« AnteriorContinuar »
of thinking, “L'Aiglon” is not a tragedy at all, but a far as we do, in the only way possible, understand the pathetic spectacle, like “ Hannele" done on a gorgeous course of evil, so that it becomes a part of the great scale, wherein, by means of a series of rather loosely world-order to which we belong, that it appeals to our connected scenes, we see the spirit of a lovable child tragic sense. So long as it appears unaccountable, bruised and crushed by the relentless forces of life. arbitrary, so long shall we feel impatience and rebellion, There is nothing worth calling a struggle; he does not, so long shall we be withheld from experiencing with as the slang phrase goes, “put up any fight at all.” regard to it the “pity and fear” which, whatever is
It seems, then, as though the mystery-theory involved meant by them, are admitted to be the essentials of the us in confusion as to what “seeing why" really means. tragic attitude. Caliban's notion of Setebos •
“just But perhaps the trouble is caused by a failure to dis- choosing so " admits of suffering and of conflict, but tinguish between the argument of a play and the play not of tragedy, and the arbitrary postulate, as it seems itself. Professor Hale has two minds about “Hamlet, to us moderns, in the “Edipus,” is its weakness, not one when he thinks of the story, another when he thinks its strength. of the play: when thinking of the first he “cannot see It is this understanding of evil, this seeing through why it should have happened at all,” when thinking of it, seeing how, which it is preëminently the tragedian's the second he does not deny a single step." Note business to endow us with; if he fails of this, he has not that it is the second mood which is induced by the play written a tragedy, but a melodrama, or something else. itself, the mood, not of querulous mystification but of Thus, Professor Hale holds that while “Hamlet” is a compelled understanding, which accompanies our sense tragedy, the death of a young man in battle is not. of the tragic. It is not while we follow the play that Granted, but why? Not because we understand the we “do not see why," it is only when we repeat, in evil involved; I do not think we do, — the Providence barren and meaningless formula, the story of the play. that governs battlefields seems quite as inscrutable as This argument rather makes against its own cause, in- the Providence that governs royal murders; — but bedicating that our feeling of the tragic and our under- cause such a death, glorious or pathetic according to standing of its inevitable processes are at least con- one's point of view, is what we call accidental: the comitants. In discussing “A Doll's House,” Professor bullet happened to come his way. An artist may arise Hale again mistakes the material of the tragedy for the who will take such a story and make it seem to us intragedy itself. It cannot, he argues, be the conflict evitable, but no one has yet done so. Perhaps the between husband and wife that makes it tragic, because nearest approach to it is in “Romeo and Juliet," where "a brawling house is not tragic.” Not when thus form- the catastrophe is the outcome of a series of unfortunate ulated, certainly, but it has been made the basis of more accidents, any one of which might have turned out difgreat tragedies than any other one subject. He adds ferently and saved the game. But I think the play that this particular brawl " was an extraordinary case, only helps to prove the point, for it bas never seemed or perhaps it only seemed so because of the skill in to me a great tragedy, when compared with the greatputting the case." Exactly. In other words, it was est; it seems a sweet and pathetic love-story, like that the writer's skill which made it to some extent into a of “ Paul and Virginia," and I have never been able to tragedy. Curiously enough, all great tragedians have see anything very shocking in the German acting verthis skill: Lear's was a brawling house, too; so was sion which arrested the poison and the dagger, and Agamemnon's, and Antigone's, and Beatrice Cenci's. allowed the lovers to live happily ever after. Moreover,
In Professor Hale's discussion of “Hamlet” there is it is significant that a class of college girls, when I rea further confusion of terms: “Granted that Hamlet ferred to the play casually as a tragedy, almost unaniwas too weak of will, how did he get so ? By too much mously protested. Everything, they argued, was going thinking ? Is not thinking the great faculty of man, the well, the plan of escape, though a stupidly complicated thing that raises him above the beasts? Why should one, might easily have succeeded, and they refused to too much thought put the thinker in the power of the consider a play tragic which held within itself even up circumstances around him ? We do not understand to the last moment the possibility of a happy solution. these things.” But the difficulty here is that Professor When asked about “ Lear," and the happy solution Hale is using the word “thinking” in two senses, as a which used occasionally to be substituted at its close general term for human reason, of which we cannot by our German (and, alas! English too) play-managers, have too much, and as a special name for a special they held that the case was different; that here the kind of activity which we all know does, speaking pop- tragedy lay not in the death of Lear but in his life, ularly, interfere with effective action. And we all know, and that even if he had ended his days in comfortable too, in a general way, the reasons why it does thus senility, tended by Cordelia, his life would have been interfere. Take a real instance: An old professor was none the less a tragic failure, and inevitably a failure. sitting in a street car with his legs crossed, reading, It is, then, not “strange unexplainableness” that when he suddenly realized that he had passed his cor- makes tragedy, nor is it conflict alone. Tragedy gives
He arose hastily and tried to leave the car, but us something different from the one and something having neglected to uncross his legs he found it diffi- more than the other. JIt shows us great suffering, mortal cult, almost impossible. What was his trouble? Too conflict, great natures, and as it shows us these it makes much thinking; which thus actually had “put him in us feel that they, and we, are in the grasp of eternal, the power of the circumstances around him." Thinking unalterable law. The suffering and the struggle, when may do this at any time, and no mystery about it; it all apparently outside the dominion of law, arouse in us depends on the circumstances, and on how and what only extreme rebellion or sullen non-resistance; when one thinks. In this case the lowest of the “beasts," manifestly within its realm, they stir in us those feel. even a hen, would have done better than the professor. ings of “pity and fear” which are our response to
The mystery-theory, then, does not appear to me as what we call great tragedy. ) a satisfactory solution of the problem. I rather believe
ELIZABETH WOODBRIDGE. that the reverse of it is the truer, and that it is in so New Haven, Conn., April 18, 1901.
The New Books.
memorials, and how much, how very much, the name of Augustus Hare meant to them. Few
men's natural modesty, however great, could AUGUSTUS HARE- TO DATE.*
have withstood that sort of thing very long; “What fun!” cheerily ejaculates Mr. Au. and it is no wonder if Mr. Hare, living thus gustus Hare, of guide-book fame, in a letter daily within earshot of his own praises and to a friend, after telling how the Reviews had basking in the sun of his great social popubeen abusing him for what they thought the larity, has come at last to take himself pretty
“ twaddle, conceit
, toadyism, inordinate length, seriously,” and even to feel it incumbent on and so forth, of the first instalment (in two him to climb to the general view on a pedestal volumes) of his autobiography. Even the
of autobiography four volumes high. staid “ Athenæum for once lost its temper,
We deplore as much as anybody what Mr. and called Mr. Hare a “ literary valet,” the
Gosse calls the “big-biography habit,” and we “ British Review” went so far as to think him
think that a writer who has contracted it ought “ an absolute beast," a critic out in India voted
to be suppressed and kept out of print until him and his “chatter" a "prodigious nuis time and abstention have effected a radical
. ance," an American paper politely hinted that
The practice of exhibiting one-volume so erratic a Hare must surely be one of the
men in two-volume and even three-volume March variety, and, in fine, Mr. Hare must
books has increased, is increasing, and ought have felt as if the good old days of Jeffrey and
to be diminished, even if an example has to be Lockhart were come again for his express en
made of a contumacious biographer or two. tertainment.
But in Mr. Hare's seemingly aggravated case Bent on having more “fun” of this unusual of making much ado about comparatively noth
" sort, Mr. Hare now puts forth a second brace ing, it ought in fairness to be observed that of much thicker volumes on the same seductive
what he calls the story of his life is in point of theme, and gleefully awaits the result.
fact so largely made up of stories about and are sorry to disappoint him of our small con- by others, and of impersonal descriptions of tribution to the treat he has promised himself, places he has visited in his capacity of quasi
, but we must in candor say that his book, though professional tourist and guide-book maker, that
it long and of no great substance, strikes us
may be read with interest even by those who nevertheless as a really entertaining one in its
care least about Mr. Hare himself. Mr. Hare's way, and even as an almost ideal book to pick habit of Boswellizing even his chance and unabout in and dawdle over in the dozy Summer important acquaintances, of jotting down their
talk and especially their stories, is largely redays, when one is content to keep cool and drift along idly on the stream of almost any.
sponsible for the length of his book. Telling body's talk. It is, furthermore, to our notion,
in his journal, for instance, how he breakfasted a book that reflects, not "an absolute beast"
with a Mr. Richmond he relates how his host(how the “British Review” could speak or
“ Talked of Carlyle - of how his peculiarities began
in affectation, but that now he was simply lost in the think thus of the winsome and accomplished mazes of his own vocabulary. One night, he said, he Augustus passes our comprehension), but an met a man at Albert Gate at 12 P. M., who asked for amiable, talkative gentleman, who, if he some- a light for his cigar. He did not see who it was till, what too manifestly has a high opinion of him.
as he was turning away, he recognized Carlyle, who self, bas at all events come by it honestly. For
gave a laugh which could be heard all down Piccadilly
as he exclaimed, 'I thought it was just any son of Adam, Mr. Hare has long been a very popular writer and I find a friend.'” with that large class of occasional readers who,
Carlyle was tormented by street noises. He when they like a man's books, like them with
said to Mr. Hare: out stint or qualification, and are eager to tell
“That which the warld torments me in most is the him so, rapturously, when they meet him in the awful confusion of noise. It is the devil's own infernal flesh. Numerous admirers of Mr. Hare, as we din all the blessed day long, confounding God's warks gather from his pages, have praised him to his
and His creatures—a truly hell-like combination, and the
warst of it a' is a railway whistle, like the screech of ten face, and gratefully told him how their steps
thousand cats and ivery cat of them as big as a cathedral.” had been led and their minds uplifted by his In his diary Mr. Hare tells amusingly of a incomparable guide books and pious family dinner at the Grotes'.
* THE STORY OF MY LIFE. By Augustus J. C. Hare. “ After dinner, she (Mrs. Grote) would leave the Volumes III. and IV., completing the work. Illustrated. historian,' as she called him, in his study, and come up New York: Dodd, Mead & Co.
to the drawing-room, where she would talk to her
guests and be most entertaining. At nine o'clock, tea and may serve to indicate a certain quality in would be brought up — such a tea as one never sees
his writing which is the one, we fancy, largely now, with tablecloth, muffins, cakes, etc. Then she would say to the servant, · Bring up the historian',
responsible for the irritation of his critics. and the historian was brought up.' He was vastly
“I was afterwards at a breakfast at Lord Bute's. civil, of the old school, and wore a great deal of frill. There were few people I knew there, and the grass He would take his place opposite the table, and im- was very wet, so I sat under the verandah with the mediately taking a large clean pocket-handkerchief Egertons. Presently an old lady was led out there, from his pocket, spread it very deliberately over his
very old, and evidently unable to walk, but with a dear knees, after which a dog jumped up and sat on it. Then
beautiful face, dressed in widow's weeds. She seemed he would say, as to a perfect stranger, 'And now, Mrs. to know no one, so gradually - I do not know how it Grote, will you kindly favor us with a sonata?' and came about — I gave her a rose, and sat down at her Mrs. Grote, who was an admirable musician, would play feet on the mat, and she talked of many beautiful a very long sonata indeed; after which he would say,
things. She was evidently sitting in the most peaceful • Thank you, Mrs. Grote. I am sure Lady Lyvedon waiting upon the very threshold of the heavenly kingjoins with me in being very much obliged to you for
dom. When I was going away she said, I should like your beautiful sonata.'»
to know whom I have been talking to.' I said, “My name Mr. Hare's impressions of Tennyson, as re
is Augustus Hare.' She said, “I divined that when you
gave me the flower.' I have not a notion who she was.” corded in his diary, will not please the poet's admirers who would have no spots on their sun.
Mr. Hare's book, it must be admitted, is “... This afternoon I have been with Mrs. Gre: largely a chronicle of pretty small beer, but it ville to Mr. Tennyson at Haselmere . . Tennyson is
is entertaining enough, as we have tried to older looking than I expected, so that his unkempt ap
show, in its light way. The volumes are propearance signifies less. He has an abrupt, bearish fusely illustrated, mainly with woodcuts set in manner, and seems thoroughly hard and unpoetical: the text, which assist in making an unusually one would think of him as a man in whom the direst prose of life was absolutely ingrained. Mrs. Greville
inviting page. Of his own portraits the author kissed his hand as he came in, which he received with
has been lavish.
E. G. J. out any protest. He asked if I would like to go out, and we walked round the gardens. By way of breaking the silence I said, • How fine your arbutus is.' • Well, I would say arbutus,' he answered, otherwise
THE SCIENCE OF MEANING.* you are as bad as the gardeners, who say Clematis'... For the poet's bearish manners the Tennyson family
Etymology is a science, said Voltaire, in are to blame, in making him think himself a demigod.
which vowels count for nothing and consonants One day, on arriving at Mrs. Greville's, he said at once,
for mighty little. Since then there has arisen •Give me a pipe, I want to smoke.' She at once went a science of language at whose bar every slightoff by herself down the village to the shop, and return- est dialectical variation and shadow of a breathing with two pipes, offered them to him with all becoming subservience. He never looked at her or
ing is required to justify its existence, and the thanked her, but, as he took them, growled out, “ Where
old gibe has lost its force. But the etymology are the matches? I suppose now you've forgotten the of which Voltaire spoke was essentially the matches!'... Dined at Lady Lyvedon's. Sat by Lady etymology of the ancients.
It was a more or S., who was very pleasant. She talked of Tennyson,
less ingenious and plausible playing of the who had been to stay with her. He desired his sons to let her know that he should like to be asked to read
fancy about the transitions of meaning by some of his poems in the evening. Nevertheless, when
which one word arises out of another. At its she asked him, he made a piece of work about it, and worst, it was a refined form of punning. At said to the other guests, I do it, but I only do it be- its best, it was a convenient vehicle for the concause Lady S. absolutely insists upon it.' He read badly and with too much emotion: over •Maud' he
veyance of ethical and æsthetical symbolism, sobbed passionately."
as it appears in the etymologizing of Plato and Glad, no doubt, to have escaped the spec
Plutarch, or in Ruskin's interpretations of the tacle of a man sobbing passionately
proper names in Shakespeare. Plato derived public over his own poems, Mr. Hare was
hemera, day, from himeros, desire, because nevertheless compelled to hear Browning read primitive man, reversing Shelley's practice, at Lady Airlie's, and it was a sore trial to him. passed the night in terror-stricken longing for “I never heard any one, even a child of ten, read so
the dawn. Aristotle deduced dikaios, just, atrociously. It was two of his own pieces -Good
from dicha, in twain, because justice is a fair news to Ghent' and • Ivan Ivanowitch,' the latter division. The Stoics, in Cicero's phrase, labored always most horrible and unsuitable for reading aloud, pitifully in enucleating the origins of words. but in this case rendered utterly unintelligible by the
And the moderns before this century were not melodramatic vocal contortions of the reader."
* SEMANTICS : Studies in the Science of Meaning. By The following passage from Mr. Hare's
Michel Bréal ; translated by Mrs. Henry Cust, with Preface journal seems in general fairly characteristic, by J. P. Postgate. New York: Henry Holt & Co.
much better. The great Scaliger himself de popular papers on the theme, be about two rived persona from peri soma, around the years ago put forth a volume to which, with a body. But there is some naïveté in the modern slight modification of the current term, he gave scholar's triumph over the ignorance of his the name “Sémantique." And this, translated predecessors. Superior minds, such as Plato under the title “Semantics” by Mrs. Henry and Plutarch, were well aware that etymolo- Cust, and introduced in an interesting and gizing, like the allegorical interpretation of suggestive though somewhat rambling essay by mythology and poetry, was merely a literary Professor Postgate, now lies before us. device. They did not take their fancies so Professor Bréal has written a charming book. seriously as we are apt to assume. But in the Has he constituted a new science ? Apart absence of verified scientific law, it was impos- from a few modifications of terminology, has sible for even the greatest thinkers to acquire he anything to offer that is new — I will not
the modern educated man's instinctive sense of say to the student of recent German semasiothe possible and impossible in this field or in logical work, but even to the reader of Max the world of physical phenomena.
Müller, Trench “On the Study of Words," or But truth is stranger than fiction and quite the ingenious author of “Stories from the Dicas interesting. The miracles of fairy land are tionary”? I think not. eclipsed by the realities of modern science, and Of the three divisions of Professor Bréal's etymologies on which philology has set its work, only the second part, “ How the Meanaustere seal present as good material for the ing of Words is Determined,” belongs to his kaleidoscopic play of fantastic associations, as subject taken in the stricter sense. The first the uncontrolled fancies of pre-scientific literary part, though entitled “The Intellectual Laws ingenuity. Why resort to romance to derive of Language,” is mainly concerned with forms Alfana from equus if science permits us to dis- and inflections, and together with the third til glamour from grammar, kneads dough into part, “ How Syntax is Formed,” falls under fiction, demonstrates the identity of wig and semantics only if we make the word cover Mount Pilate, extracts eel and quinsy from everything in the science of language not inthe same root, and equates tear and larme, cluded in sound change. Now the phenomena while warning us that there is nothing in com. of semantics in the larger as in the narrower mon between boucher and bouche, kaléo and sense are primarily special manifestations of call, holos and whole, augé light and Auge eye? the association of ideas, and can with a little And wherein is the notorious antiphrasis lucus ingenuity be grouped under a few broad rubrics, a non lucendo funnier than the admitted deri. such as association by similarity or antithesis, vation of paraffin from parum affinis, too little or contiguity in time or place, or causal seakin ? Until recently, however, this fascinating quence, expansion and restriction of meaning, field has been abandoned to the popular essay- specialization, generalization, concretion, abist, or invaded by the philologer only for the straction, metaphor, analogy, confusion, conpurpose of culling a casual flower or two to tamination, survival, and the like. The number commend his severer wares. But of late there of such categories actually employed in any has been a demand that this domain too be given treatise, and the precision and subtlety annexed by science, and brought under the with which they are discriminated, depend reign of strict philological law. Monographs more on the logical idiosyncrasy of the author have been written on the development of mean- than on any inherent and constraining order in ings in particular classes of words, as numbers, the phenomena. Mr. Bréal's tripartite division, verb-forms, words of color, or the names of the while conducive to clearness in some respects, operations of the mind. And here and there is unfavorable to his design of eliciting a few a scholar emulous of Holmes's coleopterist, and simple laws. It leads to over-subtlety of classiadopting a term introduced by the gram- fication and the multiplication of terminology, marian Reisig about the year 1830, has de- a malady of science quite as serious as the nominated himself a semasiologist, or student abuse of abstract and metaphorical language
a of the science of meanings. The most enthu- which he so sensibly deprecates. siastic advocate of the new study is Professor Thus what he calls the law of specialization Michel Bréal, best known to scholars for his is illustrated in Part One by the tendency of edition of the Eugubine Tables and his etymo- words of originally substantive import to belogical Latin Lexicon. After many years' de- come specialized as mere signs of grammatical lay, and the anticipatory publication of various relations. It is in this way that the transition
from synthetic to analytic languages is ex- Words is Determined,” treats of such topics plained. It is a misleading metaphor, Mr. as the restriction and expansion of meaning, Bréal thinks, to say that the case endings de metaphor, polysemia, etc., and, in final sumcay and are replaced by prepositions and a mary, “How Names are Given to Things." fixed syntactic order. What really happened These chapters with their wealth of apt illuswas that the Latins, seeking precision, fell into tration are very readable. But we cannot the habit of saying dare ad aliquem instead of admit that they constitute even the beginning dare alicui, and then the terminations no longer of a new science. That things are often named needed were discarded. These considerations from one of their qualities taken as represenare interesting, but the term specialization tative of the rest, as when a horse was for the could be and has been applied within the field Aryans the swift thing par excellence, and for of Semantics proper to the facts which Mr. the modern Greek the irrational thing; that Bréal relegates to another book and chapter meanings may be strangely narrowed, as when under the heading “ Restriction of Meaning" species becomes spices and muth mood is lim
the narrowing, that is, of extension and ited to courage ; or widened, as when pecunia deepening of intension by which, e. g., tectum becomes the symbol of wealth generally; that becomes the special covering toit. So with metaphor is one of the chief ways in which the
differentiation,” Mr. Bréal's second law. As imagination creates new meanings, as when the applied to vocabulary it is virtually equivalent first threads of the warp came to stand for all to the desynonymization ” of Trench. The primordia and exordia ; that experts in every classical illustration of this process is found in matter use abbreviated expressions the meaning “ Ivanhoe,” in Wamba's reflections on sheep of which is determined by the context, or by and mutton, oxen and beef, and it is manifested what the logicians call the “universe of diswhen advancing thought sharply discriminates course, as when novellae means new vines to for its convenience terms like genus and a farmer, and to a jurist laws added to the species, brigade, regiment, battalion, esteem, code of Justinian these and similar proporespect, venerate, whose etymology supplies no sitions were not first enunciated or illustrated necessary basis for such distinction. But the by the science of Semantics. It is an interterm also includes the process by which the infi-esting fact (if true) that tempus originally nite wealth of Greek and Sanscrit verb-forms meant temperature.
meant temperature. But when Mr. Bréal adds are appropriated to separate functions, and for that then in French weather was thus desigthis reason Mr. Bréal treats of it in Part One. nated, and finally, the abstract idea of dura
The phenomena which many scholars lumption, was reached, he will mislead readers who under analogy Mr. Bréal distributes into sev- do not recall that Aristotle discussed the metaeral groups. He coins, e.g., the term “ irradia- physics of “ time” with the word chronos (the tion” to denote the process by which a depre- including ?) which in modern Greek has sunk ciatory subaudition attaching to a few words to “year,” while the kairos, or opportune of the originally innocent termination aster moment, of Greek ethics and poetry now means spreads and irradiates into all words of like weather. Such curiosities give us no law or ending giving us poetaster and marâtre. Under principle; they merely tell us that any incident analogy proper he discusses rather the psycho- or aspect of the passage of the hours or seasons logical motives of the resort to analogy. And may by historical accident become the sign of from the fact that there always is such a the abstract idea of time, and again be degraded motive he concludes somewhat sophistically that to a trivial concrete meaning. The writer of we have no right to speak of false analogies a popular book on language naturally groups as if they were mere blunders.
We can un
and arranges his examples, as a psychologist doubtedly detect a method in the madness of classifies his anecdotal illustrations of the aschildren who say “I goed,” or in the late sociation of ideas, or a rhetorician invents an Latin speakers who coined prostrare from elaborate nomenclature for different kinds of prostravi, and developed étude from a supposed metaphors. But after the enunciation of a feminine studia. But common sense will con- few general principles or pathways of associatinue to speak of blunders and false analogies tion, there is no scientific law in either case in spite of Mr. Bréal's ingenious plea that such to determine the number of the headings and imperfect speakers are actuated by the highest subdivisions. They may as well be thirty as impulse — the search for regularity and law! ten. It is purely a question of literary skill
The second part, “ How the Meaning of l and convenience of presentation of the ma