New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1888-05-22
NEW PUBLICATIONS.
ELIzABETHAN LITERATURE.

Co
This is the second volume Of History Of Eng
lish Literature, in which periods are to DO Illus
trated by different writers. The first volume
which has not yet appeared. on the English PERIOD
will DO written by Stopford Brooke: the third
treating the literature OF the eighteenth century
bv Edmund Gosse the final volume on Modern Lit
erature by Professor Dowden. Mr.. Saintsbury's
contribution to the work is very satisfactory 1t
is so good that il the level is reached by his
colleagues, the history, as whole, will take very
high rank Mr.. Saintsburys task was particu-
larly difficult one. To have written an extended
account of Elizabethan literature would have been
much easier, for the abundance Of material is an
incentive to large treatment in suoh a case But
10 condense in one small volume the essence ana
gist of the most important, prolific and impressive
literary period in English history, IL not in all his
tory, calls for the exercise not only of rare dis
elimination, but also of a rare faculty Of exposl-
ton. Mere compression is within the ability OF
many, but compression which is attained by sacrl-
fcing essentials results in loss far outwcighlng
any possible advantage derivabe from the appre-
waiting process, and is generally accompanied by
an aridity of style which Ievolts the reader ana
condemns the work.
This fault Mr.. Saintsbury has avoided with SO
much adroitness that, Notwithstanding the ne
scheme) Of employing chronological and other
data freely, and passing rapidly from name to
name the interest of the survey is maintained
throughout. the cases in which the Importance OF
the subject usties the critic in lcisureiy analysis
are heartily enjoyed, and the severe condensation
does not interfere with the impression intended 10
be conveyed regarding the broad aspects OF the
period. The century touched by Mr.. Santsbury
covers 1901 $50 in general way, though the
first twenty years Of this century gave little promise
of the opulent production about to begin VI
this time of unparalleled literary fertility again,
the space of twenty years includes the highest
expression in quality, and though for the sue
ceeding fifty years the output was great, distinct
falling of from the work of l5S01600 is seen.
What, as Mr.. Saintsbury points out with emphasis,
is most marked in the central period, and If less
marked vet still noticeable in the following half
century, is the prevalence OF the poetic spirit
Plenty Of crudity in form there is among these
Elizabethan writers, plenty of unsklfulness and
coarsencss But the difference between that
poetry and the poetry OF the nineteenth century
is finely indicated by Mr.. Saintsbury in the fol-
lowing extract: There is famous story OF a good
natured conversation between Scott and Moore
in the latter days Of Sir Walter, in which the two
poets agreed that verse which would have made
o fortune in their young days appeared constantly
in magazines without being much regarded in their
age No sensible person will mistake the meaning
of the apparent praise 1t meant that thirty years
of remarkable original production and of much
study Of models had made possible and common
o standard of formal merit which was very rare
at an earlier time. Now this standard of formal
merit undoubtedly did not generally exist in the
DAYS of Elizabeth. But what did generally exist
was the wind blowing where 1t isteth,' the
presence and influence Of which are least likely
to be mistaken or denied by those who are most
strenuous IN insisting on the importance and the
necessity Of formal excellence itself" And he
goes on to refer to his experience as poetical
critic to literary journal, in the course of which
he read through or looked over probably not
much less than q thousand. certainly not less than
five or six hundred volumes" In these, he says,
there was plenty of quite respectable poetic
learning; next to nothing Of the poetic spirit
But in the period dealt with in
this volume. that spirit is everywhere and its
sisters. the spirits OF drama and of prose- The
result of this fact upon the Importance Of the
period is this: " In reading other lteratures
a man may lose a little by obeying the advice
!, of those who tell him only to read the best
things; in reading Elizabethan literature by
obeying he can only disobey that advice, for
the best things are everywhere
Mr. Saintsbury extracts freely, and his extracts
are in general good examples of the authors.
OF the separate criticisms in volume which is
all criticism, little can be said in the way of
illustration The pages on Shakespeare are so
comfortably sane and sound that the brevity of
the treatment is there especially regretted.
Nothing can be more timely than the sturdy pro-
test against those fantastic and chmerical methods
of Shakespcarcan exeeesis which aim at the de-
termination of partial or entire authorship by
considering the degree Of conformity Of the text
with purely imaginary standard Of dignity In
ethics and philosophy There is more danger to
the reputation Of Shakespeare from these unnat-
ural and absurd critical devices than from the
Baconian crotchets. The rational view Of the
great poet must always be that taken in this
volume namely, that his genius was elastic,
comprehensive, unprejudiced; that he held nothing
human to be foreign to him. that he took what
suited his purpose wherever he found it, that
he was not above catering to the popular taste
Of his time; that he was capable Of writing
Titus Andronicus' as Hamlet All departure
from this view of Shakespeare leads toward coDfu-
sion and what happens when Shakespearean scholars
begin to persuade themselves that by this or that
artificial test they can distinguish the lines Of
the master from those Of suppostitous assistants,
has been Witnessed in the extravagsnt theories,
the wild conjectures, Of too many students who
have thus cut themselves adrift from the only
firm anchorage attainable.
Regarding Mr.. Saintsburys work rs a whole,
we know not where else to find so compact, yet
comprehensive, SO iudicious, weighty and we'll
written a review and critique of El7abethan
literature 1t is not to be expected that all of his
estimates will satisfy every reader. Some may
consider that he allows too much importance to
several Of the minor dramatists and earlier poets.
few Of the extracts may be thought not to
warrant the praise bestowed upon their authors.
The judgments Of Lamb, Hazltt and other critics
may now and then appear juster than Mr.. Saints
burys. Here and there a conjecture-such as
that which would substitute Shakespeare for
prayton as the writer of that exquisite sonnet