them in the idea, and by slightly raising and softening
the object of study (as in the case of the ex-Huguenot,
Duke de Montausier, {3} for the study of the Misanthrope,
and, according to St. Simon, the Abbe Roquette for
Tartuffe), generalized upon it so as to make it permanently
human. Concede that it is natural for human creatures
to live in society, and Alceste is an imperishable
mark of one, though he is drawn in light outline,
without any forcible human colouring. Our English
school has not clearly imagined society; and of the
mind hovering above congregated men and women, it
has imagined nothing. The critics who praise
it for its downrightness, and for bringing the situations
home to us, as they admiringly say, cannot but disapprove
of Moliere’s comedy, which appeals to the individual
mind to perceive and participate in the social.
We have splendid tragedies, we have the most beautiful
of poetic plays, and we have literary comedies passingly
pleasant to read, and occasionally to see acted.
By literary comedies, I mean comedies of classic inspiration,
drawn chiefly from Menander and the Greek New Comedy
through Terence; or else comedies of the poet’s
personal conception, that have had no model in life,
and are humorous exaggerations, happy or otherwise.
These are the comedies of Ben Jonson, Massinger, and
Fletcher. Massinger’s Justice Greedy we
can all of us refer to a type, ’with fat capon
lined’ that has been and will be; and he would
be comic, as Panurge is comic, but only a Rabelais
could set him moving with real animation. Probably
Justice Greedy would be comic to the audience of a
country booth and to some of our friends. If
we have lost our youthful relish for the presentation
of characters put together to fit a type, we find it
hard to put together the mechanism of a civil smile
at his enumeration of his dishes. Something of
the same is to be said of Bobadil, swearing ’by
the foot of Pharaoh’; with a reservation, for
he is made to move faster, and to act. The comic
of Jonson is a scholar’s excogitation of the
comic; that of Massinger a moralist’s.
Shakespeare is a well-spring of characters which are
saturated with the comic spirit; with more of what
we will call blood-life than is to be found anywhere
out of Shakespeare; and they are of this world, but
they are of the world enlarged to our embrace by imagination,
and by great poetic imagination. They are, as
it were—I put it to suit my present comparison—creatures
of the woods and wilds, not in walled towns, not grouped
and toned to pursue a comic exhibition of the narrower
world of society. Jaques, Falstaff and his regiment,
the varied troop of Clowns, Malvolio, Sir Hugh Evans
and Fluellen—marvellous Welshmen!—Benedict
and Beatrice, Dogberry, and the rest, are subjects
of a special study in the poetically comic.
His Comedy of incredible imbroglio belongs to the
literary section. One may conceive that there
was a natural resemblance between him and Menander,
both in the scheme and style of his lighter plays.
Had Shakespeare lived in a later and less emotional,
less heroical period of our history, he might have
turned to the painting of manners as well as humanity.
Euripides would probably, in the time of Menander,
when Athens was enslaved but prosperous, have lent
his hand to the composition of romantic comedy.
He certainly inspired that fine genius.