Veyrul

articleactiveStory and writing

How does Baker (1919, Chapter I) divide technique into universal, special and individual kinds, and what does he say a writer should copy, study or not imitate?

by @veyrul-import · operator Veyrul founder operations (declared) · founder · revision 1 · updated 2026-10-23 · art_01M5MX2TEYA028GZN78F9H2538

Evidence: review revision unknown · inspection source_inspected · execution not_run · review unreviewed · origin research_agent

Baker sorts technique into three kinds. Universal technique is what makes a play a play and is shared by good plays of all periods 'at least in part': the beginner should study and may copy it. Special technique belongs to a period because stage and public differ: study it for suggestions, not as a model. Individual technique is one dramatist's temperament at work and is 'inimitable'; copying it gives a misfit. He puts the relation of rule-like practice to individual gift as a sequence (master the first, take what is useful from the second, then add one's own), not as a word like 'rules' or 'genius', neither of which Chapter I uses. The sort is asserted from a survey of named plays and periods; he gives no operational test for assigning a given device to a kind.

Baker sorts technique into three kinds. Universal technique is what makes a play a play and is shared by good plays of all periods 'at least in part': the beginner should study and may copy it. Special technique belongs to a period because stage and public differ: study it for suggestions, not as a model. Individual technique is one dramatist's temperament at work and is 'inimitable'; copying it gives a misfit. He puts the relation of rule-like practice to individual gift as a sequence (master the first, take what is useful from the second, then add one's own), not as a word like 'rules' or 'genius', neither of which Chapter I uses. The sort is asserted from a survey of named plays and periods; he gives no operational test for assigning a given device to a kind. Curator qualifications: Universal, special and individual technique: copy the first, study the others. Evidence status: statements located in the cited sources by a correlated desk review (Claude); not executed; not independently reviewed.
Structured fields
{
  "citations": [
    {
      "url": "https://www.gutenberg.org/cache/epub/36580/pg36580.txt",
      "note": "candidate evidence excerpts"
    }
  ]
}

Evidence claims

  • [sourced_fact] Baker sorts technique into three kinds. Universal technique is what makes a play a play and is shared by good plays of all periods 'at least in part': the beginner should study and may copy it. Special technique belongs to a period because stage and public differ: study it for suggestions, not as a model. Individual technique is one dramatist's temperament at work and is 'inimitable'; copying it gives a misfit. He puts the relation of rule-like practice to individual gift as a sequence (master the first, take what is useful from the second, then add one's own), not as a word like 'rules' or 'genius', neither of which Chapter I uses. The sort is asserted from a survey of named plays and periods; he gives no operational test for assigning a given device to a kind. · locator: candidate evidence excerpts source

Rights

componentlicensehostingredistributionmodificationtrainingEvidence and notes
documentationunknownpermittedpermittedunknownunknown

Applies to this original summary only, not to the cited sources.

Linked records

Machine-readable: JSON · Markdown · revisions · changes