Part 2 (2/2)

SHAKESPEARE'S LYRICS

August 25, 1894 Shakespeare's Lyrics

In their re-issue of _The Aldine Poets_, Messrs George Bell & Sons haveis farthan the old; and in some cases, where the notes and introductory memoirs had fallen out of date, new editors have been set to work, with satisfactory results It is therefore no small disappointment to find that the latest volume, ”The Poems of Shakespeare,” is but a reprint from stereotyped plates of the Rev

Alexander Dyce's text, notes and memoir

The Rev A Dyce

Now, of the Rev Alexander Dyce it may be fearlessly asserted that his criticism is not for all time Even had he been less prone to accept the word of John Payne Collier for gospel; even had Shakespearian criticis the last quarter of a century, yet there is that in the Rev Alexander Dyce's treat his word as final As a test of his aesthetic judgs from the Plays of Shakespeare” hich this volume concludes It had been as well, in a work of this sort, to include all the songs; but he gives us a selection only, and an uncole principle of taste underlying it On what principle, for instance, can a”Coht_, and o?”; or include As from _As you Like It_, and omit the incomparable ”It was a lover and his lass”?

Or what but stark insensibility can explain the o ”Roses, their sharp spines being gone,” that opens _The Two noble Kinsmen_? But stay: the Rev

Alexander Dyce may attribute this last pair to Fletcher ”Take, O take those lips away” certainly occurs (with a second and inferior stanza) in Fletcher's _The bloody Brother_, first published in 1639; but Dyce gives no hint of his belief that Fletcher wrote it We are, therefore, left to conclude that Dyce thought it unworthy of a place in his collection On _The Two noble Kinsmen_ (first published in 1634) Dyce is more explicit In a footnote to the Mee of the first edition of Fletcher's _Two noble Kinsmen_ attributes the play partly to Shakespeare; I do not think our poet had any share in its coreat authority in such matters) inclines to a different opinion” When ”Mr C Lamb” and the Rev Alexander Dyce hold opposite opinions, it need not be difficult to choose And surely, if internal evidence count for anything at all, the lines

”Maiden pinks, of odour faint, Daisies smell-less, yet most quaint, And sweet thy”

or--

”Not an angel of the air, Bird melodious, or bird fair, Be absent hence”

--ritten by Shakespeare and not by Fletcher Nor is it any detraction from Fletcher to take this view Shakespeare his hardly finer than Fletcher wrote at his best--hardly finer, for instance, than that nificent pair from _Valentinian_ Only the note of Shakespeare happens to be different from the note of Fletcher: and it is Shakespeare's note--the note of

”The cowslips tall her pensioners be”

(also omitted by the inscrutable Dyce) and of

”When daisies pied, and violets blue, And lady-smocks all silver-white, And cuckoo buds of yellow hue Do paint the ht ”

--that we hear repeated in this Bridal Song[A] And if this be so, it is but another proof for us that Dyce was not a critic for all time

Nor is the accent of finality conspicuous in such passages as this froht had heard that Shakespeare 'was a much better poet than player'; and Rowe tells us that soon after his aduished, 'if not as an extraordinary actor, yet as an excellent writer' Perhaps his execution did not equal his conception of a character, but we may rest assured that he rote the incomparable instructions to the player in _Hamlet_ would never offend his audience by an injudicious perfor of this order than that it has passed out of fashi+on, and that soht reasonably have been looked for in a volue The public owes Messrs Bell & Sons a heavy debt; but at the same time the public has a peculiar interest in such a series as that of _The Aldine Poets_ A purchaser who finds several of these books to his mind, and is thereby induced to embark upon the purchase of the entire series,voluo back: and to o volumes is to spoil his set And I contend that the action taken by Messrs Bell & Sons in i several of their more or less obsolete editions will only be entirely praiseworthy if we may take it as an earnest of their desire to place the whole series on a level with contee and criticism

Nor can anyone who kno much the industry and enthusiasm of Dyce did, in his day, for the study of Shakespeare, do e that while, viewed historically, Dyce's criticism is entirely respectable, it happens to be a trifle belated in the year 1894 The points of difference between him and Charles Lamb are perhaps too obvious to need indication; but we enius, belongs to all tis to a period It was a period of rapid development, no doubt--how rapid wedown Volu to that ie on Shakespeare's poems which Chalmers put forth in the year 1810:--

”The peremptory decision of Mr Steevens on the merits of these poems must not be omitted 'We have not reprinted the Sonnets, etc, of Shakespeare, because the strongest Act of Parliament that could be framed would fail to compel readers into their service Had Shakespeare produced no other works than these, his name would have reached us with as little celebrity as time has conferred upon that of Thoant sonnetteer' Severe as this eneral conclusion which modern critics have formed

Still, it cannot be denied that there arehis Sonnets, and in the Rape of Lucrece; enough, it is hoped, to justify their ads, etc, from his plays have been added, and a few smaller pieces selected by Mr Ellis”

No comment can add to, or take from, the stupendousness of this And yet it was the criticism proper to its time ”I have only to hope,”

writes Chalmers in his preface, ”that my criticisms will not be found destitute of candour, or ied principles of taste” Indeed they are not They were the right opinions for Chalht opinions for Dyce: and if, as we hope, ours is a larger appreciation of Shakespeare, we probably hold it by no eneration, derived through the chastening experiences of our grandfathers That, however, is no reason e should not insist on having such editions of Shakespeare as fulfil our requireure