in the Play- 19 house made itself felt. McDermott quickly recognized the quality of the Playhouse undertaking, and he also realized that the people must be educated to give recognition to good theater.

The quality of the 1925 Playhouse production of Gerhart

Hauptmann's The Sunken Bell was appreciated by McDermott although the

Wachter und Anzeiger reviewed the play in lukewarm fashion, especially in comparison to the eulogies the play had been given when performed in German nearly twenty years before. The German reviewer praised the translation and the production but called the play a tiresome imitation Po of Goethe and Ibsen. McDermott did not comment on the production until it was past. When he finally did so, it was in a wry fashion as he admitted that his column was supposed to deal with more popular en­ tertainment. He called it "a strong, provocative, and very beautiful 21 play by one of the world's genuinely great dramatists." He recognized that some people found it dull and old-fashioned, but he claimed that these people did not understand it. An American audience resents being puzzled, McDermott went on. He was familiar enough with the play to have been less satisfied with Charles Meltzer's translation than was the 152

Wachter und Anzeiger critic, although he was very pleased with the superlative ensemble work of the Playhouse cast.

The Sunken Bell had been Hauptmann's first total departure from naturalism. The play had taken Berlin by storm in 1 8 9 6 , and Hauptmann became rich because of it. It was intensely popular because it cap­ tured the mood of an age in its usage of many mythological motifs, the cult of art and life furthered by Nietzsche, and because it partially mirrored Hauptmann's personal life. The artist Heinrich fluctuates between the mountain world of art and the valley of his community. He is also torn between two women, the creature of inspiration, Rautende- lein, and Magda, his wife in the valley, just as the married Hauptmann then was attracted to another woman. Heinrich fails to become a

Nietzschean superman because he succumbs to the valley's pull. Like

Icarus he unsuccessfully strove to reach the sun.

It is generally agreed that the work, despite some effective lyrical sections, is contrived, "popular," and cluttered. The ingredi­ ents of its popularity, such as the presence of gnomes, sprites, and elves, are poorly integrated, making the issues dealt with confusing.

It was all quite new for Clevelanders in 1925, despite the earlier

German-language production, and even the foremost drama critic in town was swept up by its novelty. The German newspaper critic, however, must have been aware of the play's loss of favor in Europe and his criticism reflects this loss.

The Playhouse presented three modern German plays in the re­ maining years of the third decade. They were Goat Song (1920) by

Franz Werfel, The Green Cockatoo (1 8 9 8 ) by Arthur Schnitzler, and The Concert (1910) by Hermann Bahr. The Plain Dealer contained scarcely more than a brief mention of titles and authors for each. This neglect is especially surprising in the case of Werfel's play which had been performed in New York several months earlier, and was*much-talked about PP there. ^ Werfel’s play, entitled Bocksgesang in German, was the first play by a German expressionist writer to be performed in Cleveland.

The plot of Goat Song deals with revolt of peasants against their wealthy landowners. In the revolt the instincts of the masses are symbolized by a monster— half man and half ram— which is worshipped by the peasants after its emergence from a forest. The revolt is eventu­ ally crushed and its leaders perish along with the creature. The spirit of the revolt is passed on in the form of a child, fathered by the crea­ ture and a peasant girl who had given herself to the monster on the altar of a church. It is strong material and the work caused a furor in New

York, where discussion groups were actually formed in intellectual 23 circles to discuss the meaning of the symbol-laden play. There is no evidence of such furor during or after the Cleveland production, al­ though the program notes indicate that the actors and staff were aware of the daring and ambitious nature of undertaking a performance of

Bocksgesang. The Playhouse in Cleveland obviously dared to produce the new and controversial and was not overly concerned with lack of public acclaim or, as in this case, critical neglect. Expressionistic Plays in Cleveland, 1930s

Expressionism faded from the stage in Germany after 1925* though some of its staging techniques still persist today. But the movement did not really make itself felt in Cleveland until the early

1930s. The expressionists sought a new mode of exhibition in rejecting the established patterns of naturalism and neo-romanticism. A more assertive and emotional attitude toward life and art is evident in their works. They moved away from detailed descriptions of suffering in at­ tempting to portray injustice with more universal and psychological terms. The expressionists intended to penetrate beneath the surface of objects and conditions in order to present their fundamental quality.

Expressionistic painters, for example, wanted to free themselves from nature in order to paint the essence of things. Writers often circum­ vented the rules of speech in their dramas, and their most character­ istic utterances were hysterical slogans. This latter tendency led to the excesses which eventually meant the movement's downfall. Despite its revolutionary form, this literary wave was last gasp rationalism in its belief that man could solve problems on his own.

Although some of the best known plays of the most prolific expressionistic writer Georg Kaiser— such as From Morn to Midnight and the

Gas trilogy--were produced in New York, they never made it to Cleveland.

In fact, the first Georg Kaiser play in Cleveland, performed in 1930 and at the Playhouse, of course, was The Fire in the Opera House (in its

American premiere), a pure meolodrama. The action of the play takes place in Paris during the eighteenth century and centers on the burning 155 of an opera house. The play's plot sounds melodramatic and even baroque.

As is the case with most expressionistic plays, the extreme action was calculated to shock. A Paris gentleman has made a naive orphan his wife who, distrusting his love, sought further reassurances of her worth by attending opera balls without the knowledge of her husband. She escaped the flames of the fire but not the wrath of her husband who finds out her secret. He has loved her but now she becomes as if dead for him. In fact, he transfers his devotion to the corpse of a woman who had perished in the fire. His wife throws herself into the flames of the still burning opera house; he realizes his harshness and her love too late to save her. Confusion and distrust are finally dispelled but not before death.

McDermott reviewed the play shortly after it opened; he praised the staging and added, somewhat gratuitously, that plays of expression- 2k ism are good theater despite the melodramatic aspects of their plots.

McDermott referred to The Fire in the Opera House as a strange and pro­ vocative drama which left the small audience puzzled and surprised, and he admitted that the patrons might have been irritated by the

"unreality" of the play. He further described the play as containing scenes of "horror and passion" and he commended the Playhouse for doing 25 a "worthy job with a play worth doing. ’

By 1930 the Playhouse had established its reputation, and

McDermott, in recognizing it as the only theater in Cleveland to pro­ vide consistently good theater, gave it much attention from this point on. The company was becoming increasingly professional but without be­ coming too commercialised, and it steadfastly refused to cater to 156

popularity for the sake of good business. Since the theater was sup­

ported by season subscriptions, gifts and the free time of Cleveland's

drama enthusiasts, not every play had to be a smash hit.

At the end of the year 1930, another play of German expression­

ism came to the boards at the Playhouse. This one was Ernst Toller’s

Hinkemann (Broken-Man). Toller was to become even more famous in

America than Kaiser. The play Hinkemann is more realistic than the

typical plays of expressionism, and its "Heimkehrer" motif is common to

many of the dramas of the new wave of realism which followed on the

heels of expressionism. In Hinkemann, Toller depicts the plight of a

returning war veteran in a man who has lost a leg and his virility

through war injuries. The names of the characters, as indicated by the

name of the main figure which also serves as the German title of the

work, do not designate individuals, but rather physical or moral types.

The crippled Hinkemann joins a circus side show in a morally crippled

time. Hinkemann, who was renowned for his strength, makes a living by

killing small animals, including rats, with his teeth. His wife is

seduced by an ambitious weakling who publicly ridicules Hinkemann by boasting of his deed. The wife asks for forgiveness and,when she re­

ceives none from the bitter Hinkemann, commits suicide. Filled with

grotesque situations and horrific visions the play was designed to re­

flect the general state of degeneracy in Germany after the war.

McDermott’s review of the play singled out the sensational aspects of the work. Having seen the play performed in Germany, 26 McDermott actually felt that the Playhouse production was superior,

even though he found fault with what he termed the play's lack of 157

reality. McDermott did not emphasize the war references in the play

but rather chose to refer to the cruel element in the society to which

Hinkemann succumbs. This was a wise decision since the play had al­

ready been accused of being outdated in New York because it centered

on a war long past. The war had apparently become a distant memory to

most Americans, who did not, contrary to the Europeans, have the con­

stant reminders of crippled veterans. The war theme, however, would

become popular again soon enough.

The last play of the short and belated flowering of expression­

ism in Cleveland was also one by Toller, The Machine Wreckers. The

play's premiere had taken place in Berlin in 1921. In Cleveland it was

shown in 1933 the opening play of the eighteenth season of the Play­ house. It was not produced in New York until 1937, where it achieved little popularity despite its timely themes of depression and unemploy­ ment. The play was one of a string of failures for Toller, who attend- 27 ed the opening of the New York production.

The Machine Wreckers deals with the revolt of weavers in England in the early nineteenth century. In the play the weavers destroy the new machines that had caused many of them to lose their jobs. Along with the machines they also destroy the spokesman of humanism who sug­ gested a just social order in which machines would aid, not hurt, the weavers and other exploited groups. Jimmy Cobbet, the idealist, is killed by the masses he hoped to help although his message of brother­ hood is repeated by one of the weavers at the end of the play. This lends a glimmer of hope to an otherwise starkly pessimistic ending.

As the plays of the Sturm and Drang period had often sought to point 158

out social wrongs, so did Toller's The Machine Wreckers seek to attack

suppression and exploitation of the masses.

The Plain Dealer critic devoted much space to a review of the PR Cleveland production at the Playhouse. McDermott expressed pleasure

that the Playhouse continued its tradition of bringing serious works to

the stage in Cleveland. The opening-night audience of the eighteenth

season, he admitted, seemed to hope for a less depressing offering.

McDermott suggested that the audience did not care for the play's truth,

namely that there is brutality, treachery, and exploitation in the world.

Although he defended the drama's message, the critic did have reserva­

tions about the play's suitability for the stage. He was still not com­

fortable with expressionism, and the transcendence of reality in the

play was termed "chaotic" and "confusing." The stylized speeches of the

hero, "a communistic idealist," left McDermott cold; only his death at

the hands of the workers he had attempted to help contained enough pathos

to please the reviewer. If William McDermott found fault with a play’s

lack of reality and excessive polemics, then it is not hard to imagine

what the ordinary theatergoer thought about the piece.

Dearth of German Plays, 19^0s

Theater patrons were spared any further such challenges since

1933 marked the last expressionistic play to appear on the Cleveland

stage. In fact, except for Girls in Uniform, a play based on Christa

Winsloe's Gestern und Heute, and Stefan Zweig's version of the comedy

Volpone, there is no indication that any other German play was performed 159 by the Playhouse until the late 1950s, when Bertolt Brecht came into vogue. Girls in Uniform is an attack on the Prussian system; the stage version, presented in Cleveland in 1935 > did not achieve the popularity of the excellent movie made in Germany two years before Hitler came to power. Zweig’s Volpone was performed in 1938 in Cleveland. Like the original Elizabethan version, it was a humorous attack on greed, which

Zweig felt, was prevalent in Germany in the 1920s also.

The lack of popular acclaim for the expressionistic plays in

Cleveland influenced the decision to perform fewer modern German plays, but the political situation of the time was a more decisive factor in the dearth of German drama in the city between 1935 and 1950. It is natural that anti-German feeling would reduce the number of imports: and even if this feeling had not existed, there were very few contem­ porary German plays to import. Most of the major German dramatists had fled the country soon after Hitler's takeover and were scattered throughout the world, especially in the United States and Switzerland.

Many attempted to affiliate themselves with Broadway and Hollywood with little success. Others joined the Zurich Schauspielhaus in Switzerland where quality German drama continued to be performed during the years of the Third Reich. In Germany itself, according to available evidence, the audiences were usually being fed a steady diet of heroic dramas or

Kitsch.

For the most part, the emigre* artists in the United States found themselves unable to continue their productivity because they were of course cut off from the culture and the audiences which had inspired them. In his work dealing with German drama in New York, l6o

P. Bauland states that hardly any important play of German origin was 29 presented on the stage in New York during the war years. ^ This can be said for Cleveland as well, except that the time span is greater.

The only German play by a noted playwright performed in Cleveland from 1939 to 1955 Franz Werfel's Jakobowsky and the Colonel. It played in an adaptation by S. N. Behrman, one year after it had had a successful run on Broadway in 19^. The Broadway production was the world premiere of the play by Werfel who lived in the United States at the time. (The author was dissatisfied with the adaptation. He re­ sponded with the premiere of his version which took place in Zurich in the fall of the same year.) The theme of the unconquerable strength of the Jewish spirit is one of the focal points of this comedy, as it had been for a more serious, earlier play by Werfel, Per Weg der Verheissung

(The Hoad of Destiny, 193&). In the later play Jacobowsky, the Jew, is able to take an anti-semitic Polish officer and his mistress through

French and German lines to the coast and safety. He manages this feat because of his intelligence, ingenuity, and sense of humor, which wins him the respect of the Polish colonel and the audience. Behrman's adaptation was sugarcoated in the Hollywood tradition; the horrors of the Nazi regime were glossed over and Jacobowsky was portrayed as being 30 clever and enduring rather than being intellectually superior. The prevalent Broadway attitude was that comedy is comedy and that it was bad form to mix it with anything serious.

In Cleveland Jacobowsky and the Colonel was performed in 19^5 at the Hanna Theater, where road shows from New York still play today.

For this play the critic for the Plain Dealer was Ward Marsh, who served primarily as film critic during William McDermott's tenure with the paper. Marsh called the play the season's "gayest comedy," an 31 "excellent play excellently done." He barely mentioned the satirical and deadly earnest aspects of the comedy, an oversight we can attribute, at least in part, to the watered-down adaptation he witnessed. One feels, though, that the very literate McDermott would have attempted to compare the adaptation with the original, since he usually seemed to have read and studied a play he reviewed. In any case the weak adapta­ tion was popular enough to have been made into a highly successfull

Hollywood film in 1956.

Werfel's play was only the third well-known German play to come to Cleveland from New York on tour in nearly thirty years. The first two were The Weavers and The Miracle, way back in 1916 and 192U. This means that very few German plays were considered road material because of their lack of broad appeal. The theatrical dominance of New York over the cities of the Midwest was nearly total. Without the Little

Theater movement and college drama departments, these cities, includ­ ing Cleveland, of course, would simply have been deprived areas as far as the theater was concerned.

Renewed Interest in German Drama, 195Os and 1 9 6 0s

Good German drama had been in hibernation in Cleveland for nearly two decades, when a breath of spring air came in late March,

1955. And it came not from the Playhouse but from the Karamu House, where Bertolt Brecht’s The Threepenny Opera was performed. The idea 162

for Karamu began around the same time as the Playhouse,but it was estab­ lished mainly as a neighborhood recreational center; a theater group

evolved only gradually out of this center. The amateur group chose plays for their social content; and as it became increasingly profes­

sional, it performed to large audiences in church halls and also, on 32 one occasion, in the Playhouse. The players were members of the black and white race and it is mainly the interracial aspect of the venture that has helped Karamu become famous throughout the world. The Karamu

House, in addition to its theatrical activity, conducts workshops and classes in the various art forms for the children of the community.

Cleveland is fortunate in having at least two establishments striving to provide the community with good theater.

The Threepenny Opera had had its first performance in Berlin in

1928. It was a triumphant success and Brecht made so much money that it nearly made Brecht a capitalist in spite of himself. The people in the audience enjoyed the songs and they interrupted the play frequently to have them repeated. They were drugged with enthusiasm— exactly what

Brecht wanted to avoid. The audience is supposed to remain detached and ponder the play's message. One of the grim messages of the play is found in one of its songs: the world is poor, man is evil. The play was an attack on the very people who enjoyed it for its comedy and music, and the popularity of it was based on misunderstanding. Brecht wanted to move away from the strictly culinary aspects of the opera, but this was recognized by only a few for years.

Marc Blitzstein’s adaptation of the Brecht work in question opened in New York in the fall of 1955, several months after Karamu had 163 33 performed this same adaptation. The New York production lasted for

2,611 performances and stands as the longest run of any German play 3I+ ever to he produced in New York. Blitzstein romanticized the text

somewhat and that probably increased its popularity in the 1950s in

America. Yet the critical reception matched the popular reception.

Brecht's plays were from that moment on in demand in New York.

As has been noted, the Brecht vogue actually reached Cleveland

sooner, since the play was performed at Karamu in the spring of 1955-

William McDermott, approaching the end of his career as drama critic

for the Plain Dealer, stated that Karamu deserved the public's thanks 35 for giving Cleveland this extraordinary and unusual play. He called

the music witty and noted that life was being burlesqued in the play.

This was the last German play reviewed by McDermott, and it is unfortun­

ate that this literate friend of the theater in Cleveland had had so few

good German plays to write about during his years as critic.

Arthur Spaeth of the Cleveland News attempted to match the whimsy he saw in the play in his review. He called The Threepenny Opera

"amiable highjinks" and commented on the "no noose is good news" end­

ing. ^ The tattered curtain with rags for titles and the sandwich man's boards forecasting the scenes were taken to be articles of mere amuse­ ment. Spaeth totally missed the point of alienation in epic theater, but the Karamu production's emphasis on comic, superficial aspects might be partially to blame for this lack of perception.

Seven years later the play was brought back to the Karamu House.

This time the Cleveland Press music critic, Frank Hruby, named it a

"breezy almost jovial" piece. He recognized the social satire but it 16U 37 did not interfere with the fun he witnessed. Ethel Moros of the Plain

Dealer mentioned as the play's message the idea that hunger and expedl- ency, rather than morality, control high and low society. The year

1968 witnessed another (third) production hy Karamu of The Threepenny

Opera but little attention was paid it by the papers.

The most recent Cleveland showing of the play took place in

1970 for the opening of the fifty-fifth season of the Playhouse, and was seen by this writer. Peter Bellamy, now the leading critic for the

Plain Dealer, was impressed with the production and noted that most audi- 39 ences miss the social commentary in the play. He claimed that it was intended to satirize the German society of the Weimar Republic— a some­ what myopic interpretation. Tony Mastroianni of the Cleveland Press also praised the production and claimed that the play was not "prettied r I+O up" and that its satire continued to be "savage."

Despite this latter assertion, the play was well received be­ cause its message in this production was unusually bawdy rather than

Brechtian. The production also seemed to emphasize the farcical musical quality of the play at the expense of the grim message. Brecht was less a Marxist than he was a man of the theater; the temptation to enjoy his theater with little thought for its serious purpose proved too great for the audience and the actors alike in this Playhouse presentation of The Threepenny Opera.

Three years after the first Brecht play in Cleveland the Play­ house staged the professional American premiere of Brecht's Mother

Courage and her Children. It appeared in Cleveland in 1958— seventeen years after its initial performance in Zurich in 19^1. The Thirty Years’ War is the background of the drama. The business aspects of the

war are stressed by Brecht, and his indefatigable Mother Courage follows

the armies across Europe and is prepared to do anything in order to con­

tinue her business. At the beginning of the play she sets out with her

three children and a wagon filled with wares to follow the fighting.

The end of the play shows her, bereft of her children, pulling the

wagon— now emptier— alone and toward the same destination. Her will to

stay alive, to continue with her business, has preserved her, but it

has also helped to kill her children. She both profits from war and

suffers because of war. Duality, here profit and suffering, is often

found in Brecht’s plays, and is also brought out through the main prop

of the drama, the wagon. Courage is the owner, but also a slave to her

vehicle.

Mother Courage is one of Brecht's most realistic plays, allow-

ing for greater identification of the audience with the characters, and hence the medium is more compelling than the message Brecht intended the play to carry. He claimed that he did not want to create a heroine but rather to point out that capitalism and war, going hand in hand as always, corrupt every aspect of society. Yet in Mother Courage he created, perhaps in spite of himself, an ambivalent figure with heroic qualities. One cannot help but admire this woman despite her greed and immorality because she endures in a totally hostile world, but it is

Brecht's intention that we also condemn Anna Fierling, because she was not totally helpless and therefore did not have to capitulate to in­ justice. She chose to live according to her "Song of the Great 166

Capitulation" because it takes too great a rage, causes a lot of trouble,

and hurts business to do otherwise.

Eric Bentley's translation of Mutter Courage und ihre Kinder was

used by the Cleveland Playhouse in 1958. The Plain Dealer reviewer

called the play "a dramatic indictment-of-war shocker" staged with Ul "heart-burning intensity." The reviewer also called the play a

"thinly disguised attack on Hitlerism" and claimed that the main theme

was the punishment which eventually overtakes the greedy. Mother Cour­

age was correctly portrayed as a haggling profiteer who, according to

the critic, was played so well that she nevertheless gained the sympathy

of the audience. The reviewer had a narrow view of Brecht's intent al­

though he did not totally miss the mark. This latter distinction was U2 left to a review of the same production in the Cleveland Hews. The

News critic claimed that Brecht took two long acts to say what General

Sherman said in only three words. He called the play "provocative" but

"pretentious"...in general "an unhappy excursion into the experimental theater." The reviewer did not seem to appreciate or understand the production's attempts at epic theater since he also criticized the un- dramatic quality of the play.

The initial Hew York production of Mother Courage and her

Children took place on Broadway in 1963, five years after the presenta­ tion of the piece in Cleveland. In the words of Peter Bauland:

The Broadway production of this masterpiece was an almost total disaster. After nine­ teen previews, fifty-two regular performances, it closed. It is hard to believe that so great a play could have been so brutally butchered by allegedly professional hands,... Clearly, the production wanted to satisfy the Broadway audience, an audience too largely dominated by the vulgar affluent who respond to all the wrong things.... 3

The translation used was again Bentley's; the blame for failure cannot reside in this version.

In 1959 Friedrich Diirrenmatt1s The Visit came to the Hanna

Theater in Cleveland. The play was on tour from New York where it won the Critics' Circle Award for the best foreign play of 1958-1959- The work had experienced its world premiere in Zurich in 1955- It is no coincidence that two of the greater living German-language dramatists,

Diirrenmatt and Max Frisch, are actually Swiss. Switzerland was the only place a writer of German could have an audience and freedom to nurture his craft during the years of the Third Reich. The culture necessary to produce great dramatists was not interrupted in Switzerland as it had been in Austria and Germany.

Diirrenmatt often portrays mem existentially, as an alienated individual in an irrational world. He suggests that heroes are no longer possible in such an environment, and the only way to write about the world is in a bitingly humorous and cruelly grotesque manner. Like every avant-garde dramatist after World War II, he has been compared to Bertolt Brecht since both writers have satirized what they view to be a corrupt society. Brecht, however, believed that evil society could be changed through revolution, but Diirrenmatt's view is more pessimistic, since there is little, if any, hope in his world.

Diirrenmatt -calls The Visit (Per Besuch der alten Dame) a tragic-comedy. In it an old woman, Claire Zachanassian, returns to a town which had long ago ruined and rejected her. She has since become the richest woman in the world and has used her power to impoverish

the town in order to make it ripe for her goals. Claire's return

causes the inhabitants to name 1 1 1 , her former lover, as candidate for

mayor. They hope to get some of her millions and think that 111 will be instrumental in gaining her favor and her money for the town. But

Claire has other plans; she wants to buy "justice'1 by offering the

town a fortune if someone in it will kill 1 1 1 , who deserted her after

seducing her decades ago. The initial indignation of the citizens is

quickly eroded, as they begin spending money they can only hope to re­

ceive by executing 111. They succumb to temptation and kill 111 to

receive the reward. The corruption of the residents is as inevitable as fate itself. Ill initially reacts to the plot like a cornered animal but regains his composure with the acceptance of his guilt. The money of the avenging Medea-like figure of Claire seduces the townspeople but permits 1 1 1 to achieve personal redemption.

For the New York production, starring Lynn Fontanne and Alfred

Lunt, Maurice Valency's adaptation was used. The play is softened in the adaptation and "much of the humor and satiric comment are deleted for fear that American audiences would not accept too much wit in a

serious play.'1^ The Visit was quite successful in New York due mainly to its startling scenes and due to the drawing power of the Lunt acting team.^ The performance was highly praised by the critics.

When the play came to Cleveland in 1959) the reviewers devoted more space to the arrival of Lynn Fontanne and Alfred Lunt than to the play itself. (The star system was obviously not dead.) Arthur Spaeth in the Cleveland News called it a "bitter ruthless drama of ideas, 169

and he described Lynn Fontanne as "elegant" in the role of Claire.

This is a far cry from the horrific, artificially re-constructed, venge­

ful old lady of Durrenmatt's intention. The Plain Dealer reviewer dis­

cussed the performance of the Lunts with glowing praise; he called it h7 their greatest performance in a long time. Only the Cleveland Press

critic paid more attention to the philosophical issues of the play than U8 to the visiting stars. He claimed that Durrenmatt -intentionally left the play's point open for discussion: the citizens of the town are either victims of their own greed or of an overpowering fate.

A few months later still another German play came on tour from

New York. It was Schiller's Mary Stuart and was one of the few pro­ ductions of a German classic in English in Cleveland. In fact, the most recent German classic performed in translation on the stage in

Cleveland was the very same play done sixty years before with the famous actress Hr. Modjeska playing the lead. Even the Playhouse, which often performs Shakespeare, has never produced a play by Goethe, Schiller,

Kleist, or Hebbel.

The production received critical acclaim in New York in 1957.

Its director Tyrone Guthrie was interviewed by the New York Times con- 1+9 cerning the disappearance of the German classics from American stages.

Guthrie expressed regret that the German-Americans were so eager to pro­ duce Wagner but not Schiller. He speculated that since the German classics are considered great literature, they are excluded from becom­ ing great entertainment. Broadway hungers for hits, and literary 50 classics, which have less chance of exciting audiences, are neglected. 170

In Cleveland the production took place in the ffasic Hall in

December, 1959* Paul Mooney, writing for the Cleveland Press, called

it one of the great evenings of the theater and urged all drama lovers

to see it.'^' The play was poorly attended, however, and the reviewer

chided the residents of the city for their gross neglect. The old

Broadway adage "that there are two bad weeks on the road— Holy Week and 52 Cleveland," had come true again, Arthur Spaeth called the play "a

joust of queens to the death." 53 The Plain Dealer reviewer nostalgi­

cally compared it to the great productions of classics in the past, 5^ when stars came to town to play the lead in Shakespeare plays.

In 1964 Western Reserve University Eldred Theater in Cleveland

finally gave the other great contemporary Swiss dramatist, Max Frisch,

a hearing by presenting Biedermann and the Firebugs. The play received

its premiere in Zurich in 1955 and was a flop on Broadway in 1 9 6 3 . The

Eldred Theater group also performed Brecht's Galileo in 1 9 6 2,but neither

production received much attention from the press. University theaters

had become over the decades increasingly important in this country,

though, especially because of their increasing emphasis on avant-garde

theater.

Two years after the Eldred Theater performance, the Playhouse produced Galileo. It was the first capacity audience at a Playhouse 55 opening in six years. There exist three versions of this play, indi­ cating Brecht's propensity to re-appraise and amend a work. The first was written in the late 1930s and portrays Galileo recanting in the

face of the Inquisition in order to be allowed to finish his work. He

is portrayed as a cunningly brilliant individual who believes that the 171 end justifies the means, and his positive qualities far outweigh the negative ones. After the detonation of the atom bomb, however, Brecht viewed science and Galileo in a different light; and his changed view is reflected in the second version which was written in English with the help of Charles Laughton in Hollywood at the end of the war.

Galileo is now made to appear as the man who rejects his mission of making life better for all in order to save his own skin. He is, by his own admission, a criminal, the man who committed the original sin of scientists (therefore corrupting future generations of scientists) by bowing down before authority and thus hiding the truth. The third version was written after Brecht had returned to Germany to become the director of the Berliner Ensemble in East Berlin. It is essentially a German re-working of the English version.

Galileo, along with Mother Courage, is Brecht's most realistic play because it contains fewer alienation effects and a more tradi­ tional plot than other Brecht works. The figure of Galileo is a com­ plex one, as complex as Brecht himself. He is portrayed as a sensuous man who cannot give up good food any more than he can give up doing re­ search. This physical craving helps to make him a great scientist but also causes him to fear physical pain. When he is threatened with torture he recants. One might say that nis great qualities cause his downfall, as is also the case with Mother Courage.

The premiere of the English version of the play took place in

Los Angeles in 19^7 with Charles Laughton portraying Galileo. Neither the audience nor the critics liked it, and this was also the case later in the year when it was presented in New York. The work was thought to 172 te dull and episodic and closed in the former city after six perform­

ances . The American audiences and critics of I9 U7 were not yet ready

for Brecht or his Galileo. Despite this negative reception the play has since teen almost universally acclaimed as one of Brecht's greatest— even in the United States.

The Cleveland production in I9 6U was praised by two of the three critics reviewing the performance. Peter Bellamy of the Plain Dealer was pleased by the portrayal of Galileo as a pleasure-loving figure of 56 flesh and blood. He also lauded the Playhouse decision to use the musical composition of Gustav Holst, The Planets, in the play. Arthur

Spaeth was similarly impressed, calling the performance a "cerebral 57 evening." Stan Anderson of the Cleveland Press was less enthusiastic.

He was especially critical of the use of the author's unorthodox staging techniques in the production; he claimed the "Brecht gimmicks" inter- 58 fered with the play's message.

A filmed version of the play was shown in Cleveland and other cities in the winter of 1975* Many reviews in Cleveland and elsewhere were strongly critical but the reviewers who were aware of Brecht’s intention not only praised the film but also the Brechtian techniques it employed. The director, Joseph Losey, who had also helped to direct the first stage production of Galileo in America, incorporated the

5Q techniques into the film with a degree of success.'-^ Since he was work­ ing with a different medium, it is not surprising that total success eluded him.

Another play dealing with the theme of the scientist and his role in society was chosen by the Playhouse for a 1 9 6 5 production. 173

This was Durrenmatt's The Physicists, which had received its premiere

in ZUrich three years earlier. Even though the play is called a

"comedy" by the author, its view of the world is grimmer than the view

in Brecht's scientist play Galileo. The figure of Galileo is made

criminally responsible because he, as an individual, failed to take

advantage of his power to make life better for mankind. But Mobius,

the main figure of The Physicists, hides his knowledge and withdraws

from the world because he is certain that his knowledge of physics can

only harm the world. The setting of the play is an insane asylum to

which Mobius has retreated, feigning madness in order not to be forced

to reveal the secrets he has learned. He is so convinced of his posi­

tion that he kills a nurse who loves him to make sure that she not give

him away. He glibly justifies this murder as necessary for mankind's

salvation. Mobius claims that his departure from the madhouse with the

knowledge he possesses would cause the world to become a madhouse. Two physicist spies, one from each of the two great world powers, have them­

selves admitted to the sanatorium in order to wrest the secrets from

Mobius. The powers of Mobius' persuasion are so great that the two

spies decide that the world is really better off not knowing the secrets.

They too continue to remain at the institution under the names of

Einstein and Newton, assumed to pretend madness. Unfortunately, the directress of the institution has already stolen the vital secrets and threatens to use them. The three pretending madmen must stay where they are and the world is doomed to destruction.

Despite the grotesque humor also found in the play, the pervad­

ing feeling derived from The Physicists is one of doom. Things and 171*

people are not what they seem to be. The imprisoned madmen are power­

less victims whose herculean attempts to control their own fates prove

to be absurd. There is no reality in the world, Diirrenroatt seems to

say with this play; all is alienation and delusion.

This drama opened in New York in the fall of 196*4-, a few months

before the Playhouse production, in the adaptation of James Kirkup,

Despite the fine cast including Jessica Tandy, Hume Cronyn, and Robert

Shaw as Mobius, the play received a lukewarm reception:

The general response to The Physicist was that it was too grotesque to be serious, too seri­ ous to be funny, too analytical to be enter­ taining, too distant to be moving, and too didactic to be stimulating. This reception greeted the play nowhere but in the United States. 6 0

Peter Bellamy's review of the Cleveland Playhouse production

follows the tone of this critical reception. He called the play "way

out," "slow," "nonsensical," and "ludicrous." He paid tribute to the

actors who were, he said, able to maintain a straight face throughout

this farce of a play. The reviewer of the Sun Press Arthur Spaeth, who

had been the drama critic of the now defunct Cleveland News, called it

a "very uneven doomsday satire." He felt that one did not have to be mad to enjoy the play but that this would not hurt. ^ 2 These deprecating,

flippant comments make the ones by the Cleveland Press reviewer all the more startling. Tony Mastroianni called the play "easily one of the most stimulating plays seen here in some time." Mastroianni character­

ized the play as being "bitter" and "ironic" without failing also to

note the grotesque humor. He even requested that it be performed again

next season.^ 175

The Brecht fad had in the meantime reached such proportions in

the United States that a work consisting of bits and pieces was pack­

aged under the title of Brecht on Brecht in New York in 1 9 6 1. George

Tabori arranged the songs, scenes, and poems making up this production.

The response from New York audiences was favorable, and, after a popular

stay there, Brecht on Brecht went on the road for a successful tour. 6U The "shamelessly superficial exploitation of the poet" found its way

to John Carroll University in Cleveland as part of that school's artist

series. Lotte Lenya was still featured in the musical potpourri, as

she had been on Broadway. Tony Mastroianni called the acting of the

ageless star a "bravura performance" to which the audience responded

enthusiastically.^ Brecht on Brecht was repeated as part of the Play­

house repertoire in 1 9 6 6, at which time Peter Bellamy called it "intel-

lectual" and "emotional" but "lacking in action." Even in the evening

of distilled Brecht,Bellamy missed the mark, since action is irrelevant

in the revue-like work. Stan Anderson, the Press music critic, claimed to like it more than he had Galileo and stated that he was beginning to

see why Brecht is thought of so highly. It is regrettable that the

lukewarm Brecht on Brecht received this critical acclaim and that

Galileo did not.

The greatest uproar caused by any modern German play in trans­

lation in Cleveland was that which greeted Peter Weiss's play Marat/

Sade. It arrived on tour from New York in the spring of 1 9 6 7 to play to full houses at the Hanna Theater in Cleveland. The work, which had had its premiere in Berlin in 1 9 6U, had become an international hit, but the audiences were captivated by the spectacle of the presentation 176 6 v rather than by Weiss's ideas. The insights gained from the play's

presentation come primarily from a close reading before or after seeing

it. This drama requires huge and talented casts, and the stage is

frequently asylum and arena, bedroom and bathroom at the same time.

Each actor and actress is a constantly moving piece of the portrayed

kaleidoscope of madness. Two eyes and ears cannot perceive all the

happenings. The senses are bombarded, causing the audience to respond

with giggles, gasps, and groans to the provoking scenes on the stage.

No one leaves the theater with a feeling of complacency and, in that,

Weiss's intention to provoke is fulfilled. Many in the audience feel

elated by the experience but vaguely depressed by the message, or lack

of one. Depressed not only because they feel themselves attacked or because, in the versions presented in the United States, there are no

solutions offered, but also because it is unclear as to what problems are posed. One may say that it is a play of ideas which, like some of

Brecht's plays, became popular because of its display.

Besides the play within a play, the piece also contains the confrontation of the Marquis and Marat. This conflict actually forms the heart of the play. The Marquis represents the alienated individual who believes that action is senseless. Marat is the man of action who believes that revolution is needed to produce the necessary changes in society. Ironically Marat, the man of action, is confined to a bath­ tub in the play, while the Marquis, the man of introspection, directs the action of the play within the play. Neither position proves satis­ factory and only the final curtain seems to protect the audience from 177 becoming directly embroiled in the madness threatening to spill from stage to audience.

This tour de force was initially mounted in the United States by the Royal Shakespeare Company from London, on tour in New York in

1 9 6 6, but it was continued by an American group, since the play was still drawing crowds toward the end of the British Company's planned run. The first English-language staging took place in London under the direction of the talented Peter Brook. In the introduction to the

English version translated by Geoffrey Skelton, Brook claimed that the play was great not because it had been well-staged but because it was a very good drama: 68

Starting with the title, everything about it is designed to crack the spectator in the jaw, then douse him with ice-cold water, then force him to assess intelligently what has happened to him, then give him a kick ■ in the balls, then bring him back to his senses again. It's not exactly Brecht and it’s not Shakespeare either, but it's very Elizabethan and very much of our time. °

Peter Bellamy reviewed the presentation in New York while there on assignment for his newspaper. In mentioning that a patron had a heart attack which no one noticed during the showing, he underscored the sensational aspects of the play.^ 0 He paid special tribute to Glenda

Jackson who played the killer of Marat, Charlotte Corday, and said there might never be another show like it. The New York critics were also profoi'- .ffected. Haskel Frankel, writing for the National

Observer, wanted to toss his hat into orbit after witnessing a presenta­ tion. He was, in his words, "exhausted with happiness" after seeing the 71 play. Even John Simon, who hardly ever likes anything, had high praise 178 for this piece of theater at first, though after the initial euphoria of the spectacle had passed, he was later to call it a "fuzzy blueprint" 72 and a "limp libretto." Many other reviewers were impressed by what they called "total theater," but few of them mentioned any of the play's ideas except to note their lack, of clarity.

Peter Bellamy had not lost his enthusiasm for the play when it arrived in Cleveland over a year later. He admitted that some in the audience found it "sexually shocking and nauseating" and called the play (in a comment of questionable taste) "the strongest of dramatic red meat.Tony Mastroianni of the Press also gave the production high praise but did note that the play's arguments are lost because 7h "the senses are bludgeoned."

In 1 9 6 9, Heinar Kipphardt's cerebral German play, In the Matter of J. Robert Oppenheimer, came to the Hanna Theater. It is one of the foremost works of the genre "documentary theater" and had its world premiere in 1 9 6^ in Berlin and its American premiere in Los Angeles in

1 9 6 8 . The critic Clive Barnes praised the Californian production and suggested that Broadway would probably be afraid to take a chance on it after the failure of R. Hochhuth's documentary drama The Soldiers:

"Broadway audiences do, after all, get the theater they so richly deserve.

The source materials for Kipphardt’s play are the records of the proceedings of the hearing to determine the loyalty of J. Robert

Oppenheimer in I9 5U. The hearing resulted in 3,000 pages of testimony which was published by the Atomic Energy Commission. In order to dramatize the material, Kipphardt reduced the number of witnesses and testimony without sacrificing historical veracity. The play’s closing statement is Kipphardt's invention, however, and is the main reason why the dramatization was rejected by the famous physicist himself. The drama deals again with the role of the scientist in society, as do

Galileo and The Physicists. J. Robert Oppenheimer, in the wake of the

McCarthy hearings, came under suspicion of having retarded the progress of the United States toward the development of the hydrogen bomb because of his leftist sympathies. He had worked to develop the atom bomb when

Russia was still an ally of the United States but withdrew his active support after the war. Oppenheimer argued convincingly in the hearing

(as he does in the play) that he refused his support because he felt that the construction of a hydrogen bomb was not feasible, and because of the horrors the atomic bombs had produced in Japan— in other words, that his conscience prevented him from continuing. This view was con­ tradicted by an opposing figure, the physicist Edward Teller, who claimed instead that morality should play no part in their research.

A scientist is not, according to the view Teller is made to express in the play, responsible for the misuse of his discoveries. Oppenheimer I ends the play with a monologue, in which he maintains that scientists have been too loyal to the military and have consequently at times done the work of the devil. (The investigating committee found Oppenheimer innocent of any disloyalty, though it did declare him a security risk.)

Kipphardt's Oppenheimer is a direct descendant of Brecht's Galileo.

Both scientists express guilt at having capitulated to established authority instead of weighing the morality of their actions. 180

Clive Barnes was wrong— the play did come to New York, where it

was performed by the Lincoln Repertory Theater in the spring of 19&9*

Eric Bentley in the New York Times f praised the play, although he was

more impressed by the similar presentation of the theme in Brecht's

Galileo. Richard Cooke of the Wall Street Journal^ stated that "we

are indebted to this play for reviving the debate, within ourselves,

over where our deepest loyalties should lie." The Time magazine reviewer,

frequently cute instead of accurate, named the play "Operation Re­

hash."^® He said that "dissertation is not drama" and that writers such

as Hochhuth, Weiss, and Kipphardt were "factmongers and displaced

pedants." The play nevertheless was chosen by the critics as one of

the best in New York for the 1 9 6 8 - 1 9 6 9 season.

In the Matter of J. Robert Oppenheimer arrived in Cleveland on

tour from New York in December of the same year. Mastroianni stated

that the performance proves intellectually stimulating plays can be

exciting also.^ He wrote a well-researched review which showed that

he had read Ruth Speiers' translation of the play. He noted the "moral

hangover" suffered by several scientists after the Japan explosions and

pointed out that Kipphardt had not, despite his sympathies, overloaded

the case in favor of Oppenheimer. Bellamy, Cleveland's other leading

theater critic, called it a play for intelligent theatergoers, 8 0 which

lacked action but did contain intense emotion.

Having witnessed this Cleveland production myself, I can add

to the comments above. Kipphardt very effectively used the natural

drama of the court room to heighten the drama of his documentary ploy.

All the action takes place in the same room but it is augmented with 181 pictures of several leading political figures of the period flashed on a screen behind the proceedings. The pictures are accompanied by taped segments of appropriate speeches. In this manner, McCarthy is brought into the play and remains as a kind of specter throughout. The play is long and requires matching concentration for its concentrated verbal action. Many empty seats were to be seen and some in the audience seem­ ed impatient to leave. Perhaps the play might have received a better response if it had been performed at the Playhouse to an audience more accustomed to serious drama.

Four German plays have been performed in Cleveland in the 1970s:

The Threepenny Opera (already discussed), Tie Resistable Rise of Arturo

Ui, and Happy End, all by Bertolt Brecht, and Woyzeck by Georg Buchner.

Arturo Ui was presented by the semi-professional group of the Dobama

Theater in March 1970. Brecht wrote this play, which compares Hitler to a Chicago gangster with the traits of Richard III, in 19^1, and hoped that the play would meet with an enthusiastic response in America.

This hope was never realized, although the play was produced by David

Merrick in New York in 1963- Merrick attempted to emphasize the super­ ficial carnival aspects of the play in order to have it appeal to a

Broadway audience but for a change, "Merrick, a long-time subscriber to Mencken's law that no one ever went broke underestimating the taste 8 l of the American public, was wrong." The play closed after eight per­ formances. Not much attention was paid the more recent production of 82 the play in Cleveland, which was labeled "a fair job of weak Brecht."

BUchner’s play Woyzeck received critical acclaim, as it had in the other cities it toured. The performance took place in the Playhouse 182

in 1971 and was dona by the National Theater of the Deaf in half-spoken, half-mimed form. The play, which shows the exploitation and consequent psychological disintegration of a common man, has had a profound influ­ ence on modern drama despite the fact that it was written approximately one hundred and forty years ago. The Cleveland critics stressed the excellent work of the deaf players and not the play itself.

The most recent German play performed in Cleveland, and the last one to be mentioned, has the fitting title of Happy End. This early Bertolt Brecht play (1929) opened the most recent Playhouse season, 197H-1975. It is a lesser but lively Brecht work written to capitalize on the success of The Threepenny Opera. In 1929 it had proved to be a dismal failure, however, and had closed after only one performance in Berlin, despite the presence of Oskar Homolka, Lotte

Lenya, and Peter Lorre in the leading roles. Again Chicago gangsters figure prominently in the plot, but this time some of them are almost worth saving by the Salvation Army. Mastroianni mentioned that the 83 play gets in the way of the excellent songs by Brecht and Weill. He also noted its similarity to the more recent Guys and Dolls. Bellamy complimented the "top-notch cast" in the performance of a "trivial,

8 U farcical, musical melodrama."

Conclusion

Less than forty modern German plays of recognized worth have been performed in Cleveland since W.W.I. Very few of them are road shows from New York, and if it were not for the Playhouse, and to a 183 lesser extent Karamu, only a handful of German plays would have been presented in Cleveland in the last sixty years. Yet over four hundred

German plays have been produced in New York in the same time span. Not r.1 1 of the latter number have been plays of literary quality, of course, but since W.W.I at least three or four quality plays of German origin have been produced in New York nearly every season.

This imbalance is only mildly surprising since the commercial theater is entertainment, and entertainment an industry, in the United

States; yet the buyers of the product are still most plentiful in the

New York area. However, around 1900, plays from New York came frequent­ ly and often drew crowds regardless of their success in New York, but with the advent of professional sports and movies, the residents of

Midwest cities no longer flocked to the promotions of a new York theater syndicate. As time passed, only the most popular productions were sent on the road, and' thus very few modern German plays ever arrived because they did not prove to be popular entertainment, since they are frequent­ ly disturbing, depressing, and too demanding. They are often plays of ideas which do not appeal to audiences not educated to appreciate ideas, and if a play did not appeal to the sophisticated New Yorkers, then it was very unlikely to go on tour to less urban and urbane cities such as

Cleveland.

The greatest number of German plays in translation in Cleveland were produced in the years before and after the depression, and again in the sixties and seventies. Of the approximately twenty German plays performed by the Playhouse since its founding, nearly half of them were presented between 1925 and 1935- The Playhouse apparently thought very 18U

highly of experimental drama, and nearly every season of that period

featured plays such as Werfel's The Goat Song, Kaiser's The Fire in the

Opera House, and Toller's The Machine Wreckers. Other plays on the

repertoire included works by O'Neill, Ibsen, Shaw, and Chekhov, showing

further the Playhouse’s dedication to literate drama. Judging from the

critical response, the plays were well-staged and acted, indicating that

the Playhouse recognized the importance of thorough preparation.

After 1935 anti-German sentiment and lack of good material

caused the virtual demise of German drama from the Cleveland stage from

1935 to 1955. A renaissance of German plays occurred in the 1 9 6 0s,

however, as Brecht came into vogue and experimentation became the watch­

word. The 1 9 6 0s were times of radical change, of protest against nega­

tive conditions in society, and the plays of Brecht and Durrenmatt es­

pecially spoke to these needs.

At the present, in the mid 1970s, there seems to be a lull in

Cleveland as far as the performance of new German plays is concerned.

Recent revivals of lucrative rock musicals, and a number of suspense pieces point more to the past than the future. For over a year the most popular play in Cleveland has been the musical review Jacques Brel

is Alive and Well and Living in Paris, a culinary bit of entertainment which, fittingly, includes dinner with the price of admission. Despite the proliferation of small theaters in the area (many of them actually of the dinner-theater variety), only the Playhouse and Karamu can be counted on to provide more than superficial entertainment with any 85 regularity. ^ 185

The situation in Germany is obviously better because of their

experimental tradition, their more serious public, and government sub­

sidies for most theaters. I might add that the fear in this country

that government funding would mean government control is probably un­

founded, as the theater departments of state universities are supported by public money and are often excellent.

In the United States, sports, movies, radio, and television have all made life difficult for theaters, which have to draw constant audiences to stay alive. Although such diversions exist in Germany as well, they do not seem to dominate to the extent that they do here: the West German Information Agency of the Federal Republic of Germany announced that in the 1978-73 season 800,000 people had attended theat­ rical presentations in Hamburg alone. Neither the Cleveland Browns nor the Cleveland Indians normally draw more people in a season, and for most reside- cs cultural entertainment means a drive to the nearest shop­ ping center to see a film.

Many German-Americans also fit this social pattern, but others continue to seek their cultural entertainment through participation in the activities of local German clubs. In examining the German community, in order to determine whether the cultural activities include theater, one finds that a wave of immigrants after 1950, most of them displaced by the Second World War, caused the number of Germans in Cleveland to increase greatly. Many of them are highly educated individuals who were and are influential in causing the German societies in Cleveland to experience a renaissance. A German-language school has been created and musical clubs formed; a German-language theater, however, is a phenomenon of the past. 186 Chapter VIII Footnotes

1Julia McCune Flory, The Cleveland Playhouse: How it Began (Cleveland: The Press of Western Reserve University, 19657, pTTT. p Ibid., Forword.

3 Ibid., p. 9 -

^Ibid.

3 Ibid., p. 15.

8 Ibid., p. 2 6 . 7 'Bauland, p, 19-

8 Ibid., p. 2 2 .

^Cleveland News, 16 March 1916.

^ Plain Dealer, 20 March 1 9 1 6,

1 :LIbid. , 21 March 1 9 1 6.

^ Wachter und Anzeiger, 21 March 1916.

•L3 Bauland, p. 59- lU ! ■ t Plain Dealer, 21 December 192U.

"^Ibid,, 28 December 192U.

■^Ibid., 2 9 December 192U.

^ Play, 12 January 1825.

^Flory, p. 1 1 1 .

^Brown, p . 5^- • 20 Wachter und Anzeiger, 29 November 1925- 21 Plain Dealer, 5 December 1925-

2 2 Bauland, p . 8 5 .

2 3 Ibid. pli Plain Dealer, 5 February 1930.

25Ibid. ^Ibid., 6 December 1930*

^Bauland, p. 112.

Plain Dealer, U October 1933*

^^Bauland, p. ll+5.

3 0 rbid., p. 151.

Plain Dealer, 13 April 19^5*

Reuben Silver, "A History of the Karamu Theater" (Ph.D. disser­ tation, Ohio State University, I9 6I), p. 202.

^^Bauland, p. 128. An adaptation of the Threepenny Opera had come to New York for twelve performances in 1933, and then the work was not seen again in this country for over 20 years. The intentionally shabby stage and strident music struck the audience perhaps as lacking pro- fessionality. 1933 marked the first on-Broadway attempt at Brecht and the last one for thirty years. Whenever Brecht plays were performed in midwest cities during this span, they came from elsewhere, not from New York. 3U J Ibid., p. 1 2 9 .

3^Plain Dealer, 30 March 1955*

36,Cleveland News, 30 March 1955-

^Cleveland( Press, 22 May 1962.

3®Plain Dealer, 22 May 1962.

3 9 Ibid., 17 October 1970. 1+0 Cleveland Press, 17 October 1970.

^ Flain Dealer, 11 December 1958. 1+2 Cleveland News, 11 December 1958.

^ 3 Bauland, pp. 192-193• \ ^Ibid., p. 2 0 2 .

**5Ibid.

Cleveland News, 6 October 1959*

^ Plain Dealer9 October 1959*

1+8 Cleveland Press, 6 October 1959* 188 ^New York Times, 6 October 1957.

5 0Ibid.

^ Cleveland Press, 8 December 1959-

5 2Ibid. 53 Cleveland News, 8 December 1959-

Plain Dealer, 8 December 1959*

^ Plain Dealer, 22 October 196^-.

5 6Ibid.

^^Cleveland Sun Press, 22 October 196h. 58 Cleveland Press, 22 October I9 6U.

59^Having seen the film, I was surprised at the harsh reviews of it I had read earlier. Of the reviews I read, only Hollis Alpert's, in Saturday Review, seemed to exhibit more than a superficial knowledge of Brecht.

^°Bauland, p. 2 0 6 .

Plain Dealer, 22 April 1 9 6 5.

Cleveland Sun Press, 22 April 1 9 6 5.

^ Cleveland Press, 22 April 1965-

^Ba uland, p . 1 8 8 . 6 5 , Cleveland Press, 2 5 October I9 6 3 . 66 Plain Dealer, 2 9 December 1 9 6 6. 6*7 Having seen the production, and having discussed it with others who have, has caused me to reach this conclusion. It is only upon studying the play that most people can recall its ideas. 68 Peter Brook, Introduction to the Persecution and Assassination of Jean-Paul Marat as performed by the Inmates of the Asylum of Charenton under the Direction of the Marquis do Sade, by Peter Weiss, trans. by Geoffrey Skelton (New York: Atheneum, 19&5), p. vii.

^Ibid., p. vi. 70 The Plain Dealer, 6 February 1 9 6 6,

^National Observer. 3 January 1 9 6 6. 72Book Week, 22 May 1 9 6 6. l89

7^Plain Dealer, 4 April 1 9 6 7. 74 ^ Cleveland Press, 7 April 19&7*

7^New York Times, 7 June 1 9 6 8 .

7 6Ibid., 16 March 1 9 6 9.

77Wall Street Journal, 10 March 1 9 6 9.

7^Time, l4 March 1 9 6 9.

7 9 Cleveland Press, 9 December 1969- fto Plain Dealer, 1 December 1 9 6 9.

^Bauland, p . 194. D p Cleveland Press, 16 March 1970,

8 3 Ibid., 10 October 1974. 84 Plain Dealer, 19 October 1974.

8 5 There is no intention to slight the Berea Theater, the Great Lakes Shakespeare Festival, or several other quality theatrical enter­ prises. These places are too new or specialized to warrant inclusion. They have, to my knowledge, never presented a German play. APPENDIX A

List of plays and their authors presented during the first highpoint of the German-language theater in Cleveland, I8 7 2 -I8 7 U.

Date Play Author (first initial not always known)

Sept. 1 Graf Essex H. Laube 8 Der Jongleur oder Der Seiltanzer auf der Leipziger Messe Pohl & Conradi 15 Ein geadelter Kaufmann oder Hoch im Burgerstand A. Kbrner 2 2 Muttersegen oder Die Perle von Savo jen Lemoine & Schaffer 29 Der Mann mit der eisernen Maske oder 20 Jahre im Kerker Lebrun Oct, 6 Berliner Kinder Salingre 13 Zopf und Schwert oder Am Hofe Friedrich Wilhelms K. Gutzkow 2 0 Der Pfarrer von Kirchfeld Oder Pflicht und Liebe Anzengruber 27 Robert und Bertram oder Die lustigen Vagabunden G. Rader Nov. 3 Ein Held der Feder oder Ein Achtundvierziger in Amerika Werner 1 0 Die Karlschuler H. Laube 17 Drei Paar Schuhe Oder Es ist hicht alles Gold was glanzt Gorlitz 2k Philippine Welser oder Die Schone Augsburger Biirgertochter 0. v. Redwitz Dec. 1 Die Maschinenbauer A. Weyrauch & Lange k Mutter und Sohn oder Familiengliick und El end C. Birch-Pfeiffer 8 Aschenbrodel R. Benedix 15 Madchen vom Dorf Kruger 2 2 Der Glockner von Notre Dame oder Die Strassentanzerin von Paris C. Birch-Pfeiffer Jan. 5 Dreissig Jahre aus dem Leben eines Spielers Hell 1 2 Von Stufe zu Stufe H. Muller 19 Columbus H. Schmidt Feb. 2 Der Stbrenfried R. Benedix 7 Hans Lange P. Heyse 1 6 Die Teufelsmilhle am Wienerberg ■9 2 1 Ein armer Teufel F . Hopp 23 Der Goldbauer C. Birch-Pfeiffer Mar. 2 Cardinal und Jesuit F. Schutz 7 Ein gea.'elter Kauftnann A. Kbrner 9 Anna Lis - Hersch m Memoiren des Teufels L. Schneider

190 191 Date Author

Mar. 1 6 Der Verschwender oder Millionar und Bettier F . Raimund 2 1 Spielt nicht mit dem Feuer Putlita 23 'S Lorle oder Dorf und Stadt C. Birch-Pfeiffer 2 8 Das Stiftungsfest G. v. Moser 30 Ein Kind des Gluckes C , Birch-Pfeiffer Apr. It Muttersegen Lemoine 6 Das Stiftungsfest G. v. Moser 13 Lurapac i-Vagabundus oder das liederliche KLeeblatt J. Nestroy 1 8 Einer von unsre Leut D, Kalisch 27 Maria und Magdalena P. Lindau May 2 Bekenntnisse vor und nach der Hochzeit E, v. Bauernfeld h Herz und Dollar M. Cohnheim 1 1 Wenn Leute Geld haben! A. Weyrauch 1 8 Eine feste Burg ist unser Gott H. Muller 25 Die Rauber Schiller June 6 Das Stiftungsfest (third time) G. v. Moser Sept. Ik Narziss A. E. Brachvogel 19 Die Selige an den Verstorbenen daub ille & Bernard 2 1 Hundert tausend Thaler D, Kaiser 2 2 Ein Rezept gegen Schwiegermiitter 9 2 6 Marion P. Lindau 2 8 Die relegierten Studenten oder Die Taugenichtse R. Benedix Oct. 3 Die relegierten Studenten Oder Die Taugenichtse R. Benedix 5 Das Volk, vie es weint und lacht Berg & D. Kalisch 1 2 Agnes Bernauer 0, Ludwig 17 Das Urbild des Tartuffe K. Gutzkow 19 Pechschulze Salingre 2k Die alte Schachtel Putlitz 26 Anti-Xantippe oder Krieg der Frauen Kneisel 31 Anti-Xantippe oder Krieg der Frauen Kneisel Nov. 2 Auf eigenen Fiissen oder die Bummler Pohl 5 Die Urgrossmutter R . Benedix 9 Die Jungfrau von Orleans Schiller 1 U Die Maler A . Wilbrandt 2 1 Die Lady in Trauer 23 Wilhelm Tell Schiller 27 Wilhelm Tell Schiller 30 Er ist Baron A. Weyrauch Dec. 5 Ein-Schritt vom Wege E. Wichert 7 Das Testament des grossen KurfUrsten G. v. Putlitz 1 2 Die Tochter der Holle Kneisel 192 Date Play Author

Dec. 19 Die Tochter der Holie Kneisel 2 1 Eulenspiegel J. Nestroy 25 Der Goldbauer aus Kalifornien Pohl 28 Der Meineidbauer Anzengruber Jan. It Tochter der Holie Kneisel 9 Kabale und Liebe Schiller 1 1 Der Herr Stadtmusikus und seine Kapelle Kneisel 1 6 Konigin Margot und die Hugenotten A. Dumas 1 8 Das Stiftungsfest G. v. Moser

(The split occurred after this period and soon there were two groups. The initial of the last name of the director, Eiche or Szwirschina, before the date indi'ates which ensemble.)

E 2 5 Liebe kann alles oder Die bezahmte Widerspenstige Holbein after Shakespeare E 30 Partei-Wuth F. Ziegler S Feb. 12 Der Vicomte von Leforteres Scherenberg E 12 Die Blinde von Paris A. Prix E 15 Muller und Miller A. Elz S 15 Griseldis F. Halm s 19 Die Stiefnutter R, Bendix E 20 Der Vater der Debutantin Herrmann S 22 Der Jesuit und sein Zogling A. Schreiber s 2U S ’Lorle oder Dorf und Stadt C. Birch-Pfeiffer E 26 Der Alte Magister R. Benedix S 27 Die Waise von Lowood C . Birch-Pfeiffer E Mar. 1 Robert und Bertram Rader S 1 Preziosa P. A. Wolff, music by Weber s k Adrienne Lecouvrer Translated from E. Scribe s 7 Der Verschwender F. Raimund s 1 2 Die Zwillinge Trautmann s 17 Die Mai-Konigin Trauen s 2 2 Philippine Welser 0, v. Redwitz s 27 Die deutschen Comodianten S. H. v. Mosenthal s 2 9 Die Verschworung der Frauen H. Muller s Apr. 2 Gute Nacht Hanschen H. Muller s 2 Lenore oder Die Todtenbraut Holtei s 1 0 Uriel Acosta K. Gutzkow s 1 2 Die Lieder des Musikanten Kneisel s 15 Die Camelien Dame after Dumas E 19 Der beste Ton K. Topfer s 19 Das Milchmadchen von Schonberg Mannstadt E 23 Die Bettlerin von Marienburg Masson E 26 Die Einfait vom Lande Topfer s 2 6 Die Regimentstochter St. Georges Date Pi2Z Author

E Apr. 30 Die Schule der Verliebten C. Blum S May l Flotte Burschen Wagner E l Tony und sei Burgai F . Priiller S 8 Unruhige Zeiten E . Pohl E 10 Rose von Bacharach Gassmann S 10 Der Pl'arrer von Kirchfeld L. Anzengruber E 15 Der liebe Onkel Kneisel S 17 Lorbeerbaum und Bettelstab Holtei E 2 2 Graf Essex H. Laube E 2k Die Monche Tenell E 29 Der Fluch des Galilei H. Muller E June 5 Lumpaci-Vagabundus J, Nestroy E 7 Die Juden von Worms Gassmann E 12 ' S Barfussle B . Auerbach E lk 3 Hute E . Neumann E 19 Enoch Arden oder Der verschollene Seemann after Tennyson by C. Wolff E 21 Die Fremden R . Benedix E 2 2 Das Stiftungsfest G. v. Moser E 2 8 Maria Magdalena P. Lindau E July 5 Die Mucker oder: Er muss aufs Land W. Friedrich APPENDIX B

List of Plays from 1885 under the leadership of Goldschmied and Wolkenstein.

Date Play Author

1 8 8 5 Mar. 1 Kathchen von Heilbronn H. v. Kleist 8 Drei Tage aus dem Leben eines Spielers Seybold 15 Die beiden ReichenmUller Oder: Die Ho Hander in auf der Brautschau 9*■ 22 a) Der Schuster als Prinz Plotz b) Er ist nicht eifersiichtig A. Elz 2 9 Der Sohn auf Reisen Oder: Peter in der Fremde Feldman Apr. 5 Das Milchmadchen von Schoneberg Mannstadt 12 Drei Paar Schuhe Gorlitz 19 Mein Leopold A. L'Arronge 26 Gebruder Bock A. L'Arronge May 3 Die schone Galathee Suppe 10 Ihre Familie J. Stinde 17 Die Perle von Savoyen Friedrich 2h Schuster-Pluster Weihrauch 31 Gewonnene Herzen H. Miiller June lU Einc Million flir ein Kind Gorner 21 Lumpac i-Vagabundus oder: Das liederliche Kleeblatt J. Nestroy 28 Lumpaci-Vagabundus oder: Das liederliche Kleeblatt J. Nestroy July 5 a) Schneewittchen und die sieben Zwerge b) Dei beiden Waisen 12 a) Der verwunschene Prinz Plotz b) Anna-Lisa Herrsch 26 Das Versprechen hinter’m Herd Baumann Sept. 13 Der Bettelstudent 20 Die Tochter der Holle R. Kneisel 27 Der Verschwender F . Raimund Oct. ^ Preziosa Wolff 11 Die Rauber F. Schiller 18 Der Bibliothekar G. v. Moser 2 5 Hasemann's Tochter A, L'Arronge Nov. 1 Robert und Bertram oder: Die lustigen Vagabunden G . Rader 8 Die Herren Eltern (Our Boys) from English 15 a)* Wilhelm Tell Schiller b) Das Stiftungsfest G. v, Moser

This was the end of the Goldschmied and Wolkenstein season, although plays continued - - mainly to prevent actors from starving. 195

APPENDIX C

Plays performed during the Theaterverein era, 1899-190^.

Date Play Author

1899 Oct. 1 Der Huttenbesitzer Ohnet 6 Comtesse Guckerl Schonthan & Koppel-Ellfeld 8 Die Naherin Held & Jacobson 13 Bocksprtinge Kraatz & Hirschfeld 15 Fuhrmann Henschel G . Hauptmann 2 2 Eva R. Voss 29 Der Waldteufel Mannstadt Nov. 5 Krieg im Frieden G. v. Moser 1 2 Der Compagnon A. L ’Arronge 17 Hans Huckebein Blumenthal & Kadelburg 19 Sodoms Ende H. Sudermann 2 6 Das Schiitzenlis'1 L Treptow Dec. 3 Verlorenes Paradies L . Fulda 1 0 Der Stabstrompeter Mannstadt 17 Comrfcesse Guckerl Schonthan & Koppel-Ellfeld 2 2 Kurmarker und Picarde L. Schneider 2h Hans Huckebein Blumenthal & Kadelburg 31 Flotte Weiber L . Treptow 1 9 0 0 Jan. 7 Im weissen Ross'l Blumenthal & Kadelburg lU Uriel Acosta K. Gutzkow 2 1 Mamselle Nitouche Bergere 2 8 Die Grille C. Birch-Pfeiffer Feb. h Die Wilde Katze Mannstadt & Weller 1 1 Graf Essex H . Laube 1 8 Das Opferlamm Walter & Stein 25 Hofgunst T. v. Throta Mar. h Gluck im Winkel H. Sudermann 1 1 Herr und Frau Doktor H. Heinemann 1 8 Heimat H. Sudermann 25 Marianne, ein Weib aus dem Volke Dennery & Mallian Apr. 1 Mein Leopold A, L ’Arronge 8 Mutter und Sohn C. Birch-Pfeiffer 15 Nachruhm R. Misch 2 2 Beruhmte Frau Schonthan & Kadelburg 29 Als* ich wiederkam Blumenthal & Kadelburg Sept. 30 Goldfische Schonthan & Kadelburg 196 Date Play Author

1900 Oct. 7 Grafin Charlotte oder: Das Zweite Gesicht 0. Blumenthal Ik Faust Goethe 17 Jugendfreunde L. Fulda 21 Der Rechte Schliissel F. Stahl 2k Minna von Barnhelm Lessing 28 Bluthochzeit oder: Die Bartholomausnacht A, Lindner Nov. k Unsere Don Juans L . Treptow 1 Einsame Menschen G , Hauptmann 11 Lon Carlos F. Schiller 1 6 Die goldene Eva Schonthan & Koppel-Ellfeld 1 8 Madame Unverzagt after V. Sardou 25 Der Schlafwagon Controlleur A, Bisson Dec. 2 Drei Paar Schuhe C . Goerlitz 9 Die Jugend von heute 0. Ernst 12 Der Biberpelz G . Hauptmann 1 6 Die goldene Eva Schonthan & Koppel-Ellfeld 19 Die bezahmte Widerspenstige W. Shakespeare 23 Die Rauber F. Schiller 26 Hasemanns Tochter A . L 'Arronge 30 Im weissen Rossel Blumenthal & Kadelburg 1901 Jan, 1 Der Raub der Sabinerinnen Schonthan 6 Der Sohn der Wildnis F. Halm 13 Der Problemkandidat E . Dreyer 20 Luftschlosser Mannstadt & Weller 27 J ohanni s feuer H . Sudermann 30 Groszstadtluft Blumenthal & Kadelburg Feb. 3 Jugendfreunde L. Fulda 10 Wilhelm Tell F. Schiller 13 Liebelei A. Schnitzler 17 Onkel Braesig Reuther 2k Des Meeres und der Liebe Wellen Grillparzer Mar. 3 Ehrliche Arbeit H. Wilken 1 0 Narziss A . E , Brachvogel 1 7 Renaissance Schonthan & Koppel-Ellfeld 2k Charleys Tante by Brandon Thomas, trans. by Jacobson 31 Konig Heinrich E. v. Wildenbruch Apr. 7 Unser Doktor L . Treptow ii* Die Goldgrube Laufs & Jacoby 2 1 Der Veilchenfresser G. v, Moser 2 8 Der Trompeter von Sackingen Hildebrandt & Keller Sept. 2 9 Zwei gllickliche Tage F. Schonthan & G . Kadelburg 197 Date Flay Author

1901 Oct. 6 Flachsmann als Erzieher 0. Ernst 13 Nord und Sued oder: Gevonnene Herzen H. Muller 20 Der Ausflug ins Sittliche G. Engel 27 Der Walzerkonig W. Mannstadt & G. Steffens Nov. 3 Die Journalisten G. Freytag 1 0 Kabale und Liebe F, Schiller 13 Der Herr Senator F. Schonthan & G . Kadelburg 17 Das letzte Wort Schonthan 20 Unsere Frauen G. v, Moser 2k Der Talisman L. Fulda Dec. 1 20,000 Mark Belohnung L. Treptow & G. Steffens k Dei Schmetterlingsschlacht H. Sudermann 8 Wohltater der Menschheit F. Philippi 15 Der Fall Clemenceau Dumas & Artois 22 Der Goldfuchs Jacobson & Ely & Roth 27 Rosen im Schnee K. Nies 29 Cyprienne Sardou 1902 Jan. 5 Die versunkene Glocke G . Hauptmann 12 Der Frobepfeil 0. Blumenthal 19 Der Rantzau Eckermann & Chatrian 23 Falchsmann als Erzieher 0. Ernst 26 Im Exil Freiherr von Ludinghausen 30 Logenb rlider Laufs & Kraatz Feb. 2 Egmont Goethe 7 Fedora Sardou - by P. Lindau 1 6 Robert und Bertram oder: Die lustigen Vagabunden G . Raeder 23 Die Ehre H. Sudermann 28 Die zartlichen Verwandten R. Benedix Mar, 2 Die lustigen Weiber von Windsor W. Shakespeare 9 Doktor Klaus A . L 'Arronge 1 6 0 diese Schwiegermama E , Neumann after A. Bisson 23 Die Hochzeit von Valeni Ganghoffer & Brociner 30 Die Schauspieler des Kaisers K. Wartenburg Apr, 6 Die Jungfrau von Orleans F. Schiller 13 Prinz Karnevals Brautfahrt F. Nolte & R, Lenz 20 Circus Leute F. Schonthan 2 7 Alt- Heidelberg Meyer - Foerster Sept. 28 Die Rothe Robe E . Brieux Oct. 12 Die goldene Eva Das erste Mittagessen 17 Die Fledermaus J. Strauss 198 Date Play Author

1902 O c t . 2 6 Hoppla.' Vater sieht's ja nicht! Jacobson after G. Feydeau N o v . 2 Napoleons Ende R. Voss 9 Maria Stuart F Schiller 1 0 Die GrUnhorner H. Kissling 23 Der Verschwender F . Raimund 30 Der Grosskaufmann Walter & Stein D e c . 7 Johannes Sudermann lU Lumpaci-Vagabundus oder: Das liederliche Kleeblatt J. Nestroy 2 1 Der Meineidbauer L. Anzengruber 2 8 Hanneles Himmelfahrt G . Hauptmann 1903 Jan. k Unsere Don Juans L. Treptow 7 Aschermittwoch Fischer & Jarno 1 1 Der Schlafwagen Controlleur A. Bisson 19 Hoffnung auf Segen H. Heijermann 25 Nathan der Weise G. E. Lessing Feb. 8 Othello W . Shakespeare 13 Wie die Alten sungen, so zwitschern die Jungen K. Niemann 2 2 Es lebe das Leben H . Sudermann Mar. 1 Eine leichte Person E. Pohl 8 Wilhelm Tell F. Schiller 15 Preziosa P. Wolff 1 8 Ultimo G. v. Moser 2 2 Mamsell Nitouche Meilhart & Milland 29 Zehn Madchen und kein Mann F . v. Suppe Sein Doppelganger Hennequin & Duval Apr. 5 Fraulein Doktor 0, Walter & L. Stein 1 2 Der Roman eines jungen Mannes 0, Feuillet 15 Hans Huckebein Blumenthal & Kadelburg 19 Das Erbe F. Philippi 2 6 Gerechtigkeit 0. Ernst O c t . 1 2 Miss Hobbs W. Wolters after K, Jerome Nov. 1 Rosenmontag E . v . Hartleben 1 1 Die Rauber F. Schiller 8 Kyritz - Pyritz 15 Alt Heidelberg Meyer - Foerster 2 2 Frauen von heute B, Jacobson 29 Die Haubenlerche E. v. Wildenbruch D e c . 6 Iphigenie auf Tauris Goethe 13 Der Herrgottschnitzer von Ammergau Ganghofer & Neuert 2 0 Kean A. Dumas 27 Das Gluck im Winkel H . Sudermann 190U Jan. 3 Er -und seine Schwester Walden 1 0 Monna Vanna M, Maeterlinck 2 2 Minna von Barnhelm G. E. Lessing Feb. lU Als ich wiederkajn Blumenthal & Kadelburg 199 Date Flay Author

190U Feb. 23 Jungfrau von Orleans F, Schiller 21 Der Mennonit Wildenbruch 28 Der Raub der Sabinerinnen Schonthan Mar. 6 Kabale und Liebe F. Schiller 13 Das Flinfte Rad H. Lubliner 20 Lorle oder: Dorf und Stadt C. Birch-Pfeiffer 27 Das Stiftungsfest G. v. Moser Apr. 12 Uriel Acosta K. Gutzkow li+ Im bunten Rock Schonthan & Schlicht 2k Der Konigsleutnant K. Gutzkow May 1 Papageno R. Kneisel 8 Unser Doktor L . Treptow 15 Madame Bonivard Halevy 200

APPENDIX D

German drama in translation in Cleveland since W.W.I

Date Pla£ Author

1916 The Weavers* Gehart Hauptmann 1919 Death and the Fool Hugo von Hofmannsthal 1921-22 An Episode Arthur Schnitzler The Farewell Supper Arthur Schnitzler 1923 Literature Arthur Schnitzler 192h The Miracle* Vollmoller & Reinhardt 1925 The Sunken Bell Hauptmann 1926-27 Goat Song Franz Werfel The Concert Hermann Bahr A Farewell Supper Schnitzler 1927-28 The Green Cockatoo Schnitzler 1930 The Fire in the Opera House Georg Kaiser Hinkemann (Broken-Man) Ernst Toller 1933 The Machine Wreckers Kaiser 1935 Girls in Uniform Christa Winsloe 1938 Volpone Stefan Zweig 19^5 Jacobowsky and the Colonel* Werfel 1955 Threepenny Opera* Bertolt Brecht 1958 Mother Courage Bertolt Brecht 1959 The Visit* Friedrich Durrenmatt Maria Stuart Friedrich Schiller 1962 Threepenny Opera* Brecht 19 Biedermann and the Firebugs* Max Frisch The Good Soldier Schweik Brecht Galileo Brecht 1 9 6 5 The Physicists Durrenmatt 1 9 6 6 Brecht on Brecht arranged by G. Tabori 1967 Marat/Sad e* Peter Weiss 1 9 6 8 Threepenny Opera* Brecht 1 9 6 9 In the Matter of J. Robert Oppenheimer* Heinar Kipphardt 1970 Threepenny Opera Brecht 1970 The Resistable Rise of Arturo Ui* Brecht 1971 Woyzeck Georg Buchner 197'U Happy End Brecht

♦not performed at the Playhouse The above list does not include operettas or musical adaptations such as The Merry Widow and The Chocolate Soldier which were presented often in Cleveland earlier this century. SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY

Primary

Gutzkow, Karl. Dramatisehe Werke. Vol. 7: Uriel Acosta. Leipzig: Brockhaus, 1862.

Kotzebue, August von. Menschenhass und Reue. In Deutsche National Literatur. Vol. 2. Part 2. Drama der klassischen Periode. Edited by Adolf Hauffen. Stuttgart: Union Deutsche Ver- lagsgesellschaft, n.d.

Moser, Gustav von. Der Bibliothekar. Edited by William A. Cooper. New York: American Book Co., 1902.

Sudermann, Hermann. Heimat. Introduction by F. G Schmidt. New York: D. C. Heath and Co., 1938.

Other Books Consulted

Aiken, Samuel C. Theatrical Exhibitions: A Sermon. Cleveland: Francis B. Penniman, Printer. 1836.

Alker, Ernst. Die deutsche Literatur im 19. Jahrhundert (1832-191*+). Stuttgart: Alfred Kroner Verlag, 1 9 6 1.

Arnold, Robert. Das deutsche Drama. Miinchen: Beck'sche Verlags- buchhandlung, 192 5.

Avery, Elroy McKendree. A History of Cleveland and its Environs. 3 vols. New York! Lewis Publishing Co., 1918.

Bab, Julius. Das Theater der Gegenwart: Geschichte der dramatischen Buhne seit 1870. Leipzig: J. J. Weber, 1928.

Bentley, Eric. In Search of Theater. New York: Random House Vintage Books, 1953*

______. What is Theater: Incorporating the Dramatic Event and Other Reviews I9 UU-1 9 6 7. New York: Atheneum, 1 9 6 8 .

Bauland, Peter. The Hooded Eagle. Modern German Drama on the New York Stage. Syracuse, New York: Syracuse University Press, 202 Brook, Peter. Introduction to The persecution and assassination of Marat as performed by the inmates of the asylum of Charenton under the direction of the marquis de Sade. by Peter Weiss. Translated by Geoffrey Skelton. New York: Atheneum, 1966.

Brown, Irving. "Cleveland Theatre in the Twenties." Ph.D. dissertation, Ohio State University, 1 9 6 1.

Bruford, Walter Horace, Theatre, Drama and Audience in Goethe's Germany. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1950.

Brummer, Franz. Lexikon der deutschen Dichter und Frosaisten. 6th ed. Nendeln-Liechtenstein: Klaus Reprint, 1975*

Carlson, Marvin. The German Stage in the Nineteenth Century. Metuchen, New Jersey: The Scarecrow Press, 1972.

Carter, Huntley. The Theatre of Max Reinhardt. New York: Benjamin Blom, 196M-.

Chandler, Frank W. Modern Contirr.ntal Playwrights. New York and London: Harper & Brother.. 1931*

Clark, Barret. A Study of the Modern Drama. New York: D . Appleton & Co., 1925.

______. The Continental Drama of Today. New York: Henry Holt & Co., 1915.

Cleveland und sein Deutschthum. Cleveland: German-American Publishing Co., I8 9 7 -I8 9 8 .

Cole, Toby and Chinoy, Helen. Actors on Acting: The Theories, Techniques, and Practices of the Great Actors of All Times as Told in Their Own Words. New York: Crown Publishers, 1970.

Cronau, Rudolf. German Achievements in America. New York: By the Author, 3t0 East 1 9 8 th Street, 191^-

Cunz, Dieter. They Came From Germany. New York: Dodd, Mead & Company, 1 9 6 6.

Demetz, Peter. Postwar German Literature. New York: 1 'gasus, 1970.

Devrient, Eduard. Geschichte der deutschen Schauspielkunst. Berlin: Eigenbrodler Verlag, 1929-

Dickinson, Thomas. The Theater in a Changing Europe. New York: Henry Holt *& Co. , n . d,

Dix, William S. "The Theater in Cleveland, Ohio, 185^-1875." Ph.D. dissertation, University of Chicago, 19^6. Ermatinger, Emil. Deutsche Pichter 1700-1900. 2 vols. Bonn: Athenaum Verlag, 19^9*

Ezekiel, Margaret U. "The History of the Stage in Cleveland 1875-1885- Ph.D. dissertation, Western Reserve University, 1967-

Faust, Albert. The Gentian Element in the United States. 1st ed, 2 vols. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co., 1909.

Flory, Julia McCune. The Cleveland Play House: How it Began. Cleveland: The Press of Western Reserve University, 1965-

Gaiser, Gerhard Walter. "The History of the Cleveland Theater from the Beginning to 1 8 5 ^." Ph.D. dissertation, Ann Arbor, Michigan: University Microfilms, 195^-

Garten, H. F. Modern German Drama. London: Methuen & Co., Ltd., 1959

Geisinger, Marion. Flays. Players, and Playwrights; an illustrated history of the theatre. New York: Hart Pub. Co., 1971-

Geissler, Rolf. Zur Interpretation des modernen Dramas: Brecht- Diirrenmatt"Frisch. Frankfurt a. M. : Verlag Moritz Diesterweg, 1 9 6 6.

Gregor, Joseph & Fulop-Miller, Rene. Das amerikanische Theater und Kino. Wien: Amalthea Verlag, 1931-

Grube, Max. The Story of the Meininger trans. by Ann Marie Koller. Coral Gables, Fla.: University of Miami Press, 1 9 6 3 .

Hapgood, Norman. The Stage in America 1897-1900- New York: The Macmillan Company, 1901.

Hatcher, Harlan and Durham, Frank. Giant from the Wilderness. Cleveland: The World Publishing Co., 1955*

Hawgood, John Arkas. The Tragedy of German-America. New York: Arno Press & New York Times, 1970.

Hinck, Walter. Das moderne Drama in Deutschland. Gottingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1973-

Higham, John. Strangers in the Land: Patterns of American Nativism 18Go-1925- New York: Atheneum, 1965-

Hornblow, Arthur. A History of the Theatre in America. 2 vols. Philadelphia and London: J. B. Lippincott Co., 1919-

Hughes, Glenn. A History of the American Theatre 1700-1950- New York: Samuel French, 1951- 20U Just, Klaus Gunther. Von der Grunderzeit bis zur Gegenwart: Geschichte der deutschen Literatur seit 1871- Bern: Francke Verlag, 1973-

Kennedy, James. A History of the City of Cleveland, its Settlement, Rise and Progress; 179^-189^! Cleveland: Imperial Press, IH9^

Kerr, Alfred. Das neue Drama. Berlin: s. Fischer Verlag, 1917.

KLingenberg, Karl-Heinz. Iffland und Kotzebue als Dramatiker. Weimar: Arion Verlag, 1 9 6 2,

Knudson, Hans, Deutsche Theatergeschichte. Stuttgart: Alfred Kroner Verlag, 1959-

Kummer, Friedrich. Deutsche Literaturgeschichte des neunzehnten Jahrhunderts. Dresden: Verlag von Carl Reissner, I9 0 9 .

Leuchs, Fritz A. H. The Early German Theatre in New York 18^-0-1872. New York: Columbia University Press, 1 9 2 8 .

Leverton, Garret. The Production of Later Nineteenth Century American Drama. New York: Bureau of Publications, Teachers College, Columbia University, 1936.

Martersteig, Max. Das deutsche Theater im neunzehnten Jahrhundert. Leipzig: Verlag von Breitkopf & Hartel, 1924.

Michael, /riedrich. Geschichte des deutschen Theaters. Stuttgart: Reclam, 1 9 &9 -

Miller, Jordan. American Dramatic Literature. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co., 1 9 6 1.

Mueller, Jakob. Aus den Erinnerungen eines Achtundvierzigers, Skizzen aus der deutsch-amerikanischen Sturm und Drang Periode der 50er Jahre. Cleveland: R. Schmidt Co., 18967

Newmark, Maxim. Otto Brahm: The Man and the Critic. London: G. E. Stechert & Co., 1 9 3 8 .

Nolle, Alfred. The German Drama on the St. Louis Stage. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania, 1917.

Orth, Samuel. A History of Cleveland Ohio. 3 vols. Chicago-Cleveland: The S. J. Clarke Publishing Co., 1910.

Pap, Michael S. Ethnic Communities of Cleveland. A limited edition reference work. Cleveland: Institute for Soviet and East European Studies, John Carroll University, 1973-

Fochmann, Henry A. German Culture in America. Madison: The University of Wisconsin Press, 1957. 205 Rose, William Ganson. Cleveland, the Making of a City. New York and Cleveland: The World Publishing Co., 1950.

Rusk, Ralph Leslie. The Literature of the Middle-Western Frontier. New York: Columbia University Press, 1925.

Sayler, Oliver, ed. Max Reinhardt and his Theatre. New York: Benjamin Blom, 19oS.

Schanze, Helmut. Drama im biirgerlichen Realisinus (1850-1890) - Frankfurt a. M.: Vittorio Klostermann, 1973*

Schlossmacher, Stephan. Das deutsche Drama in amerikanischen College- und Universitatstheater. Emsdetten: Verlagsanstalt Heinrich & J. Lechte, 193§

Shaw, Leroy, ed. The German Theater Today: A Symposium. Austin: University of Texas Press, 1 9 6 3 .

Silver, Reuben. "A History of the Kararnu Theater of Karamu House." Ph.D. dissertation, Ohio State University, 1 9 6 1.

Sinden, Margaret. Gerhart Hauptmann: The Prose Plays. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1957.

Soergel, Albert. Dichtung und Dichter der Zeit. 2nd. ed. Leipzig: R. Voigtlanders Verlag, 1912.

Stebbins, J. E, Fifty Years History of the Temperance Cause. Cincinnati, Ohio: Henry Howe, 18 7 U.

Stock, Frithjof. Kotzebue im literarischen Leben der Goethezeit. Dusseldorf: Bertelsmann Universitatsverlag, 1971.

Thomas, T. E. The Theatre. Dayton: Payne & Holden, 1866.

Thompson, L. F. Kotzebue: A Survey of his Progress in France and England. Paris: Libraire Ancienne Honord - Champion, 1 9 2 8 .

Winter, William. The Wallet of Time. 2 vols. New York: Benjamin Blom, 1913.

Witkowski, Georg. The German Drama of the Nineteenth Century. Trans­ lated by L. E. Homing. New York: Henry Holt & Co., 1909.

Wittke, Carl. We Who Built America: The Saga of the Immigrant. Cleveland: The Press of Western Reserve University, 19&f.

Zimmermann, G. A. Deutsch in Amerika. Chicago: Ackermann & Eyller, 1892. 206 Journals

Kopp, William Lamarr. "Das klassische deutsche Drama an den New Yorker Biihnen seit dem Zweiten Weltkrieg." Zeitschrift fur Kulturaustausch. 20, pt. 3- Stuttgart: Institut fur Auslandsbeziehungen, 1970.

Loomis, L. Grant. "The German Theater in San Francisco." University of California Publications in Modern Philology. 36, no. 8. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1952, pp. 193-2^2.

Olson, Esther Marie. "The German Theater in Chicago." Jahrbuch der deutsch-amerikanischen historischen Gesellschaft von Illinois. 33 (1937): 71-123.

Paetel, Karl 0. "Deutsches Theater in Amerika." Deutsche Rundschau. 8 1 (1955): 271-275-

Rothfuss, Hermann E. "The Beginnings of the German-American Stage." German Quarterly. 2U (1951): 93-102.

Trepte, Helmut. "Deutschtum in Ohio." Jahrbuch der deutsch- amerikanischen historischen Gesellschaft von Illinois. 32 (1937): 155-1*09.

Wood, Ralph. "Geschichte des deutschen Theaters von Cincinnati." Jahrbuch der deutsch-amerikanischen historischen Gesellschaft von Illinois": 32 (1932): Ull-522.

Zeydel, Edwin. "The German Theater in New York, 1 8 7 8 -1 9 1 ^." Jahrbuch der deutsch-amerikanischen historischen Gesellschaft von Illinois" 15 (1915): 255-309

Zucker, A. E. "The History of the German Theater in Baltimore." Germanic Review. 18 (19^+3): 123-135.

Magazines

Book Week, 22 May 1 9 6 6.

Play (Cleveland), 12 January 1925-

Der Spiegel, "Report uber die Deutschen in Nordamerika," 27 October 1975.

Time, 1*+ March 1 9 6 9. Newspapers Used Heavily

(No dates will be indicated - all were used mere than ten times.)

Cleveland Anzeiger.

Cleveland Plain Dealer.

Cleveland Press.

Cleveland Wachter am Erie.

Cleveland Wachter und Anzeiger, (including the Fiftieth Anniversary Edition, 9 August 1902.)

Newspapers Used Sparingly

Cleveland News, 16 March 1916, 30 March 1955* 11 December 195®» 6 October, 8 December 1959-

Cleveland Sun Press, 22 October 19f&> 22 April 19&5-

National Observer. 3 January 1 9 6 6.

New York Times, 6 October 1957, 7 June 1 9 6 8 .

Wall Street Journal, 10 March 1 9 6 9.

Mi s c ellan eous

Theater files of the Cleveland Public Library including clippings, reviews, and programs.