Penn State University Press

Works by Shaw

Shaw, Bernard. “‘The Dark Lady’: G.B.S. Replies to Mr. Frank Harris.” SHAW: The Annual of Bernard Shaw Studies. Volume Nineteen. University Park: Penn State University Press, 1999; pp. 79–84.

———. Extract from “Against the Well-Made Play,” from his Preface to Three Plays by Brieux (London: A. C. Fifield, 1911), pp. xv–xxvii. Modern Theories of Drama: A Selection of Writings on Drama and Theatre 1850–1990. Ed. George W. Brandt. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1998; pp. 99–105. This sectional title does not appear in the Complete Prefaces or in Bernard Dukore’s edition of The Drama Observed. In the later printings the well-made play is discussed in sections of the preface captioned “The Pedantry of Paris” and “How the Great Dramatists Torture the Public.” At least 42 figures are represented in this pantheon of contributors to modern drama and theatre.

———. Extracts and selections from Music in London, “Blaming the Bard,” “Epistle Dedicatory” to Man and Superman, Preface to Major Barbara, a letter to G. K. Chesterton, The Intelligent Womans’s Guide to Socialism and Capitalism, Preface to Geneva, and Sixteen Self Sketches. The New Oxford Book of English Prose. Ed. John Gross. Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press, 1998. Not seen.

———. “George Bernard Shaw.” A check of March 24, 1885, endorsed [End Page 265] “G.B.Shaw” on the verso and signed by Annie Besant. She paid “G.B. Shaw Esq . . . Two pounds 15 S[hillings] for the Free Thought Publishing Co.” Scott J. Winslow Associates, Inc. auction catalogue (3 December 1999), lot 2451: $450-up. A mostly readable photo illustration is provided.

———. “George Bernard Shaw.” A typed three-page memorandum of Agreement of 28 February 1931, signed “G. Bernard Shaw,” involving the publishing firm Fountain Press of New York, Elbridge Adams; with Shaw and Constable and Co., London, authorizing the publication of letters between Shaw and Ellen Terry. (Adams owned the rights to Terry’s letters.) Comes with two other documents, signed by Terry’s daughter, Edith Craig. Remember When Auctions, Catalogue 46 (10 July 1999), item 433, $750–1,000. A readable photo of part of the first page is provided.

———. “George Bernard Shaw.” Odd and amusing “A.N.S.” of 25 November 1949; no addressee given. Presents a printed comment by Shaw and a one-sentence note in Shaw’s writing: “If you neither believe what I say, nor will do what I tell you, will you please stop bothering me about yourself”; signed “G.B.S.” Alexander Autographs, Inc., telephone, mail, and fax bid auction catalogue (20/23 April 1999), item 1846, $200–300. A readable photo of the item is provided.

———. “George Bernard Shaw (1856–1950).” Typed letter of 5 June 1908 signed by Shaw to Dr Ch [sic] Barbaud in France, regarding violating a Shaw copyright: “You should not translate a copyright literary work without being authorized to do so by the proprietor. . . . The existence of your version is a violation of the right of my authorized translators . . . you really might as well write to me to say that you had stolen M Hamon’s [Shaw’s authorized French translator] watch, Mme Hamon’s parasol, and my hat . . . no doubt you acted in good faith . . . but M Hamon may not take that view of it . . . his powers in the matter are equal to my own. . . .” Remember When Auctions, Mail and Phone Auction Catalogue #45 (March 1999), lot 3569, $500–750. A readable photo of the letter is provided.

———. “George Bernard Shaw (1856–1950).” An autograph letter of 15 September 1918, signed “G. Bernard Shaw,” to Hugo Vallentin on “Great Southern Hotel” letterhead: “Behold me settled here until the end of the month. No news whatever. Receipt annexed. Methuselah play unfinished and in incoherent fragments at Ayot St. Lawrence. Love to your ladies. ever.” Scott J. Winslow Associates, Inc. auction catalogue (3 December 1999), item 2452: $800-up. A readable photo of the letter is provided.

———. “George Bernard Shaw (1856–1950).” A printed form 8;dp x 101/4;dp signed “G. Bernard Shaw” and filled in Shaw’s hand licensing the Astrigg [End Page 266] Shakespearean Players to perform Candida at Astrigg on 13th and 15th April 1925. Scott J. Winslow Associates, Inc. mail and phone auction catalogue (16 June 1999), item 351, $600–800. A readable photo of one side of the form is provided.

———. “George Bernard Shaw (1856–1950).” An “A.N.S.” in Shaw’s handwriting of 25 December 1933, on a printed compliments card, signed “G.B.S.”: “for the Xmas fund of the staff. Do not trouble to acknowledge. I shall be passing presently. G.B.S.” With original autograph transmittal envelope. Alexander Autographs, Inc., telephone, mail, and fax bid auction catalogue (20/23 April 1999), item #1845, $200–300.

———. “George Bernard Shaw (1856–1950).” A typed letter of 8 March 1940, amended in Shaw’s handwriting, and signed “G.B.S.” to George Sylvester Viereck (1884–1962), the American writer later imprisoned in the U.S. for pro-German propaganda, with: “Excellent content re Adolf Hitler, in the early stages of World War II.” Sample: “I think I made Hitler give a better account of himself than he has ever done in real life . . . His Nordic anti-Semite rubbish . . . his resentment complex to the circumstance that he has never been able to impose himself on the Jews. . . .” Remember When Auctions, Catalogue #46 (10 July 1999), item 432, $4,000–6,000. Published in Shaw Collected Letters 1926–1950.

———. “George Bernard Shaw (1856–1950).” A postcard style note of 25 June 1940, typically sarcastic, good content about health and illness, “A.L.S.” in Shaw’s hand, signed “G.B.S.” to “Ethel” Davis, Shaw’s cousin once removed. Her father James Cockaigne Shaw—“Kaffir”—and GBS were cousins. Alexander Autographs, Inc., telephone, mail, and fax bid auction catalogue (20/23 April 1999), item 1844, $400–600. A readable photo of the note is provided.

———. “My Memories of Oscar Wilde by George Bernard Shaw” in Hebrew. Haye Oskar Vaild. Israel: Hod ha-Sharon, 1999. Not seen. Includes a piece by Frank Harris. Translator not recorded.

———. Selected Plays of George Bernard Shaw. Two volumes. New York: Vintage Books, 1999. Not seen. Introduction by Alfred Kazin for “1st Vintage Classics ed.[ition].”

———. “Shaw, George Bernard. Saint Joan: a Chronicle Play in Six Scenes and an Epilogue, London: Constable and Company, 1929.” Author’s inscribed presentation copy to Helen Wills Moody: “Dear Helen Wills I promised you this at Clivedon. You may remember stealing my heart on that occasion. G. Bernard Shaw 19th July 1929.” The catalogue further supplies that Wills recalls this occasion in her autobiography Fifteen Thirty (New York 1937) when Shaw declared that “tennis should be played in the long grass in meadows in the nude.” Christie’s South Kensington [End Page 267] auction catalogue, Tennis, Including the Helen Wills Collection (15 June 1999), item 10: Euro 460–760 /£300–500.

——— and Mrs. Patrick Campbell. George Bernard Shaw and Mrs. Patrick Campbell: Their Correspondence. Ed. Alan Dent. AMS, 1999. A reprint; $36.50 at Barnes and Noble (web: http://www.bn.com).

———. Unpublished letter. See Berst, Charles A., in “Books and Pamphlets,” below.

———. See also Valenti, Michael, in “Books and Pamphlets,” below.

II. Books and Pamphlets

Albert, Sidney P. “Ballycorus and the Folly: In Search of Perivale St. Andrews.” SHAW: The Annual of Bernard Shaw Studies. Volume Nineteen. University Park: Penn State University Press, 1999; pp. 159–74.

———. “Evangelizing the Garden City?” SHAW: The Annual of Bernard Shaw Studies. Volume Nineteen. University Park: Penn State University Press, 1999; pp. 41–77.

Allett, John. “Mrs Warren’s Profession and the Politics of Prostitution.” SHAW: The Annual of Bernard Shaw Studies. Volume Nineteen. University Park: Penn State University Press, 1999; pp. 23–39.

Asher, Michael. Lawrence: The Uncrowned King of Arabia. Woodstock, New York: The Overlook Press, 1999 (1998). Remarkable for its minimal report of TEL’s connection to the Shaws, although there are ten references to Charlotte and six to G.B.S.

Beckson, Karl E. The Oscar Wilde Encyclopedia. New York: AMS Press, 1998. Not seen. Provides an entry for Shaw, which the abstract notes as being among the more interesting entries.

Berst, Charles A. “Two By Shaw” (review of Bernard Shaw on Cinema, and Not Bloody Likely!, edited by Bernard F. Dukore). SHAW: The Annual of Bernard Shaw Studies. Volume Nineteen. University Park: Penn State University Press, 1999; pp. 175–83. Berst’s review prints an unpublished letter from Shaw to Arthur Brentano, his American publisher, in October 1920. The letter comments on Shaw’s problems with the way American film makers tried to do business with him.

Bierce, Ambrose. A Sole Survivor: Bits of Autobiography. Ed. S. T. Joshi and David E. Schultz. Knoxville: University of Tennessee Press, 1998. At least one interesting reference: from a letter to Herman Scheffauer, 31 March 1908: “Your ‘modern masters’ are Ibsen and Shaw, with both of whose works and ways I am thoroughly familiar, both of whom I think very small men—pets of the drawing-room and gods of the hour.”

Bloom, Harold. George Bernard Shaw. Bromall, Pa.: Chelsea House Publishers, 1999. Not seen. “A comprehensive research and study guide for several plays [not named].” In “Bloom’s Major Dramatists” series. [End Page 268]

Campbell, Mrs. Patrick. See “Shaw, Bernard and Mrs. Patrick Campbell” in “Works by Shaw” above.

Carpenter, Charles A. Dramatists and the Bomb: American and British Playwrights Confront the Nuclear Age, 1945–1964. Westport, Conn., and London: Greenwood Press, 1999. In this study, Carpenter, a former bibliographer of The Shaw Review, includes numerous references to Shaw and a chapter subsection, “Shaw’s Reactions to the Birth of the Atomic Age,” a version of which was published in SHAW 18 as “Shaw’s Dramatic Reactions to the Birth of the Atomic Age.” Carpenter offers a discussion of Shaw’s reactions to the nuclear age in his dramatic works, in small segments of Buoyant Billions and Farfetched Fables. In Buoyant Billions Shaw conveys positive implications of atomic power. In Fables he tilts to the negative.

Chen, Wendi. “The First Shaw Play on the Chinese Stage: The Production of Mrs Warren’s Profession in 1921.” SHAW: The Annual of Bernard Shaw Studies. Volume Nineteen. University Park: Penn State University Press, 1999; pp. 99–118.

Cooke, Alistair. Memories of the Great & the Good. New York: Arcade Publishing, 1999. Not seen. The subject of one of the memories is Shaw.

Davis, Tracy C. See Getting Married, below.

Ewbank, Inga-Stina, Olav Lausund and Bjorn Tysdahl, eds. Anglo-Scandinavian Cross-Currents. Norwich, Norfolk: Norvik Press, 1999. From the TLS (23 June 1999): 33, review by Carolyne Larrington: a collection of essays dealing with the British view of Scandinavian art, literature, and history in the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, focusing on three areas: Vikings and Victorians; the English reaction to Ibsen and Munch in the 1890s, and Joyce, Dickens and Ibsen. The review does not mention Shaw.

Getting Married: Shaw Festival 1999 (Shaw Festival production program, 1999). Includes “Wedding Banns, Wedding Bonds” by Tracy C. Davis, which explains that in Getting Married “Shaw created a cast of characters who represented the spectrum of early twentieth-century anxieties about heterosexual union.” Shaw’s proposals for addressing the dilemma of modern marriage include “radical feminism (or feminist separatism), ménages à trois, open marriage, polyandry, and celibacy. . . . Take nothing for granted, Shaw seems to say: ‘innate’ maternalism can be excessive, companionship can be underrated, and because ethical guidance will not come from the divines any more than the solicitors we may as well turn to the shopkeeping and working classes for moral and logistical guidance. . . . From time immemorial, comedy and marriage have been paired in the Western theatre. Men demonstrate their courage and masculinity by courting and keeping women, while women find [End Page 269] their independence in a myriad of ways, with or without menfolk at their sides.”

Gunby, David. “The First Night of O’Flaherty, V.C.” SHAW: The Annual of Bernard Shaw Studies. Volume Nineteen. University Park: Penn State University Press, 1999; pp. 85–97.

Heartbreak House: Shaw Festival 1999 (Shaw Festival production program, 1999). Includes “Director’s Notes” by Tadeusz Bradecki and “Apocalypse Then” by Ronald Bryden, excerpted from his “The Roads to Heartbreak House” in The Cambridge Companion to George Bernard Shaw (1998).

Hiney, Tom. Raymond Chandler: A Biography. New York: The Atlantic Monthly Press, 1997. One Shaw reference. Around 1907 Chandler took in a lecture by Shaw: “As a very young man, when Shaw’s beard was still red, I heard him give a lecture in London on Art for Art’s sake, which seems to have meant something then. It did not please Shaw of course; few things did unless he thought of them first” (from a letter to James Sandoe, 10 August 1947).

Hugo, Leon. Edwardian Shaw: The Writer and His Age. Houndmills, Basingstoke, U.K.: Macmillan Press. New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1999. Reviewed in this volume.

Larson, Gale K. “General Introduction: Shaw and History.” SHAW: The Annual of Bernard Shaw Studies. Volume Nineteen. University Park: Penn State University Press, 1999; pp. 1–6. Larson, guest editor of SHAW 19, is now the general editor of SHAW.

———. “‘In Good King Charles’s Golden Days’: An Imaginative and Truthful History.” SHAW: The Annual of Bernard Shaw Studies. Volume Nineteen. University Park: Penn State University Press, 1999; pp. 149–58.

Lausund, Olav. See Ewbank, Inga-Stina, above.

Marowitz, Charles. See Valenti, Michael, below.

Morris, Edmund. Dutch: A Memoir of Ronald Reagan. New York: Random House, 1999. In the early 1930s when Reagan was with a few close friends, he did scenes, playing several parts at once, from about a dozen plays in his repertoire: Moliere’s Le Malade imaginaire, Shakespeare’s Taming of the Shrew, and Shaw’s Apple Cart.

Müller, Wolfgang G. “George Bernard Shaw and Shakespeare: An Intertextual Analysis of Caesar and Cleopatra.” Twentieth-Century Theatre and Drama in English: Festschrift for Heinz Kosok on the Occasion of his 65th Birthday. Ed. Jürgen Kamm. Trier, Germany: Wissentschaftlicher Verlag, 1999; pp. 99–114. “Shaw’s intertextual strategies serve him well to reject and refute what he condemned as egocentric individualism in the sense of the political megalomania of Shakespeare’s Caesar and in the sense of the excessive sexual infatuation of Shakespeare’s Antony. Shaw also succeeds in opposing to what he considers Shakespeare’s lack of [End Page 270] teachable morality and philosophy his own didactic theatre, in which he, the believer in social progress and self-realisation, assigns a special role to Caesar as belonging to that type of statesman and hero on which the hope for the future of mankind may rest. As a dramatic character Shaw’s Caesar with this superiority, intellectual agility, efficiency, humour, and wit is certainly a successful representative of civilization holding barbarism at bay. Whether Shaw’s basing of Shakespeare produced good theatre is not to be discussed here, but there is no doubt that he made his point and that Caesar and Cleopatra is with its new concept of a hero and its use of the stage as a forum for discussion in several ways a theatrical innovation.”

O’Casey, Eileen. Cheerio, Titan: The Friendship Between George Bernard Shaw and Eileen and Sean O’Casey. Collingdale, Pa.: Diane Publishing Company, 1999. A reprint.

O’Hara, Michael M. “Federal Theatre’s Androcles and the Lion: Shaw in Black and White.” SHAW: The Annual of Bernard Shaw Studies. Volume Nineteen. University Park: Penn State University Press, 1999; pp. 129–48.

Pernoud, Régine and Marie Véronique Clin. Joan of Arc: Her Story. Trans. Jeremy du Quesnay Adams. Ed. Bonnie Wheeler. New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1999 (1998). Includes two brief and complimentary mentions of Shaw. Provides a synopsis of the history and interpretation(s) of Joan of Arc’s life, a chronology and bibliography of the trials, trial transcripts and excerpts from trial records, along with “contemporary sources”—in French (one in German).

Perret, Geoffrey. Eisenhower. One reference to G.B.S. from the diary (8 July/10 August 1942) of Harry C. Butcher, a Lt. Commander in the U.S. Navy Reserve and a V.P. at CBS. Eisenhower turned down a chance to meet Shaw at a dinner hosted by the Lord Mayor of London. “To hell with it,” said Ike. “I’ve got work to do.”

Peters, Sally. “Writings for ‘The Dreaded Weintraub”‘ (review of Shaw and Other Matters: A Festschrift for Stanley Weintraub on the Occasion of His Forty-Second Anniversary at the Pennsylvania State University, edited by Susan Rusinko). SHAW: The Annual of Bernard Shaw Studies. Volume Nineteen. University Park: Penn State University Press, 1999; pp. 183–85.

Pyle, Hilary. Red-Headed Rebel: Susan L. Mitchell, Poet and Mystic of the Irish Cultural Renaissance. Dublin: Woodfield, 1998. Not seen. Review by Florence O’Donoghue in TLS (12 February 1999: 34), notes that Mitchell’s 1916 book on George Moore infuriated Moore, and delighted G.B.S.

Reynolds, Jean. Pygmalion’s Wordplay: The Postmodern Shaw. Gainesville: The University of South Florida, 1999. “In this book I have argued that the Derridean concepts of absence, presence, and supplement can illuminate Shaw’s creative process. Once again margins have migrated toward [End Page 271] the mainstream: Postmodern thought, which might at first seem extraneous to a writer who died in 1950, turns out to be ‘tailor-made for Shaw,’ as R. F. Dietrich has pointed out” [in “Deconstruction as Devil’s Advocacy,” 177, Critical Essays on George Bernard Shaw, ed. Elsie Adams, 1991]. To be reviewed in SHAW 21.

Rosen, Charles. Romantic Poets, Critics and Other Mad Men. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1998. Not seen. Includes a section on “The Journalistic Critic as Hero: George Bernard Shaw.” P. N. Furbank in a TLS (4 June 1999: 7) review says Rosen “is ready to call Bernard Shaw ‘perhaps the greatest of all music critics,’ in an essay which practically never shows Shaw actually discussing music. (Shaw’s greatness, for Rosen, lies in his understanding of the function of musical journalism, the nature of concert-giving and the practicalities of the musical life.) Similarly, in an admiring essay about William Empson, Rosen writes that “Even when wrong, which was often enough, he [Shaw] was generally a better critic than his opponents.”

Sheridan, Alan. André Gide: A Life in the Present. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1999. The proximity of Shaw and Gide is lightly represented here, in the notice that they were both on the “praesidium of twelve” for the International Association of Writers for the Defense of Culture, and in the reporting of Gide’s knowledge of Shaw’s work. Gide saw Apple Cart, and when he later saw Devil’s Disciple, he joined his two companions in being “overcome with admiration and enthusiasm.”

Siegert, Bernhard. “Switchboards and Sex: The Nut (t) Case.” Inscribing Science: Scientific Texts and the Materiality of Communication. Ed. Timothy Lenoir. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1998; pp. 78–90. Siegert argues, in part: “In Ma Bell, the mother of Alexander Graham, a shift in the materiality of discourse can be demonstrated that implies the silencing of speech in the first person as a feminine career possibility and comprised the immediate prehistory of the telephone. That this demonstration occurred within the function of male authorship is characteristic of that muting itself. My case in point is George Bernard Shaw’s Pygmalion. [paragraph] The parallel between the cockney speech of the flower girl and the deaf-mute condition of Bell’s students is no coincidence. The empirical Eliza Doolittle was very probably Eliza Grace Symonds, Alexander Graham Bell’s mother, who was deaf and mute from birth. And the connections extend further: Shaw owes the plot of Pygmalion to the Bell family.” The real Henry Higgins (Henry Sweet, the phonetician) was acquainted with the real Eliza, and “a striking line uttered by Higgins in Act Five, when he doubts whether Eliza ‘has a single idea that has not been funneled into her head,’ recalls almost literally Eliza Bell’s situation: her ears were in fact accessible only with a megaphone. When A. G. Bell, en route to the telephone, connected [End Page 272] Koenig’s manometric flame to a speaking tube, just as Professor Higgins does in Pygmalion, he commented upon the construction with these words: ‘just like Mama’s tube.’ [paragraph] At the center of Pygmalion lies this question: Is it possible for Eliza, a flower girl—or speaking machine—to establish an identity using language of which she is not the subject?” In fact, “Eliza professionalizes . . . [a] parrot status at the end of the play, at the cost of the classical comic ending, in order to become an assistant to a phonetics specialist. [paragraph] Because the first person of Eliza Doolittle is spoken by Higgiins, as the first person of Eliza Bell was spoken by her husband, . . . nothing remains for them but speaking, and speaking on, extraneous lines—no differently than the tens of thousand of operators in the switching offices after them, who were in principle neither transmitters nor receivers of a discourse, but rather third persons, in whom all first and second persons ground themselves.”

Stashower, Daniel. Teller of Tales: The Life of Arthur Conan Doyle. New York: Henry Holt and Company, 1999. There was substantial connection between Doyle, and Shaw, and Stashower presents it here, drawing upon the Holroyd Bernard Shaw and the Laurence Collected Letters as well as the Doyle archive. The most extensive example is in “The Ruthless Vegetarian,” an even-handed chapter detailing the Shaw/Doyle newspaper duel over the report of the Titanic disaster. Shaw’s posture was that the newspapers had lied in their descriptions of the acts of heroism, especially by the captain of the ship. Doyle’s view was sentimental, rationalizing that glossing the brutal facts (if such facts were present) was salutary since there was already immense shock and pain from the tragedy. He believed, in addition, that Shaw’s attack was not sincere, but a typical Shavian ploy of self-advertisement. The exchange was bitter but did not change their “kindly personal relations.” Doyle wrote, “Shaw is a genial creature to meet, and I am prepared to believe that there is a human kindly side to his nature though it has not been presented to the public. It took a good man to write Saint Joan.”

Stuart, Gloria. Gloria Stuart: I Just Kept Hoping. Boston, New York, London: Little, Brown and Company, 1999. The oldest actor/actress ever nominated for an Academy Award, for playing Old Rose in James Cameron’s Titanic, Stuart remembers giving a party to which Joel Sayre, a New York newspaperman, brought Mrs. Patrick Campbell. “I was terribly impressed that Mrs. Campbell, Bernard Shaw’s great love (no sex), was my dinner guest.”

Sutherland, Donald. See “VI. Miscellany,” below.

Tynan, Kenneth. Profiles. New York: Random House, 1998. Not seen. Reprints a short piece on Shaw.

Tysdahl, Bjorn. See Ewbank, Inga-Stina, above. [End Page 273]

Valentini, Michael and Charles Marowitz. Bashville in Love: A Musical Comedy. New York and London: Samuel French, 1998. Not seen. Adapted from The Admirable Bashville by George Bernard Shaw.

Village Wooing in Lunchtime Theatre: Shaw Festival 1999 (Shaw Festival production program, 1999). Includes “Director’s Notes” by Nikki Lundmark, and excerpts from Robert G. Everding’s “Village Wooing: A Call for Individual Representation” from SHAW 7 (1987), and Michael Holroyd’s biography, Bernard Shaw, Volume 3 (1991).

Weintraub, Rodelle. “Too True to Be Good: The Bottomless Abyss Following World War I.” SHAW: The Annual of Bernard Shaw Studies. Volume Nineteen. University Park: Penn State University Press, 1999; pp. 119–27.

Weintraub, Stanley. “Bernard Shaw: The Dramatic Achievements.” Twentieth-Century Theatre and Drama in English: Festschrift for Heinz Kosok on the Occasion of his 65th Birthday. Trier, Germany: Wissentschaftlicher Verlag, 1999; pp. 77–98. An updated biographical essay based upon an earlier one in the Dictionary of Literary Biography, Volume 10 (1982).

———. “The Burgunder Shaw Collection.” Review of “The Instinct of an Artist”/ Shaw and the Theatre. An Exhibition for the Bernard F. Burgunder Collection of George Bernard Shaw, edited by Ann L. Ferguson. SHAW: The Annual of Bernard Shaw Studies. Volume Nineteen. University Park: Penn State University Press, 1999; pp. 175–76.

———. “Cetewayo: Shaw’s First Hero from History.” SHAW: The Annual of Bernard Shaw Studies. Volume Nineteen. University Park: Penn State University Press, 1999; pp. 7–22.

Womack, Peter. “3. Drama: The Twentieth Century.” The Year’s Work in English Studies 77 (1996). Oxford: Blackwell Publishers, 1999. Dan H. Laurence, ed., Bernard Shaw Theatrics, and Sally Peters, Bernard Shaw: The Ascent of the Superman, are reviewed. In the “Nineteenth Century” section, Barbara Belford’s Bram Stoker: A Biography of the Author of Dracula is noted as examining Stoker’s place among the writers of his day, including Shaw.

III. Periodicals

Allen, Henry. “Stare Masters: A Level Gaze at the Celebrity Photo.” Washington Post (22 August 1999), Section G, p. 1. From Newspaper Abstracts: “Here’s a clip of George Bernard Shaw strolling up a curved gravel path—photography’s classic, can’t-miss, winding-road composition. He ignores the camera—why do we all know that you should never look into a camera if you’re walking toward it, whether you’re famous or not? He then defies decorum by blowing his nose several times, vigorously, thereby attaining pseudo-intimacy with the viewer, an intimacy he toys with by giving a lecture on how to pose for the camera.” [End Page 274]

Almaric, Jean-Claude. Review of Christopher Innes, ed., The Cambridge Companion to George Bernard Shaw. Études Anglaises 52:3 (July-September 1999): 358–59.

Anderson, Michael. Review of Michael Holroyd’s Bernard Shaw: The One Volume Definitive Edition. New York Times (31 January 1999), Section VII, p. 17.

Anstead, Alicia. “Acadia Troupe’s Arms Would Make Shaw Proud” (review of Acadia Repertory Theatre production in Somersville, Massachusetts). Bangor Daily News (30 July 1999). Not seen. No pages given in source listing.

Backalenick, Irene. Review of the Bouwerie Lane Theatre (New York) production of Caesar and Cleopatra. Back Stage 40:9 (26 February 1999): 43.

Barron, Neil. “What’s So Funny?” SFRA Review 235/236 (August/October 1998): 5–6. Recycling in this Science Fiction Research Association forum is part of a piece by Michael Dirda in the 16 August 1998 Washington Post on the “100 most amusing novels in English.” Barron notes that Man and Superman is among the choices, especially choices Barron identifies as fantasy or science fiction.

Bellmann, Werner. “Wort und Wörtlichkeit: Zu einer Shaw-Ubersetzung und einem Essay von Annemarie und Heinrich Böll [Words and Candor: On a Translation of Shaw and an Essay by Annemarie and Heinrich Böll]” Euphorion: Zeitschrift für Literaturgeschichte 92:4 (1998): 483–91. In 1964 Annemarie and Heinrich Böll translated Shaw’s Caesar and Cleopatra into German. Based on this experience and their experience in translating two novels by J. D. Salinger (Raise High the Roofbeam, Carpenters and Seymour, an Introduction), they produced an essay on translation entitled “Wort und Wörtlichkeit” [Meaning and Literalism]. Bellman’s essay details the history of the Bölls’ translation of Caesar and Cleopatra and its critical reception. It also clarifies the publishing history of the essay “Meaning and Literalism,” correcting “numerous bibliographic errors.” Annotation furnished by Eric Torgersen, Central Michigan University.

Bemrose, John. “Theatre of the Mind: The Shaw Festival Stays True to Its Artistic Roots—and Still Makes Money.” MacLean’s (26 July 1999), pp. 50–51. A feature piece that distills the Festival productions as “several dramas that take a scalpel to the rich.”

Berry, Kevin. “Major Barbara.” Times Educational Supplement (21 May 1999), p. SS35. Not seen. Michael Friend discusses his UK touring production of Major Barbara.

Christiansen, Richard. “Double Dose of Shaw Proves Too Ambitious” (review of the Strawdog Theatre productions of Wit and Moonlight: A Paper Courtship, by Sam Patterson, based on the correspondence of Shaw and [End Page 275] Ellen Terry, and Village Wooing). Chicago Tribune (14 January 1999), Section 5, p. 2.

“Christina Foyle.” Detroit Free Press (11 June 1999), Section B, p. 5. This obituary notice for the death, at 88, of the renowned bookstore director, includes a GBS anecdote: After a lunch for 2,000, George Bernard Shaw wrote to lament the lack of vegetarian food. Inviting him to another event, Miss Foyle assured him cheese and celery would be offered. He declined, saying he could not stand the idea of 2,000 people crunching celery simultaneously.

Cohen, Edward H. “Shaw.” In “Victorian Bibliography for 1997.” Victorian Studies 41:4 (Summer 1998): 811–12. Twenty-nine entries retrospective to 1994, a few not listed in the Checklist.

Curtis, Nick. “A Little Bit of GBS for GBS” (review of the Royal National Theatre Tour production of Widowers’ Houses). Evening Standard (London) (14 October 1999), p. 58.

Dickinson, Bob. “Obituary: Roger Eagle. . . .” Guardian (15 May 1999), Section 1, p. 24. Eagle, 56, an influential disc jockey, was distantly related to Shaw. Eagle’s mother, Dorothy Eagle, was Shaw’s Aunt Emily Carroll’s great granddaughter.

Einsohn, H. I. Review of Michael Holroyd’s Bernard Shaw: The One Volume Definitive Edition. Choice (January 1999): 886.

———. Review of Christopher Innes, ed. Cambridge Companion to George Bernard Shaw. Choice (April 1999): 1455.

Fanger, Iris. Review of Trinity Repertory Theater and the Huntington Theatre productions of Mrs Warren’s Profession. Boston Herald (10 October 1999), Section O, p. 5.

Fisher, Mark. Review of the Citizens’ Theatre (Glasgow/Perth) production of Pygmalion. The Herald (18 September 1999), Section 16, p. 2.

Fred Crawford Memorial Statements. New Canterbury Literary Society News: The Richard Aldington Newsletter 27:2 (Summer 1999): 1–3. The number is dedicated to the memory of Professor Fred D. Crawford, a major Aldington scholar, in addition to his decade-long (SHAW 10 to SHAW 20) tenure as editor of SHAW: The Annual of Bernard Shaw Studies.

Freeman, Don. “I Say ‘Tomayto’ and You Say ‘Tomahto.”‘ The San Diego Union-Tribune (11 August 1999), Section E, p. 2. Column on speech accents makes substantial reference to Shaw’s Pygmalion and Lerner and Loewe’s My Fair Lady.

Friedlander, Mira. “Canadian Beckon: Three Summer Theater Fests Expand Reach.” Variety 374:2 (1–7 March 1999): 87f. On Stratford, Soulpepper Theater, and the Shaw Festival, which will begin to present plays set during Shaw’s lifetime, regardless of their year of composition, relaxing the previous bar that required the plays be written in Shaw’s lifetime. [End Page 276]

———. “Shaw Fest Shows its Strengths” (feature article on the Shaw Festival’s season offerings). Variety 375:5 (14–20 June 1999): 41f.

Gale, Bill. Review of Trinity Repertory Company production of Mrs Warren’s Profession. Providence Journal (30 September 1999), Section L, p. 10.

Garebian, Keith. “Four at the Shaw” (reviews of the 1999 Shaw Festival productions of Getting Married and Heartbreak House). Performing Arts and Entertainment in Canada 32:3 (August 1999): 20–21.

Hampton, Wilborn. “Fondly Bickering ‘Until We are Dead”‘ (review of the Irish Repertory Theater production of Jerome Kilty’s Dear Liar—adapted from the letters of GBS and Mrs. Patrick Campbell). New York Times (27 July 1999), Section E, p. 5.

———. “Demanding Brat Meets Mild Mentor” (review of the Jean Cocteau Repertory production of Caesar and Cleopatra). New York Times (1 April 1999), Section E, p. 29.

Hargrave, Harry. “High-pitched ‘House”‘ (review of Arts Center Community Theater production of Heartbreak House). The News & Observer (Raleigh, N.C.) (5 June 1999), Section E, p. 9.

Herbert, Ian. “Writing in the Dark: Fifty Years of British Theatre Criticism.” NTQ 15:3 (August 1999): 236–46. The article covers the period 1948–1998 and begins with the observation that the public was perhaps ready for the seriousness of the “new theatre” that had begun around the turn of the century. “Certainly, its English champion, Bernard Shaw, whose long life as a writer and educational polemicist included four glorious years as a most devastating theatre critic, was alive and relatively well, and still as controversial as ever in the land of post-war New Labour. Apart from Shaw and one or two other brilliant self-publicists such as James Agate and [Kenneth] Tynan, the history of English theatre criticism is the story of a group of dedicated, slightly dull fellows who strove nightly to communicate their pleasure in what they saw at the theatre.”

Hodgins, Paul. “Philandering Shaw: A Victorian Cad Mimics the Life of His Creator in an SCR [South Coast Repertory] Production about Still-relevant Issues” (review of The Philanderer). The Orange County Register (7 September 1999), Show Section, p. 3.

Holder, Heidi. Review of Leon Hugo’s Edwardian Shaw: The Writer and His Age. Choice (October 1999): 328.

Isherwood, Charles. Review of Irish Repertory Company production of [End Page 277] Jerome Kilty’s Dear Liar). Variety 375:10 (26 July 1999): 42.

Jacques, Damien. Review, in part, of the American Players Theatre production of You Never Can Tell. Milwaukee Journal Sentinel (4 July 1999), p. 12.

Lehman, John. Review of Huntington Theater Company production of Mrs Warren’s Profession. The Patriot Ledger (Quincy, Mass.) (25 September 1999), p. 37.

Marino, Eugene. “Niagara’s Shaw Festival Offers World-Class Theater” (review of the first five productions of the 1999 season). The Detroit News (11 June 1999), Section F, p. 11.

Marx, Bill. “Huntington Takes up Mr. Shaw’s Feminism” (review of Huntington Theatre production of Mrs Warren’s Profession). Boston Sunday Globe (5 September 1999), Section K, p. 3.

———. “Mrs Warren Weilds Too Big a Shtick” (review of the Trinity Repertory production). The Boston Globe (2 October 1999), Section C, p. 6.

———. “Wilson’s Agitprop at Hartford Stage.” The Boston Globe (3 November 1999), Section E, p. 4. This review of Lanford Wilson ‘s Talley’s Folly calls attention to the play’s portrayal of its liberal heroine character, Ruth, who also plays lead in a fictive, local production of Saint Joan. Another of Wilson’s characters, in Book of Days (Hartford Stage Co.) is the director of a production of Saint Joan. See Variety review by Markland Taylor, 8 November 1999 (50:5).

McCauley, Mary Carole. “Festival Short Works Are a Mixed Bag” (review of Milwaukee Chamber Theatre production of Passion, Poison and Petrification). The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel (19 April 1999), p. 6.

McMillan, Joyce. “Strangers Trample on the Shaw” (review of Citizens’ Theatre—Glasgow/Perth production of Pygmalion. The Scotsman (20 September 1999), p. 5.

Meisel, Martin. “The Real Shaw” (review of Shaw 17, Stanley Weintraub’s Shaw’s People, Richard Dietrich’s Bernard Shaw’s Novels, Gareth Griffith’s Socialism and Superior Brains: The Political Thought of Bernard Shaw, and Sally Peters’ Bernard Shaw: The Ascent of the Superman). Victorian Studies 41:2 (Winter 1998): 265–76.

Melich, Nancy. “Shaw’s You Never Can Tell Keeps Shakespeare Fest Peppered” (review of the Utah Shakespeare Festival production of You Never Can Tell). The Salt Lake Tribune (5 July 1999), Section B, p. 4.

Murray, Christopher. Review of John P. Harrington’s The Irish Play on the New York Stage: 1874–1966). Irish University Review 29:1 (Spring/Summer 1999): 194–96.

Nance, Kevin. “‘Mismatch’ Mates Chekhov, Shaw in Farce” (review of the Mockingbird Public Theatre production of Overruled and Chekhov’s The Brute). The Tennessean (9 May 1999), Section K, p. 3.

Nathan, Rhoda. “Shaw in New York.” New York Times Book Review (3 January 1999): 2. To add an omitted representative to Phillip Lopate’s “omnium-gatherum” of the reactions of writers to New York, Nathan engages Edmund Wilson’s account of Shaw speaking in the old Metropolitan Opera House on April 11, 1933. Shaw said, “The splendor of this building has blinded me to the fact that the majority of my audience [End Page 278] apparently belong to the unemployed.” A burst of applause from the highest balcony followed.

“Never Mind.” The Salt Lake Tribune (6 November 1999), Section A, p. 12. An example of a syndicated (appeared in several major papers) news story on the Internet sale of ova (eggs) from beautiful models. It retells a story wherein Shaw was once asked if he would consider fathering a child with an extremely beautiful woman in order to develop a perfect child. Shaw accepted, but asked pensively, “What if the child has her brains and my looks?”

Newton, Alan. “Nurture and Neglect: A Comparison of Themes in Rebecca Harding’s ‘Life in the Iron Mills’ and George Bernard Shaw’s Pygmalion” (abstract of 1999 annual conference presentation). Michigan Academician: Papers of the Michigan Academy of Science, Arts & Letters 31:2 (May 1999): 202.

Nickson, Richard. “Shaw and Shelley’s Socialism.” The Independent Shavian 36:3 (1998): 51–4. A lecture on “Shelley’s Socialism” by Edward Bibbins Aveling on 14 December 1887 presented many of the views that are reflected in Shaw’s works, as exhibited in a substantial extract contained in Nickson’s paper. While Mary Shelley averred that Shelley “loved the people,” Nickson observes that Shaw “was faithful to them . . . in his fashion.”

Nicolaisen, W. F. H. Review of G. B. Bryan’s The Proverbial Bernard Shaw: An Index to Proverbs). Folklore 109 (1998): 118–19.

Patner, Andrew. Review of Chicago Cultural Center production of You Never Can Tell). Chicago Sun-Times (6 May 1999), p. 40.

Phillips, Michael. “Shaw’s Heartbreak House Just about Right” (review of the Noise Within theater production). Los Angeles Times (16 April 1999), Section F, p. 29.

Presley, Nelson. “Shaw’s Heavy Heartbreak: [review of] Washington Stage Guild’s Dazzling, Deeply Felt Comedy.” Washington Post (5 March 1999), Section C, p. 7.

Rawson, Claude. “Killing the Poor: An Anglo-Irish Theme?” Essays in Criticism 49:2 (April 1999): 101–31. This fine piece erects an analysis principally of Swift, Wilde, and Shaw wherein they “didn’t much like the poor. And all three are on record as wanting to eliminate them in some sense.” Shaw said in Intelligent Woman’s Guide to Socialism (1928), “I hate the poor and look forward eagerly to their extermination.” “[I]t becomes clear in the full context that Shaw is contemplating the disappearance of poverty through improved social arrangements, and that his resentments, like Swift’s, extend to other social groups. Nevertheless, the force of the language is studiedly death-dealing, a peculiar reversal of a classic equivocation found in much extermination rhetoric, where actual or potential murderous intentions are insinuated in non-murderous [End Page 279] or ambiguous language. . . . In both Wilde and Shaw, moreover, as in Swift’s Yahoos, the issue, literally or fictively conceived, is ‘killing’ the poor, not letting them die or (its euphemistic obverse) eat cake. It is ‘killing’ them not because they are a revolutionary menace in the sphere of political action, but because they are poor, (and remembering especially that for Shaw the issue was not punitive) for what they are rather than what they do, the way you might kill, or contemplate killing, a racial group: except, of course, that what they are, at least intermittently, is said to be partly defined by what they do, or fail to do, and except (again) that in this Anglo-Irish context, the Irish are and are not a racial group, are both ‘ourselves’ and ‘other,’ and that Wilde and Shaw are not specifically speaking about Irish poor, though the old language about these rubs off on what they say.”

Reynolds, Jean. “Deconstruction in the Composition Classroom.” Teaching English in the Two-Year College (March 1999): 254–61. Reynolds enlists Shaw to advance her analysis: “Postmodernists say that language shapes our reality in yet another way by forming our ideas and feelings. Describing the love affair he and actress Ellen Terry conducted solely through letters, Bernard Shaw wrote, ‘Let those who may complain that it was all on paper remember that only on paper has humanity yet achieved glory, beauty, truth, knowledge, virtue, and abiding love.’ Without words, ideals and values cannot exist. . . . I sometimes bring a video of Shaw’s Pygmalion to class so that students can contrast the ‘natural’ Eliza of Act I and the well-coached Eliza of Act V. Like composition students, Eliza cannot fully realize her potential until she reinvents herself through language.”

Rollins, Ron. “Aproaching Millennium Millennial Moments 1880 A.D.-1899 A.D.: World Flips Switch to Modern Convenience.” Dayton Daily News (7 November 1999), Section E, p. 1. Shaw is listed with Twain, Whitman, Zola, Kipling, James, and Freud, as representing the “modern world.”

SB. “Radio Review: Tuesday 26 October.” The Observer (24 October 1999), p. 19. Offers an extract of Christina Hardyment’s documentary, interviewing elderly former domestics of important people. “Violet, who worked for Churchill and Attlee and also George Bernard Shaw, recalls how she used to plan to dust the hall when Shaw was coming down stairs just so she could hear him say her name in his special way, ‘Vio-let.”‘

Sengupta, Goutam. “A Protest and A Quest: A Study of Shaw’s Political Vision in The Apple Cart.” Journal of the Department of English (University of Calcutta) 26:1 (1998–99): 49–60. By the time Shaw wrote Apple Cart, given his involvement with Fabianism, “he could never place his trust in the invincibility of a revolution waged by the proletariat. With the elitist bias that the Fabians always showed in trying to educate and organize [End Page 280] the masses he was left with no other option than to seek the autocrat in action. In spite of what the critics were apprehensive about, what emerges from the play is Shaw’s refusal to give himself up to despair.”

Shenitz, Bruce. “For Bookworms Who Want to Talk about It.” New York Times (22 January 1999), Section B, p. 35. The Bernard Shaw Society is one of 15 New York based societies devoted to literary and theater figures encapsulated here.

Siegel, Ed. “A Fair to Middling My Fair Lady at Beverly” (review of North Shore Music Theatre production). Boston Globe (3 June 1999), Section E, p. 5.

———. “Mrs Warren Still in Business: Prostitution May No Longer Scandalize, But There is Power Yet in the Shaw Play” (review of the Huntington Theatre production). Boston Globe (17 September 1999), Section C, p. 1.

Simon, John. “Putting on Heirs” (review, in part, of the Irish Repertory Theatre production of Jerome Kilty’s Dear Liar). New York (9 August 1999), pp. 52–53.

Skidelsky, Robert. “Doing Good and Being Good: The Conflicting Ideals of Bernard Shaw and John Maynard Keynes.” TLS (26 March 1999): 12–14. An edited version of the annual Bernard Shaw Lecture that Skidelsky gave at the University of Hertfordshire in February. Establishing a loose identification of Shaw with the culturally practical Fabians, and Keynes with a Bloomsburyian seeking of the aesthetic, Skidelsky comments, “In his paper ‘My Early Belief,’ read to old Bloomsberries in 1938, Keynes recalled that ‘Our prime objects in life were love, the creation and enjoyment of aesthetic experience and the pursuit of knowledge. Of these love came a long way first.” Contrast this with the words Shaw puts into the mouth of Mrs. Clandon in You Never Can Tell, a play dating from 1902: “‘Let me tell you, Mr. Valentine, that a life devoted to the Cause of Humanity has enthusiasms and passions to offer which far transcend the selfish personal infatuations and sentimentalities of romance.’ Both men acted on their principles.” To paraphrase the title, Shaw does good; Keynes is good. This annotation only suggests the magisterial elegance of Skidelsky’s discourse.

Sparks, Julie. “Bernard Shaw: Cinephile” (review of Bernard Shaw on Cinema, edited by Bernard F. Dukore). ELT 42:1. (1999): 86–90.

Taylor, D. J. “Ready Steady Write . . . Newly Revealed Letters Show that George Bernard Shaw Thought a Professional Writer Should Manage 1,000 Words a Day. D. J. Taylor Sees How Other Scribes Measure Up.” The Guardian (29 October 1999), p. 5. Not seen. The letters referred to are here reported as having been on sale at Sotheby’s.

Trotter, Herman. “Third Time’s a Charm for Shaw Comedy of Manners” [End Page 281] (review of Shaw Festival production of Getting Married). Buffalo News (1 June 1999), Section C, p. 6.

Ward, Lucy. “Fabians Split on Blairite Makeover Move to Rewrite Constitution of Century-Old Labour Thinktank.” The Guardian (20 August 1999), p. 10. From the on-line abstract: unprecedented conflict after modernizers proposed rewriting society constitution in New Labour language. Threatened is the society’s long-held rule 2, advocating “the collective ownership and democratic control of the economic resources of the community.”

Weintraub, Stanley. “Bernard Shaw’s Other Irelands: 1915–1919.” ELT 42:4 (1999): 433–442. The essay turns attention to Shaw’s second and third plays set in Ireland (“far less known to the stage” than John Bull’s Other Island, 1904), O’Flaherty, V.C. (1915) and The Tragedy of an Elderly Gentleman (written in 1919, part four of Back to Methuselah), noting that of 54 plays, these are the only three set in Ireland. In O’Flaherty “The pastoral Ireland of song and story is seen . . . as romanticizing the reality of poverty and boredom; but Shaw has exaggerated the meanness of the land and its people to suggest that love of adventure and freedom from strained family ties are better reasons to enlist than trumped up patriotism.” On the other hand, Elderly Gentleman, “fantastic and philosophical beyond what can be described here, and ironic as every Shavian play must be, is a moving tribute to his native island.”

Welsh, Anne Marie. “Shaw’s Take on Love is a Charming Romp” (review of the South Coast Repertory production of The Philanderer). The San Diego Union-Tribune (14 September 1999), Section E, p. 4.

Wren, Celia. “Putting the Pig Back in Pygmalion” (review of Gorilla Theatre production of Aubrey Hampton’s GBS & Company). American Theatre 16:2 (February 1999): 9.

Independent Shavian 36: 3 (1998). Journal of the Bernard Shaw Society. Includes “Shaw and Shelley’s Socialism” by Richard [End Page 282] Nickson, “As Shaw Once Said . . . Or Did He?” “Borges on Shaw’s Pre-eminence,” “Shaw Breaks a Rule” by Leon M. Lion, “Letter from England” by T. F. Evans, “A Literary Dispute,” “‘A Man of Deeply Religious Feeling’,” “The British Library,” “TV Adaptation of Classics Then (and Now?)” by Dan H. Laurence, “Shaw’s ‘Egregiously Ignored’ Novels,” “Candida: Up for Auction” by Richard Nickson, “Bernard Shaw: The Iconoclast and the Eikon” by A. K. Bhatt, “News of Shaw’s Corner and the Birthplace Museum,” “David Lean Remembers Shaw,” “Shaw in New York,” “Book Review (of Shaw and Other Matters: A Festschrift for Stanley Weintraub, ed. Susan Rusinko)” by John Koontz, “Book Review (of John O’Donovan’s Jonathan, Jack, and GBS: Four Plays about Irish History and Literature and Don L. F. Nilsen’s Humor in Irish Literature: A Reference Guide)” by Richard Nickson, “Obituaries,” “News About Our Members,” “Society Activities,” and “Our Cover.” See also entry for Nickson, Richard, above.

Independent Shavian 37: 1–2 (1999). Journal of the Bernard Shaw Society. Includes “Heartbreak House: A Dramatic Epic” by Daniel Leary, “Shaw on the Mystery of Smoking,” “Letter from England—June 1999” by T. F. Evans, “Shaw on Brandes—Brandes on Shaw,” “A Thought for the New Year,” “A Fearful Swindle,” “Shaw’s Will—Again,” “Scotched!” “GBS and Laura Ormiston Chant—Man and Superwoman,” “Shaw Considers Posterity,” “Saint Joan on the School Stage: Some Problems,” “News from Nowhere,” “Defects as Viewed by Beatrice Webb,” “Photograph—GBS Tries his Hand at Photography,” “The House of Satan” by George Jean Nathan, “The Trenchancy of Shaw’s Eight Words,” “Upton Sinclair Visits ‘Our Modern Voltaire,”‘ “Theatre Review—Caesar and Cleopatra” by Richard Nickson, “Book Reviews (of SHAW 18 and Charles A. Carpenter’s Modern Drama: Scholarship and Criticism 1981–1990)” by Richard Nickson, “The One-Volume Edition,” “Obituary—Fred Crawford,” “Our Cover,” “News About Our Members,” “Society Activities,” “Coming Event,” and “Mr. Bernard Shaw on FORMAMINT.”

Shavian 8: 6 (Summer 1999). The Journal of the Shaw Society. Includes “Editorial,” “Obituary,” “A Review and a Reply,” “A Superb Lecture,” “Our Theatres in the Nineteen-Nineties,” “Ellen and Edy” by Roy Simpson, “Book Reviews” (of Leon Hugo’s Edwardian Shaw: The Writer and His Age, by Bernard Dukore, and Peter Brook’s Evoking Shakespeare, by Frances Glendenning), “Scraps and Shavings,” “Things to Come,” and “Notes of Meetings.”

IV. Dissertations

Bates, Ruth-Ellen. “An I-Thou Approach to Saint Joan of Arc.” The Union Institute, 1996. Dissertation Abstracts Online 58—05A: 1688. “Joan of Arc had what Rollo May calls ‘the courage to create.”‘ The freshness of this study stems from the use of the I-Thou philosophy of Martin Buber. The first chapters explain the I-Thou and how it can be used in the creation and study of literature. A review of works on Joan of Arc includes a biography of Joan by Regine Pernoud, Bernard Shaw’s Saint Joan, and Jean Anouilh’s L’Alouette. In these works the study explores the I-Thou bonds between Joan and the authors as well as the I-Thou bonds between Joan and persons in her life. The study also explores ways to relate the I-Thou in Joan’s life to the creation of shalom (wholeness and peace) in the twentieth century. The final part of this study shows the I-Thou perspective in a novel, Francesca and the Lark (by the author of the dissertation?), in which Joan of Arc is a character.

Chen, Wendi. “The Reception of George Bernard Shaw in China, 1918–1996.” [End Page 283] University of Minnesota, 1999. Dissertation Abstracts Online 60—03A: 750. “Despite changes in political regime, cultural values, official literary policy and aesthetic criteria, Shaw has remained an influential figure in China. His comparatively secure and stable reputation reflects the fact that useful and even kindred qualities in Shaw have often been recognized by Chinese critics and cultural authorities.” Investigates Shaw’s life and work as appropriated in China at four historical moments: “First, the May Fourth Movement when Shaw’s plays substantially affected the radical rethinking of the function of drama in China . . . Secondly, in 1933, when Shaw paid a visit to Hong Kong, Shanghai and Beijing at a time of great domestic and international turmoil,” creating a grand political event. Thirdly, the centenary commemoration of Shaw in Beijing in 1956 used as socialist propaganda, and, finally, the 1991 production of Major Barbara in a prestigious Beijing theater, which marked a time of great changes in the reception of Shaw’s work.

Doan, William John. “Shaw’s American Importance.” Case Western Reserve University, 1999. Dissertation Abstracts Online 60—04A: 1193. Presents three “arguments,” all centered on Shaw who was enormously popular in America in the first three decades of the 20th century. (1) He appealed greatly to Eugene O’Neill, Elmer Rice, and Hallie Flanagan, the architect of the Federal Theatre project. (2) Chapter two analyzes Shaw’s art criticism, noting his borrowings from Ruskin, Carlyle, and Shelley in developing his tendency to privilege artists who have reframed the way the world can be understood. (3) The greater artist translates “sight into insight.” This trope of sight to insight arises in Doctor’s Dilemma and Candida.

Hanson, Michael Alan Hanchett. “Irony, Conflict and Creativity: A Case Study of the Creative Development of George Bernard Shaw as an Ironist during WWI.” Columbia University, 1999. Dissertation Abstracts Online 60—06B: 2985. “The roles of metaphor in exploring ideas through similarities have been examined in case studies of exceptionally creative individuals. The uses of irony in exploring and evaluating ideas through oppositional meanings, however, have not. . . . Quantitative and qualitative analysis of Common Sense shows Shaw’s use of ironic schemata was pervasive and flexible. He described over 300 situational ironies in analyzing the war in 1914. He used multiple ironies in building and extending concepts; he integrated verbal irony with situational irony, and he described meta-ironies, built on other ironic observations. . . . In the 1919 preface to Heartbreak House, Shaw used the same proportion of irony to text that he had in 1914. . . . In 1914, he took the stance of Specific Irony . . . , describing himself as an outsider criticizing the world’s correctable, or exploitable, follies. In 1919, he moved toward [End Page 284] General Irony . . . implicating himself as a participant in a world where the irony was often inescapable.”

Hudson, Steven Laurens. “I Am Enough: Playing Octavius Robinson in Shaw’s ‘Man and Superman.”‘ University of Louisville, 1997. Dissertation Abstracts Online 36—05: 1218. For an M.F.A. “In preparing for my thesis role as Octavius Robinson in Shaw’s Man and Superman, I faced the same acting challenges that dominated my first year of training. . . .” Research helped Hudson understand the comic and philosophic elements of the play, discover where he fit into the story, and appreciate how the presence of Octavius enables Shaw to make his points about romantic attraction.

Kapelke, Randy B. “Artistic Victories: How the Legitimate Theatre Overcame New York City’s Efforts to Impose Censorship on ‘Sapho’ in 1900, ‘Mrs Warren’s Profession’ in 1905 and Other Productions to 1927.” Tufts University, 1998. Dissertation Abstracts Online 59—04A: 1011. The New York authorities failed for five reasons: First, crusades against the plays did not originate from genuine public outrage but from performers eager for free publicity and from disingenuous editors, often from “yellow” newspapers, hoping to profit from coverage of theater-related scandal. Secondly, authorities, usually from Tammany Hall, had reputations for corruption and ignorance that rendered them unfit as censors. Thirdly, the productions’ prestigious elements (their playwrights, audiences, theaters, place in theater history, etc.) significantly benefited the defenses’ side. Sophisticated New Yorkers, including jurors, were not shocked by suggestive plays and were loath to punish theaters with rich traditions. Fourthly, the performers’ status in society as professionals and charismatic leaders gave them an advantage in public opinion. Finally, play defenders argued that the productions taught morality more effectively than could moralists, who were often ridiculed.

Kennell, Vicki Renii Munro. “The Persistence of Pygmalion: Inscribed Selves in Twentieth-Century British Narrative.” Purdue University, 1998. Dissertation Abstracts Online 59—08A: 3001. In transforming Ovid’s tale of physical creation into the story of linguistic creation, Shaw—and those authors who follow him—examines an abundance of issues related to identity (“selves”) creation. The sociological category of issues includes the inscription of one character by another, particularly with respect to group identity. The aesthetic category examines identity creation as a theatrical or role-playing situation in which a character’s true self may be forced incognito. The philosophical category questions the role that the perceptions of others play in the formation of reality and of a real self. This dissertation examines these categories in the framework of the Pygmalion Project as exemplified in the works of Shaw, considers its transformation at the hands of novelist Ford [End Page 285] Madox Ford, and then demonstrates how it persists in the later British narratives of Muriel Spark, John Fowles, and Iris Murdoch.

Maryanow, Maurice. “Divided Houses: Place and Creative Destruction in ‘Howards End,’ ‘Lady Chatterley’s Lover,’ ‘Heartbreak House,’ and ‘The Magic Mountain.”‘ Auburn University, 1998. Dissertation Abstracts Online 59—11A: 4138. These works are concerned with crises, particularly with events surrounding WW I. Each uses a private dwelling place as a metonym for the public crises of industrialization and international conflict. As privileged, orderly retreats, the dwelling places are associated with the past, with home and harmony, in contrast with the chaos of industrial cities; however, the retreats are financed by industrial development and, in other ways, are implicated in urbanization and imperialism. The seemingly stable dwellings come to represent the process of change they oppose. The study follows Marshall Berman’s definition of modernism as a loose grouping of ideas about how to respond to these changes. The study finds that pastoral references to shepherds (or such modern equivalents as gamekeepers) in some kind of exile provide a mode for evaluating both the order of the private estate and the disorder of the city. Behind the process of pastoral is the assumption that all people are alike, so class differences are artificial and don’t really matter. In the tensions among urban chaos, privileged estate, and pastoral greenwood, the metonym of the estate as representative of the nation is broken down: the spirit of place becomes real estate and repressive financial power.

Raymer, Jessica Lynn. “‘Pygmalion’ vs. ‘My Fair Lady’: A Comparison of the Vision of Two Authors and What Each Play Says to Women.” University of Nevada, Las Vegas, 1999. Dissertation Abstracts Online 37—05: 1288. M.A. thesis. “Through this examination, it is discovered what Shaw considered a romance and how his ideas could and couldn’t be translated into the conventions of nineteen-fifties musical theatre. This thesis follows each play from its inception through its arrival to legendary status.” The last chapter discusses which play, if any, makes a stronger statement for women.

V. Recordings

Chalberg, Chuck, and Frank Turner. G. K. Chesterton vs. George Bernard Shaw ( June 10–12, 1999, cassette sound recording of Chalberg as Chesterton, Turner as Shaw, presented at the 18th Annual Midwest Chesterton Conference, University of St. Thomas, St. Paul, Minnesota). OCLC accession no: 42677778.

George Bernard Shaw (1996; 30 minute video examines major works, common themes, and best-known characters), #GBSH, $29.95. Teacher’s [End Page 286] Video Company, P.O. Box ENL-4455, Scottsdale, AR 85261. Telephone: 1-800-262-8837. Lists also My Fair Lady (1964), #MFLA, $29.95, and Pygmalion (1938), #PYGL, $29.95. Not seen.

———. $16.95. 1999. Web: http://www.amazon.com

Major Barbara (1999; unabridged audiocassettes featuring Flo Gibson; 4 hours), DSHO13, rent $8.95; buy $23.50. 1999. Web: http://www.storytapes.com. Telephone: 1-800-238-8273. Also lists Man and Superman (unabridged audio cassettes featuring Ralph Fiennes, Juliet Stevenson, and a full cast; 3.75 hours), DSHO17, rent $10.95; buy $22.00; and Pygmalion (unabridged audio cassettes featuring Michael Redgrave, Lynn Redgrave, Michael Hordern, Donald Pleasence, and cast, 1971), DSH018, rent $6.95; buy $18.00.

Man and Superman. Text is Cambridge, Massachusetts: The University Press, 1903 [Brentano], the first American edition. The Bartleby Library great books online. 19 November 1999. Web: http://www.bartleby.com. Lists also Pygmalion: text is New York: Brentano, 1918; including Androcles and Overruled, the first edition.

———. See entry for Major Barbara, above.

My Fair Lady (1964 film; 3 hours, 10 minutes), EWFOX000974/EWFOX000975, $19.95. Critics’ Choice Video (July 1999), P.O. Box 749, Itasca, IL 60143-0749. Telephone: 1-800-367-7765.

———. (1998 sound disc re-release of 23 March 1959 compact disc; first recorded 1 February 1959, London, England; track 17 recorded 17 April 1956 at CBS 30th Street Studios). New York: Columbia Broadway Masterworks.

Pygmalion (1999 videocassette of 1938 motion picture; 96 minutes), St Laurent, Quebec, Canada: Madacy Entertainment Group. No price provided.

Pygmalion. See entries for George Bernard Shaw, Man and Superman, and Major Barbara, above.

The Design of Modern Theatre: Adolphe Appia’s Innovations (50 minutes), #CDH3366, $149; rental $75. Films for the Humanities & Sciences catalogue, 1999. P.O. Box 2053, Princeton, NJ 08543-2053. Telephone: 1-800-257-5126). Not seen. Appia’s designs for Ibsen and Shaw productions link 20th-century theatre to the freedoms of ancient Greek drama.

Turner, Frank. See Chalberg, Chuck, above.

VI. Miscellany

Hampton, Aubrey. GBS & Company: A Biographical Celebration in Two Acts Presided Over by Bernard Shaw. Tampa: Organica Press, 1989 (1988). Copies may be ordered from Organica Press, 4419 North Manhattan Avenue, Tampa Florida 33614. World premiere production at Gorilla [End Page 287] Theatre (Tampa, Florida), 5 February 1999. From the playbill: “Where else can you spend the evening with Ellen Terry, Mrs. Patrick Campbell, Albert Einstein, Houdini, Oscar Wilde, W. B. Yeats, Henry George, Bo [sic] & Sidney Webb, H.G. Wells, Gene Tunney, Bertrand Russell, Beerbohm Tree, Richard Mansfield, Harley Granville-Barker, Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, Madame Blavatsky, Annie Besant, Florence Farr, and, of course, George Bernard Shaw.”

Murphy, Brian. The Importance of Being. 1997. Unpublished. Request copies from Brian Murphy, 623 Birch Tree Court, Rochester Hills, Michigan 48306. A salon reading arranged by Carolyn Gillespie (Head, Theatre Department at University of Michigan-Flint) and Michael Gillespie (Head, Theatre Section of the Department of Music, Theatre and Dance at Oakland University in Michigan), 17 November 1997. From the playscript: “A Prefatory Paragraph. Although Stewart Headlam was quite famous as a radical clergyman, in London, in the years around the sharp turn history took into the 20th century, it is his appearances in fascinating footnotes to literary history which make him the subject of the following play. Historically, he appears (a) as the model for Shaw’s character The Reverend James Mavor Morell, in Candida, (b) visiting a self-described “Shavian” in prison who refused to speak to anyone except Shaw—when Shaw was out of the country—and, most fascinatingly of all, (c) as a surprise figure in the story of Oscar Wilde’s trials and incarceration. There is a biography of Headlam, a very ‘official’ biography published soon after his death in 1924. One discovers which committees he sat on, learns of his many good works; and one is continually reminded how wonderful a friend he was. The book contains exactly one personal detail—a tantalizing fact about his marriage. This fact, some others, and some actual lines attributed in various accounts to the historical personages, are to be found within. Everything else is a dramatic fantasia.” Substantial parts are provided for the characters of Oscar Wilde and Bernard Shaw.

Patterson, Sam. Wit and Moonlight: A Paper Courtship. 1998. No publishing information provided in Newspaper Abstracts, source: Chicago Tribune (14 January 1999; Section 5, p. 2). Produced at Strawdog Theatre (Chicago), January 1999. Based on the Shaw/Ellen Terry correspondence, covering the period 1892–1912.

Peters, Margot. Persuasions. A Play in Two Acts. 1998. Unpublished. Request copies from Margot Peters, 511 College Street, Lake Mills, Wisconsin 53551. World premiere readers’ theater production at Milwaukee Chamber Theatre, 26 April 1999. A comedy drama of a three-way romance among Ellen Terry, Henry Irving, and Bernard Shaw that combines the letters of Terry and Shaw with original dialogue. [End Page 288] Bram Stoker, Irving’s company manager, is also among the dramatis personae.

Sutherland, Donald. Further Adventures of the Black Girl in Her Search for God. 1999. Available from: Donald Sutherland, 155a North View Road, Hornsey, London, N8 7ND. From the “Note” on the inside cover: “It is important that this story is read as a sequel to Bernard Shaw’s Adventures of the Black Girl in Her Search for God which he wrote in 1932” after his first trip to Africa.

John R. Pfeiffer

John R. Pfeiffer is Professor of English at Central Michigan University and the SHAW bibliographer. His most recent articles are on Sir Richard Burton, John Christopher, Octavia Butler, John Brunner, and Aldous Huxley.

Previous Article

Shaw and the Edwardian Age

Next Article

Contributors

Additional Information

ISSN
1529-1480
Print ISSN
0741-5842
Launched on MUSE
2001-09-01
Open Access
No
Back To Top

This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website. Without cookies your experience may not be seamless.