Unusual is the word that
comes to my mind whenever I think about this play and the playwright. Ednah Aiken (1872-1960) was not known as a
playwright, but she was, in 1916, a nationally recognized short story author
and novelist with a then current best-selling novel titled The River. It was unusual for Bobbs-Merrill Books to publish a
play, but the topic must have resonated with the publisher since the company
had six other war related books written by men.
Those books plus The Hate Breeders
were advertised together under the heading of BOBBS-MERRILL BOOKS “Bearing on
the World War.”
It was unusual to have a
recipient of the Nobel Peace Prize write an introduction for a published
version of a play. The Hate Breeders
has an Introduction by Henri La Fontaine (1854-1943) a citizen of Belgium who
was awarded in 1913 the Nobel Peace Prize. La Fontaine was President of the
International Bureau of Peace, Professor of International Law and a Senator in
the Belgium Legislature. La Fontaine
stated: “the unusual and suggestive work before us, enriching American and
world literature alike, new in the form adopted, new in its crude realism, it
avoids a declamatory tone, and remains human throughout. A nightmare of despair!”
I have found no record
that this play received a professional New York theatre production. It may have had a large readership given all
the publicity sponsored by Bobbs-Merrill in major American newspapers, but I
have found little evidence regarding the reception for this stirring drama. While I read announcements about Aiken’s
novel’s in British newspapers, I found nothing about this play.
The
Hate Breeders is categorized as “a drama of war and
peace in one act and five scenes”. It is
dedicated to Douglas Sedgwick Aiken, the playwright’s son. The First and Fifth
Scenes take place in the play’s present time of 1914 during the German invasion
of Belgium, while the Second and Third Scenes are flash-backs into the
protagonist’s life prior to his induction into the German army. The Fourth
Scene is a flashback representing his conduct in Belgium during the early days
of the campaign. Max, the protagonist,
is wounded and brought into the chateau/hospital during the first scene and
prepared for surgery. Scene five is when the surgery is completed and Max
regains consciousness. The location of the chateau is near the town of Louvain,
Belgium about thirty kilometers southeast of Brussels—an area that was
devastated in the early days of the war.
The fact that Max is not
a coward is immediately established as soon as he is visible since he “has
three Heidelberg scars across his cheeks, long purple welts.” These scars
symbolize that he displayed valor through stoic endurance of an opponent’s
blows during academic duels. These duels were considered a competitive sport
and the facial scars also reflected the participant’s educational status as
well as upper-class social standing.
The manner in which Aiken
envisioned this play for the stage strikes me as being cinematic, another unusual feature. Not cinematic in the style of a 1916 film,
but in a more 1930s/1940s mode. It was
never made into a film. The play is filled with long speeches particularly in
the fourth scene between the dying Belgium soldier and wounded Max. This scene was the focus of a review in The Drama, Volume 6, Issues 23-34, 1916,
658. The unnamed reviewer, became harsh in the comments about the play claiming
“It is anemic and unconvincing drama.” The reviewer felt that wounded Max should never
have been allowed to present a “logical presentation of how nations could avoid
war by preliminary periods of arbitration,
. . .” While the fourth scene is
lengthy, Max has been articulate
throughout the play about his pacifist beliefs. Two dying soldiers lying on a battlefield may be more dramatically
interpreted in a film rather than on a stage.
It
was unusual for an American, in 1916, to write a strong antiwar drama that
illustrated the cruel sacrifices and horrors of World War One at its
onset. The play sets up the acts of war
as crimes against innocent people who have done nothing to incite it. It sets
up the perpetrators as breeders of hate. This play does not extol the nationalistic ideology of heroism, love of
country and might as a virtue. Aiken’s
uses Max to show readers that once he was a staunch advocate for not engaging
in war. However, once Max is in uniform and placed in battle situations he
becomes a criminal that rapes and kills.
La Fountaine concludes his
Introduction with the thought that Aiken captures this cursed war “with its
rapid and striking scenes. May it arouse
ideas, and awaken hearts and brains, and instill in men the definite and
peremptory will to wipe out forever the crime made of crimes, the breeder of
crimes, the crime war is!”
No comments:
Post a Comment