That I may not write a decrescendo about the designs for "The Tower of
London," I begin with their faults. Cruikshank's Simon Renard is too
darkling a Spaniard even for a staged Spain, and even Lady Jane Grey's
waist should have been made rather larger than her throat. "Mere
skeletons in farthingales," quoth "The Athenæum" of Cruikshank's Queen
Mary, Jane and Elizabeth. To what extent defective figure-drawing
diminishes the proper force of Cruikshank's designs the reader may judge
by the reproduction of _The Death Warrant_, which is presented as a
frank example of his melodramatic invention. The masked assassin peers
at the Spanish Ambassador through the window of the chamber of the Tower
where the little princes were murdered, and where the pen that has just
doomed Lady Jane Dudley hovers in Queen Mary's hand. Her hound is an
incarnate presentiment and the gods of old Drury could have asked no
more. There are, however, far finer plates in the book. In Underhill,
the Hot Gospeller, burning at the stake, his finger nails riveted to his
bare shoulders while he bawls his last agony, Cruikshank shows the
longevity of the Marian crime--the crime of creating fears and
loathings, for here we have absolutely a reflective shudder, a naked
confidence from an abominable place which we thought was cleansed by
merciful years. No other figure in the gallery of Cruikshank's "Tower"
is so vital as this dying man, but he drew a handsome Wyat, an
executioner as repulsive as a ghoul, and groups--for instance Elizabeth
and her escort on the steps of Traitor's Gate--which a stage manager of
melodrama might like to imitate.
Partly contemporaneous with "The Tower of London" was Ainsworth's "Guy
Fawkes" (1840-1) with Cruikshankian etchings, which are as little
serviceable to the dignity of a brave fanatic as the effigies exhibited
by boys on the fifth of November. Cruikshank had drawn a typical effigy
of Guy for "The Every-Day Book" of 1826; twelve years later came his
ludicrous _Guys in Council_, but being required in 1840 to produce a
serious Guy he only succeeded in being operatic. In one of his etchings
the rigidity of Guy's cloak suggests that the garment is a
"bath-cabinet" in occupation; in another a celestial visitor resembles a
Dutch doll. Such failures are not to be explained by a desire to annoy
the publisher of "Guy Fawkes," Richard Bentley, whom Cruikshank bitterly
attacked in 1842. Cruikshank could and did produce etchings in a hurry
for stories which he had not read, by way of expressing his dislike for
a contract which survived his approval of it; but he could also be
befooled by his own solemnity.
[Illustration: THE DUEL IN TOTHILL FIELDS ("The Miser's Daughter"). From
"Ainsworth's Magazine," 1842.]
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.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account