Lighting and setting designs for Holberg's Erasmus Montanus
Item Type text; Thesis-Reproduction (electronic)
Authors Russell, Rufus Talmadge, 1931-
Publisher The University of Arizona.
Rights Copyright © is held by the author. Digital access to this material is made possible by the University Libraries, University of Arizona. Further transmission, reproduction or presentation (such as public display or performance) of protected items is prohibited except with permission of the author.
Download date 23/09/2021 21:39:25
Link to Item http://hdl.handle.net/10150/551387 LIGHTING AND SETTING DESIGNS
FOR HQLB1RG?S ERASMUS MONTANDS ■
fey / ; ; ■ ■ • ' Rmfms T» Russell
A Thesis Submitted to the Faculty of the
■ DEPARTMENT OF DRAMATIC'ARTS
In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements . For the Degree of
MASTER OF ARTS
In the Graduate College
UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA
1 9 5 9
This thesis has been submitted in partial fulfill ment of requirements for an advanced degree at the University of Arizona and is deposited in the University Library to be made available to borrowers under rules of the Library.
Brief quotations from this thesis are allowable without special permission, provided that accurate acknow ledgement of source is made. Requests for permission for extended quotation from or reproduction of this manuscript in whole or in part may be granted by the head of the major department or the Dean of the Graduate College when in their judgement the proposed use of the material is in the interests of scholarship. In all other instances, however, permission must be obtained from the author.
SIGNED r X
APPROVAL BY THESIS DIRECTOR
This thesis has been approved on the date shown below:
A/O ROBERT C. BURROUGHSitte A Associate Professor of Dramatic Arts TABLE OF COITEITS
Chapter Page
INTRGBWCTieH ooooo oo oo oooaooooo o o ooooo ooaoo o o
I HISTORICAL BACKGROUND OF HOLBERG,o o o o o o o o o do o 1
II A REVIEW OF THE STAGING METHODS DURING HOLBERG?S REIGN AS A PLAYWRIGHT0...... 14
III AN ANALYSIS OF THE PLAY... o o o o o o o o p o o o o o o o t> o 26 IV THE DESIGNER’S APPROACH TO BiHASMH S • MQNTANU3 000000 ooooo 000000 0000000 3D
V CONCLUSIOMo000000000000000000000000000000000 70
Ao OO OOO O OOOOOOO OOOOO O OOOO O p o O OOOOOO 74
So O O O OOOO OOOO OO OO O O OOOO OOOOO O 0 o o do o 77
S XSi/IO OSAPSTY* O OOO OOOOOOOO O O OOOOO OOO 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 0 O 78 LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS
Page
G0LOR SIODIOPGEjS o o o o o o o o o o o o a O O O O O O O O O O tf O O O O O O O O 0 O O O O 0 o o 46 o o o o o o o o o o o o o o 6 o-o o o o 0 0-0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o o oo o o 4 7
GROUND PLANS oooooooo o oooo oooo o 0 * ^ 0 o ooo ooo o o o coo oooo o o U 48
0-0 0 0 0 ooo o ooo o oooo po ooo oooooo oo ooo oooo ooo<>o 49
FRONT ELEVATIONS
DROPS O OOOOOOOO o oooo o o oooo o o ooo o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o 50 o o o o o o oo ooo o o o o o o Oooo O 0 O 0 ooo o o o o o o ooo o o o o 51
WINGS o o o o o 6 o o oo o O o o o o o o ooo o o oooo o o ooo o o o oooooo 5 2 o o oooo oooo oooo o o o o o o o o oooooo o o o o oooooooo o o 5 3
BORDERS oooooo ooooo o o ooo ooo o oooooo o o o o o o o o oo-ooo 54
ooo ooo oooooo oooo ooo ooo oooooo o o o o oooooo 0 55
REAR ELEVATIONS
DROP O O O O O O O O o O o OOOOO O 0 O O O P O O O O O O OOOOOO O o o o o ooo 55
WIN OS o o o o o o o ooooo o o ooo 0 o d o o o o o o o o o o oooo o o o oooo 57 ' o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o 'o oooooo o O O O O O O 0 o o o o o 58
BACKING m i T o ooooooooooo ooooo ooo oooo OOOOOO oooo oooooooo o
LIGHT PLOT o o O O 0 o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o
INSTRUHENT SCHEDULE SHEET....o o oooooo oooo ooo o o o o oooooo.. 67
SWITCHBOARD SET-UP CHART....o o o o o o o o o 0 o o ooo ooooo O 0-0 0 00 0 0 68
DETAIL DRAWINGS.o....o.....o..o .....o...... 60 ■ ■ - 0 0 . 0 0 0 . . 0 0 . 0 0 . 0 OOOO. . o O 00 0 0 .0 0 . . . 0.0 0 0 0 69 ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The author wishes to express sincere gratitude
to Professor Robert 0. Burroughs, director of this
thesis, and to Professor John Eo Lafferty, whose
guidance was invaluable in this study*
Also, appreciation is extended to Professor
Oscar Jo Campbell, Jr., for his assistance and interest in this project.
' RTR INTRODUCTION
Ludvig' Heiberg was perhaps one of the most gifted philosophers, playwrights, authors, and men of letters ever to emerge from late 17th and early 18th Century
Europeo He fathered the drama movement in Scandinavia which eventually produced men such as Henrik Ibsen and his naturalistic style of drama.
The main functions of this thesis are threefold:
First, to analyze the man Holberg and to learn how and where he acquired the flare for quick wit and comic timing which some authorities feel borders on genius| to learn how and where his writing style developed^ to shed light on the nature of theatre in his day; and to acquaint the reader with the volumes of work, both literary and dramatic, which this man formulated.
Secondly, to review the particular methods of staging during the period in which Holberg was active as a playwright; to touch upon the trends of theatre immedi ately prior to his tenure as a playwright; and to illustrate how these trends affected his writing style and his methods of play construction.
i Thirdlyy to submit for consideration a complete set of designs for the setting of Holbergfs Erasmus
Montanus. These designs include ground plans/ front and rear elevations, detail drawings, reproductions of color sketches, and lighting plots with instrument schedule sheets and switchboard set-up charts=
The purpose of these designs, is to show how the humor and warnith of the play may be captured, how the style of setting chosen may support a play of this type, and how the universality of the play can be brought to the attention of a prospective audience/
The thesis contains three types of material:
First, the regular typed text, or body, of the work; secondly, the series of design plates which have been photostated and reduced to regulation thesis size; and lastly, color reproductions of watercolor sketches which have been mounted on the proper-sized paper for insertion into: the body of the thesis <,
ii CHAPTER I
HISTORICAL BACKGROWHD OF HOLBERC
Ludvig Holberg was born in Bergen, Norway, on - ■ i December third, 1684, the youngest of twelve children,
At that time, Norway was under the crown of the King of
Denmark, so he is generally considered as being Danish,
His father was an army officer, and his mother was the
granddaughter of a bishop, In his youth Holberg attended
a German grammar school and later went to a Latin school,
both located in Bergen, In 1704, after two years of study,
he graduated from the University of Copenhagen, While
there, he studied English, French, Italian, and several
other languages, all of which aided him immeasurably in
his travels during coming years, It is interesting to
note that philosophy, one of his principal subjects while
attending the University, was to become the satirical sub
ject for some of his later plays, although he actually
cared little for the study.
Unless otherwise noted, the bulk of information con cerning Holberg ?s life was obtained primarily from the books of Oscar James Campbell, Jr,, Professor of English, presently on the staff of the Huntington Library, Columbia University, New York| a leading authority on the life and works of Ludvig Holberg, All other sources for Holberg?s biography are duly noted in footnote form throughout the 'text, 1 ;/ ' ■■ ' . 2 - ' ’ During Helberg?s youths Bergen was considered one
of the leading cultural centers of Europe5 consequently,
its citigens traveled extensively and lived in an atmos phere of cosmopolitan worldlinesso Due to this atmosphere,
the cityvs population was able to take better advantage of
Europe8 s intellectual centers, such as Holland and England,
and they (the citisens) considered themselves more mundane
than averageo
Holberg taught in Bergen for a short time after
graduation, then went to Holland, where it is believed he
intended to follow the vocation of his father and enter military serviceo This never materialised, however, because
after a year in Holland he ventured further to England and
finally enrolled at Oxford, where he spent two years in inde pendent studyo Leaving England, he went to Germany as a
traveling companion to the son of a prominent Danish family.
After returning to Denmark in 1709, Heiberg taught at
Brochvs College in Copenhagen, and it was while he was on
the staff there that he began to explore the field of writing
by penning the first of his many historical articles, In
1714, after five years of meager earnings at Broch?s, he was 1 granted a position of extraordinary professor at the
This title carried no salary; it only guaranteed him the right to fill the first vacancy on the permanent staff. 3
University by proclamation of the King of Denmark« Holberg held this position for four years, during which time he became what might be termed a Mtraveling fellow" of the
University. As such, he journeyed over most of Europe, visiting Paris, Rome, and other cultural centers. It seems reasonable to assume that while in Italy Holberg had his 1 first limited contact with Italian comedy. It is quite evident that this acquaintance was to have lasting influence on Holberg during his years as a playwright. :
In 1716, after leaving Rome, he literally walked back to Copenhagen, meeting many types of people during his journey and undoubtedly maturing to a large degree insofar as his outlook and philosophy of life were concerned. This cross-continental trip furnished him with much valuable material for his plays.
By modern standards, Holberg might be considered a vagrant, but these years of apparently aimless wandering were not without purpose. They served largely to satisfy his intellectual curiosity. Through his association with foreign countries and their people, Holberg arrived at a good understanding of the cultures of England, France, and
Germany, without which he could never have developed his talent for satire.
1 ' "o..we have positive evidence of Holberg9s early acquaintance with the Commedia Dell9 Arte", Campbell, Oscar James, Jr., The Comedies of Holberg. p. 16. 4
At the age of 35, he was finally awarded a permanent position on the faculty of the University, where he became a professor of Latin* It was while serving in this capacity that he caused a wide dispute over a history of Denmark which had been written by a scholar named H^yer* Holberg could not agree with the history and said as much in his first satirical writing, Peder Paarso^ This essay was to lead him eventually into direct contact with the theatre*
In 1721, three influential people in Copenhagen began thinking seriously about the formation of a Danish theatre* Holberg*s spreading fame, due to Peder Paars„ brought him to the attention of this group, and they inquired as to his willingness to write for the proposed company*
Since he was very much interested, he was commissioned as the company playwright* Holberg*s relationship with this theatre was to leave a lasting impression on the Danish drama, for he became the first man to write a native drama in the na tive tongue, using as M s characters native Danish types*
The theatre opened August 28, 1722, and presented five of
Holberg*s best works* For the first time in the history of
Denmark, the people had a drama of their own* 1
1 Peder Paars is a bitter satire on Danish life, touching on every social level then existing* There was much protest from all sides, but the work was very popular and served to establish Holberg as a writer of keen satire reflecting the traits of. his countrymen* : , . . ; s
Holberg was greatly influenced by MoHere and the
Conmiedia Bell* Arte® He tended to gather material which had never before been used and to place it on the stage as a distinctly new type of dramatic approach — an approach which had an enormous effect on Dane-Horwegian literatures and which ultimately spread to become quite popular in
France5 Swedens Germanys and Holland» Heiberg7s connection with the theatre lasted six years, during which time he wrote some 25 plays which were extremely well received.
In spite of this popularity, however, the organization experienced financial difficulties, and was on the verge of bankruptcy before King Frederick IT granted the company royal support in 1728, Following this grant, the company . became known as the $,Royal PlayersUnder this arrangement, everything would have been satisfactory had it not been for two stumbling blockss (1) Holberg7 s hesitancy in writing any more.satirical comedies because of the many heated controversies he was causing, and (2) a fire in October of
1728 which all but destroyed the city of Copenhagen, caus ing government support to be withdrawn from the theatre.
Before aid could be reinstated to the drama group,
Frederick IT died, leaving his throne to Christian TI, who supported certain church elements in denouncing any form of drama. This event killed active theatre in Denmark and, at the same time, apparently put ah end to Holberg7s capacity 6 as a playwrighto As Professor Campbell states in his books
Although it is customary to speak of Holberg?s dramatic development as almost interrupted by these events, the fire and cessation of royal support, the plain facts seem to show that before this time he was written out. Almost all of his comedies were the result., of one sudden impulse to expression, ■L
Aft#r these incidents, Holberg never again devoted the full measure of his intellectual ability to the writing of drama, A logical conclusion must be drawn as to why this occurredg After spending so much of his youth and early manhood in the cultural centers of Europe, his return to Copenhagen revealed the Danish way of life to be ridiculous in comparison to the formal cultures of
England, Holland, France, Germany, and Italy| and he merely recorded what he saw. However, after becoming re-accustomed to his homeland, these seemingly absurd in congruities faded§ and as his status as an academician developed, his interest became less satirical and more scholarly, Holberg was made a professor of history in 1730 and devoted the greater part of his future years to the writing of his many histories. In 1737, he was appointed treasurer of the University,
^Campbell, eja, cit,, p, 41,
^See Appendix for list of Holberg’s works. Theatre again enters the picture in 1746, Upon the death of Christian VI, the crown passed to, Frederick V, who proved to be a patron of the arts; thus the Danish theatre was once more given royal support and began to flourish, Holberg?s plays were now more popular than ever, and each night one or more of his comedies was presented to the audience, At first, Holberg had no active relationship with the new theatre, but public inter est in his plays stimulated him to write six more. He seemed to have lost his touch, however, for these plays were evidently lacking in sharpness and spirit and they did not exhibit the Quality of his earlier works, This was to be his last connection, in any capacity, with the theatre.
In recognition of land donations to educational institutions of Denmark, Frederick V awarded the rank of
Baron to Holberg in 1747, Thdrs was; the only payment he ever received for his tremendous contributions to Danish drama, ?l¥ithout the steadying effects of Holberg?s author ity in native comedy, Danish poets and dramatists might have postponed the development of a native Danish drama,llJ"
Holberg retired from active life and spent his last years on his country estate writing short histories and
iHartnoll, Phyllis (Ed,) The Oxford Companion to the Theatre, p, 704, _ ... 8 completing his autobiography,. He died in Copenhagen Janu ary 28, 1754, of a lung infection* He was M**/buried as he lived, simply, almost unnoticed by his fellow citizens
*eethe keen modern satirist who made the Danish bourgeoisie laugh at itself
There seems to be no question"that Holberg was a great man, and that his plays were just another method of expressing his views on the growing pains of a specific culture, but the methods which he employed intthe writing of his plays are interesting and enlightening*
Basically, Holberg wrote four types of plays, all
, ,, ■ ' ' » of which are comedies* First, there were his Domestic
Comedies of Character* These plays ridicule the ideals of one central figure* Second, he wrote Simple Comedies of Character* Here, Holberg departs from his first method by switching the main inter-play of character from the leading character9s family to some other element in the play* Third are his Comedies of Intrigue* With these, he uses a host of tricks and *gimmicks* to provide the main interest of the play. This style encompasses the use of mistaken identities as well as many other standard farcical traits» The most outstanding characteristic of this type of drama is that the central interest of the play rests not
^Campbell, gj). bit* 9 pp* 58-9* 9 upon the leading role, but rather upon the humor of the trickery perpetrated upon this character<, The fourth and final style of writing employed by Holberg was his Comedies of Mannero Actually, the plays in this group are miscellan-- ecus pieces concerned with a variety of subjects. All of his plays have one basic common denominator, however; each one effectively satirizes some social or political folly which is not usually treated as being the foible of any particular individual of the play. .
Any great man is subject to influences which tend to mold M s greatness. So it was with Holberg,. though in his case many have accused Mia of copying or mimicking
; ; - , . ' ■■■ ■ ■ . - ■ ■'' : ' . ' - ■■ . .. . those who influenced him the most. This accusation is wholly unjust, as we shall see.
Heiberg is generally believed to have been most influenced, insofar as his comic ideas and writings were concerned, by two elements. (1) the style of Moliere, and
(2) the works of the Commedia Sell® Arte. In regard to this, many scholars have labeled. Holberg the ^Danish Moliere”
This is a false comparison, as Campbell is quick to point outs
The difference in effect which the work • of the two men produce upon the reader is due largely to the difference in the kind of realism which they felt bound to show on the stage. Moliere wrote for audiences who possessed a preference for refined and thought ful laughter.&=his figures were drawn only after a compromise with realism had been reached... they are therefore, always well-mannered and decently behavedoaoHolberg, on the contrary, wrote for people with little or no literary and dramatic backgroundo-1-
Gne might say that Holberg was a true realist, giving his people exactly what he saw. He learned a great deal from
the French writer and made valuable nse of the skills he
acquired by observing the Frenchmane s works very closely*‘
The fact that he was able to put his observances to use
resulted from his exposure to French-influenced drama while he wrote for the Danish theatre, because, during
this time, a French director was manager of the drama
groupo From Moliere, Heiberg freely borrowed stock comic
figures, methods of expounding, character groupings, more
than a few plots, and many examples of comic detail* This is particularly evident in his Domestic Comedies of Char
acter * A similarity can easily be seen, because most of
Moliere9s famous comedies, Tartuffe. Doctor in Spite of
Himselfo etc*, are plays of the type mentioned above*
It is said of Holberg, "A writer of such comedies has two
distinct problems: First, the construction of the family
group; and second, the introduction, the display, and
final disposition of the main character* In solving both
these problems, HblEerg followed Moliere9s method, even in
details
ICampbell, #p*. §it*.0 p* 13#*'
^Ibid*, p* 95* 11
Holberg also took his character delineations from
Moliereo For - example, in lollere the strong figure is the mother — the same with Holberg 0 In Holiere the comic
figure is usually the father — the same with Holberg=
In Mo He r e there is almost always a 51 common-sense8’ char
acter — the same with Holberg„ Witness the fact that in plays of both Moliere and Holberg the entrance of the comic
hero is usually postponed until his frailties have been
vividly described by members of his family» Note the 1 evident similarity of Erasmus Montanas and Tartuffeo
Although Moliere influenced Holbergj, this is no
indication Holberg was a cheap imitator of the French mastero "The truth is, not only that Holberg possessed a
profoundly original comic spirit, but also that with the
dramatic ideas which he learned from Moliere he combined
and interrelated those derived from other sources
One of the other sources, and the second main influ
ence on Holberg, was the Commedia Dell’ Arte* Research re
veals that Holberg probably never actually saw the Commedia 3 . - . ; . Dell’ Artec He read about them thoroughly and developed a
great liking forethe stock characters employed by the Italian
groupo The company from which Holberg gained the greatest *2
^Campbell, O£o cite, p 0 104»
2Ibid0, pc 143o
^Ibido„ pc 140o ' . : 12 benefit was the group which toured Europeg centering in
Paris in 1662 and staying in that city for 26 years0
During this period, plays which had been performed by the
Italians were printed in book form, and it was here that
Holberg became intimately acquainted with the Commedia
Dell? Arte style. Primarily9 Holberg borrowed the skeletal plot idea from the Italians; i.e., the plot can be regarded as a basic skeleton on which hang the more-or-less unre lated scenes of horse-play and nonsense.^ This can be borne out by analyzing his Comedies of Intrigues for in these he patterns himself after the Italians very closely.
It is important to make note of the fact that Holberg?s drama is closely related to that of the Commedia Dell?
Arte, because it inherited the elements of humor which are quickly and easily adaptable to farcical characters. It is the opinion of the writer that Holberg owes two main things to the craftsmanship of his works insofar as the Commedia
Dell? Arte is concerned: (1) the use of the stereotype lover, and (2) the buffoon, clown-like figure who is instru mental in the development of the plot.
These are the elements which tended, for the most part, to mold and crystallize Holberg?s methods of play— writing. Men of literature such as Ben Jonson, George Far-
-^Evidenee the Mscenario?? method for which the Commedia Dell? Arte is.famous. , t .13
qntiar5 Thomas Addison5, and many others also influenced
Holiberg, but they served mainly in furnishing him with
i -C:/ :This, then, was the man Holberg. A man well respect
ed throughbut Europe and bbnSidered by his countrymen to
be the, father of Danish drama„ Only rarely have his works
been translated into Englishj and because of this, when he
is viewed in respect to world literature, he seems rather
''insignificant^. ;»■ But in the Scandinavian, countries he is ;.
considered a giant» Campbell and others seem to think that
he ranks among the great comedy writers of all timeo
And if not the greatest, then certainly one of the most
interesting 5 „ 0he is interesting because his work illus
trates, better than that of almost anyone else, the process
by which elements of widely different sorts may be combined
by a genius so as to produce a profoundly original
1 Campbell, Bp 0 jltc a p 0 320 = v CHAPTER II
: . ' A RE1TIW OF THE STAGING METHODS
‘ HURIM"HOLBERG»S REIGN AS : APLAYWRIGHT
The period during which Holberg lived and the few years when he served as a playwright were important years to the growth of the theatre in Europe» The staging methods of established European theatres at this time were vivid and amiversalo The changes which spanned the years from the Restoration to the latter part of the 18th
Century were legiono For the purpose of this chapter, only those changes/'whlch would have bearing on Holbergv s
the basic staging methods employed by theatres during this time, a parallel development of lighting will also be presented, in order to provide, as completely as is possi ble, a true picture of the technical theatre with which
Holberg had to concern himself in the Writing of his plays«
were not actually performed until the early part of the 18th Century, but for sake of clarity it is of value to make note of those changes in staging 15 theatre may he more easily achievedo
Physically, by the arrival of the Restoration, which was approximately 1660, theatre had grown consider ably since its recovery from the Dark Ages o> Europe, especially Italy, had possessed public theatre houses 1 since 16370 This meant that when Holberg began to write for the stage, his theatre possessed a building which had been designed and built specifically for the presentation of dramatic productions0 Such a building usually had the following standard equipment: (1) a proscenium arch which separated the stage from the audienceg (this arch could have as many as three doors in each side to accomodate the actors? entrances and exits);. (2) a deep forestage, which was a carry-over from the Elizabethan period; (3) a fly gallery, an area which had been in constant use since the latter part of the Renaissance; (4) a proven method of scene painting known as the Diagonal Perspective, which had been introduced by Fernando ©alii de Bibiena in the
^The first theatre for the general public was the San Oassiano Theatre built in Venice in 1637» The first actual theatre, however, was the Teatro Famese, constructed in 1617-18o Hartnell„ P*„ The Oxford Companion to the Theatre, pp, 492 & 712. “ — _ _
2The Bibiena family of Italy, throughout three generations of Scene designers, spread their influence over the whole of Europe. Ibid., p. 713. ; 16 early part of the 17th Century! (5) the utilisation of candles in chandeliers, in footlights, and in candelabrum for the purpose of lighting the playsf and (6) the curtain, which had seen limited use. during the Restoration and which was new employed primarily to open and close the play*
On the stage of Holberg9s theatre, there were tried and proven methods of scenery operation and shifting®
There were the wings, whic h had bbem in use as early as
1618 and were considered to be one of the most essential elements in scene design® These wings were quite ingenious in their operation! they were placed on stage in grooves that had been cut into the stage floor® This was done to facilitate easier shifting in and out of the scenes®x
These units could, be brought onstage until they met in the center and formed a solid backdrop on which could be painted any One of a number of scenes® . When the scene was over, the two wings were pulled offstage to reveal another scene, usually an interior® This method accommodated scene shifts with no interruptions in the continuity of the performances ®
■ • - There were the traps in the stage floor, under#eath which were fashioned elevator stages, a device which had seen constant use since the Restoration® These traps, or
3-Bo swell, E ® , The, Restoration Court Stage, p® 151® : : ; ■■■' “ i? trap doorsp were usually constructed for easy removal9 in
order to allow an elevator stage of the same size to
: raise and fill the trap: opening<, : The elevators were oper
ated by a pulley .system^ manually controlled, attached to
heavy framing which bounded the elevator stage on all
sideso In operation, the trap door was removed in one of
several ways^ and the elevator stage, adorned with actors
and/or set pieces, appeared as if by magic», There were
also small traps on the apron, equipped similarly to those
on the stage proper, which were used for sudden appearances
of single actorso
There was a supply of black maskings, presumably
black drapes similar to the type found in theatre today,
used for shielding the audiencefs view of the backstage
operation. There was the gridiron, sometimes referred to
as the "floor over the ceiling*8, - from which were suspended
chandeliers and the one almost indispensable item to this
type of theatre --the painted backdropo^ This drop was
, 1 • • -i ‘ ^ _ ■ - ^These doors could be removed by sliding them back and underneath the stage floor in special slanted grooves, or by having 18the door taken away altogether and replaced V for the occasion by a closure of a special type to allow a y sudden appearance,,,88 Hartnoll, bp0 bit0, p, 763,
" V ^Boswell, pp, git,, p, 152,
3ln some theatres^ especially those on the continent, not all of these: drops /were suspended from the fly area, They were raised through a special trap opening in the stage floor, 88TMis action,,,entailed a greater depth, so that the continental theatre cellar often deseended for four ©r five stories, Hartnoll, '■pit < p, 764, 18 usually painted in forced perspective so as to give the illusion of gigantic pieces of ornate architectureo^
Holherg had at his command the benefit of over one hundred years of developments in stage lighting tech niques o In addition to working with the candles mentioned previously, he was able to take advantage of the experi ments conducted in the 16th Century by Sebastiano Serlio, an Italian Renaissance painter and architect,, Serlio had introduced color to the stage in the form of bottles filled with colored liquids and placed before the candles„ This innovation had been used throughout Europe for a century before Holberg began his careera As a result of their continual use and improvement, playwrights such as Holberg felt at ease when they spoke of special effects such as moonlight. He, Holberg, had the benefit of working with reflectors for the lights on the stage; these reflectors were the work of England9s greatest theatre personage dur ing the early 17th Century, Inigo Jones.
The manner of lighting the stage and the actual location in the theatre of the sources of illumination had long been established. The apron on which Holberg?s actors gave birth to his lines was lighted primarily by a series
^MacGowan, K., and Melnitg, W=, The Living Stage, pp. 87, 229. Illustrations representative of the type mentioned in the text are to be found on these pages. 19
of bracket lamps attached to the frontispiece on each side
of the proscenimm arch, and also by one or two chandeliers»
**Candles were usually placed about the circumference of the
suspended hoops which were raised above the actors* heads 1 by means of pulley arrangementso!* The location of the
footlights is self-explanatory, but their value to the
success of the play was changing= A method of dimming these
candles had undergone experimentation in 1639 when a
designer named Nicola Sabbattini perfected a device consist
ing of a series of perforated metal collars, controlled by
the wires from which they were hung so that they could be 2 dropped on cue over the lights, thus dimming the scene.
The Oxford Companion to the Theatre has made a
very keen observation about stage lighting during this time.
It states that during the late 17th and early 18th Centur
ies the specificlproblem involved in lighting was not a
way to light the stage proper, but rather a way most
effectively to illuminate the theatre as a whole. This problem existed because at this period, little or no thought
had been given to the ndimming18 or extinguishing of the
house lights. The general plan of lighting in those days
usually called for a given number of candles for5the house
-kPuobs. I.. Stage Lighting, p. 36.
^Simonson, L. , The Stage is Set, p. 256. Contains an illustration of Sabbattini’s dimmer system. 20 and a like designated number of candles for the stage areas.
Once this allocation was accomplished, the lighting for the show was considered completed.
Since the theatre of Heiberg’s time utilised the
staging methods perfected during the Restoration, it is logical to assume that it was also forced to endure the
crafts which were born because of those methods. One such
craft which bears special mention is that of a man called
the Candlesnuffer. This m a n ’s job would no doubt seem annoying to modern audiences, in that the continuity of the play would suffer because of this figure, who regularly made his way through the audience and up on the stage in the midst of a scene in order to snuff out a few candles and
thereby dim the lighting of the play."*"
The Restoration also bequeathed to Holberg and
other playwrights of the 18th Century net only its methods
of play production, but also its procedures of theatre
operation. This is perhaps best exemplified by the manner
in which the performances themselves were promulgated.
Notice of a performance usually began with a loud affrontry,
consisting of the beating of a drum and the blaring of a
trumpet, prior to the opening of the box office. This
-^Lawrence, W.J. , Old Theatre Bays and Ways. pp= 19-21. This man .was employed wherever tEere was a theatre house and active in his trade as late as the latter half of the 18th Century. 21 .
practice is believed t© have originated as early as 1600,
and proved so successful that the event was continued,
minus the drum, as’ late as the 19th Century.
This, then, was the state of the theatre and its
staging methods when-Heiberg first became personally ac
quainted with it. During the first fifty years of the
18th Century, Heiberg witnessed important changes in the
staging methods of his theatre...changes which directly
affected him in his capacity as a playwright. One of the most important of these was the use, or rather the lack of
use, of the curtain. Since it seems to have been more-ore
less forgotten by the playwrights of the period, they
found other methods by which to end their scenes or acts.
One such method made use of the wings sliding together to
form a new acting area or sliding open to reveal another
scene, but the most outstanding method was known as
’’scene-shutting® or ^seene-closing18 ®
Heiberg had to use the same type of scenery which
was used during the Restoration, almost without exception.
His wings, painted backdrops, and forestage were as important
to him as were the actors who performed in his plays; and
these technical elements, his most assessable tools,
3-A method whereby Holberg and other playwrights of the period were able to close a scene by shifting the actors to a new locality on the stage without their ever haying to leave it. Hicoll, A.i History.of Early 18th Century Drama, 1700-1750. p. 152. : : : ■ . - ■■ . 22: . accomplished a great deal. Note is made of the fact that
scene designers 5, and therefore playwrightss used the same
settings over and over again9 regardless of the type of play they were presenting. This especially imclmded the practice of repeatedly using the same painted backdrop for
different kinds of productions. This would account, in part, for the simplicity employed by Holherg in most of his plays. Reference is made to the similarity of his play construction insofar as his street scenes are concerneds
specifically those to be found in his plays Erasmus, Mont anus a
Jeppe of the Hill, and The Political Tinker. With the physical nature of the theatre as it was, Holberg^s task as a playwright was simplified a great deal, especially in
those portions of his plays pertaining to the unities.
The writer- feels it safe to assume that at the time Heiberg was engaged as a company playwright, he was well acquainted with the advantages and limitations of his particular theatre and stage. Since his theatre was -basically the same as other
theatres throughout Europe, it is therefore assumed that the restrictions which he encountered were considered normal for
the period, and presented no unfamiliar hardships. ‘ Rather,
these restrictions served as a sort of guide by whic h he was able to exhibit his art.
^Street scenes were usually played in front of these painted backdrops. . 3" I . 23
There was ome change of which Heiberg had occasion to take advantageo This was the addition of set-pieces^ to the stageo By the application of these set-pieces, he nrast have been able to place new emphasis on certain phases of his playwriting, and consequently, impart an entirely new dimension to the production=
Another change which transpired in the years of
Heiberg’s activity was Europe’s increasing trend toward realismo Reasons for this trend were connected with a growing tendency for the stage to become more shallow.
This trend could not have had too much effect on the playwright, however, because it did not begin to make it—
: ■ '' ' ' ' " ' ' , "" ' • self felt until Heiberg was writing his last plays, at the mid-way mark of the 18th Century0
During these years of change in the methods of stag ing, there were also changes occurring in the development and improvement of lighting techniques« Improvements were . attempted on the use of reflectors in order to increase the amount of light actually illuminating the actors, more candles were added throughout the theatre, and a new innova tion had just been tried — the use of a series of candles, mounted perpendicularly on a stand and placed in the wings, for side lighting« ,
^-Set-piece. “Any piece of scenery — usually fairly small, standing by itself in the scene0” Gassner, J e, Producing the Play, p. 837, 24
This was Heiberg*s theatres a theatre which was usually one and a half times as large in the stage areas as it was in the auditorium| an institution which had just emerged from the discord caused by the Thirty Tears War, and having used the period known as the Restoration to regain its footing, was now beginning to experiment with new ideas 0
The specific theatre for which Holberg penned his works was built in Copenhagen, Denmark, in 1721 and named wThe Little Cromegade^o It had as its builder a French man named Etienne Chapion, who was employed as designer of scenery and machinery»
In reviewing the situation of the physical theatre during the time of Holberg, it might be well to bear in mind a statement made by Montague Summers, author of a book entitled The Restoration Court Stages “There; was no sudden and abrupt transition from the platform stage to the picture stage with the introduction of scenery in the public theatre, but rather a gradual remolding and adaptation, a process of a long time during which much that was Pre-Restor- 2 ation persisted and was blended with the new*“ This premise would also have applied between the Restoration and the
18th Century0
^Roughly translated, “The Little Cromegade“ means “The theatre on the little o l d - s t r e e t Encyclopedia Britan- ica, “Copenhagen**, Volo YI, p = 410»
^Summers, Montague, The Restoration Court Scene, p-o 9 5 „ 25
Holberg had to deal with this type of theatre,
■because, like every playwright, he was governed by the
fact that 81 ooo dramatic literature is always conditioned
by the circumstances of the special theatre for which it
was designedo 0 o the dramatist is subdued to what he, works
inj and he can only accomplish that which is possible in
the particular playhouse for which his pieces were destinedo88
Playwrights who had to work with the facilities provided
by the early 18th Century may have been tempted at times
to revel in ornate elegance and elaborate wit= The plays
of Ludvig Holberg are evidence that this was true.
^Matthew, Brander, A Book About the Theatre, p„ 129 CHAPTER III
: ' ■• M 3 ANAi-YSIiS OF THE PLAY
The play„ Erasmus Montaiaus,, was written in 1723
and has been termed a Domestic Comedy of Character when
judged according to Holbergfour classifications of plays as defined by Campbell and described earlier in the
texto The play presents to the audience the idiosyncrasies
of the central character, Rasmus Berg, and exposes these
frailties to satire and ridicule. This is achieved by
Rasmus9s relations with a well-organized family group.
The dramatic interest is always focused on Rasmus and the
situations which involve him and his family. It was this
type of play which most appealed to Holbergss audiences
and reflected his most original thinking =
In the first act, members of Rasmus?s family are
introduced and the audience gets a clear picture of the
dramatic action to come, in addition to receiving sub
stantial impressions of the supporting characters, Rasmus
as yet has not appeared, although definite opinions con
cerning him have been shaped by preceding dialogue, Up to
this point, he has most certainly been the center of
interest.
26 27
Rasmus is introduced for the first time in Act Two,
and he is presented to the audience in such a way as to
create am extremely farcical indication of learned preoccu pation® His disposition is established immediately by his
constant complaints that his education and knowledge have left him without friends in his village® It is in this
act, too, that his full character begins to emerges "His insufferable intellectual conceit, through which the undisciplined feelings of a spoiled peasant boy continually
appear, is realistically drawn, with little or no exaggera-
tion®,,J" He is a young ^know-it-all", filled with impractical ideals, who comes back to his peasant home after having
graduated from the University of Copenhagen® While attempting
to force his opinions upon the village, he accomplishes
two thingss (1) he executes the satire on education which was Holberg7s intent, and (2) he brings the indignation of
the entire village down upon himself ®
The comedy of this play stems from the other char
acters and their reactions to Rasmuses silly foibles® The play* s method utilizes the typical family organization which
was common to farcical drama during this period, i®e®, the middle-aged father, the mother, the "common-sense" character,
and the central character® These are either pitted against
^Campbell, op0cit® a p® 70® 28 one another$ or are pitted against such outside elements as the village sheriff, the girl friend, and the preacher, as is the case in Erasmus Montamus»
In plays of this type, there is a marked feature found in the works of other famous playwrightsg that of postponing the entrance of the principal figure until the conversation of the family has sufficiently aroused interest in him. This is certainly true in the case of Rasmus Berg.
The play is pure comedy, but not pure farce as one is inclined to judge it at first contact. This holds true because of the action of the play. The main action rests primarily with the characters and secondarily with the situ ation; thus it is much more than farce. One writer has gone so far as to label it a Culture Comedy of Universal Signifi-
cance.
Briefly, the play concerns Rasmus Berg, a peasant who has obtained a degree in philosophy from the University
of Copenhagen. When he returns to his native village, he
changes his name to its impressive Latin equivalent,
Erasmus Montamus, and looks upon the entire village population
as a pack of idiots. His newly acquired education makes him drunk with pride and power, and he demands that his
family, especially his ignorant brother, Jacob, call him
^monsieuh^. ©he of the first moves he makes upon returning
^Campbell, o£= cit., p. 77. 29 heme is to call on Peer* the deacon, who is the village?s most learned man. He does this for the purpose of disputation. This action brings about much of the comedy in the play and introduces into the plot a chain of events that find Rasmus’s bride-to-be, her enraged father, and the village bailiff entering into the picture.
For boastfully making the statement, “The world is roundw, Rasmus finds himself accused by the entire village of being a lunatic. Even his bride-to-be will not be allowed to marry him unless he declares theworld is flat
(a condition which the villagers believe to be true),
Rasmus is strong in his belief, giving in to no one until an army lieutenant bests him at his own practice of logic and forces Rasmus to join the army. He is about to be marched off to camp when the bride’s father agrees to buy him out of the service if he will renounce his priggish educational doctrine, and consent to a simple life in the village, To do this, Rasmus will have to retract his statement that the world is round, and since he is a man proud of his recently acquired knowledge, he is naturally reluctant to do this. This is revealed by the dialogue of.
■IThe art of disputation, or argument employing the uses of semantics, logic, and syllogism, was a required course during Heiberg’s stay at Oxford and at the Univer sity of Oopenhagen, _ 30
M s sweethearts Lisbedp and by Rasmus1s replys
Lisbedg Oh, my dear,, for my sake say that . it is flat!
Rasmusg I cannot humor you in this, so long as I am in full possession of my reason = I cannot give the earth another shape from what it has by nature0 For your sake I will say and do whatever is possible for me| but in this one thing I can never humor you, for if the brothers in my order should find out that I had given expression to such an opinion, I should be thought a fool, and despisedo Besides, we learned folk never give up our opinions, but defend what we have once said-, to the uttermost drop of our inkhornSo ■
The end result of the play is achieved by Rasmus swallowing his pride and announcing to the entire village that the world is not round, but flat 0 This action prompts his prospective father-in-law to buy him out of the army and give M s consent to the marriage of his daughter to
Rasmuso This brings about a happy ending for the play, a feature that is evident in all of Holberg9s plays.
Erasmus Montanus is a good-natured jibe at the practice of pedantic education, and upon reading or seeing it, one cannot help but extract a moral from it, a moral which might well beg Education is collective matter from bookso Knowledge is knowing how to apply Education,
^Holberg, Baron Ludvig, Comedies by Holberg, "Erasmus Montanus",. p0 156, . ■ • - 31
In order to better understand Holberg and his brand of satire, an analysis of the principal characters in
Erasmus Montanus will be of help0 There are four main characters in the play= First/ there is Rasmus Berg, or
Erasmus Montanus <, A peasant boy, he is educated at the
University of Copenhagen at griat expense to his family.
He is a young man in his early twentiess headstrong, impulsive and completely immature insofar as the intelli gent use of his education is concerned. He is handsome to a degree, and of slight build,,, this enhances the comic value of the play when he declares that he is superior to everyone in the village and serves to illustrate the type of comedy which can result from being educated and ignorant at the same time. He is a likable character and manages to sway the audience in his favor most of the time. There are incidents in the play when one is not certain whether one is laughing with him or at him, but one is laughing, and that is Holberg9s purpose, .
The second principal character in the play is Jacob
Berg, younger brother to Rasmus, It is easy to see Moliere9s influence here, because Jacob is an example of the ncommon-sensew character that is prevalent in most of the
Frenchman's works, Jacob is a young man in his late teens, of average looks and,great in physical, strength because of tilling the fields on the small farm. He is not educated in the academic sense of the word, but Holberg saw fit to have 32 his inherent knowledge developed to a high degree. This is evident in his speeches with Rasmus throughout the play.
In order, to be effective, this character must create the impression of almost utter simplicity, and if this is done,
the character in many respects reaches'a magnitude great -
enough for him to become the focal point of the play.
In proper perspective, he is the foil for Rasmus and sets
a standard by which the follies of his brother may be measured. . . . ' ■ ’
Next, is the father of Rasmus, leppe Berg. In the
ease of this character, we witness the skill employed by
Holberg in combining some of the traits of Moliere together with methods of his own. Following Moliere*s method of generally using the father as the figure who carries the
comic idea of the play, Holberg thus employs Jeppe Berg.
However, he adds to.this basic type the characteristics of
the native Danish farmer. This produces a lovable old man, full of the earthy qualities of a peasant, yet still retain ing enough of comic value to add immeasurably to the productionp -t'k :
The fourth and last principal character is Rasmus9s mother, Nille Berg. She is a strong, robust woman who heads the household. She is not taken from Moliere, because
Holberg drew away, from any outside influences and created . her in the likeness of many t8=.i,superstiti©us, stupid, yet 33 robust womenwho were representative examples of
Danish peasant types» She is a plump old woman who is kind but ignorant, a fact evidenced by the manner in which she views her son’s academic accomplishments; with a kind of superstitious terror. Her role in the play serves9 as do the other members of Rasmus’s family, to provide a realistic background for Rasmus and to focus the attention of the audience constantly on the young pedant.
There are three major supporting characters in
Erasmus Montanus who bear mentioning because they compose the antagonistic element of the play, and because they help to bring about the speedy development of the comic situations contained in the plot. The first of these is Peer, the deacon. His position in the development of the story is an important one, because it is he who is considered to be the most learned man in the village and, therefore, the most logical choice upon whom Rasmus can practice his new-found art of disputation. He is well loved and respected by everyone in the village, and when Rasmus loudly renounces him as being ignorant and unworthy of the time of a scholar, the entire village descends on Rasmus, declaring him to be a lunatic. From the attitude of the villagers, we receive the impression of a man in his early forties, having the
1Campbell, bp. bit., p. 119. bearing of one who is safe and satisfied in his position and confident that he will remain so. This is Peer at the beginning of the play; later, we see him looking harried and fearful for his welfare. This transition of personality
contains some brilliant comedy. He is a short, fat, balding man, and has a tendancy toward acting the role of a pompous priest. He is a good character who serves to lead the opposing element of the play against whatever good, if there is any, that Rasmus intends bringing about for his countrymen
The second character is the bailiff, Jesper. He is
the representative of the voice of experience in the play, and is regarded by the villagers as being a man of the world.
He has seen most of what life has to offer and consequently is qualified to bring about just decisions for the villagers
to abide by. He first laughs at Rasmus for holding beliefs
that are so ridiculous, then he becomes angry at the lad for being such a pedant. Much of the comic dialogue in the play is brought forth in conversations between Rasmus and
Jesper. He is in his fifties and a good-humored character in every sense of the word.
The third character in this "outside** group is
Jeronimus, the prospective father-in-law to Rasmus. Here is an example of a character who is molded not unlike the V . ' ■ ■■ 35 men of Moliere^s bourgeois fathersThe only difference is that Jeronimus finally agrees to the marriage between
Rasmus and Lisbedo He considers himself an intellectual leader of the village, because he has gained a position of ! importance and wealth0 He is the playvs second voice of
“common sense®* and as such is stubborn* never giving an inch when he feels the good of his position is at stake.
He represents a type of restricted intellect combined with arrogance that sometimes attends material success« He is an essential part of the inter-play between Rasmus and the opposing element and contributes highly to the rapid pace of the play.
One other character bears mention. This is Lisbed*
Rasmus9 betrothed. Although she is a minor character in the play, she represents the perfect example of Heiberg9s realism as manifested by the majority of his works. Lisbed is the girl who was promised to Rasmus before he went away to school, She is a realistic, outspoken personality and proves this by showing clearly that she harbors a basic desire for Rasmus. Such a characteristic is not found in the works of the men who influenced Holberg = Lisbed is from the
1-Many of the fathers in Holiere, and consequently in Holberg, are patterned along the lines that 16«.. the daughter must give up her lover for the man of his choice.® Campbell. fit., p. 99. 36 rough-hewn stock of many Danish peasants, a characteristic that comes to the fore strongly when her father asks her what she dreamedo dreamt,*? she says, "that I slept with him last night.^ Her use in the play is primarily to aid in the development of the play? s climax, and as an induce ment for Rasmus to change his ways„ Listed is fair, in her mid-teens, and the stereotype of the prettiest girl in the villageo She never fully understands RSsmus * s reasons for not wanting to change his mind, nor does she comprehend the tongue lashings that are received from her father as a result of declaring her feelings for Rasmuso She is an interesting character, though not a dominant one.
Erasmus Montanus is considered one of the three best plays written by Holberg, and as such its production record would naturally surpass that of some of his other plays.
It is a certainty that between 1723 and the beginning of the 19th Century, the play enjoyed mass reception in the
Scandinavian countries as well as in other parts of Europe.
After this, however, little is known about the production history. Information contained in the December, 1922, issue of the magazine Forum gives some evidence that Erasmus
Montanus was presented before an audience in Copenhagen in
January of 1922, commemorating the 200th anniversary of
Holberg?s death.
LHolberg, op. cit.. Po 128. : . ; ' . 37 In search of further facts concerning the play*s production history, letters of inquiry were written to
Professor Campbell at Columbia University, the American-
Scandinavian Foundation, and the University of Copenhagen, seeking any information they might have uncovered on the subject,, As of the present date, only the American-
Scandinavian Foundation in New York has submitted any reliable informationo
In the winter issue of the quarterly magazine.
The American Scandinavian Review, published in December,
1949, there is an article entitled, ifErasmus Hontanus
Revived88, in which record of the production date is given as March 11, 1949, at Connecticut College for Women«
The article contains photographic illustrations of the
settings and actors, and excerpts from the review of the plays Says the review in part: 81 The ’artificial* sets for
Erasmus were not only charming, but entirely effective dramatically, and their being changed before our eyes seemed more natural than a faked Cottage Interior=„oc The cast presented a, piece which we could take frankly historically, laugh at not quite innocently but with some slight self> instruction, and enjoy as part of the history of what men have found amusing„ The Audience had an pbviensiy good time.**!
-^“Erasmus Mont anus' Revived88, The American S candina vian Review, December, 1949, pp, 358-60. 38
The reviewer appreciated the “subtle»»® self-deceptioms
Helherg put int© the play", and was impressed that a college dramatic group had chosen to present it despite the disad vantages attending the hazards of translation. ' CHAPTER IV
THE B1SIGNER'>S APPROACH TG ERASMUS MGNTANUS
A, THE SETTING
In approaching the design for the setting of
Erasmus Montanus„ several factors had to he considered«
Foremost of these was the decision involving the type of
setting to be used for the play. This, in turn, depended
on several other items, to he considered separately later,
which tended to influence the method of attack used on the
design problem itself. After reading the play carefully
several times and noting the amount and type of action
called for within the script, it was decided to undertake
the design in a manner similar to the method used during
the time in which the play was written, i,e,g the
Restoration Period, Only by using this style of design,
it was felt, would the true flavor of both the period and.
the play be most effectively captured and conveyed to a
prospective audience.
Having once decided to use the basic wing and drop
setting, the elements which influence this type of design had to be considered. Necessarily, this method of design
had to conform to the mood and feeling of the play and.
39 . • ■ ; ■ - . " ; . ■' . ■ 46 if possible, to add to the play, without impairing or destroying its message or .structure*-' Mood was the most important of these elements. The play is a satirical farce aimed at the society of the times, and, because of
this, it is easy to understand why the play is not realis tic in the sense that it is a Mslice of life® such as is predominant in theatre of modern times„ Rather, the play is a distorted comedy of characterization, containing very little which is realistico Its characters and its situa tions are very definitely stylized* This accounts for the stylized or distorted elements in the design itself (see page 50), for they lend to the play a quality of humor which would be found lacking in any other type of design*
It was felt that although the dialogue carried the comic feeling of the play very well, it would enhance this comic feeling if the setting, of itself, gave a feeling of comic overtones. The best way to achieve this was to stylize
certain elements of the design.
Another of the factors influencing the design was the use of color. Since the play concerns peasants and their way of life, the color scheme of the design had to be authentic, yet also had to achieve the feeling of the play without destroying the lightness of the comic values. The
colors selected were standard for simple people; they were
earthy and had an air of crudeness about them. This involved
the liberal use of browns. In an effort to keep the feeling 41 as light as possible, a monochromatic scale of brown was used, ranging from warm tans to the application of rich browns in order to achieve the warm, friendly feeling which is projected by the majority of the characters in the play9 For results of the color treatment, refer to the color sketches On pages 46 and 47»
Certain compensations were made in most of the areas mentioned above for the type of setting used in this designo In the interest of clarity, the writer feels these should be mentioned and explained. As pointed out previously in Chapter Two of the text, the methods of staging during the Restoration were rather universal.
These methods, however, contained aspects of design which the writer felt would hinder rather than complement the play. Whereas, in the Restoration period, wings were usually shifted on and off stage by means of grooves cut in the floor or by small railings attached to the stage floor, to do this ih a modern theatre would, be impractical. So it was decided to modify the design in such a way as to have the wings flown in the same manner as were the drops. This was the only major modification applied to the production. The re mainder of the characteristics of the Restoration;; i.e.: the chandeliers, the footlights, the backdrop in forced per spective; these were all patterned after the period in which they were prominent. 42
In the actual drafting of the designs, prepara
tion entailed many factors, First, most difficult, and most important to the success of the overall design, were
the painted backdrops, There are two drops, each depicting
one of the two locations represented in the play (see
pages 50 and Si')'. It should be mentioned that the de
signer arbitrarily divided the play into three acts, in
keeping with the present tradition, instead of the five
acts which are contained in the script. This did not affect
the designs in any way; it merely simplified the identifi
cation of each of the design plates. In the first and
third acts, the. scene is set on a street in a small village.
It is in these two acts that most of the true satire of the
play takes place. Therefore, the painted backdrop for acts
one and three is stylized to a greater degree than the
backdrop for act two. The buildings are distorted upward
and outward to help support the ridiculous feelingsconveyed
by most of the principals during their scenes in front of
this drop (see page 50). This particular drop is a framed
drop, braced sp that it is rigid. This method was used in
order to facilitate a special feature of the drop...the
door which actually opens to allow entrances and exits into
the central building. The door was created because of the mother who has a good deal of inherent comic business during
the first act, when she repeatedly goes in and out of the
house bringing wine to the local parson. It was felt that 43 by designing a practical door* the comic value of the mother^s business could be heightened.
The remaining backdrop is a perspective picture of the interior of Erasmusvs home. This drop is used dur ing the second act of the play. In this act, the satirical feeling is not as evident in the writing as it is in the other two acts; consequently, the design is less distorted and less stylized than the design for acts one and three.
It is an interior scene; therefore it had to be accurate in regard to the type of detail used by the peasants of
Scandinavia during the period represented by the play.
The only liberty taken in the designing of this drop was applied to the huge fireplace. This was distorted outward with a curved line and painted a light color in order to support the comic feeling and to counter-act the heavy concentration of medium and dark colors which are contained by many straight lines (see page 51 ), This drop is not framed, because there are no inherent situations in the plot which render it necessary, .
There are two sets of wings for each of the back drops, each set consisting of a stage right wing and a stage left wing, ;For the first and third acts of the play the greater degree of stylization had to be stressed again, because of the feeling transmitted by the dialogue. The wings were designed as flat surfaces to be painted in •' ' ■. 44 perspective and, as in the drop, the buildings were extended upward and outward to keep the proper balance throughout the design (see page 52 )o Tbe wings for the interior setting were designed in keeping with the flavor of the painted backdrop of that act, stressing the simplicity of line and mass, These, too, were painted in perspective with warm browns and tended to give a depth to the setting which it might not otherwise have had (see page 53 ).
Two different requirements were inherent in the design of the borderso The borders for the street scenes were taken directly from the standard cloud shaped borders found in extensive use during the Restoration Period,
These borders are scalloped on the bottom edges, as were - the borders used during the Restoration, and are identical in use. They are, however, painted a solid shade of blue rather than decorated with cloud formations as they were in the 17th Century, By keeping the color of these scalloped borders the same shade of blue as the sky portions of the street drop, the overall effect is one which has a tendency to blend the entire setting into a single large street scene on a clear day. These borders are not framed and are made to blend with the drop through the subtle use of lighting (see page 54 ), The borders for the interior setting were designed to give the impression of crossbeams supporting a ceiling. They are painted in perspective and are unframed (see page 55 )» To make certain that no misunderstanding occurred
in the translation of the designs and to aid in the actual
construction of said designs, a complete set of rear
elevations, or construction drawingss were drafted to
show the methods of hanging wings, borders and drops*
These drawings are self-explanatory, and, in addition to
explaining the hanging methods, they show the hanging
arrangements of the wings and the procedures and materials
to be used in building the various flats (see page 57 ).
These drawings also show the method used for attaching the
wing profile units to the individual flats and contain
scaled details of all the distorted elements used in these
wings (see page 58 )0 Each drawing relates the type of materials and the various dimensions to be used and also
contains any special notations which have to be considered
in the construction of the individual units (see page 56 )»
In the case of an extra-complicated structure, such as the
footlights or the chandeiiers, special detail drawings '
showing step by step •construction were drafted in order that
clarity might be uniform throughout the entire design
problem (see page 69 l* t \
\ With these things firmly in mind, the writer feels
■' f.'.''. v i " ' . r.. ' ■; ' " ' : - that the setting- designs for Erasmus Montanns convey the
feeling of the play and the period to a high degree, and that
the end result was sound and rewarding.
- .\ _ , us :::* 5
ACT ONi AND THREE SCALE-- ^ in c h - if o o t
BACIUNG UNIT
BA1!’TLD DROP FRONT U.LVATIOM
sib Tucir. LLlltmON * z
| BORDIRS | Sli TROUT ZUWTIOW # S
FALSh. PR05CINIUJA
4^ 00 '".AY: .YCCA.TJS
ACT____ .TWO_ ___ SCALE: t m • i f o o t mSlGN'LD BY: j
pact:- : inurior mop
see fr o m " AT.’on » 4
WINGS s i l FBONT 1L1V JID H #
BORDETS ^ — " SEE FRONT liXJK'.lOH » 6
IALSI PRCSCililUM -> / H
•36' -O'
2?:: s m .* Wlu. v A iY Y ;_. : vi-.: Cn O [P L A ^m S M V S MCKTAK’JS NOILS: ACT T^O SCALE- K X H . 1TOOT m i m : . DLSIGNID 2Y:
Ln H P L A Y IBU.'.U: .f.I.'T K '.'li
a : : o::i a : tht-u TCAll: . UCOT - pi AUi: 3X--^J~
Vpr/iAGl TtlSHT WING HOW STAGI SIGHT WING ro m r
c;~” . W . :5tt* • i.HM u n T S 'C .ii:. •-itm i2Ki ■ ■ ..•.".ca
.O-.II-
.0 - .01
'nnr:s':i P L A Y : ERASMUS MOWTAWJS NOTES'. ACT OKI Ai.'L THr.L-. SCALE: i INCH . 1 TOOT DESIGNED E Y : ^ ^
1JJ.yt.iJ1 J.1 1.I1 H I :. X .1 L .
SROMUirs w i.b m .-k -
Cn 4^ PLAY: iHAbMu: MON". JUS
AuT TWO NOTT-S: SCALL: 1 INCH » HOOT DiSI&NLL
j \ i *-M 4 n -n m 114 y u h n m n rrM v u - a n n 1 n ipp p ^Z
Ut-tTAOl. UORt.tR T
Ji * 24*' O* “ J i
* WLbBJi.’S — — - ,
rOWNSTAM HOSOiA .o-.o
1 T ------42' - 0" ------—------HUu'-iw.. l. L'JMBIX IS 3‘V/HITi KVf, t i MOi»
:i'v:;RrRS rVf.-lCOZ ■ ATUcaiS V.'ITH # 9 »+* SCHV.V . A:: ::-..::; j 3.CH0M M LI5 > *L 1 INCH SIZi. . : :• ^ < '
HANGING IRONS -7 - SCAM lout r~-t*rZZ>
-<--- 6" -O" - * 6 -Q- — —----
— 13'- 9" -»1
’ LAV- IW i-M’J MCOTAJPJS m ACT r .'.T SGALi.: * WCl! I FOOT i i w s t e - iLrs-jf. m*s at
— 10' -O”
UKT/.uL IXTT VffiK
-C-O* \ or S’ -0" —
in 00 PLAY' mw.us mr:;r's jut Tunt^1' ACT :!l- A>: THKt.: SCALY OQi 'ITOOT .15161111 ±T ■' NOUS:
FRONT ILUKTION BZAR m^TIOR PLA~ {: IRASMUS MOkT^JS
ACT OJ£4> imi SC AI }:■ imch ■ iTQor D£S:GMDBY:
RIA.P. I1LVAT10M SIDI YEW FRONT ULYATiON DOOR DITAIL Bo TI3E LIGHTING
. ' The lighting design for Erasmus Montanus was a
challenge in that it had to light this wing and drop
setting adequately and effectively without distorting any
of the set colors or the overall warmth of the set designa
This was achieved by paying close attention to the evident
sources of light which were prevalent during the period of
the play, &..e. t the chandeliers and the footlights = With
these two main features as primary sources of light, the
rest of the lighting more-or-less designed itself*
During the Restoration, the majority of the acting
was done on the downstage, or apron, areas of the stage.
In keeping with this characteristic, the apron areas could
be lighted with a balance of warm and cool light which would spread evenly across the forestage =,
There were several problems connected with the
light design of this play which demanded special considera
tion, One of these problems was the fact that, in order to be successful, the play as a whole would have to project
an air of theatricalism. The addition of chandeliers and
token footlights would aid immeasurably in solving this problem, 'Another facet which merited special attention was
finding a method to light effectively, but notoover-light,
the wings, borders, and backdrops. Basically, this could
be solved in two ways, In illuminating the backdrops and
bordersj the designer could rely on the use of strip lights
■ ■ 6i to tone the surfaces as much as possible. These strips are composed of the primary lighting colors, red, blue, and green, which, when mixed, will produce a near white light of low intensity* It was felt that this would be
the most effective method of getting enough light on the drops and borders to bring out their warmth and comic feeling* The method of controlling the light hitting the wings could be accomplished by placing light towers,
equipped with Fresnel lights which had been masked, in the wing areas * These lights would be beamed cross-stage and upstage slightly* When controlled effectively.by dimmers
these lights would blend the entire upstage area with an
even spread of light which would vary little from one side of the set to the other<, Special areas on the stage, such as the doorwaylin the street scenes and the.backing area behind the door, would be lighted with the type of instru ment which would most effectively do the task * , v - : , '.K/. ' r \ ' ' '' One other special problem remained insofar as maintaining an even spread of;light over the .entire stage was concerned„ With the double-strength, cross-beamed
.light plotted to cover the upstage areas, the designer, was
then confronted with the fact that this could weaken the
forestage areas by comparisen0. The problem was solved by
adding to the forestage areas a couple of “booster15 instru ments« These instruments could then be focused on the center
of the downstage areaj thereby concentrating the light on 63
the dominant acting area and allowing the spill of light from these lamps to blend with the light on the other sec
tions of the forestages thus balancing the upstage and downstage areas= For information on the areas and the type of instruments supplying these areas, see page 66»
With the areas planned and plotted and the pattern
of light well in mind, the next problem relating to the lighting design was the question of the color to be used with these lights. Color is the all-important factor in
stage lighting. Without it, the lights become just so many watts uselessly distributed on stage. The specific problem involved was to select colors for the lights which would be of most benefit to the color scheme followed by
the setting. The browns had to be kept rich and warm, the
tans had to remain alive and vibrant, and the blues for the
sky had to be rich, yet not too intense. All of these things
can be accomplished by the correct use of color in light.
The color medium used would be Cinemoid, a durable plastic material which is heat resistant and waterproof. Since it is manufactured in England, it is rather expensive, but well worth the expense due to its durability and use. In regard
to the individual colors, it was decided to use pink for the warm color, because of its ability to transmit warm overtones
to the stage without changing the value of the set colors.
Since the play is a comedy, the warn feeling achieved by the
setting design should be maintained by the lighting design. For the cool color, a very pale blue, called steel blue, would be used to create dimensional shadows, while still leaving the color of the setting relatively unchanged„ For special instruments such as the footlights and the chandeliers, small amber bulbs would be used in ' order to give the impression of a light source but not to detract from the actual lighting*
This was the plotting of the lighting design for
Erasmus MontanuSo There is an instrument schedule sheet, which is a written rather than drawn light plot* It shows the reader the location of each instrument, the wattage of that instrument, and contains any other information vital to the correct lighting of the play (see page 67 )»
There is a switchboard set-up chart, showing the manner in which the dimmers of the lighting control coordinate informa tion contained on the lighting plot and the schedule sheet.
Its main function is to clarify in the reader’s mind pre cisely how the entire operation is handled (see page 68;.).
There is one essential fact which the; reader must bear in mind when attempting to understand the light plot of any production. This fact is that at best, a light plot is only a theory of what the designer hopes will work. It is almost impossible to foretell exactly which lights will require which colors and should be focused on which areas in order to balance the set. This is perhaps the one intangible element in the field of design and is generally 65 carried out on a t$trial and errorM bksis» The one saving factor in regard to this problem is that the more experience a person has had in lighting all types of productions, the faster he will be able to design a plot and the surer he will be that it will work in its entirety.
This, then, was the designer?s approach to the settings and lighting for the play, Erasmus Montanus.
This approach resulted in a setting design which the writer feels has captured the warmth and satirical qualities of the play most effectively, and a lighting design which the writer feels is very well executed.
6 11 9 EL BEAM LEKO 500 CINLv’.CIL# 17 % 9 13 13 Z r PIPE TRESNEL 500 a m t o i : * 54 PINK STEEL 1 0 15 15 H lu PIPE FRESNEL 500 CINEl^OID# 17 BLUE 11 14 16 % lu PIPE TRESNEL 500 ClfSMOID *5 4 PINK STEEL 1 2 13 17 Z r PIPE FRESNEL 5 0 0 CINEMCW17 BLUE 1 3 16 19 lti PIPE TRE6NE1 5 0 0 CINEM0ID#5t PINK 14 14 21 Z lu PIPE m s N Z 5 0 0 CmiOD#17 % 1 5 2 2 2 8 K 2" PIPE BABY L 1 K 0 5 0 0 CINEMOID # 54 PINK THIS IS TH1 LOOP. SPI.IAL 16 2 3 31 HE FRESNEL 5 0 0 CINLM01D # 4 AMBER THIS IS A BACIUis lisHT 1 7 15 4 3 3Zl TOWLE FRESNEL 5 0 0 CINEMOID# 54 PINK on iNSTBUimrrs 18 17 4 4 EL TOWER FRESNE 5 0 0 CINEMOID# 54 PINK 17 THKCUHH 22, 19 19 4 5 Z TOWER FRESNEL 5 0 0 CINEMOID* 54 PINK MATT TH1 Sil THAMES 2 0 16 4 8 w TOWER FRESNEL $ 0 0 CINEMOID# 17 % IN ORDER TO CONTROL 21 19 4 7 z TOWER FRESNEL 500 CINEMOID #17 5 % THE SPREAD Ci 2 2 1 7 46 EL TOWER FRESNEL 500 CINEMOID# 17 32Ti LIGHT. SPECIAL 2 0 It,CO SPECIAL r pipe CHANDELIER 80 NONE AMBER SPECIAL TONING l" -2 " PIPES 2 8 0 0 RONDEL RED TRIBE ABE THREE OBOTTS n ~ 1% 25 STRIP PER STRIP; EACH CIRCUIT CQNTAINIW5 POUR LAMPS, SPECIAL 2 11,23,26 TONING 1"-2" PIPES STRIP 2800 RONDEL GREEN EACH LAMP IS 100 WATTS. SPECIAL 3 12,24,27TONING 1C-2-.PIPES STRIP 2 8 0 0 RO N D EL BLUE THERE AM TOURTEL-: LAMPS; SPECIAL 21 52 APRON EDGE OF APRON FOOTUGHT 3 5 0 NONE AMBER EACH LAMP B 25 WATTS.
<1 —
SWITCHBOARD SET-UP CHART
PRODUCTION: .ERASMUS MONTAKUS
COMPILE 3Y :
OUTLET s }? i 1 I ? a ii 11 i II n 1LSL DIM 0 5 INSTRUMENT: STRIP STRIP STRIP NOT USED l i 1 ? ll M }?
AREA: TONEfj TONING I H nr E nr Z 3ZT
DIMMER m : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 © 9 10 11 12 13 14 25 VKTlA&i. PER DIMMER: *VUV MKA1 1 J -
OUTLET > 52 26 31 11 46 i? it ' NOT TH LSI D I N MIPS 13 16 INSTRUMENT « r It USED N1)T US ED
AREA, i 2E H z SPICIAl APRON 2T unr DIMMER NO. i (16 IT 16 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 26 29 W HR DIMMER *• ----2000 VDV-TS * 3 C ,
P R O JiC llD mt! e
AUDIENCE'S Vim SMALl. INK CHAIN
LIGHT WIRi. V.'OVLN THROUGH LINK —
ZLiiR DiiAi TOOT 1IGHT DESIGN A:L LET:;- SCALE-. 6 INCHES* 1 F O O T CHAPTER Y
. CONCLUSION ; ■ , : ' .
The concluding chapter of this thesis has as its
object an evaluation of the work accomplished in regard
to adaptability, interest, audience appeal, and produc
tion practicability.
It is hoped that this project has established, with reasonable certainty, the play*s adaptability to the needs of a modern audience, and shown that the method of
adaptation most satisfactory for a play such a's' this would be a modified wing and drop type of setting, .
In the field of interest, the play presents a problem.’ Whereas, the play is very interesting and filled with comic situations rivaling some of the best modern
comedies, the barrier of translation has proven to be the weapon of defeat for the potential popularity of this play.
Because of this lack of adequate translation, the knowledge
that the play even exists is scant in many educational
and professional institutions throughout the country.
Tpe term "interest" is applied to the designs rendered in
this work, because it is felt that the overall appeal of
the play has been enhanced due to. these designsThe designs 71
are planned to aid the comic action of the play and to
capture the feeling which is inherent in the dialogue,
thereby adding to the play*s potential interest for a prospective audience.
The audience appeal of the play is good. It is written to appeal to those who have a basic sense of humor, and, in the opinion of the writer, succeeds quite well. The problem here is the same as that found in dealing with the interest of the play.a.if&a^pfospective audience cannot hear about the play, due to translation inadequacies and insufficient publicity, then the audience
can formulate no real interest in itg therefore, the play’s appeal to that audience suffers. Viewed from the design
standpoint, it is the picturisation that either appeals
to or displeases an audience. It was intended that the designs would have eye appeal and would convey a warm, humorous atmosphere of simple people in simple surroundings.
Based on elements of mass psychology, the majority of audiences should find this setting, and consequently the play, somewhat appealing.
Production practicability is perhaps the most important phase of a play when considered by those involved in actually producing it. Into this area enter all the possibilities, all the problems, all the solutions connected with every facet of the play. Erasmus Montanus. as far as being a play that is practical to produce, offers no more
obstacles than weald other comedies confined to a specific
periodo The theme of the play is certainly evident in our
modern societyVoothe world still has its quota of men who
share Erasmuses outlook on life0 Some critics might contend
' that the play is antiquated and that its message would not
be appreciated by modern audiences« However, the universal
elements contained in the play, i.e«: the satire on human
behavior patterns, the evident farcical action, and the
hints at slapstick| these tend to nullify this contention.•
Concerning the practicability of producing the play
when regarded from the technical aspects of production;
extensive research on the period in which the play was written (the late 17th and early 18th Centuries) has revealed
that the chances of success for the production would more
than likely increase if the elements of design practiced
.during that time were incorporated into the modern design.
Relating this theory to the work in this thesis, it is the
opinion of the writer that items such as footlights and
chandeliers would remove the play from the ordinary level
of everyday comedy and plape it in the realm of something
worth remembering.
... Another area in which the play would be of practical
value to an audience -is in the supposition that more people
i n ;this country would be Introduced to a relatively unknown 73 author and playwright® Thereby, they would become better acquainted with foreign cultures and men who record these
cultures® In respect to this, it is hoped that the designs
contained herein have augmented the work of Ludvig Holberg to such a degree as to entice more students of drama and literature to investigate this man9s contributions to the theatre and to European literature® , . . . ■ ■ APPENDIX A
HGLBERG9 S WORKS.AND DATES OF PUBLICATION
The following comprises a chronological listing of the known works of Ludvig Heiberg together with the deates of publication*^
MISCELLANY
An Introduction to European History*-• ••••.«.'.. * *. • .1711
Appendix to Introduction to European History,,*»« * * * * * * * *1713
Introduction to Natural Law and to the Law of Nations * * * *1716
Polemics Against H^yer o p o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o b o o o o*1719
The Poet Advises His Friend Jen Larsen not to Marry,* *»»*1719
Peder Paars , , , , , * *, o*, * * ,,, *,, *,, * * *■,,, * * , * * , , , , * * * 1719
Hans Mickels en ^ s■ Humorous Poems * *,,,, * *, .* © * * * © © * * * © ©, * © * © 1722
Zille Hansen9 s Defense; of the Feminine Sex, ,,© © © © © © © © © © ©,1722
THE PLAYS
ihe W eat her g o ck, © © © © © © © © © ©- ©. © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © ©. © © © © © 17 22
The Political Tinker © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © * © © © © © © © © © © ©,1722
I ena de France© © © * © © © © © © © © © © © ©.© ©©©, * © © © © © © © © © © © © <>© © © © © © * ©1 / 22
^Obtained from the unpublished Master9s Thesis of Francis Anderson, Department of Drama, University of Southern California, 1950, -
74 M es t©r G©T*t • W©stpIxciX©x* ©.©o'©©© ©o © © © © 0000060000 0 0 0 6 © 00000 00 o XT22 The Lyi.ns^xii. Chsuiiher* © 0 0 o © © © © ©i© © © © © 0 © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © 172-3 ■ The E)Xeveiith ©f Jwzie © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © X723 X&ohh vozi Tyboe© © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © <0 © © © © © © © © © © ©X723 The Busy Tz^xfXei^ © © © © © © © © © © © ^ & © © © ©* © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © X7 2 3 Et*s,sirms Mont^zins © © © © © © o © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © ©X723 Don H 3,1111^,0 o© coo©©© 00. ©©Do©©©© © 00 oo© 00 o© © © © 00060 © 00 a©©©© ©o © X 72 3 UXysseS' "iron Ithfiicxd.©••© © © © © © © © © © © © © © ©,© © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © X723 Wxtchci*3,f t o o © o o 00© ©000 000 0000 o 0000 0000©©© o o © ©o o © © © o © o o o o ©X723 Wxthont FIe3»d. ot TetxX© © © © © o © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © X723 MeXampe o ©, © © © o © o ©O © O 00 © o © © © o © © © © o O 0 O © O GO © © 0 O O O O Q © © .oo0,1723 Wew y eai* ^ s DnoXo ^ne © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © X7 23 The 3 ourney to the Spnxn.^ © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © ©X72327 Mennx oh .and DennxXXa © © - © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © X72 3”2*7 Dxderx ch Mens chneslcx*eh © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © X 723 ~27 The JPawned Deasant Boy © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © @ X 72 3 27 :The Happy : Shxpwi'C’Clc © © © © © © © © © © © © ©, © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © X7 2 3**927 BernxXXa ^ s Shont Maxdenho©d © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © o X723 27 The Christmas Painty© © 000 © © 0 0 © © 0 0 o 000 © 0000 © o o 00 © o © © ©,0,1723-27 Masquerade.© © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © X723^27 ::f V The Arabxan Bowder © © © © © © © © ©;© ©>© © © © © © © © © © © o © © © © © © © © © © © © © X723*”27 - '/ .. / /' \ ' The XnYxsxbXe © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © X723*"*27 Hones t Ambx txon © © © © © © © © 9 © © © o © o ° o 0, © © © © © © ,0 © © © © © © © © © © © © © ©.X723t 2,7 FnneraX ©x Danxsh Comedy © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © ©X 72 3 *”27 76 ' • HISTORIES'. .. , 3kih© t C llltO l-'p h .O SZL S o 60000 0 0 o 0 0 o 0 o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o P. o o e O O O O Q o ©01727 ' EpiS tola o 00 000000 00 00 00 00 00'OOOO p. OOOO O0OOOOOO OOO 00000 0. ,«© ©1728 Description of Denmark and Norway00000000000000000 © ©1735 Des crip txon of Ber §an o 0 © o 000 © 00.000000 © o © © © © © © ©. © © o © © © © * 601737 General Cknrck $11 story © o © © © © © ©. o © © © © © o © 6 .© © © © © © © © © © © © o © i © ©1738 Great Men in History© © © © © © © © © © © © ©. .© © © © © © © ©©©ooooooooooi 001739 Niela Klim© © © © © © o © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © < © ©1741 History of tke Jews © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © 0 01742 ■Moral Reilections © © © o © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © o © © © © ©©© © © ©1744 Great Women in History© © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © ©©©©©©© © ©1745 THE LATER PLAYS PlntnS 0 ©0 © © © © © © © 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 © o 000 ©6 OOOOGO© 000 0 0 0 0 0 0 .oooooo © ©1748; Sganarel ^ s *Tonrney© © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © ■© © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © o,1748 A or a cadabr a©©©©©©©©©©©©© ©,. © © ©©©©. ©©©©©©©©©©©©o©©©©©©©©© •-■.1748 Philosopher in His own Imagination © © © © © © © © © © ©© o ©© © © © © ©©1748 The Repnbli c © © © © © © © © © © © © *0 * © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © 001748 The Transformed Bridegroom© © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © ^ © © © © ©©©1748 AUTOBIOGRAPHIES Epi s ties (1st) © © © © ©o © © oo* oooooo© 0*0 © ©o o© © © © © © © © © © © © o© © © © »1748 Epistles (2nd)© © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © ,1750 Episties (3rd)© © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © © ol754 .1600 -VOLTAIRE - -DIDIROT -HOLBLR6 • C0NGRLY1 CIBBER -TAKQUHAR- ABDISON- •GOLDSMIIH - shlrida:: ■ APPENDIX B CONI IMPORAR IIS OF H0LB1RG o <1 BIBLIOGRAPHY BOOKS Anderson, Francis, Annotated Translatlons of Three One-Act Plays by Baron Ludvig Heiberg, ?tfEe Christmas Party,88 88The Transformed Bridegroom," And uThe ,' Arabian P o w d e r .With an Introductory Essay on Holbergfs Life ■and His Contributions to Drama, Master?s' Thesis, unpublished. Department of Drama, University of Southern California, 1950, ' 107: pp., typed, ^ Bates, Alfred, The Drama, London: The Athenian Society, 1897 Boswell, Eleanore. The Restoration Court Stage, Cambridge, Mass„l Harvard University Press, 1932, Buckle, Richard, Modern Ballet Design, New York: The Macmillan Co,, 1955, Bunn, Alfred^ The Stage: Both Before and Behind the Curtain, , ' Vol, I,, Hew Burlington Street, London: Richard Bently, Publ,; 1840, Burris-Meyer, H , , and Cole, E ,D ,, Scenery for the Theatre, Boston: Little, Brown, and Co,, 1946, Campbell, Lily B,, Scenes and Machines of the English Stage During the Rennalsance, Cambridge: University Press, ■■y- ■ 1923, . ■ . , , ' v- Campbell, Oscar J», Jr,, The Comedies of Holberg, Cambridge, Mass,: Harvard University Press, 1914, Cheney, Sheldon, The Theatre: 3000 Years of Drama, Acting, and Stagecraft, New York: Longmans§» (Green and Co,, - 1952, . . _ " Clark, BArrett B , , Europeans? Theories of the Drama With a Supplement on the American Drama, New York: Crown Publishers, Inc,,1947, t!Copenhagen,81 Encyclopedia Britannica, Vol, VI, p. 410, - London - Chicago: 1955, 7 8 - ; , ■:''' -: ' : 4 '' - : .? - ^ Fraserj John Ho s and Friederic h a Willar J Scenery Design for the Amateur Stage, Hew York; Macmillan Co., 1950, Fuchs, Theodore, Stage Lighting, Boston: Little, Brown and 1^29.^ , , _ . , . •" v ./ / , Callaway, Marian, Constructing a Play, New Torfer Prentice- Hall, Inc .71^50. ' Gassner, John, Producing the Play — With the New Scene Technicians Handbook hy Philip Barber (RevTTT New York: Dryden Press, 1953. Hainaux, Rene, Editor^ Stage Design Throughout the World, ''New York: Theatre Arts Books, 1956. Hartnoll, Phyllis, Editor, The Oxford Companion to the Theatre (2nd Ed.), London: Oxford University Press, 1957o . ■ , ' ■ . Holberg, Ludvigy Baron. Comedies by Hoiberg. Translated by Oscar J . Campbell, Jr., and Frederic Schenck, The American-Scandinavian Foundation, 1914. Hotson, Leslie, The Commonwealth and Restoration Stage, Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1928. Hume, Samuel J. and .Duerst, Walter R . , Twentieth Century Stage Decoration, fol. II, New York: Alfred A. Knopf 1929. — -v- ■ ■ Johnson, Robert II., A Technical Analysis and Stage Design for a Production of Robert Sherwood;s ^The Queen?s • Husband,K Masterys Thesis, unpublished, Department of Drama, University of Southern California, 1957, 117 pp, typed. ^ -/y". y Lawrence, W.J., Old Theatre Days and Ways, London: George ;G. Harrap and Co., Ltd.,1935. , Macgowan, Kenneth, and Melnitz, William, The Living Stage, New York: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1955. Matthews, Brander, A Book About the Theatre, New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1916. - ' , Editor, The Chief European Dramatists, New York: Houghton Mifflin Co., 1944. Uriiv. of Arizona Library • '• '' : ' . ' ■ . ' • : ■ ■ • 80 . ■ \ ;: ;; ■' '■ v - , /' ' ■■■■ " ■ y- Hicolls Allardyce9 History of Early 18th COntury Drama, 1700— 1850,- Cambridge University Press, 1925. ___, History Of the fate 18th, Oentury Drama, 1750-1800, , ~ Cambridge University Press,,1925e ; ' The Development of the Theatre, New York: Ear court. Brace,”and Co«, 1937o"™ Pendleton, Ralphs Editor, The Theatre of Robert Edmund Jones, : Middletown, Conrio: Wesleyan University Press, 1958. Philippi, Herbert, Stagecraft and Scene Design, Cambridge, Mass., Houghton Mifflin Co., 1953. Rock, Norman E.~, Design and Technical Production of the Play, "Build no Fence. Around Me," by Alexander Greendale, Masterys Thesis.unpublished. Department of Drama, Stanford University, 1949, 195 pp, typed. Seldon, Samuel, and Sellman, Hunton D., Stage Scenery and Lighting, New York: F.S. Crofts and Co., 1931= Stage Scenery and Lighting^ (3rd Ed.), New York: ■ Apple ton-Century-Crofts, Inc., 1959.. Simonson, Lee, The Art of Scene Design, New York: Harper and Bros.> Co. , The Stage is Set, New York: Harcourt. Brace, and "““ C o r r 1932 . - ■ ■. , . . . Summers, Montague, The Restoration Theatre,.London: Regan ^ Paul, Tr^cE%™Trubner, and Co. , 1934. Whiting, Frank M., An Introduction to the Theatre, New York: Harper and Bros. Co., 1954. ^ periodicals Belas co, David, "Evolving .a: New Scenic Art, F Current ; Opinion Yol. LY (October, 1913), 251-52. "Briefs on New Books,n The Dial LVIII (June 1, 1914), 468-69. Cheney, Sheldon, "Story of the Stage," (ill.) Theatre Arts YII (January, 1923), 50-57. . '■ ' 81 "Drama and. Music.," .The Nation XCYIII (June . 18, 1914), 734. / "Erasmtis Mont anus Revived,,z The American Scandinavian - Review (December, 1949J, 158-60. Hopkins, A.A., "Magic Stage Illusions and Scientific Diver sions ,", Science American Illustrated LXXVI (May 29, 18WJ7“346-47. Moritzem, Julius, "Holberg and the Danish Stage," The Forum LXVIII (December, 1922), 1026-33. ... " ” Rae, F.Bi "Stage Lighting by Zones," Illustrated World ■ • XXVII (August, 1917), 87-96._ Speer, R.D., "Developments in Lighting," Theatre Arts XIX ' (July, 1935), 550-51. ~ . Stoker, B ., "Irving and Stage Lighting," 19th Century LXIX,. (May, 1911) , 903-12. "Theatre Without Footlights," Scientific American CXVII (September 22, 1917), 201. ■ '. - -