Records Of A Girlhood Volume 1 (1 Of 2), Frances Ann Kemble [i can read book club .txt] 📗
- Author: Frances Ann Kemble
Book online «Records Of A Girlhood Volume 1 (1 Of 2), Frances Ann Kemble [i can read book club .txt] 📗». Author Frances Ann Kemble
All Felt For This Beloved And Valued Friend Tended To Produce Justice
And Moderation In All Our Conflicts Of Opinion."[A]
[A] Sketch Of Lord Dacre's Character By Madame Huber.
Lady Dacre Had Had By Her First Marriage, To Mr. Wilmot, An Only Child,
Volume 1 Chapter 19 Pg 135The Mrs. Sullivan I Have Mentioned In This Letter, Wife Of The Reverend
Frederick Sullivan, Vicar Of Kimpton. She Was An Excellent And Most
Agreeable Person, Who Inherited Her Mother's Literary And Artistic
Genius In A Remarkable Degree, Though Her Different Position And Less
Leisurely Circumstances As Wife Of A Country Clergyman And Mother Of A
Large Family, Devoted To The Important Duties Of Both Callings, Probably
Prevented The Full Development And Manifestation Of Her Fine
Intellectual Gifts. She Was A Singularly Modest And Diffident Person,
And This As Well As Her More Serious Avocations May Have Stood In The
Way Of Her Doing Justice To Her Uncommon Abilities, Of Which, However,
There Is Abundant Evidence In Her Drawings And Groups Of Modeled
Figures, And In The Five Volumes Of Charming Stories Called "Tales Of A
Chaperon," And "Tales Of The Peerage And The Peasantry," Which Were Not
Published With Her Name But Simply As Edited By Lady Dacre, To Whom
Their Authorship Was, I Think, Generally Attributed. The Mental Gifts Of
Lady Dacre Appear To Be Heirlooms, For They Have Been Inherited For
Three Generations, And In Each Case By Her Female Descendants.
The Gentleman Who Accompanied Her To Her House, On The Evening I
Referred To In My Letter, Was The Honorable James Stuart Wortley,
Youngest Son Of The Earl Of Wharncliffe, Who Was Prevented By Failure Of
Health Alone From Reaching The Very Highest Honors Of The Legal
Profession, In Which He Had Already Attained The Rank Of
Solicitor-General, When His Career Was Prematurely Closed By Disastrous
Illness. At The Time Of My First Acquaintance With Him He Was A Very
Clever And Attractive Young Man, And Though Intended For A Future Lord
Chancellor He Condescended To Sing Sentimental Songs Very Charmingly.
Of My Excellent And Amiable Friend, The Reverend William Harness, A
Biography Has Been Published Which Tells All There Is To Be Told Of His
Uneventful Life And Career. Endowed With A Handsome Face And Sweet
Countenance And Very Fine Voice, He Was At One Time A Fashionable London
Preacher, A Vocation Not Incompatible, When He Exercised It, With A
Great Admiration For The Drama. He Was An Enthusiastic Frequenter Of The
Theater, Published A Valuable Edition Of Shakespeare, And Wrote Two
Plays In Blank Verse Which Had Considerable Merit; But His Pre-Eminent
Gift Was Goodness, In Which I Have Known Few People Who Surpassed Him.
Objecting From Conscientious Motives To Hold More Than One Living, He
Received From His Friend, Lord Lansdowne, An Appointment In The Home
Office, The Duties Of Which Did Not Interfere With Those Of His Clerical
Profession. He Was Of A Delightfully Sunny, Cheerful Temper, And Very
Fond Of Society, Mixing In The Best That London Afforded, And Frequently
Receiving With Cordial Hospitality Some Of Its Most Distinguished
Members In His Small, Modest Residence. He Was A Devoted Friend Of My
Family, Had An Ardent Admiration For My Aunt Siddons, And Honored Me
With A Kind And Constant Regard.
Miss Joanna Baillie Was A Great Friend Of Mrs. Siddons's, And Wrote
Expressly For Her The Part Of Jane De Montfort, In Her Play Of "De
Montfort." My Father And Mother Had The Honor Of Her Acquaintance, And I
Went More Than Once To Pay My Respects To Her At The Cottage In
Hampstead Where She Passed The Last Years Of Her Life.
The Peculiar Plan Upon Which She Wrote Her Fine Plays, Making Each Of
Volume 1 Chapter 19 Pg 136Them Illustrate A Single Passion, Was In Great Measure The Cause Of
Their Unfitness For The Stage. "De Montfort," Which Has Always Been
Considered The Most Dramatic Of Them, Had Only A Very Partial Success,
In Spite Of Its Very Great Poetical Merit And Considerable Power Of
Passion, And The Favorable Circumstance That The Two Principal
Characters In It Were Represented By The Eminent Actors For Whom The
Authoress Originally Designed Them. In Fact, Though Joanna Baillie
Selected And Preferred The Dramatic Form For Her Poetical Compositions,
They Are Wanting In The Real Dramatic Element, Resemblance To Life And
Human Nature, And Are Infinitely Finer As Poems Than Plays.
But The Desire And Ambition Of Her Life Had Been To Write For The Stage,
And The Reputation She Achieved As A Poet Did Not Reconcile Her To Her
Failure As A Dramatist. I Remember Old Mr. Sotheby, The Poet (I Add This
Title To His Name, Though His Title To It Was By Some Esteemed But
Slender), Telling Me Of A Visit He Had Once Paid Her, When, Calling Him
Into Her Little Kitchen (She Was Not Rich, Kept Few Servants, And Did
Not Disdain Sometimes To Make Her Own Pies And Puddings), She Bade Him,
As She Was Up To The Elbows In Flour And Paste, Draw From Her Pocket A
Paper; It Was A Play-Bill, Sent To Her By Some Friend In The Country,
Setting Forth That Some Obscure Provincial Company Was About To Perform
Miss Joanna Baillie's Celebrated Tragedy Of "De Montfort." "There,"
Exclaimed The Culinary Melpomene, "There, Sotheby, I Am So Happy! You
See My Plays Can Be Acted Somewhere!" Well, Too, Do I Remember The Tone
Of Half-Regretful Congratulation In Which She Said To Me, "Oh, You Lucky
Girl--You Lucky Girl; You Are Going To Have Your Play Acted!" This Was
"Francis I.," The Production Of Which On The Stage Was A Bitter
Annoyance To Me, To Prevent Which I Would Have Given Anything I
Possessed, But Which Made Me (Vexed And Unhappy Though I Was At The
Circumstance On Which I Was Being Congratulated) An Object Of Positive
Envy To The Distinguished Authoress And Kind Old Lady.
In Order To Steer Clear Of The Passion Of Revenge, Which Is In Fact
Hatred Proceeding From A Sense Of Injury, Miss Joanna Baillie In Her
Fine Tragedy Of "De Montfort" Has Inevitably Made The Subject Of It An
_Antipathy_--That Is, An Instinctive, Unreasoning, Partly Physical
Antagonism, Producing Abhorrence And Detestation The Most Intense,
Without Any Adequate Motive; And The Secret Of The Failure Of Her Noble
Play On The Stage Is Precisely That This Is Not (Fortunately) A Natural
Passion Common To The Majority Of Human Beings (Which Hatred That _Has_
A Motive Undoubtedly Is, In A Greater Or Less Degree), But An Abnormal
Element In Exceptionally Morbid Natures, And Therefore A Sentiment (Or
Sensation) With Which No Great Number Of People Or Large Proportion Of A
Public Audience Can Sympathize Or Even Understand. Intense And Causeless
Hatred Is One Of The Commonest Indications Of Insanity, And, Alas! One
That Too Often Exhibits Itself Toward Those Who Have Been Objects Of The
Tenderest Love; But De Montfort Is Not Insane, And His Loathing Is
Unaccountable To Healthy Minds Upon Any Other Plea, And Can Find No
Comprehension In Audiences Quite Prepared To Understand, If Not To
Sympathize With, The Vindictive Malignity Of Shylock And The Savage
Ferocity Of Zanga. Goethe, In His Grand Play Of "Tasso," Gives The Poet
This Morbid Detestation Of The Accomplished Courtier And Man Of The
World, Antonio; But Then, Tasso Is Represented As On The Very Verge Of
That Madness Into The Dark Abyss Of Which He Subsequently Sinks.
Volume 1 Chapter 19 Pg 137
Shakespeare's Treatment Of The Passion Of Hatred, In "The Merchant Of
Venice," Is Worthy Of All Admiration For The Profound Insight With Which
He Has Discriminated Between That Form Of It Which All Men Comprehend,
And Can Sympathize With, And That Which, Being Really Nothing But
Diseased Idiosyncrasy, Appears To The Majority Of Healthy Minds A Mere
Form Of Madness.
In His First Introduction To Us The Jew Accounts For His Detestation Of
Antonio Upon Three Very Comprehensible Grounds: National Race Hatred, In
Feeling And Exciting Which The Jews Have Been Quite A "Peculiar People"
From The Earliest Records Of History; Personal Injury In The Defeat Of
His Usurious Prospects Of Gain; And Personal Insult In The Unmanly
Treatment To Which Antonio Had Subjected Him. However Excessive In
Degree, His Hatred Is Undoubtedly Shown To Have A Perfectly
Comprehensible, If Not Adequate Cause And Nature, And Is A _Reasonable_
Hatred, Except From Such A Moral Point Of View As Allows Of None.
An Audience Can Therefore Tolerate Him With Mitigated Disgust Through
The Opening Portions Of The Play. When, However, In The Grand Climax Of
The Trial Scene Shakespeare Intends That He Shall Be No Longer Tolerated
Or Tolerable, But Condemned Alike By His Venetian Judges And His English
Audience, He Carefully Avoids Putting Into His Mouth Any One Of The
Reasons With Which In The Opening Of The Play He Explains And Justifies
His Hatred. He Does Not Make Him Quote The Centuries-Old Hebrew Scorn Of
And Aversion To The Gentiles, Nor The Merchant's Interference With His
Commercial Speculations, Nor The Man's Unprovoked Spitting At, Spurning,
And Abuse Of Him; But He Will And _Can_ Give _No_ Reason For His
Abhorrence Of Antonio, Whom He Says He _Loathes_ With The Inexplicable
Revulsion Of Nature That Certain Men Feel Toward Certain Animals; And
The Mastery Of The Poet Shows Itself In Thus Making Shylock's Cruelty
Monstrous, And Accounting For It As An Abnormal Monstrosity.
Hatred That Has A Reasonable Cause May Cease With Its Removal. Supposing
Antonio To Have Become A Converted Jew, Or To Have Withdrawn All
Opposition To Shylock's Usury And Compensated Him Largely For The Losses
He Had Caused Him By It, And To Have Expressed Publicly, With The Utmost
Humility, Contrition For His Former Insults And Sincere Promises Of
Future Honor, Respect, And Reverence, It Is Possible To Imagine Shylock
Relenting In A Hatred Of Which The Reasons He Assigned For It No Longer
Existed. But From The Moment He Says He Has _No_ Reason For His Hatred
Other Than The Insuperable Disgust And Innate Enmity Of An Antagonistic
Nature--The Deadly, Sickening, Physical Loathing That In Rare Instances
Affects Certain Human Beings Toward Others Of Their Species, And Toward
Certain Animals--Then There Are No Calculable Bounds To The Ferocity Of
Such A Blind Instinct, No Possibility Of Mitigating, By Considerations
Of Reflection Or Feeling, An Inherent, Integral Element Of A Morbid
Organization. And Shakespeare, In Giving This Aspect To The Last
Exhibition Of Shylock's Vindictiveness, Cancels The Original Appeal To
Possible Sympathy For His Previous Wrongs, And Presents Him As A
Dangerous Maniac Or Wild Beast, From Whose Fury No One
Comments (0)