of Pallas: she covers with fanlike tracery the
vaulted entrance to Christ Church Hall, and looks
out from the windows of Merton; her feet have stirred
the Cumnor cowslips, and she gathers fritillaries in
the river-fields. To her the clamour of the
schools and the dulness of the lecture-room are a
weariness and a vexation of spirit; she seeks not to
define virtue, and cares little for the categories;
she smiles on the swift athlete whose plastic grace
has pleased her, and rejoices in the young Barbarians
at their games; she watches the rowers from the reedy
bank and gives myrtle to her lovers, and laurel to
her poets, and rue to those who talk wisely in the
street; she makes the earth lovely to all who dream
with Keats; she opens high heaven to all who soar with
Shelley; and turning away her head from pedant, proctor
and Philistine, she has welcomed to her shrine a band
of youthful actors, knowing that they have sought
with much ardour for the stern secret of Melpomene,
and caught with much gladness the sweet laughter of
Thalia. And to me this ardour and this gladness
were the two most fascinating qualities of the Oxford
performance, as indeed they are qualities which are
necessary to any fine dramatic production. For
without quick and imaginative observation of life
the most beautiful play becomes dull in presentation,
and what is not conceived in delight by the actor
can give no delight at all to others.
I know that there are many who consider that Shakespeare
is more for the study than for the stage. With
this view I do not for a moment agree. Shakespeare
wrote the plays to be acted, and we have no right to
alter the form which he himself selected for the full
expression of his work. Indeed, many of the beauties
of that work can be adequately conveyed to us only
through the actor’s art. As I sat in the
Town Hall of Oxford the other night, the majesty of
the mighty lines of the play seemed to me to gain
new music from the clear young voices that uttered
them, and the ideal grandeur of the heroism to be
made more real to the spectators by the chivalrous
bearing, the noble gesture and the fine passion of
its exponents. Even the dresses had their dramatic
value. Their archaeological accuracy gave us,
immediately on the rise of the curtain, a perfect
picture of the time. As the knights and nobles
moved across the stage in the flowing robes of peace
and in the burnished steel of battle, we needed no
dreary chorus to tell us in what age or land the play’s
action was passing, for the fifteenth century in all
the dignity and grace of its apparel was living actually
before us, and the delicate harmonies of colour struck
from the first a dominant note of beauty which added
to the intellectual realism of archaeology the sensuous
charm of art.