In no wise disparaging his greatness, let us view him
both in the light of his contemporaries and in comparison
with the present.

In power of tragedy does he surpass Fulke Greville

In mighty bombast, bombast that is enjoyable because of his
perfection, is he more master than Marlowe

On the other tack: Have any of you really learned human nature
from his plays. Does he show you craftily hidden pre-
psychology that you had not seen before

Are men changed with the years ( personally I think yes
in the mass and superficially, Genious being ever " gilded
by the same sun and not subject to times and seasons )

Or does Shaw show more knowledge of the inner man.

Is his Shakespeares poetry better than Maeterlinck

Or his supernatural in a class with the skill of Maeterlinck
and Ibsen in the deliniation of the -sup- hidden mentality
and sup-conscious suggestion.

Constructively, he equals Ibsen in his proof that
rules of structure have very little to play with dramatic art.

In like manner to differ with the Orthodox.

reverse Chapman and Ben Jonson

Especially for deliniation of classic times and for show of
classic sympathy, and understanding.

Of. Grevilles "Alaham" with Lear. amb. 14. vol. 1.

In Grev. the truth of continual replying of Optimism and
pessimism. And his weight to which ever side we have previously
belonged. I.E. we see his plays as we see life, and judge
his justice by our own prejudice.

He sees what all sane men see: the truth on both horns of
paradox.