You do not currently have permission to view the full text for this document. Please sign in to an account with an active subscription or contact support.
Tausk's commentary is striking for having the most lavish praise sprinkled throughout an essentially negative evaluation of this 1906 production. He wrote: 'Whoever follows the action, loses the continuity of thought… Whoever is bent on following the thought through the luring, florid jungle is delayed by the action which … does not allow time for such pretentious mental excursions… And thus some will not derive benefit from the action, others not from the thought. Everyone, however, feels cheated out of some emotional reaction and peaceable reasoning and leaves the house with a grudge… This is the reason why Pippa is a bad play.' He finds the play an analytical work in which there is no protagonist; instead, '… a company of limited liability has been founded for the sake of solving the question of life… Accordingly, Pippa is nothing other than the question of existence expressed in symbols… Thus we are deprived of true compassion with the figures because they … [fail to assume] personal responsibility or individual stance.' Yet Tausk finds that 'the formation of the figures is one of rare perfection… The language is rich and sparkling … the play moves us deeply because it harbors beauty, sincerity and kindness… [It] presents the highest degree of artistic objectivity [and is] a truly great artistic achievement.' In addition, it is 'a great, beautiful work, as abounding in life and wealth of contemplation as the finest that has ever been created'.