Title:  The Atlantic Monthly, Vol. 12, No. 72, October, 1863

Author:  Various

Release Date:  May 16, 2005 [EBook #15838]

Language:  English

Character set encoding:  ASCII

*** Start of this project gutenberg EBOOK the Atlantic monthly, Vol. ***

Produced by Cornell University, Joshua Hutchinson, Josephine Paolucci and the Online Distributed Proofreading Team.

[Transcriber’s Note:  Footnotes moved to end of document.]

THE

Atlantic monthly.

A magazine of literature, art, and politics.

Vol.  XII.—­October, 1863.—­No.  LXXII.

Entered according to Act of Congress, in the year 1868, by Ticknor and
fields, in the Clerk’s Office of the District Court of the District of
Massachusetts.

* * * * *

Charles lamb’s UNCOLLECTED writings.[1]

Second paper.

Readers of Lamb’s “Life and Letters” remember that before “Mr. H.” was written, before Kemble had rejected “John Woodvil,” Godwin’s tragedy of “Antonio” had been produced at Drury-Lane Theatre, and that Elia was present at the performance thereof.  But perhaps they do not know (at least, not many of them) that Elia’s essay on “The Artificial Comedy of the Last Century,” as originally published in the “London Magazine,” contained a full and circumstantial account of the cold and stately manner in which John Kemble performed the part of Antonio in Godwin’s unfortunate play.  For some reason or other, Lamb did not reprint this part of the article.  Admirers of Charles Lamb and admirers of the drama will be pleased—­for ’tis a very characteristic bit of writing—­with what Elia says of

* * * * *

John Kemble and Godwin’s tragedy of “Antonio.”

“The story of his swallowing opium-pills to keep him lively upon the first night of a certain tragedy we may presume to be a piece of retaliatory pleasantry on the part of the suffering author.  But, indeed, John had the art of diffusing a complacent equable dulness (which you knew not where to quarrel with) over a piece which he did not like, beyond any of his contemporaries.  John Kemble had made up his mind early that all the good tragedies which could be written had been written, and he resented any new attempt.  His shelves were full.  The old standards were scope enough for his ambition.  He ranged in them absolute, and ‘fair in Otway, full in Shakspeare shone.’  He succeeded to the old lawful thrones, and did not care to adventure bottomry with a Sir Edward Mortimer, or any casual speculator that offered.