The Works of Congreve. Comedies: Incognita: Poems by F. W. Bateson; William CongreveReview by: P. AlexanderThe Review of English Studies, Vol. 8, No. 30 (Apr., 1932), pp. 232-233Published by: Oxford University PressStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/508846 .

Accessed: 17/12/2014 10:53

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

.

Oxford University Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The Review ofEnglish Studies.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 128.235.251.160 on Wed, 17 Dec 2014 10:53:54 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

R. E. S., VOL. 8, 1932 (NQ 30, APRIL) R. E. S., VOL. 8, 1932 (NQ 30, APRIL)

wealth of literary illustration and a metaphorical style (e.g. pp. 90-91) combine to make the involuted argument difficult to follow. In the first essay, on Cleopatra, the author expounds more fully " what is meant by characterisation without psychology, particularly by the differentiation of the speech," ideas which he had previously adumbrated in his Shakespeare Studies (pp. 63-70). He then proceeds to show how Shakespeare, employing such technique, is able to present the character of the Queen as "a living thing " and artistically consistent. "In her inconsistency she is consistent. But the chief means by which the dramatist makes her so is the identity, through all her changes, of her tone and manner. She changes as a vivacious, amorous, designing woman changes, not so as to lose her identity, like Proteus."

In another essay, Mr. Stoll speaks with wisdom and experience on " Certain Fallacies and Irrelevancies in the Literary Scholarship of the Day." He draws attention to the futility of many of the dissertations undertaken for the Higher Degrees, and illustrates, with amusing examples, the fallacy inherent in the work of many scholars who " acknowledge that evidence bit by bit is not consider- able, and may be questionable, but consider the effect of it to be cumulative." Professor R. W. Chambers, in this country, once suggested that all scholars should study the laws of probability: Mr. Stoll makes no blunders in this sort of calculus, and so ensures that his volume will for ever escape that index librorum mortuorum, where he would list the titles of many others.

G. N. G.

The Works of Congreve. Comedies : Incognita : Poems. Edited by F. W. BATESON. London: Peter Davies. I93o. Pp. xxviii+507. 7s. 6d. net.

THIS selection from the Works of Congreve, which includes all the Comedies and some fifteen of the Poems, has been carefully edited by Mr. F. W. Bateson. He takes as the basis of his text of the plays and poems the Works of Mr. William Congreve, I7Io, but he has compared this edition of the plays with the earlier quarto editions and recorded his findings in a compact set of Bibliographical Notes. To the whole he puts a lively preface in which he says some suggestive things about his author's art, and he includes a number of the good

wealth of literary illustration and a metaphorical style (e.g. pp. 90-91) combine to make the involuted argument difficult to follow. In the first essay, on Cleopatra, the author expounds more fully " what is meant by characterisation without psychology, particularly by the differentiation of the speech," ideas which he had previously adumbrated in his Shakespeare Studies (pp. 63-70). He then proceeds to show how Shakespeare, employing such technique, is able to present the character of the Queen as "a living thing " and artistically consistent. "In her inconsistency she is consistent. But the chief means by which the dramatist makes her so is the identity, through all her changes, of her tone and manner. She changes as a vivacious, amorous, designing woman changes, not so as to lose her identity, like Proteus."

In another essay, Mr. Stoll speaks with wisdom and experience on " Certain Fallacies and Irrelevancies in the Literary Scholarship of the Day." He draws attention to the futility of many of the dissertations undertaken for the Higher Degrees, and illustrates, with amusing examples, the fallacy inherent in the work of many scholars who " acknowledge that evidence bit by bit is not consider- able, and may be questionable, but consider the effect of it to be cumulative." Professor R. W. Chambers, in this country, once suggested that all scholars should study the laws of probability: Mr. Stoll makes no blunders in this sort of calculus, and so ensures that his volume will for ever escape that index librorum mortuorum, where he would list the titles of many others.

G. N. G.

The Works of Congreve. Comedies : Incognita : Poems. Edited by F. W. BATESON. London: Peter Davies. I93o. Pp. xxviii+507. 7s. 6d. net.

THIS selection from the Works of Congreve, which includes all the Comedies and some fifteen of the Poems, has been carefully edited by Mr. F. W. Bateson. He takes as the basis of his text of the plays and poems the Works of Mr. William Congreve, I7Io, but he has compared this edition of the plays with the earlier quarto editions and recorded his findings in a compact set of Bibliographical Notes. To the whole he puts a lively preface in which he says some suggestive things about his author's art, and he includes a number of the good

232 232

This content downloaded from 128.235.251.160 on Wed, 17 Dec 2014 10:53:54 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

remarks of earlier critics. He seems, however, quite to overstate his case when he observes:

It has been customary to praise Congreve's " style," and to overlook the "styles" of Millamant, Lady Wishfort, Valentine and the rest. Congreve's real achievement, which sets him apart from every other dramatist, including Shakespeare, is his differentiation of character, within the limits of a recognisably individual style, by the manner of the dialogue. . . . Congreve, when he is at his best, can give the impression that every sentence almost could not have been spoken by any one else or in any other way.

But surely this is exactly what has been said about Shakespeare by a score of critics. Hamlet and Falstaff both speak the prose of Shakespeare but with a difference; Mr. Granville-Barker can talk of Shakespeare's individualising a character in the music of the verse.

The reading of the plays is greatly facilitated by the very brief notes at the foot of the page, which explain allusions and meanings. The editor, however, should have made it clear why he explains the passage in The Way of the World, " But when he's drunk he's as loving as the monster in The Tempest," as a reference to Sycorax in the Dryden-Davenant version of the play and not just to Shakespeare's Caliban.

P. ALEXANDER.

A Newton Among Poets. By CARL GRABO. The University of North Carolina Press; London: H. Milford. 1930. Pp. xiv+2o8. I3s. 6d. net.

MR. GRABO seems a little uncertain as to what his contention is. He calls the book A Newton Among Poets, and quotes Professor A. N. Whitehead as saying, " If Shelley had been born a hundred years later, the twentieth century would have seen a Newton among chemists," surely a rather meaningless conjecture for a great thinker, more especially as Newton devoted considerable study to chemistry without making any striking discovery-or is that the point ? This and other indications would seem to imply that Mr. Grabo was concerned to show that Shelley was a man of remarkable scientific intuition fitted by disposition and abilities to make profound dis- coveries in the field of natural philosophy. He proceeds, however, to prove that Shelley was a disciple of Erasmus Darwin, who wrote a little sense combined with a prodigious amount of nonsense in

remarks of earlier critics. He seems, however, quite to overstate his case when he observes:

It has been customary to praise Congreve's " style," and to overlook the "styles" of Millamant, Lady Wishfort, Valentine and the rest. Congreve's real achievement, which sets him apart from every other dramatist, including Shakespeare, is his differentiation of character, within the limits of a recognisably individual style, by the manner of the dialogue. . . . Congreve, when he is at his best, can give the impression that every sentence almost could not have been spoken by any one else or in any other way.

But surely this is exactly what has been said about Shakespeare by a score of critics. Hamlet and Falstaff both speak the prose of Shakespeare but with a difference; Mr. Granville-Barker can talk of Shakespeare's individualising a character in the music of the verse.

The reading of the plays is greatly facilitated by the very brief notes at the foot of the page, which explain allusions and meanings. The editor, however, should have made it clear why he explains the passage in The Way of the World, " But when he's drunk he's as loving as the monster in The Tempest," as a reference to Sycorax in the Dryden-Davenant version of the play and not just to Shakespeare's Caliban.

P. ALEXANDER.

A Newton Among Poets. By CARL GRABO. The University of North Carolina Press; London: H. Milford. 1930. Pp. xiv+2o8. I3s. 6d. net.

MR. GRABO seems a little uncertain as to what his contention is. He calls the book A Newton Among Poets, and quotes Professor A. N. Whitehead as saying, " If Shelley had been born a hundred years later, the twentieth century would have seen a Newton among chemists," surely a rather meaningless conjecture for a great thinker, more especially as Newton devoted considerable study to chemistry without making any striking discovery-or is that the point ? This and other indications would seem to imply that Mr. Grabo was concerned to show that Shelley was a man of remarkable scientific intuition fitted by disposition and abilities to make profound dis- coveries in the field of natural philosophy. He proceeds, however, to prove that Shelley was a disciple of Erasmus Darwin, who wrote a little sense combined with a prodigious amount of nonsense in

REVIE4WS REVIE4WS 233 233

This content downloaded from 128.235.251.160 on Wed, 17 Dec 2014 10:53:54 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions