Assistant Professor

English Department

TDPG College

 Jaunpur Uttar Pradesh, India  

John Galsworthy was one of the greatest dramatists of the school of realism and naturalism in drama, and played a conspicuous part in popularising the Problem Play in the twentieth century. He was a dramatist of social life and concentrated his attention on problems facing us in society. He found his material and inspiration in the world of everyday life and affairs, and described himself as 'a painter of pictures, a maker of things, as sincerely as I know how, imaginated out of what I have seen and felt.[1] Leaving aside The Little Dream, he maintained a realistic attitude in his dramas consistently and it was his avowed object as a dramatist to deal with the actual facts and conditions of contemporary life, instead of making excursions into the realms of fancy and romance like the Scottish dramatist Barrie. Galsworthy was wedded to the actual, and tried to present as faithfully as he could the phenomena of life and character without fear, favour or prejudice. He made no attempt to glorify and embellish the dreary realities of a dull life with the false colours of romance, but strove to create an illusion of actual life on the stage "as to compel the spectator to pass through an experience of his own, to think and make and write with people he saw thinking, talking, and moving in front of him."[2] His work is rooted in contemporary life and provides a vivid and fairly accurate picture of the conditions and society of the times in which he lived. He has defined art as "the perfect expression of self in contact with the world", and his dramatic art at least is based on his reaction to the world at large.

Galsworthy is the critic and the interpreter of contemporary  English life in his dramas. In his plays we have a fine discussion of the problems of marriage, sex relationship, labour disputes, administration of law, solitary confinement, caste feeling or class prejudice. In The Silver Box and Justice, he deals with the problem of justice and the cruel working of the legal machinery. In Strife he concentrates on the conflict between capital and labour, and in The Skin Game he brings out the conflict between the landed gentry and the new capitalistic class. The main plays of Galsworthy deal with social problems. These varied problems of our social life are treated by Galsworthy in relation with the social organism as a whole. Ibsen had also dealt with problems in his dramas, but he treated social problems in relation to the individual or the family. Shaw occasionally dealt with the problems of the individual in relation with society, but Galsworthy always discussed problems in relation to social organism.

His Impartiality and Detachment

Galsworthy deals with the problems of life with impartiality. He is an artist and takes a detached view of the problems, though by probing deeply we can feel his sympathy with one side or the other. But as a rule he examines both sides of the case with equal carefulness and presents them without expressing any opinion. He strikes the note of impartiality in the following words, "Let me try to eliminate any bias and see the whole thing as should an umpire, one of those pure things in white coats, purged of all the prejudices, passions and predilections of mankind. Let me have no temperament for the time being. Only from an impersonal point of view, there be such a thing, am I going to get even approximately at the truth." While presenting the picture of contemporary life, he keeps himself in the background. He does not allow his own personality to intrude into his dramas. In his plays he has always tried to present both sides of a problem with strict impartiality. To maintain balance and equipoise in his dramatic technique, he is not swept off his feet by emotion. He might be emotionally sympathetic to this character or that, to this class or the other, but as a dramatist he successfully checks the temptation of treating any particular character with undue partiality.

In The Silver Box Jones, an unemployed young man, steals a silver purse in a fit of drunkenness, from Jack Barthwick, the idle son of a wealthy Liberal M. P. We can hardly blame Jones for this trifling crime when unemployment was prevalent everywhere and when even Jack Barthwick himself could steal the silver purse from an unknown lady and go unpunished by law. But a strictly impartial judge like Galsworthy cannot allow this crime to go unpunished, though he allows Jones to have his full say and hints at the fact that there were two laws prevalent at that time, one for the rich and the other for the poor, and Jones becau e he is poor, cannot hope for that justice which he could easily buy if he were rich. "If Galsworthy had been made of cheaper clay he would have made the Barthwicks unspeakable villains, and the Joneses the innocent victims. But old Barthwick is a well meaning man, and Jones is a scoundrel and a wife-beater. There is good and bad on both sides. The balance is made as fair as the dramatist can make it."[3]

In Strife also the balance is kept intact with perfect impartiality. The dramatist presents both sides of the case. He presents the case for Capital, and Labour with strict impartiality. In the play the scales are held dispassionately and the readers only feel the futility of the tragic pride and prejudice on both sides; the side of Anthony, the capitalist and Roberts, the labour leader.

Instances can be multiplied to show Galsworthy's impartial approach to the problems of life. As an artist he kept his impartiality admirably well, with the result that his plays seem inconclusive. There is no finality about them.

Galsworthy's Sympathy and Humanity

Though Galsworthy presents his situations and characters with impartiality, yet, if we go deep down in his plays, we can detect his sympathy for the down-trodden and the underdog in society. His sympathy extends even to animals. He has a Tolstoyan reverence for all life. Once the veil of this intellectual impartiality is lifted, the humanist, Galsworthy, is clearly revealed, voicing his strongest protest against the cruelty and injustice of our society. The warmth of feeling could hardly be chilled by the cold touch of the necessities of dramatic art. The humanistic approach to life and its problems is evident in almost all the plays of Galsworthy and the best example of it can be given from Justice. Galsworthy's sympathy is evidently with Falder. In the defence of the counsel for Falder, we feel the voice of Galsworthy himself. It appears to us that the dramatist has put off his lawyer's gown and is passionately appealing to consider the case of the accused with compassion. The judge may turn a deaf ear to the sentimental appeal of Mr. Frome, the lawyer for Falder, but it will never fail to find a sympathetic echo in the hearts of the readers and the audience, because the voice of the dramatist is presented through Frome. In this respect it is interesting to compare Galsworthy with Bernard Shaw. Shaw has actually more imaginative sympathy than is usually conceded to him, but his satiric gift, his genius for derision causes him to appear cynical. Shaw is carried away by his own views to such an extent that he fails to enter adequately into the view point of others. Galsworthy in never guilty of this lapse of dramatic sympathy and understanding. Where Shaw would scoff and curse, Galsworthy would wince and ultimately find himself constrained to bless. Shaw's intellectualism runs to witty satire and attack; Galsworthy's emotionalism leads rather to charity and sympathy and toleration.

"Underlying the plot of each of Galsworthy's plays, there is a broad current of intense humanity which preserves his work from the ravages of time. Strife is not an ephemeral pamphlet but a study of the spirit of diehardism, that robs men of their discretion, warps their judgment, and leads to bitter conflict and suffering. Justice deals with the blindness of the judicial system; it was blind in the Greeks and Romans, and there is no reason to suppose it will not be blind in future. The system may change, but the lack of understanding and foresight shown by common humanity will persist, and lead to suffering such as was experienced by Falder."[4]

Galsworthy's Moral Purpose and Reformative Tone

 Galsworthy had infinite sympathy for his downtrodden and crushed characters. He was pained by the conditions prevailing in society, and it was his hearty desire to reform the evils of our social life. But Galsworthy could not be a blatant propagandist like Shaw. He suggested reform in his dramas, but the tone of the reformer is hushed and muffled. That he intended to introduce reform in society through his plays cannot be gainsaid. There is hardly any one of his plays which does not convey a message or a lesson. There is a moral note in each one of his plays. He believed that every work of art should have a moral or a 'Spire of meaning.' "A drama", he has himself pointed out, "must be so shaped as to have a spire of meaning. Every grouping of life and character has its inherent moral and the business of the dramatist is to pose the group as to bring that moral poignantly to the light of day." Didacticism was the main spring of his art. His didacticism is not obstrusive. His dramas have, strictly speaking, not a moral which may be obtrusive but a spire of meaning which develops itself as naturally from the drama as a spire completes the structure of a Gothic church. The public gets this meaning, not through a coarse melodramatic opposition of villain and hero (as in the older dramas), not even through any intellectual argument, but through emotional sympathy with characters presented in such a way as to appeal to the spectator's sense of truth and justice.

In Strife the moral is that we should not be adamant and head strong in our view but should seek honourable compromise over issues which cannot be resolved without sacrifice of principle. In Loyalties he denounces racial prejudice and pleads for just social treatment to all classes of people in society. In The Silver Box he desires to avoid the evils of unemployment and pleads for sympathy for the waifs and derelicts of society and so on.

Plot Construction

In this book The Inn of Tranquility Galsworthy makes a pregnant observation about plot construction. He points out, "A good plot is that sure edifice which rises out of the interplay of circumstances on temperament and of temperament on circumstances, within the enclosing atmosphere of an idea." The plots of Galsworthy's plays are based on ideas and hang on characters. The stories of Galsworthy's plays receive their significance from the characters and the ideas that are interwoven in them. Each play of Galsworthy has a theme, and every incident happening in the scene contributes to the furtherance of the theme. The theme is grounded on the idea evolved in the play.

Galsworthy's plot construction is based on a situation or incident, and the reaction of a few characters to that situation. The loss of money in Loyalties is the starting point, and the play unfolds, as different characters present their reaction to the alleged charge of theft on Captain Dancy.

The plots of Galsworthy have real, critical, pleasant climaxes and surprises, that keep up the interest of the play and save them from being jejune and dull. J. B. Coats refers to the climax and surprises in Galsworthy's plots in an admirable manner. He says, "On the whole, Galsworthy's climaxes are good. They are not included in literary play, but where they do occur, they are reached naturally and inevitably by a kind of sure pointing forward and acceleration from the beginning." The element of suspense is also plays. In The Silver-Box our suspense is kept right to the end. We do not know whether Jack Barthwick would be punished in the same manner as Jones. In Loyalties we hold our breath till the perpetrator of the £ 1000 robbery is discovered. In Escape we are ill at case so long as the fate of Denant is not decided. In Justice, when two advocates plead for and against Falder, we are kept in suspense till the judge announces his judgment. There is a dextereous management of suspense in The Eldest Son where previous to the arrival of Sir William  at a critical point in the play, the family anxiously discusses what his attitude to Bill and Freda is likely to be.

One special feature of Galsworthy's plot construction is the employment of the technique of parallelism. In The Silver Box there is a parallelism between Jack and Jones, and the same is noticed in Skin Game between Hillcrist and Hornblower.

Galsworthy's architectural instinct in plot construction is also a special feature of his art. He builds the structure of his plot like an architect. The edifice reared by him is perfect in harmony and symmetry.

There is no lopsidedness in his plays. Each play stands as a perfect whole. Referring to this architectural quality of Galsworthy's plays J.  W. Marriott remarks, "Galsworthy's architectural instinct for symmetry and poise was just a trifle too strong. The artistic conscience which controlled his writing corresponds to the social conscience which controlled his daily life."[5]

Characterisation

Galsworthy's characters are drawn from common life. His personages range between the accidental thief and the middle class member of Parliament, the workman and the company director, the charwoman and the colonel's wife. His heroes are common men and rarely do we come across in his tragic plays heroes of the dimension of King Lear, Hamlet, Macbeth or Othello.

Galsworthy's characters are evolved from the impact of situations. They advance and grow as the drama unfolds the idea underlying each play.

Galsworthy's characters are types rather than individuals. His characters are embodiments of certain ideas, and hence they tend to be types rather than individual figures.

Galsworthy's heroes and heroines are highly emotional but they fail to express them adequately. Emotion is the stuff of their life. The characters of Shaw are generally intellectual, and stand well contrasted with the emotional characters of Galsworthy. The characters of Galsworthy fail to give proper and adequate expression to their emotional feelings. They are subdued and fail to give proper ventilation to their feelings. "One cannot help contrasting Galsworthy's characters with those of Bernard Shaw, whose characters are all articulate to the point of volubility. There is no need to guess their emotions; they expound them with wonderful lucidity. But in the case of Galsworthy, it often happens that an incoherent ejaculation or a clumsy gesture is more eloquent than a fine speech because it hints at the unplumbed depths of agony suffered by the dumb animals of the human race."[6] There is much force in Galsworthy's own admission about his characters when he says, "About Shaw's plays one might say that they contain charac- ters who express emotions which they do not possess. About mine one might say that they contain characters who possess emotions which they cannot express."

Broadly speaking the characters of Galsworthy are purely English. They are dominated by traits common to English men and women. There is little theatricality about them. They are the product of a naturalistic technique, and hence there is truth and verisimilitude in their presentation. We recognise the ordinary humanity in Galsworthy's characters. Schalit rightly remarks, "Galsworthy's characters are dire in action, never far-fetched of self- stultifying. They are always drawn from the average man and woman of our immediate surroundings. From the very outset he surrounds his characters with a peculiar atmosphere of its own and maintains it throughout and thus in each case has something faith- ful, something inevitable about it."

Galsworthy's thumb-nail sketches of characters introduced in stage direction are equally impressive. The hints presented by the stage representation of characters are enough to make the character stand out before us in clear outline. Edward Fillarton is represented on the stage "as one of those clean shaven naval men of good presence who has returned from sea but not from their susceptibilities."

In characterisation, Galsworthy may be compared with Bernard Shaw. The characters of the Shavian plays are all mouth pieces through which the dramatist propagates his theories. They act and talk as the dramatist likes them to, and in their movements there is always some wire pulling from behind. As a result of this, the Shavian characters have been mere mouthpieces of the dramatist. But Galsworthy never allows his personality to intrude into his plays. His characters move and act according to dramatic needs. They have been brought down from an intellectual to a human level and as such they never cease to inmpress or interest us. "Since the characters must be deliberately posed in order to carry out a pattern they are hardly likely to be inspired with a life of their own. Perhaps this will explain why he has created few great personalities who have an existence outside the plays personalities like Cyrano de Bergerac, Peter Pan or Sir John Falstaff."[7]

Though Galsworthy has not been able to create characters of the same excellence as that of Shakespeare, he has created some nice characters which may be taken as types rather than as individuals. We have such fine characters in Galsworthy as John Anthony in Strife, Mrs. Jones in The Silver Box, Falder in Justice, Captain Dancy in Loyalties and these characters cannot be forgotten. We shall always remember the stubborn rigidity of purpose in Anthony, Cordelia like simplicity and sincerity in Mrs. Jones, intense restlessness in Captain Dancy, and tragic irony in Falder.

Dialogue

Galsworthy lays great emphasis on dialogue. In Some Platitudes Concerning Drama he writes about the importance of dialogue in an effective play, "The art of writing true dramatic dialogue is an austere art, denying itself all licence, grudging every sentence devoted to the mere machinery of the play, supposing all jokes and epigrams severed from character, relying for fun and pathos as the fun and tears of life. From start to finish good dialogue is hand-made like good lace; clear, of fine texture, further- ing with each thread the harmony and strength of a design to which all must be subordinated."[8]

The dialogues of Galsworthy are pointed and sharp though they lack the play of corruscating wit present in the sparkling dialogues of Bernard Shaw. Galsworthy's dialogues are effective in the presentation of tragic emotion of a subdued character. His dialogues are generally short and to the point though there are long speeches as well here and there as Frome's speech in Justice and Anthony's defence of capitalism in Strife.

His Craftsmanship

Galsworthy is a great craftsman in his dramatic art. He knows the art of plot-construction, and of giving to his plot a keen sense of dramatic effectiveness. He manages his plots with economy, restraint and concentration. Every word beats on the action or reveals character or suggests the attitude which Galsworthy desires his spectators to take. The same artistic thrift is seen in his stage directions also. Stage directions in modern drama are always very important, but some dramatists, like  Shaw, carry their stage directions to the length of an essay. errs in this respect. He never says too much, but at the same time, he never omits any single detail which is important.

Galsworthy's Dramatic Effectiveness

We do not, however, claim for Galsworthy the Shakespearean genius of portraying that 'double-conflict', conflict with the elemental forces and simultaneously conflict with conscience, but nevertheless, this much credit must be given to Galsworthy that he has succeeded in creating some very fine dramatic moments by a few subtle hints and suggestions. Such dramatic moments are present in all his plays. In Strife the two unbending leaders of Capital and Labour respectively are deserted by their followers to force a compromise. They stare at each other and there is in their looks a dramatic intensity that keeps us spell bound for some- time. Let us note the words-

Roberts- "Then you are no longer Chairman of this company? (Breaking into half-mad laughter) Ah ha-ah ha, ha! They've thrown you, over-thrown their chairman A ha-ha! (with a sudden dreadful calm). So they've done us both down, Mr. Anthony ?"

"Anthony rises with an effort. He turns to Roberts, who looks at him. They stand several seconds, gazing at each other, fixedly; Anthony lifts his hand, as though to salute, but lets it fall. The expression of Robert's face changes from hostility to wonder "

Play of Irony

In Galsworthy's dramatic art dramatic irony as well as irony of life are presented with great care and astuteness. There is a note of irony in all his plays. It has become a part of Galsworthy's art. For example, in Justice the machinery which the Law has devised for dispensing justice, results in producing marked injustice. In Strife Capital and Labour come into collision causing untold suffering and wastage to all concerned. When both parties are thoroughly exhausted, they strive at a compromise, the terms of which are exactly the same as had been proposed before the quarrel began and which had been contemptuously rejected by both the parties then. Tench the Secretary, reveals the irony of the situation in the concluding lines of the drama.

Tench (staring at Harness)-Suddenly excited. Do you know, Sir- these terms, they are the very same we drew up together you and I, and put to both sides before the fight began? All this-all this--and what for?

Harness (In a slow grim voice) That's where the fun comes in.

Summing up

The general effect left on our mind after reading Galsworthy's play is one of of despair and groom. A dramatic world is mainly grey. His tragic plays are for the most part serious, even sombre. But he is not a pessimist; there is a ray of hope that the lot of human beings would be better in the world to come. He believes that the cause of tragedy in social life lies in failure of sympathy and imagination, and he hopes that human lot is capable of amelioration.

References

1. Life and Letters of J. Galsworthy Ed. by H. V. Marrot
2.  J. Galsworthy: 'Some Platitudes concerning Drama', The Inn of Tranquility
3.  J. W. Marriott: Modern Drama
4.  Dr. R. C. Gupta: The Problem Play
5.  W. Marriott: Modern Drama
6. J.W. Marriott : Modern Drama
7.  J.W. Marriott : Modern Drama
8.  John Galsworthy : Some Platitudes Concerning Drama