The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1916-03-26
srai generations had been strong but

sral generations had been strong but
quiet and moderately obscure people.
They had not used up their energy
In active living but had. OF the con
trary. handed down unused energy to
the genius who topped their tree OF
life. Take the ancestry of n very
active, very t~ranscendent genius. Mar
tin Luther. Shelley. Michael Angelo.
Beethoven. and what you are likely TO
md are strong. simple. quiet people
who have had energy in surplus 10 that
they used. SO II IL should appear that
Shakespeare came from the distin-
guished. active. statesman class. 1t
would be psychologically al anomaly
and an irregularity. Such classes pro-
duce talent and ability often. Rarely
Is there In them enough unused en-
ergy TO produce genius which Is the
Towering Of superabundant intellec-
tual strength.
hut MIR. Baxter is one OF the most
astounding Of critics. He is not sat
isfied with presenting Bacon with
S~hakespeare's work. lie practically
desires to present him with the
whole English Renaissance. at any
rate with the best of Greene, Marlowe.
Peel and some OF sponsors poems.
as well as Burton's ANATOMY of Mel
ancholy"; and yet the publishers have
wasted ink and printers time as well
as paper that weighs too much for the
ordinary reader TO hold. Because the
borrowing Of thought had not in that
day been labelled plagiarism and
tabooed, the entire mental activity Of
the time IL attributed by this 'ngenu-
ous n undiscriminating author TO u
single mind: no allowance Ia made for
the natural INTERPRETATION Of thought
and for the natural s~ubconscious
spreading OF ideas.
Although in the prologue" the au-
thor appeals to students to uphold him
In the statement that not only is 1t
natural for two totally unacquainted
authors to fall upon the same thoughts
but also TO use the same expressions
he opens Chapter Nv. with the state
ment that any student knows the i'm
possibility OF two minds thinking the
same thoughts and expressing them
In like manner" This. then. Is his
reason for urging his discovery that
Shakespeare was Bacon and Bacon the
whole Of the English Renaissance
The odd thing II that he does moi pre-
sem Bacon apparently with the
French version Of M%ontaignc. En-
actly why IL Is difficult to find out.
for the parallel passages between the
Montague essays and certain passages
In Shakespeare are more striking than
any other examples OF direct borrow
ing. These passages. though well
known. are not given in this book.
The whole volume Is a monument to
the futile labors Of the uncritical in
t%elligence. That a man should spend
his days over such trivialities. such
a Jealous culture " sercndipity, is sad
enough. but saddcr when SO man
works OF real value are going a-beg-
ging for a publisher that such tones
should be gravely given to the world.
Tho a%ttribution Of dates to the plays
Is as foolish as the rest Of the book:
dating "Venus and Adonis" many
years after King Lear" King Lear
Is supposed 10 have been written by
Bacon at the mature age OF 90. What
sort OF a critical intelligence could
imagine a boy OF .: writing a king
Lear?
The book would he unworthy pro-
longed criticism were It not in the
hope Of discouraging any other similar
waste Of time.
Another tome. printed, We are
pleased to note. on light paper. Is Ivy
G. G. GREENWOOD. entitled Is There n
Shakespeare Problem? Lane). This
Is not 20 amazing a volume as the
n by Mr.. Baxter. II upholds a purely
negative view OF the case. II states
that what We know Of Shake
speare. the man OF Stratford, would
not lead the average mar to expect
the works OF the poet Shakespeare.
Mr.. Greenwood does not insist that
Bacon necessarily wrote the works.
He gives chapters on J. NJ. Rob
ertson's controversial methods: on
Shakespeare's legal knowledge; OH the
learning OF Shakespeare: THE Real
Shakespeare Problem: Professor
Dry-as.Dust AMI Genius; Shake
spsare's will: Shakespeare's writing;
THE Name Shakespeare: "Some AL
lusions 20 Shakespeare; THE jon
sonian Ctterances" and the First
Folio.
The author when he desires to refer
TO the man " Stratford spells the
name "~Shakspere". when he refers
10 the author Of the works he ampli-
fies the vowels 10 shakespeare" As
the author makes a great point OF
this IL is we'll To note II, though he
liz writing Of an 4 where all spelling
was largely a matter Of taste and pri-
vate Judgment. The ground OF this
discussion is Nh overworked and en-
hausted and SO entirely u%nfruitful that
wen criticism seems further waste.
The land must lie fallow Ill, new fer
tilizer is produced. The easiest chap
ter to fall foul Of is that OF "Profcs-
sor Dry-as-Dust and Genius" Genius.
says the author. il not Independent
Of the law of causation. True. but no
man has yet laid hare all the laws
Of causa;ion--not eve Mr.. Green
wood; and his discussion OF the entire
subject shows how little he knows OF
genius. Genius, he argues must after
al. be taught.
On the contrary. genius is usually
a tremendous. unexhausted mental
energy which teaches itself whatever
Il happens TO wan to know. We have
known n genius who desired to read
Balzac In the original. and without
previous knowledge Of the Language
,.g.. A,,,,,rl as, IA, Qua ..~.,A