It is incomprehensible to me why our stage Juliets, in the "Balcony Scene," go through their billing-and-cooing as deliberately as they do their toilets, never for a moment thinking that the "place is death" to Romeo, and that "loves sweet bait must be stolen from fearful hookes." In Shakespeare"s time this scene was acted in broad daylight, and the dramatist is careful to stimulate the imagination of his audience with appropriate imagery. The word "night" occurs ten times, and I suppose the actor would be instructed to give a special emphasis to it. There are, besides, several allusions to the moon and the stars, including that descriptive couplet:
"Lady, by yonder blessed Moone I vow, That tips with siluer all these frute tree tops."
When Shakespeare could give us in words so vivid a picture of moonlight, Ben Jonson could well afford to have a fling at Inigo Jones"s mechanical scenery, and say:
"What poesy e"er was painted on a wall?"
Romeo goes direct from Capulet"s orchard to Friar Lawrence"s cell to make confession of his "deare hap." He loves now in earnest, and love teaches him to brave all dangers, and even to face matrimony; and his virtuous mood wins for him the good-will of the Friar, who sees in the alliance of the two houses their reconciliation. In the poem and novel both the lovers avow a similar disinterested motive to justify their union, but the mind of reason never enters the heart of love, and Shakespeare, in their case, wisely omits this bit of sophistry. The advance of the love episode must move side by side with the quarrel episode, so in the next scene we hear of Romeo receiving a challenge from Tybalt. The Irving-version omits most of the good-natured banter between Romeo and Mercutio, which is all telling comedy if spoken lightly and quickly. The Nurse enters, and Mercutio and Benvolio set off for Montague"s house, where they propose dining. The incident that follows must have been very irritating to the Elizabethan Puritans, who complained of the corruption of morals begot in "the chapel of Satan" by witnessing the carrying and recarrying of letters by laundresses "to beguile fathers of their children." Here more excellent comedy is omitted in the Irving-version, including the Nurse"s allusion to Paris as being "the properer man" of the two, and her nave question, "Doth not Rosemarie and Romeo begin both with a letter?" The Nurse had overheard Juliet talk about "Rosemarie and Romeo." Later on we see rosemary strewed over the body of the apparently dead Juliet.
The scene in which Romeo and Juliet meet to be married at the Friar"s Cell ends on the stage the second act. But to drop the curtain here interrupts the dramatic movement just as it is about to reach a climax in the death of Tybalt, followed by the banishment of Romeo. These incidents require action that is all hurry and excitement, and are therefore out of place at the beginning of an act, unless it be the opening act of a play. Besides, they are immediately connected with the scene in which allusion is made to Tybalt having challenged Romeo. We are shown Mercutio and Benvolio returning from Montague"s house, where they proposed dining. And Mercutio has, apparently, indulged too freely in his host"s wine, for the prudent Benvolio is anxious to get his friend out of the public streets as quickly as possible. Benvolio"s worst fears are realized by the entrance of the quarrelsome Tybalt, whom Mercutio, as is the way with fuddled people, at once offers to fight. But Tybalt hesitates to cross swords with a relative of the Prince, and is glad of the excuse of Romeo"s appearance to transfer the quarrel to him. Romeo will not draw sword upon his wife"s cousin, and Mercutio, exasperated, takes up the challenge, is stabbed by Tybalt under Romeo"s arm, and dies cursing the two houses. This tragedy rouses Romeo to action; he will now defend his own honour since he was Mercutio"s dear friend. Tybalt is challenged and killed. The citizens "are up," and for the second time we hear their ominous shout:
"Downe with the Capulets, downe with the Montagues!"
They enter, followed by the Prince, with the heads of the two houses and their wives. The Capulets call for Romeo"s death. The Montagues protest that Romeo in killing a man whose life was already forfeited has but taken the law into his own hands. For that offence he is exiled by the Prince.
"I haue an interest in your hates proceeding: My bloud for your rude brawles doth lie a bleeding.
But ile amerce you with so strong a fine, That you shall all repent the losse of mine.
I will be deafe to pleading and excuses, Nor teares, nor prayers, shall purchase out abuses.
Therefore use none, let Romeo hence in hast, Else when he is found, that houre is his last."
The whole of the latter part of this scene is brilliant in the variety and rapidity of its action, and should not, I consider, be omitted in representation as is directed to be done in the Irving-version. To take out the second renewal of hostilities between the two houses; not to show, in action on the stage, the rage of the Capulets at the death of Tybalt, and the grief of the Montagues at the banishment of Romeo, is to weaken the tragic significance of the scenes that follow. Without it the audience cannot vividly realize that the hatred of the two houses has reached its acutest stage, and that all hope of reconciliation is at an end.
Mercutio at the commencement of this scene says to Benvolio: "Thou wilt quarell with a man for cracking nuts, having no other reason but because thou hast hazel eyes." Did Shakespeare, who, according to tradition had hazel eyes, act the part of Benvolio? I think he did. It is the only part in the play I can fancy him able to act. A study of both the bust and the Droeshout portrait of the poet-dramatist leads me to believe that he would not have been able to disguise easily his ident.i.ty on the stage. His flexibility was essentially of a mental and not of a physical nature. The face is entirely wanting in mobility, and the head is so large that no wig could hide its unusual size. Shakespeare, moreover, became bald probably early in life. The Droeshout portrait shows undoubtedly the likeness of a youngish man, about thirty-five years old, while his baldness would still justify the epithet of "grandsire" with which Mercutio dubs Benvolio; and "grandsire" may have been a nickname of Shakespeare"s suggested by his baldness. "Come hither, goodman bald-pate"--words spoken by Lucio in "Measure for Measure"--have been quoted as a reason for presuming that Shakespeare played the Duke in that comedy. Sir William Davenant, who liked to be thought a natural son of the poet, in an adaption of this play altered the words to, "She has been advised by a bald dramatic poet of the next cloister." If the audience recognized their "gentle Will" in the part of the peace-loving Benvolio, we may imagine the laughter that would arise at Mercutio"s words: "Thy head is as full of quarelles, as an egg is full of meate"--Shakespeare"s head being egg-shaped. If my supposition be correct, we may honour the self-abnegation, the entire absence of personal vanity that enabled Shakespeare, like Moliere, to direct laughter against himself. The scattered references to him which we find in the writings of his contemporaries show us, says Professor Dowden, "the poet concealed and sometimes forgotten in the man, and make it clear that he moved among his fellows with no a.s.suming of the bard or prophet, no air of authority as of one divinely commissioned; that, on the contrary, he appeared as a pleasant comrade, genial, gentle, full of civility in the large meaning of the word, upright in dealing, ready and bright in wit, quick and sportive in conversation." How aptly does this description fit the character of Benvolio! One quality was especially common to the two men--tact. It was the possession of tact that made Shakespeare so invaluable to his fellow-actors as a manager. Benvolio"s tact is shown in his conversation with Romeo"s parents, with Romeo himself, with Mercutio when hot-headed, and with the Prince, Mercutio"s relative. It is true that Benvolio attributes Mercutio"s death to Tybalt"s interference, while in reality it was due to Mercutio"s indiscretion; but we have no pity for Tybalt, who, as Brooke says, thirsting after the death of others, lost his life.
Romeo"s banishment brings us to the middle and "busy" part of the play, where the Elizabethan actors were expected to thunder their loudest to split the ears of the groundlings; and Shakespeare, not yet sufficiently independent as a dramatist to dispense with the conventions of his stage, follows suit on the same fiddle to the same tune; and after all the ranting eloquence on the part of Romeo and Juliet, we are just where we were before with regard to any advance made with the story. Act III., Scene 2, is often entirely omitted in representation, but the Irving-version retains most of it. It is not till the middle of Act III., Scene 3, that the action advances again. But this, and the previous scenes, if acted with animation and rapidly spoken by all the characters concerned, would not take up much time, and could be declaimed with effect. The stage fashion of making the Friar stolidly indifferent to the unexpected complication that has arisen through Tybalt"s death is not only undramatic, but inconsistent with the text. A heavy responsibility lies on him, and his position is full of difficulty and danger. The scene that follows shows us Capulet fixing a day for the marriage of Juliet with Paris, and the father"s words--
"I thinke she will be rulde In all respects by _me_: nay, more, I doubt it not,"
have a significance, and render the parting of the lovers in the next scene highly dramatic. In the poem and novel, Juliet, before parting with Romeo, proposes to accompany him disguised as his servant; about the best thing she could do. After a good deal of arguing on both sides the idea is abandoned as impracticable. Shakespeare prefers his lovers to discourse about the nightingale. Romeo being gone, the mother enters to announce to the wife her betrothal to Paris, and the early day of marriage. The news is sprung upon her with terrible abruptness, though the audience have been in the secret from the first, and Juliet has hardly time to protest against "this sudden day of joy" before the father enters to complete her discomfiture by his torrents of abuse. Capulet"s varnish of good manners entirely disappears in this scene, and his coa.r.s.e nature is exposed in all its ugliness. But in the emergency of this tragic moment, as Professor Dowden points out, does Juliet leap into womanhood, and realize her position and responsibilities as a wife, and in the following lines Shakespeare touches the first note of highest tragedy in the play: that of the mind"s suffering as opposed to the mere tragedy of incident--
"O G.o.d, o Nurse, how shall this be preuented?
My husband is on earth, my faith in heauen; How shall that faith returne againe to earth, Unlesse that husband send it me from heauen By leauing earth? comfort me, counsaile me."
I am curious to learn on what grounds these thrilling words are omitted in the Irving-version. To me they are the climax of the scene and of the play so far as it has progressed. They mark the turning-point in Juliet"s moral nature. They enable us to forgive her any indiscretions of which she may previously have been guilty. From this point onwards all is calm in Juliet"s breast, because there is no infirmity of purpose,
"If all else faile, my self have power to die."
As the shadows fall across the path of the lovers, so do they over that of the Friar.
"O _Iuliet_, I already know thy greefe, It straines me past the compa.s.se of my wits,"
is his greeting in the next scene. A "desperate preventive" to shame or death is decided upon, and then follows what is perhaps the most dramatic episode in the whole play. We are shown Capulet"s household busy with the preparations for the marriage-feast, and the father, now bent on having a "great ado," hastily summoning "twenty cunning Cookes"--the consequence possibly of Juliet"s threatened opposition to his wishes. Juliet enters to feign submission and beg forgiveness, which enables the father to indulge in another despotic freak by hastening the day of marriage, heedless of all the inconvenience it may cause. Juliet retires to her chamber, and Capulet goes to prepare Paris against to-morrow. Then comes Juliet"s terrible ordeal, the undertaking "of a thing like death," which is all the more terrible because it must be done alone. This scene is often overacted on the stage. Our Juliets do far too much "stumping and frumping" about. I once saw the "potion-scene" acted with dramatic intelligence by an actress quite unknown to fame. When Juliet lays her dagger on the table, the actress took up the vial, and, standing motionless in the centre of the stage, spoke the lines in a hurried, low whisper, conveying the impression of reflection as well as the need for discretion. At the words,
"O looke, me thinks I see my Cozins Ghost,"
she sank on one knee, and, raising the right arm with a quick movement, pointed into s.p.a.ce, the eye following the hand, a very simple but telling gesture. The words, "Stay, _Tybalt_, stay!" were not given with a scream, but in a tone of alarm and entreaty, followed immediately by the drinking of the potion, as if to suggest Juliet"s desire to come to Romeo"s rescue.
The whole scene was acted in less than two minutes. The vision of Tybalt"s ghost pursuing Romeo for vengeance, an incident not to be found in the originals, shows the touch of the master dramatist. We feel the need of some immediate incentive to nerve Juliet to raise the vial to her lips; and what more effectual than that of her overwrought imagination picturing to herself the husband in danger.
While the poor child lies prostrate upon her bed in the likeness of death, we are shown the dawn of the morning, the rousing and bustle of the household; we hear the bridal march in the distance, the sound coming nearer every moment; the Nurse knocking at Juliet"s chamber-door; her awful discovery; the entrance of the parents; the filling of the stage by the bridal party, led by the Friar; the wailing, and wringing of the hands as the first quarto directs; the changing of the sound of instruments to that of melancholy bells, of solemn hymns to sullen dirges, of bridal flowers to funeral wreaths. All this is thrilling in conception, and yet the episode as conceived by Shakespeare is never represented on the stage.
Why are the Capulet scenes omitted, those which are dovetailed to the "potion scene," and make it by contrast so terribly tragic? The accentuation here of Capulet"s tyranny, of his sensuality, his brutal frankness, his indifference to every one"s convenience but his own, his delight in exacting a cringing obedience from all about him, are designed by the dramatist to move us with deep pity for Juliet"s sufferings, and by emphasizing its necessity to save the "potion scene" from the danger of appearing grotesque. But Shakespeare"s method of dramatic composition, that of uniting a series of short scenes with each other in one dramatic movement, will not bear the elaboration of heavy stage sets, and with the demand for carpentry comes the inducement for mutilation. At the Shakespeare Reading Society"s recital of this play, given recently under my direction at the London Inst.i.tution, these scenes were spoken without delay or interruption, and with but one scene announced, and the interest and breathless attention they aroused among the audience convinced me that my conception as to the dramatic treatment of them was the right one.
Until these scenes are restored to the acting version, Shakespeare"s tragedy will not be seen on the stage as he conceived it; and when they are restored, their dramatic power will electrify the house, and twentieth-century dilettantism will lose its influence among playgoers.
The comic scene between Peter and the Musicians should also be restored.
It comes in as a welcome relief after the intensity of the previous scenes, and is, besides, a connecting link with the comedy in the earlier part of the play.
The last act can be briefly dealt with. We antic.i.p.ate the final catastrophe, though we do not know by what means it will be brought about.
It is carried out, as it should be, effectively but simply. The children have loved and suffered, let them die easily and quickly. Romeo"s costume in exile is described in the poem as that of a merchant venturer, which is certainly a more appropriate dress than the conventional black velvet of the stage. After hearing the fatal news, which provokes the boy to mutter, "Is it even so?" in the Lyceum version is inserted the stage-direction, "_He pauses, overcome with grief_." But as there is no similar stage-direction in the originals, the actor may, without violation to the author"s intentions, pause _before_ the words are spoken. The blow is too sudden, too cruel, too overwhelming to allow of any immediate response in words. The colour would fly from Romeo"s face, his teeth grip his under lip, his eyes gleam with a look of frenzy, _looks_ that "import some misadventure," but there is no action and no sound for a while, and afterwards only a muttering. The stillness of Romeo"s desperation is very dramatic. There is nothing, in my opinion, unnatural in Romeo"s description of the Apothecary"s shop. All sorts of petty details float before our mental vision when the nerves are over-wrought, but the actor should be careful not to accentuate the description in any way; it is but introductory to the dominant words of the speech,
"And if a man did need a poyson now."
As Juliet"s openly acknowledged lover, Paris occupies too prominent a place in the play to be lightly dismissed, and so he is involved in the final catastrophe. In Brooke"s poem, Romeo, before dying, prays to Heaven for mercy and forgiveness, and the picture of the boy kneeling by his wife"s side, with her hand clasped in his, pleading to his Redeemer to--
"Take pity on my sinnefull and my poore afflicted mynde!"
would, on the stage, have been a supremely pathetic situation. But Shakespeare"s stern love of dramatic truth rejects it. In Romeo"s character he strikes but one note, love--and love as a pa.s.sion. Love is Romeo"s divinity, physical beauty his deity. The a.s.sertion that--
"In nature there"s no blemish but the mind, None can be call"d deform"d but the unkind,"
would have sounded in Romeo"s ears profanation. When he first sees Juliet he will by touching hers make _blessed_ his rude hand, and when he dies he will seal the doors of breath "with a _righteous_ kiss." To the Friar he cries:
"Do thou but close our hands with holy words, Then loue-deuouring death do what he dare.
It is inough I may but call her _mine_."
And "love-devouring death" accepts the challenge, but the agony of death does not "countervail the exchange of joy" that one short minute gives him in her presence. Here Shakespeare"s treatment of the love-episode differs from that of Brooke"s in his tolerance for the children"s love, though it be carried out in defiance of the parents" wishes, and in his recognition that love, so long as it be strong as death, has an enn.o.bling and not a debasing influence on character: we are made to feel that it is better for Romeo to have loved and lost than never to have loved at all. For the hatred of the two houses Shakespeare shows no tolerance. Juliet"s death is carried out with the greatest simplicity, and within a few moments of her awakening. There is neither time for reflection nor lamentation; the watch has been roused, and is heard approaching. She has hardly kissed the poison from her dead husband"s lips before they enter the churchyard, and nothing but the darkness of the night screens from them the sight of the steel that Juliet plunges into her breast. It is the presence of the watch, almost within touch of her, that goads her to lift the knife, just as it is the vision of Tybalt"s ghost pursuing Romeo that nerves her to drink the potion. The dramatist"s intention is clearly indicated in the stage-directions of the two quartos and the folio, but the Irving-version retains in this last scene the modern stage-directions.
Professor Dowden is of opinion "that it were presumptuous to say that had Shakespeare been acquainted with the earlier form of the story (in which Juliet wakes before Romeo dies), he would not have altered his ending."
But an ending of this kind is inartistic. It is bringing the axe down twice instead of once. It is introducing a new complication and a new movement at a moment when none is wanted. The catastrophe should be and always is, by Shakespeare, carried out with simplicity and directness.
After Juliet"s death other watchmen enter with the Friar in custody, while from afar we hear for the third and last time the cries of the citizens:
"Downe with the Capulets, downe with the Mountagues!"
the only child of each of the two rival houses lying dead before the spectators. Nature had done her best to effect a reconciliation, but man thwarted her in her purpose. Then the Prince and the heads of the two houses enter and learn for the first time that
"_Romeo_ there dead, was husband to that _Iuliet_, And she there dead, that"s _Romeo"s_ faithfull wife."
Well may the Prince say--
"_Capulet, Montague_, See what a scourge is laide upon your hate That heauen finds means to kill your joyes with loue."
All this last scene is full of animation, and presents a fine opportunity for the _regisseur_. I am obliged to use the French word, for we have no similar functionary in this country. Our public is sufficiently indifferent to the welfare of dramatic art to allow its leading actors to be their own stage-managers and often their own authors. As a consequence the public gets no English plays worthy of being called plays, and no guarantee that a dead author"s intentions shall be respected. Human nature has its prejudices, and the actor is seldom to be found who can look at a play from any other point of view than in relation to the prominence of his own part in it. It is owing to the despotism of the actor on the English stage, and consequently to the star system, that I attribute the mutilation of Shakespeare"s plays in their representation. The closing scene of this play might be made very effective in action. The crowd hurrying with "bated breath" to the spot; its horror at the sight of the dead children, who for all it knows are murdered; its amazement at finding they are man and wife; the Prince"s stern rebuke; the bowed grief and shame of Montague and Capulet; the reconciliation of the bereaved parents, and joining of hands across the dead bodies. The Irving-version omits all but the entrance of the citizens with Montague, Capulet, and the Prince, who at once ends the play with the couplet--
"For neuer was a Storie of more wo Than this of _Iuliet_ and her _Romeo_."
But if the Prince hears no story, he and those who enter with him cannot be aware that Romeo and Juliet are man and wife, or that they died by their own hands, and are not victims to an act of treachery. Then why open your play with the quarrel of the two houses if you do not intend to show them reconciled? Why not follow the c.u.mberland acting-version, and take out the crowd scenes altogether? It is a more intelligible proceeding than this compromise of the Irving-version.
Criticized as cla.s.sical tragedy, the play of "Romeo and Juliet" is a veritable hotch-potch. It seems to defy the laws of criticism. The characters at one moment talk in the highest poetical language, and at another in the most commonplace colloquy. Nothing can well seem more inconsistent than to put into the mouth of Capulet these words--
"Death lies on her like an untimely frost, Upon the sweetest flower of all the field."