Page images
PDF
EPUB

I would not, however, be thought to infult the editor, nor to cenfure him with too much petulance, for having failed in little things, of whom I have been told, that he excels in greater. But I may without indecency, obferve, that no man fhould attempt to teach others what he has never learned. himself; and thạt those who, like Themistocles, have ftudied the arts of policy, and can teach a fmall ftate how to grow great, fhould, like him, difdain to labour in trifles, and confider petty accomplishments as below their ambition *.

*To this article, when first printed, Dr. Johnson affixed Propofals for a new edition of Shakspeare. Thefe he afterward dilated into the following larger Profpectus.

[ocr errors]

PROPOSAL S

FOR PRINTING THE

DRAMATICK WORKS

OF

WILLIAM SHAKESPEARE,

Printed in the Year 1756,

W

'HEN the works of Shakespeare are, after fo many editions, again offered to the Publick, it will doubtlefs be inquired, why Shakespeare ftands in more need of critical affiftance than any other of the English writers, and what are the deficiencies of the late attempts, which another editor may hope to fupply?

The bufinefs of him that republishes an ancient book is, to correct what is corrupt, and to explain what is obfcure. To have a text corrupt in many places, and in many doubtful, is, among the authors that have written fince the ufe of types, almoft peculiar to Shakespeare. Moft writers, by publifhing their own works, prevent all various readings, and preclude all conjectural criticifm. Books indeed are fometimes published after the death of him who produced them; but they are better fecured from corruption than these unfortunate com

pofitions.

pofitions. They fubfift in a single copy, written or revised by the author; and the faults of the printed volume can be only faults of one defcent.

But of the works of Shakespeare the condition has been far different: he fold them, not to be printed, but to be played. They were immediately copied for the actors, and multiplied by tranfcript after tranfcript, vitiated by the blunders of the penman, or changed by the affectation of the player; perhaps enlarged to introduce a jeft, or mutilated to fhorten the representation; and printed at last without the concurrence of the author, without the consent of the proprietor, from compilations made by chance or by stealth out of the feparate parts written for the theatre; and thus thrust into the world furreptitiously and haftily, they fuffered another depravation from the ignorance and negligence of the printers, as every man who knows the ftate of the prefs in that age will readily conceive.

It is not eafy for invention to bring together fo many caufes concurring to vitiate the text. No other author ever gave up his works to fortune and time with fo little care: no books could be left in hands fo likely to injure them, as plays frequently acted, yet continued in manufcript: no other tranfcribers were likely to be fo little qualified for their task as those who copied for the ftage, at a time when the lower ranks of the people were univerfally illiterate: no other editions were made from fragments fo minutely broken, and fo fortuitoufly reunited; and in no other age was the art of printing in fuch unfkilful hands.

With the causes of corruption that make the revifal of Shakespeare's dramatick pieces neceffary, may be enumerated the causes of obscurity, which may be partly imputed to his age, and partly to

himfelf.

When a writer outlives his contemporaries, and remains almoft the only unforgotten name of a diftant time, he is neceffarily obfcure. Every age has its modes of fpeech, and its caft of thought; which, though eafily explained when there are many books to be compared with each other, become fometimes unintelligible and always difficult, when there are no parallel paffages that may conduce to their illustration. Shakespeare is the firft confiderable author of fublime or familiar dialogue in our language. Of the books which he read, and from which he formed his ftyle, fome perhaps have perifhed, and the reft are neglected. His imitations are therefore unnoted, his allufions are undifcovered, and many beauties, both of pleafantry and greatness, are loft with the objects to which they were united, as the figures vanith when the canvafs has decayed.

It is the great excellence of Shakespeare, that he drew his fcenes from nature, and from life. He copied the manners of the world then paffing before him, and has more allufions than other poets to the traditions and fuperftition of the vulgar; which muft therefore be traced before he can be underftood.

He wrote at a time when our poetical language was yet unformed, when the meaning of our phrafes was yet in fluctuation, when words were adopted at

pleasure

pleasure from the neighbouring languages, and while the Savon was ftill vifibly mingled in our diction. The reader is therefore embarraffed at once with dead and with foreign languages, with obfoleteness and innovation. In that age, as in all others, fashion produced phrafeology, which fucceeding fashion fwept away before its meaning was generally known, or fufficiently authorifed: and in that age, above all others, experiments were made upon our language, which distorted its combinations, and disturbed its uniformity.

If Shakespeare has difficulties above other writers, it is to be imputed to the nature of his work, which required the use of the common colloquial language, and confequently admitted many phrases allufive, elliptical, and proverbial, fuch as we fpeak and hear every hour without obferving them; and of which, being now familiar, we do not fufpect that they can ever grow uncouth, or that, being now obvious, they can ever feem remote.

These are the principal causes of the obscurity of Shakespeare; to which might be added the fulness of idea, which might fometimes load his words with more fentiment than they could conveniently convey, and that rapidity of imagination which might hurry him to a fecond thought before he had fully explained the firft. But my opinion is, that very few of his lines were difficult to his audience, and that he used fuch expreffions as were then common, though the paucity of contemporary writers makes them now feem peculiar.

Authors are often praised for improvement, or blamed for innovation, with very little juftice, by

thofe

« PreviousContinue »