B.
86
Conclusion
Now that I have presented the facts regarding the reception
of Schnitzler in the United States It is hardly necessary for me
to do anything but end the discussion. Yet, there are some ob-
servations of my own which I should like to add. If we were to
indicate haphically the subject treated in this paper we should
have to begin with 1899 when Freiwild was presented in the Irving
place Theater. However, the first rise would begin in 1904 and
continue suadually until 1911 when, with the publication of
Granville Karker's.translation of Anatol, we have the first real
notice of Schnitzler. Then we should go along, rising slowly and
with ocassional spasmodio jumps - a rather high one in 1917 -
until about 1919 when we have a falling away inAdpularity. In
the following years Schnitzler "came back", so to speak, and
from 1925, when Fraulein also brought new enthusiaam, until the
present his fame has aforeased almost uninterruptedly. It is
possible that the character of the translations might have had
some bearing on the direction taken by the lines of this opph.
The first outstanding ctranelation was that by Larker: Loving's
transletions were probably somewhat kotrimental to Schnitzler'
reputation; but in the last decide we find that theoritios feel
it is only fair that the translators should come in for a share
of the prise accorded the work itself and it is the exception
rather than the rule when the translations are called anything
but excellent. Just as always when anyone comes before the public
eye, newspapers begin to vie with one another in obtaining inter-
views. Karl Schauermann of the Milwankee Journal staff and Pierre