B
had it been a more masterful one, theoritics would better have
seen the real worth of the playe. W.Haynes wrote: "A translation
of Schnitzler's 'einektere' has more than timely interest. For
Sifteen years he has been one of the most-followed teachers to
a large school of playwrighte who have been supplying the inti-
mate playhouses of Europe with realistic short pieces, and re-
cently his influence has been extended to the young merican
dramatists whose one-not play* are being presented in our own
Little Theaters -- The first thing to stride the render of
these playe is that the plot of each one has a sexual basis.
Taken alone each situation is perfectly possible; taken as a col-
lection they are unnatural —. We miss 'the over 'tge man'. To
comprehend this characteristie of his work we must remember that
Schnitzler is a practising physical, a specialist in psychology,
student of Freud. He is so keenly interested in pathological
paychology that the normal human being does not interest him at
all." (1) The Schnitzler-Freud relation is brought out in an¬
other review: "Schnitzler is Freud turned dramatiet. His great
power oonsists in his building (plays not upon the broad basis of
general and tested character values, but upon the psychology of
our ocussional lapses away from the overage, our hinden (omitional)
unleschings, sulden angers and momentary esprices." (2) In
The Nation prise is mixed with rebuke: "In the normal dram
Schnitsler's art is fragile, not to say fleeting; in the one-act
ploy it is compet, serried, tingling, spiculer. No lower of ad-
dress can afford to neglect these virtuosities; if they share
theetturely retrospect of Ibsen in the smugness of their pack-
ing the rival the master himself – The final judgment on
Schnitzler will hardly be altered by the suscinot vigor of these
mesterly vignettes. He lacks body on he lacks soul. In Schnitzler
pession has the tenuity of sentiment, and built has the teste-
lessness of innocence. The translation is plebeian, but not un-
rendable." (3) The review which seems to give the fairest report
of the playe is from the Springfield Republican; "Hr. Schnitzler
Geeps his literary fabrie delieste, and his lrony permits his
readers to believe that he, too, is much amused by his character,
and is wisely refusing to idealize any of them, or to give them
more importance then they observe. The 'littleness' of the playe
is thus justified to the artistie consciousness." (4)
In 1917 another group of playes was published but we are al-
ready well-acquinted with this volume Anatol:Living Hours:The
Ireen Cockatoo. Anderner's translation of Anatol came from the
1. ) Tho Dial. July, 1917. LKIII. 63.
Revlew of Revlews. Oct. 1917, LVI, 444.
3.) The Nation. Aug. 30, 1917, OV, 125.
4. ) Springfleld Repablican, Aug. 5, 1917. p 15.
had it been a more masterful one, theoritics would better have
seen the real worth of the playe. W.Haynes wrote: "A translation
of Schnitzler's 'einektere' has more than timely interest. For
Sifteen years he has been one of the most-followed teachers to
a large school of playwrighte who have been supplying the inti-
mate playhouses of Europe with realistic short pieces, and re-
cently his influence has been extended to the young merican
dramatists whose one-not play* are being presented in our own
Little Theaters -- The first thing to stride the render of
these playe is that the plot of each one has a sexual basis.
Taken alone each situation is perfectly possible; taken as a col-
lection they are unnatural —. We miss 'the over 'tge man'. To
comprehend this characteristie of his work we must remember that
Schnitzler is a practising physical, a specialist in psychology,
student of Freud. He is so keenly interested in pathological
paychology that the normal human being does not interest him at
all." (1) The Schnitzler-Freud relation is brought out in an¬
other review: "Schnitzler is Freud turned dramatiet. His great
power oonsists in his building (plays not upon the broad basis of
general and tested character values, but upon the psychology of
our ocussional lapses away from the overage, our hinden (omitional)
unleschings, sulden angers and momentary esprices." (2) In
The Nation prise is mixed with rebuke: "In the normal dram
Schnitsler's art is fragile, not to say fleeting; in the one-act
ploy it is compet, serried, tingling, spiculer. No lower of ad-
dress can afford to neglect these virtuosities; if they share
theetturely retrospect of Ibsen in the smugness of their pack-
ing the rival the master himself – The final judgment on
Schnitzler will hardly be altered by the suscinot vigor of these
mesterly vignettes. He lacks body on he lacks soul. In Schnitzler
pession has the tenuity of sentiment, and built has the teste-
lessness of innocence. The translation is plebeian, but not un-
rendable." (3) The review which seems to give the fairest report
of the playe is from the Springfield Republican; "Hr. Schnitzler
Geeps his literary fabrie delieste, and his lrony permits his
readers to believe that he, too, is much amused by his character,
and is wisely refusing to idealize any of them, or to give them
more importance then they observe. The 'littleness' of the playe
is thus justified to the artistie consciousness." (4)
In 1917 another group of playes was published but we are al-
ready well-acquinted with this volume Anatol:Living Hours:The
Ireen Cockatoo. Anderner's translation of Anatol came from the
1. ) Tho Dial. July, 1917. LKIII. 63.
Revlew of Revlews. Oct. 1917, LVI, 444.
3.) The Nation. Aug. 30, 1917, OV, 125.
4. ) Springfleld Repablican, Aug. 5, 1917. p 15.