An outline of humor: Being a true chronicle from prehistoric ages to the twentieth century
History
An outline of humor: Being a true chronicle from prehistoric ages to the twentieth century
Wit and humor
_Shallow._ The same Sir John, the very same: I saw him break
Schoggan’s head at the court-gate, when he was a crack, not thus
high; and the very same day did I fight with one Sampson Stockfish, a
fruiterer, behind Gray’s-inn. O, the mad days that I have spent! and to
see how many of mine old acquaintances are dead!
_Silence._ We shall all follow, cousin.
_Shallow._ Certain, ’tis certain, very sure, very sure: death (as
the Psalmist saith) is certain to all, all shall die.--How a good yoke
of bullocks at Stamford fair?
_Silence._ Truly cousin, I was not there.
_Shallow._ Death is certain. Is old Double of your town living yet?
_Silence._ Dead, sir.
_Shallow._ Dead! see, see! he drew a good bow; and dead? he shot
a fine shoot. John of Gaunt loved him well, and betted much money on
his head. Dead! he would have clapped i’ th’ clout at twelve score; and
carried you a forehand shaft a fourteen and a half, that it would have
done a man’s heart good to see.--How a score of ewes now?
_Silence._ Thereafter as they be: a score of good ewes may be
worth ten pounds.
_Shallow._ And is old Double dead?
* * * * *
There is not anything more characteristic than this in all Shakespeare.
A finer sermon on mortality was never preached. We see the frail
condition of human life, and the weakness of the human understanding
in Shallow’s reflections on it; who, while the past is sliding
from beneath his feet, still clings to the present. The meanest
circumstances are shown through an atmosphere of abstraction that
dignifies them: their very insignificance makes them more affecting,
for they instantly put a check on our aspiring thoughts, and remind us
that, seen through that dim perspective, the difference between the
great and little, the wise and foolish, is not much. ‘One touch of
nature makes the whole world kin’: and old Double, though his exploits
had been greater, could but have had his day. There is a pathetic
_naïveté_ mixed up with Shallow’s commonplace reflections and
impertinent digressions. The reader laughs (as well he may) in reading
the passage, but he lays down the book to think. The wit, however
diverting, is social and humane. But this is not the distinguishing
characteristic of wit, which is generally provoked by folly, and spends
its venom upon vice.
The fault, then, of Shakespeare’s comic Muse is, in my opinion, that it
is too good-natured and magnanimous. It mounts above its quarry. It is
‘apprehensive, quick, forgetive, full of nimble, fiery, and delectable
shapes’: but it does not take the highest pleasure in making human
nature look as mean, as ridiculous, and contemptible as possible. It is
in this respect, chiefly, that it differs from the comedy of a later,
and (what is called) a more refined period.”
_FROM HENRY IV, PART I_
_Enter_ HENRY _Prince of Wales and_ SIR JOHN FALSTAFF.
_Falstaff._ Now, Hal, what time of day is it, lad?
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account