To my ears it would read far more Shakespearian thus:—

“And what poor duty cannot do, _yet would_,

Noble respect,” &c.

_Ib._ sc. 2.—

“_Puck._ Now the hungry lion roars,

And the wolf behowls the moon;

Whilst the heavy ploughman snores

All with weary task foredone,” &c.

Very Anacreon in perfectness, proportion, grace, and spontaneity! So far

it is Greek;—but then add, O! what wealth, what wild ranging, and yet what

compression and condensation of, English fancy! In truth, there is nothing

in Anacreon more perfect than these thirty lines, or half so rich and

imaginative. They form a speckless diamond.

“Comedy Of Errors.”

The myriad-minded man, our, and all men’s Shakespeare, has in this piece

presented us with a legitimate farce in exactest consonance with the

philosophical principles and character of farce, as distinguished from

comedy and from entertainments. A proper farce is mainly distinguished

from comedy by the licence allowed, and even required, in the fable, in

order to produce strange and laughable situations. The story need not be

probable, it is enough that it is possible. A comedy would scarcely allow

even the two Antipholuses; because, although there have been instances of

almost indistinguishable likeness in two persons, yet these are mere

individual accidents, _casus ludentis naturæ_, and the _verum_ will not

excuse the _inverisimile_. But farce dares add the two Dromios, and is

justified in so doing by the laws of its end and constitution. In a word,

farces commence in a postulate, which must be granted.

“As You Like It.”

Act i. sc. 1.

“_Oli._ What, boy!

_Orla._ Come, come, elder brother, you are too young in this.

_Oli._ Wilt thou lay hands on me, villain?”

There is a beauty here. The word “boy” naturally provokes and awakens in

Orlando the sense of his manly powers; and with the retort of “elder

brother,” he grasps him with firm hands, and makes him feel he is no boy.

_Ib._—

“_Oli._ Farewell, good Charles. Now will I stir this gamester: I hope, I

shall see an end of him; for my soul, yet I know not why, hates nothing

more than him. Yet he’s gentle; never school’d, and yet learn’d; full of

noble device; of all sorts enchantingly beloved! and, indeed, so much in

the heart of the world, and especially of my own people, who best know

him, that I am altogether misprised: but it shall not be so long; this

wrestler shall clear all.”

This has always appeared to me one of the most un-Shakespearian speeches

in all the genuine works of our poet; yet I should be nothing surprised,

and greatly pleased, to find it hereafter a fresh beauty, as has so often

happened to me with other supposed defects of great men.—1810.

It is too venturous to charge a passage in Shakespeare with want of truth

to nature; and yet at first sight this speech of Oliver’s expresses

truths, which it seems almost impossible that any mind should so

distinctly, so livelily, and so voluntarily, have presented to itself, in

connection with feelings and intentions so malignant, and so contrary to

those which the qualities expressed would naturally have called forth. But

I dare not say that this seeming unnaturalness is not in the nature of an

abused wilfulness, when united with a strong intellect. In such characters

there is sometimes a gloomy self-gratification in making the absoluteness

of the will (_sit pro ratione voluntas!_) evident to themselves by setting

the reason and the conscience in full array against it.—1818.

_Ib._ sc. 2.—

“_Celia._ If your saw yourself with _your_ eyes, or knew yourself with

_your_ judgment, the fear of your adventure would counsel you to a more

equal enterprise.”

Surely it should be “_our_ eyes” and “_our_ judgment.”

_Ib._ sc 3.—

“_Cel._ But is all this for your father?

_Ros._ No; some of it is for _my child’s father_.”

Theobald restores this as the reading of the older editions. It may be so:

but who can doubt that it is a mistake for “my father’s child,” meaning

herself? According to Theobald’s note, a most indelicate anticipation is

put into the mouth of Rosalind without reason;—and besides, what a strange

thought, and how out of place and unintelligible!

Shakespeare, Ben Jonson, Beaumont and Fletcher · 第 31 / 186 题