« AnteriorContinuar »
DRAMATIC WORKS AND POEMS
ORIGINAL AND SELECTED, AND INTRODUCTORY REMARKS TO EACH PLAY,
SAMUEL WELLER SINGER, F. S. A.
A LIFE OF THE POET,
CHARLES SYMMONS, D.D.
IN TWO VOLUMES.
PUBLISHED BY HARPER & BROTHERS,
NO. 82 CLIFF-STREET.
Shakspeare should swell into twenty or even increasing the evil. He has indeed been happily twice twenty volumes, when the latest editor (like designated the Puck of commentators:' he frethe wind Cecias) constantly draws round him the quently wrote notes, not with the view of illustrafloating errors of all his predecessors ?' Upwards of ting the Poet, but for the purpose of misleading Matwenty years ago, when the evil was not so great lone, and of enjoying the pleasure of turning against as it has since become, Steevens confessed that him that playful ridicule which he knew so well how there was an exuberance of comment,' arising from to direct. Steevens, like Malone, began his career the ambition in each little Hercules to set up pillars as an Editor of Shakspeare with scrupulous attenascertaining how far he had travelled through the tion to the old copies, but when he once came to dreary, wilds of black letter ;' so that there was entertain some jealousy of Malone's intrusion into some danger of readers being 'frighted away from his province, he all at once shifted his ground, and Shakspeare, as the soldiers of Cato deserted their adopted maxims entirely opposed to those which comrade when he became bloated with poison-guided his rival editor. Upon a recent perusal of a crescens fugere cadaver.' He saw with a prophetic considerable portion of the correspondence between eye that the evil must cure itself, and that the them, one letter seemed to display the circumtíme would arrive when some of this ivy must be stances which led to the interruption of their intiremoved, which only served to hide the princely macy in so clear a light, and to explain the causes trunk, and suck the verdure out of it.'
which have so unnecessarily swelled the comments This expurgatory task has been more than once on Shakspeare, that it has been thought not unworm undertaken, but has never hitherto, it is believed, thy of the reader's attention. The letter has no been executed entirely to the satisfaction of the ad- date :mirers of our great Poet: and the work has even Sir,-I am at present so much harassed with now devolved upon one who, though not wholly private business that it is not in my power to afford unprepared for it by previous studies, has perhaps you the long and regular answer which your letter manifested his presumption in undertaking it with deserves. Permit me, however, to desert order weak and unexamined shoulders.' He does not, and propriety, replying to your last sentence first.however, shrink from a comparison with the labours I assure you that I only erased the word friend beof his predecessors, but would rather solicit that cause, considering how much controversy was to equitable mode of being judged; and will patiently, follow, that distinction seemed to be out of its and with all becoming submission to the decision of place, and appeared to carry with it somewhat of a a competent tribunal, abide the result.
burlesque air. Such was my single motive for the As a new candidate for public favour, it may be change, and I hope you will do me the honour to expected that the Editor should explain the ground believe I had no other design in it. of his pretensions. The object then of the present • As it is some time since my opinions have had publication is to afford the general reader a correct the good fortune to coincide with yours in the least edition of Shakspeare, accompanied by an abridged matter of consequence, I begin to think so indiffocommentary, in which all superfluous and refuted rently of my own judgment, that I am ready to givo explanations and conjectures, and all the controver- it up without reluctance on the present occasion.sies and squabbles of contending critics should be You are at liberty to leave out whatever parts of omitted; and such elucidations only of obsolete my note you please. However we may privately words and obscure phrases, and such critical illus- disagree, there is no reason why we should mako trations of the text as might be deemed most gene- sport for the world, for such is the only effect of rally useful be retained. To effect this it has been public controversies ; neither should I have leisure necessary, for the sake of compression, to condense at present to pursue such an undertaking. I only in some cases several pages of excursive discussion meant to do justice to myself; and as I had no into a few lines, and often to blend together the in- opportunity of replying to your reiterated contradice formation conveyed in the notes of several com- tions in their natural order, on account of your per.
When these explanations are petual additions to them; I thought myself under mere transcripts or abridgments of the labours of ihe necessity of observing, that I ought not to be his predecessors, and are unaccompanied by any suspected of being impotently silent in regard 10 observation of his own, it will of course be under- objections which I had never read till it was ioo late stood that the Editor intends to imply by silent for any replication on my side to be made. You
acquiescence that he has nothing betier to pro- rely much on the authority of an editor; but till I pose.' Fortune, however, seems to have been pro- am convinced that volunteers are to be treated with pitious to his labours, for he flatters himself that he less indulgence than other soldiers, I shall still has been enabled in many instances to present the think I have some right at least to be disgusted reader with more satisfactory explanations of diffi- especially after I had been permitted to observe cult passages, and with more exact definitions of that truth, not victory, was the object of our criti obsolete words and phrases, than are to be found in cal warfare. the notes to the variorum editions.
As for the note at the concrusion of The PuriThe causes which have operated to overwhelm tan, since it gives so much offence, (an offence as the pages of Shaskpeare with superfluous notes are undesigned as unforeseen,) I vill change a part of
; but Steevens, though eminently fitted for it, and subjoin reasons for my owent both from you
mentators into one.
and Mr. Tyrwhitt. You cannot surely suspect me | Steevens had undoubtedly, as he says of himself on of having wished to commence hostilities with either another occasionof you, but you have made a very singular com- *Fallen in the plash his wickedness had made ;' ment on this remark indeed. Because I have said and in some instances contested the force and I could overturn some of both your arguments on priety of his own remarks when applied by Malone other occasions with ease, you are willing to infer to parallel passages; or, as Malone observes : that I meant all of them. Let me ask, for instance. They are very good remarks, so far forth as they sake, what would become of his "undertakers,” are his; but when used by me are good for nothing; &c. were I to advance all I could on that subject. and the disputed passages become printers' blun. I will not offend you by naming any particular posi- ders, or Hemingisms and Condelisms.' Hence his tion of your own which could with success be dis- unremitted censure of the first folio copy, and supputed. I cannot, however, help adding, that had I port of the readings of the second folio, which Ma. followed every sentence of your attempt to ascer-lone treats as of no authority ;-his affected contain the order of the plays, with a contradiction tempt for the Poerns of Shakspeare, &c. sedulous and unremitted as that with which you Mr. Boswell has judiciously characterized Steehave pursued my Observations on Shakspeare's vens :— With great diligence, an extensive acWill and his Sonnets, you at least would not have quaintance with early literature, and a remarkably found your undertaking a very comfortable one. I was retentive memory: he was besides, as Mr. Gifford then an editor, and indulged you with even a printed has justly observed, “ a wit and a scholar.” But foul copy of your work, which you enlarged as long his wit and the sprightliness of his style were 100 as you thought fit.-The arrival of people on busi- often employed to bewilder and mislead us. ness prevents me from adding more than that I hope consciousness of his own satirical powers made to be still indulged with the correction of my own him much too fond of exercising them at the exnotes on the Yorkshire] T[ragedy). I expect al- pense of truth and justice. He was infected to a most every one of them to be disputed, but assure lamentable degree with the jealousy of authorship; you that I will not add a single word by way of re- and while his approbation was readily bestowed ply. I have not returned you so complete an an- upon those whose competition he thought he had swer as I would have done had I been at leisure. no reason to dread, he was fretfully impatient of a You have, however, the real sentiments of your brother near the throne : his clear understanding most humble servant,
G. STEEVENS.' would generally have enabled him to discover what The temper in which this letter was written is was right; but the spirit of contradiction could at obvious. Steevens was at the time assisting Ma- any time induce him to maintain what was wrong. lone in preparing his Supplement to Shakspeare, It would be impossible, indeed, to explain how any and had previously made a liberal present to him of one, possessed of his taste and discernment, could his valuable collection of old plays; he afterwards have brought himself to advocate so many indefencalled himself a dowager editor,' and said he would sible opinions, without entering into a long and unnever more trouble himself about Shakspeare. This gracious history of the motives by which he was inis gathered from a memorandum by Malone, but Huenced.' Steevens does in effect
in one of his letters ; Malone was certainly not so happily gifted ; adding, · Nor will such assistance as I may be able though Mr. Boswell's partiality in delineating his to furnish ever go towards any future gratuitous pub- friend, presents us with the picture of an amiable lication of the same author : ingratitude and imper- and accomplished gentleman and scholar. There tinence from several booksellers have been my re- seems to have been a want of grasp in his mind to ward for conducting iwo laborious editions, both of make proper use of the accumulated materials which which, except a few copies, are already sold.' his unwearied industry in his favourite pursuit had
In another letter, in reply to a remonstrance placed within his reach : his notes on Shakspeare about the suspension of his visits to Malone, Stee- are often tediously circumlocutory and ineffectual: vens says :- I will confess to you without reserve neither does he seem to have been deficient in that the cause why I have not made even my business jealousy of rivalship, or that pertinacious adherence submit to my desire of seeing you. I readily allow to his own opinions, which have been attributed to that any distinct and subjoined reply to my remarks his competitor. on your notes is fair ; but to change (in conse- It is superfluous here to enlarge on this topic, quence of private conversation) the notes that drew for the merits and defects of Johnson, Steevens, and from me those remarks, is to turn my own weapons Malone, as commentators on Shakspeare, and the against me. Surely, therefore, it is unnecessary to characters of those who preceded them, the reader let me continue building when you are previously will find sketched with a masterly pen in the Biodetermined to destroy my very foundations. As 1 graphical Preface of Dr. Symmons, which accoinobserved to you yesterday, the result of this pro- panies this edition. The vindication of Shakspeare ceeding would be, that such of my strictures as from idle calumny and ill founded critical animadmight be just on the first copies of your notes, must version, could not have been placed in better hands often prove no better than idle cavils, when applied than in those of the vindicator of Milton; and his to the second and amended editions of them. I eloquent Essay must afford pleasure to every lover know not that any editor has insisted on the very of our immortal Bard. It should be observed that extensive privileges which you have continued to the Editor, in his adoption of readings, differs in claim. In some parts of my Dissertation on Peri- opinion on some points from his able coadjutor, with cles, I am almost reduced to combat with shadows. whom he has not the honour of a personal acquaintWe had resolved (as I once imagined) to proceed ance. It is to be regretted that no part of the work without roserve on either side through the whole of was communicated to Dr. Symmons until nearly that controversy, but finally you acquainted me with the whole of the Plays were printed ; or the Editor your resolution (in right of editorship) to have the and the Public would doubtless have benefited by last word. However, for the future, I beg I may his animadversions and suggestions in its progress be led to trouble you only with observations relative through the press. The reader will not therefore to notes which are fired ones. I had that advan- be surprised at the preliminary, censure of some tage over my predecessors, and you have enjoved readings which are still retained in the text. the same over me; but I never yet possessed the Dr. Johnson's far famed Preface-which has so means of obviating objections before they could be long hung as a dead weight upon the reputation of effectually made,' &c.
our great Poet, and which has been just!y said to Here then is the secret developed of the subse- look like 'a laborious attempt to bury the charace quent, unceasing, and unrelenting opposition with teristic merits of his author under a oad of cumwhich Steevens opposed Malone's notes: their brous phraseology, and to weign mis excellencies controversics served not 10 make sport for the and defects in equal scales stuffed fuil of swelling world,' but to annoy the admirers of Shakspeare, figures and sonorous epithets,'-will, for obvious by overloading his page rith frivolous contention. reasons, form no part of this publication. His brica strictures at the end of each play have been retain- The text of the present odiäion is formed upon ed in compliance with custom, but not without an those of Steevens and Malone, occasionally com occasional note of dissent. - We may suppose that pared with the early editions; and the satisfaction Johnson himself did not estimate these observations arising from a rejection of modern unwarranted devivery highly, for he tells us that in the plays which ations from the old copies has not unfrequently been are condemned there may be much to be praised, and the reward of this labour. in those which are praised much to be condemned !' The preliminary remarks to each play are augFar be it from us to undervalue or speak slightingly mented with extracts from the more recent writers of our great moralist; but his most strenuous admirers upon Shakspeare, and generally contain brief critimust acknowledge that the construction of his mind cal observations which are in many instances, opincapacitated him from forming a true judgment of posed to the dictum of Dr. Johnson. Some of these the creations of one who was of imagination all are extracted from the Lectures on the Drama, by compact,' no less than his physical defects prevent the distinguished German critic, A. W. Schleghel, ed him from relishing the beautiful and harmonious a writer to whom the nation is deeply indebted, for in nature and art.
having pointed out the characteristic excellencies of
the great Poet of nature, in an eloquent and philoQuid valet ad surdas si cantet Phemius aures ? Quid cæcum Thamyram picta tabella juvat?' sophical spirit of criticism; which, though it may It has been the studious endeavour of the Editor tical enthusiasm, has dealt out to Shakspeare his
sometimes be thought a little tinctured with mysto avoid those splenetic and insulting reflections upon due meed of praise
; and has, no doubt, tended to the errors of the commentators, where it has been dissipate the prejudices of some neighbouring nahis good fortune to detect them, which have been tions who have been too long wilfully blind to his sonetimes too captiously indulged in by labourers
merits, in this field of verbal criticism. Indeed it would ill become him to speak contemptuously of those who, vour the public with an edition of Shakspeare : how
Mr. Gifford, as it appears, once proposed to fawith all their defects, have deserved the gratitude of admirably that excellent critic would have performthe age; for it is chiefly owing to the labours of Tyr-ed the task the world need not now be told. The whiti, Warton, Percy, Steevens, Farmer, and their Editor, who has been frequently indebted to the successors, that attention has been drawn to the remarks on the language of our great Poet which mine of wealth which our early literature affords ; occur in the notes to the works of Ben Jonson and and no one will affect to deny that a recurrence to Massinger, may be permitted to anticipate the pube it has not been attended with beneficial effects, if it lic regret that these humble labours were not prehas not raised us in the moral scale of nations.
sented by that more skilful hand. As it is, he must The plan pursued in the selection, abridgment; console himself with having used his best endeavour and concentration of the notes of others, precluded to accomplish the task which he was solicited to the necessity of affixing the names of the commen- undertake; had his power equalled his desire to tators from whom the information was borrowed; render it useful and acceptable, the work would and, excepting in a few cases of controversial dis- have been more worthy of the public favour, and of cussion, and of some critical observations, authori- the Poet whom he and all unite in idolizingtes are not given. The very curious and valuable Illustrations of Shakspeare by Mr. Douce have been
The bard of every age and clime, laid under frequent contribution; the obligation has
Or genius fruitful and of soul sublime, not always been expressed; and it is therefore hore Who, from the flowing mint of fancy, pours acknowledged with thankfulness.
No spurious metal, fused from commou ores, It will be seen that the Editor has not thought, But gold, to matchless purity refin'd, with some of his predecessors, that the text of
And stamp'd with all the godhead in his mind; Shakspeare was 'fixed'in any particular edition
He whom I feel, but want the power to paint beyond the hope or probability of future amendment. He has rather coincided with the opinion of
JUVENAL, Sat. vi. Mr. Gifford's Translation. Mr. Gifford, that those would deserve well of the public who should bring back some readings which Steevens discarded, and reject others which he has MICKLEHAM, dopted.'
Dec. 3, 1825.