The Irish National Theatre
Yeats co-founded the Irish Literary Theatre, which evolved into the Irish National Theatre Society and the Abbey Theatre. The founding of the theatre was a move by Yeats and other writers toward the establishment of a new national literature for Ireland. As Dawn Duncan notes in her book Postcolonialism in Irish Drama, 1800-2000, Irish writers of the period strove to reclaim Ireland’s national identity in their writing by two different means, both of which addressed the identity conflict resulting from the suppression of the Irish language: some sought to create a new national literature written in Irish, while others sought to create a distinctly Irish brand of literature in English. The former group sought to keep the fading Irish language alive, and thereby to revive an older identity for the Irish; while the latter group understood their identity as having been irrevocably altered by English colonialism, and felt that any new literature of the Irish would need to encompass that alteration. The latter group also seemed at least implicitly to understand a more pragmatic concern for the establishment of a new national literature and identity: by the turn of the 20th century the portion of the Irish populace who could speak and read Gaelic was relatively small. Yeats himself was unable to master the language, despite his best intentions.
The founding of the Irish Literary Theatre was accompanied by debate over the necessity or usefulness of a new Irish literature. Those against saw the putative theatre as a path toward provincialism, the “‘[praise of] work, not because it deals with Ireland or it was good, but because it was the work of Irishmen’” (Duncan 131, quoting a paraphrase of the speech of a Mr. W. Thackwell in an article, “Trinity College and the Literary Theatre; speech of W.B. Yeats,” found among Yeats’ manuscripts). Yeats rebutted this view, prophesying that “‘America had a national literature, and America wrote in English. Ireland would have a national literature which would be written to a very great extent in English’” (Duncan 132). Duncan situates the language-based identity conflict which the creation of a new Irish literature and the founding of the literary theatre sought to address, as well as the ensuing debate over whether such a literature and such a theatre would be necessary or helpful, as direct precursors of both postcolonial theory and of one of the issues (provincialism) which postcolonial critics must consider and contest in their work to the present day.
Yeats' prophetic notion of what kind of Irish literature and theatre would flourish and promote Irish culture to the world has been realized to a great extent, though, thankfully, literature (including drama) in the Irish language continues and has grown as the language has experienced a revival (thanks in part to the arts). The theatre that he, Lady Gregory, and others worked to create has become one of the most widely recognized in the world: The Abbey. While Yeats' own plays struggled to receive their due appreciation during most of the 20th century, given the symbolism and experimentalism present in many, companies today are mounting powerful productions. The Druid, a great theatre in Galway that has gained worldwide fame since its founding in the 1970s, has brought the playwright so closely associated with that area back to the theatrical boards with great verve. Given continued interest among both scholars and theatrical artists, Yeats' legacy looms large today and will likely remain lively in times to come.
The founding of the Irish Literary Theatre was accompanied by debate over the necessity or usefulness of a new Irish literature. Those against saw the putative theatre as a path toward provincialism, the “‘[praise of] work, not because it deals with Ireland or it was good, but because it was the work of Irishmen’” (Duncan 131, quoting a paraphrase of the speech of a Mr. W. Thackwell in an article, “Trinity College and the Literary Theatre; speech of W.B. Yeats,” found among Yeats’ manuscripts). Yeats rebutted this view, prophesying that “‘America had a national literature, and America wrote in English. Ireland would have a national literature which would be written to a very great extent in English’” (Duncan 132). Duncan situates the language-based identity conflict which the creation of a new Irish literature and the founding of the literary theatre sought to address, as well as the ensuing debate over whether such a literature and such a theatre would be necessary or helpful, as direct precursors of both postcolonial theory and of one of the issues (provincialism) which postcolonial critics must consider and contest in their work to the present day.
Yeats' prophetic notion of what kind of Irish literature and theatre would flourish and promote Irish culture to the world has been realized to a great extent, though, thankfully, literature (including drama) in the Irish language continues and has grown as the language has experienced a revival (thanks in part to the arts). The theatre that he, Lady Gregory, and others worked to create has become one of the most widely recognized in the world: The Abbey. While Yeats' own plays struggled to receive their due appreciation during most of the 20th century, given the symbolism and experimentalism present in many, companies today are mounting powerful productions. The Druid, a great theatre in Galway that has gained worldwide fame since its founding in the 1970s, has brought the playwright so closely associated with that area back to the theatrical boards with great verve. Given continued interest among both scholars and theatrical artists, Yeats' legacy looms large today and will likely remain lively in times to come.
| Previous page on path | Irish Nationalism and Rebellion, page 2 of 3 | Next page on path |
Discussion of "The Irish National Theatre"
Add your voice to this discussion.
Checking your signed in status ...