New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1902-11-22

Ak. 449. Charles Scribner's Sons.
SHAKESPEARE AND voLTAIRE BY
Thomas R. Lounsbury, l. H. D., Ii. D..
Professor Of English in Yale University
Octave, pp. XII, 1853. Charles Scribners
Sons.
In the series of volumes to which Professor
Lounsbury gives the general title of Shake
spearian Wars" he has undertaken to trace the
history of several old critical controversies
through an enormous mass of critical and So
called creative" literature much of 1t COM
paratively forgotten, else never heard of.
not merely by the general reader, but by schol-
ars. The subject in his second volume. to wit,
the relations of Voltaire and Shakespeare. has
indeed been more than once investigated for
example, by NJ. Jusserand. our French
Ambassador but not before with such patient
thoroughness and such acumen. With respect
To the first volume, it may fairly be said of
Professor Lounsbury that, for latter day Eng
fish and American readers at least, he has both
created and exhausted his subject.
Perhaps some shrewd reader may detect in
the above paragraph the basis for question, if
not for complaint with regard TO these vol
umes. Why, he may ask, should ancient lit
erary quarrels and controversies be presented
with such fulness to a generation that has for
gotten them? Is it not unnecessary to slay the
slain? Is IT not uncharitable both to them and
to us TO do it by slow degrees-that is to say,
plausible, and in view of the fact that Profess
sor Lounsbury has still two volumes to give us
before his series viii be complete, it seems
almost inevitable. Yet he might legitimately
reply that the larger part Of all history, whether
political or literary or social consists Of an
elaborate Staying of the slain, and that when
the slain have been intimately connected with
causes institutions, regulations that are still
alive 1t is often instructive well interest
INC in words TVha
done in deeds Moreover Of all human reputa- |
tons that of Shakespeare is probably the most |
truly alive at the present day, and few who |
care for this reputation fail to take inter |
est in the oppositons it has encountered, in the
triumphs it has won. 1t is these oppositions, |
these triumphs. that Professor Lounsbury re-
counts in his ''Shakespearian Wars" In other |
words to imagine that he is primarily con- /
cerned with Staying already slain critics is to |
ignore the positive side of his work To i'm |
agine that he performs his task in a heavy or |
a ferocious manner is to be ignorant Of his I'M |
tagging humor his shrewd yet genial philoso- |
ply his urbane culture.
This is not to say. however, that the critic of |
these books is compelled for once TO abandon |
completely that role of Pathfinder which in the |
eyes Of many persons constitutes his chief rea-
son for existing Professor Lounsbury is. /
think fairly open the charge of diffusiveness- |
He is so full of his subject and he writes so |
easily that he writes too much. Had he chosen |
10 analyze more succinctly the Grass critical |
opinions which it necessary for him to |
present, his readers would have trusted both his |
reports and his judgments. They could have |
dispensed with many of the sentences in which |
he makes the purpose Of his book so clear that |
a child could scarcely misunderstood it. They |
could even have spared some of the humorous |
comments which, delightful in themselves, are |
abundant as almost to give the impression |
that Professor Lounsbury takes feline pleas |
ure in playing with his victim before dealing |
him a death blow. But these tri1ing com |
ments that hesitates to make when one
recalls the fact that critical treatise that does
not contain a dull page is an almost unknown |
phenomenon in the history OF literature. 1t is |
due also TO author to remember that his |
materials were enormous and in large part |
they determined the scale Of his books. No |
one who is not familiar with the bypaths Of |
eighteenth century literature can have ade- !
quate idea Of Professor Lounsbury's knowl !
edge of that prolific period. He has read its /
worthless drama, its superlatvely minor poets, /
its arrogant criticisms. its pamphlets its cor |
TespondenCe, its magazines with thOroughness |
that excites almost much commiseration as
admiration. When he comes to deal with Vol |
taire-in a volume which he had intended TO |
make only chapter-he seems to be scarcely |
less thorough in his researches. If. then, we !
matter of style. must credit him with self
control in view of the great Of details he /
might easily have persuaded himself to give |
The first volume to which the author has |
affixed a title unfortunately pre-empted by |
Professor Moulton, opens with thorough dis !
cussjon in three chapters of the battle long |
waged over the famous dramatic unities Apart |
from their interest to students of Shakespeare |
these chapters valuable as furnishing /
excellent brief account Of the rise, elimination /
and decline of Of the most remarkable lit |
erary decisions that ever took possession Of the |
human 1nind-a deluson which readers and |
students constantly have their attention drawn. |
and the history of which they will here find |
recorded in a most convenient and interesting /
fashion. The lesson TO be drawn from the dis |
cussion is that writ large in both of Pro- |
fessor Lounsbury's volumes, namely, the utter |
futility OF literary dogmatism. The ancient and /
not entirely defunct controversy with regard |
the propriety Of intermingling the comic |
and the tragic within the limits Of a single /
play is next discussed, and this chapter is fol- |
lowed by one dealing with the charge so often /
made against the English stage, that il was too /
hospitabe to representations of violence and |
bIoodshed- Then comes a chapter minor |
dramatic conventions which is chiefly notable.
at least TO any reader not preternaturally ten
der hearted. because it contains inimitable !
dissection OF the character and criticism of the |
fatuous Rymer. The treatment of Dennis Gil
don and other critical worthless in the chapter
entitled Late Seventeenth Century Controver-
sizes About Shakespeare" is mild in comparison
with the discussion of Rymer but the absurdities
Of that transplanted American. Mrs Charlotte
Lennox. in her Shakespeare Illustrated" draw
author a. his most characteristics