bearing upon the "plausibility" of the conclusion that Beaumont and
Fletcher "influenced" Shakspere, the likelihood that "Philaster" was the
original, "Cymbeline" the "copy." Shakspere at the age of forty-six,
long after he had portrayed the real insanity of Lear, the simulated
insanity of Hamlet, the confessional dream of Lady Macbeth; long after
he had "filled the audience with surprise and delight" by the romantic
realities of Hero and Portia, of Viola and Rosalind; years after he had
anticipated the heroic "romance" in the romantic adventures of Marina;
long after he had depicted the heroic triumph of Isabella over the
lustful Angelo--this man, Shakspere, condescended to imitate a youth of
twenty-two, whose name was Beaumont, to steal from him much of the plot,
characters, action, and denouement of "Philaster" and to make the theft
more open and unblushing, presented "Cymbeline" upon the same stage
within a year of the original "type," and assigned the parts to the same
actors who had won remarkable popular applause for the drama from which
he had "cribbed" his imitation. And this imitation was not from friendly
authors, but from those of a hostile school, who had during their whole
career borrowed from his plots, parodied his phrases, and ridiculed his
masterpieces by slurs and burlesques. We respectfully dissent from the
assertion that these facts "create a strong presumption that 'Philaster'
was the original," "Cymbeline" the "copy." On the contrary, it seems to
us that they are utterly inconsistent with any such presumption, and
with the whole theory and teaching of Professors Wendell and Thorndike.
That theory, as we have shown, is based upon the assumption that
Marlowe, or Greene, or Peele, or somebody else, wrote most of "Henry
VI"; the assumption that Fletcher helped Shakspere write "Henry VIII";
the assumption that Shakspere assisted Fletcher in the composition of
"The Two Noble Kinsmen"; the unsupported, the admitted conjecture that
"Philaster" was written before October 8th, 1610; the unwarranted
assertion that Beaumont and Fletcher "created the romance" in spite of
the admission that the date of creation depends upon the priority of
"Cymbeline" or "Philaster," which is likewise admitted to be wholly
uncertain; the suppression of the proof from "Measure for Measure" that,
years before "Philaster," Shakspere, within the proposed definition, had
produced a romantic tragi-comedy; the guess as to priority in favor of
Beaumont and Fletcher, in spite of repeated imitations by them from
previous plays of Shakspere. And so the argument in support of the
theory is a pyramid of _ifs_, supporting an apex that vanishes into
the thin air of an invisible conclusion.
To us, after all this latest effort to depose the sovereign of English
literature from the throne where he has worn the crown for more than
three centuries, and seat there a pretender, having no title, either by
divine right or the suffrages of mankind, Shakspere is the sovereign
still.
He needed and he sought no allies to win his realm; he imitated no
fashions of other courts to maintain his own; he took good care that the
records of his universal conquests should be kept,--written by his own
hand, and fortunately preserved by his friends,--secure from the
interpolations and imitations of his contemporaries and successors.
Much has been written of Shakspere's impersonality, and we have been
taught to think that his dramas are utterly silent as to his own
experience. But now and then one finds in them a glimpse of it, as the
lightning flash in the darkest night for an instant shows the heavens
and the earth. That others attempted to imitate him is clear enough;
that he imitated others, and least of all Beaumont and Fletcher, nobody
can reasonably believe who reads his opinion of the imitator in "Julius
Caesar":
"A barren spirited fellow; one that feeds
On objects, arts, and imitations,
Which, out of use, and stal'd by other men,
Begin his fashion."
Matthew Arnold's verdict has not been reversed.
"_Others abide our question. Thou art free._
_We ask and ask--Thou smilest and art still,_
_Out-topping knowledge. For the loftiest hill,_
_Who to the stars uncrowns his majesty,_
"_Planting his stedfast footsteps in the sea,_
_Making the heaven of heavens his dwelling-place,_
_Spares but the cloudy border of his base_
_To the foil'd searching of mortality;_
"_And thou, who didst the stars and sunbeams know,_
_Self-school'd, self-scann'd, self-honour'd, self-secure,_
_Didst tread on earth unguess'd at.--Better so!_
"_All pains the immortal spirit must endure,_
_All weakness which impairs, all griefs which bow,_
_Find their sole speech in that victorious brow._"
* * * * *
Transcriber's note
The following changes have been made to the text:
Page 14: "a successful playright" changed to
"a successful playwright".
Page 33: "'T is but the short'ning" changed to
"'Tis but the short'ning".
Page 53: "piece was writtin" changed to
"piece was written".
Page 53: "two valiant Kinghts" changed to
"two valiant Knights".
Page 73: "Professer Wendell applies" changed to
"Professor Wendell applies".
Page 87: "German critcism has" changed to
"German criticism has".
Page 108: "is n't it just" changed to
"isn't it just".
Page 126: "throne where he was worn" changed to
"throne where he has worn".
End of Project Gutenberg's The Critics Versus Shakspere, by Francis A. Smith