paffion already raised. Further, mufic, though it cannot of itself raise a paffion, prepares us for the paffion that follows: by making chearful, tender, melancholy, or animated impreffions, mufic has power to difpofe the heart to various paffions. Of this power, the firft fcene of the Mourning Bride is a fhining inftance: without the preparation of foft mufic in a melancholy ftrain, it would be extremely difficult to enter all at once into Almeria's deep diftrefs. In this manner, mufic and reprefentation fupport each other delightfully: the impreffion made upon the audience by the representation, is a fine preparation for the mufic that fucceeds; and the impreffion made by the mufic, is a fine preparation for the reprefentation that fucceeds. It appears to me clear, that, by fome fuch contrivance, the modern drama may be improved, fo as to enjoy the advantage of the ancient chorus without its flavifh limitation of place and time. And as to mufic in particular, I cannot figure any plan that would tend more to its improvement. Compofers, thofe for the ftage at least, would be reduced to the happy neceffity of ftudying and imitating nature; inftead of indulging, according to the prefent fashion, in wild, fantaftic, and unnatural conceits. But we must return to our subject, and finish the comparison betwixt the ancient and the modern drama. The numberless improprieties forc'd upon the Grecian dramatic poets by the conftitution of their drama, are, of themselves, one should think, a fufficient reafon for preferring that of the moderns, even abftracting from the improvement propofed. To prepare the reader for this article, it must be premised, that as in the ancient drama the place of action never varies, a place neceffarily muft be chofen to which every perfon may have access without any improbability. This confines the scene to to fome open place, generally the court or area before a palace; which excludes from the Grecian theatre transactions within doors, though these commonly are the most important. Such cruel restraint is of itself fufficient to cramp the most pregnant invention; and accordingly the Grecian writers, in order to preserve unity of place, are reduced to woful improprieties. In the Hippolytus of Euripides,* Phædra, diftreffed in mind and body, is carried without any pretext from her palace to the place of action, is there laid upon a couch unable to fupport herself upon her limbs, and made to utter many things improper to be heard by a number of women who form the chorus. What is fill worfe, her female attendant ufes the ftrongeft intreaties to make her reveal the fecret caufe of her anguish; which at last Phædra, contrary to decency and probability, is prevailed upon to do in prefence of this very chorus.† Alceftes, in Euripides, at the point of death, is brought from the palace to the place of action, groaning and lamenting her untimely fate. In the Trachiniens of Sophocles, a fecret is imparted to Dejanira, the wife of Her cules, in presence of the chorus. In the tragedy of Iphigenia, the meffenger employ'd to carry Clytemneftra the news that Iphigenia was facrificed, ftops short at the place of action, and with a loud voice calls the Queen from her palace to hear the news. Again, in the Iphigenia in Tauris, the neceffary presence of the chorus forces Euripides into a grofs abfurdity, which is to form a fecret plot in their hearing; and to difguife the abfurdity, much courtship is bestowed on the chorus not one woman but a number, to engage them to fecrecy. In the Medea of Euripides, that princefs makes 03. + A& A&t 1. fc. 6. A&t 2. fc. 1. § A& 4. at the clofe, 2. fc. 2. || A& 2. no no difficulty, in prefence of the chorus, to plot the death of her husband, of his miftrefs, and of her father the king of Corinth, all by poifon. It was neceffary to bring Medea upon the stage, and there is but one place of action, which is always occupied by the chorus. This fcene clofes the second act; and in the end of the third, the frankly makes the chorus her confidents in plotting the murder of her own children. Terence by identity of place, is often forc'd to make a converfation within doors be heard in the open ftreet: the cries of a woman in labour are there heard diftinctly. The Grecian poets are not more happy with respect to time than with refpect to place. In the Hippolytus of Euripides, that prince is banished at the end of the fourth act. In the first scene of the following act, a meffenger relates to Thefeus the whole particulars of the death of Hippolytus by the fea-monfter. This remarkable event must have employed many hours; and yet in the reprefentation it is confined to the time employed by the chorus upon the fong at the end of the 4th act. The inconfiftency is ftill greater in the Iphigenia in Tauris*. The fong could not exhaust half an hour; and yet the incidents fuppofed to have happened in that time, could not naturally be tranfacted in less than half a day. The Grecian artifts are not lefs frequently obliged to tranfgrefs another rule, derived alfo from a continued representation, which is, that the place of action must conftantly be occupied; for the very leaft vacuity is an interruption of the reprefentation. Sophocles, with regard to this rule as well as others, is generally correct. But Euripides cannot bear fuch restraint: he often evacuates the ftage, and leaves it empty for others in fucceffion. Iphigenia in Tauris, after pronouncing a • A& 5. fc. 4. foliloquy foliloquy in the first scene, leaves the place of action, and is fucceeded by Oreftes and Pylades. They, after fome converfation, walk off; and Iphigenia re-enters, accompanied with a chorus. In the Alceftes, which is of the fame author, the place of action is void at the end of the third act. It is true, that to cover this irregularity, and to preserve the representation in motion, Euripides is extremely careful to fill the ftage without lofs of time. But this is ftill an interruption, and a link of the chain broken: for during the change of the actors, there muft always be a space of time, when we cannot justly fay, that the ftage is occupied by either fet. It makes indeed a more remarkable interruption, to change the place of action as well as the actors; but that was not practicable upon the Grecian stage. It is hard to fay upon what model Terence has formed his plays. Having no chorus, there is a ceffation in the representation at the end of every act. But advantage is not taken of this ceffation, even to vary the place of action. The street is always chofen, where every thing paffing may be feen by every perfon and by this choice, the most sprightly and interesting parts of the action, which commonly pafs within doors, are excluded; witnefs the laft act of the Eunuch. He hath fubmitted to the fame flavery with respect to time. In a word, a play with a regular chorus, is not more confined in place and time than his plays are. Thus a zealous fectary follows implicitly ancient forms and ceremonies, without once confidering whether their introductive caufe be still fubfifting. Plautus, of a bolder genius than 'Terence, makes good ufe of the liberty afforded by an interrupted representation: he varies the place of action upon all occafions, when the variation fuits his purpose. The intelligent reader will by this time underftand, that I plead for no change of place in our 04 plays plays but after an interval, nor for any latitude in point of time but what falls in with an interval. The unities of place and time ought to be strictly obferved during each act; for during the reprefentation, there is no opportunity for the fmalleft deviation from either. Hence it is an effential requifite, that during an act the ftage be always occupied; for even a momentary vacuity makes an interval. Another rule is not lefs effential: it would be a grofs breach of the unity of action, to exhibit upon the ftage two feparate actions at the fame time, and therefore to preserve this unity, it is neceffary that each perfonage introduced during an act, be linked to thofe in poffeffion of the stage, fo as to join all in one action. These things fol low from the very conception of an act, which admits not the flightest interruption. The moment the reprefentation is intermitted, there is an end of that act; and we have no other notion of a new act, but where after a pause or interval, the reprefentation is again put in motion. French writers, generally fpeaking, are extremely correct in this particular: the English, on the contrary, are fo irregular as fcarce to deferve a criticifm: actors not only fucceed each other in the fame place without connection; but, what is ftill worfe, they frequently fucceed each other in different places. This change of place in the fame act, ought never to be indulged; for, befide breaking the unity of the act, it has a disagreeable effect. After an interval, the mind can readily accommodate itself to any place that is neceffary, juft as readily as at the commencement of the play; but during the reprefentation, the mind rejects change of place. From the foregoing cenfure must be excepted the Mourning Bride of Congreve, where regularity concurs with the beauty of fentiment and of language, to make it one of the moft complete pieces England has |