Page:The Journal of English and Germanic Philology Volume 18.djvu/20

14 made in it—and whether he made any in the dumb-show. This investigation will, I think, provide comfort for those who are disturbed at the close resemblance of the play and the dumb-show to the facts of the murder.

A high literary value cannot be assigned to the 'Murder of Gonzago,' but it appears to be a fair specimen of the drama of the 'Cambises' variety, which must have fallen upon the ears of Shakspere's audience as stilted and artificial. There is of course a good reason for the employment of this type of drama just here—the same reason as in the First Player's elocutionary effort on Hecuba; Shakspere "had to distinguish the style of the speech from that of his own dramatic dialogue." The 'Murder of Gonzago,' while not of a sort unknown to the audience of the Globe Theater, would have seemed old-fashioned on account of its conventionality, its monotonous rhymes, and its rather turgid rhetoric. All this, with the antiquated dumb-show, set sharply against the prose of the speeches of Hamlet, Ophelia, and the King, would have increased its illusion as a stage stage-play.

There has been a great deal of discussion about the lines inserted in the play by Hamlet. Did Shakspere mean that the audience should identify these? I think not: he lays stress on this insertion (in Hamlet's conversation with the First Player, in his instructions to the players, and in his words to Horatio before the play), in order to make the close resemblance between the play and the murder more plausible, and to focus the interest of the audience upon the spoken play. If we must identify the insertion, it seems most likely that it is the speech of Lucianus the Poisoner, beginning "Thoughts black, hands apt, drugs fit, and time agreeing," because of Hamlet's exultant words to Horatio after the play is over, when his test of the King's guilt has fully succeeded.