Reviewed by:

• Verse Drama in England, 1900–2015: Art, Modernity and the National Stage by Irene Morra
• Kayla McKinney Wiggins (bio)

Irene Morra is Reader in English Literature at Cardiff University. In Modern Verse Drama in England, 1900–2015, she analyzes more than a hundred years of attempts by poets, playwrights, and theatre practitioners to return poetic drama to a valued place on the English stage. Morra’s study addresses the difficulty inherent in this endeavor given that verse is generally viewed as irrelevant to modern theatre on two counts: because Shakespeare is sufficient as the acknowledged poet of the national stage, and because verse is inappropriate expression for the subject matter of modern drama. Each section of the book considers a particular era of modern verse drama, followed by a more detailed analysis of individual playwrights and plays. Morra’s study is absorbing, if at times a bit erudite. The scholarship is exceptionally thorough. Although discussions of the better-known plays are understandably more accessible, Morra’s focus on performance, production, and poetry offers readers insight into even less familiar verse plays.

In the introduction to her study, Morra notes that verse drama “occupies a vexed position in contemporary England, both on the mainstream national stage and in the historiography of modern British theatre.” She follows this observation with examples of recent verse plays and the critical response to them, observing that “verse drama is today seen at best as an anomaly, as an amusing embrace of anachronistic whimsy—and at worst as a regressive self-indulgence fundamentally opposed both to the essential demands of theatre and to the contemporary reality of the modern audience” (1). Morra contends, however, that this “assumption overlooks the extent to which the diverse tradition of modern verse drama in England has attempted variously to expand upon, revitalize and redefine the contemporary stage. It also risks overlooking the extent to which the very critical marginalization of that tradition might itself point to an essential conservatism” (6). Following an overview of the origins of verse drama in English, Morra addresses modern verse drama as an attempt to “articulate and develop [End Page 161] a much-needed and frequently experimental mode of contemporary theatrical expression” (10), concluding that it ultimately failed in this endeavor, in part because of its association with religious drama, but also because it was viewed as outmoded and “at odds with” a “socially progressive” national drama (15). The aim of Morra’s study, therefore, is to “advocate for a scholarly revaluation of what must be identified as an influential and overlooked tradition of aesthetic challenge and creativity” (15). She concludes that although verse dramatists never managed to achieve a lasting, cohesive movement, their work deserves critical attention and more general recognition.

After setting the stage with a discussion of nineteenth-century poets who turned to verse drama more as poetic expression than theatre application, Morra’s first chapter considers the work of early twentieth-century verse dramatists Stephen Spender and James Elroy Flecker, who drew on the legacy of the Romantics and of Shakespeare to produce large-scale plays grounded in blank verse and history while still establishing the foundation for a verse drama that would attempt to respond to the demand for a modern theatre of new sensibilities. Chapter 2 considers early modernists who wrote verse drama that either embraced the new theatre movements of social and practical reform or reacted against those movements and toward a theatre of personal expression. Although these early twentieth-century verse dramatists rejected the “contemporary commercial stage to which Phillips and Flecker had aspired,” Morra notes that they nevertheless “found themselves in an unprecedented engagement with the realities of an innovative, progressive culture of theatrical reform” (41). This discussion considers the diverse range of possibilities in verse drama during the early twentieth-century and takes a closer look at the work of W. B. Yeats and Terence Gray, concluding that the contemporary tendency to dismiss verse drama as “‘coterie’ theatre. . .goes very...

审核人：

• 1900-2015年英国诗歌戏剧：艾琳·莫拉（Irene Morra）的艺术，现代性和民族舞台
• 凯拉·麦金尼·威金斯（生物）

Irene Morra是加的夫大学英语文学的读者。在现代诗剧在英国，1900年至2015年，她分析了诗人，剧作家和戏剧从业人员一百多年尝试使诗歌戏剧回到英国舞台上重要地位的尝试。莫拉（Morra）的研究解决了这一努力中固有的困难，因为从两方面来看，诗歌通常被认为与现代戏剧无关：因为莎士比亚足以作为民族舞台公认的诗人，并且因为诗歌对于现代戏剧的主题是不恰当的表达。本书的每个部分都考虑了现代诗歌戏剧的特定时代，然后对个人剧作家和戏剧进行了更详细的分析。莫拉（Morra）的研究有时很博学，但令人着迷。该奖学金非常详尽。可以理解，虽然对知名戏剧的讨论更容易进行，但莫拉（Morra）专注于表演，制作，

在她的研究导论中，莫拉指出，诗歌戏剧“在当代英国中，无论是在主流民族舞台上还是在现代英国戏剧史上，都占据着令人烦恼的位置。” 她以最近的诗歌剧本及其对批评的回应为例，观察到这一观点，她指出：“今天的诗歌剧本充其量被视为一种反常现象，是一种过时的异想天开的有趣拥抱，而在最坏的情况下，则是一种从根本上反对回归的自我放纵。既满足剧院的基本要求，也符合现代观众的当代现实”（1）。然而，莫拉认为，“这种假设忽视了英格兰现代诗歌戏剧多样性传统在多大程度上试图扩展，振兴和重新定义当代舞台的程度。它还有可能忽视这一传统的非常关键的边缘化本身可能会指向一种基本的保守主义的程度”（6）。在概述了英语诗歌戏剧的起源之后，莫拉（Morra）将现代诗歌戏剧作为试图“表达和发展”的一种尝试。[结束页161]是当代戏剧表达的急需的，经常是实验性的模式”（第10页），认为它最终在这项工作中失败了，部分原因是因为它与宗教戏剧联系在一起，而且还因为它被认为过时和过时。与“社会进步的”国家话剧“不符”（15）。因此，莫拉（Morra）的研究目的是“主张对必须被认定为具有影响力且被忽视的美学挑战和创造力传统进行学术上的重新评估”（15）。她得出的结论是，尽管诗歌戏剧家们从未成功地实现持久，凝聚力的运动，但他们的作品值得给予高度重视和更广泛的认可。

在讨论了十九世纪诗人的舞台之后，他们将诗戏剧更多地视为诗意表达而非戏剧应用，莫拉的第一章考虑了二十世纪初诗人戏剧家斯蒂芬·斯潘德和詹姆斯·埃罗伊·弗莱克的作品，他们借鉴了遗产剧情片和莎士比亚戏剧的作者，将以空白的诗歌和历史为基础制作大型剧本，同时仍为诗歌戏剧奠定基础，以尝试回应对现代感的新剧场的需求。第2章考虑了早期的现代主义者，他们写诗的戏剧要么接受社会和实践改革的新戏剧运动，要么反对这些运动并走向个人表达的剧院。尽管这些20世纪早期的诗句戏剧家拒绝了“菲利普斯和弗莱克所追求的当代商业舞台”，但莫拉指出，尽管如此，他们“发现自己与剧院改革的创新，渐进文化的现实空前地接触”（41 ）。这次讨论考虑了20世纪初在诗歌戏剧中的各种可能性，并仔细研究了WB Yeats和Terence Gray的工作，并得出结论，当代倾向于将诗歌戏剧视作“小圈子”剧院。。。非常... 这次讨论考虑了20世纪初在诗歌戏剧中的各种可能性，并仔细研究了WB Yeats和Terence Gray的工作，并得出结论，当代倾向于将诗歌戏剧视作“小圈子”剧院。。。非常... 这次讨论考虑了20世纪初在诗歌戏剧中的各种可能性，并仔细研究了WB Yeats和Terence Gray的工作，并得出结论，当代倾向于将诗歌戏剧视作“小圈子”剧院。。。非常...