SHAKESPEARE AND HIS LOVE.

Timaru Herald, Volume XCIV, Issue 14393, 7 January 1911, Page 1 (Supplement)

SHAKESPEARE AND HIS LOVE.

'A- REMARKABLE ARGUMENT. Anew play, orwther * »hort interlude by - Bernard Shaw, " The Dark Lady of tha 602222 eta/ 1 has.' been presented for th» first time, in London, bv the National Shakespeare Memorial ! Committee, at . two matinees, organized for; the benefit of the scheme. The • Dark . Lady *is the lady for whom Shakespeare expresses a. Aerribleiinf&tu*. atfon, against which all his reason and naWre rebelled, m the Sonnets. The' Sonnets were dedicated to William Herbert; Earl. of Pembroke, and the theory ha* bees, advanced that the Eady was Herbert's mistress, Mary Fitton 33ns theory has been adopted by Mr ShaWj the announcementof whose play provoked an. indignant change ol plagiarism from Mr Frank Harris, . who, in a really valuable recent work attempted to reveal the man Shakespeare behind the dramatist, and irho has since written a play entitled /'Shakespeare and His" Lore," which,' was being hurried through the ptess when Mr Shaw's inter! ode appeared. In the light of the announcement of Mr Harris's play (writes Mr W. K. Titterton in the* London "Daily News") one sentence of what Mr. Shaw had lately to- say on the subject of his Shakespeare'drama, gains a new significanoe:

''The only English writer who .has really grasped this part; jd£ Shakespeare's story is Mr. Frank Harris; but Frank sympathises with Shakespeare. It is like see in g /Se mele reduced to ashes and sympathising Jupiter.' And then co 11263 this advertisement, with the phrase, 41 ' His chief disciple. G. Barnard Shaw."

I pictured Mr. Harris (writes. Mn »v. R.. Titterton) waiting eagerly for the reporting angel to put 'h-fa case L-e----fore th&ißritish public. I was wrong. He received me courteously,, but without empressement.

OWII here," he said, "and 111 walk up and down and tell you all about it." He rammed me into a sea *» an _d,- tising the hearthrug for his quarterdeck, he poured out the prologue or the fight in a flood of impassioned gesticulation.' f years ago, I said to Kunciman. 'Shaw is the man we want to do the drama for the "Saturday Renew/* He's written ~ all he to write on music, but he's got S e , Jt's what he's meant for. xios. an. Irish showman: give h' m the orama.

•a saw Shaw.abont it. I said. 'Give Bp writing oil music—you've said it all. Cjiae on to the "Saturdav," and-write drama. — Ho«- much would I ET 9 Si .Whatever he thoupjifc it worth. Ho. asked six pounds. . KING CHARLES'S HEAD.

"WeU, he began writing good stuff. £gs after a few weeks Shakespeare S°P °P izr-cTery article ■ tike K)n£ Maries's" head. •'UTiy don't tou writing -this rot about bnajrirapeare?'" a friend of mine asked ' I read a fair' -of - tlie articles - Then I wrote to r a,r j ' Your drama is great stuff.. But way don t you step writing about Shakespeare?* ' 3fy dear Harris/ replied Shaw, 'what do you mean? I about Shakespeare than living.' c Come out to lunch, with ii»,. I answered; 4 l'll give vou Tegetarian grub; Pll give you anything you I'H convince vou you icnow about him.'* '• I took him orut. At the end of obont four hour?' solid talk he said that if I would write about- Shakesceare be would 'leave off nritingaboiit 5° J begaji my articles ih the hatnrday Review,' wherein I showed hotr BainJrtchet l ! Sliakesneare lives behind the masks of the heroes of hi= plays. 1

j of the eoisode. I drifted oft mw> other tilings, and Shaw began writing-prefaces. But vorv soon -Punj2 Charles s head DODped up* .vain —thi> t-rae'wrth very different features. He boldly announced my discovery, and pnt on his own trade-mark (notahjv in "Man and Su-perman "). and all* the acknowledgment he gave me was *h?s casnal referorce: . 'All Shakespoaro's critic* from Jonson to Frank Harris have kept as far on this side idolatrr as T.*

'•Oscar "Wifdo thtpj l nie the cr:b. J snu 1 *r didn'/- -m; { If Shaw w.t* bis erKTiidx *n:u» to :n.v work and carry it on hr wa- welcome to do *'>. - If }in. wnsn'*. tliei* icooner or later cred'* - would row* to nt£, •Ten if the cash Lad come to iiin*

"Wikio u-:j, ' 'No; y«u bare to fight for i'niuo on- tUa doorstep. if you do iiot take care, you wd» » n <j yourself robbed of all your credit, and another man wearing your crown. 1 said I tfould take the risk. THE MAN SHAKESPEARE.

" Six or seven years ago I wrote m y pi av, to show in action the Man Shakespeare that I have recovered From the . professors' rubb-sh-heaps. Ueerbohm Tree agreed to produce it. Airs Patrick Campbell was willing to do anything and give anything to ai-t Marv Fitton. But 'J'reo couldn t stoniiicli Shakespeare. 'He is too weak; he subsides,' he told me; make him heroic.' 'By heaven, no! i taid; 'l'll take out anything you like, but put in a lino that isn't true Shakespeare I won't.' "So I withdrew the play. Some tima afterwards the Ycdreunc-Barker people were to do it. V edrenne insisted he would get it tliroug.i. "Then. I "met Shaw in the stree-., and he said, 'l've read your play, Harris; but you make Shakespeare too sad Ho never was sad.; he was a rollicking fellow. Though, at least you've given his genius, and that s extraordinary. Nobody else ever d.d that." ■ , . 44 Last rear I brought out my booir, •The Man Shakespeare,' and Shaw said it was great. Then why didn t he write a criticism of it? He nod done so—forty folios long; but nobody would print it. I gasped. Did lie m&an to tell me nobody would print forty folios by George Bernard Shaw? Let him give it to me, and I would guarantee to publish it. Iso it was too indecent he averred. . "This year I published m . 'The English Review' a series of articles on the Women of Shakespeare, ramming home my proof that Mary Fitton wa*"the passion of Shakespeare's whole life. And now Mr. Shaw has written' 'The Dark Lady of the . Sonnets,' neatly covering himself by confining my lady to the sonnets, but, as appears from the interview in last week's 'Observer, 7 annexing the whole of the theory I liave built up during the past fifteen years, and acknowledging the annexation with, a contemptuous pat on my head." Mr. Harris turned and rushed at me fiercely. " What does Shaw know about' Mary Fitton? "What does •he -understand about women? "What does he understand about passion? And ho is. going to take lier part , against Shakespeare, and explain her- countless infidelities. "What does he understand about Shakespeare? -I have drunk in Shakespeare for all these years until I know every word, every heart's-beat of him. For every other critic he has been dead clay. I, only I, have seen the great gentle tortured soul passing through h?s-k>ng martyrdom." "You do not complain that Shaw has taken your theory' as the oasis of his play, I suppose.?'* •^ ...."-No; thereJs. in-fact" —Mfr Harris stood still and glared, at me'from under, his. heavy eyebrows—- " this is only my-'queer way of welcoming frir" as the chiefest of jov disciples." MB SHA-W'S REPLY. . Mr Shaw, while admitting the main facts of «the conversations with Mr Harris, denies that he has been guilty of unfair plagiarism. "Have yon really stolen, his Shakepeare?" asked an interviewer from the "Daily News."

"Why should I? Not that his Shakespeare is not worth stealing, hut Shakespeare is common property; and X can dramatise him for myself in half the time dt would take me to steal Frank's dramatization. Besides, lie will never really understand Shakespeare. Frank lias a .most enormous capacity for pity; he is a sort of Parsifal—* durch Mitleid wissend '; and liis pity for Shakespeare overwhelms every other consideration -with him. But what did Shakespeare say ? Listen! There is no creature loves me ; And when I die no soul will pity me. Nay, wherefore should they? since that I myself

Find in myself no pity for myself. '"Ellis Inst jibing anti-climax, highly characteristic of Shakespeare, is the side of hint that Harris cannot stomach. Shakespeare, with all his humanity, Nwas as hard as a diamond, and was a | stupendous mocker and laugher. Mary ; Fitton might just as easily have broken the. dome of St. Paul's in her little fingers as Shakespeare's heart. There is no'suffering in Shakespeare. Tragedy swingsr-.him up instead of striking him down. He defies Frank's pity. No matter: Frank's genius is a genius for pity, a pride in. suffering; aud he makes Shakespeare pitiable in spite of all the ] immortal "William's :jibes. Now, I ' pity Mary Fitton.".