Imagens das páginas
PDF
ePub

NOTES

The object of this collection is to bring the purely lyrical works of Shakespeare, and the lyrical only, within a portable volume. The Venus and the Lucrece, which in modern times have generally accompanied the Sonnets, (as belonging rather to the class Lyrical-narrative, than Lyric pure), are hence omitted, together with a very few sonnets connected closely in subject with the Venus, and marked, like it, by a warmth of colouring unsuited for the larger audience-compared with that before the Elizabethan Muses-which poetry now addresses.

The Songs have been arranged under classes: as when grouped thus, the minor lyrics acquire more value, and the series presents a less fragmentary character. Songs too closely involved in the action of the play for intelligible separation from it, and some of doubtful authorship, are not included. In the Sonnets the original order has been preserved. The text is that of the "Globe' edition of 1864. The principle of that edition is a sparing introduction of the most plausible emendations of the most obviously corrupt passages. Except, however, perhaps, in the Lover's Complaint, the original texts of the lyrical poetry do not seem so faulty as those of the dramatic. Most of the notes are simply glossarial. For some of the exegetical, the reader is indebted to the kindness of Mr. W. G. Clark.

Pleasure is the object of poetry: and the best fulfilment of its task is the greatest pleasure of the greatest number. But pleasure demands intelligibility; and, in the hope of aiding it, titles have been added to the poems. The editor was here encouraged by the counsel of a friend, distinguished for refinement in poetical criticism; he has tried to make his titles explanatory to the lovers of poetry, either by way of hint or of more direct statement; he submits this intrusion upon Shakespeare to their good nature. There are very few men whose greatness is so conspicuous and imperial, that their writings have obtained a prescriptive right to appear, century after century, without the formality or impertinence of introduction by other hands. Homer, Virgil, Dante, Milton, and Shakespeare are monumental. They move through the ages in a long triumph; and even a Preface cannot presume to go before them. But every book should carry its own history with it, and, so far as possible, its own explanation. A few remarks upon the style and character of the preceding poems are therefore added here, as an Envoy to the reader.

Νου. 1865

F. T. PALGRAVE

PAGE

I

SONGS FROM THE PLAYS

And Phoebus, &c.: the sun begins to drink the dew in the flower-cups.

7 she doth owe: doth own.

10 youth and kind: youth and nature.

16 On a day: The version of this song in the Passionate Pilgrim reads gan for can, , 1. 6, and Wish'd for Wish, l. 8.

18 foison: abundance.

20 cypres: crape.

23 Consign to thee: become confederates and partakers with thee.

25 whist: quiet.

28 the triple Hecate: used here for Diana; the moon.

30 takes his gait: his way.

33 pugging tooth: thieving appetite.

34 hent the stile take it.

36 toys for your head: caps.

44 keel generally explained, skim. May it not be, cool? Compare leese for lose.

THE SONNETS

Only three or four generations of fairly long-lived men lie between us and Shakespeare; literature in his own time had reached a high development; his grandeur and sweetness were freely recognised; within seventy years of his death his biography was attempted; yet we know little more of Shakespeare himself than we do of Homer. Like several of the greatest men,-Lucretius, Virgil, Tacitus, Dante, ‚—a mystery never to be dispelled hangs over his life. He has entered into the cloud. With a

natural and an honourable diligence, other men have given their lives to the investigation of his, and many external circumstances, mostly of a minor order, have been thus collected yet of "the man Shakespeare," in Mr. Hallam's words, we know nothing. Something

which seems more than human in immensity of range and calmness of insight moves before us in the Plays; but, from the nature of dramatic writing, the author's personality is inevitably veiled; no letter, no saying of his, or description by any intimate friend, has been preserved : and even when we turn to the Sonnets, though each is an autobiographical confession, we find ourselves equally foiled. These revelations of the poet's innermost nature appear to teach us less of the man than the tone of mind which we trace, or seem to trace, in Measure for Measure, Hamlet, and the Tempest: the strange imagery of passion which passes over the magic mirror has no tangible existence before or behind it :- the great artist, like Nature herself, is still latent in his works; diffused through his own creation.

The Sonnets, with the Lover's Complaint, were published in 1609 by Thomas Thorpe, an eminent bookseller of that day. Their comparative freedom from typographical misreadings is the single point whence it might be conjectured that Shakespeare was in any way connected with the publication. There it no distinct evidence when he wrote them: a brief reference to certain sonnets of his in the Palladis Tamia of Meres (1598), is united by no link with these, and may rather point to the sonnets upon the Venus and Adonis legend. Nor does the dedication (reprinted on page 56) throw any light upon the history of the work. Read as it has generally been, it implies that Thorpe wishes happiness and fame to Mr. W. H., the only object, or author, or procurer, of the following Sonnets. Read according to another conjecture, it is Mr. W. H. who wishes happiness to the only object, or author or procurer, of the Sonnets: -The well-wishing adventurer

being, in this case, referred to Thorpe's interest in the work as publisher. Of the six interpretations thus possible, the first alone has afforded any reasonable clue : Thorpe being understood by it to dedicate the Sonnets to the only object of them, Mr. W. H. Disregarding the only, it has been supposed that the male friend, who is certainly addressed in most of these poems, above Shakespeare in position, and younger in age, was William Herbert, third of that family who held the Earldom of Pembroke. If we allow that the other interpretation should yield to the one which thus dedicates the Sonnets to their object, the plausible reasons which give that honour to Herbert are, however, open to the difficulty that, as he became Earl in 1601, and Knight of the Garter in 1603, a publisher would not probably address him as Mr. Herbert in 1609 :-nor is it credible that the whole series could have been occasioned by or with any verisimilitude ascribed to one only object. No other known, or really plausible name but Herbert's has been suggested. And if we surrender this interpretation, the remaining five throw no light whatever upon the poems. It would be useless to know that Mr. W. H. procured them, or that he wished well to their object, author, or procurer: that he was the author himself is of course inadmissible.

Turning then to the Sonnets themselves, they obviously present a certain sequence or story, which has been wrought out by the ingenuity of Mr. A. Brown (1838) into six "" poems," or definite divisions. The Friend is addressed in five of these (pages 57 to 181); the Mistress in the last (pages 182 to 206). It should be observed that Mr. Brown has established these divisions to his own satisfaction without deviating from Thorpe's arrangement,

« AnteriorContinuar »