1242= . 128
#arbarb (College Librarg ".
SHAKESPEARE COLLECTION
FROM THE GIFT OF
WALTER WEHLE NAUMBURG
(Class of 1889)
OF NEW YORK





THE FOOLS OF
SHAKESPEARE





T H E FOO LS
OF SHAKESPEARE
An Interpretation of Their Wit,
Wisdom and Persona/ities
BY
FREDERICK WARDE

1915
MCBRIDE, NAST & COMPANY
ROLLS HOUSE, 2 BREAMS BUILDINGS
LONDON


| H & 3, 1 & 3-
&N ARD couſ,
°oCT 18 1917°
LIBRARY
ºf
* // ???? law, **** -
Copyright, 1913, in the United States of America by McBride, Nast & Co.
Arinted in the United States of America by Vail-Ballou Co., New York, 1915


To
the memory of that gallant gentle-
man, loyal friend and splendid actor,
LOUIS JAMES,
in close association with whom were
spent the happiest years of my profes-
sional life, is dedicated all that may be
found worthy in the following pages.


*, *
- º faeae！ –----


PREFACE
Foolery, sir, does walk about the orb like the sun;
it shines everywhere. -
How far the above epigram may apply to the
compiler of this work, may be a mattes of opinion.
Among the legion of books dealing with the
characters of Shakespeare, I have found the ma-
jority to be devoted to his tragic and serious crea-
tions, a few to his humorous types, but none to
his fools.
In the course of a lengthy career upon the
stage, which has been chiefly devoted to the plays
of Shakespeare, I have witnessed the performance
of these fools by accomplished actors whose skill
has illuminated the text, and whose abilities have
vitalized the poet's creations till they lived in my
mind, not as imaginary beings, but as real men
who walked, talked, and gamboled before me.
I have listened to their words, laughed at their
wit, pondered on their wisdom, and have marveled
i


ii PREFACE
that their point and significance have apparently
escaped the notice of so many readers and students.
This must be my excuse, if not my justification,
for the book.
The matter was the subject of one of my lec-
tures, under the title, “The Wit and Wisdom
of Shakespeare's Fools” and included in my
series “Shakespeare and His Plays.” I found,
however, the material so abundant I could not
include it in the limited time at my command on
the platform. I have therefore elaborated the
theme, enlarged the scope of the design, and
divided it into chapters, which I hope will enter-
tain the reader, instruct the student, and prove of
some interest generally.
I make no claim to originality, and have en-
deavored in all instances to credit the author with
the thoughts I have quoted.
I have found occasion in several instances, to
differ with some of the well known Shakespearean
scholars; but it must always be remembered that
I speak from the view-point of the actor, for
whom, and for whom alone the plays were written.


PREFACE iii
I have not entered the literary dissecting room, nor
invaded the realm of psychology. The line of
demarcation between humor and imbecility, folly
and insanity, I leave to the professional alienist.
I have taken the characters as they appear in
the plays and as I conceive the author intended
them, with due reference to their relation to the
Other characters.
I proceed upon the fact that Shakespeare, being
an actor, wrote these plays to be acted. That his
purpose was to create or draw the characters as
he saw or imagined them for dramatic presenta-
tion. I believe their literary quality was a mat-
ter of comparative indifference to him, the cre-
ation of the plot, the conception of the charac-
ters, and the arrangements of the incidents being
his first, if not his only consideration. The beauty
of diction, the delicate imagery, the exquisite
poetry, and the sublime philosophy, were the
Spontaneous expression of his transcendent but
unconscious genius





THE FOOLS OF
SHAKESPEARE








Frederick Warde as
“Cecco” in “The Duke's Jester”


T H E F O O L S
OF SHAKES PEAR E
An Interpretation of Their Wit,
Wisdom and Person a /ities
BY
FREDERICK WARDE

†:
&
<-->
6
* *
1915
McBRIDE, NAST & COMPANY
ROLLS HOUSE, 2 BREAMS BUILDINGS
LONDON


| -
*
H & 3, 1 & 3-
§ ARD º
OCT 18 1917
LIBRARY
& ſº-
* *
r 7), 71; ) lawłºwº,
Copyright, 1913, in the United States of America by McBride, Wast & Co.
Arinted in the United States of America by Vail-Ballou Co., AWew York, 1915


To
the memory of that gallant gentle-
man, loyal friend and splendid actor,
LOUIS JAMES,
in close association with whom were
spent the happiest years of my profes-
sional life, is dedicated all that may be
found worthy in the following pages.


* *
±± •


PREFACE
Foolery, sir, does walk about the orb like the sun;
it shines everywhere. -
How far the above epigram may apply to the
compiler of this work, may be a mattes of opinion.
Among the legion of books dealing with the
characters of Shakespeare, I have found the ma-
jority to be devoted to his tragic and serious crea-
tions, a few to his humorous types, but none to
his fools.
In the course of a lengthy career upon the
stage, which has been chiefly devoted to the plays
of Shakespeare, I have witnessed the performance
of these fools by accomplished actors whose skill
has illuminated the text, and whose abilities have
vitalized the poet's creations till they lived in my
mind, not as imaginary beings, but as real men
who walked, talked, and gamboled before me.
I have listened to their words, laughed at their
wit, pondered on their wisdom, and have marveled
i


PREFACE iii
I have not entered the literary dissecting room, nor
invaded the realm of psychology. The line of
demarcation between humor and imbecility, folly
and insanity, I leave to the professional alienist.
I have taken the characters as they appear in
the plays and as I conceive the author intended
them, with due reference to their relation to the
other characters.
I proceed upon the fact that Shakespeare, being
an actor, wrote these plays to be acted. That his
purpose was to create or draw the characters as
he saw or imagined them for dramatic presenta-
tion. I believe their literary quality was a mat-
ter of comparative indifference to him, the cre-
ation of the plot, the conception of the charac-
ters, and the arrangements of the incidents being
his first, if not his only consideration. The beauty
of diction, the delicate imagery, the exquisite
poetry, and the sublime philosophy, were the
spontaneous expression of his transcendent but
unconscious genius


Scan the records of the thoughts of men,
On graven stone, or papyrus leaf;
On parchment scroll or printed page,
Through all the eons of the ages past
To the high noontide of the passing day:
Then add the sum, and its grand total
Will be beggared by the genius of one name, alone.
Shakespeare!
FREDERICK WARDE.


CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . I
THE FOOL IN LIFE AND LITERATURE . . . . 9
- vyonick • . . . . . . . . . . . 25
- TOUCHSTONE . . . . . . . . . . . 31 &
*TRINculo in “THE TEMPEST" . . . . . . 72
*
ESTE IN 1 WELFTH NIGHT" . . . . . .
F “T N 33 8 Lº
LAUNCELOT GOBBO IN “THE MERCHANT OF
VENICE” . . . . . . . . . . . Io3
.CITIZEN IN “JULIUS CAESAR” . . . . . . I2I
THE CLowN IN “ANTONY AND CLEOPATRA” . . 132
THE GRAVE-DIGGERS IN “HAMLET" . . . . 139
LAUNCE AND SPEED IN “THE Two GENTLEMEN
OF VERONA” . . . . . . . . . . I62
- THE Fool IN “KING LEAR”. . . . . . . 187





CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . .
THE FOOL IN LIFE AND LITERATURE . . . .
yORICK . . . . . . . . . . . .
TOUCHSTONE . . . . . . . . . . .
‘ſkinculo in “THE TEMPEST" . . . . . .
FESTE IN “Twelfth NIGHT” . . . . . .
LAUNCELOT GoBBO IN “THE MERCHANT OF
VENICE" . . . . . . . . . . .
.CITIZEN IN “JULIUS CAESAR” . . . . . .
THE CLowN IN “ANTONY AND CLEOPATRA” . .
THE GRAVE-DIGGERS IN “HAMLET’’ . . . .
LAUNCE AND SPEED IN “THE Two GENTLEMEN
OF VERONA” . . . . . . . . . .
THE FOOL IN “KING LEAR” . . . . . . .
PAGE
IO3
I2I
I32
I39
162


----- - - -
~- ------- -


ILLUSTRATIONS
, Frederick Warde as “Cecco” in “The
Duke's Jester” . . . . . . Frontispiece
FACING
PAGE
* Edwin Booth as “Bertuccio” in “The Fool's
Revenge” . . . . - - - -
James Lewis as “Touchstone” in “As You Like
It" . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
^T. C. Cooke as “Trinculo” in “The Tempest” . 74
y E. Y. Backus as “Feste” in “Twelfth Night” . . 96
(Charles Charters as “Launcelot Gobbo” in “The
Merchant of Venice” . . . . . . . II6
* Louis James as “Pepé” in “Francesco da Rimini” 150
. James Lewis and Sidney Herbert as “Launce” and
“Speed” in “The Two Gentlemen of Verona” 17o
I2





THE FOOLS OF SHAKESPEARE





INTRODUCTION
The somewhat trite old adage, “It takes a wise
man to make a fool,” is familiar to us all, but the
full point and significance of the proverb is only
comprehended by those who are familiar with
mediaeval history, romance, or poetry.
Its apparent inconsistency, however, is founded
upon a substantial basis of reason, and a brief
relation of mediaeval conditions will show the
truth of the adage, and the point of its application.
In the early and middle ages it was customary
for a monarch, prince, or a powerful noble to have
in his retinue or household a fool or jester, whose
office was to entertain and amuse his master and
his friends. He was quite an important person-
age; enjoyed privileges, and was permitted liber-
ties that were denied the greatest nobles, the
closest friends, or the nearest kindred of his mas-
ter.
Nor birth nor rank were immune from the jests
I


2 INTRODUCTION
and pranks of “The Jester,” the monarch himself
often bearing with good humor the jibes that
would have cost the life of one less privileged.
The fool was, however, exempt, upon the prin-
ciple that “There is no slander in an allowed
fool.” Usually a favorite with his master, his
influence was sought in many a state and court
intrigue, for under the cloak of folly he could by
tale or parable, tell his patron truths that others
could not or would not speak, and approve or
ridicule any scheme or project that his interest or
wishes might desire. However plain his truths
or bitter his satire few were rash enough to retali-
ate, and woe to that noble or courtier who might
incur the enmity or displeasure of the fool, for he
would become the target of his wit and the butt
of his jests, with little hope of redress, or oppor-
tunity for revenge.
The life of a jester was a lonely one: he was
subject to the caprices of his master, contemned
above the board, hated below it, yet feared by
all.
To play Such a part successfully required a man


INTRODUCTION 3
of more than ordinary wisdom. He could not be
without learning. He must be a man of great
observation, judgment, and understanding; quick
to take advantage of every occasion for the exer-
cise of his wit, with judgment of the time, and
discretion as to what to say as well as what to
leave unsaid.
Times have changed. Progress and evolution
have brought new conditions; folly no longer
carries a bauble, and the man who was wise enough
to wear the motley of the mediaeval fool might
don to-day the robe of the justice, or the toga of
the statesman with dignity to the office and honor
to himself.
The requirements of a court fool are well de-
scribed by Viola in “Twelfth Night,” Act 3, Sc. 1. vº
This fellow's wise enough to play the fool,
And to do that well craves a kind of wit:
He must observe their mood on whom he jests,
The quality of persons, and the time,
And, like the haggard, check at every feather
That comes before his eye. This is a practice
As full of labor as a wise man’s art;
For folly that he wisely shows is fit,
But wise men, folly-fallen, quite taint their wit.


4. INTRODUCTION
The dress of the fool was a motley or parti-
colored doublet and hose, with the arms of the
house to which he belonged embroidered on the
breast or thigh; his head-dress, a hood parti-
colored like his coat, and surmounted by a cocks-
comb; his emblem, which he always carried,
was a lath or short staff, headed by a miniature
hood and cockscomb similar to his own called
a bauble, and was as sacred to the fool as
the sword to the soldier, or the crest to the
knight. The bauble also served as a protection,
and rendered him immune from the anger of those
whom he might offend—for, to strike the fool was
considered the act of a coward. The cap, bauble,
and points of the jester's dress were adorned with
small bells that jingled as he moved, and gave
warning of his approach.
y Jaques, in “As You Like It,” thus enumerates
the privileges of a fool:
O, that I were a fool!
I am ambitious for a motley coat.
I must have liberty
Withal, as large a charter as the wind,


INTRODUCTION 5
To blow on whom I please: for so fools have:
And they that are most galled with my folly,
They must most laugh. And why, sir, must they so?
The “why” is plain as way to parish church:
He, that a fool doth very wisely hit,
Doth very foolishly, although he smart,
Not to seem senseless of the bob; if not
The wise man's folly is anatomis'd
Even by the squandering glances of the fool.
Invest me in my motley: give me leave
To speak my mind, and I will through and through
Cleanse the foul body of the infected world,
If they will patiently receive my medicine.
The jester was not usually a gentleman, but
history records several instances where men of
gentle birth and breeding have filled the office:
sometimes from design or policy, and sometimes
because of physical infirmities which rendered
them incapable of bearing arms, or prevented them
from taking part in feats of chivalry in field or
tourney. Not infrequently the jester was a
dwarf or cripple, his deformity giving a grotesque-
ness to his appearance and grim point to his satire.
Dr. Doran, in his “History of Court Fools,” "
gives us the following legend, as the origin of the
character, and the office:
\
* *
| -



6 INTRODUCTION
Once upon a time, it happened that all Olympus
was dull and the gods were moping about, simply
bored to death. It was a warm summer day and
in a distant valley below they could see a group
of Greek peasants disporting on the green turf in
gala attire. The happy rustics were dancing and
singing, enjoying the bright Sunshine, and the
sounds of their mirth floated up faintly to the gods
in a manner that was altogether offensive to them.
“Omnipotent Father,” cried Mercury, ill-natur-
edly, “it would be rare sport, O king of gods and
men, to scatter all these gaily-robed revelers, and
by a shower spoil their finery and their fun.”
The suggestion was enthusiastically received by
the assembled deities.
“I propose an amendment,” exclaimed Juno,
with feminine sympathy. “Before you send the
rain, let your priest from the shrine below an-
nounce to the people that a shower is about to
descend, but it shall wet only fools.”
Zeus, approving, a slight sound of thunder was
heard, and the priest stood in front of the altar
and made the requisite announcement to the peo-


----+---+--~~~~）. --~~~~ ~~~~ ------ - ~~~~==---------- ----------- -


THE FOOLS OF SHAKESPEARE


THE FOOLS OF SHAKE-
SPEARE
THE FOOL IN LIFE AND IN
LITERATURE
ISTORY records the names of a number
of men who in the character of court fool
have made themselves famous both in word and
deed. Of these one of the most distinguished
was Triboulet, court jester to King Francis I, of *
France. Triboulet was a nickname, but we know
no other. He was deformed in body, ludicrous
in appearance, but of a very brilliant mind. His
wisdom was equal to his wit, and he was, at times,
both fool and adviser to the king. Francis was
deeply attached to him and he returned the af-
fection loyally. Much of his wit is recorded,
and his pranks at the meeting of his master with
King Henry VIII, of England, at the “Field of
the cloth of gold,” are related in the chronicles
9


IN LIFE AND IN LITERATURE 11
abeth. Heywood, however, was also a drama-
tist of some distinction, and Tarleton, a very pop-
ular comic actor of the period. Later we find
Archie Armstrong, at the court of James I; and
Tom Killigrew, who besides being jester was
“Master of the Revels,” to Charles I. The lat-
ter is described by Pepys as “a merry droll, but
a gentleman of great esteem with the king.”
Killigrew was probably the last of the licensed
court fools, and the office of household jester
ceased to exist, the character subsequently degen-
erating into the itinerant merry-andrew, a buffoon
who appeared at country fairs and village festi-
vals, and is now seen only at Christmas time with
the mummers that accompany the waits and carol
singers in old-fashioned English villages.
In romance the fool has prominently figured,
always with picturesque and frequently with dra-
matic effect.
Sir Walter Scott, in his romantic novel “Ivan-
hoe,” has described with much detail and fidelity
the character of “Wamba,” and has given us a
very accurate and impressive picture of the life


12 THE FOOLS OF SHAKESPEARE
and characteristics of the jester-minstrel of the
time of Richard Coeur-de-Lion.
We are indebted to Victor Hugo, in “Le Roi
s’ammuse,” for a striking and powerful picture
of the Italian court fool. The character is more
familiar, perhaps, in a dramatic version of the
same story, called “The Fool’s Revenge,” by Tom
Taylor, in which the late Edwin Booth gave such
a wonderfully effective presentation of the poor
deformed jester Bertuccio, concealing under the
motley garb and mocking tones of the fool the
intensity of a father's love.
The French court fool is most picturesquely
presented in “La Dame de Monsereau,” in which
the elder Dumas has woven a very interesting
and exciting romance around the character of
“Chicot,” jester to King Henry III. Chicot is
represented as a gallant soul, full of honor and
chivalry, as ready with his sword as with his
wit, both being equally effective. The romance
was dramatized for me recently, under the title
of “The Duke's Jester,” by Mr. Espey Williams,
who transferred the scene of action from the court


From an etching by H. J. Hennessy in possession of "The Players,” New York
Edwin Booth as “Bertuccio” in “The Fool's Revenge”


！ ±± --Æ æ！
=！= ） --★ → −E § –= -x=è=ī - º----ae; ~--~ <a_»
！; - =# … :） - TĒ №.№ īſāſ g-ſ - Ē - 5 - 5Ē Áº - ſā. --№→ēſī （， ? .:-）


IN LIFE AND IN LITERATURE 13
of France to that of the Duke of Milan, in Italy;
and changed the name of “Chicot” to “Cecco.”
I played the part of the jester with some success,
and retained the play in my repertoire for several
years. -
In the drama we have an admirably constructed
and splendidly written play, “Francesca di Ri-
mini,” by the late George Boker, where we find
the fool “Pepe,” keen of wit, but depraved in
mind, a very “Iago” in motley. His fun is ma-
licious, his humor mischievous and his wit malev-
olent. A masterly performance of the character
was given by my friend and comrade, Mr. Louis
James, with whose name it will always be
identified.
It is Shakespeare, however, who has given us
the best types of fool, in which may be found not
only wit and wisdom, but all of those qualities
‘I have endeavored to enumerate. He has left us
enduring pictures of mediaeval life and manners,
that make the characters live again in their true
and perfect body and environment.
Of pertinent interest after this brief sketch of


14 THE FOOLS OF SHAKESPEARE
the historical position of the fool is the interpre-
tation of Shakespeare's fools contained in a post-
humous work by Francis Douce, published in
vº London in 1839, entitled “Illustrations from
Shakespeare.” There I find a chapter of about
twenty pages with the caption: “Desertation I.,
The character of Shakespeare's fools.”
My knowledge of this work was obtained from
Mr. Wilfred Clarke, a son of the late eminent
comedian, John Sleeper Clarke, who found the
manuscript of the extracts, printed below, in the
property room of the old Walnut Street Theater
in Philadelphia, while he was examining some
papers and effects of his deceased father. The
MSS. was written, I have subsequently learned,
by Mary Ann Booth, and is in a fine hand, on
old-fashioned blue note paper, now soiled and
discolored with age, and dogs-eared as if from
frequent use and reference.
In the printing of the excerpts I have retained
the capitalizing of the words and the punctuation
as I found it in the MSS. as characteristic of the
writer and the period.


IN LIFE AND IN LITERATURE 15
I cannot agree with several of the propositions
advanced by the author, and it may be interest-
ing to know that on its first publication the book
met with severe condemnation at the hands of the
critics, so much so, that the author withdrew it
from sale, and it was not republished till some
five years after the author's death.
The significance of this little manuscript lies
in the evidence it gives us of the study and re-
search that such an actor as the late Mr. Clarke
gave to the accurate presentation of his characters,
fools and clowns though they were. The details
of the various kinds of fools may also be noted
with interest, as well as the difference of the kind
and quality of the costumes worn by these at-
tractive men of motley.
I. THE GENERAL DOMESTIC FOOL.
(Often but as it should seem improperly termed “a
clown.”)
He was—I. A mere natural or idiot.
2. Silly by nature, yet cunning and sar-
castical.
3. Artificial.


16 THE FOOLS OF SHAKESPEARE
Puttenham speaking of the latter, says— A
buffoune or counterfeit foole, to hear him speake
wisely which is like himself, it is no sport at all; but
for such a counterfeit to talk and looke foolishly it
maketh us laugh, because it is no part of his natural.
All these officiated occasionally as menial servants.
The Court Fool belonged to this 3rd class.
Immoderate and disordinate joy became incorpo-
rate in the body of a jeaster; this fellow in person is
comely, in appearell courtly, but in behaviour a very
ape and no man; his studie is to coine bitter jests, or
to shew antique motions, or to sing baudie ballads:
give him a little wine in his head, he is continually
flearing and making of mouthes: he laughs intemper-
ately at every little occasion, and dances about the
house, leaps over tables, outskips mens heads, trips
up his companions heels, burns sack with a candle,
and hath all the feats of a lord of misrule in the coun-
try: feed him in his humour, you shall have his heart,
in meere kindness he will hug you in his armes, kisse
you on the cheek, and rapping out an horrible oath,
crie God's soul Tom, I love you, you know my poore
heart, come to my chamber for a pipe of tobacco,
there lives not a man in this world that I more honour.
In these ceremonies you shall know his courting, and
it is a speciall mark of him at the table, he sits and
makes faces: keep not this fellow company, for in
jugling with him, your wardropes shall be wasted,
your credits crackt, your crownes consumed, and time


IN LIFE AND IN LITERATURE 17
|
|
(the most precious riches of the world) utterly lost.
This is the picture of a real hireling or artificial fool,
from a singular tract entitled “Wit's miserie,” 1599.
It is so exceedingly clear that the terms clown and
fool were used, however improperly, as synonymous of
our old writers that it would be an unnecessary occu-
pation of the reader's time to adduce examples. Their
confused introduction in the dramatis personae might
indeed render this position doubtful to any one who
had not well considered the matter; but although the
fool of our old plays denoted either a witty hireling
or artificial fool, both retained for the purpose of
making sport for their employers, the clown was cer-
tainly a character of much greater variety. He oc-
casionally represented one of the above personages;
sometimes he was a mere rustic, and very often no
more than a shrewd and witty domestic. There are
some instances in which any low character in a play
served to amuse the audiences with his sallies
of coarse byffoonery, and thus became the clown of
the piece. In short, the theatrical clown or fool
seems to have been a kind of heterogeneous character,
drawn in part from real-life, but very considerably
heightened-to-produce stage effect; an opinion that
derives considerable support from what Shakespeare.
has put into the mouth of Hamlet, when he makes him
admonish those who play the clowns to speak no
more than is set down for them. Indeed, the great
dramatist himself cannot be absolved from the imputa-
tion of having given too high a colouring to the char-
acters in question, unless we suppose, what is ex-


18 THE FOOLS OF SHAKESPEARE
tremely probable, that his plays have been very much
interpolated by the extemporaneous nonsense of the
players.
Dr. Fuller, speaking of the Court Jester, whom he
says some count a necessary evil, remarks in his usual
quaint manner, that it is an office which none but he
that hath wit can perform, and none but he that wants
it will perform.
THE CLowN. .
I. A mere country booby.
2. A witty rustic.
3. Any servant of a shrewd and witty disposition,
and who, like a similar character in our modern plays,
was made to treat his master with great familiarity
in order to produce stage effect.
III. The female fool, who was generally idiot.
IV. The City or Corporation Fool, whose office was
to assist at public entertainments and in pageants. To
this class belong perhaps the Lord Mayor's state fool,
and those employed by the companies of trades &c.
V. Tavern Fools. These seem to have been re-
tained to amuse the customers. We learn from one
of Ben Jonson's plays that they exhibited with the
jews harp, mounted on a joint-stool, and in another of
them he has preserved the name of such a character:
they were sometimes qualified to sing after the Italian
manner. Fools were also employed in the common
brothels.
VI. The Fool of the ancient theatrical mysteries and
moralities. He was more properly speaking, the Vice,
§
%
:


IN LIFE AND IN LITERATURE 19
a singular character, that would afford matter for
much better dessertations than those of Warburton
and Upton. Being generally dressed in a fool's habit,
he appears to have been gradually and undistinguish-
ably blended with the domestic fool; yet he was cer-
tainly a buffoon of a different sort. He was always
a bitter enemy to the Devil, and a part of his employ-
ment consisted in teazing and tormenting the poor
fiend on every occasion. He ceased to be in fashion
at the end of the sixteenth century.
VII. The Fool in the old dumb shows exhibited at
fairs, and perhaps at inns, in which he was generally
engaged in a struggle with death; a fact that seems
alluded to more than once in Shakespeare's plays. It
is possible that some casual vestiges of this species of
entertainment might have suggested the modern Eng-
lish pantomimes.
VIII. The Fool in the Whitsun ales and Morris
dance.
IX. The Mountebank's fool, or Merry Andrew.
There may be others introduced into our old dramas
of an indefinite and irregular kind, and not reducible
to any of the above classes.
CoSTUME.
Whoever is desirous of obtaining general and ac-
curate information concerning the great variety of
dresses that belong to some of the characters in ques-
tion at different periods, must study ancient prints and
paintings, and especially the miniatures that embel-
lished manuscripts. These will furnish sufficient


2O THE FOOLS OF SHAKESPEARE
specimens; but the difficulty of ascertaining how the
theatrical fools and clowns of Shakespeare's time
were always habited, is insuperable. In some instances
the plays themselves assist by peculiar references that
leave but little doubt; but this is not the case in gen-
eral.
It may be collected both from the plays themselves,
and from various other authorities, that the costume
of the domestic fool in Shakespeare's time was of
two SOrtS. "
(Here follow some etchings in pencil.)
On the first of these the coat was motley or parti-
coloured, and attached to the body by a girdle, with
bells at the skirt and elbows, though not always. The
breeches and hose close, and sometimes each leg of
a different colour. A hood resembling a monk's cowl,
which at a very early period, it was certainly designed
to imitate, covered the head entirely, and fell down
over part of the breast and shoulders. It was some-
times decorated with asses’ ears, or else terminated in
the neck and head of a cock, a fashion as old as the
fourteenth century. It had often the comb or crest
only of the animal.
The fool usually carried in his hand an official
sceptre or bauble, which was a short stick ornamented
at the end with the figure of a fool's head, or some-
times with that of a doll or puppet. To this instru-
ment there was frequently annexed an inflated skin
or bladder, the form of it varied. It was not always
filled with air, but occasionally with sand or peas.


IN LIFE AND IN LITERATURE 21
The other dress, and which appears to have been
more common in the time of Shakespeare, was the
long petticoat. This originally appertained to the
idiot or natural fool. Why it came to be used for
the allowed fool is not apparent. It was like the first,
of various colours, the materials often costly, as of
velvet, and guarded or fringed with yellow. In one
instance we have a yellow leather doublet.
| TRINCULO. *
The character of Trinculo, who in the dramatis
personae is called a jester, is not very well discrim-
inated in the course of the play itself. As he is only
associated with Caliban and the drunken butler, there
was no opportunity of exhibiting him in the legitimate
character of a professed fool: but at the conclusion
of the play it appears he was in the service of the
King of Naples as well as Stephano. He must be
regarded as an allowed domestic buffoon, and habited
in the usual manner.
LAUNCE AND SPEED.
The character of Speed is that of a shrewd witty
servant. Launce is something different, exhibiting
a mixture of archness and rustic simplicity. There is
no allusion to dress, nor any other circumstance that
marks them as the domestic fool or jester.
THE CLOWN-FESTE.
This clown is a domestic or hired fool, in the serv-
ice of Olivia. He is specially termed “an allowed
!


22 THE FOOLS OF SHAKESPEARE
fool” and “Feste, the jester, that the Lady Olivia's
father took much delight in.” Malvolio likewise
speaks of him as “a set fool.” Of his dress it is im-
possible to speak correctly. If the fool's expression
“I will impeticoat thy greatility,” be the original lan-
guage, he must have been habited accordingly. Mr.
Ritson has asserted that he has neither coxcomb nor
bauble, deducing his argument from the want of any
allusion to them. Yet such an omission may be a very
fallacious guide in judging of the habit of this char-
acter on the stage. It must, however, be admitted
that where this happens there can be no clue as to
the precise manner in which the fool was dressed.
i MEASURE FOR MEASURE-THE CLOWN.
The clown in this play officiates as the tapster of a
brothel; whence it has been concluded that he is not
a domestic fool, nor ought to appear in the dress of
that character. A little consideration will serve to
shew that the opinion is erroneous, that this clown is
altogether a domestic fool, and that he should be hab-
ited accordingly. Many ancient prints furnish in-
stances of the common use of the domestic fool in
brothels.
| Love's LABOUR's Lost—THE CLowN.
The clown in this play is a mere country fellow.
The term “fool” applied to him in Act V, Sc. II, means
nothing more than a silly fellow. He has not suf-
ficient simplicity for a natural fool, nor wit enough
for an artificial one.


24 THE FOOLS OF SHAKESPEARE
THE WINTER's TALE.
The clown is a mere country booby.
KING LEAR.
The fool of this play is the genuine domestic buf-
foon; but notwithstanding his sarcastical flashes of
wit, for which we must give the poet credit, and
ascribe them in some degree to what is called stage
effect, he is a mere natural with a considerable share
of cunning. Thus Edgar calls him an innocent, and
every one will immediately distinguish him from such
a character as Touchstone. His dress on the stage
should be particoloured; his hood crested either with
a cock's comb to which he often alludes, or with the
cock's head and neck. His bauble should have a head
like his own with a grinning countenance for the pur-
pose of exciting mirth in those to whom he occasion-
ally presents it.


26 THE FOOLS OF SHAKESPEARE
up one of the skulls from the mound of earth
and asserts, “This skull hath lain i' the earth
three-and-twenty years.” “Whose was it?”
asks the prince. “A whoreson mad fellow's it
was,” replies the sexton, and then adds, “A pesti-
lence on him for a mad rogue! a poured a flagon
of Rhenish on my head once. This same skull,
sir, was Yorick's skull, the king's jester.”
Gently taking the grim remainder from the
irreverent hands of the old grave-digger, and
gazing at it with loving tenderness, the prince ex-
claims: “Alas, poor Yorick!—I knew him, Hora-
tio: a fellow of infinite jest, of most excellent
fancy: he hath borne me on his back a thousand
times; and now how abhorred in my imagination
it is! my gorge rises at it. Here hung those lips
that I have kissed, I know not how oft. Where
be your gibes now? your gambols? your songs?
your flashes of merriment, that were wont to
set the table in a roar? Not one now to mock
your own grinning! quite chap-fallen!”
For three-and-twenty years that skull had lain
in the earth, till every vestige of its personality


YORICK 27
had been destroyed, and only the experienced eye
of the old sexton could recognize it.
A chapless skull! dust and bones tossed up
from the decaying earth from which they sprang,
and to which, by the inexorable law of nature,
they had returned; a skull that once was covered
with skin and tissues, through which ran a myriad
of arteries and veins, conveying the blood to and
from the active brain that lay in the now empty
shell. A skull that had crowned a frame, clothed
like itself, intersected with nerves that connected
the sensations of heart and brain, and canals that
carried the vital fluids on their ceaseless course,
giving the entire structure a living entity, and an
individual personality; the personality of Yorick,
jester to the court of Hamlet, King of Denmark.
Yorick! what a merry, loving soul he must
have been, how full of fun and frolic. What
pranks he must have played on those big, good-
natured, long-haired Viking warriors, as they sat
at the banquet table in the great hall of the castle
of Elsinore. In fancy, I can hear their laughter
at his madcap jests, and the deep roar of their


28 THE FOOLS OF SHAKESPEARE
.*.*.*.*
* * * *
* * ***2.
***-*
tº "."
* *
voices as they join in the chorus of his merry
Songs.
I can see him in the churchyard, serious for a
moment, sitting on an ancient tombstone, gravely
watching the old sexton digging “a pit of clay”;
the last resting place of folly and wisdom;
but his fun-loving soul cannot long be restrained
by even such solemn environment; so, furtively,
the mad rogue purloins the bibulous old grave
digger's flagon of Rhenish, standing near-by, and
pours its contents over the head of the discomfited
sexton; then, fleet as a deer he runs away, leaps
the churchyard wall, and the faint echo of his
merry laughter is the only Solace for the old man’s
wrath.
Yorick! the lines are few, and the description
brief that Shakespeare has given us of the man,
but they are so pregnant with suggestion, so sweet
in thought, and so tender in memory that he lives
in our minds as completely as though he gamboled
on the earth again, and laughingly jingled his cap
and bells in our very ears.
How happy must have been those early days


YORICK 29
at Elsinore, when Hamlet was a child and Yorick
his play-fellow. How they must have romped
together in the gardens. What fun it was for the
little prince to climb upon the jester's shoulders
and race pick-back along the terraces, the boy’s
long fair curls blowing in the wind, and his merry
laughter filling the air with music. How pleas-
ant to sit in the shade of one of the big old trees
in the park, and listen to the jester tell such inter-
esting tales of the folklore of the country; of the
traditions of the prince's warlike race, and the
mighty deeds of his great Viking ancestors. Then
there were stories, too, wonderful stories, of gob-
lins, sprites and fairies who did such strange
things that the relation of them almost frightens
the little prince; but he is reassured by a smile,
and, twining his arms round dear old Yorick's
neck, and kissing the jester's lips, he nestles close
to the breast of his motley friend in confident
Security.
Three-and-twenty years have passed since then;
years of sorrow, years of pain! The prince is now
a man, with more than a man's share of doubts,


30 THE FOOLS OF SHAKESPEARE
perplexities and cares: and yet at the sight of the
bare, chapless skull of his dead play-fellow all
the sweet and tender past comes back again.
What a tender pathos is mingled with the
prince's philosophic reflections on the remains of
his dead friend, as memory recalls each word and
incident. It is indeed a reflex of Yorick himself,
as the prince utters the grim jest, “Now get you
to my lady's chamber, and tell her, let her paint
an inch thick, to this favor she must come.”
So must we all! The king lies in his marble
sepulcher, the jester in his humble grave in the
churchyard: but the ermine robe and motley
coat, the crown and bauble will mingle their dust,
and find equality in the universal democracy of
death.


TOUCHSTONE
“A Worthy Fool”
O term Touchstone a clown, as he is called
in the cast of characters of “As You Like
It,” seems to me both a misnomer and an injustice.
His knowledge, his wisdom, his wit and his faculty
of observation, raise him far above the condition
that such a term would imply.
Fool to the court of The Duke, whose dukedom
is not named, the character of Touchstone is a
most positive and complete conception of the
mediaeval jester, and he more fully realizes the
accomplishments essential to that office, as de-
scribed by Viola in the “Twelfth Night,” than 4
any other of the motley-minded gentlemen that
the poet has created.
He is a man of considerable learning, his wit is
never lacking in wisdom, he chooses the object of
his jests with prudence, the time with discretion,
3I


32 - THE FOOLS OF SHAKESPEARE
the matter with judgment, and he is never at a
loss for a reply that is apt and to the point.
Touchstone scorns mere persiflage, is happily
free from the punning habit, and is seldom a cor-
- rupter of words; he makes his jests by logical de-
ductions, with a good premise, a sound argument,
and a positive conclusion.
This same happy quality may be found in his
encounters with the gentlemen of the court, the
|
ladies in their disguises, the simple shepherds in
the forest, and with the grave philosopher Jaques;
indeed, it is the latter gentleman who most accu-
rately summarizes the accomplishments, and gives
the keynote to the jester's character, when he pre-
sents him to the Duke: “Is not this a rare fellow,
good my lord? he is as good at anything, and yet
a fool.”
The wit of Touchstone does not scintillate, but
burns with a steady flame; it is not like the sparks
that fly from the contact of tempered steel, but
the bright and ruddy glow that radiates from
molten metal in the crucible. It is sententious
rather than brilliant, more philosophic than friv-


34 THE FOOLS OF SHAKESPEARE
and probably of punishment if discovered; he ac-
cepts the fatigues of the journey and the discom-
forts of life in the forest of Arden without hesita-
tion or complaint; he readily adapts himself to
his new environment, keeps his own counsel, as
well as that of his mistress, and holds the secret
of the disguises of Celia and Rosalind inviolate.
My first acquaintance with Touchstone was
made many years ago, at Manchester, in England.
A very elaborate production of “As You Like It”
was presented at the Prince's Theater there. I
played the part of Orlando to the Rosalind of that
beautiful and incomparable actress, Miss Adelaide
Neilson. Mr. Compton was the fool. I cannot
imagine a more adequate and effective performance
of the part than Mr. Compton gave; his quaint
personality, his unctuous humor, his artistic in-
stinct, added to his ripe experience, combined to
present a complete embodiment of the poet's
design. The mobility of his features reflected the
spirit of every line he uttered; and though he sel-
dom smiled, under the gravity of his expression
you seemed to feel there was the keenest appreci-
-------—— *


James Lewis as “Touchstone” in “As You Like It”


------- ----~--~~~~ ~~~~ =


TOUCHSTONE 35
ation of the humor of the occasion, which laughter
would have failed to convey.
The memory of Mr. Compton's performance
will ever remain with me as the living embodiment
of Touchstone.
It is a pleasing pastime to conjure up in one's
mind the pictures that Shakespeare has drawn, and
give them vitality, form and color. I have en-
deavored to imagine the scene of the first meeting
of Touchstone with the gloomy philosopher
Jaques, in the forest, as described by that eccentric
gentleman.
A fool, a fool! I met a fool i' the forest,
A motley fool!—a miserable world!
As I do live by food, I met a fool
Who laid him down and bask'd him in the sun
And rail'd on Lady Fortune in good terms,
In good set terms, and yet a motley fool.
The description is brief, but it suggests to the
imagination a scene of rare sylvan beauty, and
striking human contrast. An opening in the trees
where the sun, unimpeded by the heavy foliage of
the deep forest brightens the landscape, and the
atmosphere is redolent with the fragrance of the


TOUCHSTONE 37
finally accosts, and greets him with a salutation
that invites conference.
After the greeting there is another picture. The
background is the same, but the figures have
changed their position. The fool is still lying
upon the ground, now alert and responsive; while
Jaques has found the trunk of a friendly tree,
against which he leans in contemplative curios-
ity.
It would be interesting to hear the whole of the
dialogue between the recumbent fool and the
standing philosopher; but the dramatist was too
wise to make such an error of construction. He
gives us the main points and leaves the rest to the
imagination. That Touchstone was fully equal
to the occasion, and “vented from the strange
places in his brain, crammed with observation,
mangled forms” that impressed and astonished
“Good Monsieur Melancholy,” is proved by the
fact that the latter's usual gravity is changed to
the broadest merriment, culminating in his ex-
pressed desire to emulate the province of the
y
clown.


38 THE FOOLS OF SHAKESPEARE
O that I were a fool!
I am ambitious for a motley coat.
But to return to that portion of this interesting
interview-the poet has given us. It is narrated
by Jaques himself:
“Good morrow, fool,” quoth I. “No, sir,” quoth he,
“Call me not fool till heaven hath sent me fortune.”
And then he drew a dial from his poke,
And looking on it with lack-lustre eye,
Says very wisely, “It is ten o'clock;
Thus may we see,” quoth he, “how the world wags.
'Tis but an hour ago since it was nine,
And after one hour more 'twill be eleven;
And so, from hour to hour, we ripe and ripe,
And then from hour to hour we rot and rot;
And thereby hangs a tale.” When I did hear
The motley fool thus moral on the time,
My lungs began to crow like chanticleer,
That fools should be so deep-contemplative,
And I did laugh sans intermission
An hour by his dial-O noble fool!
A worthy fool! Motley's the only wear.
We are not informed of the effect of the inter-
view on Touchstone but, doubtless, like a good
soldier that appreciates a foeman worthy of his
steel, he esteemed the philosopher the more after
the combat of their wits.
ls


TOUCHSTONE 39
Henry Giles, in his “Human Life of Shake- Y
speare,” calls Touchstone “The Hamlet of mot-
ley,” and finds “a sadness in his jests” and “in his
mockery seem(s) to hear echoes from a solitary
heart.” He epigrammatically summarizes the
character as follows: “He is a thinker out of place,
a philosopher in mistaken vesture, a genius by
nature, an outcast by destiny.” It may be pre-
sumption on my part to differ from so distin-
guished an authority, but, while I approve the
application of the term “Hamlet of motley” as
justified by Touchstone's analogy to the Danish
prince in his reflective philosophy on the mutabil-
ity of life, I fail to find any evidence of “sadness
in his jests” or the “echoes from a solitary heart”
in his sentiments or conduct. As I have before
observed, his jests are not frivolous, but they are
characteristic of the man, quaint and sententious,
and never lacking in humor. On the arrival of
the fool in the forest of Arden, with Celia and
Rosalind, he jests at the love tale which he and
the ladies overhear Sylvius relate to Corin, and
burlesques the amatory verses that Orlando has


TOUCHSTONE 41
This has caused so eminent an authority as Dr. 1.
Furness to conclude that Shakespeare intended to
present two separate and distinct characters: an
ordinary “roynish clown” or “clownish fool,” as
he is called in the first act, and the keen and witty
philosopher, the “worthy fool” we find in the
later acts.
Again, I am compelled to differ with a dis-
tinguished scholar.
I can find nothing inconsistent in the character.
In the first act, Touchstone's jests are light and
frivolous, but in perfect keeping with the duties
of his office, which were to entertain and amuse
his master and his household; and even that
trifling example of the knight and the pancakes
is an apt illustration of his argument on “swearing
by his honor”; while his sarcastic reference to
“breaking of ribs” as “sport for ladies” is entirely
consistent with his philosophic satire in the later
aCtS.
The unities of the character are well preserved,
and the link connecting Touchstone at the court
with Touchstone in the forest is clearly defined.


42 THE FOOLS OF SHAKESPEARE
Rosalind and Celia, having decided to leave the
court and seek security in the forest, Rosalind
proposes:
What if we assay’d to steal
The clownish fool out of your father's court?
Would he not be a comfort to our travel?
To this proposal Celia eagerly assents:
He'll go along o'er the wide world with me;
Leave me alone to woo him.
That her wooing was successful is obvious, for
the next time we meet them they are at the edge of
the forest, Touchstone is with them, and like
themselves wearied by the journey they have
made. The continuity is complete. The same
trenchant wit that satirized the “breaking of ribs”
at the court, humorously exclaims against the
fatigues of the journey, and the discomforts of
the forest.
Ros. O Jupiter how weary are my spirits!
Tou. I care not for my spirits, if my legs were not
weary.
Cel. I pray you bear with me; I cannot go further.
Tou. For my part, I had rather bear with you than


TOUCHSTONE 43
bear you; yet I should bear no cross if I did bear you,
for I think you have no money in your purse.
Ros. Well, this is the forest of Arden.
Tou. Ay, now I am in Arden; the more fool Il
when I was at home, I was in a better place: but
travelers must be content.
It is obvious to me that the characters developed
in the mind of the author as he progressed in the
construction of the play, and however clear may
have been his first conception of the part, he elab-
orated and perfected it as the possibilities pre-
sented themselves.
Dr. Furness, however, is most emphatic against
this view of Shakespeare's methods. He says:
“I cannot suppose—it is unthinkable—that from
the first instant each character was not present
before him in perfect symmetry and absolute com-
pleteness.”
This is the natural point of view of such an ac-
complished scholar and scientific literary critic as
Dr. Furness; but Shakespeare had not the Doctor's
advantages of a systemized education, nor such
profound literary culture. Shakespeare adopted
methods of his own, which were at variance with


44 THE FOOLS OF SHAKESPEARE
conventionality; he discarded the scientific rules
of construction, followed the natural instincts of
his own mind, and established a new standard
of dramatic writing.
Such evidence as we have, indicates that nearly
all of the poet's play-writing was hastily done,
and as he then thought, but for temporary use on
the stage. We have no evidence of revision either
for publication or for subsequent reproduction,
but much that justifies the inference that he was
indifferent to the merits of his dramatic work;
so that while his plots may have been carefully
prepared, the characters grew in detailed impor-
tance as they developed in the mind of the actor-
dramatist, and the construction of the play pro-
ceeded. It must also be remembered that Shake-
speare worked from more than one point of view;
he possessed the creative faculty of the author,
the ideality of the poet, the constructive ability
of the dramatist, as well as the actor's instinct of
delineation. This condition I assume to have
existed in the construction of “As You Like It,”
and the result was the evolution of Touchstone.


TOUCHSTONE 45
The story of the knight and the pancakes, re-
ferred to in the foregoing lines, is told by Touch-
stone in the second scene of the first act; his initial
appearance in the play.
Rosalind and Celia are in the gardens of the
Duke's palace, when they are approached by
Touchstone, who addressing Celia, says:– “Mis-
tress, you must come away to your father.” Celia
responds with the question, “Were you made the
messenger?” “No, by mine honor,” asserts
Touchstone, “but I was bid to come for you.”
Honor being a quality with which a fool was not
supposed to be familiar, his asseveration draws
from Rosalind the query, “Where learned you that
oath, fool?” to which Touchstone replies as fol-
lows: “Of a certain knight who swore by his
honor they were good pancakes, and swore by his
honor the mustard was naught. Now I’ll stand
to it, the pancakes were naught and the mus-
tard was good, and yet was not the knight for-
sworn.”
The ladies at this apparent trifling, grow sar-
castic, Celia asking, “How prove you that in the


TOUCHSTONE 47
see some wrestling, which he terms “good sport,”
and describes with much detail the bouts that have
already occurred, in which Charles, the champion
wrestler, has overthrown and broken the ribs of
three young men, brothers, who have essayed to
compete with him. Le Beau reports the young
men as having been apparently fatally injured,
and that some of the more sympathetic spectators
have joined the aged father of the boys in his
lamentations at their hurts. At the conclusion of
Le Beau's narrative Touchstone gravely inquires,
“But what is the sport, Monsieur, that the ladies
have lost?” “Why, this that I speak of,” returns
the courtier. “Thus,” replies Touchstone, “men
may grow wiser every day! It is the first time
that ever I heard breaking of ribs was sport for
ladies.”
In the early days of my dramatic experience,
there was an unworthy “gag” introduced into this
scene by comedians who played Touchstone. At
the conclusion of the wrestling, which is witnessed
by the ladies and Touchstone, the champion is
worsted by Orlando, and thrown senseless to the


TOUCHSTONE 49
that the travelers, unperceived, overhear a lover's
complaint by a young shepherd, Sylvius, to his
more mature friend Corin. The relation of the
passion of the young shepherd brings from Rosa-
lind the acknowledgment that she is similarly
affected; and Touchstone declares he too has suf-
fered, and humorously describes his experiences
with Jane Smile, concluding with the sage aver-
ment: “We that are true lovers run into strange
capers; but as all is mortal in nature, so is all
nature in love mortal in folly.” The sentiment
is approved by Rosalind, who remarks, “Thou
speakest wiser than thou art ware of.” “Nay,”
modestly replies Touchstone, “I shall ne'er be
ware of mine own wit till I break my shins against
it.”
Touchstone's adaptability and good nature
soon make him friends and in the third act we
find him in pleasant converse with the old shep-
herd Corin, who evidently has considerable respect
for him, for he addresses him first as “Master
Touchstone” and subsequently as “Sir” Corin's
homely wit, however, is no match for that of


5o THE FOOLS OF SHAKESPEARE
Touchstone, but the latter is compelled, in justice,
to acknowledge that even in the limited sphere
of his pastoral life the shrewd observations of the
old shepherd have made him a natural philos-
opher. The dialogue is bright and characteristic
throughout the Scene, but the passages quoted be-
low are especially good examples of Touchstone's
logical reasoning.
Cor. And how like you this shepherd's life, Master
Touchstone?
Tou. Truly, shepherd, in respect of itself, it is a
good life; but in respect that it is a shepherd's life,
it is naught. In respect that it is solitary, I like it
very well; but in respect that it is private, it is a very
vile life. Now, in respect it is in the fields, it pleas-
eth me well; but in respect it is not in the court, it is
tedious. As it is a spare life, look you, it fits my
humor well: but as there is no more plenty in it, it
goes much against my stomach.-Wast ever at court,
Shepherd?
Cor. No, truly.
Tou. Then thou art damned.
Cor. For not being at court? Your reason.
Tou. Why, if thou never wast at court, thou never
saw'st good manners; if thou never saw'st good man-
ners, then thy manners must be wicked; and wicked-
ness is sin, and sin is damnation.


52 THE FOOLS OF SHAKESPEARE
and he thus complains: “When a man's verses
cannot be understood, nor a man's good wit
seconded with the forward child Understanding,
it strikes a man more dead than a great reckoning
in a little room.”
He then expresses the wish that the gods had
made her poetical. This, too, is beyond Audrey’s
comprehension, and she artlessly inquires, “Is it
honest in deed and word? Is it a true thing?”
In spite of Touchstone's desire that Audrey should
be poetical, he has apparently no very exalted
opinion of poetry, for in reply to her query he
replies, “No, truly, for the truest poetry is the
most feigning; and lovers are given to poetry; and
what they swear in poetry may be said as lovers
they do feign.” -
I must confess that I find almost as much diffi-
culty as Audrey in comprehending the argument
of Touchstone in the following passages. To
Audrey’s query, “Do you wish then that the gods
had made me poetical?” Touchstone replies, “I
do, truly; for thou swear'st to me thou art honest:
now, if thou wert a poet, I might have some hope


TOUCHSTONE 53
thou didst feign.” These words are clear enough,
even to the simple understanding of Audrey, who
asks in surprise, “Would you not have me
honest?” It is Touchstone's reply to this question
that I find confusing. He evidently has a sincere
affection for this homely country girl; he admires
her ingenuous simplicity in spite of her ignorance,
and his intentions are honorable, for he proposes
to make her his wife; yet he answers Audrey's
question, first, with an emphatic negative, “No,
truly,” and then makes the following reservation,
“Unless thou wert hard favour’d,” and gives the
concluding illogical reason, “For honesty coupled
to beauty is to have honey a sauce to sugar.”
It may be that Touchstone's worldly wisdom sees
danger in too many virtues, and the honesty of
Audrey is sufficient attraction without beauty.
There is a ring of sincerity in Audrey’s re-
joinder; a note that argues well for harmony,
and a longer voyage on the sea of matrimony than
Jaques allots them. Audrey may not be learned
or poetical, but neither is she shallow nor vain like
the little shepherdess, Phoebe; she is not coquet-


54 THE FOOLS OF SHAKESPEARE
ting for a compliment, but with refreshing candor
admits: “Well, I am not fair, and therefore I
pray the gods to make me honest.” I find in Au-
drey’s simple prayer and womanly candor qualities
indicating that in the choice of a wife Touchstone
has neither been unwise nor unfortunate.
It would appear that Touchstone had little
doubt of the success of his suit, for he not only
tells Audrey that he will marry her, but has antici-
pated matters by engaging Sir Oliver Martext,
the vicar of the next village, to meet them “in this
place in the forest, and to couple us.”
That Audrey approves of this hasty wooing is
evidenced by her characteristically implied con-
sent, “Well, the gods give us joy!” to which
Touchstone adds, “Amen!”
As the fateful moment approaches, however,
Touchstone indulges in some self-communion:
“A man may, if he were of a fearful heart, stagger
in this attempt; for here we have no temple but
the wood, no assembly but horn-beasts. But
what, though? . . . Is the single man therefore
blessed? No; as a walled town is more worthier


56 THE FOOLS OF SHAKESPEARE
of a gentleman; rather than by a hedge-priest in
the forest, like a beggar. Touchstone hesitates
before adopting this course, and Shakespeare has
put an aside speech into his mouth, which if taken
seriously would destroy much of our respect for
him. Some of the commentators have taken it
seriously, and have deduced the conclusion that
Touchstone intended to deceive Audrey; but I can-
not think it. Every action of the fool, and every
other line that the author has given him, expresses
sincere regard and indicates honorable intentions.
The entire speech seems to me to be the spon-
taneous expression of the humor of the situation,
as it appears to the keen sense of our motley
friend. The subject matter is not new nor the
treatment of it original. Marriage has been the
theme of jest at all times, to all conditions of
people, and Touchstone was too instinctively a
jester not to appreciate the possibility of a jest,
even on himself. The lines are as follows:
(Aside) “I am not in the mind but I were better
to be married of him than of another, for he is
not like to marry me well, and not being well


TOUCHSTONE 57
married, will be a good excuse for me hereafter
to leave my wife.”
However, Touchstone and Audrey accompany
Jaques to discuss the matter further, leaving the
despised Sir Oliver in high dudgeon, and without
a fee.
Jaques evidently succeeded in convincing
Touchstone of the propriety of his suggestion, but
Audrey fails to comprehend the necessity of de-
lay. To her limited understanding, one priest is
as good as another. In the first scene of the fifth
act she emphatically expresses her impatience, in-
dicating that she has an opinion, if not a will, of
her own, and protests, “Faith, the priest was good
enough, for all the old gentleman's saying.”
Touchstone finds it quite a task for his wit to
pacify the lady, and is only successful by divert-
ing her attention to the claims of another to her
affections; a certain forest youth named William.
It is a shrewd piece of diplomacy on the part of
the fool, and not new to the world by any means;
to terminate an argument by changing the sub-
ject, and affecting reproach, or of meeting one


58 THE FOOLS OF SHAKESPEARE
accusation by making another. Audrey, however,
denies the soft impeachment, and fortunately the
bucolic gentleman referred to appears most op-
portunely on the scene.
Touchstone regards the newcomer critically,
and complacently observes, “It is meat and drink
to me to see a clown. By my troth, we that have
good wits have much to answer for; we shall
be flouting, we cannot hold.”
It is a curiously contrasted group we have be-
fore us now: The country girl, awkward and
embarrassed in the presence of her rustic suitor,
and her court trained lover; the forest youth, ill
at ease, nervously shifting from one foot to the
other, as he stands, hat in hand before her; and
the smug, self-satisfied court fool, who conscious
of possession, revels in his superiority, and re-
joices in the discomfiture of his unsuccessful rival.
With what a delightful assumption of patron-
age, Touchstone questions the simple William,
encourages, emboldens, then confuses, and finally
drives the poor fellow from the field with the most
terrible threats of disaster and death. The scene


TOUCHSTONE 59
is rich in comedy, but beneath the surface may be
appreciated a deep satire on the world.
One passage especially, presents a most whole-
some truth, that it is superfluous for me to em-
phasize, but which I cannot forbear quoting.
Amongst other questions, Touchstone asks of
William, “Art thou wise?” William incau-
tiously replies, “Ay, sir, I have a pretty wit.”
This is Touchstone's opportunity, and he retorts:
“Why, thou sayest well. I do now remember a
saying, The fool doth think he is wise, but the 7
wise man knows himself to be a fool.”
Touchstone is now summoned by his “master
and mistress” (Rosalind, disguised as Ganymede,
and Celia), who evidently acquaint him of their
matrimonial intentions, and approve of his; for
the next time we meet the motley “lover and his
lass,” the former tells her, “To-morrow is the joy-
ful day, Audrey; to-morrow will we be married,”
to which she candidly and sensibly replies, “I
do desire it with all my heart; and I hope it is no
dishonest desire to be a woman of the world.”
Audrey’s wishes are shortly realized; Rosalind,


60 THE FOOLS OF SHAKESPEARE
the good fairy, waves her wand, and the forest of
Arden becomes a veritable Temple of Hymen.
All differences are adjusted, all wrongs righted,
and true love receives its reward. It is a joyous
meeting of their betters, to which Touchstone
brings his prospective bride, and to which they
are heralded by Jaques in his characteristic
fashion: “There is, sure, another flood toward,
and these couples are coming to the ark! Here
comes a pair of very strange beasts, which in all
tongues are called fools.”
However, on their appearance he bespeaks a
welcome for them from the Duke: “Good my
lord, like this fellow,” to which the Duke cour-
teously replies, “I like him very well.”
Touchstone's acknowledgment is characteristic,
if not especially gallant; but his self-abnegation
is scarcely consistent with his previously expressed
declaration, that he would not take Audrey “on
gift of any man.” However, his concluding epi-
gram is convincing, and his metaphor perfect:
“God 'ield you, sir! I desire of you the like. I
press in here, sir, amongst the rest of the country


TOUCHSTONE 61
copulatives, to swear and forswear, according as
marriage binds and blood breaks. A poor virgin,
sir, an ill-favored thing, sir, but mine own; a
poor humor of mine, sir, to take that that no
man else will. Rich honesty dwells like a miser,
sir, in a poor house, as your pearl in your foul
oyster.”
The completeness of the character of Touch-
stone is achieved in his last scene, which I have
given below in full, with some slight transposi-
tions. Here Touchstone is in his element. Sur-
rounded by persons who understand his office and
can appreciate his wit, he appears at his best.
The various accomplishments by which he claims
the title of a courtier, are irresistibly amusing,
and the humor may be applied to some modern
views on gallantry, as well as to mediaeval stand-
ards of courtesy.
No less entertaining is Touchstone's parody on
certain books on good manners, and on the ethics
of honor, which attracted some attention at this
time; and there is a vein of the most delicious
satire in his definitions of the degrees of a lie,


TOUCHSTONE 63
Quarrelsome: and so to the Lie Circumstantial and
the Lie Direct.
Jaq. And how oft did you say his beard was not
well cut?
Tou. I durst go no further than the Lie Circum-
stantial, nor he durst not give me the Lie Direct; and
so we measured swords and parted.
Jaq. Can you nominate in order now the degrees
of a lie?
Tou. O sir, we quarrel in print by the book, as
you have books for good manners. I will name you
the degrees: the first, the Retort Courteous; the sec-
ond, the Quip Modest; the third, the Reply Churlish;
the fourth, the Reproof Valiant; the fifth, the Counter-
check Quarrelsome; the sixth, the Lie with Circum-
stance; the seventh, the Lie Direct. All these you
may avoid but the Lie Direct; and you may avoid that
too, with an ‘If I I knew when seven justices could
not take up a quarrel, but when the parties were met
themselves, one of them thought but of an if I as, “If
you said so, then I said so;” and they shook hands
and swore brothers. Your “if” is the only peace-
maker; much virtue in “If.”
The concluding compliment of Jaques is but a
just tribute to the accomplishments of Touch-
stone, and well epitomizes what I conceive to be
the poet's conception; while the reply of the Duke
indicates the vein of Satirical truth that underlies


64 THE FOOLS OF SHAKESPEARE
the entire character, and summarizes the motive,
as well as the result of the author's clearly ex-
pressed intention.
y | Jaq. Is not this a rare fellow, my lord? he's as
good at anything, and yet a fool.
Duke. He uses his folly like a stalking horse, and
under the presentation of that he shoots his wit.
It was my privilege to take part in the great
dramatic festival held in Cincinnati, in 1885.
One of the plays produced was “As You Like It.”
I played the part of Orlando to the Rosalind of
that fine actress, Fanny Davenport. Stuart
Robson was the Touchstone of the occasion, and
I recall with pleasure the unique and interesting
performance he gave of the character. His dress
was that of the conventional jesters; parti-colored
doublet and hose of the period, with the tradi-
tional hood, cockscomb and bauble. His walk,
or perhaps I could better describe it as a strut,
was like that of the barnyard bird whose head
adorned his own, and his carriage was in harmony
with the same idea. His voice: what playgoer
who has once seen and heard Stuart Robson in


66 THE FOOLS OF SHAKESPEARE
tant, was on this occasion played by Mr. William
H. Crane, out of compliment to his old friend
and comrade Mr. Robson, with whom he had
been so long associated. The delightful air of
superiority assumed by the court fool over the
bucolic youth, who in his Smock frock stood with
vacuous stare and open-mouthed wonder in fear-
ful awe of his motley tormentor, was a splendid
_-
contrast of diversified humor. The keen, incisive
quality of Mr. Robson's comedy and the intelli-
gent understanding and appreciation of the text
underlying it was never better exampled than
by his delivery of that potent truism, “The fool
doth think he is wise, but the wise man knows
himself to be a fool.” It was indeed, a gem of
wisdom in a setting of golden comedy. Again,
the assumption of anger, the direful threats of
bloodthirsty consequences with which he over-
whelmed the terror-stricken William and drove
him from the field, leaving the fool in full and
undisputed possession of his lady love were simply
delicious.
This scene was rendered doubly effective by the


68 THE FOOLS OF SHAKESPEARE
the simile, he flapped his wings with the tri-
umphant Satisfaction of a barnyard rooster;
argued his right to be called a courtier with the
logic of a lawyer, and expounded the degrees of
a lie with the wisdom of an oracle.
What old playgoer does not recall the delicacy
and refinement of Mr. James Lewis's perform-
ance of the Shakespearean clowns in the several
comedy revivals at Daly's Theater, New York.
“As You Like It” was produced there in the early
eighties, with Ada Rehan as Rosalind, John Drew
as Orlando, and Mr. Lewis (Little Jimmie Lewis,
as he was affectionately called) as Touchstone.
The cameo clearness of his conception, the quaint
incisiveness of his delivery, the significance of
his business, and the delicate finish of the entire
characterization left an impression never to be
forgotten. The performance had not that
breadth of humor given to it by some comedians,
nor the rich unction of others, but it was imbued
with the quaint little gentleman's own personal-


TOUCHSTONE 69
ity, and presented with an artistic instinct that
permeated every character he assumed.
I was a witness to an eloquent though silent
tribute paid to Mr. Lewis by a stranger, of which
the actor was, at the time, unconscious.
Mr. Lewis was walking down Broadway one
afternoon in the early fall. I was a short dis-
tance behind him. Approaching, somewhat
slowly, from the opposite direction was a well-
groomed gentleman of middle age, apparently a
business man returning from his office down town.
The expression of the gentleman was absorbed
and thoughtful, as if he were revolving some
knotty problem in his mind. As he neared Mr.
Lewis he raised his eyes and, recognizing the
comedian, his expression changed completely; a
Smile replaced his frown, his eyes brightened, and
the careworn look left him entirely. He paused
slightly as Mr. Lewis passed him, looked after
the retreating figure of the comedian a second,
then resumed his journey up town with a quick-


70 THE FOOLS OF SHAKESPEARE
ened step and smiling face, the tenor of his
thoughts apparently changed and brightened by
the memory of the pleasures he had enjoyed by
the performances of the talented little gentleman
he had so unexpectedly met and recognized.
I related the incident to Mr. Lewis later. It
gratified him exceedingly, and he told me he felt
it to be one of the most delightful compliments
he had ever received.
Another Touchstone worthy of note was that
presented by Mr. Edwin Stevens, the successor
of Mr. Lewis as the comedian of Daly's Theater.
Equally artistic was Mr. Stevens, but entirely dif-
ferent in methods as he was in features and
physique. Mr. Stevens seemed to take his posi-
tion more seriously than Mr. Lewis and main-
tained a greater personal dignity. He spoke his
lines with the deliberation of oracular wisdom
rather than with spontaneous wit, and among the
courtiers carried himself as a social equal rather
than as a retainer. He wooed the humble
Audrey with condescension, and accepted com-


TOUCHSTONE 71
mendation as a matter of course. It was a most
delightful performance of the character from the
point of view of Mr. Stevens, and a worthy
achievement of a versatile and intelligent artist.


TRINCULO
IN
THE TEMPEST
“What a pied ninny’s this.”
RINCULO, in “The Tempest,” is the only
one of Shakespeare's fools who in the dram-
atis personae of the play is called a jester; and
is the one least worthy of the title.
Fool to the court of Alonzo, King of Naples,
Trinculo, while accompanying his master and
others on a sea voyage, is shipwrecked and cast,
with them, upon an unknown and apparently un-
inhabited island. Here he has wonderful adven-
tures, meets extraordinary beings, and is brought,
by the art of Prospero, the genius of the island,
under the influence of fairies, sprites, goblins, and
other strange creatures of the author's imagination.
Whatever may have been Trinculo's ability as
72


TRINCULO 73
a wit at court, he certainly does not appear to
great advantage in that respect on the island,
although, it must be admitted, he is environed by
an atmosphere of discomfort and danger, which
while affording amusement to the observer, savors
little of humor to him.
In his first scene he is out on an open plain,
“with neither bush nor shrub” in a heavy storm;
on his next appearance he is under the influence
of liquor; and the third time we meet him, he has
been pursued by fiends through a horse-pond, and
is saturated with its offensive contents.
He is dominated in the first instance by terror,
in the second by liquor, in the third by anger
and disgust; and is in turn cowardly, maudlin,
silly and disgusting. His wit is the poorest kind
of punning, and his pranks, if so they may be
called, are not spontaneous fun, but drunken
folly.
He is ungrateful and treacherous. On being
rescued from the sea, he exhibits no anxiety for
the safety of his master, nor loyalty to his mem-
ory, when he is supposed to be lost; and he readily


T. C. Cooke as “Trinculo” in “The Tempest”





76 THE FOOLS OF SHAKESPEARE
the lips of the jester, and the quality of the latter
began to deteriorate from the witty retainer of the
court, to the coarse buffoon whose jests ap-
pealed to the low and the ignorant, rather than to
the cultivated and intelligent.
It was at this period of deterioration that
Shakespeare wrote “The Tempest,” and possibly
his conception of Trinculo may be based upon the
conditions that then existed, and the character
made to present his own view of the coarseness of
expression and the poverty of wit exhibited by
the professional fools of his time.
That Shakespeare was alive to the current
events of the period in which he wrote is illus-
trated by a passage spoken by Trinculo in his
first scene.
A number of American Indians had been
brought from the newly established colony of Vir-
ginia to London; the novelty of their color, ap-
pearance and dress attracted great attention, and
caused considerable excitement and curiosity.
One of the Indians succumbed to the rigors of the


FESTE
IN
TWELFTH NIGHT
“I am indeed not her fool, but her corrupter of
words”
N the list of the characters in “Twelfth
Night,” the fool is not given a name. He is
coupled with Fabian, as “Clown,” and together
they are called “Servants to Olivia,” but in Act
2, Scene 4 of the play, he is spoken of by Curio,
a gentleman attending on the Duke, as “Feste,”
and is described as “the jester, a fool that the
Lady Olivia's father took much delight in.” He
is a combination of jester and minstrel, and is a
member of the household of the Countess Olivia,
a wealthy noblewoman of Illyria.
Feste is not of the gentle disposition of Yorick,
nor of the mental fiber of Touchstone; his wit has
neither the spontaneous humor we can imagine in
78


FESTE 79
the former, nor the sententious wisdom we find
in the latter; it is at times labored, frequently
forced, and seldom free from obvious effort. It
is professional foolery, rather than intuitive
fun.
He is o' the world, worldly; his conversation
is coarse, even for the period, and many of his
jests are vulgar. -
His retorts are neither keen nor incisive; they
have the brutality of the cudgel, rather than theº
point of the rapier.
He trusts more to “good fooling” than to ready
wit, and many of his sallies are but thinly dis-
guised imp dence; yet it must be admitted that
------
at times he makes some telling points, and de-
livers some very clever epigrams.
He is shrewd and thrifty if not covetous; he
does not scruple to accept money, even from
strangers, nor does he hesitate broadly to suggest
liberality to those patrons who are tardy with
their bounty.
Disguised as Sir Topaz he quotes Latin aptly
and accurately; he shows familiarity with Gre-


8o THE FOOLS OF SHAKESPEARE
cian history and legend, and is not unacquainted
with the philosophy of Pythagoras.
In spite of his knowledge, he appears to be tol-
erated rather than appreciated; and although he
is admitted to the revels of Sir Toby Belch, and
Sir Andrew Aguedheek, on a comparative equal-
ity, it is chiefly on account of his accomplishments
as a minstrel. He associates with the servants
of the house, and is treated as one by his mis-
treSS.
His best friend appears to be Maria, the wait-
ing-woman to Lady Olivia. On his first appear-
ance in the play, in Act 1, Scene 5, he is appar-
ently seeking her good offices with her mistress,
to excuse his evidently unauthorized, and lengthy
absence from the household. With feminine
curiosity Maria endeavors to gain from him an
account of his truancy, but Feste shrewdly avoids
any compromising admissions. Maria, somewhat
irritated, expresses herself with characteristic de-
cision, and warns him of the severe punishment
he may expect. Feste assumes a recklessness, but
realizes the gravity of his offense:


FESTE 81
Mar. Nay, either tell me where thou hast been, or
I will not open my lips so wide as a bristle may enter
in way of thy excuse; my lady will hang thee for thy
absence.
Clo. Let her hang me; he that is well hanged in
this world needs to fear no colors.
Mar. Make that good.
Clo. He shall see none to fear.
Mar. A good lenten answer; I can tell thee where
that saying was born, of “I fear no colors.”
Clo. Where, good Mistress Mary?
Mar. In the wars; and that may you be bold to
say in your foolery.
Clo. Well, God give them wisdom that have it;
and those that are fools, let them use their talents.
Mar. Yet you will be hanged for being so long ab-
sent. . . . Here comes my lady; make your excuse
wisely, you were best.
Maria leaves him, and being alone Feste thus
soliloquizes: “Wit, an’t be thy will, put me into
good fooling! Those wits, that think they have
thee, do very oft prove fools; and I, that am sure
I lack thee, may pass for a wise man; for what
says Quinapalus? ‘Better a witty fool than a Y
foolish wit.’” f
The Lady Olivia enters, whom he respectfully
salutes, with: “God bless thee, lady!”


82 THE FOOLS OF SHAKESPEARE
But the lady is evidently much displeased, and
very promptly and indignantly commands:
“Take the fool away.”
With characteristic audacity the fool chal-
lenges the lady, in the following dialogue:
Clo. Do you not hear, fellows? Take away the
lady.
Oli. Go to, you're a dry fool; I'll no more of you;
besides you grow dishonest.
Clo. Two faults, madonna, that drink and good
counsel will amend: for give the dry fool drink, then
is the fool not dry; bid the dishonest man mend him-
self; if he mend, he is no longer dishonest; anything
that's mended is but patched; virtue that transgresses
is but patched with sin; and sin that amends is but
patched with virtue. . . . The lady bade take away the
fool; therefore I say again, take her away.
Oli. Sir, I bade them take away you.
Clo. Misprison in the highest degree! . . . Good
madonna, give me leave to prove you a fool.
Oli. Can you do it?
Clo. Dexterously, good madonna.
Oli. Make your proof.
Clo. I must catechise you for it. . . . Good ma-
donna, why mourn'st thou?
Oli. Good fool, for my brother's death.
Clo. I think his soul is in hell, madonna.
Oli. I know his soul is in heaven, fool.


FESTE 83
Clo. The more fool, madonna, to mourn for your
brother's soul being in heaven.—Take away the fool,
gentlemen. •º
The wit of the fool somewhat molifies the
anger of the lady, who appeals to Malvolio to
indorse her approval of his readiness: “Doth he ,
not mend?”
But the steward is no friend of Feste, and re-
plies with a sarcasm that is not lost on the fool:
“Yes; infirmity, that decays the wise, doth ever
make the better fool.”
This brings from Feste the prompt and clever
retort: “God send you, sir, a speedy infirmity,
for the better increasing your folly! Sir Toby
will be sworn that I am no fox, but he will
not pass his word for twopence that you are no
fool.”
Malvolio, thus goaded, continues to dispraise
the fool, but Olivia warmly defends him, and ad-
ministers a severe reproof to the steward for his
vanity: “O, you are sick of self-love, Malvolio.
. . . There is no slander in an allowed fool,
though he do nothing but rail; nor no railing *


88 THE FOOLS OF SHAKESPEARE
ness: “I warrant thou art a merry fellow, and
carest for nothing.”
The reply she receives, however, is neither po-
lite nor encouraging: “Not so, sir, I do care for
something; but in my conscience, sir, I do not care
for you; if that be to care for nothing, sir, I would
it would make you invisible.”
Ignoring this discourtesy, Viola asks: “Art
not thou the Lady Olivia's fool?”
| Again Feste justifies his office by the descrip-
| tion he gives of himself: “No, indeed, sir; the
Lady Olivia has no folly; she will keep no fool,
sir, till she be married; and fools are as like hus-
bands as pilchards are to herrings; the husband's
the bigger. I am indeed not her fool, but her
*/ corrupter of words.” w
In reply to Viola's assertion that she saw Feste
recently at the palace of the Count Orsino, the
jester gives us the following terse but eloquent
truism: “Foolery, sir, doth walk about the orb
like the sun; it shines everywhere.”
At this, Viola, who is disguised as a youth, and
is mistaken for one by Feste, offers him a coin.


FESTE 89
In way of thanks the latter exclaims: “Now
Jove, in his next commodity of hair, send thee a
beard.”
Viola is deeply in love with the Duke Orsino,
who is ignorant of her passion; and at this sally
of the fool, wittily rejoins: “By my troth, I’ll
tell thee; I am almost sick for one, though I would
not have it grow on my chin.”
Feste does not understand this allusion, but
holding the coin he has received in his hand,
makes the pointed suggestion: “Would not a
pair of these have bred, sir?”
Viola replies: “Yes, being kept together and
put to use.”
Feste is resourceful, and returns to the charge
armed with a simile from Grecian legend.
º
Fes. I would play Lord Pandarus of Phrygia, sir,
to bring a Cressida to this Troilus. -
Vio. I understand you, sir, 'tis well begged.
Fes. The matter, I hope, is not great, sir, begging
but a beggar; Cressida was a beggar.
Finding his efforts to increase his bounty inef-
fectual, Feste continues to “dally nicely with


90 THE FOOLS OF SHAKESPEARE
words,” and then retires. “My lady is within,
sir. I will construe to them whence you come;
who you are and what you would are out of my
welkin; I might say element, but the word is
Overworn.” -
It is the preceding scene that suggests to Viola
the passage that so aptly describes the require-
ments of a fool, which I have quoted at length in
the introduction to this book, and which I repro-
duce here to accentuate its significance.
This fellow's wise enough to play the fool;
And to do that well craves a kind of wit;
He must observe their mood on whom he jests,
The quality of persons, and the time,
And, like the haggard, check at every feather
That comes before his eye. This is a practice
As full of labor as a wise man's art;
For folly that he wisely shows is fit;
But wise men, folly-fallen, quite taint their wit.
The complications that arise in Act 4, conse-
quent on the disguise of Viola as Cesario, and
her subsequent mistaken identity for Sebastian,
occur in rapid succession. Feste, of course, be-
comes involved in them, and in the first Scene,


FESTE 91
with the real Sebastian, there is a dialogue of
considerable humor. Feste, as usual, is “dal-
lying with words” and unusually, exhibiting some
impatience; however the irritation is quickly
allayed by the soothing application of a coin, a
remedy that seems effective with the fool at all
times.
In the second scene, Feste, at the instigation of
Maria, assumes the character of Sir Topaz, the
curate, to assist in tormenting his old enemy Mal-
volio, who, by a trick of that mischief-loving
maid, has been seized as a madman, bound, and
confined in a dark cellar. The scene is one of
good fooling, rather than witty dialogue; but in
assuming the robe of the curate, Feste makes some
reflections indicating that sanctimony and hypoc-
risy were as prevalent in the days of Shakespeare
as they unfortunately are in ours:
Fes. Well I’ll put it on, and I will dissemble my-
self in’t, and I would I were the first that ever dis-
sembled in such a gown. I am not tall enough to be-
come the function well, nor lean enough to be
thought a good student; . . . but as the old hermit of
Prague very wittily said to a niece of King Gorboduc,


92 THE FOOLS OF SHAKESPEARE
º “That that is, is; so I, being master parson, am mas-
ter parson, for what is ‘that but ‘that'? and ‘is’ but
‘is’ Pº
He greets Sir Toby with a Latin salutation, and
bears himself with humorous gravity as Sir
Topaz. He uses big words, and applies them
with a contrary meaning. He questions Mal-
volio as to his views on the opinions of Pythag-
oras concerning wild fowl, and leaves him with
assumed indignation when the alleged lunatic
will not agree with the philosopher.
Fes. Remain thou still in darkness. Thou shalt
hold the opinion of Pythagoras, ere I will allow of
thy wits, and fear to kill a woodcock, lest thou dis-
possess the soul of thy grandam.
Feste then doffs his disguise, and addresses
Malvolio in his own character, with assumed
sympathy: “Alas, sir, how fell you besides your
five wits?”
“I am as well in my wits, fool, as thou art,”
replies Malvolio.
“Then,” retorts Feste; “you are mad in-
deed, if you be no better in your wits than a
fool.”
~


FESTE 93
Feste continues to plague the poor steward,
now as Sir Topaz, now as himself, reveling in the
prisoner's discomfiture till the man is almost dis-
tracted, and begs for candle, ink, and paper that
he may communicate with his mistress. These
articles Feste promises to obtain, but before going
delivers a parting shaft:
Fes. Are you not mad indeed? or do you but coun-
terfeit?
Mal. Believe me, I am not; I tell thee true.
Fes. Nay, I'll ne'er believe a madman till I see his
brains.
And with a merry catch, the laughing fool
leaves the poor imprisoned steward to his misery.
Malvolio evidently obtains his ink and paper,
writes his letter, and intrusts it to Feste for de-
livery; the latter, however, pockets the missive,
and on the principle that “A mad man's epistles
are no gospels, so it skills not when they are de-
livered,” keeps it there till inclination prompts,
and opportunity provides a suitable occasion to
present it to his mistress.
In the meantime, in company with Fabian, Feste


g4 THE FOOLS OF SHAKESPEARE
encounters the Duke Orsino, for whom he lately
sang. The Duke asks if they belong to the
household of the Lady Olivia. With his usual
effrontery and lack of reverence, he answers,
“Ay, sir, we are some of her trappings.”
The Duke recognizes him, and graciously in-
quires: “How dost thou, my good fellow?”
His reply and argument are worthy a wiser
man than Feste, and exhibit a philosophy as
sound, as it is wholesome.
Fes. Truly, sir, the better for my foes and the
worse for my friends.
Duke. Just the contrary; the better for thy
friends.
Fes. No, sir, the worse.
Duke. How can that be?
Fes. Marry, sir, they praise me and make an ass
of me; now my foes tell me plainly I am an ass; so
that by my foes, sir, I profit in the knowledge of my-
self, and by my friends I am abused: . . . why, then,
the worse for my friends, and the better for my foes.
Appreciating the shrewd wisdom of the fool,
the Duke exclaims, “This is excellent,” which
gives Feste an opportunity for one of the cleverest
retorts in the play:


FESTE 95
Fes. By my troth, sir, no; though it please you to
be one of my friends.
The Duke is himself not without wit, and
promptly recognizing the ready sarcasm of the
fool, replies: “Thou shalt not be the worse for
me; there's gold.”
Feste accepts the gratuity, and again exhibits
his avaricious shrewdness by suggesting:
Fes. But that it would be double dealing, sir, I
would you could make it another.
After a brief passage of protest and replication,
the Duke yields to the fool's clever pleading:
Duke. Well, I will be so much a sinner to be a
double-dealer; there's another.
Even this liberality does not satisfy the greed
of the fool, who again importunes the Duke, on
the principle that “The third pays for all.” But
that nobleman is not so easily cajoled, and deliv-
ers his ultimatum with some emphasis.
|
Duke. You can fool no more money out of me at
this throw; if you will let your lady know I am here
to speak with her, it may awake my bounty further.


96 THE FOOLS OF SHAKESPEARE
Finding that any further effort to enlarge his
purse at the expense of the Duke would be use-
less, for the present, Feste retires; not, however,
without a parting hint of future possibilities.
Fes. Marry, sir, lullaby to your bounty till I come
again. I go sir; but, as you say, sir, let your bounty
take a nap, I will awake it anon.
After much delay, Feste finds an opportunity
to deliver the letter of Malvolio to his mistress.
She commands him to “open and read it,” which
he proceeds to do, prefacing his task with the ad-
monition:
Fes. Look, then, to be well edified when the fool
delivers the madman.
But Lady Olivia has had enough of his folly,
and instructs another to read the letter, which
being done explains the trick that has been played
on Malvolio, and assists in unraveling the com-
plications, and clearing up the mysteries of the
play. Malvolio's humiliation is sufficient pun-
ishment to all but the fool, whose petty nature
cannot refrain from gloating over his fallen foe,
by repeating the passages in the decoying letter,


,,\q3 IN qųJIºa^JL,, uĮ „34 sºlº,, se snyſoeg. ‘A ‘GH


FESTE 97
and former reproaches that he has received at the
hands of the steward:
Fes. Why, “Some are born great, some achieve
greatness, and some have greatness thrown upon
them,” I was one, sir, in this interlude; . . . “By the
Lord, fool, I am not mad.” But do you remember?
“Madam, why laugh you at such a barren rascal? an
you smile not, he's gagged.”
And to quote Feste's own words in conclusion:
“And thus the whirligig of time brings in his
revenges.”
At the culmination of what may be termed the
serious interest of the play, all the characters ex-
cept the clown retire: he being alone concludes
the comedy with a song:
When that I was and a little tiny boy,
With hey, ho, the wind and the rain,
A foolish thing was but a toy,
For the rain it raineth every day.
But when I came to man's estate,
With hey, ho, the wind and the rain,
'Gainst knaves and thieves men shut their gate,
For the rain it raineth every day.
But when I came, alas ! to wive,
With hey, ho, the wind and the rain,


98 THE FOOLS OF SHAKESPEARE
By swaggering could I never thrive,
For the rain it raineth every day.
But when I came unto my beds,
With hey, ho, the wind and the rain,
With toss-pots still had drunken heads,
For the rain it raineth every day.
A great while ago the world begun,
With hey, ho, the wind and the rain,
But that's all one, our play is done,
And we'll strive to please you every day.
This song has caused such an amount of con-
flicting comment, so opposite in its conclusions,
that I append a few excerpts to assist the reader
in his consideration of its intention and sig-
nificance.
George P. Goodale, the dramatic critic, incor-
porates the view of Charles Knight in one of a
series of essays on the subject, published recently,
under the caption of “The Kaleidoscope” in The
Detroit Free Press. He says: “The song of the
Clown, originally given as an epilogue, though
not retained in the acting editions of the hour, is
judiciously regarded as the most philosophical
Clown song on record, on the discoverable wis-


FESTE iO1
mer. How gracious hath Shakespeare been to
mankind in this play. He could not do other-
wise than leave Feste all alone to pronounce its
benediction, for his heart was a nest of songs
whence they rose to whistle with the air of wis-
dom. Alas for the poor fool in Lear who sang
to drown the cries from a violated nest.”
I wish that I could take the same view as Dr.
Weiss of the song and the singer. It is not only
ingenious but poetical in the extreme and is a
reflex of the gentle nature and sweet fancy of the
writer; but with exception of the love songs, sung
as a minstrel, I do not find a line of poetry in the
part of the jester, nor a single expression of sin-
cere or even simulated sentimentality.
Lloyd seems to have summed up the character
concisely when he says: “He knows the world
too well . . . to feel much sympathy for any-
body, or consequently to get much in return.”
While Ulrici goes still further and asserts: “He
(Feste) alone in full consciousness contemplates
life as a merry Twelfth Night, in which every
one has, in fact, only to play his allotted part to


102 THE FOOLS OF SHAKESPEARE
the greatest possible amusement of himself and
others.”
For my part I think the song is the conven-
tional conclusion of the play, appropriate, but
with no special significance.
The same design is followed in “Love's Labor's
Lost,” and the “Midsummer Night's Dream”;
they both terminate with a song. Epilogues con-
clude “As You Like It” and “Henry VIII”; and
Chorus closes the historical plays. The tragedies
alone close with the culminating incident.
I recall when almost every form of dramatic
composition closed with a “Tag,” and it was one
of the superstitions of the dramatic profession,
that to speak the tag at rehearsal augured failure.


LAUNCELOT GOBBO
IN
THE MERCHANT OF VENICE
“A Merry Devil”
N that delightful comedy, “The Merchant of
Venice,” we have a type of the shrewd but
ignorant serving man, or boy, drawn on the same
lines as Launce and Speed in “The Two Gentle-
men of Verona,” and the two Dromios, in “The
Comedy of Errors,” but apparently younger and
less matured than either of them.
His name is Launcelot Gobbo, a fact of which
he is somewhat proud. He has a crude philos-
ophy and a rude kind of wit. He uses big words
and misapplies them most ingenuously. He is
good-natured, full of fun, and rejoices in a prac-
tical jest.
Launcelot is the servant to Shylock, a wealthy
Jewish merchant and money lender of Venice,
IO3


104 THE FOOLS OF SHAKESPEARE
with whom he lives and of whom he stands in
wholesome awe. His fun-loving nature, how-
ever, has served to brighten the dull and dreary
home of that stern and revengeful gentleman, a
fact that Jessica, the Jew’s daughter, frankly
acknowledges in her first interview with the boy.
Our house is hell, and thou a merry devil
Did'st rob it of some taste of tediousness.
Launcelot does not appear till the second Scene
of the second act of the comedy, when we find
him stealthily leaving his master's house. We
learn that he feels aggrieved at some apparent
wrong at the hands of his employer, and is debat-
ing whether to remain in his service, or to run
away. His soliloquy or self-argument on the
point is most entertaining. He would be just,
but being both plaintiff and defendant, as well
as advocate and judge of the question at issue,
he can scarcely be credited with impartiality.
However, the motives that he frankly acknowl-
edges, and the reasons he advances are most de-
lightfully human, and most humorously ex-
pressed. The entire passage is a quaint, and by


LAUNCELOT GOBBO 105
no means unnatural, self-contention between duty
and inclination; the conclusion, as a matter of
course, being in favor of inclination.
Certainly, my conscience will serve me to run from
this Jew, my master: the fiend is at mine elbow, and
tempts me, saying to me, “Gobbo, Launcelot Gobbo,
good Launcelot, or good Gobbo, or good Launcelot
Gobbo, use your legs, take the start, run away.” My
conscience says—“No, take heed, honest Launcelot;
take heed, honest Gobbo ; or,” as aforesaid, “honest
Launcelot Gobbo; do not run; scorn running with
thy heels.”—Well, the most courageous fiend bids me
pack; via! says the fiend; away, says the fiend; for the
heavens rouse up a brave mind, says the fiend, and
run. Well, my conscience, hanging about the neck
of my heart, says very wisely to me—“my honest
friend Launcelot, being an honest man's son”—or
rather an honest woman's son;–for, indeed, my
father did something smack, something grow to, he
had a kind of taste;—well, my conscience says—
“Launcelot, budge not;” “budge,” says the fiend;
“budge not,” says my conscience. Conscience, say I,
you counsel well; fiend, say I, you counsel well; to be
ruled by my conscience, I should stay with the Jew,
my master, who, Heaven bless the mark! is a kind of
devil; and, to run away from the Jew, I should be
ruled by the fiend, who, saving your reverence, is the
devil himself: certainly, the Jew is the very devil
incarnation, and, in my conscience, my conscience is


106 THE FOOLS OF SHAKESPEARE
but a kind of hard conscience, to offer to counsel me
to stay with the Jew: the fiend gives the more friendly
counsel ! I will run; fiend, my heels are at your com-
mandment, I will run.
However, Launcelot does not run; he is spared
that violence to his conscientious scruples by the
unexpected advent of his father, an old Italian
peasant, whose vöice is heard calling in the dis-
tance, and halts the would-be runaway.
Launcelot’s decision of character is not very
marked, nor his resentments very strong, for in a
moment his wrongs are forgotten, and he is de-
signing a practical jest on his aged parent.
“O heavens!” he exclaims, “this is my true-
begotten father; who, being more than sand-
blind, high-gravel-blind, knows me not:-I will
try confusions with him.”
Old Gobbo, bent with age, almost blind, and
feeling his way by the aid of a staff, hobbles on
the Scene; he carries a small basket on his arm,
and in a voice of “childish treble” cries: “Mas-
ter young gentleman, I pray you, which is the way
to master Jew’s?”


LAUNCELOT GOBBO 107
Launcelot takes the old fellow by the shoul-
ders, and turns him first to the right, then to the
left, and finally completely round, giving him
the following, somewhat confusing directions:
“Turn up on your right hand at the next turn-
ing, but at the next turning of all, on your left;
marry, at the very next turning, turn of no hand,
but turn down directly to the Jew’s house.”
Small wonder that the old man exclaims:
“By God’s sonties, 'twill be a hard way to hit.”
However, he is seeking and most anxious to
find his son, and as soon as he has recovered from
the jolting he has received at the hands of his
demonstrative informant, he asks him the follow-
ing most extraordinary and confusing question:
“Can you tell me whether one Launcelot, that
dwells with him, dwell with him, or no?”
This is excellent matter for the boy to try con-
fusions with, so he answers question with ques-
tion, prefacing it, however, with an aside, “Mark
me now; now will I raise the waters. Talk you
of young Master Launcelot?”
But the old man will not admit that his son


108 THE FOOLS OF SHAKESPEARE
is entitled to the dignity of “Master” Launcelot:
so that eccentric young gentleman, who certainly
has a novel sense of humor, tells him that his son
is dead. The sincere grief of the old man evi-
dently shames the boy, for he quickly changes
his tone, and asks: “Do you know me, father?”
Old Gobbo pitifully replies: “Alack, sir, I
am sand blind; I know you not.”
This induces some shrewd observations from
Launcelot, which are worthy of note: “If you
had your eyes, you might fail of the knowing me:
it is a wise father that knows his own child.”
Launcelot then kneels down with his back to
his father, and continues: “Give me your bless-
ing: truth will come to light, murder cannot be
hid long, a man's son may, but in the end truth
will out.”
The old man has been deceived once and hesi-
tates; upon which Launcelot exclaims with Some
impatience: “Pray you, let's have no more fool-
ing about it, but give me your blessing; I am
Launcelot, your boy that was, your son that is,
your child that shall be.”


112 THE FOOLS OF SHAKESPEARE
the edge of a feather bed,—here are simple 'scapes.
Well, if Fortune be a woman, she's a good wench
for this gear.—Father, come; I'll take my leave of
the Jew in the twinkling of an eye.
Notwithstanding his scruples of conscience that
caused him so much anxiety, when we first met
him, Launcelot has not been entirely loyal to his
master, and on leaving we find him secretly bear-
ing a letter from Jessica, the Jew’s daughter, to
her young Christian lover, Lorenzo. The mis-
sive requires a reply which Launcelot obtains ver-
bally, and the cunning young rascal cleverly man-
ages to convey it to the young Jewess, while bear-
ing an invitation to her father, from his new mas-
ter, Bassanio. His words are not brilliant, but
serve to indicate his ingenuity.
Mistress, look out at window, for all this;
There will come a Christian by,
Will be worth a Jewess’ eye.
Launcelot accompanies his new master to Bel-
mont, where on our next meeting we find him
comfortably installed; very much at home, and
in a new livery. He is still bandying words with


LAUNCELOT GOBBO 113
Jessica, who is now the wife of Lorenzo, and, in
the absence of Portia, mistress of the house.
His self-esteem seems to have grown in his new
service, his vocabulary has increased, and he
speaks with more authority, but with the same
unfortunate propensity for punning. He is ob-
viously favored by his “betters,” and like many
others of small mind takes advantage of that fact
to speak with a freedom that is not entirely de-
void of impudence. However, his humor atones
for much, and his good-nature accomplishes the
TeSt.
The dialogue quoted (with some slight elim-
inations) below takes place in the garden of Por-
tia's house (Act 3, Scene 5). It is apparently
the continuation of a discussion of the old theme
of Jessica's parentage, and her father's sins;
Launcelot taking a literal view of the scriptural
precept in her case.
Laun. Yes, truly; for, look you, the sins of the
father are to be laid upon the children; therefore, I
promise you, I fear you. I was always plain with you,
and so now I speak my agitation of the matter; there-
fore, be of good cheer; for, truly, I think thou art


114 THE FOOLS OF SHAKESPEARE
damned. There is but one hope in it that can do you
any good.
Jess. And what hope is that, I pray thee?
Laun. Marry, you may partly hope that you are
not the Jew's daughter.
Jess. So the sins of my mother should be visited
On me.
Laun. Truly then I fear you are damned both by
father and mother; thus when I shun Scylla, your
father, I fall into Charybdis, your mother; well, you
are gone both ways.
Jess. I shall be saved by my husband; he hath
made me a Christian.
Laun. Truly, the more to blame he; we were
Christians enow before; e'en as many as could well
live, one by another. This making of Christians will
raise the price of hogs; if we grow all to be pork-
eaters, we shall not shortly have a rasher on the coals
for money.
The entrance of Lorenzo puts an end to
Launcelot's calamitous predictions, and that
gentleman having little appreciation of the lat-
ter's verbal fooling, directs him. “Go in, sirrah:
bid them prepare for dinner.”
To which the irrepressible Launcelot replies:
“That is done, sir; they have all stomachs.” -
With some impatience, Lorenzo exclaims:


LAUNCELOT GOBBO 115
“Goodly Lord, what a wit-snapper art thou! then
bid them prepare dinner.”
This does not discourage the boy, who re-
sponds: “That is done too, sir; only, cover is the
word.”
Lorenzo, with some irritation, seeks to bring
this equivocation to a close, and now gives his
directions with emphasis: “I pray thee, under-
stand a plain man in his plain meaning; go to thy
fellows, bid them cover the table, serve in the
meat, and we will come in to dinner.”
The imperturbable self-esteem and good-nature
of Launcelot is proof, however, against censure or
sarcasm; and with unruffled gravity he replies
with humorous iteration: “For the table, sir, it
shall be served in; for the meat, sir, it shall be
covered; for your coming in to dinner, sir, why,
let it be as humors and conceits shall govern.”
And having thus delivered himself, Launcelot
makes a dignified exit from the scene.
Lorenzo's apostrophe to Launcelot's discourse.
is an admirable summary of the shallow mind,
that mistakes the mere jugglery of words for wit.


116 THE FOOLS OF SHAKESPEARE
It was a favorite method of Shakespeare's to
furnish humor in his “simples” and serving men,
and proved an amusing diversion in their mouths:
but, in others, it is the unconscious tribute that
ignorance and incapacity pays to knowledge and
distinction. -
Lor. O dear discretion, how his words are suited!
The fool hath planted in his memory
An army of good words; and I do know
A many fools that stand in better place,
Garnish'd like him, that for a tricksy word
Defy the matter.
Launcelot makes one more brief appearance, to
announce the early return of Bassanio to Bel-
mont, and as a harbinger of glad tidings we leave
him in the service of a noble master and a gra-
cious mistress.
The business of the Shakespearean clowns is
traditional. It has been handed down by come-
dians from generation to generation. It was
familiar to every stage manager of experience, in
the days of the resident stock company; and any
departure from the conventional business of these


Charles Charters as “Launcelot Gobbo” in “The Merchant
of Venice”


* ,


LAUNCELOT GOBBO 117
parts was, until recently, viewed with disap-
proval, and regarded as presumption.
A most interesting and unique performance of
Launcelot Gobbo was given some years ago by
that sterling character actor, Mr. Robert Peyton
Carter, so long associated with Miss Maude
Adams. I was the Shylock of the performance to
which I refer. Mr. Carter's Launcelot was not a
boy, but a humorous and mischievous young man.
At no time during the performance, even when
trembling with fear before his master, was a smile
absent from his face; with this result, the audience
were smiling all the time Launcelot was in view.
You knew, as you looked at him during his self-
argument between duty and inclination, that his
mind was already made up to run away, and that
his conscientious scruples (if he really ever had
any) were overcome before he uttered them. His
practical jest with his father, when he misdirects
him to the Jew’s house, indicated that it was but
a sample of the pranks the young man had played


118 THE FOOLS OF SHAKESPEARE
upon him all his life, and the bright twinkle in
his eyes as his young mistress called him “a merry
devil” connoted a thousand tricks that the young
rascal had played during the term of his service in
the Jew’s house and robbed that somewhat dreary
residence of its “taste of tediousness.”
Mr. Carter's business on the delivery of Jessica's
letter to Lorenzo was original and good; his exag-
gerated obeisance to the several friends in company
with that gentleman being particularly character-
istic and happy. In the last act of the comedy, too
frequently omitted in representation, Mr. Carter's
appreciation of Shakespearean humor was mani-
fest. The importance of his new employment,
his vanity in his “rare new livery,” and confidence
of privileged service were delightfully presented,
and rounded out a performance as notable as it
was consistent and effective.
“The Merchant of Venice” held an important
place in the repertoire of the late Mr. Richard
Mansfield. In discussing the various characters
in the play with that distinguished gentleman, he


LAUNCELOT GOBBO 119
told me he considered the Launcelot Gobbo of Mr.
A. G. Andrews, of his company, the best he had
ever seen. It did not surprise me, for I knew Mr.
Andrews to be a thorough and painstaking artist,
studying out to the most minute detail every point
of his make-up, costume and business. Mr.
Andrews presented Launcelot as a boy to whom
life was a very serious problem. His costume
was extremely characteristic; his doublet and
trunks were worn and patched, his hose seamed and
darned, and his sandal-shoes with their leather
straps had seen service hard and long. He made
his first entrance from his master's house hastily,
then looked round fearfully and, finding himself
unobserved, sat down upon the door-step and
seriously held self-communion as to the justice of
leaving his master's service. In other respects he
followed the traditional business of the part;
but nothing was exaggerated, rather subdued; his
object being to present Launcelot as a possible
human being, and not an impossible clown, as
many comedians have done. The humor of the
part was always present, never intruded, but con-


120 THE FOOLS OF SHAKESPEARE
veyed naturally and without effort: the result
being a well proportioned and artistic perform-
ance.


CITIZEN
IN
JULIUS CAESAR
f
HE tragedy of “Julius Caesar” is so exalted
in theme, so heroic in sentiment and so noble
in principle, that humor would scarcely be an ap-
propriate factor in its composition. The magni-
tude of manhood that the author has brought into
Such striking contrast and juxtaposition is so com-
pletely sustained, and the elements of lofty patriot-
ism and civic virtue are preserved so exclusively,
that the lesser qualities and conditions of life are
dwarfed into insignificance.
The characters of Marcus Brutus, Cassius, Marc
Antony, Caesar, Casca, Trebonius and the others,
are cast in such “heroic mold,” that they repre-
sent “the highest heaven of invention,” and like
Chorus, in the prologue to “Henry V,” we might
well ask:
_ a-
I2I


122 THE FOOLS OF SHAKESPEARE
A kingdom for a stage, princes to act
And monarchs to behold the swelling scene!
However, before the great personages in the
drama make their appearance, Shakespeare has
given us an illustration of the character of the
Roman populace, and has introduced an episode
that serves as a foundation for the later incidents,
and at the same time furnishes an excellent exam-
ple of broad comedy and wholesome humor.
It is in the first scene of the play, which is
simply described as “Rome. A Street.” A num-
ber of citizens are assembled; a typical crowd of
mechanics, artisans, serving-men, and idlers, who
are awaiting the advent of the procession to the
ceremonies of the feast of the Lupercal. They
are good-naturedly but somewhat boisterously
jostling, and shouting, when they are interrupted
by the approach of two of the tribunes, Flavius
and Marullus, who in turn silence, reprove and
question them.
The dialogue between the characters briefly in-
forms us of the sumptuary laws of Rome at that
period, and indicates the sentiments and relations


CITIZEN IN JULIUS CAESAR 123
that existed between the patricians and the com-
mon people.
In the assemblage, two only of the citizens
reply to the questions of the tribunes; they have
no names in the list of characters, but are simply
distinguished as “First” and “Second” citizens.
The first citizen is an ordinary mechanic, dis-
tinguished by no especial feature from the rest of
the crowd; but the wit and humor of the second
warrants some description.
In many places that I have visited, I have found
a local wit or jester. The community is usually
very proud of him, and he is brought forward on
all social occasions to sustain the reputation of the
town for humor, and its appreciation. These al-
leged wits vary in condition, but never in charac-
teristic. They are usually fat, ruddy-faced and
good-natured, with a stock of well-seasoned wit
and fully matured stories which they exploit and
relate much to their own satisfaction and the ad-
miration of their local admirers, but not always
to the enjoyment of the visitor. Whatever they
say is supposed to be witty, and they are at all


124 THE FOOLS OF SHAKESPEARE
times ready for a verbal passage at arms with any
one who has the temerity to challenge them. This
type is not rare, but occasionally one meets a
natural wit who is both mellow and keen. Such
an one I imagine the individual to be who appears
under the title of the “Second Citizen” in “Julius
Caesar.”
The man is a cobbler by trade, and a wit by
nature; his replies to the questions of the tribunes
are respectful, but each of them is accompanied
by a jest which in the presentation of the play is
followed by a hearty laugh from his fellows, to
indicate their appreciation, and his popularity
with them.
The scene, as I before observed, is brief and
largely self-explanatory; I therefore give the text
in full without further comment:
Flavius. Hence! home, you idle creatures, get you
home.
Is this a holiday? What! know you not,
Being mechanical, you ought not walk,
Upon a laboring day, without the sign
Of your profession? Speak, what trade
art thou?


128 THE FOOLS OF SHAKESPEARE
memory, but it is still affectionately cherished in
the sphere in which they lived.
The citizens appear on several occasions during
the progress of the tragedy, notably, in the Senate
Scene at the assassination of Caesar, and later, in
the market-place, where they are addressed in turn
by Brutus and Marc Antony. Their lines are
merely acquiescent to the sentiments of the prin-
cipal characters; but there is one line that always
struck me as humorous in the extreme. It occurs
in Act 3, Scene 2, after the first part of Marc An-
tony's address over the body of Caesar. Antony,
apparently overcome by emotion, pauses in his
eloquent argument in defense of his dead friend,
when the First Citizen Sagely remarks: “Me-
thinks there is much reason in his sayings.” To
which our old friend, the Second Citizen replies:
“If thou consider rightly of the matter, Caesar
hath had great wrong.”
It is to this last speech that I refer. His ab-
surdly inadequate expression of sympathy for the
great man who has been so foully murdered, and
whose body lies before him covered with wounds,


CITIZEN IN JULIUS CAESAR 129
always seemed to me to carry with it a sense of
the ridiculous, that I could never completely over-
come; although I am prepared to admit that, per
se, it is not inappropriate to the limited intelli-
gence of the speaker.
There is a brief episode in the next scene of the
same act in which the citizens again appear, that
has a delightful touch of satirical humor. It oc-
curs after the people have been aroused to venge-
ance against the conspirators by the address of
Marc Antony, and are seeking the assassins in
the streets of the city. Among many suspicious
persons accosted by the crowd is Cinna, the poet,
who is seized and assailed by a perfect volley of
questions from the excited multitude; to which he
replies: “What is my name? Whither am I go-
ing? Where do I dwell? Am I a married man
or a bachelor? Then to answer every man di-
rectly, and briefly, wisely, and truly; wisely I say,
I am a bachelor.”
To this our ever-humorous friend the Second
Citizen, who is one of the foremost in the crowd,
and evidently a married man, responds in charac-


130 THE FOOLS OF SHAKESPEARE
teristic fashion: “That's as much as to say, they
are fools that marry; you’ll bear me a bang for
that, I fear.”
Further questioning reveals the name of the
captured man to be Cinna, which being also the
name of one of the conspirators, for whom he is
mistaken, the crowd cry: “Tear him to pieces, he
is a conspirator!”
The poor fellow, however, protests: “I am
Cinna, the poet; I am Cinna, the poet.”
Cinna's poetry does not appear to be highly
appreciated by the people, or he has unfortunately
encountered an unsympathetic critic, for one of
the citizens exclaims: “Tear him for his bad
verses; tear him for his bad verses.”
Again the poet protests: “I am not Cinna, the
conspirator.”
Whatever justice there may have been in the
fate adjudged the poor poet by the enraged popu-
lace, our ingenuous friend, the Second Citizen, is
not without mercy, and he proposes: “It is no
matter; his name's Cinna; pluck but his name out
of his heart, and turn him going.”


CITIZEN IN JULIUS CAESAR 131
Which suggests the significance of the trite old
adage, “Save us from our friends.”
In a memorable production of “Julius Caesar,”
at Booth's Theater, New York, in the early seven-
ties, a most excellent actor, Mr. Charles Leclerq,
played the Second Citizen, and gave it an impor-
tance and significance I had never before witnessed.
Mr. Leclerq was tall and of spare figure; and his
natural manner incisive rather than unctuous.
His conceptions were the result of well-digested
thought, and his performances rounded and com-
plete. Surrounded by his homely fellows, and
confident of their support, he was important but
not intrusive, and impressed his audience with the
characteristics I have endeavored to describe, so
that, when one left the theater, in spite of the
overwhelming predominance of the other charac-
ters, Mr. Leclerq's performance of the homely old
Roman cobbler lingered in the memory.


IN ANTONY AND CLEOPATRA 133
many beauties of thought, much philosophic re-
flection, and a fund of characteristic humor.
From the rich mine of his transcendent genius,
the poet has drawn such a wealth of wit and wis-
dom, that he has endowed the peasant as liberally
as the prince, and the clown as the courtier; the
flashes of brilliancy that sparkle in the repartee of
the prince become bits of homely humor in the
simple dialogue of the peasant, and the compli-
ment of the courtier is bluntly expressed in the
rugged honesty of the clown. The garb, becom-
ing and appropriate, is fitted to the wearer; the
doublet to the one, the smock to the other.
In all of his rustic and humorous characters,
Shakespeare has been most conservative of their
possibilities; probably from the fact that prior to
his time, and also during his early career on the
stage, the clown monopolized the attention of the
audience to the exclusion of the serious interest of
the play, and was usually a most exaggerated cari-
cature without sense or significance.
Shakespeare felt this condition keenly and ex-
pressed himself emphatically on the subject; espe-


130 THE FOOLS OF SHAKESPEARE
teristic fashion: “That’s as much as to say, tº
are fools that marry; you’ll bear me a bang
that, I fear.”
Further questioning reveals the name
captured man to be Cinna, which being
name of one of the conspirators, for wh
mistaken, the crowd cry: “Tear him to
is a conspirator!”
The poor fellow, however, prot
Cinna, the poet; I am Cinna, the po
Cinna's poetry does not appe.
appreciated by the people, or he hº
encountered an unsympathetic
the citizens exclaims: “Tea
verses; tear him for his bad
Again the poet protests:
conspirator.”
Whatever justice the
fate adjudged the poo
lace, our ingenuous


T | TULIUS OPATRA 133
ºriº h. philosophic re-
– ºr is im ºut intº ristic humor.
ranscendent genius,
-- mºtºr mºnº alth of wit and wis-
at Boutº Theater New * peasant as liberally
tº a mºntº. der. the
Tº the secºnd º partee of
=missiºn Iº - in the
ºlº a ompli-
natural mºnº is bluntly he
Histº. clown. The
thºut and ºn. fitted to the
Tº sº.
* ºn
intº |
charaº. .
that whº ºn- --
º
tº he exclusion of the
º nd was usually a most exagº
ºut sense or significance
this condition kee
cally on the sub-


IN ANTONY AND CLEOPATRA 135
sensible to the significance of his errand, ignorant
of its design, but honest in his warning as to the
dangerous character of the worm; and what a
powerful dramatic contrast is presented by the in-
troduction of this dense, slow-witted fellow as an
instrument to bring the means of death to the im-
perious “Sorceress of the Nile,” now a hopeless
despairing woman; “Tho' uncrowned, yet still a
queen and daughter of a king.” -
At first he is denied admission by the soldier
guards, but he creates such a disturbance, and the
contents of his basket appear to be so harmless,
that on the queen's intervention, the clown is per-
mitted to enter her presence.
The fellow is ignorant of the exalted rank of
his patron, and entirely lacking in reverence, for
he pays the queen no deference, but gabbles on in-
sensible of dismissal and oblivious to interruption
till his tale is finished.
Cleopatra asks: “Hast thou the pretty worm
of Nilus there?” To which he replies: “Truly
I have him; but I would not be the party that


IN ANTONY AND CLEOPATRA 137
or in the extremity of her grief, unperceived; and
the clown is dismissed.
But the fellow is not to be gotten rid of so
easily; he starts to go, but returns repeatedly with
continued warnings as to the dangerous character
of the worm: “Look you, the worm is not to be
trusted,” and “Give it nothing, I pray you, for it
is not worth the feeding.”
To this last admonition, Cleopatra inquires:
“Will it eat me?” The clown takes this question
as a reflection on himself, and replies with some
emphasis: “You must not think I am so sim-
ple, but I know the devil himself will not eat
a woman; I know that a woman is a dish for the
gods, if the devil dress her not. But, truly, these
same whoreson devils do the gods great harm in
their women, for in every ten that they make, the
devils mar five.” And with the parting saluta-
tion: “I wish you joy of the worm,” the clown
finally takes his departure.
Ordinary students of Shakespeare must have
noted that in spite of the fact that the poet has


138 THE FOOLS OF SHAKESPEARE
given us some of the noblest ideals of womanhood,
there are passages in his plays of the keenest satire,
and bitterest denunciation of women.
How far his own unfortunate experience with
the sex may have influenced his mind, it is not
my purpose to discuss here; but in the two passages
spoken by the clown, that I have quoted above, I
cannot but think there is an echo from the heart of
the man, that as the poet Sounds the key-note of
an uncongenial marriage, an unappreciative mis-
tress, and a friend's duplicity.
It is interesting to note, that in the two great
tragedies, “Julius Caesar” and “Antony and Cleo-
patra,” the only scenes of humor, in both instances
equally brief, are placed, in the former at the be-
ginning of the play, and in the latter almost at its
conclusion.


THE GRAVE-DIGGERS
IN
HAMLET
“Has this fellow no feeling of his business, that
he sings at grave-making?”
T would scarcely seem possible that a grave-
yard attached to a church, with a half-dug
grave in the foreground, for the scene; midnight
or near thereto, for the time; a pickax, a Spade, a
heap of fresh earth, some human skulls and bones
for the properties; and two grave-diggers for the
dramatis personae would furnish a location and
material for comedy and humor, yet in the first
scene of the fifth act of the tragedy of “Hamlet,”
Shakespeare has taken these materials and con-
ditions, and given us a series of incidents, a variety
of character, and a dialogue replete with the most
delightful comedy, brilliant repartee, ready wit
and subtle humor.
I39


140 THE FOOLS OF SHAKESPEARE
The circumstances are these: A young lady
attached to the court of the King of Denmark has
been drowned. The general opinion being that
she committed suicide. In the time of Shake-
speare, and prior thereto, such unfortunates were
denied Christian burial. Their remains were in-
terred outside of consecrated ground without serv-
ice or any of the rites of the Church. In fact, it
was not unusual to bury them at the intersection
of the highways, very deeply, and to drive a strong
stake through the body. The object of this bar-
barous proceeding being, to empale and destroy
the evil spirit, which the prevailing superstition
supposed to be in possession of the suicide. In the
present instance, the King has commanded that
the remains of the unfortunate lady should be
buried in the consecrated ground of the church-
yard.
The King's command, violating all the ancient
and accepted traditions of the church, arouses the
indignation of the old sexton, who combines the
office of grave-digger. To this personage Shake-
speare has given such a strong individuality, such


THE GRAVE-DIGGERS 141
a pungency of wit and wealth of humor, together
with such delightful touches of nature, making it
so true to life, that I cannot but think the poet
must have had a prototype in his own observation
and experience.
In the list of characters in the play this person-
age and his assistant are set down as “Two
Clowns as Grave-diggers,” but modern editors
have separated them in the cast, and called them
“First and Second Grave-diggers.” This method
has been adopted in all the acting editions, and
in the following observations I shall so designate
them.
The first grave-digger is of a type that may be
found in many of our country villages to-day,+
a quaint sententious old fellow “dressed in a little
brief authority,” and full of his own importance.
He has a little knowledge of law, quotes one or
two legal phrases in Latin incorrectly, and
preaches a crude idea of socialism to his younger
assistant, much to the awe and admiration of that
simple individual, who addresses his acknowl-
edged superior as “Goodman delver.”


142 THE FOOLS OF SHAKESPEARE
I picture the old fellow in my mind as robust
of figure, ruddy of feature, with distinct evidences
of bibulous taste on his nose and cheeks, a humor-
ous twinkle in his eyes, in spite of an assumed
severity, dressed in the homely smock of the
peasant of that place and period, and about fifty
years of age. He has the courage of his con-
victions for he has seldom found any one to com-
bat them, so he advances his arguments with the
authority of one whose dictum is not to be ques-
tioned. Should these fail him, however, he can
command the respect of his fellows by a ready
tongue and homely wit, as exampled in his dia-
logue with his subordinate, and later with Prince
Hamlet.
He is no respecter of persons: his replies to the
questions of Hamlet being as straightforward and
blunt as those to his peasant companion, while
his replications in the exchange of wit with the
former indicate so much irreverence and indepen-
dence, that it draws from the Prince the signifi-
cant observation: “By the Lord, Horatio, . . .


THE GRAVE-DIGGERS 143
the age is grown so picked that the toe of the
peasant comes so near the heel of the courtier, he
galls his kibe.”
The character of the old sexton bears in some
small degree a resemblance to that of “Dogberry”
in “Much Ado About Nothing,” in its self-import-
ance, but it is more consistent, less bombastic, and
never servile.
Our first acquaintance with the old fellow is
made at the beginning of the first scene of the
fifth act of the play, when he enters the church-
yard followed by his assistant, who carries a spade
and a mattock. That his mind is disturbed by
the violation of ancient traditions is evidenced in
his first speech given in the form of a question to
his follower: “Is she to be buried in Christian
burial that willfully seeks her own salvation?”
To which his assistant, evidently a younger man,
with the assurance of accurate information, re-
plies: “I tell thee she is; and therefore make her
grave straight: the crowner hath sat on her and
finds it Christian burial.”


THE GRAVE-DIGGERS 147
1st Gra. There is no ancient gentlemen but gar-
deners, ditchers and grave-makers: they hold up
Adam's profession.
2nd Gra. Was he a gentleman?
1st Gra. A’ the first that ever bore arms.
2nd Gra. Why, he had none.
1st Gra. What, art a heathen? How dost thou
understand the Scripture? The Scripture says Adam
digged: Could he dig without arms?
After a hearty laugh at the jest, the old fellow
propounds a conundrum, a very popular form of
entertainment among simple country wits. How-
ever, to realize the significance of the riddle and
the preceding dialogue, it is essential to have the
full picture in one's mind: the solemn background
of the church, the grim environment of the old
headstones and tombs, ghostlike in the midnight
shadows, the newly made grave waiting for its
tenant, the odor of the fresh earth, and the homely
figures of the two sextons with the dismal tools
of their trade, form a combination in strong con-
trast with the humor of the dialogue, and yet in
complete harmony with the spirit of the occasion.
The old grave-digger standing with one foot on
his spade, his eyes sparkling with humor, empha-


148 THE FOOLS OF SHAKESPEARE
sizes with his index finger the question that is to
confuse the wits of his younger assistant; the
other leaning on the mattock listens with parted
lips, eager to catch every word, and match his wit
against that of the veteran humorist.
“What is he that builds stronger than either
the mason, the shipwright, or the carpenter?”
The young man is puzzled for a moment,
scratches his head, then with a look of triumph,
answers quickly: “The gallows-maker ; for that
frame outlives a thousand tenants.”
It is a good answer and the old fellow is not
slow to acknowledge it, but it is not the correct
one, so the momentary satisfaction of the young
man is turned to chagrin, and his wits spurred to
another effort. How the old fellow chuckles as
the young one wrestles with the knotty problem,
and how deliciously is the patronage of the old
egotist's superior wisdom expressed in the passage
that follows: “I like thy wit well, in good
faith: The gallows does well: but how does it
well? It does well to those that do ill: now thou
dost ill to say the gallows is built stronger than


THE GRAVE-DIGGERS 155
Hamlet, he incidentally suggests his own. “I
have been sexton here, man and boy, thirty
years.”
This, granting he was about twenty years old
when he began his work as a grave-maker, and it
is improbable to suppose that he would be en-
trusted with such serious work at an earlier age,
would make him fifty at this time, as I have be-
fore suggested.
Hamlet’s next question: “How long will a
man lie in the earth ere he rot?” provokes more
punning by the old man and some very plain and
original reasoning as to the time and process of
the decay of mortal remains; those of a tanner in
particular.
The dialogue is terminated by the selection of
one of the skulls by the grave-digger to illustrate
his arguments, which the old man asserts is the
skull of Yorick, the late King's jester.
The “property of easiness,” suggested by Ho-
ratio, is again exampled by the irreverence and
familiarity with which the grave-maker handles
this skull. As he recalls the pranks of the dead


156 THE FOOLS OF SHAKESPEARE
jester, he laughingly slaps the hollow temples of
the unconscious remnant, as if he were boxing the
ears of the living jester, and gleefully chuckles
as memory revives the “mad rogue's" wit and
humor, before handing it to the Prince.
This incident diverts the mind of Hamlet from
his catechism of the grave-digger to tender mem-
ories of his childhood's friend and playmate, so
that the sentiment of the scene is changed, but
to this I have referred at Some length in a former
chapter.
The funeral procession enters the church-yard,
the sexton assists in lowering the body of the un-
fortunate lady to its last resting place, and with
that duty done, the character of the grave-digger
in the play is concluded. But if we permit our
imagination a little Scope, we might see, after the
funeral party has left the scene, the old fellow
shoveling the earth back into the newly-tenanted
grave, and hear the refrain of his quaint song
borne upon the stillness of the early morning air:
A pick-axe, and a spade, a spade,
For and a shrouding sheet:


THE GRAVE-DIGGERS 157
O a pit of clay for to be made
For such a guest is meet.
The most conspicuous figure that I can recall
as a representative of the first grave-digger, was
the late J. H. McVicker, founder and proprietor
of McVicker's Theater, Chicago. He played the
part when en tour with Edwin Booth, his son-in-
law, who was then under his management. I
had the honor of being Mr. Booth's principal sup-
port, and played the part of Laertes. Mr. Mc-
Vicker was of Irish and Scotch descent, and com-
bined the general characteristics of those two na-
tionalities. He was strong in his own opinions,
somewhat harsh and dictatorial in his manner,
but with a vein of quaint humor that was much
in evidence when not obsessed with business.
Hardly the temperament for an artist, you would
say? True! but in the case of the old sexton
these very qualities fitted the character. Mr. Mc-
Vicker used little if any make-up, in fact he did
not need any; he was at this time, I should judge,
about sixty years of age, rotund of figure, full in
the face, which was clean-shaven, and with sparse


THE GRAVE-DIGGERS 1.59
Our property-man, however, was of considerable
experience and full of resource in an emergency
and when unable to obtain the real article invari-
ably found a substitute that served the purpose.
For the skulls he used two large turnips, shaping
them like the human head, excavating the eye
sockets, hollowing the jaws and mouth, and then
coloring them with brown paint. Indeed, they
looked remarkably well and few of the audience
could detect the imposition from the front of the
theater. One night, however, when Mr. Mc-
Vicker, as the grave-digger, handed the supposed
skull to Mr. Booth, as Hamlet, the latter gentle-
man failed to grasp it securely and it fell with a
heavy thud to the stage. The deception was then
obvious, and the audience roared with laughter.
But worse consequences followed. The con-
founded turnip rolled down to the footlights,
knocked off one of the tips of the gas jets (elec-
tricity was not then in use), a big flame rose from
the broken jet, a cry of Fire! was raised, and a
panic in the audience was only averted by the


-ºc THE FCCLS OF SHAKESPEARE
From-riction of the leader of the orchestra, who
reached over ind smothered the flaming gas-jet
with his rocket handkerchief.
Cn irother occasion during our Southern tour,
Mr. McVicker called me on one side prior to the
Beginning of the last act of Hamlet, and whis.
pered in my ear. “Watch me when I hand Edwin
the skull -o-night.” I watched.
It appeared that our property-man had been
unable to obtain even turnips with which to
fashion skulls for the grave-yard scene, so he had
procured a couple of very large Bermuda onions,
cut and perforated them as he had done the
turnips, colored, and placed them in the grave:
Mr. McVicker alone being cognizant of the char.
acter of the remains. The grave-digger threw
them out at the proper cue, and the deception
passed unnoticed, but, when the old sexton handed
the supposed skull of poor dead Yorick to Mr.
Booth, who had a particular aversion to onions in
any form, the aroma of that mutilated sphere,
mingled with the odor of the paint, became 50
offensive to him that he was seized with nausea,
t
d


THE GRAVE-DIGGERS 161
and with difficulty completed the delivery of his
tender apostrophe to the remains of his dead
friend. However, his final questions to Horatio,
as he handed, with unusual alacrity the repulsive
vegetable to that gentleman: “Dost thou think
Alexander looked o' this fashion i' the earth?
And smelt so? pah!” had a significance that here-
tofore had not been in evidence. Subsequently
Mr. Booth joined in a hearty laugh at the inci-
dent, and shortly afterwards two human skulls
were purchased for the performance.


LAUNCE AND SPEED
IN
THE TWO GENTLEMEN OF VERONA
HERE seems to be little doubt but that the
comedy of “The Two Gentlemen of Ve-
rona” was one of the earliest of the poet's dra-
matic works. There is no authentic record of its
first presentation, but it is the general impression
among the commentators that it occurred in 1591
or 1592. Sidney Lee, probably the most ac-
curate and reliable authority on Shakespeareana,
places it second in order of production. It was
not printed in the author's lifetime, nor was it pub-
lished till it was included in the First Folio edition
of collected plays that appeared in 1623, seven
years after the poet's death.
There is a crude conventionality in the con-
struction of the plot, inexperience in the develop-
I62


LAUNCE AND SPEED 163
ment of the characters, and immaturity in its de-
ductive philosophy. These conditions confirm
the view-point taken above, and are entirely con-
sistent with the known facts. Shakespeare was
at this time but twenty-seven years of age, had
been in London but six or seven years, and though
study and observation had given him some idea
of dramatic composition, it was on conventional
lines only; experience had not yet developed
his powers or given him any marked individ-
uality.
Mrs. Cowden Clarke goes so far as to suggest
that the comedy was probably one of the MSS.
that Shakespeare took with him to London.
This is disproved, I think, by his references in the
play to historical and mythological characters,
with which he would hardly be familiar before his
advent into the metropolis.
I doubt if Shakespeare did any literary work
of a dramatic character before he went to Lon-
don. It was his association with a company of
professional actors, in a varied repertory of plays,
with the environment of a regularly equipped


164 THE FOOLS OF SHAKESPEARE
theater, that revealed to him the possibilities of
the drama, inspired his ambition, and developed
his genius.
There is no originality in the story of “The
Two Gentlemen of Verona,” nor in any of the
incidents of the comedy. The characters are but
prototypes of those which appear, elaborated and
completed, in his later plays, after experience had
matured his powers and given him a deeper in-
sight into human nature.
This is particularly true of Launce and Speed,
the two clownish servants in the comedy, who are
reproduced as the two Dromios, in “The Comedy
of Errors”; as Peter, in “Romeo and Juliet,” and
as Launcelot Gobbo, in “The Merchant of Ven-
ice”; but with far more consistency of purpose
and detail of character.
Launce and Speed are servants: born to serve,
contented to serve, with little or no ambition be-
yond it. They are personal attendants on Val-
entine and Proteus, two young noblemen, and
accompany their respective masters on their
travels, obeying their orders without question,


LAUNCE AND SPEED 165
accepting their wages with satisfaction, and sub-
mitting upon occasion to personal chastisement
without resentment.
They are young, full of humor, and fond of
mischief. Their humor they exercise upon their
masters, when they can do so with safety, and
indulge in their mischief between themselves.
Both are shrewd and keenly observant, particu-
larly of the foibles and weaknesses of their
ImaSterS.
Speed is at times exuberant; Launce, who is
apparently the elder, is more thoughtful and sen-
tentious, and with the egotism of a little learn-
ing patronizes and reproves the youth and
ignorance of his comrade. Launce has some
sentimentality in his nature which is shown in his
affection for his dog, Crab, and his grief (not
wholly unaffected) at the parting from his fam-
ily. Launce does not, however, permit that
sentimentality to affect his material interests at
any time, or even influence his considerations in
the selection of a wife.
Both have the punning habit to an abnormal
º


LAUNCE AND SPEED 167
In fact, there is but one bit of repartee in the
entire dialogue worthy of note: Proteus ex-
claims with obvious sarcasm: “Beshrew me, but
you have a quick wit,” to which Speed, who has
been unable to extract a gratuity from him, re-
plies: “And yet it cannot overtake your slow
purse.”
The dialogue in Act 2, Scene 1, between Speed
and Sir Valentine, is in the same vein as in the
first act; but Speed seems to have some advantage
in it, for travel appears to have sharpened the wit
of the servant, while love has dulled the spirit of
the master. In Speed there is evidence of more
observation both of incidents and circumstances;
a clearer and brighter expression of ideas, com-
bined with a shrewdness that approaches wisdom,
—especially in his reflections on Sir Valentine's
love-lorn condition; while there is a dimness of
comprehension that amounts almost to density in
the lack of understanding displayed by his master.
Speed's critical philosophy, however, never per-
mits him to lose sight of the demands of his
stomach, or the perquisites of his position.


168 THE FOOLS OF SHAKESPEARE
This scene is so admirable in its commingling of
humor and satire, that I quote it at length:
Val. Why, how know you that I am in love?
Speed. Marry, by these special marks. First, you
have learn'd, like Sir Proteus, to wreath your arms,
like a malcontent; to relish a love-song, like a robin-
redbreast; to walk alone, like one that had the pes-
tilence; to sigh, like a schoolboy that had lost his
A B C; to weep, like a young wench that had buried
her grandam; to fast, like one that takes diet; to
watch, like one that fears robbing; to speak puling,
like a beggar at Hallowmas. You were wont, when
you laugh'd, to crow like a cock; when you walk'd, to
walk like one of the lions; when you fasted, it was
presently after dinner; when you look'd sadly, it was
for want of money; and now you are metamorphosed
with a mistress, that, when I look on you, I can hardly
think you are my master.
Val. Are all these things perceived in me?
Speed. They are all perceived without ye. .
These follies are within you, and shine through you
like the water . . . that not an eye that sees you, but
is a physician to comment on your malady.
Later, in the same scene the dialogue is note-
worthy, and again illustrates the shrewd observ-
ance of Speed, and the privilege of speech per-
mitted him by his master.


.
:
:
James Lewis and Sidney Herbert as “Launce” and “Speed”
in “The Two Gentlemen of Verona”


LAUNCE AND SPEED 171
Sir Valentine, still oblivious to the lady's de-
sign, and Speed's meaning, declares:
Val. Why, she hath not writ to me?
Speed. What need she when she hath made you
write to yourself? Why, do you not perceive the
jest?
Val. No, believe me.
Speed. Why, she hath given you a letter.
Val. That’s the letter I writ to her friend.
Speed. And that letter hath she deliver'd, and
there an end.
Val. I would it were no worse!
Speed. I'll warrant you, 'tis as well:
For often have you writ to her, and she, in
modesty,
Or else for want of idle time, could not
again reply;
Or fearing else some messenger, that
might her mind discover,
Herself hath taught her love himself to
write unto her lover.
Sir Valentine is still perplexed, he cannot see
the jest, so Speed, seeing it impossible to make
the matter clear, suggests: “”Tis dinner time.”
Sir Valentine replies: “I have dined,” but
Speed requires a more substantial diet than love,
and concludes the scene with the following most


172 THE FOOLS OF SHAKESPEARE
earnestly delivered protest: “Ay, but hearken,
sir: Though the chameleon Love can feed on
air, I am one that am nourish’d by my victuals,
and would fain have meat. O! be not like your
mistress: be moved, be moved.”
Launce does not appear till the third scene of
the second act, when he introduces himself, his
sentiments, and his dog Crab, by whom he is ac-
companied, with much humor and, as with all of
Shakespeare's characters, his mental, sentimental
and social status is at once established; while the
domestic drama played with a pair of old shoes,
a hat, and a staff as representatives of the family
of the Launces, gives us an introduction to them
as effectively as if we had met them all in person.
One can easily understand that Crab's failure to
appreciate the importance of the journey, and the
pathos of parting with such a family is a source
of great disappointment to his master. The epi-
sode is described with so much delightful original-
ity of expression and humorous detail, that the
reader must be dull indeed who cannot see the
scene enacted before his eyes: the weeping women,


LAUNCE AND SPEED 173
the wailing father, the howling maid, and the
“perplexed” household; while the dog, unmoved,
stolidly watches the entire proceedings with a
bored expression of canine indifference.
Nay, 'twill be this hour ere I have done weeping:
all the kind of the Launces have this very fault. I
have received my proportion, like the prodigious son,
and am going with Sir Proteus to the imperial's court.
I think Crab my dog be the sourest-natured dog that
lives: my mother weeping, my father wailing, my sis-
ter crying, our maid howling, our cat wringing her
hands, and all our house in great perplexity, yet did
not this cruel-hearted cur shed one tear: he is a stone,
a very pebble-stone, and has no more pity in him than
a dog: a Jew would have wept to have seen our part-
ing: why, my grandam, having no eyes, look you, wept
herself blind at my parting. Nay, I'll show you the
manner of it: This shoe is my father;-no, this left
shoe is my father; no, no, this left shoe is my mother:
—that cannot be so neither: yes, it is so, it is so; it
hath the worser sole. This shoe with a hole in it,
is my mother, and this my father. A vengeance on't:
there 't is: now, sir, this staff is my sister; for, look
you, she is as white as a lily, and as small as a wand:
this hat is Nan, our maid; I am the dog:-no, the dog
is himself, and I am the dog, O, the dog is me, and
I am myself; ay, so, so. - Now come I to my father;
Father, your blessing; now should not the shoe speak


174 THE FOOLS OF SHAKESPEARE
a word for weeping; now should I kiss my father;
well, he weeps on:—now come I to my mother, (O,
that she could speak now, like a wood woman.)—
well, I kiss her; why, there’t is; here's my mother's
breath up and down; now come I to my sister; mark
the moan she makes: now the dog all this while sheds
not a tear, nor speaks a word; but see how I lay the
dust with my tears.
The misuse of the words “prodigious” and
“perplexity” has a most familiar sound, and may
be readily recognized as a favorite comedy device
of the poet, to provide humor for his clowns and
serving-men.
In an interesting work by Dr. A. O. Kellogg,
of the State Lunatic Asylum, at Utica, New York,
entitled “Shakespeare's Delineations of Insanity,
Imbecility, and Suicide,” that distinguished alien-
ist places Launce among the imbeciles, and by
way of preface to an able analysis of the char-
acter, in which is included Crab, the constant com-
panion of the boy, he makes the following con-
crete summary:
Another shade of mental obtuseness and imbecility
has been exhibited by the poet in the character of


LAUNCE AND SPEED 175
Launce, the clown par excellence, in “The Two Gen-
tlemen of Verona.” Launce is not a character manu-
factured by the playwright, one of “Nature's journey-
men,” to serve a particular purpose, but is a product
of Nature's own handiwork, and if not the most cun-
ning, still none the less genuine.
The close companionship which exists between him
and his interesting dog, Crab, is evidently one based
upon a moral and intellectual fitness in the characters
of the two. The clown is such by natural organiza-
tion, and no education or change of circumstances or
condition could make him otherwise. So the dog
Crab, is . . . the cur that nature made him; and we
can scarcely conceive that even the cultivation of
three generations . . . would suffice to make either a
courtier of the one, or “a gentleman-like dog” of the
other. . . . The spirits of the two are so “married in
conjunction” by mutual intercourse, that the one has
come to conduct himself in all companies, as a currish
clown, and the other as a clownish cur.
As I have stated in the preface, I do not pre-
sume to differentiate between folly and imbecil-
ity. I quote the foregoing as the indorsement of
a scientist to the accuracy of the poet's conception
and treatment of the character.
In reference to the habit of punning, which is
one of the characteristics of Launce, to which I


176 THE FOOLS OF SHAKESPEARE
have before alluded in this article, as well as to
the same practice by similar characters in previous
chapters, I again quote Dr. Kellogg:
His humorous punning and play upon words is also
quite characteristic, and shows that this faculty may
be possessed in quite an eminent degree by those of
very inferior mental caliber, like Launce.”
How completely Shakespeare realized this con-
dition is evidenced, not only by the countrymen
and clowns in his comedies, but also by the char-
acters of inferior rank and humble station in his
tragedies: notably, Peter, in “Romeo and Juliet”;
the Citizens, in “Julius Caesar”; the Grave-diggers,
in “Hamlet”; and the drunker Porter, in “Mac-
beth.”
“The Two Gentlemen of Verona” is unfortu-
nately seldom presented on the stage, but Mr.
Augustin Daly made a production of the comedy
in his series of Shakespearean revivals at Daly's
Theater, New York, some years ago. Mr.
James Lewis played Launce, and while I cannot
recall the entire performance in detail, I distinctly
remember his first appearance on the scene. He


LAUNCE AND SPEED 177
came upon the stage slowly, with an expression
of extreme disgust on his face, leading his dog
Crab by a cord. The property man who had
procured the dog for the production had been
most fortunate in his selection, for a more com-
plete specimen of a “low-down cur” I never saw.
It would have puzzled the most experienced dog
fancier to name his breed or trace his ancestry.
Most animals, when they appear upon the stage,
become frightened by the glare of the footlights,
and startled by any applause that may come from
the audience, but this dog that played Crab was
absolutely oblivious to his surroundings. Crab
received even a more cordial greeting than his
popular master, but while the latter acknowledged
the compliment gracefully, the dog looked on with
complete indifference as if the entire proceedings
bored him. Launce began his first speech, which
included a mild reproach of Crab's lack of sym-
pathy, but it made no impression on the cur: he
then led the dog to the base of a statue, or foun-
tain on the scene, seated himself on the steps,
the cur by his side, and enacted the domestic scene


178 THE FOOLS OF SHAKESPEARE
described in the text with a droll humor that the
audience found irresistible, but it had no effect
on Crab, who sat upon his haunches, looked at
Mr. Lewis' manipulation of the shoes, and lis-
tened to his detailed description of the parting of
the family of the Launces as if, like Baron Grog,
in “The Grand Duchess,” he had always been
taught “to observe an impassive countenance.”
I regret that I cannot remember more of the
performance of Mr. Lewis, for everything he did
was worthy of memory: but the picture of the
dog, Crab, is indelibly impressed on my mind, and
the memory of that frowsy cur that was such an
appropriate companion to his master, tempts me
again to quote Dr. Kellogg:
Next to the human associates whom a man takes
into his confidence, nothing seems to furnish a more
correct index to his character than the species of the
canine race which he selects as his companions. The
grim-looking, fighting bulldog is found at the heels
of the bully and prize-fighter. The dignified mastiff
and gentlemanly Newfoundland, guard . . . the
stately banker. The gaunt hound is found in the train
of the active, vigorous, fox-hunting squire. The
poodle or spaniel . . . is the combed, washed, and


LAUNCE AND SPEED 179
petted companion of my lady, but the cur, who seems
to be a combination of the evil qualities of all these,
your “yaller dog,” is found at the heels of the clown,
and the nature of the relationship is nowhere so ad-
mirably depicted as by the poet in his delineations of
Launce and his dog Crab.
The play upon the words “tide” and “tied”
in the brief dialogue with Panthino, that con-
cludes the scene is another capital illustration of
the quality of wit possessed by Launce. It is
amusing, harmless and characteristic.
Pan. You'll lose the tide, if you tarry any longer.
Launce. It is no matter if the tied were lost; for
it is the unkindest tied that ever any man tied.
Pan. What's the unkindest tide?
Launce. Why, he that's tied here, Crab, my dog.
Scene 5, of Act 2, is entirely occupied by a dia-
logue between Launce and Speed. The scene
does not advance the plot or develop the char-
acters, but is marked by the same quality of wit
to which I have before referred; a brief example
of which will suffice.
Speed. I understand thee not.
Launce. What a block art thou, that thou canst
not. My staff understands me,


LAUNCE AND SPEED 181
nity submits to the judgment of his friend Speed,
reserving, however, the privilege of making the
final decision himself.
The merits of the lady are set down somewhat
as follows:
She can fetch and carry.
She can milk.
She brews good ale.
She can sew.
She can knit.
She can wash and scour.
She can spin.
She hath many nameless virtues.
And her demerits:
She is not to be kissed fasting.
She hath a sweet mouth.
She doth talk in her sleep.
She is slow in words.
She is proud.
She hath no teeth.
She is curst.
She will often praise her liquor.
She is liberal.
She hath more hair than wit, and more faults than
hairs, and more wealth than faults.


LAUNCE AND SPEED 183
the blame and the punishment for the sins of his
dog Crab. He hath “sat in the stocks for pud-
dings he hath stolen”; “stood in the pillory
for geese he hath killed”; and taken a whipping
to save that ill-bred cur from the consequences of
his “ungentleman-like conduct” at the Duke's
table. Now it is but reasonable to assume that
a man, however humble his station in life, who
would sacrifice himself so completely for the sake
of a dumb animal, would have some sentimental-
ity in the choice of a wife, and however merce-
nary he might assume to be, his selection would
not be influenced by wealth alone, but be governed
by the feelings of his heart, rather than by the
calculations of his head.
Be that as it may, there is a good deal of sound
common sense, even if it was assumed, in the
method of selecting a wife as affected by Launce,
that might be adopted with advantage by some
of our modern young men who so heedlessly as-
sume the responsibilities of marriage. A little
more prudence and consideration of their respec-
tive qualifications for what should be a life-long


LAUNCE AND SPEED 183
the blame and the punishment for the sins of his
dog Crab. He hath “sat in the stocks for pud-
dings he hath stolen”; “stood in the pillory
for geese he hath killed”; and taken a whipping
to save that ill-bred cur from the consequences of
his “ungentleman-like conduct” at the Duke's
table. Now it is but reasonable to assume that
a man, however humble his station in life, who
would sacrifice himself so completely for the sake
of a dumb animal, would have some sentimental-
ity in the choice of a wife, and however merce-
nary he might assume to be, his selection would
not be influenced by wealth alone, but be governed
by the feelings of his heart, rather than by the
calculations of his head.
Be that as it may, there is a good deal of sound
common sense, even if it was assumed, in the
method of selecting a wife as affected by Launce,
that might be adopted with advantage by some
of our modern young men who so heedlessly as-
sume the responsibilities of marriage. A little
more prudence and consideration of their respec-
tive qualifications for what should be a life-long


186 THE FOOLS OF SHAKESPEARE
tells you, currish thanks is good enough for such a
present.
Pro. But she received my dog?
Launce. No, indeed, did she not: here have I
brought him back again.
Pro. What, didst thou offer her this from me?
Launce. Ay, sir; the other squirrel was stolen
from me by the hangman's boys in the market-place:
and then I offered her mine own, who is a dog as big
as ten of yours, and therefore the gift the greater.
Poor Launce narrowly escapes the whip at the
hands of his outraged master, and is angrily dis-
missed from his presence. The future of the boy
is left to our conjecture. Did he lose his place?
Did his master restore him to favor? and did he
wed the lady whose qualifications were the source
of so much careful calculation? The author
does not tell us. Let us, however, express the
hope that an indulgent master forgave the ex-
uberant humor of his youthful servant, and per-
mitted Launce and his dog Crab, with possibly
the lady Launce has chosen, to share in his own
felicity so completely expressed in the concluding
lines of the comedy, “One feast, one house, one
mutual happiness.”


THE FOOL
IN * .
KING LEAR
“Poor fool and knave, I have one part in my heart
That’s sorry yet for thee.”
“The fool who labors to outjest
His heart-strook injuries.”
HAT an exquisite picture the poet pre-
sents of the Fool in “Lear”! He has no
name. He does not need one. It would lessen
his significance. His age, his personality, are left
to our imagination. Whether the tender pathos,
the unswerving loyalty, the shrewd observance,
the pointed parables, and the Snatches of quaint
old songs emanate from the soul of a youth or a
man of maturity, we are not informed; but cer-
tain 'tis, the tears that force themselves through
the fragments of melody and almost choke their
187 w


188 THE FOOLS OF SHAKESPEARE
utterance come from the loving heart of one whose
affection time has tried and found sterling.
His master calls him “Boy,” but that is from
|, custom rather than fact; in the same sense that a
º Mgro servant in the South is called a “boy” till
J he dies of old age.
He has been a long time in the service of the
king who evidently loves him, misses him from
º
|
his train, and is impatient of his absence; for after
repeatedly calling for him without reply, he
abruptly demands: “But where's my fool? I
have not seen him for these two days.” That the
Fool has penetrated the hypocritical protestations
of the king's eldest daughters, Goneril and Regan,
and learned to love the gentle but undemonstra-
tive Cordelia is evidenced by the knight's reply:
“Since my young lady’s going into France, sir,
the fool hath much pined away.”
I picture the Fool as a young-old man, not as
old as the king, of course; spare of body and of
homely features, weak in frame but shrewd of
mind; a gentle heart, full of gratitude for years of
kindness and consideration at the hands of his semi-


THE FOOL IN KING LEAR 189
barbaric master; seeing with silent concern the
gradual decay of a powerful personality; appalled
by the mad king's disposition of his kingdom;
impotent to save, but steadfast to soothe the
subsequent sorrow and remorse of his deluded
ImaSter.
Some of the recent commentators have found
so much love and tenderness in the Fool for the
king as to be almost filial, and have advanced the
theory that Cordelia and the fool are one and the
same person. This view I do not think is justi-
fied, either by the language or conditions. The
only passage in the play that affords any author-
ity for the theory is found in the last scene:
Lear enters, carrying the body of Cordelia in
his arms. He lays it upon the ground, and as
he bends over the lifeless form of his daughter,
he utters in his grief a number of broken phrases,
among them the words: “And my poor fool is
hanged.” This may refer to Cordelia, for
Shakespeare frequently uses the words, “poor
fool,” as a term of endearment, but I am of the
opinion they have a literal meaning. The


THE FOOL IN KING LEAR 191
peal, and his final despair at his utter helpless-
ness to stem the torrent of the king's anger, I
found a most effective adjunct to the scene. I
directed the Fool to linger on the scene after the
exit of the king and the court, and with dog-like
affection stealthily to creep over to the grief-
stricken, banished princess, furtively kiss the hem
of her robe, and then make his own exit from the
scene in sadness and silence.
The Fool disappears after Cordelia's departure
from the court with her husband, the King of
France, and hiding his grief is not seen again till
the growing impatience and repeated calls of his
master make his presence imperative.
In the fourth scene of the first act, Lear has
taken the disguised Earl of Kent into his service
as a reward for justly punishing an insolent fol-
lower of his daughter, when the Fool runs on, and
offering Kent his fools-cap, exclaims: “Let me
hire him, too: here's my coxcomb.”
Kent, with good humored amusement, asks:
“Why, fool?”
To which the Fool answers: “Why, for tak-


THE FOOL IN KING LEAR 193
such cumulative precision, that I quote it almost
in its entirety.
Fool. How now, nuncle? Would I had two cox-
combs, and two daughters!
Lear. Why, my boy?
Fool. If I gave them all my living, I'd keep my
coxcombs myself; there's mine; beg another of thy
daughters.
Lear. Take heed, sirrah: the whip.
Fool. Truth's a dog must to kennel; he must be
whipp'd out, when the lady brach may stand by the
fire. . . . Sirrah, I'll teach thee a speech. Mark it
nuncle:—
Have more than thou showest,
Speak less than thou knowest,
Lend less than thou owest,
Ride more than thou goest,
Learn more than thou trowest,
Set less than thou throwest;
And thou shalt have more
Than two tens to a score.
Kent. This is nothing, fool. &
Fool. Then 'tis like the breath of an unfee'd law-
yer; you gave me nothing for't. Can you make no
use of nothing, nuncle?
Lear. Why, no, boy; nothing can be made out of
nothing. - -
Fool. Pr'thee tell him, so much the rent of his land
comes to; he will not believe a fool.
A'Q * 


194 THE FOOLS OF SHAKESPEARE
v’
Lear. A bitter fool!
Fool. Dost thou know the difference, my boy, be-
tween a bitter fool and a sweet one?
Lear. No, lad; teach me.
Fool. That lord that counsell'd thee to give away
thy land
Come place him here by me, do thou for
him stand;
The sweet and bitter fool will presently ap-
pear;
The one in motley here—the other found out
º there. (pointing to the King.)
Lear. Dost thou call me fool, boy?
| Fool. All thy other titles thou hast given away;
that thou wast born with. . . . Nuncle, give me an
U egg, and I'll give thee two crowns.
Lear. What two crowns shall they be?
Fool. Why, after I have cut the egg i' the middle,
and eat up the meat, the two crowns of the egg.
When thou clovest thy crown i' the middle and gavest
away both parts, thou borest thine ass on thy back
o'er the dirt: thou had'st little wit in thy bald crown,
when thou gavest thy golden one away.
(singing) Fools had ne'er less grace in a year:
For wise men are grown foppish;
And know not how their wits to wear,
Their manners are so apish.
Lear. When were you wont to be so full of songs,
sirrah?
Fool. I have used it, nuncle, ever since thou mad'st


THE FOOL IN KING LEAR 195
thy daughters thy mothers; for then thou gavest them
the rod, and putt'st down thine own breeches,
(singing) Then they for sudden joy did weep,
And I for sorrow sung,
That such a king should play bo-peep
And go the fools among.
Prythee, nuncle, keep a schoolmaster that can teach
thy fool to lie; I would fain learn to lie.
Lear. An you lie, sirrah, we'll have you whipp'd.
Fool. I marvel what kin thou and thy daughters
are; they'll have me whipp'd for speaking true, thou’lt
have me whipp'd for lying; and sometimes I am
whipp'd for holding my peace. I had rather be any
kind o' thing than a fool: and yet I would not be thee,
nuncle; thou hast pared thy wit o' both sides, and
left nothing in the middle. Here comes one o' the
parings.
At this point Goneril, the king's eldest daugh-
ter, comes upon the scene; she is apparently very
angry, and her feelings are reflected in her coun-
tenance, for the king challenges her:
Lear. How now, daughter? what makes that front-
let on? Methinks you are too much of late i' the
frown.
Before Goneril can reply, and much to the
manifest indignation of that lady, subsequently


THE FOOL IN KING LEAR 197
the evidence of his eyes and his ears, his person-
ality, his very existence; and exclaims: “Does
any here know me? Who is it that can tell me
who I am?”
To which the Fool replies: “Lear's shadow.”
The words seem to carry corroboration with
them; for instead of the powerful monarch whose
will was law, and word a command, we see before
us a weak, indefinite remainder of something
which was a personality, and now is nothing;
nothing but a shadow; realizing but too late the
fatal error that robbed him of the power he is now
impotent to regain. Something, however, of his
old Self returns as insults accumulate on his rev-
erend head; the limit of even paternal endurance
is reached, and the outraged father hurls on the
head of his thankless child a curse, the terrific
force of which is probably unequaled in literature,
and leaves her.
Goneril orders the Fool to follow him: “You,
sir, more knave than fool, after your master.”
The Fool obeys, leaving, however, his compli-
ments behind him.


198 THE FOOLS OF SHAKESPEARE
A fox, when one has caught her,
And such a daughter,
Should sure to the slaughter,
If my cap would buy a halter;
So the fool follows after.
Loyally the faithful Fool follows his master;
with tender solicitude he strives, by quip and
quaint reply, to divert the remnant of the poor
king's mind from the deep grief that envelops it,
and by folly “labors to outjest his heart-strook
injuries.” The effort, however, is but partially
successful; the deep Sorrow beneath absorbs the
rippling laughter on the surface and dissolves it
into tears.
How pathetic are the steadfast efforts of the
Fool to change the current of the old king's
thoughts, and dull the constantly recurring mem-
ories of his wrongs. As one witty suggestion
fails to hold his attention, the Fool flits to an-
other; a jest, a riddle, a pun, anything that will
stifle the sob, hold back the tear, or deaden the
memory. Not folly for folly's sake, but to allay
the pain of a breaking heart. This is comedy
brought into such close relation with the great


THE FOOL IN KING LEAR 201
Once more the Fool recalls him from himself:
Fool. If thou wert my fool, nuncle, I'd have thee
b ten for being old before thy time.
Tear. How's that?
fool. Thou shouldst not have been old till thou
hadst been wise.
The horses are now brought out, and the king,
with the Fool, and his reduced train of fifty fol-
lowers start on their journey.
With untiring devotion the Fool follows the
wandering way of the king, hovering near his side
and lightening the journey with jest and song, di-
verting his old master's mind from its heavy sor-
row by numberless devices, till they reach the
castle of Gloster, where Regan, the king's
second daughter, and her husband, the Duke of
Cornwall, are visitors.
Though the king's visit is not unexpected, the
gates are closed, no preparation is made for his
reception, and his arrival is unheralded. His
messenger, the disguised Kent, whom he had sent
before to announce his coming, is set in the stocks
before the entrance to the castle; a degradation


202 THE FOOLS OF SHAKESPEARE
and punishment reserved only for the basest of
men. The Fool is the first to observe this, and
realizing at once the outrage on the dignity of the
king by the stocking of his messenger, endeavors
to dwarf the affront by turning it to folly:
Fool. Ha, ha; he wears cruel garters! Horses are
tied by the head; dogs and bears by the neck; mon-
keys by the loins; and men by the legs; when a man is
over lusty at legs, then he wears wooden nether-stocks.
But the insult is too apparent, the outrage too
flagrant, to be overlooked; the king demands an
explanation from his servant, which being given,
indicates further indignities, and provokes from
the Fool the following sage reflections:
Fool. Winter's not gone yet, if the wild geese fly
that way.
Fathers that wear rags do make their chil-
dren blind;
But fathers that bear bags shall see their
children kind.
Lear, commanding his train to remain without
enters the castle to seek his daughter. Kent, still
in the stocks, noting the reduced number of the
king's attendants, asks:


THE FOOL IN KING LEAR 203
Kent. How chance the king comes with so small a
number?
To which the Fool replies:
Fool. An thou hadst been set i' the stocks for that
question, thou hadst well deserved it.
Kent. Why, fool?
The answer to Kent’s question contains so mº
of bitter truth, worldly wisdom and sound reason-
ing, that the speaker might well be a grave and
reverend man of age, deducing his philosophy
from a life-long experience, rather than a motley
fool venting his folly for the diversion of the
moment.
Fool. We'll set thee to school to an ant, to teach
thee there's no laboring i' the winter. All that follow
their noses are led by their eyes, but blind men. Let
go thine hold when a great wheel runs down a hill,
lest it break thy neck with following; but the great
one that goes up the hill, let him draw thee iter.
When a wise man gives thee better counsel, give me
mine again: I would have none but knaves follow it,
since a fool gives it.
That sir which serves and seeks for gain,
And follows but for form,
Will pack when it begins to rain,


204 THE FOOLS OF SHAKESPEARE
And leave thee in the storm.
But I will tarry; the fool will stay,
And let the wise man fly:
The knave turns fool that runs away;
The fool no knave, perdy.
! --
Take the above, phrase by phrase, note its ap-
plication and significance; the bitter reflections of
the Fool on the disloyalty of the king's former
friends; the doubts of his present followers; the
truisms of wisdom and folly; the more than sug-
gestion of knavery; and the declaration of his
own devotion, that in another might appear ego-
tistically effusive, but in the fool is natural and
sincere.
But I will tarry; the fool will stay,
And let the wise man fly.
The reply to Kent's query is certainly true.
The lesson was well learned, but “Not iſ the
stocks, fool.”
The Fool is silent during the scene that follows,
and allows the indignation of the king to have
full sway without interruption, till passion gives
way to grief; this he tries to stay with the jest of


THE FOOL IN KING LEAR 205
the cockney and the eels and the butter'd hay, but
the great flood of an outraged father's wrath is
beyond his power to stem. Awestricken and
dumb he stands, impotently watching the sturdy
defense of his aged master against the combined
attack of his unnatural daughters. Powerless to
shield him from a single blow, he sees his
strength waning, and his reason totter, till the
limit of human endurance is reached, and the old
man, exhausted in mind and body, falls into the
arms of his humble friend with the agonizing cry,
“O, fool, I shall go mad!”
The gates, like the hearts of his “pernicious
daughters,” are closed against him; night falls,
and the storm descends. “The fretful elements
contend,” “the to-and-fro conflicting wind and
rain,” struggle for Supremacy, and vent their fury
on the earth.
The Fool is not consistent; he has not taken his
own advice to “Let go thine hold when a great
wheel runs down a hill,” but clings to the descend-
ing and revolving disk as it rolls to destruction.
The rain drenches him to the skin, the wind


THE FOOL IN KING LEAR 207
of the play with such consummate skill that a
natural and perfect harmony is preserved.
Truly there is wisdom beneath the coxcomb in
the following:
He that has a house to put's head in has a good head-
piece.
That man that makes his toe
What he his heart should make
Shall of a corn cry woe,
And turn his sleep to wake.
For there was never yet fair woman but she made
mouths in a glass.
Truisms but trifles! yet they form the only rem-
edy the poor Fool can offer to cure the deadly
grief of the old king; the only stay his puny
strength can put forth to prevent that “great
wheel” from running down the hill.
We recognize the truth of the boy's reply to the
demand of Kent upon the heath, “Who's there?”
“Marry, here's grace and a cod-piece; that's a wise
man and a fool.” But we reverse the intent of
the assertion.
Kent succeeds in inducing the old king to seek
**
A.


210 THE FOOLS OF SHAKESPEARE
When brewers mar their malt with water;
When nobles are their tailors' tutors;
No heretics burn'd, but wenches' suitors;
When every case in law is right;
No squire in debt, nor no poor knight;
When slanders do not live in tongues;
Nor cutpurses come not to throngs;
When usurers tell their gold i' the field;
And bawds and wantons churches build:
Then shall the realm of Albion
Come to great confusion:
Then comes the time, who lives to see’t,
That going shall be us'd with feet.
It will be observed that the above is the first
soliloquy of the Fool, in other words, the first
time that, being alone, he has spoken his thoughts
that we might know them.
As a rule, I have found in Shakespeare the first
soliloquy to be the keynote to the character; but
I think the present instance is an exception. The
shrewd satire of the parabolical epigrams that the
Fool has uttered with so much deliberation would
indicate a worldly wisdom and embittered sar-
casm, rather than the loyalty and love which is
his distinguishing characteristic, and which seems


THE FOOL IN KING LEAR 211
to expand and grow as the poor old king's strength
fails, and wits give way.
Once more the king is out in the storm, and now
another character is added to the scene—“Poor
Tom,” the Bedlam beggar, whose exaggerated
ravings make an appropriate addition to the en-
vironment, and complete the picture of human
misery.
Small wonder that, appalled by the combina-
tion by which he is surrounded, the Fool exclaims:
“This cold night will turn us all to fools and
madmen.”
What a trio of contrast is presented at the rude
farmhouse in which they are now sheltered:
The poor old king, his clothing torn by the briers,
his hair and beard ravished by the wind, rain-
soaked to the skin, and growing more witless every
minute; the naked Bedlam beggar (Edgar dis-
guised), “Poor Tom,” assuming madness for
safety; and the motley fool, serving and suffering
with dog-like fidelity, content to share his master's
fortune, be it good or ill. Among them it is


212 THE FOOLS OF SHAKESPEARE
indeed difficult to determine who is sane, and who
is not, and the declaration of the Fool seems to
be apt and appropriate: “He’s mad that trusts
in the tameness of a wolf, a horse's health, a boy’s
love, or a wanton’s oath.”
The composition of the court of justice, in the
old farmhouse, of a serving man, a beggar, and
a Fool on the bench, commissioned by a mad king
to try imaginary offenders, forms a most “honor-
able assembly,” and is indeed a grim satire on the
administration of justice.
It may be observed, that while Shakespeare has
treated the Chief Justice in Henry IV, and the
higher judges, if so I may term them in his sev-
eral plays, with respect and dignity, he is very
severe on the ignorance and arrogance of the petty
justices and local magistrates. How far this
may be due to his own experience with several
Warwickshire justices, with whom it is said he
became somewhat unpleasantly familiar in his
youth, and against whom he appears to have re-
tained some resentment all his life, I am not pre-
pared to Say.


THE FOOL IN KING LEAR 213
The long, long day of sorrow, pain and suffer-
ing comes to an end at last. “Oppressed nature”
has reached the limit of its endurance, her “foster-
33
nurse,” repose, has “closed the eye of anguish,”
and compassionate sleep, the “balm of hurt
minds,” brings oblivion, for a time at least.
The king falls asleep, his clouded mind mur-
muring, “We’ll go to supper i' the morning,” and
the faithful Fool, his limbs benumbed with cold,
his eyes wearied with watching and his heart
heavy with grief, responds, “And I’ll go to bed
at noon.”
These are the last lines spoken by the Fool; the
litter to carry the king to a place of safety is pre-
pared; the Fool, at Kent's command, assists the
others to bear away his sleeping master, and is
seen no more. No further reference is made to
him, and we are left in ignorance of his fate if
we except a brief passage spoken by the king in
the last scene of the tragedy: “And my poor fool
is hanged.”
Commentators as I have said, differ as to the
application of these words. Some claim that


214 THE FOOLS OF SHAKESPEARE
they refer to his dead daughter Cordelia, but I
prefer to regard them as informing us of the fate
of the poor Fool, whose life has been sacrificed
to his fidelity.
It is but a natural conclusion, and in perfect
harmony with the tragic incidents of the play.
Such love, such unselfish devotion could not sur-
vive its object. It was inevitable. Life with
such tragic memories would be impossible to en-
dure. No. One fate encompassed them both.
The gentle spirit of the faithful friend has gone
before, and patiently waits for the poor tortured
soul of his loved master to share the peace that he
has found.
He that hath a little tiny wit,
With heigh, ho, the wind and the rain;
Though the rain it raineth every day,
Oh the wind, the wind and the rain.
THE END
*
&
11


|
they refer to his dad daught Cººl
refer to regard them * iſ migºdº
ºf the poor Foºl, whº was
to his fidelity.
It is but a natural condiº minº
## ,
it incident 0
h devotiºn tºld ſº
hamony with the tº
inevitable Iſ tº
Such love, such unself
vive its object It was
such tragic memois wº be impºsiº"?
One fate tºps. " #
faithful finds;"
epº! º
dure. No.
The gentle spirit of the
before, and patiently waits for th
soul of his loved master" share the ſº |! :
has found *
He that hath
With heigh, h9. the W
Though the rain it raineth eſt) *
Oh the wind the wind and the ſa"
it—-
a ſtile tiny" -
ind and the ſaid;
THE END
Zł
11
f 8


| III/IIII
8 645 5
THE BORROWER WILL BE CHARGED
AN overdue FEE IF THIS BOOK is
NOT RETURNED TO THE LIBRARY ON
OR BEFORE THE LAST DATE STAMPED
BELOW. NON-RECEIPT OF OVERDUE
NOTICES DOES NOT EXEMPT THE
M OVERDUE FEEs.
*—4-