duce

incongruous the author may choose to intro- | clouds, and fairies floating in ether, held up by very invisible strings. And so the poetry was borne for the sake of the sight-seeing and the songs. But, for a just comprehension of Shakspere's surpassing beauties in this divine poem, we would rather hear the second scene of Act II. read as we have heard it read by a poet, than see the play, accom

was con

to show, after all, that "the best in this kind are but shadows.'

Schlegel has happily remarked upon this drama, that "the most extraordinary combination of the most dissimilar ingredients seems to have arisen without effort by some ingenious and lucky accident; and the colours are of such clear transparency, that we think the whole of the variegated fabric may be blown away with a breath." It is not till after we have attentively studied this wonderful production that we understand how solidly the foundations of the fabric are laid. Theseus and Hippolyta move with a stately pace as their nuptial hour draws on. Hermia takes time to pause, before she submits

was unattempted by him. The Faithful Shepherdess' of Fletcher-a poet who in some things knew how to accommodate himself to the taste of a mixed audience more readily than Shakspere demned on the first night of its appearance. Seward, one of his editors, calls this the scandal of our nation. And yet it is ex-panied with every scenic propriety and pomp, tremely difficult to understand how the event should have been otherwise; for 'The Faithful Shepherdess' is essentially undramatic. Its exquisite poetry was therefore thrown away upon an impatient audience its occasional indelicacy could not propitiate them. Milton's 'Comus' is in the same way essentially undramatic; and none but such a refined audience as that at Ludlow Castle could have endured its representation. But the 'Midsummer-Night's Dream' is composed altogether upon a different principle. It exhibits all that congruity of parts, that natural progression of scenes, that subordination of action and character to one leading design, that ultimate harmony evolved out of seeming confusion, which constitute the dramatic spirit. With "audience fit, though few," with a stage not encumbered with decorations, with actors approaching (if it were so possible) to the idea of grace and archness which belong to the fairy troop,-the subtle and evanescent beauties of this drama might not be wholly lost in the representation. But under the most favourable circumstances much would be sacrificed. It is in the closet that we must not only suffer our senses to be overpowered by its "indescribable profusion of imaginative poetry," but trace the instinctive felicity of Shakspere in the "structure of the fable." If the Midsummer-Night's Dream' could be acted, there can be no doubt how well it would act. Our imagination must amend what is wanting. It is no real objection to this belief that it has been acted with surpassing success since these observations were originally written. It was revived at Covent-Garden Theatre as a pantomimic opera, with exquisite scenery, and abundant music, and Oberon and Titania moving in golden chariots amongst silver

"To death, or to a vow of single life,"secretly resolving "through Athens' gates to steal." Helena, in the selfishness of her own love, resolves to betray her friend. Bottom the weaver, and Quince the carpenter, and Snug the joiner, and Flute the bellowsmender, and Snout the tinker, and Starveling the tailor, are "thought fit through all Athens to play in the interlude before the duke and duchess on his wedding-day, at night." Here are, indeed, "dissimilar ingredients." They appear to have no aptitude for combination. The artists are not yet upon the scene, who are to make a mosaic out of these singular materials. We are only presented in the first act with the extremes of high and low-with the slayer of the Centaurs, and the weaver, who will roar you an 't were any nightingale,”—with the lofty Amazon, who appears elevated above woman's hopes and fears, and the pretty and satirical Hermia, who swears—

66

"By all the vows that ever men have broke, In number more than ever women spoke."

"The course of true love" does not all “ run smooth" in these opening scenes. We have the love that is crossed, and the love that is unrequited; and, worse than all, the unhap- | piness of Helena makes her treacherous to her friend. We have little doubt that all this will be set straight in the progress of the drama; but what Quince and his company will have to do with the untying of this knot is a mystery.

To offer an analysis of this subtle and ethereal drama would, we believe, be as unsatisfactory as the attempts to associate it with the realities of the stage. With scarcely an exception, the proper understanding of the other plays of Shakspere may be assisted by connecting the apparently separate parts of the action, and by developing and reconciling what seems obscure and anomalous in the features of the characters. But to follow out the caprices and illusions of the loves of Demetrius and Lysander, of Helena and Hermia ;—to reduce to prosaic description the consequence of the jealousies of Oberon and Titania;-to trace the Fairy Queen under the most fantastic of deceptions, where grace and vulgarity blend together like the Cupids and Chimeras of Raffaelle's Arabesques ;—and, finally, to go along with the scene till the illusions disappear-till the lovers are happy, and "sweet bully Bottom" is reduced to an ass of human dimensions ;—such an attempt as this would be worse even than unreverential criticism. No, the Midsummer-Night's Dream' must be left to its own influences.

6

opinion. Malone has, with great hardihood, asserted that the part of the fable which relates to the quarrels of Oberon and Titania was "not of our author's invention." He has nothing to show in support of this, but the opinion of Tyrwhitt, that Pluto and Proserpina, in Chaucer's 'Merchant's Tale,' were the true progenitors of Oberon and Titania; that Robert Greene boasts of having performed the King of the Fairies, and that Greene has introduced Oberon in his play of 'James IV.' Malone's assertion, and the mode altogether in which he speaks of this drama, furnish a decisive proof of his incompetence to judge of the higher poetry of Shakspere. Because the names of Oberon and Titania existed before Shakspere, he did not invent his Oberon and Titania! The opinion of Mr. Hallam may correct some of the errors which the commentators have laboured to propagate. "The MidsummerNight's Dream' is, I believe, altogether original in one of the most beautiful conceptions that ever visited the mind of a poet, the fairy machinery. A few before him had dealt in a vulgar and clumsy manner with popular superstitions; but the sportive, beneficent, invisible population of the air and earth, long since established in the creed of childhood, and of those simple as children, had never for a moment been blended with human mortals' among the personages of the drama. Lyly's 'Maid's Metamorphosis is probably later than this play of Shakspeare, and was not published till 1600. It is unnecessary to observe that the fairies of Spenser, as he has dealt with them, are wholly of a different race.'

* Literature of Europe,' vol. ii. p. 338.

CHAPTER III.

ROMEO AND JULIET.

'ROMEO AND JULIET' was first printed in the ↑ We would not, indeed, attempt to establish

year 1597, under the following title: An it as a rule implicitly to be followed, that excellent conceited Tragedie of Romeo and an author's last corrections are to be invaJuliet. As it hath been often (with great riably adopted; for, as in the case of Cowper's applause) plaid publiquely, by the right Homer,' and Tasso's 'Jerusalem,' the corhonourable the L. of Hunsdon his Seruants.' | rections which these poets made in their first The second edition was printed in 1599, | productions, when their faculties were in a under the following title:-The most ex- great degree clouded and worn out, are procellent and lamentable Tragedie, of Romeo perly considered as not entitled to supersede and Juliet. Newly corrected, augmented, what they produced in brighter and happier and amended: As it hath bene sundry times hours. Mr. Southey has admirably stated publiquely acted, by the right Honourable the reason for this in the advertisement to the Lord Chamberlaine his Seruants.' his edition of Cowper's 'Homer.' But, in the case of Shakspere's 'Romeo and Juliet,' the corrections and augmentations were made by him at that epoch of his life when he exhibited "all the graces and facilities of a genius in full possession and habitual exercise of power." The augmentations, with one or two very trifling exceptions, are amongst the most masterly passages in the whole play, and include many of the lines that are invariably turned to, as some of the highest examples of poetical beauty. These augmentations, further, are so large in their amount, that, in Steevens's reprint, the first edition occupies only seventy-three pages; while the edition of 1609, in the same volume, printed in the same type as the first edition, occupies ninety-nine pages. The corrections are made with such exceeding judgment, such marvellous tact, that of themselves they completely overthrow the theory, so long submitted to, that Shakspere was a careless writer. Such being the case, we consider ourselves justified in treating the labour of Steevens and other editors, in making a patchwork text out of the author's first and second copies, as utterly worthless. We most readily acknowledge our own particular obligations to them; for, unless they had collected a great mass of materials, no modern edition could have been properly undertaken. But we, nevertheless, cannot conceal * Coleridge's Literary Remains.'

The subsequent original editions, and the folio of 1623, are founded upon the quarto of 1599, from which they differ very slightly. The quarto of 1599 was declared to be "newly corrected, augmented, and amended." There can be no doubt whatever that the corrections, augmentations, and emendations were those of the author. There are typographical errors in this edition, and in all the editions, and occasional confusions of the metrical arrangement, which render it more than probable that Shakspere did not see the proofs of his printed works. But that the copy, both of the first edition and of the second, was derived from him, is, to our minds, perfectly certain. We know of nothing in literary history more curious or more instructive than the example of minute attention, as well as consummate skill, exhibited by Shakspere in correcting, augmenting, and amending the first copy of this play. We would ask, then, upon what canon of criticism can an editor be justified in foisting into a copy, so corrected, passages of the original copy, which the matured judgment of the author had rejected? Essentially the question ought not to be determined by any arbitrement whatever other than the judgment of the author. Even if his corrections did not appear, in every case, to be improvements, we should be still bound to receive them with respect and deference.

our opinion, that as editors they were rash, and as critics they were cold and unimaginative; and we hold it to be the highest duty to attempt to undo what they have done, when they approach their author, as in their manufacture of a text for 'Romeo and Juliet,'" without reverence." We believe, as they did not, "that his own judg-people, and old people in particular, establish ment is entitled to more respect than that of any or all his critics;" and we shall attempt to vindicate that judgment on every occasion, upon the great principle laid down by Bentley:"The point is not what he might have done, but what he has done."

of poetry amongst which they are placed | audience, the play was produced, as well as during a theatrical representation, and the written, in 1591. half consciousness of the external world of Reasoning such as this would, we acknowtheir ordinary life. The ready disposition ledge, be very weak if it were unsupported of every audience to make a transition from by evidence deduced from the general chathe scene before them to the scene in which racter of the performance, with reference they ordinarily move,-to assimilate what is to the maturity of the author's powers. shadowy and distant with what is distinct | But, taken in connection with that evidence, and at hand,—is perfectly well known to all it becomes important. Now, we have no who are acquainted with the machinery of hesitation in believing, although it would the drama. Actors seize upon the principle be exceedingly difficult to communicate the to perpetrate the grossest violations of good grounds of our belief fully to our readers, taste; and authors who write for present that the alterations made by Shakspere upon applause invariably do the same when they his first copy of Romeo and Juliet,' as offer us, in their dialogue, a passing allu- printed in 1597 (which alterations are shown sion, which is technically called a clap-trap. | in the second copy as printed in 1599), exIn the case before us, even if Shakspere had hibit differences as to the quality of his mind not this principle in view, the association-differences in judgment-differences in the of the English earthquake must have been cast of thought-differences in poetical power strongly in his mind when he made the Nurse date from an earthquake. Without reference to the circumstance of Juliet's age,

"Even or odd, of all days in the year,

Come Lammas-eve at night, shall she be fourteen,"―

he would naturally, dating from the earthquake, have made the date refer to the period of his writing the passage instead of the period of Juliet's being weaned :— "Then she could stand alone." But, according to the Nurse's chronology, Juliet had not arrived at that epoch in the lives of children till she was three years old. The very contradiction shows that Shakspere had another object in view than that of making the Nurse's chronology tally with the age of her nursling. Had he written,

""T is since the earthquake now just thirteen years,"

we should not have been so ready to believe that 'Romeo and Juliet' was written in 1593; but as he has written,

""T is since the earthquake now eleven years," in defiance of a very obvious calculation on the part of the Nurse, we have little doubt that he wrote the passage eleven years after the earthquake of 1580, and that, the passage being also meant to fix the attention of an

which cannot be accounted for by the growth of his mind during two years only. If the first 'Romeo and Juliet' were produced in 1591, and the second in 1599, we have an interval of eight years, in which some of his most finished works had been given to the world. During this period his richness, as well as his sweetness, had been developed; and it is this development which is so remarkable in the superadded passages in Romeo and Juliet.' ( We almost fancy that the "Queen Mab" speech will of itself furnish an example of what we mean. "Her chariot is an empty hazel-nnt,

Made by the joiner squirrel, or old grub, Time out of mind the fairies' coach-makers." These lines are not in the first copy; but how beautifully they fit in after the description of the spokes-the cover-the tracesthe collars-the whip-and the waggoner; while, in their peculiarly rich and picturesque effect, they stand out before all the rest of the passage! Then, the "I have ****t is gone, seen the day-* 't is gone, 't is gone," of old Capulet seems to speak more of the middle-aged than of the youthful poet, of whom all the passages by which it is surrounded are characteristic. Again, the lines in the friar's soliloquy, beginning

"The earth, that 's Nature's mother, is her tomb,"