S S
25. Brofe.Bern
box 31/7
sonalities in continual and subtle con¬
flict. Its nearest counterpart in modern
drama is the third act of Granville Bar¬
ker’s Waste,“ the cabinet meeting scene
which is to be cut when the play is per¬
formed in America, It is par excellence
the “talky“ sort of drama which play¬
writing courses teach us to avoid, but
it is thrilling and dramatie throughout.
Possibly Professor Bernhardi“ will
never “go“ in America, because the sub¬
ject is not so vital a one to us. But in Ger¬
many and Austria, where a Jew can
hardly get an official chair in any State
educational institution, no matter how
learned and capable he may be, where a
Jew’s advancement in the State service
practically and admittedly depends upon
his formal acceptance of the Christian
faith, where anti-semitism is a formal
and recognized factor in polities—there
any able setting forth of the subject by
gone-who-knows the fäcts and feels the
situation is an event of the highest in¬
terest. We can imagine the work, on
the part of Arthur Schnitzler, to be al¬
most autobiographical.
But the mere treating of an interesting
thesis would by no means make a play.
Especially when, as in this piece, there
is not the slightest vestige of “love in¬
terest,“ nor a single female character
except for a nurse who appears for a
few moments in the first act. The ped¬
ants are perfectly right in saying that
discussion does not make drama. Such
a play as this demands one thing more.
That is character delineation and action,
ceaseless, rich, powerful. And this
Schnitzler has given us. Every charac¬
ter in the the piece, and there are a great
many, is shown in his pecullar shade
of political belief, personal dogma and
temperament. There is Bernhardi him¬
self, first of all a good physician, but
Umore man of the world than savant,“
witty, balanced and capable, desiring
above all things to do his work and keep
out of musses. There are the pro¬
nounced anti-semites (one of them à
Jew), and the men of the world who are
content to be pro-semites, so long as the
Jews make all desired concessions. There
are the more or less violent Jews and
the gentile pro-semites, one of the lat¬
ter a delightful old doctor who has more
bile in the cause of justice than the most
violent Hebrew. And there is especially
one remarkable character, that of Flint,
the minister of public instruction, who sees
the question quite humanly and bears
the highest friendship towards Bern¬
Through him the play drives into poli¬
tics. And it is here, apparently, that
Schnitzler says ’what he has to say.“
„
Unfortunately,“ says Flint, since I
can't get along without the coöperation
of Parliament, I must make what men
call concessions. But you are wrong if
you think it is always an easy thing to
make concessions. Do you think it cost
me no sacrifice to let these people take
their revenge on my' old friend Bern¬
hardi? And yet it was necessary. The
situation was for once clearly defined.“
Tes, Excellence,“ replies his secretary,
Lit seems that when one is an official
one has only the chofce between being
an anarchist or a toady.“
In this appears the only note of bitter¬
ness, on the part of the author, in the#
whole play. Semitism has come to be ab
matter of politics, and in any sort of!
politics or administration one cannot be
one’s true self. It is a sort of secret of
the political boudoir that he is revealing,
a thing which the young men don't know
and the old men won't tell.
Bernhardi himself never becomes mere¬
ly bitter, but falls into a sort of resigned
despair, coming to the conclusion (as so
often happens) that plays right into the#
hands of his opponents.“I feel, as per¬
haps you feel,“ he says to the priest, who
returns to beg his pardon, "and never!
more intensely than in this hour, thatt
something separates us, concerning thei
existence of which we cannot delude our¬
selves by means of friendly politeness.“
This play, so different from the super¬
flelal French and American plays on the.
same subject—Israel“ and As a Man
Thinks’—clears away two former doubts
as to its author. It proves that he is not
a mere cynic, but a serious thinker. And
it demonstrates that he is a master of
the most typical stage phenomenon of
today, the drama—genuine drama—of
H. K. M.
ideas.
Berlin, January, 1913.
25. Brofe.Bern
box 31/7
sonalities in continual and subtle con¬
flict. Its nearest counterpart in modern
drama is the third act of Granville Bar¬
ker’s Waste,“ the cabinet meeting scene
which is to be cut when the play is per¬
formed in America, It is par excellence
the “talky“ sort of drama which play¬
writing courses teach us to avoid, but
it is thrilling and dramatie throughout.
Possibly Professor Bernhardi“ will
never “go“ in America, because the sub¬
ject is not so vital a one to us. But in Ger¬
many and Austria, where a Jew can
hardly get an official chair in any State
educational institution, no matter how
learned and capable he may be, where a
Jew’s advancement in the State service
practically and admittedly depends upon
his formal acceptance of the Christian
faith, where anti-semitism is a formal
and recognized factor in polities—there
any able setting forth of the subject by
gone-who-knows the fäcts and feels the
situation is an event of the highest in¬
terest. We can imagine the work, on
the part of Arthur Schnitzler, to be al¬
most autobiographical.
But the mere treating of an interesting
thesis would by no means make a play.
Especially when, as in this piece, there
is not the slightest vestige of “love in¬
terest,“ nor a single female character
except for a nurse who appears for a
few moments in the first act. The ped¬
ants are perfectly right in saying that
discussion does not make drama. Such
a play as this demands one thing more.
That is character delineation and action,
ceaseless, rich, powerful. And this
Schnitzler has given us. Every charac¬
ter in the the piece, and there are a great
many, is shown in his pecullar shade
of political belief, personal dogma and
temperament. There is Bernhardi him¬
self, first of all a good physician, but
Umore man of the world than savant,“
witty, balanced and capable, desiring
above all things to do his work and keep
out of musses. There are the pro¬
nounced anti-semites (one of them à
Jew), and the men of the world who are
content to be pro-semites, so long as the
Jews make all desired concessions. There
are the more or less violent Jews and
the gentile pro-semites, one of the lat¬
ter a delightful old doctor who has more
bile in the cause of justice than the most
violent Hebrew. And there is especially
one remarkable character, that of Flint,
the minister of public instruction, who sees
the question quite humanly and bears
the highest friendship towards Bern¬
Through him the play drives into poli¬
tics. And it is here, apparently, that
Schnitzler says ’what he has to say.“
„
Unfortunately,“ says Flint, since I
can't get along without the coöperation
of Parliament, I must make what men
call concessions. But you are wrong if
you think it is always an easy thing to
make concessions. Do you think it cost
me no sacrifice to let these people take
their revenge on my' old friend Bern¬
hardi? And yet it was necessary. The
situation was for once clearly defined.“
Tes, Excellence,“ replies his secretary,
Lit seems that when one is an official
one has only the chofce between being
an anarchist or a toady.“
In this appears the only note of bitter¬
ness, on the part of the author, in the#
whole play. Semitism has come to be ab
matter of politics, and in any sort of!
politics or administration one cannot be
one’s true self. It is a sort of secret of
the political boudoir that he is revealing,
a thing which the young men don't know
and the old men won't tell.
Bernhardi himself never becomes mere¬
ly bitter, but falls into a sort of resigned
despair, coming to the conclusion (as so
often happens) that plays right into the#
hands of his opponents.“I feel, as per¬
haps you feel,“ he says to the priest, who
returns to beg his pardon, "and never!
more intensely than in this hour, thatt
something separates us, concerning thei
existence of which we cannot delude our¬
selves by means of friendly politeness.“
This play, so different from the super¬
flelal French and American plays on the.
same subject—Israel“ and As a Man
Thinks’—clears away two former doubts
as to its author. It proves that he is not
a mere cynic, but a serious thinker. And
it demonstrates that he is a master of
the most typical stage phenomenon of
today, the drama—genuine drama—of
H. K. M.
ideas.
Berlin, January, 1913.