DUNEDIN SHAKESPEARE CLUB

Otago Witness, Issue 2669, 10 May 1905, Page 80

DUNEDIN SHAKESPEARE CLUB

The meeting of the Dunedin Shakespeare the large hall, gallery included, was quite filled, the greater portion of the audience Club, held in the Choral Hall, on Friday, 28th ult., was attended by such numbers, that being ladies. The platform was prettily decorated with greeney and flowers.

Mr A. Wilson (president) read the following address : —

I do not know that I can better utilise the time allowed me than by setting out as clearly as may be the place which " Richard the Second" occupies in the series of Shakespeare's dramas, and the basis of history in which it is- built. It is the second in a series of splendid plays which supply a picturesque narrative of English history during the time covered by the Plantagenet, Lancastrian, and Yorkist dynasties. The reigns of Henry 11, Bichard I, Henry 111, Edward I, and Edward H offer material as rich in dramatic possibilities as those of the Lancastrian Kings. Yet Shakespeare left those reigns untouched. "We possess an "Edward III" which some good critics ascribe in whole or part to Shakespeare. Peele wrote a little-known play, "Edward I," and Marlowe a better known play, " Edward H" : and Shakespeare's modesty would probably deter him from challenging fellow dramatists on their own ground. Be that as it may, the Shakespeare series of history plays remains incomplete. But, incomplete as it is, it was a notable contribution to literature. To the English nation it was a double gift. Not merely has Shakespeare given us dramas, which are marvels of exquisite humour, passionate poetry, and psychological insight, but he has supplied a history of England which, for the period covered, has satisfied some even of the makers of history, and is all that ninetenths of his countrymen will ever desire. Certainly Shakespeare's dramas cannot be regarded as history in the sense attached to the word by modern historians. There is no minute and laborious accuracy, no collation of authorities, or consultation of original documents. Shakespeare was no historian in this sense, nor professed to be. He was a dramatist pure and simple, a writer of plays which were designed to entertain the audiences of the London theatres. It so happened that in the last decade of the sixteenth century, the closing years of Great Elizabeth, public taste ran in the direction of history dramas. And for a good reason. The nation had just passed through a momentous crisis, had passed through it and come out of it with a certain claim to the sovereignty of the seas. Timid spirits had quailed at the the - of foreign invasion, thinking the inst .on of rack and thumbscrew as good as already established in London. But England had risen to the occasion ; the ships, the money, and, above all, the men, were there when she wanted them ; her Howards, Hawkinses, and Frobishers had given the Spanish fleet a taste of their quality ; so that in the last decade of the century, when Shakespeare was in the fourth decade of his life, England was probably as proud of herself and her achievements as in any 10 years throughout her history. Elizabeth, by this time aii old woman — an unlovely and unlovable old woman perhaps, but a brave one — was near ing the finish, after a long reign of unexampled activity and difficulty. No head that ever wore a crown had better cause to lie uneasy than Elizabeth's. But amid the daily and hourly dangers of 50 years she had always been tiie same undaunted woman. No doubt she had other regal qualities besides her courage, but if she had had no other, this supreme virtue of her race might well have won her people's admiration. As head and front of a nation which had just routed the " invincible " navies of Spain, Elizabeth must have appeared to other nations what she appeared to her own subjects, the great queen of a great people. By the events of the time, therefore, the hearts of all Englishmen were then specially attuned to thoughts of loyalty and patriotism ; and as the stage, besides figuring forth those facts of life that are eternally true, must more especially gratify the emotions which for the time happen to be most deeply stirred, Shakespeare and his fellow-dramatists found their attention perforce directed to the glories of English history. They were not concerned to preach social or political doctrines, or to furnish a pedantically exact chronicle of events. What they had to do was to seize the glory or the tragedy of history and to present these to the uninetrueted people in the most interesting and intelligible way. Shakespeare had at hand the history of Holinshed, a gossipy, picturesque narrative of the various reigns, and from this almost exclusively he took the material for his history plays. It was no concern of his whether the historian was rigidly accurate in his facts. Hclinshed must be answerable for that. The important thing was that here was a picturesque and readable narrative, purporting to be authoritative, a narrative moreover which was probably as trustworthy as any other means of information available. Nor was Shakespeare concerned to construct

from history political or economical theories. Such theories, most persuasively stated, you will find in ihe dramas, but it would be a 'great mistake to father them on Shakespeare. You will find for instance in this same play of Richard II as passionate a statement of the " right divine of Kings to govern wrong " as in any manifesto of the Stuarts —

Not all the water in the rough-rude seas Can wash the balm from an annointed king — and much else in the same vein from Richard himself or other more venerable characters in the play. Anyone inclined, like Dr Johnson, to infer from this that Shakespeare was ultra-royalist should note per contra that he also deplores kings and gives as gcod reasons for the step as any roundhead. As a matter of fact, it is safe to assume that you never get the personal religion or political opinions of Shakespeare. Sometimes you may think you do, but you will soon find evidence to convince you that any opinion advanced is good only for the character into whose rnoxyth the dramatist puts it. In certain emotional experiences, however, certain partialities cr antipathies, you may sometimes detect a note of personality — his love of sleep, for instance, his horror of death, and very particularly his love of England. The history dramas are the exultant expression of this love of country, and of the feeling that filled every English heart during the last years of Elizabeth's reign. They record the victorious struggle of England with her hereditary enemies. The great hereditary enemies of England had been Scotland and France. There were two reasons why the wars with Scotland should not bei ohosen by an English dramatist as the subject of a patriotic play. In the first place it would have taxed even Shakespeare's powere of invention to find in the contest with Scotland anything at all soothing to English selfrespect ; and in the second place it must be remembered that, jwst at the time these plays were written, England was expecting at no distant date to be annexed to Scotland. There remained, therefore, the story of the long and glorious wars with France and the wars of the rival English dynasties. "Richard II" is the story of one of these last. In none of the ten history plays which, with greater or less certainty, are credited to Shakespeare, is the dramatists affection for his country more impressively indicated than in "Richard II." , As ,* n expres&ion of exalted patriotism it is ditnoult to imagine anything loftier and nobler than the sickbed speech of Gaunt in the second act. , 7 , The rei^n with which Shakespeare deals in this play is one of the most important in English history, regarded from the standpoint of national development. The previous reign had been one of glorious victories and great reverses. Edward 111 and his eldest son were both great soldiers. The Black Prince had won victories when he was a mere boy, and his life had been one long career of strenuous and successful war. Unfortunately this Prince died some months before his father, so that, on the death of Edward 111, the crown fell by natural succession to Richard, grandson of Edward 111, and son of the Black Prince. Minorities are seldom happy for king or nation. At the time of his accession Richard was a boy of 11, and if ever young king- was doomed by nature and training to a miserable reign, it was this same Richard. He seems to have had the artist's temperament, and would probably have been happier writing sonnets or troubadouring with a harp than ruling parliaments. He v/as impulsive, inconstant, vindictive, petty, and, to add to his misfortunes, he was handsome, after a delicate, effeminate fashion ; though his bearing when confronted with Wat Tyler and the Labour party of the time showed him to possess the courage of his race. Altogether, Richard lacked robustness and vigour of character. Possibly with wise training his grave defects of character might have been corrected, but, as it happened, the training he received was precisely the worst which, in the circumstances, could have been devised. His grandfather had left him, along with his kingdom, an inconvenient legacy of grownup uncles. What chance was there for a little boy of artistic temperament in the hands of masterful and ambitious uncles, when he stood between them and the crown? Two of these uncles — John of Gaunt and the Duke of Gloster — made themselves particularly disagreeable to the young king, thwarting him, wounding hig self-respect, and trying by all manner of high-handed means to make and keep him a nonentity, so that if there were two men in England whom Richard particularly detested, and was entitled to detest, these men were his two uncles. Gloster and Gaunt. The rough usage of theso men was not much mended by the treatment he received in the palace, where ho was surrounded by people who neglected his education and flattered his vicious tastes, and where, accordingly, he formed habits which were not royal, or even manly. His oourfc was the most luxurious and ex-

travagant in the English annals. This was the time of fantastic fashions, when men) wore garments of crudely contrasted colours, and shoes whose points gradually curled! outwards and upwards until they reached! the level of the knee, to which they were fastened by silver chains. What withi hectoring uncles, an Injudicious mother, and court sycophants, we need not wonder if Richard's character developed undesirable features, if he became effeminate, luxurious, selfish, and vindictive. Presently he threw; off Gloster's yoke, and for a few years ruled by advice of his parliament, like any wise constitutional monarch. But his parliament foolishly granted him supplies for, life, and from that time his descent along the primrose path was easy and rapid. It* might be said of Richard as of the lateu Bourbons, that he never learned and never forgot. He never forgot Gloster and bis brutalities. In the ripeness of time, and in a singularly treacherous way, he had hia uncle arrested and conveyed to the citadel of Calais, where, as often happened in! those days to people who were conveyed ta citadels, it was found that Gloster, a fewdays after arrival, had died of his own' accord.

Then came the quarrel between his cousini Bolingbroke and Mowbray, in which Richard! showed all his native want of resolution,, deciding in one breath and rescinding inJ the next, alienating his friend, and exasperating, without disabling his enemy. Them came Gaunt's death and the shameless confiscation of the Lancaster estates. Had Riohard dealt with Gaunt as he had dealt* with Gloster,. that crime in itself might have been condoned, for Gaunt was the best-* hated man in England. But Gaunt had,, what Glosfcer had not, a strong, wise, ingratiating son, and when Richard laid hid mean fingers on Bolingbroke's patrimony itf^ was the decisive deed in a series of deedst' that had long been alipna+*"~- "-- ""- people. From the purely dramatic p0.... it cannot be said that Richard II is interesting play. There is no plot and little dramatic action. Not one of the principal characters secures a sympathetic interest. The women are shadows, York is* mere protoplasm. Gaunt is a superior sorii of Polonius, Bolingbroke is too cold and calculating, and too plainly in the wrongRichard, with his alternate fits of weakness and resolution, and his maudlin self-pity, has only a psychological interest, for who really cares what becomes of such a harlequin? Only the Bishop of Carlisle is noble,, and of him there is so little. Ye*, defective a3 it is in plot and action, the play is unmiistakably Shakespearean. It is mostly deolamation, but it is splendid declamation. In every scene there is the well-knownl large and imaginative_ cast of thought, and) that melodious grandiosity of phrase whicls Shakespeare alone can impose upon us as the natural language of men.

The address was followed by readings taken! from acts 2, 3, 4, and 5 of " Richard ll.' The cast of characters was as follows: — > Riohard n, Mr Hanlon ; York, Mr Whitson ;! Bolingfrroke, Mr Callan; Gaunt, Mr Dempster; Northumberland, Mr Fyfe.; Aumerie,. Mr Butler; Salisbury and Gardener, Mr? Sawell; Carlisle and Servant, Mr Wat-hen; Ross and Groom, Mr Hunter; Queen, Miss Hofland ; Duchess of York, Miss Sandilands. The minor part 3of Percy, Willoughby and! Keeper, Berkeley and Scroop were doubled^ in consequence of the vuia voidable absence) of three members. The burden of the read-j ings, of course, fell upon Mr Hanlon ; butf the task was in thoroughly capable hands, for the faults and characteristics of the contradictory monarch were portrayed -with ai skill that the axidience was not slow tof recognise. Mr Callan's reading of the parti of BolingbroE© was impressive and consistent, and Mr Fyfe gave an intelligent rendering of Northumberland's lines. The best praises that can be given to the performers a 6 * whole is to say that the- large audience paid them the compliment of listening to every" scene with close attention. The ladies showed considerable elocutionary ability, Mis 3 Holland's impersonation of the Q^f? 111 receiving marked appreciation. Mies Whitson took the part of Chorus in a manner that made the scenes easy of comprehension.. The musical portions of the evening's entertainment vere sn-ecialiy attractive. Mis 3 Gertrude Pitts played a fantasia by C" 0?^0 ?^ ( >l Impromptu, Op. 66 ") with admirable skill and expression. Miss Agnes Wilson sang Liddell'e " Home song " with so much good tast© as to merit the hearty recall she received.

Australian chaff has been pronounced by the Director-general of Army Mounti at Bombay to have not_ enough nutrirneafi in it for horses on active service. Oh ! Thou husky, asthmatic old fellow,

Whom coughing has bent like a bowf Thou child with the colic, whose bellovS

Disturbs the whole neighbourhood so; O ! lad with the appetite hearty,

Whom sweetmeats too greatly allure— '

Now mark what I say, nor depart ye From Woods' Gbeat Peppermint Qxjbb*