her? Then let us say you are sad--
The first line is one foot short, the second one foot too long. This
Collin would call a stroke of genius; each _fie_ is a complete foot,
and the line is complete! But what if the line were printed thus:
_Sal_:
Why, then you are in love.
_Ant_:
Fie, fie!
_Sal_:
Not in
Love neither? Then let us say you are sad.
or possibly:
Love neither? Then let's say that you are sad.
Another possible printer's error is found in I, 3-116:
With bated breath and whispering humbleness
Say this;
Fair sir, you spit on me on Wednesday last.
Are we here to imagine a pause of four feet? And what are we to do with
the first folio which has
Say this; Fair sir, you spit on me on Wednesday last.
all in one line? Perhaps some printer chose between the two. At any
rate, Collin's theory will not hold. In the schools, of course, one
cannot be a text critic but, on the other hand, one must not praise in
Shakespeare what may be the tricks of the printer's devil. The text is
not always faultless.
Finally, Dr. Western objects to the statement that the difficulty in
translating Shakespeare lies in the great number of monosyllables and
gives
In sooth, I know not why I am so sad
as proof. Ten monosyllables in one line! But this is not impossible in
Norwegian:
For sand, jeg ved ei, hvi jeg er saa trist--
It is not easy to translate Shakespeare, but the difficulty goes deeper
than his richness in words of one syllable.
With the greater part of Dr. Western's article everyone will agree. It
is doubtful if any case could be made out for the division of prose and
verse based on psychology. Shakespeare probably wrote his plays in verse
for the same reason that Goethe and Schiller and Oehlenschlaeger did. It
was the fashion. And how difficult it is to break with fashion or with
old tradition, the history of Ibsen's transition from poetry to prose
shows. It is equally certain that in Collin's _Introduction_ it is
difficult to distinguish ascertained facts from brilliant speculation.
But it is not easy to agree with Dr. Western that Collin's explanation
of the "pause" is a tissue of fancy.
In the first place, no one denies that the printers have at times
played havoc with Shakespeare's text. Van Dam and Stoffel, to whose book
Western refers and whose suggestions are directly responsible for this
article, have shown this clearly enough. But when Dr.
|