Faculty of English Twin Stars: Shakespeare and the Idea of the Theatre in the Eighteenth Century James Harriman-Smith Peterhouse University of Cambridge This dissertation is submitted for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy July 2015 1 Acknowledgements This thesis owes much to many. Fred Parker was a true Doktorvater to me, while John Leigh, Christopher Tilmouth, Zoe Svendsen, Peter de Bolla, Stefan Uhlig, Jenny Mander and my students all made me grateful to be doing this PhD at Cambridge. Joseph Roach, Catherine Alexander, Margreta de Grazia, François Lecercle, Laurence Marie, Elizabeth Eger and Frans de Bruyn all freely gave, in a variety of media and countries, excellent advice and encouragement for the improvement of this thesis. My final manuscript benefited enormously from the keen eyes of Clare Bucknell, Matthew Ward, Roger Harcourt, Katherine Hambridge, Mike Ryall, Aurélie Wach, Sean Ferguson and, especially, Catherine Crimp. Any mistakes that remain I acknowledge mine. Last, my thanks and love to my mother, without whose sacrifices I would not be where I am today, and to Anne-Charlotte Husson, without whom I would not be one half of who I am. Declarations This dissertation does not exceed the regulation length, including footnotes, references and appendices but excluding my bibliography and translations. This dissertation is the result of my own work and includes nothing which is the outcome of work done in collaboration except as specified in the text. This dissertation is not substantially the same as any that I have submitted, or, is being concurrently submitted for a degree or diploma or other qualification at the University of Cambridge or any other University or similar institution. I further state that no substantial part of my dissertation has already been submitted, or, is being concurrently submitted for any such degree, diploma or other qualification at the University of Cambridge or any other University of similar institution. This hardbound version is identical to the version examined, except as required by the examiners. 2 Abstract This thesis draws the line of a rise and a fall, an ironic pattern whereby the English stage of the long eighteenth century, in its relation to Shakespeare in particular, first acquired powerful influence, and then, through the very effects of that power, lost it. It also shows what contemporary literary criticism might learn from the activities that constitute this arc of evolution. My first chapter interrogates the relationship between text and performance in vernacular writings about acting and editing from the death of Betterton in 1710 to the rise of Garrick in the middle decades of the century. From the status of a distinct tradition, performance comes to rely on text as a basis for the intimate, personal engagement with Shakespeare believed necessary to the work of the sentimental actor. Such a reliance grants the performer new potential as a literary critic, but also prepares a fall. The performer becomes another kind of reader, and so is open to accusations of reading badly. My second chapter analyses the evolving definition of Shakespeare as a dramatic author from Samuel Johnson onwards. An untheatrical definition of the dramatic (Johnson’s) is answered by one which recognises the power and vitality of the stage, especially in its representation of sympathetic character (Montagu and Kenrick). Yet that very recognition leads to a set of altered critical priorities in which the theatre is, once more, relegated (Morgann and Richardson). My third and fourth chapters consider the practices and critical implications of theatrical performance of Shakespeare during Garrick’s career. I focus on the acting of emotion, the portrayal of what Aaron Hill called ‘the very Instant of the changing Passion’, and show that performance of this time, attentive to the striking moment and the transitions that power it, required from the actor both attention to the text and preternatural control over his own emotions. In return, it allowed Garrick and others to claim a special affinity with Shakespeare and to capture the public’s attention, both in the theatre and outside it. Yet this situation, that of ‘twin stars’, does not last. French and German responses to English acting, the concern of my last chapter, show its decline particularly well. They also, however, show the power that existed in such a union between page and stage, and equal weight is given in both my third and my fourth chapter to how the theatrical-literary insights of eighteenth-century critical culture might also illuminate modern approaches. 3 A Note on Texts, Typography and Translation This dissertation quotes from a variety of editions of Shakespeare’s plays, as recorded in its footnotes. Where there is good reason to refer to an eighteenth-century or earlier edition, I do so. Where there is not, I use the text found in: William Shakespeare, The Arden Shakespeare Complete Works, ed. by G. R. Proudfoot, Ann Thompson, and David Scott Kastan, Revised (London: Thomson Learning, 2007). I have retained the original spelling, typography and punctuation of all my sources throughout, replacing only the long s (ſ) with the short wherever it occurred. Unattributed translations throughout are my own. 4 Contents Acknowledgements.......................................................................................................1 Declarations..................................................................................................................1 Abstract.........................................................................................................................2 A Note on Texts, Typography and Translation..............................................................3 Introduction: Twin Stars................................................................................................5 1. Text and Performance.............................................................................................12 Introduction: ‘A Second Part’................................................................................12 I. Raising Authorities.............................................................................................14 II. Editing Performance..........................................................................................27 III. Blended Imagination........................................................................................37 Conclusion: A Special Reader................................................................................56 2. Dramatic Shakespeare.............................................................................................58 Introduction: Defining Drama................................................................................58 I. Dramatic Exhibition............................................................................................64 II. Dramatic Sympathy...........................................................................................72 III. Dramatic Character..........................................................................................85 Conclusion: ‘A Distinct Being’............................................................................100 3. Transition..............................................................................................................104 Introduction: ‘Heavens, what a transition!’.........................................................104 I. The ‘very Instant of the changing Passion’......................................................107 II. The Beautiful Transition..................................................................................123 Romeo and Juliet.............................................................................................126 King Lear.........................................................................................................131 4. The Striking Moment............................................................................................142 Introduction: The Dagger.....................................................................................142 I. Mystery and Mystification................................................................................149 II. Perpetual Creation...........................................................................................163 III. Depth..............................................................................................................175 Conclusion: Fragility and Apotheosis..................................................................185 Conclusion: Lines.....................................................................................................191 Illustrations...............................................................................................................204 Appendix: Translation from Jean-François Ducis, Macbeth, 1826..........................209 Bibliography.............................................................................................................212 Reference Works..................................................................................................212 Editions of Shakespeare Consulted......................................................................212 Primary Sources...................................................................................................213 Secondary Sources...............................................................................................224 5 Introduction: