Dr. White describes “The Temple of the Holy Ghost” as a gentle piece of work punctuated, however, with grotesque elements. He characterizes O’Connor as a great Catholic artist of our own time and extols this story as one of her few, if not only, openly Catholic works. The title, according to White, speaks to the essence of “matter” and “spirit.”
In this sweeping introduction to O’Neill’s work as an American dramatist, Dr. White argues the relevance and even necessity of understanding literature, history, and Catholicism in order to appreciate the significance of O’Neill’s play. Explaining that O’Neill was the creator of a genuine American drama, White also suggests that he could not have done so without his Catholicism, nor, the doctor provocatively maintains, without losing it. This introduction to O’Neill is consequently a tour de force review of the history of the interaction between Americanism, Modernism, and Catholicism on the cultural, literary, and artistic battlefields of the beleaguered nineteenth and twentieth centuries.
Following upon his introduction to O’Neill in his first lecture, Dr. White examines the nature of O’Neill’s play and discusses both its elements and O’Neill’s approach from a number of angles. As an American with a Catholic sense but, in effect, without the Catholic faith, O’Neill’s essentially auto-biographical play reveals all the contradictions, conflicts, and essential despair characteristic of O’Neill’s personal life and his existence as an American. On the plus side, he knows renaissance drama and the “unities” – one setting, one action, one day’s time – are apparent in his work. At the same time, his play partakes of the inherent tragedy of American political and religious life. Hounded by the Faith, O’Neill spends his life running from it. In an interesting sideline, Dr. White discusses the famous American Catholic Dorothy Day and her understanding of O’Neill: “He portrayed more than any other what life with God is like.” Though he knew from memory, and could recite with energy and drama, Thompson’s Hound of Heaven, he never let God’s pursuit come to fruition. As always, Dr. White’s explication of this particular work of literature carries with it many insightful aphorisms gleaned from his sweeping and expansive knowledge of the panorama of American and Western literature as a whole. “Dead children haunt American drama”; O’Neill’s work, like so many other American productions, is full of people almost literally dying to go to confession; America, as revealed by her greatest artists, is a failed nation that compromised with materialism, as did many of the artists themselves. Still, the Catholic sense seeps through, such that, to cite just one example, O’Neill’s work is obsessed with the past, and in this respect is eminently traditional rather than modern or progressive.
The Western tradition of theater comes from the Greek tradition of theater, where art is directly connected to the worship of the gods. From the fifth century B.C., the Greeks used theater as public worship. These were grand performances, solemn, larger than life. The theaters would seat 15,000. The art was perfected at the annual spring festivals devoted to Dionysus, the god of fertility and wine. A competition was held, and three playwrights were invited to write a tragedy in three one-act plays, followed by a single act comedy. For three successive days during the festival, each playwright’s plays were performed and ten judges selected the best work. There was no higher honor than to win this competition. Sophocles won this competition several times. Aristotle praises Oedipus Rex as a model of what tragedy should be. Greek theater died with the end of the empire and there would not be another golden age of theater until the beginning of the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries in England, up to the glory of Shakespeare. The Mass inspired the revival of this tradition of theater. The medieval Corpus Christi plays are an example of this inspiration. Once again, theater is used as worship.
After the fall of Greek theater, the great philosophers began to talk about it to understand it, what it was, what it should be. Plato was suspicious of the arts. It was imitation twice removed, it was not real. Aristotle found value in theater. Art is a craft and can be learned and improved upon. Poetry has rules that must be followed for it to be art. Poetry sharpens our view of reality. The emotional life is part of human reality; it teaches what is there. Poetry also is more philosophical than history. History deals with actions. Poetry universalized truths. Finally, poetry encourages the emotions for the sake of catharsis. A plot well put together will arouse the proper emotions from which we can learn and purify. Implicit in this idea is that actions or stories that are badly put together and badly done are dangerous. There is a bad way of telling a story. There is good art and bad art. There are good stories and bad stories. The effect of the good is to enlighten and elevate; the effect of bad art is to shock and revolt, and descends into dirtiness. Aristotle tells us there is moral order to art.
Dr. White continues his introduction to T. S. Eliot by exploring the poet’s somewhat rootless youth. Though an American by birth, Eliot was never comfortable for long in one spot –- or in one country. At age 17 he graduated from Harvard after only three years, and shortly thereafter left America for Europe where he continued to move frequently from country to country. In fact, much of The Wasteland was written while Eliot lived in Switzerland. White further posits that the poem, unlike much of its contemporary work, was far from what was considered the “romantic vision” of its day, dealing as it does with the world’s fascination for and love of death.
