to confound the power of originating poetical images
and conceptions with the faculty of being able to
read or recite the same when put into words;[1]or
what connection that absolute mastery over the heart
and soul of man, which a great dramatic poet possesses,
has with those low tricks upon the eye and ear, which
a player, by observing a few general effects, which
some common passion, as grief, anger, &c., usually
has upon the gestures and exterior, can so easily
compass. To know the internal workings and movements
of a great mind, of an Othello or a Hamlet for instance,
the when and the why and the how far
they should be moved; to what pitch a passion is becoming;
to give the reins and to pull in the curb exactly
at the moment when the drawing in or the slackening
is most graceful; seems to demand a reach of intellect
of a vastly different extent from that which is employed
upon the bare imitation of the signs of these passions
in the countenance or gesture, which signs are usually
observed to be most lively and emphatic in the weaker
sort of minds, and which signs can after all but indicate
some passion, as I said before, anger, or grief, generally;
but of the motives and grounds of the passion, wherein
it differs from the same passion in low and vulgar
natures, of these the actor can give no more idea
by his face or gesture than the eye (without a metaphor)
can speak, or the muscles utter intelligible sounds.
But such is the instantaneous nature of the impressions
which we take in at the eye and ear at a playhouse,
compared with the slow apprehension oftentimes of
the understanding in reading, that we are apt not
only to sink the playwriter in the consideration which
we pay to the actor, but even to identify in our minds,
in a perverse manner, the actor with the character
which he represents. It is difficult for a frequent
play-goer to disembarrass the idea of Hamlet from
the person and voice of Mr. K. We speak of Lady Macbeth,
while we are in reality thinking of Mrs. S. Nor is
this confusion incidental alone to unlettered persons,
who, not possessing the advantage of reading, are
necessarily dependent upon the stage-player for all
the pleasure which they can receive from the drama,
and to whom the very idea of what an author is
cannot be made comprehensible without some pain and
perplexity of mind: the error is one from which
persons otherwise not meanly lettered, find it almost
impossible to extricate themselves.
[Footnote 1: It is observable that we fall into this confusion only in dramatic recitations. We never dream that the gentleman who reads Lucretius in public with great applause, is therefore a great poet and philosopher; nor do we find that Tom Davis, the bookseller, who is recorded to have recited the Paradise Lost better than any man in England in his day (though I cannot help thinking there must be some mistake in this tradition), was therefore, by his intimate friends, set upon a level with Milton.]