The Dramatic Values in Plautus Part 8

STR. (_Aside, growing angry._) The foul fiends of madness have possessed this doddering idiot. (_Majestically._) Confess you wrong me?

EUC. (_Dancing in frenzy._) To the utmost, since I don't have you strung up! And that's what'll happen too, if you don't confess.

STR. (_Shouting._) Confess what?

EUC. What did you steal from here? (_Pointing to his house._)

STR. Strike me if I stole anything of yours, (_Aside to audience_) and if I don't wish I'd made off with it.

EUC. Come now, shake out your cloak.

STR. (_Doing so._) As you please.

EUC. (_Stooping to see if anything falls out._) Haven't got it under your s.h.i.+rt? (_Pounces upon him and ransacks clothing._)

STR. (_Resignedly._) Search me, if you like;" and so on with "Give it back," What is it? "Put out your right hand," etc., etc.

Moliere again imitated almost slavishly (_L'Avare_, V. 3). Longwinded as the thing is, it is clear that the liveliness of the action not only relieves it, but could make it immensely amusing. At least it is superior to the average vaudeville skit of the present day. It must not be forgotten too that, as Plautus was in close touch with his players, he could have done much of the stage-directing himself and might even have worked up some parts to fit the peculiar talents of certain actors, as is regularly done in the modern "tailormade drama."

There are numbers of scenes of the sort quoted above, where the apparent monotony and verbal padding could be converted into coin for laughter by the clever comedian. _Amph._ 551-632 could be worked up poco a poco crescendo e animato; in _Poen._ 504 ff., Agorastocles and the _Advocati_ bandy extensive rhetoric; in _Trin._ 276 ff., the action is suspended while Philto proves himself Polonius' ancestor in his long-winded sermonizing to Lysiteles and his insistent _laudatio temporis acti_; in _St._ 326 ff., as Pinacium, the _servus currens_, finally succeeds in "arriving" out of breath (he has been running since 274), bursting with the vast importance of his news, he postpones the delivery of his tidings till 371 while he indulges in irrelevant badinage. This is pure buffoonery. And we can instance scene upon scene where the self-evident padding can either furnish an excuse for agile histrionism, or become merely tiresome in its iteration[161]. The danger of the latter was even recognized by our poet, when, at the end of much word-fencing, Acanthio asks Charinus if his desire to talk quietly is prompted by fear of waking "the sleeping spectators" (_Mer._ 160). This was probably no exaggeration.

When the padding takes the form of mutual "spoofing," the scene a.s.sumes an uncanny likeness to the usual lines of a modern "high-cla.s.s vaudeville duo." Note Leonida and Liba.n.u.s, the merry slaves of the _As._ in 297 ff., Toxilus and Sagaristio in the _Per._, Milphio and Syncerastus in the _Poen._ (esp. 851 ff.), Pseudolus and Simia in _Ps._ 905 ff., Trachalio and Gripus in _Rud._ 938 ff., Stichus and Sagarinus in the final scene of the _St._, and in _Ps._ 1167 ff. Harpax is unmercifully "chaffed" by Simo and Ballio. Or, in view of the surrounding drama, we might better compare these roysterers to the "team" of low comedians often grafted on a musical comedy, where their antics effectually prevent the tenuous plot from becoming vulgarly prominent.

2. Inconsistencies of character and situation.

The Plautine character is never a consistent human character. He is rather a personified trait, a broad caricature on magnified foibles of some type of mankind. There is never any character development, no chastening. We leave our friends as we found them. They may exhibit the outward manifestation of grief, joy, love, anger, but their marionette nature cannot be affected thereby. That we should find inconsistencies in character portrayal under these circ.u.mstances, is not only to be expected, but is a mathematical certainty. The poet cares not; they must only dance, dance, dance!

Persistent moralizers, such as Megaronides in the _Trin._, who serve but as a foil from whom the revelry "sticks fiery off," descend themselves at moments to bandying the merriest quips (Scene I.). In _Ep._ 382 ff., the moralizing of Periphanes is counterfeit coinage. Gilded youths such as Calidorus of the _Ps._ begin by asking (290 f.): "Could I by any chance trip up father, who is such a wide-awake old boy?", and end by rolling their eyes upward with: "And besides, if I could, filial piety prevents."

The Menaechmi twins are eminently respectable, but they cheerfully purloin mantles, bracelets and purses. Hanno of the _Poen._ should according to specifications be a staid _pater familias_, but Plautus imputes to him a layer of the _Punica fides_ that he knew his public would take delight in "booing." And the old gentleman enters into a plot (1090) to chaff elaborately his newly-found long-lost daughters, whom he has spent a lifetime in seeking, before disclosing his ident.i.ty to them (1211 ff.).

Saturio's daughter in the _Per._ is at one time the very model of maidenly modesty and wisdom (336 ff.), at others an accomplished intriguante and demi-mondaine (549 ff., esp. 607 ff.). When the plot of the _Ep._ is getting hopelessly tangled, of a sudden it is magically resolved as by a deus ex machina and everybody decides to "shake and make up."

Slaves ever fearful of the mills or quarries are yet p.r.o.ne to the most abominable "freshness" towards their masters. The irrepressible Pseudolus in reading a letter from Calidorus' mistress says (27 ff.):

"What letters! Humph! I'm afraid the Sibyl is the only person capable of interpreting these.

"CAL. Oh why do you speak so rudely of those lovely letters written on a lovely tablet with a lovely hand?

"PS. Well, would you mind telling me if hens have hands? For these look to me very like hen-scratches.

"CAL. You insulting beast! Read, or return the tablet!

"PS. Oh, I'll read all right, all right. Just focus your mind on this.

"CAL. _(Pointing vacantly to his head._) Mind? It's not here.

"PS. What! Go get one quick then![162]."

In order that the machinations of these cunning slaves may mature, it is usually necessary to portray their victims as the veriest fools. Witness the c.o.c.k-and-bull story by which Stasimus, in _Trin._ 515 ff., convinces Philto that his master's land is an undesirable real estate prospect.

Dordalus in _Per._ (esp. 493 ff.) exhibits a certain amount of caution in face of Toxilus' "confidence game," but that he should be victimized at all stamps him as a caricature.

LeGrand is certainly right in p.r.o.nouncing the cunning slave a pure convention, adapted from the Greek and so unsuitable to Roman society that even Plautus found it necessary to apologize for their unrestrained gambols, on the ground that 'that was the way they did in Athens!'[163]

Certain of the characters are caricatures _par excellence_, embodiments of a single attribute. Leaena of the _Cur._ is the perpetually thirsty _lena_: "Wine, wine, wine!"[164] Cleaerata of the _As._ is a plain caricature, but is exceptionally cleverly drawn as the _lena_ with the mordant tongue. Phronesium's thirst in the _Truc._, is gold, gold, gold!

The _danista_ of the _Most._ finds the whole expression of his nature in the cry of "Faenus!"[165] a.s.suredly, he is the progenitor of the modern low-comedy Jew: "I vant my inderesd!" Calidorus of the _Ps._ and Phaedromus of the _Cur._ are but bleeding hearts dressed up in clothes.

The _milites gloriosi_ are all cartoons;[166] and the perpetually moralizing pedagogue Lydus of the _Bac._ becomes funny, instead of egregiously tedious, if acted as a broad burlesque.

The panders[167] are all manifest caricatures, too, especially the famous Ballio of the _Ps._, whom even Lorenz properly describes as "der Einbegriff aller Schlechtigkeit," though he deprecates the part as "eine etwas zu grell and zu breit angefuhrte Schilderung."[168] "Ego scelestus,"

says Ballio himself.[169] He calmly and unctuously pleads guilty to every charge of "liar, thief, perjurer," etc., and can never be induced to lend an ear until the cabalistic charm "Lucrum!" is p.r.o.nounced (264).

The famous miser Euclio has given rise to an inordinate amount of unnecessary comment. Lamarre[170] is at great pains to defend Plautus from "le reproche d'avoir introduit dans la peinture de son princ.i.p.al personnage des traits outres et hors de nature." Indeed, he possesses few traits in accord with normal human nature. But curiously enough, as we learn from the _argumenta_ (in view of the loss of the genuine end of the _Aul._), Euclio at the _denouement_ professes himself amply content to bid an everlasting farewell to his stolen h.o.a.rd, and bestows his health and blessing on "the happy pair." This apparent conversion, with absolutely nothing dramatic to furnish an introduction or pretext for it, has caused Langen to depart from his usual judicious scholars.h.i.+p. After much hair-splitting he solemnly p.r.o.nounces it "psychologically possible."[171] LeGrand points out[172] that his change of heart is not a conversion, but merely a professed reconciliation to the loss. But there is no need for all this pother. The simple truth is that Plautus was through with his humorous complication and was ready to top it off with a happy ending. It is the forerunner of modern musical comedy, where the grouchy millionaire papa is propitiated at the last moment (perhaps by the pleadings of the handsome widow), and similarly consents to his daughter's marriage with the handsome, if impecunious, ensign.

3. Looseness of dramatic construction.

Lorenz with commendable insight has pointed out[173] that ????, the G.o.ddess of Chance, is the motive power of the Plautine plot, as distinguished from the ???a of tragedy. A student of Plautus readily recognizes this point. The entire development of the _Rud._ and _Poen._ exemplifies it in the highest degree. Hanno in the _Poen._, in particular, meets first of all, in the strange city of Calydon, the very man he is looking for! When Pseudolus is racking his wits for a stratagem, Harpax obligingly drops in with all the requisites. The a.s.s-dealer in the _As._ is so ridiculously fortuitous that it savors of childlike naivete.

Characters are perpetually entering just when wanted. We hear "Optume advenis" and "Ecc.u.m ipsum video" so frequently that they become as meaningless as "How d'ye do!"[174]; though, as shown above[175], even this very weakness could at moments be made the pretext for a mild laugh.

For a complete catalogue of the formidable ma.s.s of inconsistencies and contradictions that throng the plays, the reader is referred to the _Plautinische Studien_ of Langen, as aforesaid. It will be of pa.s.sing interest to recall one or two. In _Cas._ 530 Lysidamus goes to the "forum"

and returns _32 verses later_ complaining that he has wasted the whole day standing "advocate" for a kinsman. But this difficulty is resolved, if we accept the theory of Prof. Kent (TAPA. x.x.xVII), that the change of acts which occurs in between, is a conventional excuse for any lapse of time, in Roman comedy as well as in Greek tragedy. But it is extremely doubtful that Prof. Kent succeeds in establis.h.i.+ng the truth of this view in the case of Roman comedy. We see no convincing reason for departing from the accepted theory, as expressed by Duff (_A Literary History of Rome_, pp.

196-7): "In Plautus' time a play proceeded continuously from the lowering of the curtain at the beginning to its rise at the end, save for short breaks filled generally by simple music from the _tibicen_ (_Ps._ 573). The division into scenes is ancient and regularly indicated in ma.n.u.scripts of Plautus and Terence."

Langen seems surprised[176] when Menaechmus Sosicles, on beholding his twin for the first time (_Men._ 1062), though he was the object of a six years' search, wades through some twenty lines of amazed argument before Messenio (with marvelous cunning!) hits on the true explanation. It is of course conceived in a burlesque spirit. What would become of the comic action if Menaechmus II simply walked up to Menaechmus I and remarked: "h.e.l.lo, brother, don't you remember me?"

That the seven months of _Most._ 470 miraculously change into six months in 954 is the sort of mistake possible to any writer. In the _Amph._ 1053 ff., Alcmena is in labor apparently a few minutes after consorting with Jupiter; but the change of acts _may_ account for the lapse of time, here as in _Cas._ 530 ff.

But after the exhaustive work of Langen, we need linger no longer in this well-ploughed field. We repeat, the evidence all points irresistibly to the conclusion that Plautus is wholly careless of his dramatic machinery so long as it moves. The laugh's the thing!

The _St._ is an apt ill.u.s.tration of the probable workings of Plautus'

mind. The virtue of the Penelope-like Pamphila and Panegyris proves too great a strain and unproductive of merriment. The topic gradually vanishes as the drolleries of the parasite Gelasimus usurp the boards. He in turn gives way to the hilarious buffoonery of the two slaves. The result is a succession of loose-jointed scenes[177]. The _Aul._ too is fragmentary and episodical. The _Trin._ is insufferably long-winded, with insufficient comic accompaniment. The _Cis._ is a wretched piece of vacuous inanity[178].

4. Roman admixture and topical allusions.

Plautus' frequent forgetfulness of his Greek environment and the interjection of Roman references--what De Quincey calls "anatopism"--is another item of careless composition too well known to need more than pa.s.sing mention. The repeated appearance of the _Velabrum,_[179] or _Capitolium,_[180] or _circus,_[181] or _senatus_, or _dictator_,[182] or _centuriata comitio,_[183] or _plebiscitum,_[184] and a host of others in the Greek invest.i.ture, becomes after a while a matter of course to us. We see however no need to quarrel with _forum_; it was Plautus' natural translation for ?????. But it all adds inevitably and relentlessly to our argument--Plautus was heedless of the petty demands of technique and realism. His attention was too much occupied in devising means of amus.e.m.e.nt.

The occasional topical allusions belong in the same category as above; for example, the allusion to the Punic war (_Cis._ 202),[185] the _lex Platoria_ (_Ps._ 303, _Rud._ 1381-2), Naevius' imprisonment (_Mil. _ 211-2), Attalus of Pergamum (_Per._ 339, _Poen._ 664), Antiochus the Great (_Poen._ 693-4). Again we have a modern parallel: the topics of the day are a favorite resort of the lower types of present-day stage production.

5. Jokes on the dramatic machinery.

But the most extreme stage of intimate jocularity is reached when the last sorry pretense of drama is discarded and the dramatic machinery itself becomes the subject of jest. So in the _Cas._ 1006 the cast is warned: Hanc ex longa longiorem ne faciamus fabulam. In _Per._ 159-60 Saturio wants to know where to get his daughter's projected disguise:

"SAT. p??e? ornamenta?

TOX. Abs chorago sumito. Dare debet: praebenda aediles locaverunt." (Cf.

_Trin._ 858.)