J. B. Priestley (review)

Book Reviews 319 in the production. etc. Or he has combined several of these matters as tbey apply to the play under consideration, as a means of introducing and providing coherence for the reviews that follow. The result is a strikingly unified piece of criticism rather than disparate fragments. Finally, as the piece de resistance, the book is illustrated with black and white drawings by Felix Topolski of scenes from some productions; of playwrights such as Wesker, Pinter, Rattigan, Whiting. Priestley; and of actors such as Olivier. Some scene sketches are delicately drawn; others, like those from Waiting jor Gado! and Royal Hunt 0/ the Sun, are bold - providing not only support for the reviews but dramatic visual contrasts with one another. They are an integral part of the book. Solid in its selection of performances and reviews, and comprehensive in its view of the English stage, the book epitomizes taste in its wedding of the verbal and visual. The presence of these qualities of substance and style is enhanced by the absence of an overall opinionated view, conventional compilation style, distortion and fragmentation. As a result, the book is not just another collection of reviews. To this reviewer, who has seen many of the productions included, the reading is fresh and incisive. To those who have not been privileged to see the performances but are familiar with the dramas, Elsom's book should prove both informative and accurate as a barometer of English stage weather during an important period in dramatic history. SUSAN RUSINKO, BLOOMSBURG STATE COLLEGE A.A. DEVITIS AND ALBERT E. KALSON. 1. B. Priestley. Boston : Twayne/ G. K. Hall 1980. Pp. 257. This volume in the Twayne Authors Series occupies a curious position astride the dual horses of full-fledged literary criticism and general public introduction . If my metaphor is awkward it is suitable, for the book as schizophrenic rider describes the difficulty of combining intelligent critical judgements with the duty tasks of describing the contents of plots, setting a very rough historical perspective, and establishing biographical background. That the outcome must inevitably be compromise, offering thin lines of continuity, is exacerbated in the case of a prolific author like J.B. Priestley. It is small wonder, then, that Professor Kalson (whose section on the drama is of chief concern to MD readers) has not found the opportunity to deal in any ordered depth with several of the really large and nagging questions about the Priestley opus: the status of the thesis play when the thesis dies, the problem of comparing Priestley with other dramatists, and the basic confrontation betwccn scholarly judgement and the popular author. At the outset it must be said that the book is a sound study of its type: accurate, aware of existing criticism. and sensible in many individual observations . The authors chose not to examine Priestley's vast prose output in detail but made good use of it by quoting his opinions on his own work and details from the autobiographies. This said, these comments turn to problems which 320 Book Reviews are touched on or obliquely mentioned without being focused upon as the vital difficulties in studying Priestley's drama. The first problem is the fate of thesis drama once the thesis has become dated or obviously unworkable. Professor Kalsan rightly points out that the least successful of Priestley's time plays is the most didactic, I Have Been Here Be/ore, but he does not face the larger conclusion that whenever Priestley preys heavily on Dunn or Ouspensky he is treating with a brand of mystic pseudo-science which is quite dead today. In a similar way Priestley's other principal thesis, the advent of a humane socialism, has been so severely compromised by the shabby inequities of the real thing that most of his observations are without contemporary validity. Priestley's plays on these subjects lack the power and mythic authority which render Ibsen's Ghosts forever inviolate to medical cures for syphilis, or the dramatic architecture, incisive wit, and sparkling moral paradoxes which continue to hold Shaw's audiences. Priestley chose "timely" ideas and time has closed over them. Professor Kalson compares Priestley with his great predecessors...