If it be true, as we are told on high authority, that the greatest glory

of England is her literature and the greatest glory of English

literature is its poetry, it is not less true that the greatest glory of

English poetry lies rather in its dramatic than its epic or its lyric

triumphs. The name of Shakespeare is above the names even of Milton and

Coleridge and Shelley: and the names of his comrades in art and their

immediate successors are above all but the highest names in any other

province of our song. There is such an overflowing life, such a superb

exuberance of abounding and exulting strength, in the dramatic poetry of

the half-century extending from 1590 to 1640, that all other epochs of

English literature seem as it were but half awake and half alive by

comparison with this generation of giants and of gods. There is more sap

in this than in any other branch of the national bay-tree: it has an

energy in fertility which reminds us rather of the forest than the

garden or the park. It is true that the weeds and briers of the

underwood are but too likely to embarrass and offend the feet of the

rangers and the gardeners who trim the level flower-plots or preserve

the domestic game of enclosed and ordered lowlands in the tamer demesnes

of literature. The sun is strong and the wind sharp in the climate which

reared the fellows and the followers of Shakespeare. The extreme

inequality and roughness of the ground must also be taken into account

when we are disposed, as I for one have often been disposed, to wonder

beyond measure at the apathetic ignorance of average students in regard

of the abundant treasure to be gathered from this wildest and most

fruitful province in the poetic empire of England. And yet, since

Charles Lamb threw open its gates to all comers in the ninth year of the

nineteenth century, it cannot but seem strange that comparatively so few

should have availed themselves of the entry to so rich and royal an

estate. The subsequent labors of Mr. Dyce made the rough ways plain and

the devious paths straight for all serious and worthy students. And now

again Mr. Bullen has taken up a task than which none more arduous and

important, none worthier of thanks and praise, can be undertaken by an

English scholar. In his beautiful and valuable edition of Marlowe there

are but two points to which exception may be taken. It was, I think, a

fault of omission to exclude the apocryphal play of "Lust's Dominion"

from a place in the appendix: it was, I am certain, a fault of

commission to admit instead of it the much bepuffed and very puffy

rubbish of the late Mr. Home. That clever, versatile, and energetic

writer never went so far out of his depth or floundered so pitifully in

such perilous waters as when he ventured to put verses of his own into

the mouth of Christopher Marlowe. These errors we must all hope to see

rectified in a second issue of the text: and meantime we can but welcome

with all possible gratitude and applause the magnificent series of old

plays by unknown writers which we owe to the keen research and the fine

appreciation of Marlowe's latest editor. Of these I may find some future

occasion to speak: my present business is with the admirable poet who

has been promoted to the second place in Mr. Bullen's collection of the

English dramatists.

The selection of Middleton for so distinguished a place of honor may

probably not approve itself to the judgment of all experts in dramatic

literature. Charles Lamb, as they will all remember, would have advised

the editor "to begin with the collected plays of Heywood": which as yet,

like the plays of Dekker and of Chapman, remain unedited in any serious

or scholarly sense of the term. The existing reprints merely reproduce,

without adequate elucidation or correction, the corrupt and chaotic text

of the worst early editions: while Middleton has for upward of half a

century enjoyed the privilege denied to men who are usually accounted

his equals if not his superiors in poetic if not in dramatic genius.

Even for an editor of the ripest learning and the highest ability there

is comparatively little to do where Mr. Dyce has been before him in the

field. However, we must all give glad and grateful welcome to a new

edition of a noble poet who has never yet received his full meed of

praise and justice: though our gratitude and our gladness may be

quickened and dilated by the proverbial sense of further favors to come.

The first word of modern tribute to the tragic genius of Thomas

Middleton was not spoken by Charles Lamb. Four years before the

appearance of the priceless volume which established his fame forever

among all true lovers of English poetry by copious excerpts from five

of his most characteristic works, Walter Scott, in a note on the

fifty-sixth stanza of the second fytte of the metrical romance of "Sir

Tristrem," had given a passing word of recognition to the "horribly

striking" power of "some passages" in Middleton's masterpiece: which

was first reprinted eleven years later, in the fourth volume of Dilke's

_Old Plays_. Lamb, surprisingly enough, has given not a single extract

from that noble tragedy: it was reserved for Leigh Hunt, when speaking

of its author, to remark that "there is one character of his (De Flores

in 'The Changeling') which, for effect at once tragical, probable, and

poetical, surpasses anything I know of in the drama of domestic life."

The praise is not a whit too high; the truth could not have been better

said.

The play with which Mr. Bullen, altering the arrangement adopted by Mr.

Dyce, opens his edition of Middleton, is a notable example of the best

and the worst qualities which distinguish or disfigure the romantic

comedy of the Shakespearean age. The rude and reckless composition, the

rough intrusion of savorless farce, the bewildering combinations of

incident and the far more bewildering fluctuations of character--all the

inconsistencies, incongruities, incoherences of the piece are forgotten

when the reader remembers and reverts to the passages of exquisite and

fascinating beauty which relieve and redeem the utmost errors of

negligence and haste. To find anything more delightful, more satisfying

in its pure and simple perfection of loveliness, we must turn to the

very best examples of Shakespeare's youthful work. Nay, it must be

allowed that in one or two of the master's earliest plays--in "Two

Gentlemen of Verona," for instance--we shall find nothing comparable for

charm and sincerity of sweet and passionate fancy with such enchanting

verses as these:

O happy persecution, I embrace thee

With an unfettered soul! So sweet a thing

It is to sigh upon the rack of love,

Where each calamity is groaning witness

Of the poor martyr's faith. I never heard

Of any true affection, but 'twas nipt

With care, that, like the caterpillar, eats

The leaves off the spring's sweetest book, the rose.

Love, bred on earth, is often nursed in hell:

By rote it reads woe, ere it learn to spell.

Again: the "secure tyrant, but unhappy lover," whose prisoner and rival

has thus expressed his triumphant resignation, is counselled by his

friend to "go laugh and lie down," as not having slept for three nights;

but answers, in words even more delicious than his supplanter's:

Alas, how can I? he that truly loves

Burns out the day in idle fantasies;

And when the lamb bleating doth bid good-night

Unto the closing day, then tears begin

To keep quick time unto the owl, whose voice

Shrieks like the bellman in the lover's ears:

Love's eye the jewel of sleep, O, seldom wears!

The early lark is wakened from her bed,

Being only by love's plaints disquieted;

And, singing in the morning's ear, she weeps,

Being deep in love, at lovers' broken sleeps:

But say a golden slumber chance to tie

With silken strings the cover of love's eye,

Then dreams, magician-like, mocking present

Pleasures, whose fading leaves more discontent.

Perfect in music, faultless in feeling, exquisite in refined simplicity

of expression, this passage is hardly more beautiful and noble than one

or two in the play which follows. "The Phoenix" is a quaint and homely

compound of satirical realism in social studies with Utopian invention

in the figure of an ideal prince, himself a compound of Harun-al-Rashid

and "Albert the Good," who wanders through the play as a detective in

disguise, and appears in his own person at the close to discharge in

full the general and particular claims of justice and philanthropy. The

whole work is slight and sketchy, primitive if not puerile in parts, but

easy and amusing to read; the confidence reposed by the worthy monarch

in noblemen of such unequivocal nomenclature as Lord Proditor,

Lussurioso, and Infesto, is one of the signs that we are here still on

the debatable borderland between the old Morality and the new Comedy--a

province where incarnate vices and virtues are seen figuring and

posturing in what can scarcely be called masquerade. But the two fine

soliloquies of Phoenix on the corruption of the purity of law (act i.

scene iv.) and the profanation of the sanctity of marriage (act ii.

scene ii.) are somewhat riper and graver in style, with less admixture

of rhyme and more variety of cadence, than the lovely verses above

quoted. Milton's obligation to the latter passage is less direct than

his earlier obligation to a later play of Middleton's from which he

transferred one of the most beautiful as well as most famous images in

"Lycidas": but his early and intimate acquaintance with Middleton had

apparently (as Mr. Dyce seems to think[1]) left in the ear of the blind

old poet a more or less distinct echo from the noble opening verses of

the dramatist's address to "reverend and honorable matrimony."

[Footnote 1: Mr. Dyce would no doubt have altered his opinion had he

lived to see the evidence adduced by the Director of the New Meltun

Society that the real author of "A Game at Chess" was none other than

John Milton himself, whose earliest poems had appeared the year before

the publication of that anti-papal satire. This discovery is only less

curious and precious than a later revelation which we must accept on the

same authority, that "Comus" was written by Sir John Suckling, "Paradise

Regained" by Lord Rochester, and "Samson Agonistes" by Elkanah Settle:

while on the other hand it may be affirmed with no less confidence that

Milton--who never would allow his name to be spelled right on the

title-page or under the dedication of any work published by him--owed

his immunity from punishment after the Restoration to the admitted fact

that he was the real author of Dryden's "Astraea Redux."]

In "Michaelmas Term" the realism of Middleton's comic style is no

longer alloyed or flavored with poetry or fancy. It is an excellent

Hogarthian comedy, full of rapid and vivid incident, of pleasant or

indignant humor. Its successor, "A Trick to Catch the Old One," is by

far the best play Middleton had yet written, and one of the best he ever

wrote. The merit of this and his other good comedies does not indeed

consist in any new or subtle study of character, any Shakespearean

creation or Jonsonian invention of humors or of men: the spendthrifts

and the misers, the courtesans and the dotards, are figures borrowed

from the common stock of stage tradition: it is the vivid variety of

incident and intrigue, the freshness and ease and vigor of the style,

the clear straightforward energy and vivacity of the action, that the

reader finds most praiseworthy in the best comic work of such ready

writers as Middleton and Dekker. The dialogue has sometimes touches of

real humor and flashes of genuine wit: but its readable and enjoyable

quality is generally independent of these. Very witty writing may be

very dreary reading, for want of natural animation and true dramatic

movement: and in these qualities at least the rough-and-ready work of

our old dramatists is seldom if ever deficient.

It is, however, but too probable that the reader's enjoyment may be

crossed with a dash of exasperation when he finds a writer of real

genius so reckless of fame and self-respect as the pressure of want or

the weariness of overwork seems but too often and too naturally to have

made too many of the great dramatic journeymen whose powers were half

wasted or half worn out in the struggle for bare bread. No other excuse

than this can be advanced for the demerit of Middleton's next comedy.

Had the author wished to show how well and how ill he could write at his

worst and at his best, he could have given no fairer proof than by the

publication of two plays issued under his name in the same year 1608.

"The Family of Love" is, in my judgment, unquestionably and incomparably

the worst of Middleton's plays: very coarse, very dull, altogether

distasteful and ineffectual. As a religious satire it is so utterly

pointless as to leave no impression of any definite folly or distinctive

knavery in the doctrine or the practice of the particular sect held up

by name to ridicule: an obscure body of feather-headed fanatics,

concerning whom we can only be certain that they were decent and

inoffensive in comparison with the yelling Yahoos whom the scandalous

and senseless license of our own day allows to run and roar about the

country unmuzzled and unwhipped.

There is much more merit in the broad comedy of "Your Five Gallants," a

curious burlesque study of manners and morals not generally commendable

for imitation. The ingenious and humorous invention which supplies a

centre for the picture and a pivot for the action is most singularly

identical with the device of a modern detective as recorded by the

greatest English writer of his day. "The Butcher's Story," told to

Dickens by the policeman who had played the part of the innocent young

butcher, may be profitably compared by lovers of detective humor with

the story of Fitsgrave--a "thrice worthy" gentleman who under the

disguise of a young gull fresh from college succeeds in circumventing

and unmasking the five associated swindlers of variously villanous

professions by whom a fair and amiable heiress is beleaguered and

befooled. The play is somewhat crude and hasty in construction, but full

of life and fun and grotesque variety of humorous event.

The first of Middleton's plays to attract notice from students of a

later generation, "A Mad World, My Masters," if not quite so thoroughly

good a comedy as "A Trick to Catch the Old One," must be allowed to

contain the very best comic character ever drawn or sketched by the

fertile and flowing pen of its author. The prodigal grandfather, Sir

Bounteous Progress, is perhaps the most life-like figure of a

good-humored and liberal old libertine that ever amused or scandalized

a tolerant or intolerant reader. The chief incidents of the action are

admirably humorous and ingenious; but the matrimonial part of the

catastrophe is something more than repulsive, and the singular

intervention of a real live succubus, less terrible in her seductions

than her sister of the "Contes Drolatiques," can hardly seem happy or

seasonable to a generation which knows not King James and his

Demonology.

Of the two poets occasionally associated with Middleton in the

composition of a play, Dekker seems usually to have taken in hand the

greater part, and Rowley the lesser part, of the composite poem

engendered by their joint efforts. The style of "The Roaring Girl" is

full of Dekker's peculiar mannerisms; slipshod and straggling metre,

incongruous touches or flashes of fanciful or lyrical expression,

reckless and awkward inversions, irrational and irrepressible outbreaks

of irregular and fitful rhyme. And with all these faults it is more

unmistakably the style of a born poet than is the usual style of

Middleton. Dekker would have taken a high place among the finest if not

among the greatest of English poets if he had but had the sense of

form--the instinct of composition. Whether it was modesty, indolence,

indifference, or incompetence, some drawback or shortcoming there was

which so far impaired the quality of his strong and delicate genius that

it is impossible for his most ardent and cordial admirer to say or think

of his very best work that it really does him justice--that it

adequately represents the fulness of his unquestionable powers. And yet

it is certain that Lamb was not less right than usual when he said that

Dekker "had poetry enough for anything." But he had not constructive

power enough for the trade of a playwright--the trade in which he spent

so many weary years of ill-requited labor. This comedy in which we first

find him associated with Middleton is well written and well contrived,

and fairly diverting--especially to an idle or an uncritical reader:

though even such an one may suspect that the heroine here represented as

a virginal virago must have been in fact rather like Dr. Johnson's fair

friend Bet Flint; of whom the Great Lexicographer "used to say that she

was generally slut and drunkard; occasionally whore and thief" (Boswell,

May 8, 1781). The parallel would have been more nearly complete if Moll

Cutpurse "had written her own Life in verse," and brought it to Selden

or Bishop Hall with a request that he would furnish her with a preface

to it.

The plays of Middleton are not so properly divisible into tragic and

comic as into realistic and romantic--into plays of which the mainspring

is essentially prosaic or photographic, and plays of which the

mainspring is principally fanciful or poetical. Two only of the former

class remain to be mentioned: "Anything for a Quiet Life" and "A Chaste

Maid in Cheapside." There is very good stuff in the plot or groundwork

of the former, but the workmanship is hardly worthy of the material, Mr.

Bullen ingeniously and plausibly suggests the partnership of Shirley in

this play: but the conception of the character in which he discerns a

likeness to the touch of the lesser dramatist is happier and more

original than such a comparison would indicate. The young stepmother

whose affectation of selfish levity and grasping craft is really

designed to cure her husband of his infatuation, and to reconcile him

with the son who regards her as his worst enemy, is a figure equally

novel, effective, and attractive. The honest shopkeeper and his shrewish

wife may remind us again of Dickens by their points of likeness to Mr.

and Mrs. Snagsby; though the reformation of the mercer's jealous vixen

is brought about by more humorous and less tragical means than the

repentance of the law-stationer's "little woman." George the apprentice,

through whose wit and energy this happy consummation becomes possible,

is a very original and amusing example of the young Londoner of the

period. But there is more humor, though very little chastity, in the

"Chaste Maid"; a play of quite exceptional freedom and audacity, and

certainly one of the drollest and liveliest that ever broke the bounds

of propriety or shook the sides of merriment.

The opening of "More Dissemblers Besides Women" is as full at once of

comic and of romantic promise as the upshot of the whole is

unsatisfactory--a most lame and impotent conclusion. But some of the

dialogue is exquisite; full of flowing music and gentle grace, of ease

and softness and fancy and spirit; and the part of a poetic or romantic

Joseph Surface, as perfect in the praise of virtue as in the practice of

vice, is one of Middleton's really fine and happy inventions. In the

style of "The Widow" there is no less fluency and facility: it is

throughout identical with that of Middleton's other comedies in metre; a

style which has so many points in common with Fletcher's as to make the

apocryphal attribution of a share in this comedy to the hand of the

greater poet more plausible than many other ascriptions of the kind. I

am inclined nevertheless to agree with Mr. Bullen's apparent opinion

that the whole credit of this brilliant play may be reasonably assigned

to Middleton; and especially with his remark that the only scene in

which any resemblance to the manner of Ben Jonson can be traced by the

most determined ingenuity of critical research is more like the work of

a pupil than like a hasty sketch of the master's. There is no lack of

energetic invention and beautiful versification in another comedy of

adventure and intrigue, "No Wit, No Help Like a Woman's": the unpleasant

or extravagant quality of certain incidents in the story is partially

neutralized or modified by the unfailing charm of a style worthy of

Fletcher himself in his ripest and sweetest stage of poetic comedy.

But high above all the works yet mentioned there stands and will stand

conspicuous while noble emotion and noble verse have honor among English

readers the pathetic and heroic play so memorably appreciated by Charles

Lamb, "A Fair Quarrel." It would be the vainest and emptiest

impertinence to offer a word in echo of his priceless and imperishable

praise. The delicate nobility of the central conception on which the

hero's character depends for its full relief and development should be

enough to efface all remembrance of any defect or default in moral

taste, any shortcoming on the aesthetic side of ethics, which may be

detected in any slighter or hastier example of the poet's invention. A

man must be dull and slow of sympathies indeed who cannot respond in

spirit to that bitter cry of chivalrous and manful agony at sense of the

shadow of a mother's shame:

Quench, my spirit,

And out with honor's naming lights within thee!

Be dark and dead to all respects of manhood!

I never shall have use of valor more.

Middleton has no second hero like Captain Ager: but where is there

another so thoroughly noble and lovable among all the characters of all

the dramatists of his time but Shakespeare?

The Age of Shakespeare · 第 8 / 16 段