Produced by David Starner, Leah Moser and the Online Distributed
Proofreading Team.
[Illustration: BRONSON HOWARD]
(1842-1908)
The present Editor has just read through some of the vivaciouscorrespondence of Bronson Howard—a sheaf of letters sent by him toBrander Matthews during a long intercourse. The time thus spent bringssharply to mind the salient qualities of the man—his nobility ofcharacter, his soundness of mind, his graciousness of manner, andhis thorough understanding of the dramatic tools of his day andgeneration. To know Bronson Howard was to be treated to just thathuman quality which he put into even his hastily penned notes—and, asin conversation with him, so in his letters there are repeated flashesof sage comment and of good native wit. Not too often can we make theplea for the gathering and preserving of such material. Autobiography,after all, is what biography ought to be—it is the live portraitby the side of which a mere appreciative sketch fades. I have lookedthrough the "Memorial" volume to Bronson Howard, issued by theAmerican Dramatists Club (1910), and read the well-tempered estimates,the random reminiscences. But these do not recall the Bronson Howardknown to me, as to so many others—who gleams so charmingly in thiscorrespondence. Bronson Howard's plays may not last—"Fantine,""Saratoga," "Diamonds," "Moorcraft," "Lillian's Last Love"—these aremere names in theatre history, and they are very out of date onthe printed page. "The Banker's Daughter," "Old Love Letters" and"Hurricanes" would scarcely revive, so changed our comedy treatment,so differently psychologized our emotion. Not many years agothe managerial expedient was resorted to of re-vamping "TheHenrietta"—but its spirit would not behave in new-fangled style,and the magic of Robson and Crane was broken. In the American drama'sgroping for "society" comedy, one might put "Saratoga," and even"Aristocracy," in advance of Mrs. Mowatt's "Fashion" and Mrs.Bateman's "Self;" in the evolution of domestic problems, "Young Mrs.Winthrop" is interesting as an early breaker of American soil. Butone can hardly say that, either for the theatre or for the library,Bronson Howard is a permanent factor. Yet his influence on the theatreis permanent; his moral force is something that should be perpetuated.Whatever he said on subjects pertaining to his craft—his comments onplay-making most especially,—was illuminating and judicious. I havebeen privileged to read the comments sent by him to ProfessorMatthews during the period of their collaboration together over "PeterStuyvesant;" they are practical suggestions, revealing the peculiarway in which a dramatist's mind shapes material for a three hours'traffic of the stage—the willingness to sacrifice situation,expression—any detail, in fact, that clogs the action. Through theyears of their acquaintance, Howard and Matthews were continuallywrangling good-naturedly about the relation of drama to literature.Apropos of an article by Matthews in The Forum, Howard once wrote:
I note that you regard the 'divorce' of the drama from literature as unfortunate. I think the divorce should be made absolute and final; that the Drama should no more be wedded to literature, on one hand, than it is to the art of painting on the other, or to music or mechanical science. Rather, perhaps, I should say, we should recognize poligamy for the Drama; and all the arts, with literature, its H