New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1880-12-29
NEW PUBLICATIONS.
COETUF,S FAUST.

Professor BlackleS translation OF O0etnes fnaseT
piece is, in its new dress, a rather appetzins
piece of plain boekmakine. but in crossing
the ancient Scottish frontier 1T got beyond
its artistic depth, just as Professor Blacki'
himself did when he carried his vigorous
but somewhat careless mus into Goethes pro
found ard smoothly flowing verse. In crossing the
ocean his newly dressed-up lines have come to mos
inhospitable shores; to the home of Bayard Taylor
who made Faust" an American classic, current IN
the English-speaking world-Scotland. perhaps
excepted. For Professor Backie. who is dstin-
gu,shed scholar introduced Faust to his coun-
frymen some forty years ago. when bis transla-
ton had right to dispute the first place with
two three other versions not quite 81
unpublished, but less spirited The world ia
alleged 10 move. But it would occur to few tena.
cious Scotchmen. having once made up their minds
they first in a certain thing, that they could
ever be less than first in that particular The Eng
lish mind has been accused of taking insular
view of its own prominence. But the Scotch mind
Is douby nsuiar in ciIgng to a once-formed preju-
dice; its view is taken, it were. from an island
within sand. And if we question the exact JUS
tice of the saying that it takes surgical operation
to get joke into a Scotchman's head it is nearer
true that nothing short Of anat Omical dissection
Will let precOnception out.
So when Professor Blackie says IN his preface that,
after years OF decentralization Of his translation
as juvenile performance" he was impelled by the
continued praise of people 10 give il thorough re-
vision and second edition. is forced to believe
that EdiniurPh's walls still repeat the echoes Of
forty years ago 1t is not necessary to claim one
might without extravaganza, that Bayard Taylors
translation viii never lac surpassed i'll English, to be
surprised the temerty of Professor Biacle IN re-
issuinp his version, for it must be assumed that he
is acquainted with Tay lors work though 1T is doubt
Iu If he can he self-cutcal enough to wherei n
; his own compares uniayoTaby with ii. In his pre-
face and preliminary remarks he refers TO two
translations - Hayward's literal prose version.
which be does not regard as a rival, and
the metrcal translation of his friend Sir Theodore
Martin, which does not seriously rival any version
except Professor Blackics But the English critics
have reminded the latter that there Is an American
version winch must now be taken as the standard
Of comparison. However Professor Blackie's pur-
pose must NOT he taken too seriously. He is merely
putting his poetic house in order so far his taste
will allow He as felt thai his early work was de-
fcient in dignity aud grace. He takes an interest
in il as part Of himself and would like to leave
corrected copy with Time, who, it IS to be feared
Will in this case earn reputation for being ruth
lees In the same spirit Professor Baclie has just
issued a second edition OF his Lays and Legends
If Ancient Greece" from which the miscellaneous
poems have been excluded. His muse appears to
better advantage here than in his Faust" far as
finish is concerned but she is deficient in fancy, not
20 say Inauguration, and the same themes have Jared
much better in other hands.
III in no o. her way, Professor Backies new edition
Erves useful purpose in stimulating public inter
,st in Bayard TaylOrs matchless translation. 1t is
doubtful if very large number of American
readers awake to the beauties and lasting signii
eance of this work. And ii must be confessed that
even among scholars. TO whom the grace and mean
ng of Goethes creation accessible in the original
The enjoyment of Faust is something like an &C.
suired taste. Goethe's genius was not universal in
the sense that Shakespeare's was, but in some
respects 1T approaches enough to make
Shakespeares seem superbuman indeed. In
touching upon common everyday life Goethe is
closely real while Shakespeare is truthful,y ideal
And III the domain of philosophy and the super
natural Goethe is metaphysically ideal, while
Shakespeare is ideally natural or real. Hence
SbakespeaIes characters are more varied and vital
and poetic in their common thoughts and actions
And III their godlike or heroic and demoniac life
they make philosophy and the supernatural cor
,oreal in themselves. and therefore more ineligible
10 the masses Goethe must needs have his spirits OF
Good and Evil, angels. and even the abstract
quantities of philosophy, systematically ON the
scene as fois to the mind and conscience OF his
really human characters. Shakespeare, perhaps,
would not have found MephistopheIeS necessary in
be tragedy of Faust" When he wants
exterior active spirit of evil he finds thoroughly
human IdGo equal to his purpose He has his ghosts
witches aud spirits but they talk less and are more
like the vague beings of human superstition.
This is a rough endeavor to explain why Faust,
rs whole, does not appeal directly TO the under
standing and taste of the English mind and the
explanation certainly does some violence TO the
sxigcncies of Goethe's plan, in which per-
sonal Hephistopheles could not be dispensed
with Readers in general impressed only by
he episode of Gretchen or Margaret, which has
strong human interest, and forms very
small part of the work Shakespeare, we fancy
would have made Gretchen larger part OF the
drama, and, in the main, have woven the
and the supernatural into the human
wool, instead of representing them so largely by
speaking symbols HIS Gretchen would have been
how simple how tender how lovable. how pitiable
how godlike to save-but Goethe's is all of these
with the difference that she dwarfed in every
attribute as result Of the peculiar domestic slavery
OF German women. Shakespeare would have made
her free and universal. Nevertheless, who would
want Goethe's Faust " different from what it is
IL is evident from what Professor Backie
saws depIeciatory Of the second part OF
" Faust" perhaps as an apology for not
i'll that he is not i'll sympathy
with the philosophic and supernatural sides
of Goethe's genius. And the same thing is more
evident from his Interpretation of the first part for
if he really comprehended Goethes depth and scope
fer himself, the stream of thought narrowed and
Swallowed amentaby in issuing from the trans
lator's mind. He lacks penetration ana
iiA shading in dealing with work that is
IIa
by slurring them, and for that purpose uses gene
rajties that cannot receive the doubtful aud hack
neyed qualification of "glitterng." When it suits
his mood to be literal he is serve to stiffness. and
when he trusts to his pnions he generally flies
too near the ground. He is deficient most notice
ably in finish, easy grace and musical dignity, while
The most apparent qualities of Goetbes verse