The times. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1890-1903, 1902-03-22

ten exclusively for the stage by q play
wright who was in tho very centre and
heart OF theatrical life, and not by an
Inspired outsider. Che inspired outsider
may have an admirable story admirably
written, but without any knowledge OF
the stage. how is he to get his charac-
ters on and off? You see the craft OF
Shakespeare in his exits and his en-
frances. The knocking at the gate IN
Macbeth" after the murder OF Dun
can, is one OF those dramatic incidents
that hold you breathiess. II Is inc
stroke OF fate, heralding the entrance OF
Macduff and the disclosure OF the crime.
An essay might be written on Shake
sneare's exits alone. You remember
Shylock, when he leaves his house in Jes-
sica,s charge. and nlurmurs, With no sus-
picion of treachery:
Fast bind, fast find;
A nroverb never stale in thrifty mind"
That takes him off the stage effectively.
Equally Characteristic is lagos exit;
..This is the night
That either makes me or fordoes me
quito.
Sic Henry declared that no actor
ever had reason to complain
that Shakespeare sent him tamely
OF or brought him feehly on
the stage. This to his mind, is
;ndisputable evidence that Shakespeare
was a great dramatic constructor, who
knew the, stage as intimately as
matchmaker knows the mechanism OF
watch.
Again, he pointed out that there are
expressions numerous in Shakespeare
plays which have the flavor of the thea
tire and show that the writer was thor
oughly familiar with all the shop terms
of the profession. Here. for example
:. a massage between Hamlet and Hora-
ito:
"wo,,ld not this, sir, and forest OF
feathers-if the rest Of my fortunes turn
Turk with me-with two Provincial roses
on nv RACED shoes. get me fellowship
in a cry Of players, sir?'
Half a share
"a whole one, I.
This. as Judge Allen says. re1eIs "
the custom of paying players not ny
fixed sums, but in proportion to the re-
cein1s', Even if Bacon had been ac-
onaintnd with such custom, what pos
silIe interest could it have had Cor nm
Whv should he have introduced it INTO
a dialogue?
Sir Henry spoke also Of the fondness
-of Shakespeare for the mimic play WITHIN
the play. This device, it will be recailed'
was employed in Hamlet ITO catch the
conscience of the King Moreover
Hamlet was pictured as man VINO thor-
ouph,y understood what good acting was,
aSnart g
dissertation on the play.
Sir Henry contends that 1t was 1mpos-
sible that Bacon should have been Ia
miIiar with all this technical oetall OIL
the craft, or, if familiar, that he should
hsyo been interested sufficiently to have
brought it into his work. In short, he
urges that the construction OF drama
is not merely a matter of writing mes
but is 6istinctively q profession; that TIE
playwright must understand all the
tricks of the trade.
On the other hand. he says that. while
Shakespeare is always accurate IN the
technicalities OF the stage, he does vlo-
lence to geography and history and Ia"
and rhetoric. For example. he gives Boz
hernia a coast and he started ship from
the gates of Milan. He mikes metaphor
when Hamlet talks of taking up arms
against a sea of trouble" and Sir Henry
adds that the trial scene in the Merchant
OF Venice bears no resemblance to any
judicial procedure that was ever record
ed in legal annals. He does not think
it possible that Lord Bacon could have
fallen into all these errors, and so he
concludes that Shakespcare's knowledge
on the one hand and his delinquencies on
he other are irresistible proof that he,
the professional playwright, and not Lord
Bacon, wrote these plays
This is the most practical view that we
have seen Of the famous controversy and
the best argument against the "Ba-
CONAN theory