Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1884-08-16
Shakespeare,s personality.
Richard Grant White in August Atlantic

careful consideration OF what we know
about Shakespeare the man leads to the con-
cusion that he was one Of those who play to
win-aiways, the game of life or any other
game. Success, the getting and keeping of
his own, were the ends he kept constantly in
view. To this he brought an unequalled knowl-
edge of men and things, and an ability in affairs
which considering the limited field Of his &C.
ton in this respect) seems to have been not in
ferior to his other personal gifts. He presents
to US the strange and admirable union of q
good manager and great poet, an economist
and writer of felton, player and man of
thrift. Like many other men-can we not7say
like most other men?-vastly his interiors he
had two natures: Shakespeare the poet was one
| man; Shakespeare outside the realm of poetry
was another man. The two orbits in which his
dual nature revOlved did not overlap; they did
not even touch. Unlike and far above all the
rest of the world in some things In this he was
like many of the humblest Of his worshipers
Now, it is sadly sure that success in life the
success which consists chiefly In rising from
poverty to wealth, is, with very rare exceptions,
the accompaniment and the consequence of a
certain hardness OF nature. successful men are
those who make hard bargains with the world,
and hardly hold to them If to this quality they
add tact. the power Of managing. the pow er OF
personally pleasing those with whom they are
brought in contact; and If. moreover. they have
brilliant talents their success attains the point
of splendor. All these qualities seem to have
been Shakespeare's; all this success he certainly
did attain.
The notion that good poet must be good
man may be dismissed without further consider
alton, notwithstanding the responsibility OF
the names bywhich 1t is supported. Indeed all
general rules of moral Judgment, all opinions OF
men formed upon classification, are futile and
untrustwOrthy. man Is an individual and
must be judged by himself. The interesting
question remains, Was this great poet good
man? We don't know. We only know that he
was civil in his demeanor; that his conduct
united with his great mental gifts to win him,
standing in the lowest social position, the
favor OF those who arc in the highest;
that Ben Jonson loved him (his recog-
milton of the merit OF Every Man IN his Humor
brought Ben into notice. and thought him hon
est and OF free and open nature; that, being
only an actor and playwright, he rose rapidly
from absolute poverty to very considerable
wealth; that to please the coarse tastes of u
considerable part of the public, by pleasing
which he prospered, he who when he spoke jul
dicOusly denounced indecency as bad In
morals and bad in art made his plays more CO.
pleusly. more grossly and more inge9iously in
decent than any Others known to modern liter
allure; that he sued one of his Stratford
townsinen for FL 15s. 10d., and another for
&c, and getting Judgment against the lat
ter, and not being able to arrest him, he
proceeded against his surety; that he did
not save his father from similar prosecution on
the part of his creditors but that he did buy
from the Herald's College a coat-of-arms for
that father. and patent OF gentry full of false
hood of which he at least was cognZant and
that when William Combe, the squire of Wei
combe. projected the enclosure of a large part
OF the comnoniieids at Stafford on-Avon and
there was great opposition to the interests of
such men as Shakepeare's father and the poor
agricultural laborers. he Notwithstanding en-
treaty. stood by the rich. grasping squire.
We MAJ be sure that shakespeare life was,
according to the manners and morals of the
time, Misunderstanding his profession. not
ably decOrous; that his manners were ingratiat-
Ing; and that above all things else he was prll-
dent: that after his first bitter experience at
Stratford of the consequences of youthful i'm
prudence the guiding rule of his life was, '.Nul-
lum numen abest. 81 sit prudential" that he was
at the least prudentially just; that he was pru-
IDENTIFY kind in his actions, and perhaps more;
that it was probably agreeable to him to be
more than prudently courteous; that he mani
tested imprudently no personal resentments or
disiikes; and that he brought. with notable dis
erection. all his great faculties and all his intui-
tive knowledge of the world not only to his
task of play-writng. but to the advancement of
his fortunes and the elevation OF his social posi-
ton