In short, Figaro is Beaumarchais. The author is incarnated in his work, in which we have a foretaste of romanticism. His ideas, theories and expressions of hatred were ap plauded. His sympathies and feelings are ours. It should be added that the piece is admirably arranged and written in an acerb and sarcas tic strain in which every word tells. It shows a thorough understanding of dramatic art. Beaumarchais, at any rate in his best plays, displayed a master hand in comedy, and ranks without question next only to Moliere.
Finally, Turcaret' by Le Sage, should be cited. This piece was produced at the begin ning of the century, in 1709, to be precise, and was remarkable for its attack on financiers, those jobbers and unscrupulous bankers who speculated on the credulity of the public and ruined the simple but honest folk who had confided in them. It was the first play of this nature to be put on the stage, and it is the first example we have of realistic art in the French theatre.
The great novelty of the 18th century from a dramatic art point of view was the appearance of a new style, the drama, or in other words, the fusion of tragedy and comedy, so severely discountenanced by the classical writers. The first effort was made by Destouches, whose idea was to compose a com edy-character piece, in serious strain, and from which laughter was to be banned.. All he suc ceeded in achieving, however, was a play in bad taste, consisting really of a series of laical sermons intended for general edification. Only one of his plays, (Le Glorieux) (1732), is at all worthy of remark, and that because the author cleverly instilled into it a large measure of pathos and sentimentality.
La Chaussee had a tendency to exaggerate this innovation. He created pathetic comedy which merely consisted in a rough and ready handling of commonplace situations, thereby appealing to the spectators' sentiments. The new element he introduced was that, instead of interesting the public in the misfortunes of royalty and aristocracy, he chose his characters from amongst the people themselves and de picted domestic misfortunes of private families. In his piece he succeeded so well that he moved all the weaker sex to tears, and showed himself to be the direct predecessor of Emile Augier and the younger Dumas. The
play had a phenomenal success.
Finally Diderot, in 'Le Fils naturel' (1757), and 'Le Pere prodigue,' created the popular drama, which was, however, neither more nor less than pathetic comedy written in prose. Beaumarchais imitated it in his Cou pable' (1792). These works, however, of a tamtam and empty style, merely interest us as an indication of the new era then imminent. Sedaine alone treated this style with any degree of ability in his sans le savoir' (1765), wherein is a life-like portrayal of the great merchants of the 18th century, and also a charming and touching love episode of two young people.
Apart from the works themselves, which are poor, the theory of the popular drama should be examined. It was formulated by Diderot who sought to infuse between too con ventional tragedy and comedy bordering largely on caricature a really genuine style which would represent a new ideal of humanity in the different spheres of life, for example: a father, a judge, a merchant. It was an interesting idea• and one capable of, considerable develop ment but unfortunately it was incomplete. Of what good is a state of existence without char acter? It is an abstract idea without life, a symbol without reality. A father, in his ca padty as such, a judge, in his capacity as such, as a mere state of being, do not exist. Who, therefore, can be expected to take an interest in them? We must unite the two conceptions, show character exerting its influence on a state of existence, or modified by it. In this manner alone shall- we have the complete human being. Balzac's romance, Comedic humaine,' shows us such a state. These endeavors to transform drama were likewise premature. They were unsuccessful, and toward the end of the century comedy was revived which was traditional, unpretentious but mirthful. Vol taire distinguished himself by a few light works such as 'L'Enfant prodigue' (1736) and (Nan ine) (1749), The period can be summed up as follows: failure of tragedy, great modification in com edy, a tendency of the two styles to fuse and reunite into drama. It marks the end of one epoch and predicts the dawn of another. '