SHAKESPEARE AND BEN JONSON

Shakespeare was born in 1564, and as far as is now known, gained his first literary fame in 1593, when Venus and Adonis was published, and when he was 29 years old. Ben Jonson was born in 1573, and his first fame as a dramatist came from his play of Every Man in his Humor, which was acted in 1596, when Jonson was 23 years old. Although Shakespeare was 9 years older than Jonson, they may be said to have been in every way contemporaneous. It would not be possible at this time to determine which, as poet, was held in the higher esteem. They were then considered the most important dramatists of the day, and that estimation has continued to the present time. Both were reputed to be actors, and both were writers for the stage. But it is doubtful if either followed the profession of acting very persistently, though both may have appeared upon the stage intermittently, for several years.

Jonson for some reason, which does not clearly appear, incurred the antagonism of several playwrights of the time, particularly of Dekker and Marston. This resulted in much bitterness on both sides, and several plays produced and acted at the time were made the vehicles for the conduct of this stage conflict. As to whether Shakespeare was a party to this controversy, either actively or passively, has become a matter of much dispute. Many modern critics have come to the conclusion that although he was not an aggressor or participant, that he was unjustly and viciously assailed by Jonson, the reason assigned for this feeling on Jonson's part being his jealousy of Shakespeare's superior literary qualities.

Nothing that Jonson wrote, which can be said certainly to apply to Shakespeare, can justify this judgment. It is true that he criticised Shakespeare's art, but in his severest criticism he concludes, "There was ever more in him to be praised than to be condemned." No writer of that day has left so much concerning Shakespeare as has Jonson, and most of what he has left is of the very highest praise, some criticism (mostly just), and nothing abusive or that can be construed into a feeling of enmity. On the contrary everything that Jonson wrote of or about Shakespeare would indicate that Shakespeare held rather a high place

in his (Jonson's) affections. So far as is known Shakespeare never expressed himself openly concerning Jonson, and certainly not in such a way as to make the allusion definite.

The Poetaster.

Jonson's controversy with the theatrical fraternity, and particularly with the poets who were writing for the stage, was a very bitter one. As Shakespeare is supposed to have been closely associated with the players, against whom the war was being waged by Jonson, many imagine that some of the thrusts that are found in Jonson's writings were aimed at Shakespeare. On Jonson's side the principal production relating to this controversy, was a play called The Poetaster, written and produced in 1601. There is not much, if anything, said in this play at which Shakespeare or his friends could take offense. There were two prologue speeches, one by Envy, and one by Prologue in Armor, that showed much personal feeling, which was undoubtedly heart-felt. The production of the play brought Jonson into trouble, and he then attached to the play what he called 'An Apologetical Dialogue,' giving his reasons for writing the play, and disclaiming much that was charged against him, and defending himself for his attacks upon the players. He insisted that the attack was only on some of them, and then as to the others offers an apology as follows:

"Only amongst them, I am sorry for

Some better natures, by the rest so drawn
To run in that vile line."

By many it is imagined that Shakespeare was included in these 'better natures,' which of course must imply that Shakespeare felt offended at the play.

The object of discussing this matter at this time, is to suggest that Shakespeare may have been in fact represented in the play, and that thereby considerable light may be thrown upon his habits, his studies, his association with the theatre, and that much mooted question, his study of the law. If this be true, what is attributed to Shakespeare is free from viciousness, and on the contrary may be said to be inoffensive, if not considerate. But that is not to say that it might not have excited some feeling of anger in Shakespeare, for it probably did. But of this the evidence is not positive, but only the inferences which may be indirectly drawn.