« ZurückWeiter »
imputed to any other cause than want of zeal for the due execution of the talk which I ventured to undertake.
The difficulties to be encountered by an editor of the works of Shakspeare, have been fo frequently ftated, and are so generally acknowledged, that it may seem unnecessary to conciliate the publick favour by this plea : but as these in my opinion have in some particulars been over-rated, and in others not sufficiently insisted on, and as the true state of the ancient copies of this poet's writings has never been laid before the publick, I shall consider the subject as if it had not been already discussed by preceding editors.
In the year 1756 Dr. Jolinion published the following excellent scheme of a new edition of Shakspeare's dramatick pieces, which he completed in
- When the works of Shakspeare are, after so many editions, again offered to the publick, it will doubtless be enquired , why Shakspeare stands in more need of critical alliance than any other of the English writers, and what are the deficiencies of the late attempts, which another editor may hope to supply.
is The business of him that republishes an ancient book is, to correct what is corrupt, and to explain what is obscure. To have a text corrupt in many places, and in many doubtful, is, among the authors that have written since the use of types, almost peculiar to Shakspeare. Most writers, by publishing their own works, prevent all various readings, and preclude all conjectural criticism, Books indeed are sometimes published after the
death of him who produced them, but they are better secured from corruptions than these unfortunate compositions. They fubfist in a single copy, written or revised by the author; and the faults of the printed volume can be only faults of one descent.
- But of the works of Shakspeare the condition has been far different: he fold them , not to be printed, but to be played. They were immediately copied for the actors, and multiplied by transcript after transcript, vitiated by the blunders of the penman, or changed by the affectation of the player; perhaps enlarged to introduce a jest, or mutilated to shorten the representation; and printed at last without the concurrence of the author, without the consent of the proprietor, from compilations made by chance or by stealth out of the separate parts written for the theatre and thus thrust into the world surreptitiously and hastily, they suffered another depravation from the ignorance and negligence of the printers, as every man who knows the state of the press in that age will readily conceive.
It is not easy for invention to bring together fo many caufes concurring to vitiate a text. No other author ever gave up his works to fortune and time with so little care; no books could be left in hands fo likely to injure them, as plays frequently acted, yet continued in manufcript: no other tranfcribers were likely to be so little qualified for their talk, as those who copied for the stage, at a time when the lower ranks of the people were uni. versally illiterate: no other editions were made from fraginents fo minutely broken, and so fortuitously re-united; and in no other age was the art of print. ing in such unskilful hands.
With the causes of corruption that make the revifal of Shakspeare's dramatick pieces necessary, may be enumerated the causes of obscurity, which may be partly imputed to his age, and partly to himself.
" When a writer outlives his contemporaries, and remains almost the only unforgotten name of a diftant time, he is neceffarily obscure. Every age has its modes of speech, and its cast of thought; which, though easily explained when there are many books to be compared with each other, become sometimes unintelligible, and always difficult, when there are no parallel passages that may conduce to their illustration. Shakspeare is the first considerable author of fublime or familiar dialogue in our language. Of the books which he read, and from which he formed his style, some perhaps have perished, and the rest are neglected. His imitations are therefore unnoted, his allusions are undiscovered, and many beauties, both of pleasantry and greatness, are lost with the objects to which they were united, as the figures vanish when the canvas has decayed.
" It is the great excellence of Shakspeare, that he drew his scenes from nature, and from life. He copied the manners of the world then passing before him, and has more allusions than other poets to the traditions and superstitions of the vulgar; which must therefore be traced before he can be understood.
" He wrote at a time when our poetical language was yet unformed, when the meaning of our phrases
was yet in fluctuation, when words were adopted at pleasure from the neighbouring languages, and ; while the Saxon was fill visibly mingled in our diction. The reader is therefore embarrassed at once with dead and with foreign languages, with obfoleteness and innovation. In that age, as in all others, fashion produced phraseology, which succeeding fashion swept away before its meaning was generally known, or sufficiently authorized: and in that. age, above all others, experiments were made upon our language, which distorted its combinations, and disturbed its uniformity.
“ If Shakspeare has difficulties above other writers, it is to be imputed to the nature of his work, which required the use of the common colloquial language, and consequently admitted many phrases allusive, elliptical, and proverbial, such as we speak and hear every hour without observing them; and of which, being now familiar, we do not suspect that they can ever grow uncouth, or that, being now obvious, they can ever seem re
“ These are the principal causes of the obscurity of Shakspeare; to which may be added that fullness of idea, which miglit sometimes load his words with more sentiment than they could conveniently convey, and that rapidity of imagination which might hurry him to a second thought before he had fully explained the firit. But my opinion is, that very few of his lines were difficult to his audience, and that he used fuch expressions as were then common, though the paucity of contemporary writers makes them now scem peculiar.
" Authors are often praised for improvement, or
hlamed for innovation, with very little justice, by those who read few other books of the same age. Addison himself has been so unsuccessful in enumerating the words with which Milton has enriched our language, as perhaps not to have named one of which Milton was the author: and Bentley has yet more unhappily praised him as the introducer of those elisions into English poetry, which had been used from the first essays of versification among us, and which Milton was indeed the last that practifed.
“ Another impediment, not the least vexatious to the commentator, is the exa&iness with which Shakspeare followed his author. Instead of dilating his thoughts into generalities, and expressing in cidents with poetical latitude, he often combines circumstances unnecessary to his main design, only because he happened to find them together. Such passages can be illustrated only by hiin who has read the same story in the very book which Shakfpeare consulted.
" He that undertakes an edition of Shakspeare, has all these difficulties to encounter, and all these obstructions to remove.
“ The corruptions of the text will be corrected, by a careful collation of the oldest copies, by which it is hoped that many restorations may yet be made; at leait it will be necellary to collect and note the variations as materials for future criticks, for it very often happens that a wrong reading has ailinity to the right.
" In this part all the present editions are apparently and intentionally defective. The criticks did not so much as wish to facilitate the labour of those