Part 21 (1/2)

In this connection it is natural to think of the 'unhappy period' which has so often been surmised in Shakespeare's life There is not time here to expand the summary remarks made elsewhere on this subject; but I may refer a little more fully to a persistent is which we have reason to assign to the years 1602-6[11] There is surely so certain 'vices of the blood,' regarding drunkenness and sexual corruption It does not lie in Shakespeare's _view_ of these vices, but in an undertone of disgust

Read Hae about the habitual drunkenness of his uncle, or even Cassio's words about his casual excess; then think of the tone of _Henry IV_ or _Twelfth Night_ or the _Te And if you are inclined to ascribe it wholly to the fact that _Haes in thealley in _Antony and Cleopatra_ The intent of that scene is terrible enough, but in the tone there is no ht_ As to the other ression of lovers like Claudio and Juliet, nor even light-hearted irregularities like those of Cassio: here Shakespeare's speech has its habitual tone But, when he is dealing with lechery and corruption, the undercurrent of disgust seems to become audible Is it not true that in the plays from _Hamlet_ to _Timon_ that subject, in one shape or another, is continually before us; that the intensity of loathing in Hae about his mother's lust is unexampled in Shakespeare; that the treath occasionally purely humorous, is on the whole quite unlike the treatment in _Henry IV_ or even in the brothel scenes of _Pericles_;[12] that while _Troilus and Cressida_ is full of disgust and contempt, there is not a trace of either in _Antony and Cleopatra_, though soh; that this same tone is as plainly heard in the unquestioned parts of _Tiainst female lechery when he speaks to Alcibiades and his harlots, there is no apparent reason why Lear in his exalted madness should choose this subject for siood apothecary, to sweeten ination'--it is a fainter echo of this exclamation that one seegesting that it is ards drunkenness due in the least, to any private experience of Shakespeare's It ht well be connected with it only in so far as a ht be unusually sensitive to the ugly aspects of life But, if we do not take the second series of sonnets to be purely fanciful, we shall think it probable that to soin to the experience depicted in them[13]

There remain the sonnets addressed to the friend Even if it were possible to discuss the general question about them here, it would be needless; for I accept alreatly indebted to, the views put forward by Mr Beeching in his admirable edition, to which I may therefore refer my hearers[14] I intend only to state the main reason why I believe the sonnets to be, substantially, what they purport to be, and then to touch upon one or two of the points where they seeht on Shakespeare's personality

The sonnets to the friend are, so far as we know, unique in Renaissance sonnet literature in being a prolonged and varied record of the intense affection of an older friend for a younger, and of other feelings arising from their relations They have no real parallel in any series iue, or in occasional sonnets to patrons or patron-friends couched in the high-flown language of the tiht not, by itself, to convince us that they are personal The author of the plays could, I make no doubt, have written the ination and without ever having felt theination Nor is there any but an aesthetic reason why he should not have done so if he had wished But an aesthetic reason there is; and this is the decisive point No capable poet,to produce aa story like that of these sonnets, or, even if he did, of treating it as they treat it The story is very odd and unattractive Such capacities as it has are but slightly developed It is left obscure, and soible to us because they contain allusions of which we canNow all this is perfectly natural if the story is substantially a real story of Shakespeare himself and of certain other persons; if the sonnets ritten froed, and sometimes in reference to particular incidents; and if they ritten _for_ one or reater number for only one), and perhaps in a few cases for other friends,--written, that is to say, for people who knew the details and incidents of which we are ignorant But it is all unnatural, well-nigh incredibly unnatural, if, with the ard the sonnets as a free product of , then, that the persons of the story, with their relations, are real, I would add only two re see that there is sufficient evidence of his standing to Shakespeare and the 'rival' poet or poets in the position of a literary patron; while, even if he did, it appears to e of many of the sonnets as that of interested flattery And in the second place I should be inclined to push even further Mr Beeching's view on another point It is clear that the young man was considerably superior to the actor-draentle to prove that he was entleman of some note, more than plain 'Mr W

H' (for these, on the obvious though not compulsory interpretation of the dedication, seem to have been his initials) It is remarkable besides that, while the earlier sonnets show much deference, the later show very little, so little that, when the writer, finding that he has pained his young friend by neglecting hiiven, he writes almost, if not quite, as an equal Read, for example, sonnets 109, 110, 120, and ask whether it is probable that Shakespeare is addressing here a great nobleh the question is not of much importance) that the sonnets are, to quote Meres's phrase,[16] his 'sonnets a his private friends'

If then there is, as it appears, no obstacle of anythe sonnets as substantially what they purport to be, we may naturally look in them for personal traits (and, indeed, to repeat a reht still expect to find such traits even if we knew the sonnets to be purely dra inferences we have to bear in mind what is implied by the qualification 'substantially' We have to remember that _some_ of these poems may be mere exercises of art; that all of them are poems, and not letters, much less _affidavits_; that they are Elizabethan poee of deference, and also of affection, is to our ant and fantastic;[17] and that in Elizabethan plays friends openly express their love for one another as English made, however, on account of these facts, the sonnets will still leave two strong ily sensitive to the charm of beauty, and that his love for his friend was, at least at one ti al Those who are surprised by the first of these traits must have read Shakespeare's dramas with very inactive norant of human nature We do not necessarily love best those of our relatives, friends, and acquaintances who please our eyes ulated his behaviour chiefly by the standard of beauty; but , of either sex and of any age, the better for being beautiful, and are not the least ashainning, like the writer of the sonnets, to feel tired and old, are apt to feel an increased and special pleasure in the beauty of the young[18] If we remeet, that Shakespeare was a particularly poetical being, we shall hardly be surprised that the beginning of this friendshi+p see in love; and, if we must needs praise and blae of trueexpressed in the sonnets, we can easily believe it to be characteristic of the man who made Valentine and Proteus, Brutus and Cassius, Horatio and Ha portrait of Antonio, ed, sad, and almost indifferent between life and death, but devoted to the young, brilliant spendthrift Bassanio; and who portrayed the sudden co Sebastian over the Antonio of _Twelfth Night_ 'If you will not murder me for your love, let me be your servant' Antonio is accused of piracy: he may lose his life if he is identified:

I have many enemies in Orsino's court, But, coer shall seeo

The adoration, the 'prostration,' of the writer of the sonnets is of one kind with this

I do not remember what critic uses the word 'prostration' It applies to Shakespeare's attitude only in some of the sonnets, but there it does apply, unless it is taken to suggest humiliation _That_ is the term used by Hallam, but chiefly in view of a particular point, nah he 'felt and bewailed,' the injury done hih I think we should substitute 'resent ly' for the mere 'resent,' I do not deny that the poet's attitude in thisas well as unpleasant to contemplate But Hallam's explanation of it as perhaps due to the exalted position of the friend, would e seeine the situation It is not easy to speak of it in public with the requisite frankness; but it is necessary to realise that, whatever the friend's rank ht be, he and the poet were intimate friends; that, manifestly, it was rather the mistress who seduced the friend than the friend the mistress; and that she was apparently a woman not ht readily be expected to be mistress to two men at one and the same time Anyone who realises this ' in one sense, and I cannot quarrel with hi' in respect of Shakespeare's relation to his friend; nor will he wonder much that the poet felt more pain than resent infinitely stranger in a play of Shakespeare's, and it may be symptomatic Ten Brink called attention to it Proteus actually offers violence to Sylvia, a spotless lady and the true love of his friend Valentine; and Valentine not only forgives hin Sylvia to him! The incident is to us so utterly preposterous that we find it hard to iine how the audience stood it; but, even if we conjecture that Shakespeare adopted it fro, we can hardly suppose that it was so absurd to him as it is to us[20] And it is not the Sonnets alone which lead us to suriveness was particularly attractive to hiiveness of a friend ather--and there is nothing in the plays or elsewhere to contradict the impression--that he would not be slow to resent the criticisers or the world, and that he bore himself towards them with a proud, if silent, self-sufficiency But, we surer as a flint bears fire; Who, ain;

and towards anyone so fondly loved as the friend of the Sonnets he was probably incapable of fierce or prolonged resentment

The Sonnets must not occupy us further; and I will not dwell on the indications they afford that Shakespeare sometimes felt bitterly both the social inferiority of his position as an actor,[21] and its influence on his own character; or that (as we have already conjectured) he may sometimes have played the fool in society, sometimes felt weary of life, and often was over-tired by work It is ti conjectures about what es of his about ht iood ear, he liked best the tongs and the bones; that he wondered, with Benedick, how sheeps-guts should hale souls out of men's bodies; and that he wrote the faht_ froination But it is futile to deal with scepticisument froe

assu therefore that Shakespeare was fond of music, I may draw attention to two points Al, tranquillising, or pensive influence It lulls killing care and grief of heart to sleep It soothes the sick and weary, and even makes them drowsy Hamlet calls for it in his hysterical excitement after the success of the play scene When it is hoped that Lear's long sleep will have carried his madness away, music is played as he awakes, apparently to increase the desired 'teht, and the dreamy happiness of needded lovers Al , refer, I believe, to 'the lofty instruments of _war_' These facts would alnificance if Shakespeare were a more modern poet Whether they have any, or have e

The second point is diminutive, but it may be connected with the first

The Duke in _Measure for Measure_ observes that ood provoke to harood to harm, we may recall as said (p 326) of the weaknesses of soly of music than Orsino; further, how he refers to music as 'the food of love,' and who it is that almost repeats the phrase

Give me some music: music, moody food Of us that trade in love:

--the words are Cleopatra's[22] Did Shakespeare as he wrote them remember, I wonder, the dark lady to whose reatly surprised to find in Shakespeare signs of the nineteenth century feeling for mountain scenery, but we can no more doubt that within certain limits he was sensitive to the beauty of nature than that he was fond of uess at any preferences here It is probably inevitable that the flowers most often mentioned should be the rose and the lily;[24] but hardly that the violet should corance of the violet should be spoken of more often even than that of the rose, and, it seems, with special affection This ht a sentimental fancy too; but poets, like other people, may have favourite flowers; that of Keats, we happen to knoas the violet

Again, if we may draw any conclusion from the frequency and the character of the allusions, the lark held for Shakespeare the place of honour a birds; and the lines,

Hark! hark! the lark at heaven's gate sings, And Phoebus gins arise,

est one reason for this The lark, as several other collocations shoas to him the bird of joy that welcomes the sun; and it can hardly be doubted that dawn and earlywas the time of day that ht and of ht is obvious; but we find very little tosun, and music at the close, As the last taste of sweets, is sweetest last;

and still less to prove that he felt the ht, the 'heavenliest hour' of a fae in _Don Juan_ There is a wonderful line in Sonnet 132,

And that full star that ushers in the even,

but I remember little else of the saht' only once, and in an unforgetable passage: