RACINE 



BY PROSSER HALL FRYE 



When Racine began his career as a dramatist, he found the gen- 

 eral definition of French tragedy already formulated by Corneille. 

 However the latter had come by his conception — whether freely 

 and of his own instance, or in yielding to the pressure of official 

 criticism, or what is even more likely, in attempting to effect a 

 compromise between these two influences^ — the upshot of his labour 

 was, to all intents and purposes, the doctrine of the three unities. 

 All that remained for Racine was to adapt himself to these pre- 

 scriptions. Nor should the difficulty of the task be underrated. 

 It was one which Corneille himself had failed to accomplish. 

 Classic by method and finally, perhaps, by conviction, he was in- 

 curably romantic by temperament and inspiration and was never 

 wholly successful in conceiving an action thoroughly agreeable 

 with his own formulae. There is something bungling and un- 

 handy in his efforts to cage a broad and rambling plot within the 

 narrow limits required by his theory ; something cramped and un- 

 graceful about the result. In a word, it would hardly be unjust 

 to say, whatever praise he may deserve for its discovery, that he 

 never understood the practical working of his own invention ; he 

 never altogether grasped the principles of congruous simplicity 

 characteristic of the classic drama. 



To illustrate this statement I need only refer to Rodogune} 

 The Cid would be an even better example, though scarcely so fair 

 an one, since it was written while Corneille was still serving his 

 apprenticeship. But to the citation of Rodogune for such a pur- 

 pose it is impossible to take exception since Corneille himself 

 expresses a decided preference for it over all his preceding per- 

 formances including both the Cid and Cinna. And the significant 

 matter is the reason he assigns for his favouritism. Abstractly, 



1 Exaincn dc Rodogune. 



173 



