Vision of Life in Christopher Fry's Seasonal Comedies
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
VISION OF LIFE IN CHRISTOPHER FRY'S SEASONAL COMEDIES DISSERTATION SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF Master of Philosophy IN ENGLISH BY Sehar Fatima Harris UNDER THE SUPERVISION OF Professor K. S. Misra DEPARTMENT OP ENGLISH ALIGARH MUSLIM UNIVERSITY. ALIGARH (INDIA) DS1967 DEPARTMENT OF ENGLISH & MODERN EUROPEAN LANGUAGES ALIGARH MUSLIM UNIVERSITY ALIGARH—202002 (India) Fab Alary 22, 1991 TO tfmn IT nKc CONCSRK Cortifiea that Kiss, n«»hir ratiif-a Harris has ccacpleted har i^.rhil dissartiticn, castittoa ®Vi3lc!i3 cS £.iea in Cjjristori^ar Fry*o Zsmaontii Coesdl'*-',• wader try auparvtslon ORJ that *jo t!>o !:3ot of cy Irooud odga tha %«5£!c lo <atooo e^Jlaolvoly by tho c^mdldato horsdf • '^-<Z/lA/*-'Vl3-Y^ Or. E,3. Klsra Fro£e3sor of rajglish TABLE OF CONTSaSITS Page No. PRBPX:E i Chapter I : INTRODUCTION 1 Chapter II : A PHOEWIX TOO PRSQUBNT 2 6 Chapter III : A YARD OP SUN 62 CONCLUSION 103 A SELECT BIBLIOGRAPHY 116 •***•** PREFACE The present study aims at determining Fry's vision of life as it emerges from his serio-comic plays< nanr.ely, A Phoenix Too Frequent, The Lady's not for Burning, Venus Observed, The Dark Is Light Enough and A Yard of Sun. Fry is a relatively not adequately studied dramatist. He has either been approached as a landmark. in the revival of poetic drama in the twentieth coitury or has been both praised and criticized for manipulating a unique free verse style. The brillaiance of his langu age and the comedy in his plays have bean the prime con cern of the studies on Pry. But an adequate analysis of the vision of life which anerges from his major secular plays has been lacking so far. Because of the constraint on space all the serio-comic plays have not been analysed in detail. Only his first and last comedies have been analysed to demonstrate the consistency in Fry's approach to life. The intervening comedies have been briefly touched upon in the last chapter to support our conclusion about Fry' s vision of life. li The study comprises four chapters. The first chapter deals with Fry's early life, influences on him, his contact with the theatre, major researches done on his plays, his theory of comedy and the stance proposed to be taken in the present study. The second and third chapters contain respectively analysis of his first and last serio-comic plays, namely, A Phoenix Ibo Frequent ^^'^ A Yard of 3un» In the analysis the main thrust has been the working out of Fry's approach to life and hence the other dramaturgical components have naturally received less attention. In the final chapter the general points emerging from the analysis of the plays have been recapitulated. The comedies of which detailed analysis could not be given have been summarized only with reference to the vision of life contained in thern^ so that a reasonably complete picture of Pry's vision of life may be presented. In the preparation of the present study I wish to acknowledge my thanks and gratitude to my supervisor. Professor K.S. Misra, without whose help and assistence it would have been difficult to complete this task succss- fully. I would like to thank Professor S.M, Jafar Zaki, ill Chairman, Department of English £or his encouragement. I am also grateful to the members of the Maulana Azad Library and the English Department Seminar Library for their help in the preparation of the present study. FEBRUARY 1991 ( SSHAR PATIMA HARRIS ) CHATTER I INTRODUCTION Christopher Pry is considered as a landmark in the revival of English poetic drama in the twentieth century. After the hey-day of poetic drama in the Elizabethan and Jacobean periods, poetic drama had more or less disappeared except for the attempts by John Drydan in his verse plays. After a gap of a hundred and fifty years attempts were made in the nineteenth century by the Romantic and Victorian poets to revive this form. But almost all the poets were uncon nected with the theatre. Moreover, the tyranny of the theatre managers, and stardom of actors compelled thsn to write closet plays. Fresh attempts were made right from the beginning of the present century to reinstate poetic drama to its pristine glory by playwrights, like Stephen Phillips, James Flecker, Gordon Bottomley. John Masefield and John Drinkwater. But their attempts remained of historical importance and the history of theatrical per formance shows that they have been relegated into the lumber-room of past curiosities. The primary cause of their failure was perceived by T.3. Eliot. Eliot made a distinction between poetic drama in prose and poetic drama In verse. He w^s in favour of the latter. But he beli eved that the regular blank verse tradition, which had become outworn and rather remote from the living speech, should be avoided. He felt that the main cause of his predecessors' failure was attributable to their following the already exhausted Shakespearean blank verse tradition. Before we come to Fry it is relevant to have a cursory glance at Eliot's theory and practice in poetic drama and the causes for his failure. Eliot's laudable efforts are well known to the students of modem poetic drama. His main aim was to restore poetic drama to its pristine glory which it had once enjoyed in the Elizabethan period and for this he fought hard. Being a Christian, Eliot naturally started with religious plays which could help in the propagation of his spiritual and religious notions and then moved on to write more secular plays. He wanted the medium of his plays to be verse, not the Elizabethan blank verse tradi tion but which is close to conteir^porary speech idiom and was against poetry being used as a means of decoration. Instead, he believed that the language should be such that the reader is not fully aware of the medium but should be wholly engrossed in the 'dramatic action' and the •situation between the characters.' Eliot also voiced his concern against the mingling of prose and verse in the same play as it distracts the attention of the reader from the play itself to the medium of its expression. In fact, he preferred verse because emotional intensity can best be conveyed only through verse. It makes drama more complete and dramatic. Eliot favoured a poetic drama which should give entertainment not of the crude sort as in the case of the Elizabethans, but entertainment as a fonn of art. On the other hand, Eliot was convinced that a good poetic play should have two levels of actions, one which is outer and another, the inner structure, which Eliot calls the 'musical organization.' This 'doubleness in action' ' could be well explained with reference to Shakespeare's great tragedies — Hamlet, Macbeth and King Lear, in which the outer structure is full of bloody action and horrified situations in which the hero is caught, but underneath this can be seen the journey of the hero from a state of darkness to a state of spiritual enlightenment. 1. T.S. Sliot, "Poetry and Dran a, " On Poetry and Poets, (London, Faber i Faber Ltd., 1965), p. 74. 2. See T.S. Eliot, Selected Essays (London, Faber 5t Faber Ltd., 1951), p. 229. This inner structure, according to Sliot, gives unity to the play. 31iot's failure can be attributed to his obsession with 'religious' and 'spiritual' themes and his putting his verse 'on a thin diet' till poetry disappeared comp letely from his last play. He also made the mistake of choosing a worn-out tradition of social comedy to convey serious spiritual themes. "By adopting this pattern of ironic social comedy, Eliot placed upon his genius a regrettable limitation. He tied himself to a social, and still more to theatrical, conventions which were already out worn when the plays were written." Also responsible for his failure is his lukewarm interest in human emotions and issues. It is due to his excessive involvement with the holymen and their problems that he ignores people of lower status and their petty problems. In his zest for imparting spiritual message to the people, he even neglects his characters which are left simply as mouthpieces of the playwright. Apart from this, Eliot also made his charac ters undergo drastic changes in personality without much S.M. Browne, TheMakinq of T.S. Eliot's Plays (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 19 69) , p. 342. incentive on the part of the characters. This leads to the belief that his drama appeals more to the head than to the heart which is contrary to the claim made by the poet - dramatists of the twentieth century. Eliot started writing plays for a small audience but later moved on to a bigger audience. Here he is cont rasted with Yeats who started with a large audience and moved on to a smaller audience. Eliot's contribution lies in his showing the path along which poetic drama could develop further by paying special attention to the verse medium, and subject-matter which should be humane as well as entertaining. Pry was a tort;h-»bearer of the concern voiced and experiments made by W.B. Yeats and T.s. Eliot. In fact, it was "Fry who was to inherit Eliot's mantle in the 4 theatre." Some critics, while emphasizing Fry's position, have gone to the extent of saying that "In the late 1940's and early 1950's, verse drama was repre sented in the English theatre not so much by T.3.