The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1915-08-22
SOME NEW BOOKS.
Wa Sir walter Raleigh the Real
s.shakespeare,s

s.Shakespeare"s
We shall never be done with sur
misses as to who wrote Shakespeare
until the sacred bones are d.slnterred;
even X that could throw light on the
mystery. Would 1t not be cypedient
for a suffragette to prove that Queen
Elisabeth threw them of In her idle
moments? They have now been
fathered upon most Of the prominent
men of the ptrlod; 1t Il quite time to
mother them a little. Surely. &c
prove that a woman wrote them
would further the suffrage cause. So
minor a detail as that Elizabeth died
in 1903 and the plays continued unit
1915 could surely be dealt with.
To be brief. the thesis Of JoHS PEN
Rk.roN. Jr.'s book, Shakespeare and
SIR Walter Raleigh Gippincott Com
,any. Philadelphia), Is that Sir Walter
Raleigh wrote the works Of Shake
speare. IL would be unfair not to ad-
init that the author is well versed In
his Shakespeare. hat he has at hand
a wealth OF topical illusions. and II
there were no such thing in the world
IN PsyttioiokN VI pllVstbhs hN u'oh
might be convincing.
From the standpoint Of psychology.
the first thing to be pointed out Is
that the known writings Of Raleigh
r no more like Shakespeare's than
Lovelace's are like Millions. and no
man a ever shown W such totally
separated personalities. Take the case,
for example. of william Sharpe and
Fiona Macleod, and any one who
cares to make the analysis will find In
the two writings the same tendencies
in dictlon, the same objects for color
contrast, the same objects of o n
sciousness, the same habit of soaring
rather than walking. Now, any psy-
Geological analysis OF the styles Of
Raleigh and Shakespeare leaves one
without a single point Of similarity
noted. But this method OF proof APP
parently did not occur.
Secondly, "a genius does not live
what he writes. II authorship is to be
carefully analysed this is one OF the
frst truths for the critic to take to
heart. The plain man has TO see and
touch and experience what he writes
BDVut NidNduldN WHtn lie was CTOSS-
ing the Channel was so bored that
he recited an entire book of Milton's
Paradise Lost" to entertain himself,
but a tiny engraving could set Keats
to writing one Of the greatest sonnets
In the language n "A half IA phrase
would set Shelley to thinking all
night long. Genius is different from
average consciousness i'm that II has
ten times as much mental energy, and
the slightest hint Of an unknown
opening. a hidden source. will awaken
II to its greatest creation.
: When Mr.. Pemberton argues that
Shakespeare did not live at court, and
therefore could not have described II.
he must have forgotten how vivid
Keats made Greek thought and Greek
life appear, though all he had ever
seen OF Greece was Chapman's Homer
and q book of engravings. Shelley
spent all his mature life on and near
b Mediterranean, yet he wrote Of
desolate. northern seas and Scottish
storms. Did Mr.. Pemberton perchance
think that Maeterlinck's early years
wore all spent in strange, dark caverns.
or by dark woodland fountains and in
medieval castles? And when. may
one ask, did Coleridge make his trip
to xanadu? Does the writer who
depicts a murder have to commit it
first In order to write about II, or the
woman who describes the sensations
of a cOcotte have to be one first? Per-
haps no woman who ever lived had
more meagre passional experience
than Emily and Charlotte Bronte. but
fire and conviction? Pater lived
quietly in Il little house in oxford, but
his mind knew and set forth for us
the Italy of the Renaissance, the
Greece of Plato, the France of Mon
taigpe. No; the fact is, a genius is
much better served by imagination
than by experience. The remuneration
of actual life blossoms into literature.
We have what we forego.
Moreover, Mr.. Pemberton was entirely
astray when he tried to prove that
there vas no intercourse between the
court and the people in Elizabeth's
time. To be sure, brains were less
considered than birth and property.
and yet noblemen were well pleased 10
know and consort with and be lauded
by men OF letters. And does he sup
pose that 500 years ago men were so
different that they did not gather
anecdotes and tell tales Of the life at
court? Many folks to-day who have
new seen the Court of st. James's can
yet tell tales OF what Queen Mary says
to h princes and the princess, and
London Ii lively with gossip as to all
that goes on inside those walls. IL
there Is any difference 1t all 1t Is that
500 years ago the connection was
closer. greatness was more illustrious.
Interesting. and any butcher boy
could tell you more OF and
functions at Court than a London
barrister Of to-day would care to
know.
Moreover, the plea that Shake
speare's father was illiterate and that
he grew up in a plain environment is
empty and meaningless. Great men
come from families where strength
and power OF observation have peer
stored rather than used, and genius
IL most often the blossom OF
generations Of silent, simple people
who have transmitted superfiuous
energy. What p~arentage had Bee
thoven or Martin Luther? As to
humble environment, Francis Thomp-
son, like Shakespeare, earned odd pen
MES holding cab horses, and Keats wa
. stableman's son and a druggists as
sistant. George Meredith was the son
of a tailor and Shelley's grandfather