I.

ANALYSIS OF RICHARD DUKE OF YORK

EXTRACTED FROM VOLUME VIII

OF

SOME ACCOUNT OF THE ENGLISH STAGE, BY GENESTE.

By way of illustrating Keats's only serious attempt at professional criticism, it seems worth while to give here an analysis of the compilation-play in which Kean appears to have been so striking,—a play which, if printed at all, is scarce enough to be quite inaccessible for reference by the general reader. Keats deals with this play at pages 6 to 12 of the present volume. Geneste's analysis is as follows:

=

=

"[Drury Lane 22nd Decr. 1817.] First time. Richard Duke of York, or the Contention of York and Lancaster-compiled from Shakespeare's three parts of Henry 6th-Richard Plantagenet, afterwards Duke of York Kean: King Henry VIth Maywood: Gloucester Holland: Cardinal Beaufort = Pope: Mortimer = Powell: Somerset S. Penley: Suffolk Rae: Old Lord Clifford Bengough: Young Clifford=Wallack: Buckingham T. P. Cooke: Salisbury=R. Phillips: Warwick Barnard : Vernon Fisher: Horner-Wewitzer: Peter = Knight: Jack Cade Munden: Dick Oxberry : Queen Margaret = Mrs. Glover :-the bill was foolishly

=

=

=

=

=

printed with the names of the performers only-acted 7 times.

"Act Ist begins with the scene in the Temple Gardenthen follows the scene in the prison-Mortimer, instead of dying on the stage, is borne off-Plantagenet speaks a soliloquy, 20 lines of which are from Chapman—both these changes are for the worse-the latter part of this scene did not require the slightest alteration-scene 3d -the Parliament-the contention between Vernon and Clifford (or as Shakespeare calls them Vernon and Basset) is improperly omitted in representation—when the king, &c. go out, Shakespeare's short scene is foolishly eked out with 18 lines from Chapman-these scenes are from the first part of Henry 6th-then follows the Ist scene of the 2d part, badly altered.

"Act 2d begins with the petitioners-the scene is foolishly changed from the palace to a wood-and some sad stuff is added to Peter's part-scene 2d, the Council room-after some few short speeches, Gloucester enters and says

'Now, lords, my choler being overblown'

this is wrong, as Gloucester's choler and the reasons of it have been both omitted-the whole, or a part of the reproaches made to Gloucester should have been retained, and then Gloucester (without going out) might have replied

'As for your spightful false objections,

Prove them and I lie open to the law :
But Heav'n in mercy, &c.'

Horner and Peter are brought in guarded-it would have been better to have omitted these 2 characters entirelyand Buckingham might have entered, as he now does— Gloucester in Shakespeare says

'Ah, thus King Henry throws away his crutch,' &c.

-this speech is with much impropriety given to the King.

"Act 3d begins with the low characters in rebellionthen follows the 2d scene in Shakespeare's 3d Act— York speaks what belongs to Warwick, and 6 lines from Webster, badly brought in-Warwick speaks what belongs to Salisbury-this change is not only unnecessary, but improper-it was evidently made for the sake of giving more importance to Kean's part-York, who was no friend to Gloucester, is here represented as extremely zealous in his cause-besides, York was at this time in Ireland-the act concludes with Beaufort's death.

"Act 4th begins with a short scene which would have been better omitted-in the 2d scene when Cade, &c. enter, about 2 pages are inserted from Crowne-this was not necessary-scene 3d is omitted in representation, but it ought to have been retained, as otherwise it does not appear what becomes of Jack Cade-scene 4th, York enters and speaks 6 lines from Chapman-scene 5th-in Shakespeare the king says—

'See Buckingham! Somerset comes with the Queen,
Go bid her hide him quickly from the Duke'

these lines should have been retained, as without them the Queen's first speech is not to the purpose-the 4th and 5th scenes are taken from the Ist scene of Shakespeare's 5th Act-scene 6th-the field of battle near St. Alban's -some lines are omitted, because Cibber has introduced them into his Richard 3d-for that very reason they ought to have been retained-the act closes with the King, Queen and Young Clifford.

"Act 5th begins with the 1st scene of the 3d part -divided into 2 scenes and badly altered-scene 3d, Sandal Castle-the characters of Edward and Richard Plantagenet are improperly omitted-in Shakespeare

York doubts whether they ought to meet the Queen in the field as they have only 5000 men-Richard replies 'Ay, with 500, father, for a need,

A woman's general; What should we fear?'

in the alteration, this speech is absurdly given to York, who addresses it to Salisbury-scene 4th & 5th-a field of battle-Clifford kills Rutland behind the scenes -York enters wounded and bleeding-in his soliloquy, Shakspeare's simile of the swan would have been better omitted-York dies, and the play ends-there is a field at no great distance from the ruins of Sandal Castle, which is still pointed out by tradition as the precise spot where the Duke of York was killed.

"Love's Labour Lost is the only one of Shakespeare's plays, which has not been performed, in some shape or other since the Restoration-even the 1st part of Henry 6th was acted once at C. G-Mch 13 1738-Crowne revived the 2d and 3d parts with very material alterations-see D. G. 1681-Cibber compressed the History of Henry 6th into one play-see D. L. July 5 1723-the compiler of the modern play ought, as far as the history is concerned, to have followed the example of Crowne or T. Cibber-instead of which he finishes his play without any conclusion to the History of Henry 6th—it is true that he calls his piece Richard Duke of York, but this is so far from being an excuse, that it is in reality an aggravation of the impropriety of which he has been guilty— his preface makes it pretty plain why this lame and impotent conclusion was adopted—his grand object was to get Kean to play the Duke of York-he knew that Bottom the weaver would not play Pyramus, unless Pyramus were made decidedly the superior part-and he did not dare to add an act, or an act and a half, after Kean was dead he acknowledges that Shakespeare has drawn

the early part of Richard the third's character in a masterly manner-yet he has omitted all those scenes-he has with much want of judgment foisted in passages from Chapman, &c., whereas Shakespeare's materials were so ample, that the only difficulty lay, in selecting his best scenes and compressing them within 5 acts-the compiler says he is not aware of any instance in which the language of Shakespeare has been altered, except where the reason for alteration was obvious and decisive-the fine scene, in which Cardinal Beaufort dies, is so perfect, that not a letter should have been changed-the Cardinal says

'Give me some drink, and bid the apothecary
Bring the strong poison that I bought of him.'

the modern editor has had the temerity to alter 'the apothecary' to 'that wretched slave'-on the whole this alteration of Shakespeare's plays is a bad one, yet some things are done well, and Richard Duke of York deserved much better success than it met with—it appears from a note, that several passages, which had been retained by the compiler, were omitted in the representation.

"Jan. 3. Richard Duke of York 3d time. Jack Cade = Harley."

The abbreviations C. G., D. G., and D. L. in this extract stand, of course, for Covent Garden, Dorset Gardens, and Drury Lane.