Shakespeare had in his mind the rhythm marked by
this act-division? I do not mean, of course, that these phrases, or
anything like them, were present to his consciousness, but merely that
he "thought in acts," and mentally assigned to each act its definite
share in the development of the crisis.

Turning now to Ibsen, let us draw up an act-scheme for the simplest and
most straightforward of his plays, _An Enemy of the People_. It might
run as follows:

ACT I.--THE INCURABLE OPTIMIST.--Dr. Stockmann announces his
discovery of the insanitary condition of the Baths.

ACT II.--THE COMPACT MAJORITY.--Dr. Stockmann finds that he will
have to fight vested interests before the evils he has discovered
can be remedied, but is assured that the Compact Majority is at
his back.

ACT III.--THE TURN OF FORTUNE.--The Doctor falls from the pinnacle
of his optimistic confidence, and learns that he will have the
Compact Majority, not _at_, but _on_ his back.

ACT IV.--THE COMPACT MAJORITY ON THE WARPATH.--The crowd, finding
that its immediate interests are identical with those of the
privileged few, joins with the bureaucracy in shouting down the
truth, and organizing a conspiracy of silence.

ACT V.--OPTIMISM DISILLUSIONED BUT INDOMITABLE.--Dr. Stockmann,
gagged and thrown back into poverty, is tempted to take flight, but
determines to remain in his native place and fight for its moral, if
not for its physical, sanitation.

Each of these acts is a little drama in itself, while each leads forward
to the next, and marks a distinct phase in the development of
the crisis.

When the younger Dumas asked his father, that master of dramatic
movement, to initiate him into the secret of dramatic craftsmanship, the
great Alexandre replied in this concise formula: "Let your first act be
clear, your last act brief, and the whole interesting." Of the wisdom of
the first clause there can be no manner of doubt. Whether incidentally
or by way of formal exposition, the first act ought to show us clearly
who the characters are, what are their relations and relationships, and
what is the nature of the gathering crisis. It is very important that
the attention of the audience should not be overstrained in following
out needlessly complex genealogies and kinships. How often, at the end
of a first act, does one turn to one's neighbour and say, "Are Edith and
Adela sisters or only half-sisters?" or, "Did you gather wh