The Mirror of Literature, Amusement, and Instruction. Volume 19, No. 552, June 16, 1832 — John Shaqi
The Mirror of Literature, Amusement, and Instruction. Volume 19, No. 552, June 16, 1832Various
History
The Mirror of Literature, Amusement, and Instruction. Volume 19, No. 552, June 16, 1832
Various
Popular literature -- Great Britain -- Periodicals
To return to Shakspeare. The objections to his style, which are many,
especially to a more modern reader, are excusable from several causes.
The writers of the Elizabethan age and previously, were all of them very
coarse in their mode of expression, and the dramatists not very delicate
in their plots, though in doing so they did but obey the dictates of
fashion and the bad taste of the times. Even prolixity and
circumlocution were countenanced, and the insufferable conceits we meet
with in the poems of Donne, Cowley, and others, were highly relished in
those days. Euphaeism (mentioned so often by Sir W. Scott in _The
Abbot_,) was also then in vogue, and all these various peculiarities of
style, language, &c. were indispensable in all that was offered to the
public. Shakspeare's fondness and propensity for punning may claim the
same excuse, viz. "the hoary head and furrowed face of custom;" yet
there are some of these puns interspersed through his works, which are
sad blots indeed to our modern fastidious eyes, and that we could well
wish to see expunged; such a one now is this:
"Say, '_pardon_,' king, let pity teach thee now."
"Speak it in French, king, say, '_pardonnez moi_.'"
"A quibble (says Dr. Johnson,) gave him such delight that he was content
to purchase it by the sacrifice of reason, of propriety, and even of
truth; a quibble was to him the fatal Cleopatra for which he lost the
world, and was content to lose it!"
Schiller, who is styled "the Shakspeare of Germany," and who is so
ardently admired at the present day, has indeed taken our author for his
model; he has in many respects been too servile a student, for his
plagiarisms are both close and numerous. Thus, any one acquainted with
his celebrated play of _The Robbers_, will readily recollect that the
whole story is built upon the secondary plot in _King Lear_, between the
Duke of Gloucester and his two sons; one of these who is a natural
child, and a villain withal, contrives to poison the mind of the father,
and to eject the legitimate son from his favour; it will be found
exactly thus in Schiller's famous story of "The Robbers." It must be
acknowledged, however, that foreigners in general have never idolized
Shakspeare, or paid him that devoted adoration, which his countrymen
both pay and think him entitled to. Hear Voltaire's overdrawn and even
paltry criticism of _Hamlet_. "The tragedy of _Hamlet_ is a gross and
barbarous composition, which would not be supported by the lowest
populace in France and Italy. Hamlet goes mad in the second act, Ophelia
in the third; he takes the father of his mistress for a rat, and runs
him through the body. In despair, the heroine drowns herself. Her grave
is dug on the stage, while the grave-diggers enter into a conversation
_suitable_ (!) to such low wretches, and play, as it were, with dead
men's bones! Hamlet answers their abominable stuff, with follies equally
disgusting. Hamlet, with his father and mother-in-law, drink together
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